Slashdot Log In
PC Grand Theft Auto IV Features SecuROM DRM
Posted by
Soulskill
on Fri Nov 28, 2008 06:01 PM
from the players-are-pirates-qed dept.
from the players-are-pirates-qed dept.
arcticstoat writes "Game developer Rockstar has revealed that the forthcoming PC version of Grand Theft Auto IV will feature the controversial SecuROM 7 DRM system. Unlike some of EA's recent titles, such as Spore and Mass Effect, GTA IV won't limit the number of times that you can install the game, although SecuROM will be impossible to remove without leaving 'some traces' on your PC. Anyone hoping to avoid SecuROM by downloading the game form Steam will also be disappointed, as Rockstar says that all versions of the game will feature SecuROM, including digital versions online. On the plus side, Rockstar says that it's 'working with SecuROM to post information on our support pages regarding how to remove these inactive traces of the program for users who wish to do so.' Has Rockstar gotten a better balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here?"
Related Stories
[+]
Valve's Gabe Newell On DRM 241 comments
Ars Technica is running a story about recent comments by Valve's Gabe Newell in which he bluntly stated, "As far as DRM goes, most DRM strategies are just dumb. The goal should be to create greater value for customers through service value (make it easy for me to play my games whenever and wherever I want to), not by decreasing the value of a product (maybe I'll be able to play my game and maybe I won't)." Ars then points out a response by Microsoft's Games for Windows Community Manager Ryan Miller suggesting Rockstar Games' recent decision not to have install limits for the PC version of GTA IV made the use of SecuROM acceptable. GameSetWatch has a related piece discussing the difficulty in measuring piracy and enforcing infringement laws.
[+]
Ubisoft Testing PC <em>Prince of Persia</em> Without DRM 254 comments
Ars Technica reports that the upcoming PC version of Ubisoft's Prince of Persia will not feature any sort of copy protection. (Not including Steam downloads, of course.) After the backlash in recent months over the DRM in games like Spore and GTA IV, Ubisoft is giving gamers the chance to demonstrate that DRM actually increases piracy. One of Ubisoft's community reps had this to say about their decision: "You`re right when you say that when people want to pirate the game they will but DRM is there to make it as difficult as possible for pirates to make copies of our games. A lot of people complain that DRM is what forces people to pirate games but as PoP PC has no DRM we`ll see how truthful people actually are. Not very, I imagine. Console piracy is something else entirely and I`m sure we`ll see more steps in future to try to combat that."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
no (Score:5, Insightful)
No. Fuck them.
Re:no (Score:5, Informative)
Here's an idea: Don't buy the fucking game. Problem solved.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not going to be buying it, but that doesn't seem to be solving the problem, as they continue to push this crap.
Parent
Re:no (Score:4, Interesting)
And here I was thinking "finally, a halfway decent game to pay full price for".
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
pirating the game just makes one statement:
"I want this game, and I took it for free. If you can find a more secure drm, you will make more money from me"
If you really wanted t protest DRM, you would NOT play the game at all, whilst emailing them to say so.
When you pirate the game, you just get chalked up by the publisher as another pirate, not as some sort of anti-drm protest vote.
The people who pirated my games achieved fuck all in terms of removing DRM. I did that because people emailed me and made rational arguments about being in favour of drm-free games. If you actually want rockstar to ditch DRM, you need to tell them, not just act like the pirates who just want free stuff.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Interesting)
On the upside, we who pirate won't get an experience ruined by DRM.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Interesting)
I already have it on the xbox 360, but was considering buying it again for the PC, for the mouse input, free multiplayer and modding capabilities, but this DRM's put me right off.
I'm not going to pirate it - I'm not that bothered - but they lost a sale. Guess the thing is, will they care? Even if the numbers are substantial, will they even notice? Or just put it down to piracy?
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
If you really wanted t protest DRM, you would NOT play the game at all, whilst emailing them to say so. ...
When you pirate the game, you just get chalked up by the publisher as another pirate, not as some sort of anti-drm protest vote.
The people who pirated my games achieved fuck all in terms of removing DRM.
Really? Your blog post 'Talking to Pirates [positech.co.uk]' implies something different happened. You asked the question "Why do people pirate my games?", received some answers, then removed DRM from your games. Don't get me wrong, you did the right thing by asking your potential customers what's going on, but you cannot deny that piracy had an affect on your decision to withdraw the DRM.
"I want this game, and I took it for free. If you can find a more secure drm, you will make more money from me"
Yep, that's how it's interpreted, and that's why you and other game companies are facing problems with your potential customers. That is a failure on your part, not on the part of your potential customers. You end up paying more attention to the people aiming to get it for free that you end up screwing the guy that's putting a roof over your head. The game industry has been told for years that it's obnoxious that a disc is required in the system to play. That's not a new thing. It is incredibly difficult to imagine there are many game devs out there that don't know what "NOCD" means. The funny thing is, they see these cracks flying around, then they use this wonderfully broken logic: "If we make it harder to copy the game, we'll reduce piracy!" Cute. Let's reduce piracy by increasing the value of cracked software. Derr.
The truth is, you won't listen until you can attach numbers to it. You've known all along that restricting the software makes it less valuable to your paying customers. You didn't listen until you started noticing 'pirated' software of yours out there. Sad thing is, that's the case everywhere. You twits think everybody's out to save a buck (completely ignoring the success of places like Starbucks...) and that you're precariously on the verge of getting 2 million playing customers and zero sales. In 25+ years of home gaming, this hasn't happened. What did happen? The customers revolted. Spore announces restrictions, Amazon gets pelted with bad reviews. Oops. EA changes things a bit, then gets Amazon to remove the reviews. It's a small win, but again, no reaction until actual numbers start changing. That is the problem you and every other game developer big and small have. You claim you'll listen to customer feedback, but you don't actually react until people communicate through your wallet.
I saw you posting on Slashdot. You had plenty of time before 'piracy' got a response out of you.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you think any developer bothers reading past the abuse you type?
Considering that the closest thing to 'abuse' I got to was 3/4ths of the way through my post, by your own admission you have quite a bit to chew on. You think you appear to be taking the high-road, but it's clear others are not seeing it that way.
Ordinarily I wouldn't draw attention to how posts are moderated when engaged in a debate with somebody. This case, though, is different. You are using Slashdot to gain visibility for your business. Not only do you actively engage in discussions with an advert in your sig to the games you sell, but you also have submitted a story [slashdot.org] which earned you quite a bit of attention. It should matter to you how comments are moderated. My post was at +5 when you responded, you earned a Troll mod. I hope you take a moment to ponder that and grow a thicker skin. I have made points and you are publically brushing them off.
Hint: All the emails I got from pirates that were abusive got deleted. I didn't bother reading past the insults and the sarcastic crap.
Just for clarification, are you implying that I am a pirate?
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
You're both wrong. (Score:4, Interesting)
This is one of those amusing situations where stealing the game online is no different than stealing it in a store. Suppose you'd shoplifted the CD instead of grabbing it from a torrent, would you be saying that it makes a statement that "If you beefed up security here, you'd get more money from me"? Would you be saying it makes the statement that "If you got rid of the rent-a-cops I'd buy the game"?
The only message it sends is that you want the game but for whatever reason are unwilling to pay for it.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude... I, as the customer, am more important than them. Customers are what pads their wallet, and are the reason they created the game in the first place. Without us, they wouldn't even be there or have produced the game.
I do have a say in what they install in my computer, and whether or not I participate in that.
Of course it's self centered.... who would I buy the game for?
It says I'm willing to participate in using my money to buy your product as long as you don't treat me like shit. Treat me like shit, and I will protest.
As the customer, I can't initiate a change in action. I can only protest. It has to come from the producer.(ie, removal of drm)
Parent
100% true. (Score:4, Insightful)
It also says "I think I am more important than you, and that what I want is more important than what you want, and I am willing to break the law to act on my self-centered desire"
Well, that's also 100% true. In fact, I have difficulty thinking of anyone who doesn't fall into that category when confronted with excessive asshattery... Fortunately, we work within the framework of our civilization anyway most of the time, because most individuals/groups also work within the social contract. DRM typically does not, so circumventing it in those cases makes sense.
Parent
Stolen post (Score:4, Insightful)
It's called "feel good security". It's the same kind of security you run into in large corporations. You know, you have to use a randomly generated 18 character alphanumeric password and it changes every 90 days... which is great except that when you go to do your timesheets you have to enter your LAN password... which goes over the wire plaintext encapsulated in an HTTP POST query. Oops. Also, because not everybody's memory is so great, it becomes common practice to keep the 18 character passwords written on sticky notes.
This is the true genesis of DRM... Ignorance and management fretting over money. It will be viewed as good as long as they "save" more money than it "costs" them.
Parent
Re:no (Score:4, Insightful)
No. You seem to be suffering from the widely held delusion (at least among "content creators") that a pirated copy is a lost sale. The statement that is actually being made is this:
What he thinks is irrelevant, what Rockstar thinks is the important part. You can say they have no evidence all you want but they're not a court of law, they can act without evidence. What they see is somebody whining about "DRM" and using that to calm his conscience about simply warezing the game. What they see is a person who claims to have ideals but doesn't have enough of them to actually avoid playing the game, a person with no self control whose compulsion to play the game can be used to make him buy the game if it's properly secured.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Funny)
as they continue to push this crap.
In "IV" form no less. These game companies will to ANYTHING to get you hooked.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
However, as we've "discussed" (I use the term loosely) ad nauseum here on
Before I'm labelled as a corporate shill, note that I do not think DRM works. It does NOT prevent piracy, this much we know. But they still SELL a bazillion copies of the latest blockbuster game, so they must be doing something right, in there minds, right? I also think that the number of people that it REALLY causes problems for is pretty small compared to the number of copies sold on any given game. People who think they can bitch loudly on a company web forum and sign useless online petitions are deluding themselves in how much they think that companies give a rat's ass how much they piss an moan. Not until something happens on a truly epic scale (see the first sentence of this post) will they cease putting DRM in their games, and truly explore alternate means of mitigating piracy.
Yes, there are games where it's pretty bad, and yes I've seen the video on Youtube, [youtube.com] and I think that's ridiculous. But I also think that companies like EA and Rockstar are (to engage in hyperbole) filling their swimming pools with cash, and they can only reasonably conclude that it's because they are selling a shitload of games due to the fact that DRM works (again, in their minds).
Parent
Slashdot Effect (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what gets me, is that no one attempts to sprearhead and channel all the users and traffic here.
What if CmdrTaco made a post on the front page tomorrow asking every visitor to Slashdot to send EA a message that they will refuse to purchase any game with DRM. One email won't do it. 100 emails won't do it. But a few thousand emails in a single day is hard to ignore. How many people visit Slashdot in a day? Is a few thousand emails unreasonable for a coordinated effort from the Slashdot community on an issue we all largely seem to agree on?
And perhaps another day CmdrTaco posts a request asking everyone to email Nvidia about their Linux drivers.
Seriously, right now we're an unorganized group of people bitching to each other about issues we agree on as opposed to an organized group expressing our opinion to the appropriate parties.
Parent
Re:no (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, Spore is a bad example, since you will probably not want to play it in, say, 2 years. But imagine it would have been a good game with good replay value and you dig out that CD in a few years, think "hey, why not play this again instead of buying some new crap?" and find out that it won't activate?
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Informative)
You won't run into problems generally with secuROM until you start having extra hardware. Two optical drives? SecuROM has disabled one almost every time. If you have a single optical drive in your system, and it happens to be SCSI, expect SecuROM to absolutely fuck it up. running Daemon tools? It's just having to keep one step ahead to stop SecuROM from disablign it, and Process Explorer recently had to be patched to avoid SecuROM preventing it's running.
If you are a power user, you will have major problems soon enough.
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no reason for this crap to be on the Steam version. Nadeo bundled Starforce with Trackmania to start with but ultimately removed it.
Treat me like a thief? Then I'll be one. Piracy offering the better alternative again, as Securom will be neutered on the Reloaded (or whoever) release which will probably be out before the game is in all markets.
When are these idiot developers going to get their heads around this? DRM DOES NOT WORK! All it does is force people who value the contents of their PC to not buy their titles.
I wonder where the tipping point is? Because it's going to come soon I think. Where the number of sales LOST due to the DRM becomes an issue.
If you were going to buy GTA IV, and on this news now won't, please post. I mean they've lost my $50.
"Software Piracy: The friendlier, safer alternative."
Parent
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
PUBLISHERS, not developers. As a general rule, game developers are against strong DRM, and often, against any DRM at all. The publishers usually strong arm them. In this case, the developer and the publisher is pretty much one and the same (I think...), but I doubt the development department agreed with the suits on this.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I realized after I hit submit the error I made, but really, the developers need to stand up to this crap. I mean the suits may have the power, but without the developers, they have nothing to sell.
On the plus side, in the current financial climate, I should thank them for doing this since I've saved well over $100 this year that I would have otherwise spent on software had it not had ridiculous copy protection.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In many cases, the developers are not in a position to make a stance. Especialy with smaller developers, this ends up like a second take on the big labels for music/movies. The "artist" (developer in this case) needs the publisher more than the publisher needs the "artist"... some games, including decent ones, never see the light of days for lacking publishers (especially indie ones. Commercial ones still may or may not struggle to get the game out).
There may also be licenses that are owned by the publisher
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you were going to buy GTA IV, and on this news now won't, please post. I mean they've lost my $50.
Mine too. Was looking forward to it, but there are plenty of other games I can spend my time and money on.
Rockstar: see this $50? Not for you anymore.
Re:no (Score:4, Insightful)
Slashdotters are probably more fastidious (not every day I get to use that word) about their systems than most, and are more likely to not want Securom on their systems. So really, if you want GTA IV, but want to keep your system in a known state, then your only option if you want GTA IV is to pirate the game.
When SA came out, my PC wasn't capable of running it. It's very frustrating now I have a PC that can run all current games, that the Securom decision has made GTA IV go from "must purchase" to "never purchase".
I let it slide with Spore and really shouldn't have. (Especially given how disappointing that game was.)
Parent
Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)
Not quite all, I imagine.
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Not quite all, I imagine.
I don't even play these games. The humor I see in it is that Spore was cracked on September 3rd [kotaku.com]--four days before its launch date. Um, are they really under the impression that one of these schemes might stop the hackers?
At some point you have to acknowledge that you're just annoying your entire fan base to play a cat-and-mouse game with some hackers (that you're losing in an embarrassing way).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think a lot of it is appeasing idiot shareholders. "What are you doing to stop piracy?" they'll say. Rather than say "nothing" they can say lots of cool sounding words and said idiot shareholder gets a warm fuzzy feeling, unaware the schemes are a joke and completely broken.
In fact I wonder if there's any sort of correlation between choosing draconian DRM and the publisher being a publicly held company?
Still, it'd be nice to be able to make tens of thousands of dollars selling something that's broken like
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't even play these games. The humor I see in it is that Spore was cracked on September 3rd [kotaku.com]--four days before its launch date. Um, are they really under the impression that one of these schemes might stop the hackers?
This does nothing to stop determined piracy - we know it, and they know it. What it _does_ do is deter casual copying. For companies like EA, this offers one really compelling feature - it kills the resale market.
When you can only install on X PCs, it gets a lot harder to resell. Resold games don't make them any money.
Parent
Meh (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure most people don't care (or know) and the ones who do will just grab a "DRM-freed version".
I like to think that DRM is the cause of and not the solution to Piracy :)
Short Answer: No. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Has Rockstar gotten a better balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here?"
No. The fact that any sort of DRM that requires access to some other device out on the interwebz when you install it means that someday when Rockstar gets bought/sued out of existence, you might be able to install the game ever again. Until, that is, someone releases a crack for the scheme.
I have games from my DOS days that I can still freely install. THAT is software freedom. Anything less is not.
Not a hint of irony (Score:3, Funny)
My email to Rockstar (Score:5, Informative)
I have a simple comment on activation in GTA IV PC - I would appreciate if you could pass this to a relevant person / department (preferably not "Deleted Items").
Do I need to activate this game online?
Rockstar: Yes, but to be clear, if you install the game on a computer that isn't connected to the internet, you can perform certain steps to activate your game on another PC with an active internet connection. Once the game is distributed, information on this method will be available on a GTA IV support page.
Some of my favourite games were written decades ago by companies that no longer exist. GTA IV with its unique story line is an all-time classic, but the activation requirement will at some point in the future render the game unusable. It is for this reason that I refuse to purchase any game that requires activation.
Thank you for your time.
The point? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What's even the point of this protection?
Shareholders say "Do something!" and so they do something. Doesn't have to be effective, though, but works great as a "feel good" measure.
Re:The point? (Score:5, Insightful)
Kill the second hand market.
Parent
Better Questions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Better Questions (Score:5, Informative)
Simple: Because the person asking the "questions" is a shill.
Parent
Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not a fan of having additional crap like GFWL & This Rockstar Games Social Club, whatever the hell that is, forced upon me during game installs but the real question for me is whether or not it'll let me run Process Explorer (Which long since replaced Task Manager for me) and play the game at the same time (I'm looking at you, Bioshock, amongst others).
Also, why screw over the customers using Steam by including SecuROM? Steam *is* a copy protection mechanism in that restricts the game to a single user and it's not easy to duplicate a legit copy to another Steam account (Harder than downloading a cracked copy anyway). I had enough bad experiences with StarForce to be wary of anything that installs hard-to-remove driver hooks to control application usage.
Feel good security (Score:5, Insightful)
I think people may be missing the human side of the problem. Let's say your an engineer and your manager comes to you and says "zomg! piratez! they r eatin ma soupz!" And being that you're the guy they're paying the big bucks to impliment features, it falls to you to stop people from "pirating". Now, being an engineer you know that there's no way to keep a game from being copied, but your boss is frothing at the mouth and pseudo-geek talk is coming out of his mouth while he runs through the office with a stack of trade magazines -- so you have to do something. So you call up Xyzzy company and tell your boss to pay them a lot of money and the problem goes away. Your boss collapes on his desk in a deep sigh of relief, signs away several million dollars, and -- blammo, SecuROM.
It's called "feel good security". It's the same kind of security you run into in large corporations. You know, you have to use a randomly generated 18 character alphanumeric password and it changes every 90 days... which is great except that when you go to do your timesheets you have to enter your LAN password... which goes over the wire plaintext encapsulated in an HTTP POST query. Oops. Also, because not everybody's memory is so great, it becomes common practice to keep the 18 character passwords written on sticky notes.
This is the true genesis of DRM... Ignorance and management fretting over money. It will be viewed as good as long as they "save" more money than it "costs" them.
Re:Feel good security (Score:5, Funny)
your manager comes to you and says "zomg! piratez! they r eatin ma soupz!"
My manager hardly even talks like that. On the other hand, my cat. . .
Parent
PC gaming just needs to change (Score:3, Interesting)
The main problem with buying a PC game is that you're pretty much stuck with it.
What I mean by this is: if you buy a game for a console, you can be assured that if it turns out to be a bag of shit, you can take it back to where you bought it and either get store credit or just exchange it for something else.
You can't do this with PC games (not to my knowledge anyway). Once you've bought it, it's with you forever.
The risk involved in buying a game to play on your computer is far to high - It might be crap, it might not run properly, it might not run at all. There's too much risk.
I think what PC games really need is some sort of subscription system, whereby the user will pay a certain amount of money per month or year to download a set number of titles at any one time (let's just say 3 titles). Effectively you'll be renting the games, rather like when console gamers trade in their old ones to buy new ones.
Once you're bored of the game, you just revoke your lease on it and then get a different one instead. The data could stay on your hard drive in case you change your mind (and also so you don't have to download 6GBs each time you want to play).
Doing so would eliminate a great deal of the risk attached to buying a game that basically turns out to be rubbish.
(oh, and by the way - GTA4 is shit. That and Devil May Cry 4 are the worst games I played this year. You'll not care for either.)
That's what they say... (Score:4, Insightful)
Rockstar says that all versions of the game will feature SecuROM, including digital versions online
All versions except the pirated versions that is.
From '92 - '08. RIP PC gaming. (Score:5, Informative)
How things change in just over 15 years.
1992:
Buy Doom after getting to try 1/3 of the game first.
* Be able to play it via dialup modem or LAN for as long as you have the working equipment.
* Be able to sell the game after you're done with it and have that second user have the game be just as usable to them.
* Enjoy playing thousands of user-created maps and mods -- anything from a monster health editor to a porn graphic replacement mod.
2008:
Buy game X.
* Require internet permission to install it. Hopefully you haven't committed the mortal sin of installing it more than three times.
* Require internet permission every time you wish to run the game.
* Require CD checking despite the above.
* Unable to sell the game to people who want something more than a coaster.
* Multiplayer server for Game X goes down after year because Game X 2009 edition is now out. People who still want to play the original Game X via LAN/hosted internet games are SOL and anyone hacking together hosting capabilities likely receives notice from lawyers.
* Have some type of over-zealous security check built into the game mess with your computer, internet connection, or both.
* Deal with an over-moderated/sterile mod community.
Version without DRM easily available (Score:5, Informative)
I can guarantee you that copies from thepiratebay.org and btjunkie.org will be shipping without intrusive DRM or sales tax. Fast delivery. Why would you pay extra to get your machine raeped?
Blah blah blah before the dumb replies, I'm not advocating piracy from companies that treat you with respect, like Stardock. I just won't be buying (or torrenting) this game, period, but this will surely increase the number of people doing the second.
And just to be extra petty and remind you what evil bastards they are, whenever you see 'SecureROM', that's Sony just doing what Sony normally does. Screwing unaware legitimate customers.
The Logic ... (Score:5, Funny)
OH Joy! (Score:4, Funny)
So they still intend to make a mess with their install but they'll graciously provide instructions on how to clean up after them.
They should try walking their dog in someone else's yard. When the inevitable happens, offer to loan the angry homeowner a shovel and just see how happy that makes him.
We should stop calling it DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Piracy is against the law, just like murder! (Score:5, Insightful)
I sure as hell would steal a car if I could do it by duplicating the original car and creating a brand new copy.
Parent