EA Loosens Spore, Mass Effect DRM 249
An anonymous reader writes "In response to recent criticism, EA has decided to eliminate the periodic validation of Mass Effect and Spore. 'Specifically, EA's plan to dial in to game owner's computers every ten days to check whether they were running a legitimate version of their software has been scrapped, ShackNews reports. EA had planned to use the validation method for upcoming titles Mass Effect and Spore. EA now says that validation will now only occur when a user attempts to download new content for either game. Chief among the voices in opposition to this measure were members of the armed forces, who pointed out that they could not rely on having an internet connection every ten days.'"
Sudden outbreak... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/9/ [penny-arcade.com]
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:4, Insightful)
Now if one of the machines crashes, I am thinking about my Gaming (win XP) Desktop here, it has become unstable and needs a reload soon
Re: (Score:2)
DRM is ultimately the number 1 reason why I don't buy various games. The only other reason that I don't is when my ancient computer won't run them, but I tend to wait until games are in the bargain bin anyways, a good gam
Unfounded MS bashing (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll end up having to reinstall it at least 3 times the first year due to Windows unreliability.
Really, man? My last computer had Windows XP pre-installed on it, and that same install of XP lasted me for around 5 years, and that includes lots of monkeying around (such as changing the partition size with GPartEd, installing various Linux distros and Vista side-by-side, daily use with a reboot only when necessary, installing anything that seemed remotely interesting to me).
Complaining about Windows's stability is like complaining that
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:4, Insightful)
I have tons of games that came from companies that are no longer around, or companies that have completely changed since those games came out. I've reinstalled my OS or upgraded my computer countless times since those games came out. They still work fine for me, and I don't have to jump through hoops every time I need to reinstall the software I paid money for.
I seriously doubt EA/Bioware will be quick to release a patch to fix this once the game is out. So, even though I fully intend to buy the game, I'm stuck with cheering for the pirates.
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
a. EA
b. Worded correctly
Just doesn't sound like EA....
I'm scared
Re: (Score:2)
They said that one of the primary objections were from soldiers. I think looking unpatriotic/unAmerican/unSupportTheTroops would be very bad for business.
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe another factor was the realization that a large number of soldiers are coming home from Iraq with PTSD and good weapons handling skills and that it could be bad for more than business.
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:4, Funny)
A new psychological condition is predicted to appear among service men and women serving in combat in Iraq: PEASD (Post-Electronic-Arts-Stress-Disorder).
Re: (Score:2)
I swear, I read the headline as "EA looses Spore..."
Re:Sudden outbreak... No not Really (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I also know a lot of people from other service branches, from various backgrounds with varying perspectives on the war. Of course most of those soliders would "rather be home with their families"
Re: (Score:3)
That's what Eichmann [wikipedia.org] said, too.
Eh, let's get one thing straight (Score:4, Interesting)
From the same Wikipedia page:
Eichmann actively disobeyed direct orders, and kept hunting Jews after he was explicitly ordered to stop. He kept rounding them up and sending them to some camps which were being dismantled or didn't exist any more, and generally didn't want the fruit of his work any more.
Refusing to show up when called to his division to go to the front, actually makes him a deserter too.
He pretended to have an official job that he didn't actually have any more, and commandeered troops and resources that just weren't his any more. Just because he wanted to hunt more Jews. And obviously he wasn't too afraid of the consequences for _that_.
He was _appalled_ at the decision to stop exterminating Jews.
So let's put to rest the idea that he was just following orders, like everyone else. That guy didn't just continue his work when no longer asked to, he actually continued it _againt_ direct orders to stop. He also had no trouble deserting when he no longer liked the orders he was given. So, you know, why didn't he do it before, then?
There's a _world_ of difference between (A) doing what you're ordered and coaxed, like in Milgram's experiment, or out of fear of a court-martial, like many soldiers do, and (B) what Adolf Eichmann did. Past a point, he actually acted against the orders and laws, and was no more than a common (mass) murderer.
Re: (Score:2)
Off Topic: military in Iraq (Score:4, Insightful)
"Obeying orders" is never a valid excuse for doing something unethical or illegal. It doesn't relieve the wrongdoer of responsibility.
I'm not the OP and FWIW: I'm a mathematician and I worked in my last two years for a company that produces prostheses. My work for the next couple of years will be used to predict eruptions and reduce their threat. Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the message.Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You may be a mathematician, but you need to go back and learn some spelling and grammar if you want to get whatever it is you are trying to say out. WTF is 'hir'?
It's a gender-neutral pronoun. How can you be unaware of such things in this day and age? You might think anyone who uses them is a wanker (I do) but you should at least be aware that they exist. I mean, what year is this? How long have you been living under a rock? How long have you had internet access?
Also, it is only YOUR judgment that something unethical or illegal is happening with ALL of our soldiers.
The military is made up of its members, the military is executing illegal actions, every member of the military has a responsibility not to support illegal actions, therefore every member of the militar
Re: (Score:2)
It'll be back. Don't you worry. Just not this year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:5, Insightful)
- "Listen" to backlash from fans
- Announce less heavy-handed DRM
- Pat yourself on the back when the fans lavish praise on you, knowing you still got your foot in the door anyway
Sudden outbreak of common sense, my foot!
Re:Sudden outbreak... (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's where the 10 day thing comes from (Score:5, Insightful)
BioShock released with an earlier version of this system; SecuROM with Product Activation. After outcry from people then, publisher 2K Games promised a "deactivation" tool (which isn't enough for me to rent their game, but I guess it was enough for some). The problem with this tool goes a little something like this:
Step 1: Install BioShock
Step 2: Activate BioShock. SecuROM server now thinks you have "n-1" activations left. Your game is activated, and BioShock will never phone home again.
Step 3: Ghost/clone your hard drive image.
Step 4: Deactivate BioShock. SecuROM server goes back up to "n" activations left. Your game is deactivated.
Step 5: Restore your harddrive from the image you created in step 3. Now your game is activated again, but the server doesn't know that, and still thinks you have "n" activations left.
This is obviously a bit of an onerous process to go through, but it isn't hard to imagine someone automating this process (or even just automating the important part; finding where the activation is stored on your drive, backing it up, and then restoring it after the deactivation process is finished updating the server).
I strongly suspect the "phone home every 10 days" was an attempt to "fix" this. If 30 different machines are all phoning home every few days with the same key, then you know people are using this (or a similar technique) to pirate the game, so you can ban the key and kill all those installs. Without the phone home part, this activation scheme is essentially worthless.
The CORRECT fix, of course, is to get rid of product activation, because it's stupid, invasive, and is pushing your formerly paying customers into circumventing your copy protection.
Re: (Score:2)
DRM is bad. Less DRM is still bad. No DRM is the only good. Let companies know they should stop acting like greedy paranoid entities and make DRM a feature if you must (like WoW and xbox live so). Just make sure your game is worth playing and a good value and you'll be successful.
Do the right thing. Good things happen.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pictured? (Score:5, Funny)
Those games look a lot like a joystick.
Publicity (Score:5, Informative)
Phew! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Phew! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose it sucks if you don't have internet access (but then how are you posting
Re:Phew! (Score:5, Interesting)
Shelving the new requirement of needing a connection every few days, and then dumping the old requirement of occupying my DVD drive with a disk, is excellent news. Alcohol 120% will be out of business, but I'm glad I won't need them.
This is a win for both sides. Company saves money on non-game related development and infrastructure; customers' frustration level drops.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you misunderstood him.
He said "protection like this makes me MUCH less likely to buy a game", I believe "protection like" referred to the DRM malware itself. I believe his position is that the "new and improved" malware is absolutely no different than the the original malware that the company just got publicly spanked for.
The one and only change announced here is no
Re: (Score:2)
"Seemingly well designed"?
Windows have been a multiuser system for more than a decade (and for the last 7 years, multiuser have been the default configuration). Still Steam does not know how to keep user info separated when more than one user are using the same machine, meaning that the login dialog will use the name of the last user logged in from any account on that PC.
Perhaps this was considered good design 10 years ago. Today it is
Re:Phew! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Phew! (Score:5, Insightful)
The Horror (Score:5, Insightful)
1939/45... Troops freeze through the Battle of the Bulge, across Russia.
2008... Access to certain videogames sometimes limited in certain situations for a few days until net access can be resecured.
I know "Won't anybody think of the troops!" is second only to "Won't anybody think of the children!" and can thus never be questioned unless you're a terrorist as well as a paedophile.. but there comes a point where the rallying cry is used for such ludicrously trivial things that it just devalues everyone involved.
Re:The Horror (Score:5, Insightful)
Your argument could be used to justify almost any bad treatment.
"Sarge, this stew tastes like horse meat!"
"Shut up and eat your stew, Private. Just be glad you don't have trench foot!"
Or, what the hell, I guess I shouldn't ever complain about anything, because some of my ancestors had to live through famines.
Horse meat is great (Score:5, Informative)
Please don't all go PETA (OMG think of the ponies!) at once. They're dumber than pigs and pigs are delicious, too.
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, I might just know exceptionally bright bovines.
Re: (Score:2)
How about? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about? (Score:5, Insightful)
You need to start thinking like a Suit guy.
Most of them seems to think they have a God given right to sell as many games as their marketing department projected, if they don't meet the projections then it s clearly due to Piracy and weak DRM.
If we don't make sure to tell them why we are boycoting them then we will eventually end up with something like this [penny-arcade.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whereas I agree that boycotting a certain product can be a very good tactic, I also think that if it's possible (with minimal effort) to let the producer know beforehand that you have problems with some aspects of their product, it can accomplish the same thing where you still get to play their product, and them realising that this time, they took it a bit too far.
I'd pretty much call that a win-win situation.
I was btw in the camp
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
After all it actually seems to have worked in this case.
Your suggested approach has the following disadvantages:
1) Buyer and Seller lose out
2) Higher latency/lag in the feedback loop.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't buy it, then all they know is that their sales are low. If you don't buy it and tell them it's because of the DRM then they know that their sales are low and they know why their sales are low. If a lot of you don't buy it and publicly tell them you didn't buy it then their shareholders know why their sales are low and will hold the board accountable and they, in turn, will hold whoever put the DRM in there accountable.
In theory, at least.
Uhhhhh (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus it would be dumb for EA to shut out a large market. Especially since both of these games have strong single player components, and thus are of interest when you aren't going to have net access.
It isn't being used as a rallying cry, it is that the soldiers were honestly concerned they wouldn't be able to get their game on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't hard, and if you are an OSS advocate as you seem to be you ought to know the word has more than one definition.
When you are living in a crap tent that the military provides for you, eating crap food that the military provides for you, and doing the jobs the military tells you to in their equipment, you discover that your living, dining, and transport expenses are rather low. Thus the money that they pay you is free to be used for pretty
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, there's a problem with this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um, there's a problem with this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
So now instead of evey 10 days looking to verify you, its going to check anytime you need some new tidbit of data... Which could be multiple times a day...
Re: (Score:2)
I've said it before, I'll say it again. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I've said it before, I'll say it again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Do you plan to purchase or play this game?
Considering that it's a heavily anticipated game and generally recognized as being one of the more creative and innovative titles to come in in a while, it's probably reasonable for me to expect that you want to play Spore. Your stated hate for DRM leads me to believe that you couldn't bring yourself to actually pay for any product that comes with any type of DRM. Assuming that you both want to play this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it?
If so, you're contributing to the reason why these companies think they need to have DRM. I can understand why people will pirate things when cost is a factor since I did it myself once upon a time, but if you pirate this game simply to spite the paid version which has DRM you're probably not doing the cause any help.
I appologize in advance for potentially mislabeling you or constructing a situation involving you from so little information, but I have a feeling that there are a few people who will pirate the game just because they dislike the notion of DRM despite the fact that they're going to play the hell out of it and had the money to easily purchase it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is blowing my mind (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, you know, that's probably exactly how the execs over at EA think.
Re:I've said it before, I'll say it again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, I think you have it a bit backwards. This might be how The Industry thinks, but the lessening of DRM suggests that they've actually realised it's not quite so simple as that.
You state it yourself: Assuming that you both want to play this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it?
The answer to that is clearly "yes", which means "I would have bought if it weren't for the DRM". Publishers are realising that not only do most copy protection schemes not hugely inconvenience pirates, but it actively inconveniences your paying customers.
If you buy it regardless of the DRM, what incentive does that give the publishers to stop using it?
I think it's more accurate to say that this is the ONLY thing* you can do to help, but it only helps if you make sure they know that they are losing sales specifically because of the DRM measures. Mentioning it on forums is a good and semi-anonymous way to get the point across. If they're reading "yeah I love the game, the copy protection is annoying but it's worth the hassle" then they'll get the message that ... their paying customers think it's worth the hassle, and they'll keep using it so long as they think it helps reduce piracy*. If they're constantly reading "I would've bought it, but the protection was too invasive" then their attitude toward it will change.
What it comes down to is that they make a list of pros and cons for and against their protection schemes. In the pros list, they have "might reduce piracy, for a little while". In the cons list they have "increases development and support costs, inconveniences users".
So, make sure they add "reduces sales" to the cons list, and it starts looking like a very poor return on investment.
* - since nobody knows how many people have pirated a game, not buying it is effectively the same as pirating it. The fact that any piracy figures are (by necessity) made up means that it gets the blame any time sales are lower than hoped.
Re: (Score:2)
You've now become a customer. While it is, indeed, true that these companies do anything but listen to paying customers, there's certainly more incentive for them to listen to your suggestions rather than the suggestions of a pirate.
I personally don't like DRM in the way that it exists today. In most circumstances it's too restrictive. However, I'm all for protecting intellectual property with it if used
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's more accurate to say that this is the ONLY thing* you can do to help
Have you ever thought of... just NOT playing the game. As in, at all? I understand I'll probably be modded troll because I'm talking crazy talk, but seriously. If there is something that you don't like, you could always:
* Complain to the company. (Obviously, in this case it worked! Shock!)
* Boycott it. Don't buy it. Don't play it. Don't buy their other games, even used. Even if corporate won't listen to you, they will listen to retailers. Find other creative
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever thought of... just NOT playing the game. As in, at all?
Sure, and sometimes I don't. But tell me: what difference does it make to the publisher/developer of the game if I choose to never ever play it, rather than to pirate it? The obvious answer is nothing, as they don't make a sale to me either way. That's not entirely accurate though, as a person who plays the game will at least be more aware of the company and their previous products. They might even find themselves pleasantly surprised by the quality of the game, as I was with Portal, and decide to buy it.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it didn't.
One day a company announces they plan to put lead and mercury in the milk they sell.
The next day the company announces that they will only put lead in their milk.
And I supposed to feel grateful?
Hell no, I'm just as pissed off as I was yesterday.
Either I'm going to skip the milk entirely, or I'll get the milk from the Good Samaritan who volunteers to do the work filtering the lead out himself. And if that Good Samaritan then o
Re: (Score:2)
If you stick with this DRM scheme, I will only buy your game when I CANNOT find a hacked/cracked copy for download on the Internet (which I also promised I would not download
This is better, or at least good enough for me to buy a copy now (which is cool I really wanted to play but have no plan to buy a 360 right now). So yea, I at least plan to buy it and follow through.
Re: (Score:2)
> pay for any product that comes with any type of DRM. Assuming that you both want to play
> this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it?
Actually, I do both. I preordered Bioshock and got to play it on the release date, which was fun. I also cracked it as soon as the crack was available, because I don't want the CD in the drive. It will be the same with Spore. I have it on preorder right
Re: (Score:2)
With enough people publicly talking about it, maybe.... just maybe.... they will start to get the clue applying DRM schemes will block some non-trivial number of people from pirating the game (who then may or may not buy it instead) AND it will run off some paying customers AND it will ALSO convert a non-trivial number of paying customers into pirates.
-
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
DRM is a means of turning our computers against us. It is an abuse of our rights as computer owners.
Taxes are small government levied fees on property. They don't determine how I can use my property. Almost all DRM invades privacy and exists to restrict uers to a monopoly platform.
Life goes on (Score:5, Interesting)
The only thing that you could really complain about is the necessity of an internet connection to validate on install. The only other time it bothers to validate is if you're downloading an update or using some other online feature which means you're already connected to the internet.
As someone who was a little put off by the overly encumbering DRM that was originally planned to be included, I'd like to tip my hat to EA for listening to their customers and making a wise decision.
More to worry about than that (Score:5, Insightful)
A wise decision would be to forgo the DRM altogether, and apply the savings to reducing the retail price of the games. I guarantee that will have a far greater effect on sales than any DRM scheme ever would.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry I failed to meet your rigorous standards for slashdot commenting. Can I at least get credit for spelling everything correctly?
Then you and I can move on without discussing the lack of evidence that copy-protection has ever resulted in increased sales for any product.
Re: (Score:2)
Far, far too low. I'm not go
Piracy (Score:2, Funny)
I DID IT! IT'S ALL ME! (Score:5, Funny)
Nothing no one's thought or said before, but I'm sure if enough gaming curmudgeons drank enough smirnoff ice at the same time while listening to EBM then there would surely be a rival to the mass mailing botnets that don't actually have anything useful to tell anyone.
It's freaking hot in here and Qwerty pisses me off. I'm going to drink some vinegar and go to bed.
Re: (Score:2)
Real men drink ANYTHING!
Real men drink EVERYTHING!
Sure smirnoff ice is sugary, take it like a man, don't whine.
Do remember, that parent also drinks vinegar before going to bed, i suppose to kill the worst part of the smirnoff ice aftertaste...
This happen to me once.... (Score:2)
It's still bad, even if it's a little better (Score:5, Insightful)
The DRM still only allows three total installs for the lifetime of the game (although you can call EA tech support and ask for more, no guarantee though). I have many games that have existed on more than three of my personal computers. Just glancing at my shelf I see 1830, Star Fleet Command, Transport Tycoon, Starcraft, Rome Total War and the list goes on. I don't want to have to beg tech support every time I upgrade my game machine, many of these companies don't even exist anymore.
The fact of the matter is that DRM that limits the total number of times you can install the game is unacceptable. They may have fixed other problems with the DRM, but this issue remains.
Re:It's still bad, even if it's a little better (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's still bad, even if it's a little better (Score:5, Insightful)
This has bitten consumers in the ass when it comes to music, don't let it get a foothold in gaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Is the 3-installs thing just for Mass Effect or Spore as well? If I am limited to 3 installs then I'm pretty sure I won't buy it. Limited installs is one of the most serious defects in a product. Far far worse than phoning home every 10 days.
Re: (Score:2)
Getting rid of the 10 day idiocy was pretty much a given. But the deal breaker is still in place for me. Hardware lock-in.
At least this time I know about it in advance and can indeed vote with my wallet.
Re: (Score:2)
Pirates are going to crack the install activation eventually, but an account system is completely under their control, and it's far less onerous (people create accounts for trivial things on teh Intarweb all the time).
Re: (Score:2)
If it's on the box in big bright letters, then I'm simply not buying.
If it's inside the box (or on an EULA click through), then things get more interesting.
I'd be likely to buy it if on EULA (using credit card, for insurance purposes), then return it to the store as not fit for purpose. I know most stores don't allow returns, but with the weight of a credit card company behind you, things get more interesting.
Personally, I'd relish the fight on so
MIA (Score:3, Interesting)
WTF are US troops playing video games on? Laptops?
Pay a few $ at an Iraqi internet cafe?
Also, what kind of minimal system requirement do these new EA games need to run and can military issue hardware cope with it all? Are they running XP or Vista or their own custom OS?
The reason for why EA is doing this as reported seems to be a con. Just doesn't make sense
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The real question is (Score:2, Funny)
"I like this game very much and I'd really hate it if a B-52 was to accidently drop "training ordnance" [noquarterusa.net] whilst over your HQ because I was angsting over a save lost because the game failed to contact the mothership after some terrorists took out a sat-dish."
Since You Insist, I'll Stop Beating My Wife (Score:2)
The fact that because of outside pressure EA has changed their mind about constantly invading users' computers means nothing. You can count on a company that has this mindset to do whatever it thinks it can get away with to maximize its profits. Considerations like common decency or respect for the customer just aren't part of its world view.
I'm not advocating a boycott or anything, but I would strongly suggest that a common sense approach to any dealings you have with EA is to treat them as you would
Next up... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Just an illusion (Score:4, Insightful)
By accepting this DRM, you agree to have you ability to play a single player offline game controlled by an online server. There is no such thing as a one time only activation, as each time the system detect your computer has changed (which can be triggered by simply using a different windows account with crappy DRM), it will ask for activation again, eating your previous activation credit.
Nothing guarantee the auth server will be there when you want to play. Even if it is there, nothing guarantee it will give you the right to play because of some "normal usage" rules implemented on it (and which can change over time). And don't expect too much competence and generosity from a consumer service, especially a few months after launch.
The software, music and video industries are full of horror histories about activation servers going down or being simply dumb and rigid.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
*salute*
Re: (Score:2)
The huge positive about this, of course, is that if you're offline for 10+ days you no longer lose your ability to play the game. So this is definitely a change for the better.
But for me, it's still a no go. I try very hard to avoid buying products that ties itself to a specif
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)