CD Protection goes too far

[Varsity]

And when I say too far, I mean installing crap into your Device Manager.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=177528&st=0&#entry2274234

I've posted my comments in that thread, I won't spam them here.

 

[gh0st]

Game Designers make games, which people pirate. If people pirate games, people dont buy games, and the game designers dont get money. If the designers dont have money, games dont get made. i.e. i dont care what shit they put on my computer (ill erase it when i need to, "drivers" are very easy to uninstall). if the game is good, im going to play it. its not like these drivers are reporting your shit to the company, if they are you would find out quickly because you definatly have a firewall in which you will see what is being connected to where.

 

[Shuzer]

Problem is, all these anti-piracy measures aren't really doing anything other than causing a few days delay for games to be warezed

 

[PvtRyan]

Gamers owe it to themselves with their copying. Can't blame the developers for trying to stop this.
Come on, you get more shit installed on your pc after 10 minutes of porn surfing.... our pc's get violated by this sort of crap daily.

It's not 'Starforce has gone way too far this time' but 'Pirates have gone way too far for too long'
It won't be long until games require an internet connection for online registration before you can even play singeplayer. It will happen, and when it does, kick the pirates, not the developers.

 

[Varsity]

It's not 'Starforce has gone way too far this time' but 'Pirates have gone way too far for too long'
It won't be long until games require an internet connection for online registration before you can even play singeplayer. It will happen, and when it does, kick the pirates, not the developers.

This has no effect on piracy apart from the delay Shuzer mentioned. What I'm saying is that it's not going to take long for the CD protection to be driving the piracy, not the other way round. Steam is of course the exception.

 

[Hazar]

I think the safest way to prevent warez of the game is to have a manditory registration. Via the internet would be of course the easiest but the people who don't have internet could send in a little card that comes with the game. The game works for something like 30 days and then has to be registered.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

I do not condone warez or anything of the sort, but i find it annoying when i want to make a copy of a game so i can stop it getting broken (I lost C&C Renegade, and BF1942 that way) and losing it.


Fortunately i have a nice little imaging tool now which lets me basically store them on the computer, meaning i use the CD once and thats it.

 

[Deadline]

That is the only way to keep games from being pirated. The Devs can put all the damn software they want onto the cd-roms to try to keep people from pirating it, but the only thing it is doing is delaying the pirated copies acouple of days at the max and making us honest gamers get pissed off because A) for some reason our cd-roms cant read the cd because of the anti pirating software or B) because they install stuff on our already dwindiling hard drive space.

 

[B_MAN]

its only posponing the inevitable;
crackerz will always find a way around protection
:|

 

[smwScott]

It makes it worse for paying customers, and doesn't really change anything for the pirates. I had to uninstall two programs to get my legal copy of Pandora Tomorrow to work. I had to return Knights of the Old Republic because the CD protection ****ed up. It's absurd, it's almost at the point where it's more appealing to pirate single player games rather than buy it so you don't have to deal with all the copy protection. Kinda ironic.

 

[Shuzer]

Here are my thoughts on this subject

If developers would make games that are both equally good in single player and multiplayer, than people are far less likely to warez. As a result, the games sell better, the developers make more money, and copy protection isn't needed. However, it seems that companies these days either make good SP with crap MP, or SP only. Hardly EVER a good balance between the two is put forth, but when a good balance is created, a title shines.

Take StarCraft in example, was it pirated? Yes. Did it hurt sales? Doubtful, as SC is one of the best selling games ever created. Blizzard is top-notch for stopping warezed copies from playing games online, and online play was half the fun for StarCraft. It bolstered both a great single player campaign, and many many MANY hours past that in multiplayer. Which, in turn, got people to buy the game. If it had offered a great single player experience with mediocre online play, there's no way it would've lasted so long.

Half-Life is also another good example; SP was good, but so many people wanted to play it online (whether it be HLDM or mods), thus, it sold so many copies. The reason? The balance between both single player AND multiplayer. Couple this with a good system to stop warezed copies from playing online, and you have a best seller.

I feel, personally, that developers like Crytek are pumping out too much crap in terms of one side of the spectrum. In terms of single player, FarCry was a good game. Its multiplayer is pretty much crap as is, and most people I know don't give a fluff about it [the multiplayer]. Thus, games like this, which have the said copy protection which really provides nothing but a hassle for the paying customers, don't sell as well as they could. We need balance! Balance I say! I'm tired of seeing games as good as FarCry die off because of rushed/thoughtless multiplayer, but good single player. FarCry could have rivaled Half-Life or StarCraft in terms of sales, IMO, if the multiplayer had been as good as the single player.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the real reason warez is so rampant is directly related to crappily made, or otherwise rushed titles. If companies offer games that have both solid single AND multiplayer (assuming the multiplayer is of a server-browser sort, with proper cdkey authentication), warez would be far less a problem. This is common sense, clearly, but when's the last time you saw a title that had both great single AND multiplayer fail (or, otherwise fall off the radar long before it should have) due to warez? How about such a said title losing alot of sales due to warez? I can't recall a single title.

Of course, you have the single player ONLY titles.. these are obviously some of the largest targets for lost sales due to warez. This saddens me, and I don't know what is to be said/done about this, but clearly, copy protection isn't helping anything but to hinder paying customers.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Maybe so, but companies shouldn't be forced to spend extra development time making a decent multiplayer mode if it's not in their original vision. It's not the answer.

But maybe there is an answer. Has anyone managed to crack Operation Flashpoint yet?

In any case, all this protection is making piracy worse, not better. I mean, I've never played Shogun: Total War because the CD key on my copy did not match the one required for installation. Yeah, thanks a lot.

 

[thehunter1320]

Here are my thoughts on this subject

If developers would make games that are both equally good in single player and multiplayer, than people are far less likely to warez. As a result, the games sell better, the developers make more money, and copy protection isn't needed. However, it seems that companies these days either make good SP with crap MP, or SP only. Hardly EVER a good balance between the two is put forth, but when a good balance is created, a title shines.

Take StarCraft in example, was it pirated? Yes. Did it hurt sales? Doubtful, as SC is one of the best selling games ever created. Blizzard is top-notch for stopping warezed copies from playing games online, and online play was half the fun for StarCraft. It bolstered both a great single player campaign, and many many MANY hours past that in multiplayer. Which, in turn, got people to buy the game. If it had offered a great single player experience with mediocre online play, there's no way it would've lasted so long.

Half-Life is also another good example; SP was good, but so many people wanted to play it online (whether it be HLDM or mods), thus, it sold so many copies. The reason? The balance between both single player AND multiplayer. Couple this with a good system to stop warezed copies from playing online, and you have a best seller.

I feel, personally, that developers like Crytek are pumping out too much crap in terms of one side of the spectrum. In terms of single player, FarCry was a good game. Its multiplayer is pretty much crap as is, and most people I know don't give a fluff about it [the multiplayer]. Thus, games like this, which have the said copy protection which really provides nothing but a hassle for the paying customers, don't sell as well as they could. We need balance! Balance I say! I'm tired of seeing games as good as FarCry die off because of rushed/thoughtless multiplayer, but good single player. FarCry could have rivaled Half-Life or StarCraft in terms of sales, IMO, if the multiplayer had been as good as the single player.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the real reason warez is so rampant is directly related to crappily made, or otherwise rushed titles. If companies offer games that have both solid single AND multiplayer (assuming the multiplayer is of a server-browser sort, with proper cdkey authentication), warez would be far less a problem. This is common sense, clearly, but when's the last time you saw a title that had both great single AND multiplayer fail (or, otherwise fall off the radar long before it should have) due to warez? How about such a said title losing alot of sales due to warez? I can't recall a single title.

Of course, you have the single player ONLY titles.. these are obviously some of the largest targets for lost sales due to warez. This saddens me, and I don't know what is to be said/done about this, but clearly, copy protection isn't helping anything but to hinder paying customers.

Here, here!! :cheers: