|
|
 |
| [May 02, 2010, 4:48 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
The SEGA America Blog has details on how Digital Rights Management will work for the upcoming PC edition of Alpha Protocol, Obsidian Entertainment's espionage-themed action/RPG. The post includes a full FAQ on the topic of their DRM, and here's the summary: The system chosen for Alpha Protocol is Uniloc: SoftAnchor. The system will allow the user to activate Alpha Protocol online immediately out of the box and once activated the user never needs to worry about activating again. The activation can be used on a limited amount of PCs, and can be deactivated through our online servers allowing the user full control over their license – should they need to re-install, swap machines or suffer a catastrophic hardware failure on their normal PC.
In the future, SEGA will be releasing an unprotected patch of the game to alleviate any fears of not being able to play the game when the Uniloc servers won’t be around anymore.
We also do not use Steamworks – the Steam released version will use Uniloc DRM.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 60. |
Re: Alpha Protocol DRM Details |
May 6, 2010, 21:45 |
Verno |
|
|
JD wrote on May 6, 2010, 15:47:
Your entire post is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen written around here, and it clearly shows that you don't comprehend what you read.
Saying something is true isn't the same as it being true. Your continued insults and worthless snide remarks are wasted on me, I've been trolled by better 
Read the sentence which precedes that statement of mine again because you obviously misunderstood it. If SEGA simply thought AvP didn't sell well because it was a crappy or mediocre game, it wouldn't be changing its DRM. What that means is not that I personally think that SEGA would in fact make better games, but rather that SEGA itself would see that making better games was the solution to its sales problem if it thought something was wrong with the game.
Uh, it's pretty obvious we all knew what you meant. If you had bother reading the text you quoted, you'd see the response in it for what "Sega thinks" and why your interpretation of Sega's thinking are potentially two very different things. Publishers often say one thing and do another. If Sega actually applied the kind of logic you're suggesting, it would have started "making better games" long ago to use your example. As I said, you're applying your personal interpretation of their action to the situation. You're assuming Sega would even be rational when in fact publishers are usually anything but when it comes to DRM.
That being said, obviously I think Uniloc is preferable to a 3 hash base SecuRom package but it doesn't get a pass from me for simply having a deauthorization tool and a friendly press release. DRM is DRM. I'm also well aware of Steam's disadvantages, I've argued them here many times in the past.
Since I obviously need to simplify it for you what that means and shows is that those consumers accepted the Internet activation and other restrictions of Steam's DRM on the game because they liked the game. Steam's benefits as a game distributor like unlimited downloads weren't the reason because they didn't use Steam as the game distributor. These PC gamers bought the game from retailers not from Steam.
You seem to want to separate consumer buying from the distribution when they are obviously entwined. One can only assume it's because it does not suit your argument because there is literally no other good reason. And again your entire argument sits on the precarious notion of a Sega PR statement and really, what publisher doesn't invalid claims about DRM? And as for PC gamers buying from retail, not Steam, they're all getting Uniloc regardless which is really the whole point of why we're discussing this in the first place.
First, you are confusing Steam as a game distribution service with Steam's DRM. Steam's DRM offers no benefits either only restrictions. Second, from its description Uniloc does offer tangible benefits over Steam's DRM as I mentioned below: simultaneous play on up to 5 PC's and the ability to sell or give away a game.
Steam itself is the DRM for all meaningful intents and purposes. Steam's actual DRM is nothing more than a simple executable wrapper that is easily defeated. Publishers do not approach Steam for simple product protection, Steam is a suite of services that have varying levels publishers can use. Name one Steamworks title that is not also distributed through Steam.
It's not a joke for those who like to sell, lend, or share their games with family and friends. Steam's restrictiveness in that regard is the real joke on consumers. There is simply no good reason not to allow it as this new Uniloc DRM does allow it. The reason that Valve forbids and prevents it on Steam is greed.
Regardless, people who want resale purchase at retail regardless because resale on digital distribution services is dead and quite frankly was never really alive in the first place. You claim consumers have accepted internet activation DRM, I don't really buy that. I think consumers have accepted Steam. It and perhaps Direct2Drive are the only two services I can think that can reasonably make the claim that their internet activation/DRM/etc are acceptable to the mass market PC consumer audience. Uniloc DRM and other internet based activation methods that use hardware hashes can't make that same claim. In fact most if not all have been met with resistance from consumers. Even a casual market title like Spore was met with serious press problems related to its hardware hash based DRM.
And, despite those features of Steam as a service, Steam's DRM can still prevent consumers from being able to play their purchased games how and when they want or even at all. It does no good to have unlimited downloads of a game you can't play.
I don't see how you can reasonably make this claim when any other DRM can and has had the same effect on the consumer. No one here is arguing that "DRM is good". Steam is an acceptable compromise. Retail internet DRM I'm not so sure about. In fact, I'd wager this game doesn't even make a blip on the retail charts anywhere but the consoles when it launches. You know where it will? Steam. All of those consumers will have two forms of DRM which again is why I am not a fan of Uniloc in this instance. One they made a reasonable choice about and the other they most likely won't know exists until they have an actual problem with it. I doubt many people really think they're signing up and buying games on Steam so that they can have unlimited simultaneous logins and to share the games with their friends.
This comment was edited on May 6, 2010, 21:52. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
