Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Borderlands DLC Released

The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned, the debut DLC for Borderlands, is now available to update Gearbox Software's role-playing shooter with new content. The DLC is available from the Gearbox Software Store, where they warn that: "If you purchased Borderlands from a digital delivery service such as Steam or D2D, contact them to upgrade your copy of Borderlands." The Steam version of the DLC is online as well, here's word from there on the DLC:

The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is the first Add-On for Borderlands with new enemy types, new missions, and new ... surprises.

The Jakobs Corporation would like to invite you to experience the splendor of a corporate owned small town known as Jakobs Cove. Any rumors you may have heard about the "undead" walking our streets are completely preposterous and we officially deny them all. If those rumors turn out to be true simply purchase a firearm from the conveniently located Jakobs Brand Vending Machines and aim for the head. Also, would you mind saving our employees? (Non-union only please)

    • 5 New Areas to Explore
    • Dozens of New Missions
    • New Enemies to Eviscerate

View
44 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

44. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 11, 2009, 15:12 Prez
 
DRM is awesome. All I know is that if I would have pirated Dragon Age rather than buy it, I would have been playing it 2 days ago. But because the activation/product code I was given by Impulse does not work, I am still waiting to play the game I legally paid for while pirates are enjoying the hell out of it.

This is what we call "irony", kids.

This comment was edited on Dec 11, 2009, 15:13.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 11, 2009, 12:01 Verno
 
It's not DRM if it doesn't do anything. Steam is ten times worse DRM than even an activation model SecuROM, let along a modification that does nothing at all.

I am sure it has something to do with the DLC having securom and the game needing some files to work through that protection when accessing it. Why didn't they announce it? Because no one gives a shit, that's why. You can talk about these Steam forum folks all you want but I spent a great deal of time there today and the numbers are limited, most of them are complaining about the activation limits on the DLC which I oppose as well, and they represent a small minority of buyers in the first place.

I know you are outraged, I am telling you it is for nothing but you ignore that, and that's your decision. Don't act like this is some grand crusade I am too dumb to understand though, the simple fact is that dormant SecuROM files which do nothing being found in a game with massive Steam DRM already, or SecuROM already at retail, means nothing to the vast majority of people.

Massive Steam DRM is what people signed up for when they bought the game on Steam you buffoon. No one signed up for them slipping in other DRM unannounced, active or not. People can tolerate Steam DRM, they like the convenience tradeoff. They do not like SecuRom. People are outraged because of the hilarious disarray that is this game's release for the PC, this is not hard to see if you'd stop trying to make excuses for them and actually examine the facts objectively.

I don't know where your sudden need to defend every bad decision the industry makes comes from but it's thinly veiled at best and makes you look utterly ludicrous.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Alien Isolation, Legend of Grimrock 2, Super Mario 3D World
Watching: A Good Marriage, The Knick, Gotham
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 11, 2009, 10:07 nin
 
Because no one gives a shit, that's why.


Judging by the responses here and elsewhere, people do care about it.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 11, 2009, 05:41 StingingVelvet
 
And seeing as you seem to be clearly missing my problem with this...is not so much that they have DRM code in the game or that the DLC uses the DRM. It's that Gearbox silently patched the game with the code, they didn't announce the patch and when questioned on what the patch contained, they didn't even give a straight answer. I bought a game without DRM, which has been force patched after the fact to contain DRM. Whether it's idle or not is irrelevant.

It's not DRM if it doesn't do anything. Steam is ten times worse DRM than even an activation model SecuROM, let along a modification that does nothing at all.

I am sure it has something to do with the DLC having securom and the game needing some files to work through that protection when accessing it. Why didn't they announce it? Because no one gives a shit, that's why. You can talk about these Steam forum folks all you want but I spent a great deal of time there today and the numbers are limited, most of them are complaining about the activation limits on the DLC which I oppose as well, and they represent a small minority of buyers in the first place.

I know you are outraged, I am telling you it is for nothing but you ignore that, and that's your decision. Don't act like this is some grand crusade I am too dumb to understand though, the simple fact is that dormant SecuROM files which do nothing being found in a game with massive Steam DRM already, or SecuROM already at retail, means nothing to the vast majority of people.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 21:35 Krovven
 
As a further note, the stand-alone patch is 191mb. That's not a "minor" update.

There are no patch notes on the website, and there are no patch notes or any form of readme in the zip file.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 21:22 Krovven
 
The end result is this: the "SecuROM" they added does nothing, it just sits there. It is complete and utter DRM paranoia to be concerned about it.

And seeing as you seem to be clearly missing my problem with this...is not so much that they have DRM code in the game or that the DLC uses the DRM. It's that Gearbox silently patched the game with the code, they didn't announce the patch and when questioned on what the patch contained, they didn't even give a straight answer. I bought a game without DRM, which has been force patched after the fact to contain DRM. Whether it's idle or not is irrelevant.

This "stealth DRM adding" concept is ridiculous though, and the minor uproar about it is more based on people hearing the word SecuROM and seeing werewolves because anti-DRM people have made it seem like all SecuROM is evil, which isn't the case, most SecuROM is just a harmless disc check.

As I've already said, and you failed to answer...if it's not a big deal then why did Gearbox fail to notify the public of the patch? And why did they give a vague comment when asked about it? The answer is because they knew people weren't going to like it. It's shady and underhanded.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 21:12 StingingVelvet
 
RAWR!!!

The end result is this: the "SecuROM" they added does nothing, it just sits there. It is complete and utter DRM paranoia to be concerned about it.

Adding real active SecuROM with install limits to the DLC? STUPID. BOTHERS ME.

This "stealth DRM adding" concept is ridiculous though, and the minor uproar about it is more based on people hearing the word SecuROM and seeing werewolves because anti-DRM people have made it seem like all SecuROM is evil, which isn't the case, most SecuROM is just a harmless disc check.

Anyway, you go on and be mad. Have fun.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 21:01 Krovven
 
If only some time had passed between the two posts where I could have gone to the Steam forum and looked it up.

Yep mistakes happen. I was at work, reading fast and posting when I should be working. I made a mistake and corrected it. I said it was an Edit. What's your point again?

I didn't see anything about the exe, all I read on the Steam forum was added SecuROM files that are inactive.

As I just pointed out in the other thread, you obviously aren't reading what others are saying. I posted a link to the Steam thread that HAS a screenshot of the hex view of the exe file. Verno also stated he viewed the exe in a hex editor to see that SecuROM is in there.

If the exe was swapped for one with inactive SecuROM in it that is a little worse

Which is the whole point of this, but you don't bother to read what others are saying before blindly arguing against them.

Every game patches the main game to prepare for DLC, Fallout 3 did it before every new DLC

Did they announce the patch? Yes. Did they add DRM code to the game? No. Did Gearbox do the same? Swap the answers to each of the questions.

Adding some files with SecuROM traces that are only active when the DLC is installed is not that though.

If it's not a big deal, then why didnt they announce the patch? And when questioned on it, why didn't they give full disclosure? Because they knew people wouldn't like the real answer.

Thousands? Really? I haven't counted and I doubt you did.

Who needs to count when you can plainly see a large number of the threads on the Borderlands forums are regarding the DRM, and the post/view counts across jsut the official forum and the Steam forums reaches well into the tens of thousands. This does even touch on the dozens of other forums out there discussing the same things.

Forums, especially the Steam forums, are often used as a base for the fringe to be angry about something most people don't care at all about. It is pretty common.

Yours is also a pretty common and petty excuse to dismiss peoples valid complaints that you disagree with. Bottomline is you posted prior to knowing the facts and other than it doesn't bother you as an individual, you don't have any actual valid arguments as to why people shouldn't have a problem with the way Gearbox handled this, why they didn't announce the patch, or why they added DRM code to the existing game exe when it wasn't needed for those without the DLC.

This comment was edited on Dec 10, 2009, 21:01.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 20:03 StingingVelvet
 
On your last post you said you had not.

If only some time had passed between the two posts where I could have gone to the Steam forum and looked it up.

Oh wait...

So you can delete the base game exe and the game will run? I think not. Maybe you can delete the other related files, but not the exe. Which brings us back to the point I made earlier...SecuROM should only be added to the game when you purchase/download the DLC. No reason it should have been added otherwise, especially without specifically stating so.

I didn't see anything about the exe, all I read on the Steam forum was added SecuROM files that are inactive. If the exe was swapped for one with inactive SecuROM in it that is a little worse, but still... inactive is the key word.

If you don't care about companies silently adding DRM to your files, good for you. Most people do have a problem with that. This would have been an entirely different conversation if they had just announced the patch and stated what it was actually doing. Again, there was no reason for them to patch the base game when the user has not purchased & downloaded the DLC itself.

Every game patches the main game to prepare for DLC, Fallout 3 did it before every new DLC. I am not a programmer so I can't say why this is the chosen method rather than a patch within the DLC itself, but I assume there is a reason.

As for me having a problem with adding DRM after the sale I certainly would if that was what they did. Adding some files with SecuROM traces that are only active when the DLC is installed is not that though. People act like a simple trace of DRM is this horrible thing and that I do not agree with, I only have an issue with install limits and such, which is what people think when they read "securom" which is why some are upset. It is a misconception.

Again, read the forums. There are thousands of people very pissed off about this.

Thousands? Really? I haven't counted and I doubt you did.

Forums, especially the Steam forums, are often used as a base for the fringe to be angry about something most people don't care at all about. It is pretty common.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 18:12 Krovven
 
I was hypothesizing and stated that cleary,

Edit: I realise what you were trying to make an alternative suggestion. But the facts were already there proving that SecuROM was added in a silent patch that Gearbox acknowledged after the fact. You just chose to dispute it out of hand.

Anyway I did read up on it

On your last post you said you had not.

in fact you can delete them and the base game functions normally

So you can delete the base game exe and the game will run? I think not. Maybe you can delete the other related files, but not the exe. Which brings us back to the point I made earlier...SecuROM should only be added to the game when you purchase/download the DLC. No reason it should have been added otherwise, especially without specifically stating so.

No. Big. Deal.

If you don't care about companies silently adding DRM to your files, good for you. Most people do have a problem with that. This would have been an entirely different conversation if they had just announced the patch and stated what it was actually doing. Again, there was no reason for them to patch the base game when the user has not purchased & downloaded the DLC itself.

Steams system of automatically delivering patches to users has been great, and has thusfar gone unabused. But when companies like Gearbox use that feature to underhandedly add unnecessary and unannounced DRM to the files when they are not needed...that's when I begin to have a problem with it.

If you think it is you are a minority.

Again, read the forums. There are thousands of people very pissed off about this.

This comment was edited on Dec 10, 2009, 18:54.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 17:53 StingingVelvet
 
I was hypothesizing and stated that cleary, then you tell me to get my facts straight? Christ.

Anyway I did read up on it and the files are indeed idle and in fact you can delete them and the base game functions normally, so... no big deal. It is there to be activated in case of DLC installation.

No. Big. Deal.

If you think it is you are a minority. I accept your position, but that doesn't make it a true concern.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 17:44 Krovven
 
the Steam patch just has remnants of such a thing like Red Alert 3 had on Steam briefly.

Or you check into before speaking up...only to learn that there indeed was a silent and unannounced patch last night adding SecuROM into the base game exe file. It may not be 'active' for the base game, but that doesn't excuse them from adding it in without being clear about it. And when questioned on it, giving a vague response of 'adding support for DLC'.

It's very simple, Gearbox promoted Borderlands on Steam being SecuROM free, they released the DLC on Steam with SecuROM 5 activation, and then quietly added SecuROM (possibly idle) into the base game.

A quick visit to the Gearbox forums and the Steam forums.... A LOT of people have a problem with the way this was done.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 17:09 StingingVelvet
 
the latest patch (not dlc) installs securom without permission on steam, lets see you defend that bullshit stingingapologist.

Jesus, "you must be negative all the time like us or you are an apologist!!! Corporations are always wrong, they just want monies its so bad OMG!!!"

Anyway, if they snuck SecuROM into the base game as a patch that would indeed be horrible. I will have to read up on it. My initial reaction without reading anything is that the retail game had SecuROM and perhaps the Steam patch just has remnants of such a thing like Red Alert 3 had on Steam briefly.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 13:03 Krovven
 
the latest patch (not dlc) installs securom without permission on steam, lets see you defend that bullshit stingingapologist.

Indeed. I saw the patch coming in last night and couldn't find any info on it. Turns out they snuck a patch in adding DRM to the base game. If I hadn't gone in on a 4-pack I'd be asking for a refund right now, and would probably get it. But for them to refund a 4-pack, all 4 copies would be revoked...so it's kind of up to Batman and whomever else got the other copies.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 11:18 Wowbagger_TIP
 
My god, what a bunch of pansy ass little cry babies.
Well damn, that's a pretty compelling rebuttal there. I guess you win.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 09:15 Aganazer
 
My god, what a bunch of pansy ass little cry babies.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 10, 2009, 07:12 The PC Warrior
 
the latest patch (not dlc) installs securom without permission on steam, lets see you defend that bullshit stingingapologist.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 9, 2009, 23:22 Sempai
 
Time to go see if its cracked I guess

Yes because we're the uber PC elite, we want higher resolutions, more options and more freedom. But we're not gonna pay for it.

Seriously stop acting like dicks. It's not like they're charging a premium to let us play on the PC - quite the opposite for base games. Yet still everyone bitches, and then bitch more when people can't be arsed to deal with our bullshit and stop releasing on the PC.

We're being charged the same as a console user for dlc - and whilst I've never tried I imagine XBL or PSN would complain if you wanted to run on 5 consoles at the same time.

Seriously GET OVER YOURSELVES



You m'friend are a fucking moron. GG.
 
Avatar 33180
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 9, 2009, 22:09 StingingVelvet
 
Yeah I'd bet they'd really feel for us with our better graphics, controls and loading times whilst suffering equal prices for DLC whilst paying less for the actual game. I'm sure everyone would feel sorry for us poor put upon gamers who can't even run 6 copies of the same game at the same time without being asked why anyone anywhere would ever need to do that.

Honestly I despair about the horrible situation we're in.

+-fucking-1.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Borderlands DLC Dec 9, 2009, 20:33 The PC Warrior
 
and this DLC is longer than many entire games

not according to the dlc reviews. the game has two play throughs for each character. it isnt endlessly replayable and the online multiplayer is broken for half the user base while the other half has to put up with cheaters unless they play solely with friends. it was an ok game but youre trumping it up to be diablo just so you can shit on pc gamers. the embarrassment goes both ways.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo