On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

[Jan 30, 2011, 4:31 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

Destructoid has a report on plans for copy protection in Bulletstorm, along with a follow up on the DRM in People Can Fly's upcoming first-person shooter. They note that the Electronic Arts Online Disclosures for PC Games Page indicates the digitally distributed version of the game requires a persistent internet connection, but follow that up with People Can Fly denying this in a tweet, seeming to blame the internet, rather than EA for the confusion (later backing off), saying: "F**king Internets... No, Bulletstorm PC does not require any constant connection, only for install and for online play (duh!)." True to that, clicking through to the EULA itself (Adobe Acrobat-format), we see it contains word on the game's Zero Day Piracy Protection (ZDPP) and Server Side Authentication (SSA), saying: "ZDPP requires a one-time access to the Internet. It may prompt users to enter their serial code (enclosed with purchase) in order to install their game. If the code is invalid, or entered before the product’s release date, the installed executable files will remain encrypted and unusable. SSA requires a one-time access to the Internet in order to authenticate your serial code. Please keep your serial code. You may need it to access online features and/or if you seek to install your game on more than one machine." The EULA also confirms the game will use the unpopular Games for Windows LIVE. According to the EULA the game will require: "A Windows Live ID and Account, installation of the Games for Windows Live software, acceptance of the Games for Windows LIVE Terms of Use."

View

61 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

61.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 17:47

StingingVelvet

necrosis wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 16:11: And I should not have to do any of that. Between botched downloads, fowled up files, the fucked up "Oh your game is not installed on drive C:?" bullshit GFWL can eat my ass. Like I said, there were steps you should not have to take, certainly. At the end of the day though they take 5 seconds and then you're done, so if you want the DLC it's not like it's some massive chore. I think what separates the two of us is that I don't sweat the small stuff.

60.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 16:29

PHJF

Some people like to feel superior by acting like they are above silly entertainment. Cutter only watches Masterpiece Theater.

It's just Masterpiece. They changed it when they brought it to America because they thought saying Theatre would (rightfully so) frighten away the idiot American audience.




Steam + PSN: PHJF

59.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 16:11

necrosis

StingingVelvet wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 11:28: necrosis wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 09:19: GFWL == No Sale I ripped out clumps of hair dealing with it in Fallout 3 DLC. Never again. Buy DLC Download DLC Google file location for DLC Move DLC to the game's data file Play game Granted there are a couple steps there you should not have to take, I didn't have a real problem with Fallout 3's DLC. It was DRM-free too, which was nice. And I should not have to do any of that. Between botched downloads, fowled up files, the fucked up "Oh your game is not installed on drive C:?" bullshit GFWL can eat my ass.

58.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 14:26

StingingVelvet

Dev wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 13:36: As for offline profile, I was never able to do that with bioshock 2 when I tried to play. Because of GFWL screwing up itself and the game (such as freezing on updates), I was not able to play my purchased game until I made another computer half a year later. Part of it was that it required logging into an online GFWL account everytime it ran to SAVE GAMES. http://www.bluesnews.com/s/106502/bioshock-2-drm-and-gfwl-info Make an offline profile and you don't need to have the internet to save. You can choose not to believe me, but I did it myself.

57.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 13:36

Dev

StingingVelvet wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 07:38: Dev wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 00:17: Thats not true for all. Some games REQUIRE gfwl and a persistant internet connection and don't work offline. Like bioshock 2 wouldn't run without it (at least legitimately). GFWL allows companies to set a range of protections with GFWL such as a persistent internet connection requirement. BioShock 2 does not require a persistent internet connection, I don't have any idea where you got that from. The only DRM on BioShock 2's singleplayer game is actually the release-date check when you install, which has nothing to do with GFWL. After that release-date check you can use an offline profile and never need the internet. More recent GFWL games like Dead Rising 2 have had a GFWL activation be required. This is called ZDPP or "zero day piracy protection," but even then it doesn't require a persistent internet connection, that's just FUD. It's a one time activation required to play, just like Steam does. As for it causing technical issues I bet it's just a scapegoat, I never had it cause any problems and most of the problems I see blamed on it are problems that could be inherent to the game, or to a user's PC, like Fallout 3's crashes. The reason 100% verified reason GFWL sucks has little to do with DRM and mostly to do with it having a shitty interface and bad multiplayer features. My bad, I was getting it mixed up with another game/DRM. As for offline profile, I was never able to do that with bioshock 2 when I tried to play. Because of GFWL screwing up itself and the game (such as freezing on updates), I was not able to play my purchased game until I made another computer half a year later. Part of it was that it required logging into an online GFWL account everytime it ran to SAVE GAMES. http://www.bluesnews.com/s/106502/bioshock-2-drm-and-gfwl-info And no, its not a scapegoat in my case. Just because YOU PERSONALLY have never had trouble with it doesn't mean that virtually every other person who had any trouble blamed it on GFWL's when it wasn't at fault. Besides, you already mentioned you had trouble with the GFWL and DRM. You had to bypass it to play the DLC you purchased for fallout 3. Feel free to check out those GFWL forums people have linked in this thread.

56.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 13:18

Suddenly_Dead

Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Jan 30, 2011, 20:19: Considering FO3 wasn't super unstable I'm not sure what you're talking about. It was about as stable as standard netimmerse engine games, which was to say about average. Mods themselves don't push the game over the allowable amount of ram unless you have your page file disabled. In which case you're creating your own crashes. It had nothing to do with the pagefile. If a program doesn't have the IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE flag flipped in its image header, Windows will only let it address 2GB of virtual memory. That's 2 GB total. Whether some of it is paged or not is irrevelant; the game only has 2 GB that it can work with, and the OS will shuffle it around between the pagefile and RAM as it sees fit. That's because of 32-bit Windows, where by default the 4 GB virtual address space is split half between user space and half for the kernel and drivers and whatnot. Many 32-bit programs count on only getting 2 GB, and giving them more just breaks them. If that flag is flipped, the game gets up to (not quite, but certainly more than 2 GB) a full 4GB virtual address space to work with. There's a reason why this was/is a popular tweak to the game.

55.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 11:29

StingingVelvet

Dmitri_M wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 10:42: No idea why people are bashing Bulletstorm for being "juvenile" or "lowest common denominator". You all forgotten PC classics like Blood, Duke 3D, Doom? If anything Bulletstorm doesn't match the violence in those games. Slate it for lack of imagination. I haven't seen much in the videos anywhere as Diabolical as some of those old PC titles. Regardless, I liked Painkiller. I'll be trying the demo of this. Some people like to feel superior by acting like they are above silly entertainment. Cutter only watches Masterpiece Theater.

54.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 11:28

StingingVelvet

necrosis wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 09:19: GFWL == No Sale I ripped out clumps of hair dealing with it in Fallout 3 DLC. Never again. Buy DLC Download DLC Google file location for DLC Move DLC to the game's data file Play game Granted there are a couple steps there you should not have to take, I didn't have a real problem with Fallout 3's DLC. It was DRM-free too, which was nice.

53.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 10:42

Dmitri_M

No idea why people are bashing Bulletstorm for being "juvenile" or "lowest common denominator". You all forgotten PC classics like Blood, Duke 3D, Doom? If anything Bulletstorm doesn't match the violence in those games. Slate it for lack of imagination. I haven't seen much in the videos anywhere as Diabolical as some of those old PC titles. Regardless, I liked Painkiller. I'll be trying the demo of this.

52.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 09:19

necrosis

GFWL == No Sale I ripped out clumps of hair dealing with it in Fallout 3 DLC. Never again.

51.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 08:48

Your mom looks like Gears of War. She likes using cover, shakes your view, and can regenerate for another round in mere seconds! Seriously, loosen up a little!

50.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 08:29

Beamer

50 Cent Blood in the Sand was a reskinned GoW game.

This is similar in art style and reuses some of the assets built into UE3 without changing them (like the shakycam mechanic), but it plays nothing like it.

The Epic hating around here makes sense sometimes, it doesn't make sense other times. I know only one poster said it, but I still can't get over the whole "console-esque gravity defying boobs!" comment. The gravity defying boobs were always in the Unreal Tournament games, which were PC games. Gears of War, the console game, had one female and she was fully clothed in an officer's uniform, and I'm pretty certain she was in her 30s. Regardless, I don't get how that's "console-oriented" anyway, considering the PC has a long tradition of that kind of crap and it all comes from comic books.

There's always some legitimate complaints, but some of you are so carried away by irrational thought that you live in fantasy worlds.




------------- Music for the discerning: http://www.deathwishinc.com http://www.hydrahead.com http://www.painkillerrecords.com

49.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 07:38

StingingVelvet

Dev wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 00:17: Thats not true for all. Some games REQUIRE gfwl and a persistant internet connection and don't work offline. Like bioshock 2 wouldn't run without it (at least legitimately). GFWL allows companies to set a range of protections with GFWL such as a persistent internet connection requirement. BioShock 2 does not require a persistent internet connection, I don't have any idea where you got that from. The only DRM on BioShock 2's singleplayer game is actually the release-date check when you install, which has nothing to do with GFWL. After that release-date check you can use an offline profile and never need the internet. More recent GFWL games like Dead Rising 2 have had a GFWL activation be required. This is called ZDPP or "zero day piracy protection," but even then it doesn't require a persistent internet connection, that's just FUD. It's a one time activation required to play, just like Steam does. As for it causing technical issues I bet it's just a scapegoat, I never had it cause any problems and most of the problems I see blamed on it are problems that could be inherent to the game, or to a user's PC, like Fallout 3's crashes. The reason 100% verified reason GFWL sucks has little to do with DRM and mostly to do with it having a shitty interface and bad multiplayer features.

48.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 07:19

Rockn-Roll

If anyone wants to see why GFWL is reviled...just read the threads in the GFWL support forums at http://www.microsoft.com/games/en-US/Community/Pages/Forums.aspx

A good example is the problems that users have with BioShock 2...many, and I mean like over a thousand, players are unable to download and install the patches that 2K released for BioShock 2 because their systems have locked down access to their network adapter to only Windows TCP/IP stack applications. Microsoft does spend the time to analyze the problem...I'll give them that, but when it becomes clear that the user's security profile is preventing non-Windows applications from accessing the internet the support stops and the users are directed to the forums where their complaints are ignored.

My analysis indicates that GFWL is a pure and unmodified console application which only seems to mimick a Windows application...in essence it tries to make the PC experience the same as the console experience at a deep technical level. Perhaps there are some systems for which a console is superior, but I didn't build my i7-980 with 6GB of 1600Mhz triple channel DDR3 RAM and nVidia GTX285 graphics card so it can perform in an environment that feels like a child's toy.




Let's Rock!

47.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 05:05

finga

GFWL is frigging annoying and MS made it harder to just make a local profile (and is very aggravating when you refuse, causing the game to insist you can't make save games until you have a profile), but you can still just make a local profile. And if a game is good, I don't see why the mere existence of GFWL is such a great reason to skip that game. Are there just too many awesome games coming out for PC that you can skip something you'd otherwise want to play, all for the extra couple of seconds to click a profile when you start the game? If so, sure... but most of us are almost desperate for fun, hardcore new PC games. GFWL doesn't cost money to play on, and there's no requirement to use its shitty console-style online play. If Bulletstorm has servers, then that should be good enough to cover that. I'm not saying I "know" Bulletstorm is going to be a great game, but if it is, refusing to play it because of GFWL just denying yourself fun for the sake of something you have pretty much zero influence over anyway.

46.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 04:34

Icewind

Not really interested in the game anyway, not with "Crysis 2: Console Boogaloo" coming out less than a month later. Anytime a game announces it'll use GFWL though I'm out. Steam is my "Service" and I don't need something else for my lazy ass to log into and watch eat up my CPU cycles. Last time I used GFWL was with Bioshock 2, and whenever the menu came up it messed with the colors of the textures and wouldn't fix itself until a level load. Steam has never done that. Played the PS3 demo anyway and it wasn't anything special. Felt like that old arcade game "The Grid" only with over-the-top macho talk. yawn

45.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 03:56

Mac

DukeFNukem wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 03:29: I just marked this shitty game off my possible purchase list. I will NEVER pay to play a game that I haev to already pay for up front. Thats what the $60 is for you greedy bastards. Distribute the shitty software for free and I would consider paying a fee to play a game. What are you on about? MS stopped charging for Live on PC years ago ... there is no charge once you have bought the game, except for the inevitable DLC if you are daft enough to pay for that ...

44.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 03:29

DukeFNukem

I just marked this shitty game off my possible purchase list. I will NEVER pay to play a game that I haev to already pay for up front. Thats what the $60 is for you greedy bastards. Distribute the shitty software for free and I would consider paying a fee to play a game.

43.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 03:07

Sempai

Good job you just lost my business.

42.

Re: On Bulletstorm DRM and GFWL

Jan 31, 2011, 02:24

Jerykk

Did you watch the 2 videos? It looks EXACTLY like GoW.... In the first video, the player used cover about three times. And by "use," I mean "stood behind it for less than 5 seconds without even crouching once." In the second video, the player never uses cover. Good luck getting through Gears of War playing like that. For what it's worth, I've watched just about every video, looked at every screenshot and read every preview for Bulletstorm. I've also played Gears of War. Bulletstorm is not like GoW. They have completely different styles of gameplay. Bulletstorm is a run & gun first-person shooter. Gears of War is a cover-based third-person shooter. Why you're so adamant about comparing the two is a mystery to me. Out of the games you listed, I have only played the FEAR games. That was a PC game, it FELT like a PC game. I can't speak to the others, but as far as I have heard, ME and ME2 FEEL like console games.... FEAR 1 was designed for the PC, FEAR 2 was designed for 360 and ported to PC. ME1 and 2 were designed for 360 and ported to PC. That's probably why they felt like console games. None of this changes the fact that they were all available on PC and therefore qualify as PC games. And none of that changes the fact that Bluesnews is a website that focuses on PC gaming.

61 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >