131 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 6.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >
 |
| 31. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:41 |
Acleacius |
|
|
Obviously riccitiello is a liar, if it was .2% of complainers and 99.8% were happy, why would would the president even bother to address this issue? he wouldn't.
Btw, these are the same phony numbers they used to say starforce wasn't real and just a made up issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.....and they are stupid. Dwight D. Eisenhower |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 30. |
Well, so much for Far Cry 2... |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:38 |
JohnBirshire |
|
|
Glad I'm only .2% however.
*not an empty threat, was looking forward to Far Cry 2, and was going to buy it on release day...until I saw this bluesnews post. That's all it took to change my mind*
Does Fallout 3 or Red Alert 3 use it? Because those are the other two I planned on buying this month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 29. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:38 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Worrisome reports so far have indicated that even a new graphics card flags it as a new PC. I wouldn't be surprised if getting a new burner for your broken one would flag it as a new PC.
"Worrisome reports" from who? The fucktard brigade? Also your Win XP comparison is seriously lacking. I can tell you from first hand experience that Win XP is very lenient. A little while ago (and that was actually after a few minor upgrades involving RAM and the video card several times(!)) I went for a major upgrade and got a new mainboard, CPU, graphics card and a hard disk and now guess what. Even though I fully expected XP to demand manual activation by calling in I did not have to but it let me activate my copy by the click of a button as usual. Easy. Simple. Hasslefree. Awesome.
Ever since then I no longer believe in those retarded "worrisome reports" from people (and we have to use the term "people" loosely here as I'm not sure we're really talking about multicelled organisms) who claim that a graphics card driver update can require you to reactivate. Those are probably the very same idiots because of whom we got "don't use to dry your pet" stickers on microwave ovens. Seriously. There are so many dumbass motherfuckers in this world that are fucking around with their computers without even the slightest hint of a fucking clue that just about any-fucking-thing is possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 28. |
No subject |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:36 |
Skoll |
|
|
Just don't buy the game now. It will only get better in time through bug fixes, added content, expansions, lowered price, mods, and if it's like Bioshock, then removed DRM as well. Buying and playing it now will be like watching Watchmen for the first time on your ipod. Waiting 6 months to a year will be like watching Watchmen for the first time on iMAX. The value for what you get is that much higher when you wait. And not only is your value so much higher, you send a clear message that this form of DRM is unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 27. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:35 |
Undocumented Alien |
|
|
The online activations can be tolerated, in my opinion, but not the limited installs.
Perfectly stated, and I agree 100%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 26. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:29 |
Armengar |
|
|
A no-sale for me too. I dont want to have to "uninstall" properly. Which after a hard drive crash is a no no. Or a windows crash because im a tinkerer and destroy my registry etc etc. Plus that would mean uninstalling all the games based on this DRM model. I dont mind "phoning home" to legitimise the product but not if it is at the expense of limited installs.
No thanks, i'll spend my money elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Its not the cough that carries you off but the coffin they carry you off in. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 25. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:25 |
BicycleRepairMan |
|
|
- Ubisoft is committed to the support of our games, and additional activations can be provided.
- Ubisoft is committed to the long term support of our games: you’ll always be able to play Far Cry 2.
I'm sorry, you are missing the point here, Ubisoft, Let me guess, this game is already up on 50 torrent-sites, and there's no DRM if you download one.. SO WHY THE FUCK DO WE LEGITIMATE CUSTOMERS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THIS SHIT???!!
It makes no sense, nothing makes sense, if Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must stop using DRM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 24. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:21 |
BicycleRepairMan |
|
|
Thats another no-buy I was gonna buy. perhaps i'll get the torrent just to piss them off. And avoid DRM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 23. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:16 |
peteham |
|
|
BZZT! Bioshock didn't require any user-side intervention - they just made the servers just accept activations rather than keep count. A server-side fix beats the hell out of no fix at all, but I'd prefer to have the garbage removed from the client-side. I'm willing to reluctantly accept this scheme (I did buy Bioshock in the end..), as it essentially amounts to online activation. I'm not thrilled about that either, though. Why should I have to dial in for SINGLEPLAYER? Anyway, FC2 is off my buy-list along with Crysis Warhead. Spore never interested me in the least anyway, so that's no loss in my book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 22. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:03 |
SirKnight |
|
|
Ah hah! Turns out you can cancel pre-orders on STEAM. I just submitted my request to cancel FarCry 2.
OWNED!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 21. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 11:00 |
Optimaximal |
|
|
Doubtful. They'd have to spend money to make a patch to do so. BZZT! Bioshock didn't require any user-side intervention - they just made the servers just accept activations rather than keep count.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 20. |
... |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:54 |
theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
That's going to be a massive lawsuit waiting to happen, when EA turns off their first SecuROM protected game so people can't play it anymore. I'm not certain but I'd imagine they'd just push out a patch that bypasses it should they ever be shutoff.
NEway, the point isn't that it only affects 0.2% of people but that 100% of people have to deal with the possibility of losing access to the games they've paid for. And as time goes on surely the number of people affected will increase considerably? Also, 0.2% of a game that sell 10m copies is 20,000 people - 20,000 people that bought the game and are entitled to use it.
Lose / Lose |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core i7 2600-K (4.6GHz) | 12GB DDR3 | GTX680 SLI (1215/1605) | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD | Windows 8 Pro
Hazro HZ30Wie 30" | Saffire PRO 40 | Razer Mamba | Coolermaster RP1000W
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 19. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:43 |
SirKnight |
|
|
Damn it. I just remembered I already pre ordered this game on STEAM. AAAHHHHHHH! So I have to revoke my previous "NO sale" comment. Crap, I thought maybe the STEAM version would not have activations.
Oh well, I'll still crack the exe to remove the activations. 
*sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 18. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:35 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Worrisome reports so far have indicated that even a new graphics card flags it as a new PC. I wouldn't be surprised if getting a new burner for your broken one would flag it as a new PC. If that's true, then they're outright lying. Upgrading the video card is probably the most common computer upgrade, so if that isn't supported, they have no business saying upgrades are supported. It's understandable is a "revoke" is necessary before upgrading (hopefully this won't require an uninstall and reinstall), but if upgrading your video card uses up an extra one of the 3 PC's, that's ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 17. |
SALE LOST |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:33 |
Woebringer |
|
|
Pre-order canceled. Rootkit+Activations = No thanks
SALE LOST UBI. I had hoped you would not go the way of EA. I can see I was very wrong...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 16. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:32 |
Creston |
|
|
Wow, another EA game that wont get my money. I didn't know anything about this DRM bullshit with this game until now. I'm wondering if Gamespot will give me my preorder money back.
It's Ubisoft, not EA. Not a huge difference, but still. Gamespot should refund you if you cancel soon enough. (though it may take a fair few weeks before that money shows back up on your credit card...)
Creston
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 15. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:31 |
InBlack |
|
|
Telling big ass publishers to remove DRM from their games is like telling NASA to cut their budget by 5 billion dollars.
Im serious, they (EA, Ubisoft, Activision etc.) have probably a whole building full of programmers working on nothing BUT DRM, if they suddenly choose to scrap the idea, you will have a whole lot of software security "experts" without a job and on the dole.
Now that is called pure IRONY. Im pretty sure they would save enough money by cutting DRM from their titles, to cover any "fictive" costs of lost piracy sales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I have a nifty blue line! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 14. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:30 |
Creston |
|
|
I'm wondering when an upgrade is considered a separate PC. What unique identifier are they using that flags a system as being a specific PC?
Worrisome reports so far have indicated that even a new graphics card flags it as a new PC. I wouldn't be surprised if getting a new burner for your broken one would flag it as a new PC.
will Ubisoft consider it the same PC?
Very likely not. Windows activation didn't, and I seriously doubt that SecuROM is more lax than Windows is.
will the activation system be removed by then?
Doubtful. They'd have to spend money to make a patch to do so.
Creston
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 13. |
Re: Upgrade vs. new computer |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:28 |
Tumbler |
|
|
It's comical that anyone is in favor of adding this to games when you have to go into such detail just to explain what it means to customers.
The online activations can be tolerated, in my opinion, but not the limited installs. And it makes no sense to try to track and limit installations. Microsoft's approach to this type of activation has been very effective and it makes no sense why these publishers think they know better.
The limit installs approach basically concludes that people are guilty unless they can prove otherwise. So it's more important to stop people from installing the games more than X times than it is to let gamers use the software how they choose.
If you were designing a program, would you go out of your way to make sure that people couldn't install it more than 3 times? What difference would it make if someone wanted to install it all day long. Install, uninstall, install, uninstall, etc? I assume you want people to enjoy your software as much as they want, but it seems like new pc games have companies behind them that don't feel the same way. they want to make sure they enjoy the game and never use it again.
As sure as this system is screwed up as is, they end game is a 1 install limit. If they ever get people to accept this limited install model they will move it towards 1 asap.
those that say they can tolerate it and it's not that big a deal, can you not see what is coming? the PC game companies will be rewarded for dropping total installs if people are "ok" with this. there is no reward to them for increasing the number of installs, They are going to do what is in their own best interests.
I'd argue it's not in their best interest to drop install to 1 as sales might collapse, but I don't think they consider this a possibility. I think their view is that people will continue to buy the game because they are offered no other choice. (As if piracy doesn't exist...)
I'm not totally convinced that online activations will "help" in any big way. I think the stardock approach of offering patches and additional content only after registration, essentially online activation of sorts, is a far superior way to encourage people to buy games and treat your customer well.
I think we have too many publishers that don't care if they make their customers happy. they need to go under, plain and simple. PC gamers need to stop buying these games. Especially when thsoe games are on the 360/PS3 at the same time. Just rent it, if you can't live without it I suppose you can go buy it, but I doubt you'll be buying much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VGfive.com - Game Trading site (Steam codes too!)
Kickstarter "Game Developer"! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12. |
Re: No subject |
Oct 15, 2008, 10:28 |
SirKnight |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
131 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 6.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
