It was bad enough when PC gamers were getting more and more console ports. Now we're getting tablet ports?

I know Windows 8 was a big step to dumb down Windows to more tablet like behavior, but a top down Halo? LOL

That $80 billion from the people who are in the top 0.1% would make a huge difference when it comes to keeping some other important programs in place.

If you truly believe that, then you may have a limited understanding of just how big the scope of the problem is. Cuts may help a little, hikes may help a little, but like I said, they mostly just delay the inevitable. Your last point is a key for an effective potential solution (one that could start to solve the problem entirely in as fast as one month). Tax code reformation and Dev's post on a flat tax are the solutions. The tax base -must- be broadened, the code simplified, and the loopholes/exceptions for lobbied options removed. A flat tax is likely the only effective solution at this stage in the collapse. It could even potentially work with few or no cuts at all, but cuts and streamlining spending will only help as well.

This comment was edited on Jul 20, 2012, 18:03.

The 'blame the wealthy' is a misdirection tactic being used by a political idealogy (used by both R's and D's historically) in order to keep and gain more power. They want you to blame your rich neighbors and direct you to vote for them and their policies so they can achieve their ultimate objectives. The reality for hiking taxes on the rich is: there aren't enough 'rich' people to make any significant changes to the course of the country. And that's exactly what they don't want you to know while they attempt to distract you and play on your envy and jealousy so you'll enthusiastically support them and what they're doing. Even if they get what they want, it won't solve even a small fraction of the problem.

For example, say they get everything they want. Lets start with the pending tax hikes on the 'rich'. Yeah, problem solved, right? They got the hike they wanted and all will be well. No, the revenue generated (about $75-80 billion) will cover about 8 days of government spending. It's a complete farse. So lets really get those 'rich' people and take everything away from them. We'll just leave them with a few dollars to eek out an existance like the rest of the 99% of us. That'll solve it, right? Nope, even if they confiscate all of it, it'll only cover spending for a few months. The math is that the top 10% pay around 70% of the entire tax bill already, even though they earn around 43% of the total income. Sliding the scale further won't make a dent in the course of the current spending path, simply because there aren't enough of them to take enough money from.

So what are they (the ones promoting the hikes) doing? That's the real question and you'll need to read history to learn what the idealogy is based on, why they are taking the steps they are, and what it -will- eventually lead to. I'm starting to doubt it will be reversible at this point, no one (not even the 'rich' Republicans) are stepping up to make the necessary changes to turn away from the approaching cliff.

Throughout history, it often starts at the top, but always works its way down through the middle class, the poor, and everyone's property/wealth until collapse. Steps like increasing taxes, Roman empire style 'debasement' (quantitative easing in modern terms), confiscation, and reclamation are merely attempts to delay the inevitable. But at most, they may gain a few months or years of survival at best.

Give it some time (probably down to within a decade or so now) and you won't have to 'worry' about those few 'rich' people any more, you'll have a whole new array of things to worry about.

I'm sure both Windows 8 users will be thrilled

Yeah, this is looking fantastic. It's been quite a while since I've been this interested and excited about a PC game. SP would indeed be nice, but I'm looking forward to this 'get to the point' online approach as well.

It's just an annoyance. A tolerable one for most, but still a useless annoyance.

Funny, that pretty much sums up Steam for me as well. Although it's beyond just a useless annoyance to me having to submit to external gatekeepers to play games I pay for. For me, it's no Steam and no GFWL or no sale from me. At least not with either one required, optional is fine. I'm certainly a minority on this and gladly accept that (I'll probably be getting out of PC gaming mostly or entirely in the not too distant future soon anyway because of how it's being closed down due to DRM account requirements). I just refuse to have what I buy bound to any kind of 3rd party permission slip. My game library should sit on a shelf in my home or be installed from a downloadable file I can back up locally, never limited to any kind of account system that gives someone else the kill switch to my software library. Not a big deal to most though, plenty of gamers are more than willing to have thier consumer access and entertainment investments controlled by someone else, enough that such things are now accepted as normal and commonplace.

Nice! This video is very encouraging, the look and feel of a true mech game is there. If the controls are done right, this could be great. I'm looking forward to this (and no Steam required, excellent!).

I've expressed my concerns over the direction this game might go, but I really like the design and detail attributes displayed in this trailer. If they stick to a proper MW formula (particularly diverse controls and 'sim' aspects), this could be a very worthy successor. If it plays like a dumbed down FPS designed for thumb-twiddling kiddie console controls, then I'll pass.

Yes, this does sound interesting. Especially the exploration and multiplayer options. Developer, please make sure your game doesn't require Steam. Steam Required = No Sale from me.

Good tip. These kinds of interference issues are becoming more common as games continually get bigger and require more system resources... resources that are often blocked or restricted because of A/V software. And as in this case, just disabling it doesn't often work as the alterations made to the system by A/V programs and the residual tasks/services left behind still block system resources a game may need. I've also had really good success with Avast as its interference and system resource restrictions seem pretty minimal. Memory footprint is one thing, but it's isn't always how much memory is being used up, but where it is being used and blocked.

I doubt it's going to happen...

It's already gone down many times over the years, removing your access to the games you paid for. It'll happen again, we're just talking about when and for how long. While a month or more of downtime may be unlikely, the same was said about PSN and Steam getting hacked at all.

saluk wrote on Nov 11, 2011, 16:22:
The problem with the sony hack was people were locked out for months with no functionality, on top of all the privacy/identity issues.

Well, that could happen with Steam also. It's why I don't want any game I buy to be dependent on Steam. Optionally, Steam is fine, but it should never be required for any game. A game should be able to function entirely independently of Steam and only use Steam features optionally.

Well said MB, well said.

I don't have to prove myself or my expertise to you and I won't be baited into it either. You've chosen what you want to do with the facts and have decided to go down a path of speculation and assumption. It would be pointless to try and continue proving something to you that has already been proven. You're riding on speculation and arguing against problems that don't exist and haven't happened. I'm happy to sit back and watch you argue with yourself over unrelated issues and speculation? lol

Anything exposed to the net can be hacked/cracked into, it often happens to outfits like Steam because they are the biggest target (gets the hackers the most press/prestige and data). Sounds like Valve had appropriate protections in place and is doing what they can. As many around here know, I am not a fan of the Steam concept at all, I do not approve of a global net-nanny controlling everyone's PC gaming purchases and PC game libraries due to this potential problem and others. No one entity should have the kill switch on the software you pay for and no one should be required to buy a game from one 3rd party DRM service exactly for reasons like this. But I'm not going to criticize them about anything they did wrong as this was bound to happen (and bound to again with potentially more success as the hackers likely learned with this attack) and it appears they had taken appropriate security steps to protect their users as best they could. They are the #1 target for attacks like this and it's just a matter of time.

Developers should -never- force Steam to be used with their software (many don't and let me buy their software direct - Thank You). Offer Steam as an option, but do -not- require it and make sure we can purchase and use your software entirely independent of Steam. This way, we will still have access to the software we pay for, we don't need a permission slip from a 3rd party to use it, no net-nanny has the kill switch to our game library (whether flipped intentionally or unintentionally), and our private payment information isn't all housed in one location as a prime target for thieves. The fault is entirely with the hackers, but the gamer's required dependence on Steam for purchasing and using the games they buy raises the risk for everyone involved while also restricting access and control for the customer. Steam should always be optional, never required, especially for purchasing.

You have put no thought into the potential problems that can arise through normal usage due to hardware and software platforms changing either.

Your accusing 'no thought' tone doesn't prove your point and only shows how little you are apparently understanding about the argument and how this system is working. Plus, this system (and others that would be like it) functions independently of changes in hardware and software because it's entirely internal. If the game works, so does the copy protection... there are no additional dependencies on hardware or platforms at all since it is not bound to either. You really are helping me to make my point when you attack problems that don't even exist, lol. Thank you.

DRM should never have the potential to impact the gaming experience.

That's just it though, this 'DRM' doesn't impact the gaming experience at all - FOR LEGAL USERS. And that's the great thing about it.

The rest of your post is mostly just a rehash of you swinging away at past methods and denying the actual -result- of how this specific system -did- effect piracy. So it's tough to debate against someone who just wants to deal with off-topic issues, misquote/misrepresent their opponent, and make up problems that don't even exist, then doesn't even address the topic and the results at hand. It's like you are arguing with yourself over something you don't like, but that something doesn't even apply to this DRM system. Interesting and amusing, but indeed not very productive. Considering all of this, certainly no reply required :-)

Dades wrote on Nov 10, 2011, 13:01:
That's not accurate, your assumption is based on a single forum thread and a press bite from the developers. Bohemia knows its Fade system has affected its customers in the past

Again, with others and 'the past'. Have you reviewed their forum beyond the one thread? Notice anything? :-)

There are many examples of similar systems exhibiting similar problems or causing issues down the road when new versions of things like operating systems and platforms change. That's why people bring it up, this isn't high school debate club. It's a legit concern based on experience. I have no idea why are so ardently defending this, there are far better ways to deal with piracy and getting a little gotcha on the pirates is just an immature way that doesn't really address the problem nor offer a solution.

As 'offended' by it as you seem to be, it sure seems to be an effective approach. It addresses the problem directly and offers several solutions for legal users that I've already stated. And the reason I defend it is because I am all for this approach as opposed to other DRM systems as I have repeatedly stated in my earlier posts, which you seem to not read because you say you have no idea why.

It's an updated version of the same system they have been using for a long time now.

So such things never change and improve? You sound like your stuck in the past and then want to use that against a viable DRM alternative like this.

This approach may be one of the best methods to come about on the PC in a very long time (implemented the way it has been in this game). And as a gamer, I'm happy to use it since it means no problems or hoops to jump through for me as a legal user.

Dades wrote on Nov 10, 2011, 07:16:
You are just assuming it does everything the developer says it does and that anyone who says otherwise is a filthy pirate. The truth rarely lies at the edges of extremes. You want to believe it works and never affects anyone because you've typed 8000 words arguing about it and can't admit that systems like this can and have in the past affected people who paid for their games.

Lol again. I don't have to assume anything. I'm basing my comments on exactly -what happened- to that pirate and available reports on their forum from legal users (who never encountered the problem). There's no assuming involved. If that's extreme to you, so be it. And again, you keep bringing up other DRM systems instead of addressing -the results- of this one. lol

Prez wrote on Nov 9, 2011, 23:54:
I think the point is it will be cracked eventually.

Oh it probably will. But that's the fantastic approach to this system. The advantage is with the developer rather than the pirate with this method. If they eventually discover one hole in the system, there can still be hundreds or even thousands more waiting that aren't found and can't be until whatever trigger has brought it to the surface. It could potentially take years for everything to be found for even just a few hundred of these protection threads, by then the game may be freeware anyway and the effort of any pirating will be moot. It's a fantastic approach and one I as a gamer welcome as an alternative to other restrictive (and less effective) forms of DRM.

But as right as the devs are for wanting to be paid for their work, schemes like this run the risk of doing more harm than good in the long run.

Maybe, but it will become less and less so as the practice of protecting games like this becomes more common. After all, you now know about this and so does everyone else reading it. The more common it becomes, the more the userbase will understand that what they did broke the game and not the game itself. The method and result used by these developers proved effective and informative, just what was needed to determine what the cause was and let everyone else know about it.

This comment was edited on Nov 10, 2011, 00:51.

Dades wrote on Nov 9, 2011, 19:55:
Maybe you aren't paying attention because pretty much every DRM system ever conceived has been cracked, even the vaunted Ubisoft DRM with thousands of online checks and database code inserts. Once the game has shipped you can't go back and insert better DRM. This DRM doesn't work because it's not preventing piracy and only causes confusion, its that simple. DRM inconveniences people who spend money more than people who don't and the rest of the time it is mostly a worthless effort. The best DRM is a great multiplayer side, spend the time and money on that which will also make a better game for your customers.

Yup, you're not paying attention either, lol. Comments like this are actually pretty amusing. You bring up -other- DRM systems again, just like the others, refusing to even address the topic of -this- DRM system, boast about how they are all cracked, then proclaim DRM as worthless. Re-read the news blurb and the comments if you must. This DRM system worked in this instance, the pirate(s) could not play the game while the legal users could and the reduced functionality of the illegal version did not impact legal users at all. No inconvenience for the legal users who spent the money. This round went to the developer as a win. No hoops to jump through for the legal users and blocked access for the thieves. The only confusion it caused was for the pirates! lol

I suspect this will catch on based on the effectiveness, user friendliness for legal users, and just how mad and irrational it is making the pirates, lol. This method goes to show that while you can't go back and insert better DRM once a game has shipped, you can certainly come up with all kinds of time bombs and random triggers threaded throughout the game's code that can't possibly all be found or removed. It blocks pirating while giving the paying customer no hassles at all. It will likely just get bigger and better from here on out.