Golwar wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 06:46:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 06:39:
Why should pirates complain? They have DRM-free software in any case.

Who said that pirates are reasonable?
More or less PvtPoopy said that pirates are quite often trolls too and I share that conclusion.

And yes, I also don't see anything wrong with that DA2 DRM - if it is just as explained.

Just because you say pirates arent reasonable, it doesnt make you or him reasonable.

I may buy this in a few years when it's 5 dollars or less on some Steam sale, and that's a rather massive change for me, I used to be a diehard Bioware fan.

Bioware made some great games years ago, but they seem to have lost their way, as their current products are a shadow of what they used to make.

They apparently don't want my money anyway...

Fuck em. I've got plenty of other games to keep me busy, and looking at everything I've seen of DA2, I'm not missing anything. I'm sure they're already at work on Dragon Age 2012, seeing how they can fuck things up further...

Steam versions have no extra junk in the trunk? Hot damn!

Now if I could just get excited enough to actually want to buy it. Oh well one out of two ain't bad, EA!

Beamer wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 07:41:
Is there any particular reason why this board loves to champion those without the internet?

Your internet goes out from time to time, sure, though this seems to accomodate that. And yeah, sometimes I'm gaming on a plane or train but in those cases I'm on a netbook/laptop way too underpowered to run this game, anyway. And even if you've got some $4000 Alienware laptop (which Icewind apparently does) it still accomodates that.

I'm not saying it's not weird or overbearing, I'm just saying I never understand the "oh my god I need to be near the internet from time to time!" or the "what about all those people without the internet?!" comments that we see in DRM threads.

You can't account for every usage scenario in the world and that's part of the problem with DRM. This would be fine if it was at least effective but it has been shown time and time again to be completely ineffective at both fighting piracy and doing it's job without negative impact to legitimate customers. It is totally without purpose at this point, especially in the face of the growing 0 day console scene who doesn't have to worry about cracking their titles, just obtaining a disc. So if you want an answer to your question, I'd like to see your answer on why its ok to cause problems for your customers when you aren't even dealing with the problem.

El Pit wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 05:11:
I love DRM.

You may install the game on 5 PCs. But only on Mondays, you'll be allowed to play it on two of them. Unless it's full moon, of course. But if you're name is Steven, you'll be allowed to play it without online activation every 24 hours. Bad Luck, Ray, because Rays of course won't be allowed to play the game on notebooks, especially red ones. If you live in Australia, you may play it on weekends only. And, of course, you'll have to be online constantly. If you should live Germany, anyhow, you'll have to phone the chancellor and ask for her permission to play the game. Of course, the blood will be green in Germany. And no drugs in Australia. Unless your name should be Steven.

It's easy and makes sense, don't you see?

hahaha good 1 , give it a few years and thats the way it gonna be , people are blindly saying yes to everything ...."I LIKE THIS" not

Is there any particular reason why this board loves to champion those without the internet?

Your internet goes out from time to time, sure, though this seems to accomodate that. And yeah, sometimes I'm gaming on a plane or train but in those cases I'm on a netbook/laptop way too underpowered to run this game, anyway. And even if you've got some $4000 Alienware laptop (which Icewind apparently does) it still accomodates that.

I'm not saying it's not weird or overbearing, I'm just saying I never understand the "oh my god I need to be near the internet from time to time!" or the "what about all those people without the internet?!" comments that we see in DRM threads.

How the fuck is this okay with people?

Non-Steam version: Basically you can't play offline except for whatever insane period of days they choose, then you need to be online again. In other words, you are better off pirating this game if you have an unstable/infrequent connection, causing you to buy the disc version in the first place.

This should be intolerable to anyone who was upset with the online requirements for single player for other games, this is practically the same thing, especially since they rather ominously did not mention how many days grace you have been "check ins."

Another game boycotted, especially with their laughable $60 asking price for a dumbed down, simplified sequel.

Ah, that's enough ranting for one morning.


I may buy this in a few years when it's 5 dollars or less on some Steam sale, and that's a rather massive change for me, I used to be a diehard Bioware fan.

That's a no go with the EA login crud. I do not like keeping track of lots of various usernames and passwords for pointless reasons, like a worthless EA account. Sounds like I'll be playing the console version and selling the game back to amazon afterward.

The more I read the DRM description the more uncomfortable I feel. What at first seemed like a mild DRM is now starting to look as something really bad to me.

Out of curiosity I went to check the ME1 and Spore DRM's and this DRM is indeed worse than those two. The only difference is that those DRMs raised a lot of anger in the PC community and this one does not. That is making me very uncomfortable because I was also one who saw nothing too out of line with this DRM originally.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 06:39:
Why should pirates complain? They have DRM-free software in any case.

Who said that pirates are reasonable?
More or less PvtPoopy said that pirates are quite often trolls too and I share that conclusion.

And yes, I also don't see anything wrong with that DA2 DRM - if it is just as explained.

Why should pirates complain? They have DRM-free software in any case.

I always love how the people that generally look to pirate games are the ones that complain. Seriously, they need to try and do something to protect their property. If you buy the game, it works fine you and you don't have to worry about it. To this day, I have not been stopped by DRM, I am sure others may have had bad experiences, but this doesn't sound like its going to bother anyone. What's the big deal!

Paketep wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 21:01:
Much better than the usual shit (the non Steam DRM).

Bravo for EA. No DRM at all would be just as effective and even much better for consumers, but hey, let's applaud this giant step in the right direction.

See, Ubi?. Do that, and we'll go back to buying your games (if they're good). Keep your shitty DRM and it'll keep being no money for you.

Wow, how peoples standards have declined in the past years... Just because it isnt as unbelievable as the Ubi one, its suddenly super duper!

I love DRM.

You may install the game on 5 PCs. But only on Mondays, you'll be allowed to play it on two of them. Unless it's full moon, of course. But if you're name is Steven, you'll be allowed to play it without online activation every 24 hours. Bad Luck, Ray, because Rays of course won't be allowed to play the game on notebooks, especially red ones. If you live in Australia, you may play it on weekends only. And, of course, you'll have to be online constantly. If you should live Germany, anyhow, you'll have to phone the chancellor and ask for her permission to play the game. Of course, the blood will be green in Germany. And no drugs in Australia. Unless your name should be Steven.

It's easy and makes sense, don't you see?

How can the Release Control both "not install anything to the PC" and "completely remove itself after the game release date has passed?"

Presumably they mean it doesn't install any funky drivers or anything, but it still doesn't read right.

It's clearly an evolution of ME2's Cerberus Network 'phone home' that is part of the game interface, only its permenantly shut off once it receives an official response from the servers.

When they say 'doesn't install anything', they're clearly referring to the 'does not use SecuROM' qualifier, whereby a third-party utility steps in to authenticate the game.

Wolfox wrote on Jan 31, 2011, 21:19:
Remember when EA announced something similar would be done with Spore and Mass Effect (having to reauthenticate every 10 days or so)? People declared the death of EA and PC gaming, gave 1-star reviews on pre-orders, and screamed loud until EA backed up on the "require a login check after a select period of days".

How people react now? "Oh, that's pretty mild. Thank you, EA, for treating us as customers instead of the evil Ubisoft with their constantly online DRM".

It's funny. Or tragic. I don't really know.

Its the " i don't care generation" after faceshit there are no reason to take care of personal info

Aero wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 00:22:
How can the Release Control both "not install anything to the PC" and "completely remove itself after the game release date has passed?"

Presumably they mean it doesn't install any funky drivers or anything, but it still doesn't read right.

You're right, the wording was odd. But the release date check is something that runs before the installer. It runs from the DVD, so it's true it isn't installed on your hard drive. The part where they say "it completely removes itsself after the game release date has passed" is complete bullshit. It ALWAYS runs on install, but it just does so invisibly if the check passes.

Actually, it sounds totally superfluous since you need to register online before you can play anyway.

nm I'm blind

How can the Release Control both "not install anything to the PC" and "completely remove itself after the game release date has passed?"

Presumably they mean it doesn't install any funky drivers or anything, but it still doesn't read right.

Damn. I was starting to like EA, too. But then they raised the prices for all upcoming PC games to $60 and started requiring online activations and limited installs again.

I really don't see the point in such convoluted DRM schemes. It just confuses/annoys customers and provides pirate groups with a few hours of entertainment.