But if you pirate it you're just adding to the problem you think you're preventing.

Depends on how you pirate it and whether or not you buy the game afterwards. You should generally avoid torrents, as those are what publishers track. Newsgroups are far more private and you can rest assured that your downloads won't contribute to any statistics. If you enjoy the game, you should buy it too. Piracy and purchasing are not mutually exclusive.

Jerykk wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 19:43:

The ONLY way to boycott DRM is to not play the game. If you pirate it then you'll just be another number on a Torrent site that makes developers grind their teeth and try to create better DRM.

It's not enough to simply boycott the game. You have to be vocal about it too. Explain why you're boycotting the game on every forum you can, in addition to sending the developer and publishers a letter or e-mail explaining the same thing. If you boycott the game but never explain why, they'll just assume that you pirated the game.

Sure.
But if you pirate it you're just adding to the problem you think you're preventing.

The ONLY way to boycott DRM is to not play the game. If you pirate it then you'll just be another number on a Torrent site that makes developers grind their teeth and try to create better DRM.

It's not enough to simply boycott the game. You have to be vocal about it too. Explain why you're boycotting the game on every forum you can, in addition to sending the developer and publishers a letter or e-mail explaining the same thing. If you boycott the game but never explain why, they'll just assume that you pirated the game.

So IMO there are only two ways to boycott DRM: The illegal one of pirating the game and NOT paying for it at all, and the legal one of flat-out ignoring DRM'd games.

I don't do boycotts - they are stupid. I'll abstain until there's a viable warez copy for download, but it has nothing to do with activism or sending a message. I also don't care about what affect my torrent download has on anyone's perception of anything. I'm a gamer - I game. If there is a way to play an otherwise great game without having to put up with the insulting bullshit that some idiot decides to infest their game with, I'm going to do it.

Beamer wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 13:45:
Developers complain about piracy so they create more obtrusive DRM.

There, RIGHT THERE is the problem.

Developers have to learn that "fighting" software piracy is as effective as attacking windmills in hope of defeating them. There is no proof that software piracy decreases sales. There is more and more evidence, that more DRM leads to more piracy and less DRM to less piracy.

Just stop fighting. Its useless.

Lord Tea wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 13:19:
So IMO there are only two ways to boycott DRM: The illegal one of pirating the game and NOT paying for it at all, and the legal one of flat-out ignoring DRM'd games.

Dvelopers complain about piracy so they create more obtrusive DRM.
Gamers complain about obtrusive DRM so they pirate.
Developers complain about rising piracy so they create even more obtrusive DRM.
Gamers complain about even more obtrusive DRM so they pirate.

Lord Tea, your first method is dumb. It will not end DRM, it will only lead to more.
The ONLY way to boycott DRM is to not play the game. If you pirate it then you'll just be another number on a Torrent site that makes developers grind their teeth and try to create better DRM.

If you don't play that doesn't happen.

I'm with the rest of you. I purchased all the Stalker games and you won't find a bigger fan of open-world games...but I draw the line at persistent online connections for a single-player experience.

Additionally, I've already been to the official GSC forums where they have a poll set up about this: a whopping 79% voted "no purchase" as a result of this news.

And believe me, the people who frequent that board are real Stalker fans. They'd have to be to put up with that forum's terrible 1999 code and design.

Prez wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 12:35:
I will not buy an always online game without first downloading the pirated version, which will be the version I play.

from a legal standpoint this approach is questionable and with respect to the future of DRM it's just bad. If your choice is to buy a DRM-tainted license to support the developers but to play a cracked version then you'll still be denied support. In other words: You pay for the game, but you disqualify yourself for support and on top of that you also contribute to the development of even more intrusive DRM. For the publisher you are the "perfect customer". So IMO there are only two ways to boycott DRM: The illegal one of pirating the game and NOT paying for it at all, and the legal one of flat-out ignoring DRM'd games.

Double Post

Always Online = Never Buy

Simple enough equation. I hope they aren't this frickin' stupid.

All games with UbiDRM have been pirated. AssCreed 2 took a while to get properly cracked but after that, any games that used UbiDRM were cracked within days.

Which is the only way I was able to find out for myself just how awesome a game Assassin's Creed 2 is. I will not buy an always online game without first downloading the pirated version, which will be the version I play.

It really saddens me that this is (has been) the direction the PC gaming market is going. This, then the id Software RAGE CLUSTER#?$& release, then Johnny Carmack's comments about the PC no longer the lease platform (contradicting himself), etc.

I can honestly say it is getting to a point to where I will no longer purchase any new games to feed the industry that is slowly working its way into the toilette. I’ll just enjoy all the games I have (all physical copies), and reminisce the ‘good ol’ days’….sigh…..Good thing I have other hobbies to keep me busy as well.

From Rock Paper Shotgun:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10/09/gsc-respond-on-stalker-2-drm-issue/

Following yesterday’s DRM-alarm going off, GSC have now said that using an always-on solution is for them “a possibility, not a choice.” We also received this statement:

“The idea of implementing DRM came in as a possible anti-piracy solution. You know the severe level of commercial piracy we have here in ex-USSR region. This said however, there is no firm decision to go for DRM with S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 as of now. Be assured, we do realize how uncomfortable this solution is for the players, so we’ll continue looking for most effective, yet acceptable for all, way of protecting the game by the time of its release.”

I still won't buy it if they put something stupid like SecureROM and activation limits.

everyone wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 04:51:

El Pit wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 01:34:
Oh, we can hear him. So, Battlefield 3 is a SINGLEPLAYER game that needs a constant internet connection?

I've been known to play a bit of SP BF2 while my connection's been acting up.

And here's the thing: In Stalker 2 (or any always-on drm game), you couldn't!

Also, for the trolls and/or fucktards defending this DRM, Ubisoft lost 90%, that's ninety percent, of their PC games sales after introducing UbiDRM. It sure killed piracy alright, by making people not buy the games in the first place.

Actually, it didn't even kill piracy. All games with UbiDRM have been pirated. AssCreed 2 took a while to get properly cracked but after that, any games that used UbiDRM were cracked within days.

BF has always been about multiplayer, so I don't give a shit if a MP game has an online SP component since it's a game rooted in MP. Besides, kotaku already played the SP campaign and called it dull.

This is like saying RO2 has an online-only SP component. Who gives a shit if it's a primarily MP game with SP as an afterthought? The SP will suck in those cases, as it does with RO2 and apparently BF3.

Now games with established singleplayer portions, that's a different story. Assassin's Creed, Starcraft, even Diablo and CoD, that's a whole different ball game.

Also, for the trolls and/or fucktards defending this DRM, Ubisoft lost 90%, that's ninety percent, of their PC games sales after introducing UbiDRM. It sure killed piracy alright, by making people not buy the games in the first place. Hard to believe there are still narrow-minded people that paint everything in black and white when it comes to piracy in the present day.

ColBlister wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 21:38:
You can have internet with peachy connectivity and still get hosed. Suppose you have 1.4 mpbs DSL that is rock-solid reliable. Now suppose you try to play an always-connected-DRM game while your sweetie decides to watch some Netflix - guess what happens? Your single-player PC game that is running on your own PC suddenly boots you out of the game.

Hypothetical? Not at all. That's exactly what happened to me every damn time I tried to play Settlers 7. There is absolutely no justification in the world for killing a single-player game in the middle of gameplay. None that will get me to purchase another game that requires "always-on", anyway.

And you are right BUT
Talking to brain washed people won't get them to understand they will still buy it because they can't live without there game , even if they have to sell the last thing they own , peps are only thinking to there nose tip they don't look further out , "compagnies : Ohh they bought that one too ? , lets implant the next one so we can controll even more what those zombie's are doing"

Good for them, maybe we can make PC games number one again! Oo

NicklePop wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 23:39:
I'm drunk, and pissed that people think theft is OK.

And tomorrow you're sober and still have no clue at all.

El Pit wrote on Oct 9, 2011, 01:34:
Oh, we can hear him. So, Battlefield 3 is a SINGLEPLAYER game that needs a constant internet connection?

I've been known to play a bit of SP BF2 while my connection's been acting up.

Oh looky, they have developed the famous "no-buy" drm