Spore/Mass Effect Requires A Virgin Sacrifice on Western Coast of Easter Island

[Azazel]

Can we den this shit fest already?

What the fuck do you care? Skip this thread if it hurts your poor, delicate eyeballs.

[Tale]

Back in the old days, pages 1-4, we wouldn't have let this happen.

[Azazel]

your post needs more context, old timer.

[Tale]

WHEREAS the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia,
Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God,
have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the
Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the
Constitution hereby established:
And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the
Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen:
Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with
the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in
this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

HOWEVER, BY VIRTUE OF OUR POSITION AS CIVIL SERVANTS AND MEMBERS OF THIS PANEL, WE CANNOT ACQUIRE THIS MONEY IN OUR NAMES. I HAVE THEREFORE, BEEN DELEGATED AS A MATTER OF TRUST BY MY COLLEAGUES OF THE PANEL TO LOOK FOR AN OVERSEAS PARTNER INTO WHOSE ACCOUNT WE WOULD TRANSFER THE SUM OF US$21,320,000.00(TWENTY ONE MILLION, THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND U.S DOLLARS). HENCE WE ARE WRITING YOU THIS LETTER. WE HAVE AGREED TO SHARE THE MONEY THUS; 1. 20% FOR THE ACCOUNT OWNER 2. 70% FOR US (THE OFFICIALS) 3. 10% TO BE USED IN SETTLING TAXATION AND ALL LOCAL AND FOREIGN EXPENSES. IT IS FROM THE 70% THAT WE WISH TO COMMENCE THE IMPORTATION BUSINESS.

PLEASE,NOTE THAT THIS TRANSACTION IS 100% SAFE AND WE HOPE TO COMMENCE THE TRANSFER LATEST SEVEN (7) BANKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE RECEIPT OF THE FOLLOWING INFORMATIOM BY TEL/FAX; 234-1-7740449, YOUR COMPANY'S SIGNED, AND STAMPED LETTERHEAD PAPER THE ABOVE INFORMATION WILL ENABLE US WRITE LETTERS OF CLAIM AND JOB DESCRIPTION RESPECTIVELY. THIS WAY WE WILL USE YOUR COMPANY'S NAME TO APPLY FOR PAYMENT AND RE-AWARD THE CONTRACT IN YOUR COMPANY'S NAME.

WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO DOING THIS BUSINESS WITH YOU AND SOLICIT YOUR CONFIDENTIALITY IN THIS TRANSATION. PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER USING THE ABOVE TEL/FAX NUMBERS. I WILL SEND YOU DETAILED INFORMATION OF THIS PENDING PROJECT WHEN I HAVE HEARD FROM YOU.

YOURS FAITHFULLY,

DR CLEMENT OKON

[Kitsune]

So is this thread 8 pages because none of you knew what a BBS was in 1988, when it wasn't a 20 year old argument?

Oh hai guys lets all wave our nerd BBS e-peens around! 

I had an 8 line TriBBS with a Doom server that did IPX tunneling.

I was like 8 or 10 years old when I did mine.

WERE YOU 8-10 WHEN YOU RAN THAT, MR. EPEEN?

This thread got boring 4 pages back.

Pussies.  REAL Sysops ran motherfuckin' World War IV, the only BBS software worth consideration.

[NiX]

What the fuck do you care? Skip this thread if it hurts your poor, delicate eyeballs.

Calm down, Skipper! I think he's just pointing out how this thread has devolved to a point where it just doesn't matter, so it should be denned.

[Azazel]

Seriously though, all threads go off on wild tangents after a couple of pages. I think the fact that this one has remained largely on topic for the better part of 10 pages says something in itself.

Additionally, we don't go denning every other thread that goes for several pages and then veers off-topic, so it suggests to me that it's making some people uncomfortable for no real good reason. If the participants who are making points on either side were devolving into personal attacks, then sure. A tangent on BBSes or a few people posting silly shit (ie Tale's last few posts, RK47's picture) to derail it doesn't mean the ponts made throughout on both sides are invalid.

If anything gets denned from this thread, it should be a case of mod-surgery taking out the bullshit posts and denning those or splitting them off into their own tangent-thread, which is the way things seem to be done here on f13 much more often.

If the people making actual arguments on either side decide to let it rest, then the thread will die a natural death.
Crying out "waaaaaaa, den this thread because it makes me sad" means you hate freedom. And freedom force, and freedom fries.

[Aez]

Additionally, we don't go denning every other thread that goes for several pages and then veers off-topic, so it suggests to me that it's making some people uncomfortable for no real good reason. If the participants who are making points on either side were devolving into personal attacks, then sure. A tangent on BBSes or a few people posting silly shit (ie Tale's last few posts, RK47's picture) to derail it doesn't mean the ponts made throughout on both sides are invalid.

What the fuck do you care? Skip this thread if it hurts your poor, delicate eyeballs.

Crying out "waaaaaaa, den this thread because it makes me sad" means you hate freedom. And freedom force, and freedom fries.

 





The problem is not the argumentation.  It's simply going nowhere.  It's like Trammel or NGE.

[Azazel]

Ah, so because both sides of an argument are unlikely to be swayed, we'd better den the thread?
Quick! Better den every thread where Schild defends sony or derides the Wii.

By the way, "if it hurts your poor, delicate eyeballs" and "crying out "waaaa, etc" are not personal attacks - they're attacking the behaviour or opinion using irony and hyperbole, not the person.



A personal attack is when I call you a cunt.



Or.

It's the difference between "don't act like an idiot" and "you are an idiot"

Now please stop acting like a cunt because a thread you don't care for hurts your poor, delicate, freedom-hating eyes.

[MournelitheCalix]

Stephen Zepp, can you please explain to me why it is that your defending people who want me to beg to play a game I have already paid for?  I haven't pirated a single game in my life, nor have I used pirated software.  However I have to tell you the honest truth.  IF I purchase Mass Effect and that is a big IF at this point because of how Bioware/EA is treating law abiding people like myself.  I will lose NO sleep if I need to use a fourth "activation token" and go to a pirating hack/crack web site to get it, especially if EA refuses to give me a fourth activation for free.  I will be damned if any company is going to make me have to beg some man or woman with an outsourced American job in India or some other country to pay again in order to play a game I have already paid for.

Please justify this because for the life of me I can't imagine why you and the rest of the gaming companies are continually trying to further persecute me with DRM's like this garbage.  Especially when I have done nothing but support the further employment of people like you with my hard earned dollars.

[Azazel]

Crying out "waaaaaaa, den this thread because it makes me sad" means you hate freedom. And freedom force, and freedom fries.

 

Oh, and that was the point where you fell into the sarchasm. I almost added "why do you hate america?" initially but I thought the stuff about freedom force and freedom fries added enough obvious sarcasm. But apparently not.

[Mosesandstick]

Stephen Zepp...

Stephen wasn't defending DRM and he wasn't defending the companies that are trying to screw companies over. He has issues with the way people justify what he sees as theft.

[WindupAtheist]

"Activation token?"

Haha, I'll pirate the shit out of that game and I don't even want to play it.

[eldaec]

"Activation token?"

Haha, I'll pirate the shit out of that game and I don't even want to play it.

Maybe, realising that even pirates are going to get subjected to all the advertsing bullshit EA is shooting for, they've set up this whole DRM fiasco to make sure that angst filled denizens of boards like this all pirate the game for great justice, thereby giving EA a bigger advertising market then they would otherwise have had.

It's a conspiracy I tell you.

[Samwise]

That only works if you actually play the game after you download it, as opposed to just copying it from folder to folder while drinking copious amounts of rum.

[MournelitheCalix]

Stephen Zepp...

Stephen wasn't defending DRM and he wasn't defending the companies that are trying to screw companies over. He has issues with the way people justify what he sees as theft.

Go and use your reading skills on all the pages not just one.  He most certainly is saying to people like myself that we will be stealing when we are forced by this unethical system to rely on the nearest warez site or hack/crack web site to find a way to play the game I paid for after this 3 activation token garbage is up.  I have said it before and I will say it again.  I will be damned before I go begging an EA outsourced help line for another activation token.  I will lose absolutely no sleep whatsoever if I have to resort to software piracy in order to play the game I paid for.  To hell with anyone who says I am pirating software in doing so because I have paid to play my game.  Its absolutely shocking how much nerve people from these companies have and it shows how damned contemptably arrogant they have become.  The absolute nerve of someone to expounded on how were stealing from corporations is beyond me when they are in essence defending the right of a corporation to steal from me.  To say that this kind of system is justified because people are immoral and steal software simply doesn't pass the smell test either.  There is only one motivation behind this corrupt implementation of "securing intellectual property," that being forcing people to pay more for software they have already purchased.

There will be only one group of people who will be stolen from when this goes into affect, yet I hear nothing of this from stephen zepp.  How is this not corporate theft to people who have already paid for the software to play?  Remember the original defense of this defenseless position was first that if people didn't steal companies wouldn't be forced to invest in copy protection.  Well here is one who hasn't stolen anything but will happily circumvent this despicable ploy to get me to purchase more "activation tokens" or copies of a game in the name of some god damned copy protection.  Call a spade a spade, this is simply an attempt to make us pay more for a product we should already have a right to play when we initially pay for it.

[Mosesandstick]

Since I've been responding in this thread from page 1 my memory skills might not be up to task, but my reading is damn sure fine.

I don't remember Stephen anywhere discussing whether or not it was ok to d/l a pirated copy of the game if you already own it (which is what you seem to be arguing).

But, whatever. I'll let you argue with him.

[Venkman]

Call a spade a spade, this is simply an attempt to make us pay more for a product we should already have a right to play when we initially pay for it.

But again I think this goes back to blaming this specific form of copy protection rather than the concept of copy protection in its entirety. For example, if you had to do nothing, could play and install the game as many times as you wanted, but some magical invisible method was used to ensure that was your copy you were playing with, would that be a problem?

I'm asking seriously because it seems the majority of the anti-copyprotection stuff has revolved around the specific implementations, which because of how they've been designed have done little to stop pirating while doing much to piss people off.

I do like what the Sins guys said about making games only for people who actually want to pay for them. But not everyone can do that for any number of reasons (like the opportunistic IP-plays it seems and other business opportunities that don't line up with what gamers actually want at all, much less are willing to pay them).

[Mosesandstick]

My viewpoints are different from Stephen's. I was merely trying to convey what I thought Stephen said.

I am against practically all forms of copy protection because generally all they do is harm consumers whilst protecting publishers. I realise its a long thread but I'm not going to defend myself about views that aren't mine; I already stated what I think on the prior pages.

[Stephen Zepp]

Stephen Zepp...

Stephen wasn't defending DRM and he wasn't defending the companies that are trying to screw companies over. He has issues with the way people justify what he sees as theft.

Go and use your reading skills on all the pages not just one.  He most certainly is saying to people like myself that we will be stealing when we are forced by this unethical system to rely on the nearest warez site or hack/crack web site to find a way to play the game I paid for after this 3 activation token garbage is up. 

Actually, it's your reading skills that need work unfortunately. Never once did I defend any company's choice of DRM implementations. As Moose said, I have issues with the way people justify their actions. Two wrongs don't make a right, and all that.

If you purchase a product, and later on decide you don't like the way it was protected and elect to then go and use the product via whatever mechanism that is outside of the agreed upon license, then you are stealing. Real world example:

Eugene Water and Electric charges for power in three tiers of use. If you use more power than is defined in the first tier, they double the charge per kw/h, and if you go into the third tier, they tack on another 40% on top of the doubling. If I decide that I don't like this, and rig my meter somehow (using other means to acquire the product) so that it doesn't register my use of the product (power), it is most certainly stealing, and illegal.

Just because the way they charge for power may be unethical in my opinion (for the record, I don't like it, but it's certainly ethical) doesn't mean that I have a moral right to take their product from another source (or in the example's case, take it without them being able to measure it) and use it.

So yes, taking the software in a cracked form from a pirate site to evade the DRM (3 installs) is stealing in my book. The (lack of) morality of their DRM (limiting you to three installs in the first place) does not in any way justify your action.

[Tebonas]

So it is ok to crack a program if you buy it in good faith and the limitations are not mentioned on the box?

Because that is what happens right now. "Does only work for three installs" is not found on the Bioshock box, and I bet it won't be found on the new ones either.

"Requires Internet connection to play", fair enough.
"Technical copy protection measures", is a very very bad euphemism for "You are fucked after a few installs". It stops working without ever trying to copy it.

What takes away the companies rights to whine is that they don't mention those limitations and take away the customers ability to make an informed decision prior to buying the game. Two wrongs don't make a right, but in this case the first wrong invalidated the terms of the sale.

[Krakrok]

stealing

I can't take anything you say on this issue seriously. The correct term in law is copyright infringement and in most cases it is a civil matter not a criminal matter. Referring to it as stealing is propaganda.

[Lantyssa]

And the analogy is horrid.  Utilities are consumed upon use and finite in amount.  A game is not, and can in fact be duplicated over and over.

I'm willing to listen Zeppster, but if you're going to spout crazy talk we're likely to just ignore any points you make, even the decent ones, since we will have tuned you out like the nutty guy on the corner.

[Stephen Zepp]

stealing

I can't take anything you say on this issue seriously. The correct term in law is copyright infringement

I've already made the case in a sidebar to my main argument that it could be classified as theft of services, not copyright infringement.

and in most cases it is a civil matter not a criminal matter. Referring to it as stealing is propaganda.

I'm not talking law, I'm talking morality. From my point of view in this debate, that's a big freaking difference--and the fact that you seem to equate the law with the morality of an act effectively proves my point. You seem to be saying "it's not against the law, therefore I can do it and it's not wrong"--which is my entire argument--people don't see taking something that they didn't pay for as being morally wrong.

I do. No matter how much I may hate how someone offers something for sale/rental/use/whatever, I don't have a moral stance that supports using it outside of their offer, without their consent.

[Aez]

[Sky]

He most certainly is saying to people like myself that we will be stealing when we are forced by this unethical system to rely on the nearest warez site or hack/crack web site to find a way to play the game I paid for after this 3 activation token garbage is up.  I have said it before and I will say it again.  I will be damned before I go begging an EA outsourced help line for another activation token.  I will lose absolutely no sleep whatsoever if I have to resort to software piracy in order to play the game I paid for.

OK, that's some funny stuff there. WAH I GOTTA MAKE A PHONE CALL. After 3 activations. Seriously. Your rage brings tears of laughter.

There will be only one group of people who will be stolen from when this goes into affect, yet I hear nothing of this from stephen zepp.

Can't wait to play Mass Affect.

[Selby]

So yes, taking the software in a cracked form from a pirate site to evade the DRM (3 installs) is stealing in my book. The (lack of) morality of their DRM (limiting you to three installs in the first place) does not in any way justify your action.

What if I crack the game myself?  I buy it, crack\disable the activation on my own and limitations aspect and play it.  At what point does it become stealing?  Downloading a complete copy from a warez site?  Downloading the cracked .exe from a warez site?  Downloading a patch program?  Doing it all myself?

And this isn't a rhetorical question as I have in the past dissected programs for my own interest in the past.  I am trying to determine what you have a problem with: the pirates themselves and\or those who run warez sites or anyone who doesn't run a program as it came out of the box or with official patches from the official company website.

[rk47]

hell just buy it, then crack it. we're not stealing it. If it's still wrong, I guess I can live with it.

[MournelitheCalix]

If you purchase a product, and later on decide you don't like the way it was protected and elect to then go and use the product via whatever mechanism that is outside of the agreed upon license, then you are stealing. Real world example:

Is that why your industry continually hides things like how they protect their software?  Please, if you honestly believe that everyone who purchases these games understands that they will be limited to 3 activation tokens your very sadly mistaken, in fact laughably so.  So much so that it begs the question of asking if your even taking your statements seriously.  Don't go quoting Eula's on me either, your EULA isn't disclosed when we buy your product nor can we take it back to the store for our money back once we open it and see what kind of shit your industry is pushing on us.  Believe me, i have tried in two Best buys in the St. Louis area, neither will take the game back once opened.

Eugene Water and Electric charges for power in three tiers of use. If you use more power than is defined in the first tier, they double the charge per kw/h, and if you go into the third tier, they tack on another 40% on top of the doubling. If I decide that I don't like this, and rig my meter somehow (using other means to acquire the product) so that it doesn't register my use of the product (power), it is most certainly stealing, and illegal.

Just because the way they charge for power may be unethical in my opinion (for the record, I don't like it, but it's certainly ethical) doesn't mean that I have a moral right to take their product from another source (or in the example's case, take it without them being able to measure it) and use it.

So yes, taking the software in a cracked form from a pirate site to evade the DRM (3 installs) is stealing in my book. The (lack of) morality of their DRM (limiting you to three installs in the first place) does not in any way justify your action.

Your evading the question.  I am not surprised given the condescending arrogance of your defense of a defenseless practice.  Please note NO WHERE IN ANYTHING I STATED did I say I was going to be taking software that was cracked.   What I said very clearly and again I state it for your here, was that I would lose no sleep applying a crack to a piece of software that I HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR.  So to spell it out to you sir, I would own a copy of your software turned worthless by your deceptive and maybe even fraudulent DRM.

Since you addressed the lack of morality.  Lets talk about it seriously.  If there is anywhere a lack of morality it is to be found in your position because you force people who have PAID YOUR SALARY AND PROVIDED PROFIT FOR YOUR SHARE HOLDERS to go to third parties to make the software they purchased work in the manner they thought it was supposed to work when they purchased it.   That they purchased it in this manner isn't their fault for the expectation given to them by years of purchasing games and keeping people like you employed was that they would have a game they could play when they wanted whereever they wanted and was feasible to play.  It isn't until you open your game after bringing it home from the stores that you find out sometimes months later how deep the rabbit hole goes and by then its usually much too damn late.  Don't talk to me about morality as your industry has shown very little.

Also please don't also whine about stealing being wrong.  Yes while everyone agrees two wrongs don't make a right such whining really comes off as little more than the vocalizations of the little boy who cried wolf when you continue to treat people with such little regard or respect.  What goes around comes around and when people steal from you, don't act like the wronged party when your company is actively priming the market place to steal from people who paid to play a game they paid for and now can't.

   

[MournelitheCalix]

But again I think this goes back to blaming this specific form of copy protection rather than the concept of copy protection in its entirety. For example, if you had to do nothing, could play and install the game as many times as you wanted, but some magical invisible method was used to ensure that was your copy you were playing with, would that be a problem?

Darniaq I agree completely, and I don't begrudge the industry trying to deter or even stop pirating of their software.  That isn't the issue and I don't think any reasonable person would begrudge them that.  The fact of the matter is this DRM really over steps its bounds in my opinion and therein is where the problem lies.  It goes much further than deterring piracy and it steps all over the person who is supporting them legally. 

Also Darniaq I am hearing many people stating that this won't actually deter the pirates of software.  If this is to be accepted at face value ( and only time will tell if it should be) then who is this DRM really aimed at?  My ultimate fear, sort of a nightmare scenario Darniaq, is that this is the priming of a horrible "slippery slope" for the PC gamer.

[Azazel]

But again I think this goes back to blaming this specific form of copy protection rather than the concept of copy protection in its entirety. For example, if you had to do nothing, could play and install the game as many times as you wanted, but some magical invisible method was used to ensure that was your copy you were playing with, would that be a problem?

Speaking for myself, with PC games, I woundn't be super-happy, but I could live with it.
Something like Steam for example, where I have two accounts of my own, and have "given" one to my mother to use with the Popcap Collection on it.


For console games, it's far more problematic, but we're not quite there yet.

OK, that's some funny stuff there. WAH I GOTTA MAKE A PHONE CALL. After 3 activations. Seriously. Your rage brings tears of laughter.

You're not an idiot, Sky. "Contact customer support and it will be resolved on a case-by-case basis". You know those lines are wide enough to drive a truck through, let alone read between, and it already looks quite painful. And that's for every activation after the third.

There will be only one group of people who will be stolen from when this goes into affect, yet I hear nothing of this from stephen zepp.

Can't wait to play Mass Affect.

Playing Grammar Polizei as a reply to someone's argumentitive point when they're clearly not a net.fuckwit is playing strawman, and weak sauce. HA HA YOUR GRAMMAR IS IMPERFECT FOOLISH MORTAL!!!


Also, has anyone noticed if there are any cracks for Bioshock yet that nix the online activation?

[NiX]

Also, has anyone noticed if there are any cracks for Bioshock yet that nix the online activation?

Pay for my ticket and I'll do it! Serious note, there are quite a few activation cracks floating around. The only real difference from your run of the mill crack is that you have to replace DLL's instead of just the .exe. I don't see Mass Effect or Spore lasting more than a week  because that's about how long it took for a working torrent of BioShock to hit the net after release.

[Stephen Zepp]

Mourneli:

--not going to bother quoting your posts, but a few things:

--the EULA for the products I work on is freely available online, before purchase. I hate, as a gamer, EULAs that are not, but I'm also aware from personal research that they aren't enforceable in most states, and that you can in fact return the product (if you yell loud enough in the case of some stubborn chain stores--just use the terms "Warranty of Merchantability", "state law", and "lawsuit" in an acceptably strong tone of voice, normally does the trick once managers get involved. Worst case, emails to regional managers have worked for me personally in the past.)

--I feel both personally and professionally that the types of DRM being used by EA and the like is pretty idiotic, and not helping their cause. GG has an open EULA, and InstantAction specifically simply requires an account, and you can play anything you purchase from it on any supported computer at any time.

--I feel that it's the responsibility of any company that makes a game to provide a working copy, or a refund, from a moral/business ethics perspective.

--I've stated many times that I don't -care- about the "loss" from piracy, but about the moral standards the broad acceptance that "piracy is fine" that seems to be prevalent amongst the recent couple of generations. Personally, I lose not one cent of salary when (note I say when--our products show up on Torrent within 24 hours of release at the latest) a product is pirated.

--Finally, people were stating that "pirating software is putting it to the man", in what appeared to be a revenge motive in some cases, and a "send a message" motive in others. In my opinion, neither do anything worthwhile to the original issue: revenge just makes the companies think they need more restrictive DRM, and the message is the wrong one.

All of these points have already been stated by me in the thread, so call it a re-cap for those that haven't read it :P

FYI, I only responded to this thread twice in the last several days--both when called directly out. I'm seriously not trying to keep it going on my own !

[Rishathra]

--the EULA for the products I work on is freely available online, before purchase.

[Venkman]

The fact of the matter is this DRM really over steps its bounds in my opinion and therein is where the problem lies.  It goes much further than deterring piracy and it steps all over the person who is supporting them legally. 

I agree. I can stomach it for now because we're in that transitory phase. Like many problems in the media business, I think the whole gotta-protect-them-all thing is being run by business folks who are not actually interacting with the services they're inventing, and therefore don't understand the fuss.

I am hearing many people stating that this won't actually deter the pirates of software. 

Yea, pretty much. It's usually the legit folks who get hoses when systems designed to protect companies are invented. They're either not savvy enough to bother getting around things, or not savvy enough to even know there's a constraint (like the folks who will never know until that third install).

As long as that information is not clearly communicated on the box and within the installation routine (and I don't mean buried-on-EULA-line-27 "clear"), you're playing against a rule you don't know with a time limit you won't know until it hits you.

What allows this stuff to persist is the amount of people who either aren't being affected by it, or the throw-arms-in-air type who quietly walkaway.