Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Half Life 2 Available, Delays Not Valve's Fault

Posted by Zonk on from the thanks-for-making-my-weekend-guys dept.

Evil Avatar has the word that even Best Buy is selling Half-Life 2 boxes at this point. If you're planning on picking this one up it should be available pretty much anywhere. Voodoo Extreme has news from Steam that in no uncertain terms are the delays in opening the game to customers their fault. From the article: "This is not Valve's choice. Vivendi is insisting that the game has not yet been released, and has threatened that Valve would be in violation of its contract if we activate the Half-Life 2 Steam authentication servers at this time."

70 of 759 comments (clear)

  1. As they said on IGN by Internet+Ninja · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (and Shacknews)

    Hey Vivendi...seriously, fuck you.

    1. Re:As they said on IGN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hey Vivendi...seriously, fuck you.

      Hear hear. I won't buy Half Life 2, not only because VU Games sucks a fat one, but because of the you-must-connect-to-the-server garbage. If I buy a CD, I want to be able to put it in my PC and play the game that I paid for, not screw around poking holes in my firewall to let it phone home and check with mommy to see if I've been naughty or not. Doom3 runs fine totally firewalled, and runs great for LAN games without any connections to the outside world as well. I've probably spent at least $500 on id games since the Commander Keen days, and I'll keep it up since they're not asses about the control mechanisms. HL2 and this Steam business, on the other hand, is utterly annoying. I'm glad VU is being so obnoxious and I hope it costs them a half million dollars in revenue and additional support overhead.

    2. Re:As they said on IGN by loraksus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you honestly think they give a shit? Not trying to troll or anything, but I just don't think that people in the company would even think that they would close, let alone think of what would happen to their customers.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    3. Re:As they said on IGN by inquisitor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It only needs to authenticate once for single player. Valve has said as much - it's product activation, not constant authentication. The activation decrypts the Steam .gcf files and thus allows you to play the game offline.

      Besides, it's well known that gaming companies treat you like an inconvenience - StarForce and similar copy protections, constant authentication on multiplayer, constant "you need the CD in the drive", blocking of extremely useful (and legitimately used) tools like Nero or Alcohol 120% and so on. Valve's system, with a product key registered to your Steam account rather than to the program as such (so you can play it anywhere), is actually a lot more sensible than most protections I see, and it's not their fault Vivendi hate you (if Valve had had their way, HL2 would have been released last month with CS:Source.)

    4. Re:As they said on IGN by StupidKatz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nah, PC gaming is where all the good stuff is (sans most RPGs). On top of that, the user still has total control over everything on his system and can manipulate it any way he/she desires.

      So, if Sam wants to play HL5 single-player, but hates product activation, Sam can just buy/install the software, then crack the game (assuming Sam thinks the game is worth the hassle). Sam has all the resources and tools he needs to do this on his PC.
      Billy, with his Xbox4, does not.

      I'll stick with PCs for my gaming, thank you.

  2. Blows my mind by mr_zorg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow, that blows my mind that a company could be in such a state of denial. How does a situation like this happen? I could see some corporate mixup causing the game to be released early, but to then insist that it wasn't released is pure lunacy...

  3. Copy protection at its best! by shepd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will either result in:

    - People downloading a crack
    - People returning the game
    - People deciding not to play the copy protection game

    All three look good to me, and should hopefully promote a more copy-protection free future. As far as blaming Vivendi... Did Vivendi put the authentication in there? No?! Hmmm...

    Whose fault is this really, then?

    --
    If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    1. Re:Copy protection at its best! by luvirini · · Score: 4, Insightful
      As far as blaming Vivendi... Did Vivendi put the authentication in there? No?! Hmmm...

      No they did not "put" it there. But usually it is the publisher who pushes for the harder copy-protetion schemes.

    2. Re:Copy protection at its best! by shepd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is the Half Life brand name so unknown they should be forced to deal with a publisher to make sales?

      With a brand name as popular as this, I am sure Valve was in a position to tell Vivendi "jump" if Vivendi said no to a copy protection free game.

      Of course, now, they've signed a contract and, worse yet, the game is on the shelves. The damage is done. And another set of consumers are casualties of this odd war against them.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    3. Re:Copy protection at its best! by Honig+the+Apothecary · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Vivendi did not put the authentication in there. But they are the ones insisting that "the game has not shipped yet" and not letting Valve turn on the authentication servers allowing people to play.

      It is the same old business model as music if you look at it. Valve came up with robust system for distributing a game to users, who could have had the game turned on two weeks or more ago, but there is a traditional publisher saying "No you cannot do that, you will steal our profit".

    4. Re:Copy protection at its best! by desenz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know about that. As I understand it, the game has been preloaded on peoples computers for weeks now. It could have been activated long ago, if not for vivendi holding things up.

    5. Re:Copy protection at its best! by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      More robust only in the sense of increasing the publisher's profit. Everyone who has ordered Half-Life 2 on the Internet had the option to download it in increments and pre-load it on their computers, which almost everyone took advantage of. The only thing standing between them and HL2 is the same with customers who purchased it at BB, which is the go-ahead from Vivendi to turn on the authentication servers.

      If customers who purchased online lose a hard drive in the future, they can just DL it again on Steam. If CD-purchasers lose their CD -- tough shit, they have to buy another copy of the game.

      Internet distribution is simply better for the consumer and the developer, whereas traditional hard-copy distribution methods are better for the publisher.

  4. What's the Problem? by BinBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I want to play as much as anyone, but we've all known for some time that the release date is the 16th. They aren't doing anything wrong.

    1. Re:What's the Problem? by Chasing+Amy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > They aren't doing anything wrong.

      And neither was DiVX (not the codec, the early DVD competitor) when it sold its customers encrypted DVD discs that required the player to have online validation. DiVX Gold or Silver discs weren't conceptually rentals like most DiVX, but were meant to be purchased and unlocked for unlimited viewing.

      Tried playing a Silvered disc lately? Every single DiVX disc became a coaster when the validation servers were shut down, even "unlocked" ones. Sure, refunds were given for "lifetime" purchased discs, but that's hardly the point--when I purchase a game or movie, I expect that a company won't be turning it on and off at the mercy of their whims. Sorry, but selling crippleware that requires online activation even for single-player is as shortsighted and wrong as--well, as DiVX and its crippling of everyone's movies.

      --

      Chasing Amy
      (We all chase Amy...)
      "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
    2. Re:What's the Problem? by RedWizzard · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Unless you are playing on-line, it is a one time activation.
      No, it's not. It's an install time activation. If I have to reinstall for any reason, I'll need to reactivate. Are Valve going to be providing authentication 10 years from now?
    3. Re:What's the Problem? by Cecil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The guy is complaining loudly. As the subject says, what's the problem?

      --
      Random and weird software I've written.
    4. Re:What's the Problem? by RedWizzard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What if Halflife 3 through 7 are shit? Maybe HL2 is the last good one.

      Plenty of people play games 10 years old, and older. Look at the popularity of abandonware. Sure there'll probably be a crack, but some people would refer to be able to play the game they purchased legally.

    5. Re:What's the Problem? by RedWizzard · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Since I bought it, I can crack it legally. Anybody who thinks different, well, they're wrong.
      You may be able to crack it morally, and even ethically, but not legally now the DCMA is law. Even then the number of owners who can crack the software themselves will be quite low, so the legally of cracking it doesn't matter much, because it ain't legal to distribute the cracked software (which is what most owners will require). Though again, morally and ethically justifiable...
    6. Re:What's the Problem? by nathanh · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I want to play as much as anyone, but we've all known for some time that the release date is the 16th. They aren't doing anything wrong.

      I disagree. I think it's very wrong. It might be legal. It might even be common industry practise. But it's definitely wrong.

      This isn't activation for network play, or to access their servers. This is activation for the single-player version. What happens when Vivendi goes bankrupt? And they will go bankrupt because this is the gaming industry! Suddenly all of the games cease to function. That's simply retarded. They're purposefully putting timebombs on their software. You've paid for a license but they can revoke your right to use it at any time. That's WRONG.

      Software activation is simply another example of the failure to maintain a balance between owner and user rights. I'm waiting for the backlash but comments like yours indicate that might never happen; even the supposedly educated community is largely complacent!

    7. Re:What's the Problem? by Chasing+Amy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > If the authentication servers go offline there's no reason
      > that Valve couldn't release a patch of some sort that didn't
      > require activiation.

      Tell that to the guy who picks up a Half-Life 2 CD in the bargain bin or secondhand, pops it in, and wonders why he can't play his game. Or the guy who bought it new right now and goes to reinstall it a couple years later but has no idea how to go about manually finding patches, downloading them, and updating a PC game--or even that PC games can be updated. Just because you and I are savvy enough to know that most PC games have downloadable patches and add-ons doesn't mean most people do. They don't.

      The very concept of buying physical software media that are completely useless crippleware coasters without online server authentication every time you install it is repugnant. You can still play movies recorded 25 years ago to obscure RCA Selectavision CED vinyl discs, yet millions of DiVX discs are useless because of needless server authentication.

      Crippleware Half-Life 2 CDs are no different. The time will come in several years when the server isn't there and the average user--who's more used to the console heritage of games that just work and don't need to register with a server to download keys or patches just to play single-player--will have no clue how to use the software he bought anymore.

      --

      Chasing Amy
      (We all chase Amy...)
      "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
    8. Re:What's the Problem? by kolwrath · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Windows XP requires authentication every reinstall. How is this any different? Its not like you install XP *JUST* once. New HD = re-auth HL2, Reinstall XP after bad crash = re-auth HL2, New computer = re-auth HL2, corrupted install from bad mod = re-auth, etc etc.

      IMHO they did not think this through. At least Microsoft gives you 30 days to auth, and lets you do it offline over the phone.

      On another note, does anyone know what will happen when Steam goes under? How will people ever play this game again? I belive the parent brought up the very valid point of old DivX disks.

      (The official word in the Steam formus I belive was, and I quote: "You dont have to worry about that". I belive while he was typing that, he did a Jedi Mind Trick hand wave. Unfortunately that only work on the week-minded.

  5. Indeed... by mcknation · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I really will laugh when someone cracks the authenticaion for single player play and releases the iso + crack before people who actually *bought* the game can play.
    Valve really needs to find an alternative to Vivendi. /-McK

    1. Re:Indeed... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's rather clever really. I can't think of the last time I've seen a major game that wasn't available from pirates before release day - and game publishers are certainly taking note...

      Yes, this sets a wonderful precedent. Once companies no longer wish to support a game they just shut down that channel and voila... you can't run it or activate a re-installed copy anymore. Pure genius. It eliminates the idea of abandonware completely.

  6. Even single player requires Steam by willith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It does seem rather unfair that even the single-player portion of the game needs to touch the Steam authentication servers in order to become active; there appears to be no concession made to those who have no Internet connection (or are unwilling to allow the program to touch the public network).

    Even Microsoft, with WinXP's activation, has a do-it-yourself option via telephone.

    It's disappointing that a content *delivery* system like Steam is instead being used as a content *regulation* and *denial* system.

    1. Re:Even single player requires Steam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree, all software activation systems provide a way to register over the phone. I'm mostly worried about what happens in 10 years when you feel like being nostalgic and want to re-install the game? Has valve made any promises for how long steam will be around?

    2. Re:Even single player requires Steam by willith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And why would ANYONE be unwilling to block it from authenticating?

      I certainly don't want a foreign, network-aware agent with the ability to execute arbitrary code calling home and telling another entity info about my computer. At work, we call that "spyware", and I spend a goodly amount of my day cleaning it up.

      Valve is already using Steam to track pseudo-demographic data on their players' computers--RAM, graphics cards, processors and speed, OS, and those manner of things. The average WinXP user logs on with an administrative account; when running Steam in that context, the potential exists for massive abuses.

      It is likely that Steam is being used to sniff credit card numbers and other personal stuff like that? No, of course it isn't. Still, I'd trust a game publishing company about as far as I can throw their corporate office. Vivendi certainly hasn't done anything to endear itself to me personally--I'd rather keep our relationship on the level of, "I'll write you a cheque and you give me your game". Anything beyond that--like, "I'll write you a cheque and you give me your game and then your game will call home and you can decide when and where I get to play it" is wrong.

      Crap like this is why the first thing I do after buying a game is download the crack. There's already a crack to make Steam unnecessary for playing CS:S--I'll be snagging a similar crack for HL2 as soon as one shows up.

    3. Re:Even single player requires Steam by eMartin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Crap like this is why the first thing I do after buying a game is download the crack.

      You trust the cracks that you donload from unknown sources more than you trust Steam?

      I don't trust either.

    4. Re:Even single player requires Steam by luvirini · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the aftermarket of autoparts is huge and you do not need to buy authentic Nissan parts for your nissan to work. There are many alternative supliers. So for this to work in the game world we weould need alternative supliers of these types of services..

    5. Re:Even single player requires Steam by discord5 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I fully expect a properly stored vehicle would work just fine in 30 years. I would be extremely pissed off if Nissan managed to stop all cars 30 years old from starting, whether properly stored or not.

      I'm not a big fan of DRM on this level, for the reasons that in the (near) future my software might not be activated when the company goes broke. However comparing this situation to cars and carparts is like comparing apples to oranges. In 30 years from now Nissan will not stop your car from starting, but neither will Valve stop your already installed Half Life 2 from starting. In 30 years from now however, your Nissan won't get a new sparklet because that type isn't sold anymore, and most likely in 30 years from now you won't be able to play HL2.

      Now, let's all step back for a second and breathe and look at the games we bought over the past 10 years. Have you recently played a 10 year old game? Were you planning on doing that? I think that the maximum lifetime for a game is 5 years AT MOST. Most don't even have a lifetime of a couple of months.

      OK, so in 10 years from now, your half life 2 copy might not work anymore and you've wasted a couple of bucks. In the meantime you've played the game for about a year, downloaded a couple of mods, etc. In 10 years from now, if Valve goes belly up, most likely the activation part will have long been cracked, and if Valve is no more who is going to sue you? Vivendi? They'll be too busy protecting the copyright on their newer games by then.

    6. Re:Even single player requires Steam by _CyRuSS_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I certainly don't want a foreign, network-aware agent with the ability to execute arbitrary code calling home and telling another entity info about my computer. At work, we call that "spyware", and I spend a goodly amount of my day cleaning it up.
      Valve is already using Steam to track pseudo-demographic data on their players' computers--RAM, graphics cards, processors and speed, OS, and those manner of things. The average WinXP user logs on with an administrative account; when running Steam in that context, the potential exists for massive abuses.

      Wow you are paranoid aren't you.

      Question, what makes you think anybody out there gives a shit about you? you're a nobody! Why do you bother thinking someone out there may care about getting your name, or your computer specs... etc.

      I mean I am not saying don't exercise any caution on the Interweb, but you're just being totally paranoid if you think Valve really give a crap and are out to sniff all your crap on ur computer, which is likely nothing more than crap nobody cares about.

      Stop fooling yourself, you're a nobody, just like most of us. If you really do have senative data on your PC, well then playing games on it is a silly thing to do.

      If you really are going to refuse to play this game in fear of Valve getting to know you, then I think your tin foil hat is on a bit too tight.

      btw. "a foreign, network-aware agent with the ability to execute arbitrary code calling home" When you think about it, doesn't that describe almost all programs that you have installed... really for all you know thats what they all could be doing.

  7. Missing Option by gnarled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You forgot the fourth option.

    They wait two days and then activate the game and enjoy playing it. What's the big deal honestly?

    --
    I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
    1. Re:Missing Option by MP3Chuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The big deal?

      Go to store ... buy game. Go home, install, and find out ... OOPS! Vivendi says you can't play it yet. Shucks, you'll have to wait a few days...

      Dunno about you, but I'd be pissed.

      --
      Who doesn't like free music?
    2. Re:Missing Option by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "They wait two days and then activate the game and enjoy playing it. What's the big deal honestly?"

      Well, they're inconviencing customers, and there's little reason to think this will thwart piracy or make the price of games go down. I can't imagine you'd be a huge fan of purchasing a highly anticipated product and having to wait to enjoy it for a less than good reason.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  8. Valve and Vivendi by Floydius · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Well I've been mulling this over so here we go.

    My first reaction was "wow, what a bunch of jerks Vivendi U are for keeping this game out of play any longer. I said to myself: 'I'll never spend any money on them (after HL2, of course) again.' But if I were in their shoes, i might feel differently.

    What I mean is, if I had a deal with Valve that I would produce and distribute hard copies of HL2, then i would not want to be shafted at the last minute. Vivendi invested a lot of money in the raw materials to produce the copies of HL2 that are being sold. I'm sure it was a shock to them (it was to me, but i hated it for other reasons, i'm sure) when Valve came out with steam and started offering their product in a mode that totally bypassed Vivendi. While it is not illegal, it is certainly a dirtbag thing to do. If that was going to be the deal, Valve should have said so up front. perhaps old habits die hard for ex-MS employees.

    In any case, VU would have probably been glad to stop all the legal nonsense and allow Valve to unlock much earlier if they had agreed to share a fair portion from steam purchases (since they're not discounted, apparently) with VU. of course that won't happen. in this case, VU would be shooting themselves in the foot to let any more early releases occur, because what gets sold early is going to be their main profit before the massive remainder of hard copies go to the bargin bin.

    i'm just as disappointed as the next guy that I can't play until monday, and that i still have to use steam, for that matter (although that's improved a lot), but VU is just looking out for their best interests and that of their employees.

    i'll start feeling warm and fuzzy w/ valve again whenever they hire icculus-the-person to do a port. :)

    1. Re:Valve and Vivendi by James_G · · Score: 4, Insightful
      when Valve came out with steam and started offering their product in a mode that totally bypassed Vivendi. While it is not illegal, it is certainly a dirtbag thing to do

      This is analagous to musicians telling the RIAA to get lost and releasing their music over the internet instead. I can't for a second see how this could be considered a "dirtbag thing to do".

      What I mean is, if I had a deal with Valve that I would produce and distribute hard copies of HL2, then i would not want to be shafted at the last minute. Vivendi invested a lot of money in the raw materials to produce the copies of HL2 that are being sold.

      Oh please, producing the copies to sell is a trivial cost. Who put the money in to the development of HL2 for 4 years? Valve did.. Gabe Newell personally put his money into it.. and Vivendi knew about Steam in enough time to launch a lawsuit about it 2 years ago. It can hardly be considered "shafted at the last minute".

      Personally, I hope we see more of this sort of thing; Game studios telling publishers where to go and finding their own distribution methods. As I said before, it's the same as musicians releasing music over the net - the publisher model is outdated and while I'm not naive enough to think it will die any time soon, I think it will need to adapt to survive.

    2. Re:Valve and Vivendi by justins · · Score: 2, Insightful
      when Valve came out with steam and started offering their product in a mode that totally bypassed Vivendi. While it is not illegal, it is certainly a dirtbag thing to do

      This is analagous to musicians telling the RIAA to get lost and releasing their music over the internet instead. I can't for a second see how this could be considered a "dirtbag thing to do".

      Good analogy, since production of albums and games is sort of similar, in the way they're funded at least. A lot of times the publisher fronts the money, and assumes some risk, to get the project finished. So it's a "dirtbag thing to do" (and a contract violation, I would think) if the publisher funds the production of the game and the studio cuts them out of the sales of the game.

      I mostly can't believe they didn't have all the details worked out in the contract ahead of time. I don't see how there can be such large misunderstandings. It's funny, the whole thing might have come about because it's been so fucking long since they released Half Life, and their contract was drawn before the Steam technology was even conceived.

      Who put the money in to the development of HL2 for 4 years? Valve did..

      I wonder about that. If VU doesn't have any money in the game, I can't figure out how this is an issue at all. Why would Valve give them any leverage at all?

      The original Half Life and its spinoffs have been fantastically successful, but Valve has been keeping a top-notch game studio running for over five years. I wonder how the financing of that works out, and if that's why they still need the relationship with a big publisher.

      Hope they can break free soon.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
  9. it *is* Valve's fault by Karma+Sucks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is amazing.

    Valve built some kind of retarded copy-protection scheme into Half-Life 2. Now people who have bought the game cannot play it. They are blaming this on Vivendi.

    Amazing. Just amazing.

    --
    (Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
    1. Re:it *is* Valve's fault by rokzy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      as far as copy protection methods go it's actually very good.

      no limit on number of computers you can install, no need for CD in drive. in fact, no need for CDs at all - if you were away from home and on a computer with a decent internet connection, you could log into your account and play it there.

      so it's good because whereas all other copy protections are just about making things shit, this one actually has some benefits for the legitimate user.

      the only problem with it is that Vivendi are a bunch of twats (like all distributers are) and will piss of customers and sue their clients before accepting the fact they don't deserve profits from a game they didn't make sold via a method they weren't involved with.

    2. Re:it *is* Valve's fault by __aailob1448 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up!

      Valve keeps screwing up time and time again and they want to be viewed as victims?

      I remember them lying and misleading about the september 30th release date which they knew would be impossible since at least july of that year.

      I remember them extorting licenses from cybercafes who BOUGHT LEGIT copies of CS and who made the game popular in the first place.

      I remember them requiring people who wanted to play on a LAN to have each steam client connect to the internet.

      And now, they require you to authenticate the retail game online before you can play it offline.

      Poor poor Valve indeed.

      And before you answer, yes i'm voting with my wallet and not buying the game. And yes I'll bitch and bash Valve all I please.

      And yeah, VU is evil too But Valve takes the Palm.

    3. Re:it *is* Valve's fault by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I look at it rather differently.

      Valve built a very clever content distribution and protection scheme into HL2 that will activate on Nov 16th. Everyone buying online with Steam knows this and has accepted it.

      Stores decide to jump the gun and sell early. They know the street date is on Tuesday, but they release anyway because "everyone else is doing it". Customers get home and find that they can't activate and start whining up a storm. This wouldn't have happened if stores stuck to the dates they were told.

      Vivendi is pleased.

      They know Valve can't release the game early or break the contract, but stores CAN release the game early and they know that the stupider section of the population is going to be mad at Valve and be all bent out of shape about how their "RIGHTS" are being violated, and how unfair it is that they might actually have to wait until the real "street date" in order to play.

      Vivendi WANTS this uneducated reaction because they DON'T want people to accept Steam.

      They want people complaining about "some kind of retarded copy-protection scheme" to try and frighten people away from online distribution that will cut them out of the equation. Just like the RIAA and MPAA don't want people buying media online but make a few lame attempts to do something (ie: new napster) to pretend they're not the bad guys.

      Stores also don't like the idea of Steam. They like selling products to their customers, retail markups, etc. If more game designers sell direct to customers in the future, that's less money in the bank for them.

      So get a clue folks... get a clue.

      N.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    4. Re:it *is* Valve's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1. you only need to authenticate once
      2. they can always make a patch to disable authentication needs.

  10. ObLateNiteGrammarCheck by poincaraux · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Voodoo Extreme has news from Steam that in no uncertain terms are the delays in opening the game to customers their fault.

    Eh? That makes my brain hurt. What did they say "in no uncertain terms?"

    The image of them standing around and yelling "are the delays in opening the game to the customers their fault" is funny, though.

    I'm guessing this meant to say "Voodoo Extreme has news from Steam that says, in no uncertain terms, that the delays are not Steam's fault."

    Note: my comment has no useful content. I'm just tired and cranky.
  11. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The game has to be activated via STEAM before you can play it. Even for single player

    ...and this is why I wouldn't even consider buying the game.

    Besides, just 10 more days until WoW.

  12. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 2, Insightful

    or you could go find the torrent and download it and play it before tuesday with out haveing to bother with the stupid steam activation....

  13. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "...and this is why I wouldn't even consider buying the game."

    So you wont buy a game that needs to be activated online, but you will pay a monthly fee in addition to around 60$ at the register for a game that can ONLY be played online?

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  14. Re:Distributers by realmolo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Distributors are a necessary evil. It's HARD to ship boxes of a product all over the world, and even harder to get your foot in the door with the big retailers. A small company might be able to distribute their own product on a small scale, but they could never do it big enough to sell TONS of product, which, obviously, is a goal of every company.

  15. Valve is just being stupid by Khuffie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is clearly just a scheme by Valve to further hurt its relationship with Vivendi. It's obvious that they want to end it, and this is the sort of publicity that they're getting before hand so that when they go to court, they can go point to this and say "Oh look! They won't even let the people who paid for the game play it! They're EVIL!". No. The 'evil' ones are the stores that actually sold the game. The official release date is the 16th of November, and the stores are bound by contract to only start selling the game on that day. If they do allow Valve to enable the game, then this validates this process, and gives the retailers free reign to sell any game as soon as they get it in stock, regardless of release date. This hurts other retailers, and utterly destroys the concept of being able to meet demand. Granted, Valve's Steam gave Vivendi the advantage here, unlike Halo 2, where those who bought it early could still play it. And don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of Vivendi myself, but the way this release has been handled put a damper on the excitement. This petty whining is almost ruining the game. Half-Life 2 is supposed to be the king of everything; after this I don't see it surpassing, or even coming close to, what Halo 2 achieved.

  16. Hey - Vivendi! by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hey - Vivendi!

    I was going to buy the hard copy of Half Life 2 - however I just fired up steam. I don't care if it takes longer (which it probably won't) to get to play it. I am not giving you my money.

    Especially after reading This article about Valve and Half Life 2. I now sympathize with Gabe and the delays the game had. I don't really fault him - people make mistakes.

    Granted I understand Vivendi's side - but if a publisher only gets $7.00 from a retail game, you start to remind me of the RIAA Vivendi... Download here I come.

    To quote George Broussard:

    Fuck you.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    1. Re:Hey - Vivendi! by PyroMosh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ditto to that. I like Valve. And I've been anticipating this game since the E3 they showed it at initially.

      Valve got my $90 for the "Gold" edition of HL2. And Vevendi will get nothing from me.

      I was basicly sold on the idea of Steam when my prchased in 1998 HL1 CD was scratched and wouldn't install any more. The next week, Steam went live. I entered my old key and in minutes was able to play HL1 again. It even let me download games I had never purchased (such as CS, which I still have no interest in playing).

      I'm a believer.

      --
      Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
  17. Delay not Valve's Fault? by MunchMunch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So who exactly decided to force people to activate it over the Steam network anyways? Vivendi sounds like a pretty bad guy, but really, come on now--we flipped out when TurboTax, Adobe, and MS all started activation, but what? Now it's just an accepted part of using software to the point where Valve takes no blame even though they made the decision to exert total control over even the single player HL2 installations?

    1. Re:Delay not Valve's Fault? by MunchMunch · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "As for you people who are up in arms over how activation servers one day may be offline and - gasp - how will we play then? There is this thing called patch and it's a perfectly fine way to remove this feature."

      Well, that was good for a laugh, anyways. I don't know if you realize how well you perfectly summed up the utter and complete absurdity of using activation to prevent piracy. In sum, your post and the last line in particular basically just said, "Activation is fair and good, as long as they remove it." You may have been referring to either a Valve-created patch (which they have zero incentive--in fact, a disincentive-- to produce, ever, if they believe in the first place that activation will protect any sales) or a user-created hack (which even you seem to agree is inevitable)-- either situation proves my point sufficiently: The legitimate user either suffers injury for being a legitimate user, or must engage in infringement simply to exercise their paid-for privileges (I'd like you to convince me that paying the posted retail price for a game does not implicitly suggest that they'll be able to use that game), while the illegitimate user suffers nothing and receives a superior, more accessible product.

      And as for incentives in general--I don't know about you, but for me, the incentive to buy a game is considerably lessened when I need to ask permission just to play it, after I've already paid for it.

      I and many here have downloaded cracked copies of games we own for play-convenience/necessity's sake. So what, do you suggest we just do that again for HL2 after we buy it? Is activation justified even though, in order to retain our legitimate rights as a buyer to actually use what we have bought, we have to engage in illegal behavior? Activation and other overzealous copy protection mechanisms really don't 'keep people honest,' whatever that means-- just punish the honest by giving everyone a sometimes overwhelming incentive to become a criminal.

  18. If I buy something by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have an expectation that I be able to use it then. I do not go buy a hamburger and then wait for permission from Wendy's to be able to eat it, I can devour it while driving away if I like.

    If Vivendi doesn't want the game on the market, they need to take the appropriate steps to prevent it from going there. This crap of selling it but not letting you use it till later is just that: crap.

    Why is it that people seem to think that creators of digital content should have some kind of unlimited rights to their works. If anything the constution allows a more limited set of rights than on physical property. There has been a long standing concept of Doctrine of First Sale. That means once you sell some IP, be it a book, CD, whatever, you lose control over the copy. Peopel can destrouy it, resell it, whatever, they just can't copy or derive works from the content.

    Sorry but Vivendi is just wrong here. If they want to cut the games lose to retailers and allow sales, the damn game better work. Had I bought a copy, I'd be filing a lawsuit on Monday in small claims court (since software companies tell retailers not to take returns on opened merchandise).

  19. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Jason1729 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you wont buy a game that needs to be activated online, but you will pay a monthly fee in addition to around 60$ at the register for a game that can ONLY be played online?

    I'll pay a monthly fee for a service. It costs to run those servers and it is an online game. I'm not too happy about the initial fee.

    I will not ask a company for permission to run a game locally on my own computer after I've already paid for it.

  20. Escrow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's going to be fascinating to see if and how long it takes the folks who must be lined up right now to crack it when they can see the traffic to the auth servers.

    Regardless of that, the question about what happens if Valve go tits-up is a very good one and actually should apply to any vendor selling protected software. The fact it's $40 instead of $400,000 is irrelevant - there are 400,000 customers potentially losing what they've bought. Unless, that is, the EULA says different.... Has anyone out there with a box actually ready the EULA?

    When I worked for a vendor (UK based), we always had to lodge the source code with the NCC (kind of governmental computing standards org) who held it in case we went TU. If we did, the authenticated purchasers had access to the code. Pretty fair solution all round.

    Seems like this is something consumer groups and EFF could pick up.

    Mike Bakke (not anon but too lazy to reg)

  21. Re:The anti-play measures lasted a few days.... by Medevo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The first people to play the game will be those who buy it, people waiting on the "free" version will likely be waiting at least a day for it to be cracked.

    Which, for valve, will be a victory. First time in a few major game releases will the paying owners get to play before the people with leaks.

    Also, for the CD's AND for those who will buy HL2 with STEAM this is true (HL2 still says 60% preloaded), despite the fact that those gcf files are encrypted valve would really like to pull a clean release off, then break apart from from VU and such with there homebuild distro system.

  22. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For an offline game, like single-player HL2, the CD Key will still work in 5 or 10 or 100 years. I don't see a problem with the CD key in WC3 for example. I do still play very old games, arkanoid 2, the old sierra adventure games, even scorched earth.

    WoW is different because the game itself is online. It is a service with a rather unfair activation fee.

    I still use win2k and I refuse to use XP for the same reason (product activation), and I did my taxes on paper for the first time ever this year because all the tax software has the same defect.

    I bought my first mac a few months ago because eventually win2k will be end-of-lifed, so I have to maky my transition away more painless. I'm willing to put up with all the crashes and other crap people complain about with windows, but I'd rather change platforms than use product activation. I've also invested very heavily in apple because I think garbage like "trusted computing" will push people of the PC platform in droves in the next few years.

  23. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Jason1729 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By authorize do you mean like typical software where it runs a check locally or product activation? I have no problem with the former (though it seems silly to force legitimate users to go to the extra trouble), but I would never buy any software with product activation.

  24. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Especially if you can buy it, install it, and play it all in the same day.

    Just like HL2 then. HL2 is released on Tuesday, just as previously announced. On Tuesday, you'll be able to play it.

    So some dealers screwed up and started selling game boxes too soon. It's still released on Tuesday. Are people upset over the fact that the release date announcement is actually still valid?

  25. Re:FOUR MORE YEARS!!!! by murdocj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I assume you haven't heard that the Republican proposals to amend the Constitution so the Terminator can be president??

    Of course, after Bush, The Terminator isn't looking so bad.

  26. Retail + No Internet Connection? by citizenc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Question. What about people who purchase Half-Life 2 retail, but simply do not have access to an Internet connection? (IE, they can't authenticate via Steam.)

    When do they get to play HL2? CAN they at all?

  27. A different look at the situation ... by Ricx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok so to start of I've pre-ordered my copy of HL2 from amazon. Hopefully I'll get it on Tues 16th, possibly the 17th. I have nightmares about going to authenticate with Steam and it's be so overloaded I'll have to wait even longer, but seriously take these points into account:

    - HL2 is easily the biggest release this year. Here we are 2 days before the release date, and there is no leak. As of yet no cracked versions floating around on suprnova, even though you can pre-load it & the SDK is out. That is unheard of! What was the last game to come out that didn't leak onto torrent sites way before the official release date? Far Cry? nope. Doom 3? nope. Total War? nope. You can even go get a legit copy from shops (in the US I read anyway) and you STILL cannot play before the release date that has been set. That is a success on all fronts. The fact that you've been allowed to purcahse a copy is purely the fault of the shop - the date is the 16th and has been for a while now.

    - You don't have to constantly authenticate with steam to play. Once per install is whats needed. Obviously if you don't have a net connection that sucks, or if you're stuck behind a firewall or NAT'ed somehow so steam won't work. Sorry but that's just the way it is. What about people with old machines? They can't play. What about people with very old gFX cards? They can't play. What about linux users? They currently can't play. Non-net users aren't the only ones unable to enjoy it, but the majority of people will be okay. And about the installing in 20 years time question - yeah that may be an issue, but really how many games do you play from 20 years ago?

  28. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Or is it a "legitimate" volume install borrowed from work? :)"

    Not to be an anonymous ass, but quite a few business versions of the software allow staff to install the software at home as well -- its part of the M$ Lock-In scheme. My M$ Rep actually encouraged me to install it at home...and when I told him I don't run PCs at home, he sent me a free copy of VPC (I have the old Connectix version that didn't run on OSX at the time).

    So don't assume...

  29. Re:FOUR MORE YEARS!!!! by Fishstick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess you never watched demolition man?

    Stallone: "Hold it! The Schwarzenegger Library?"
    Bullock: "Yes, the Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor?"
    Stallone: "Stop! He was President?"
    Bullock: "Yes. Even though he was not born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the 61st Amendment..."

    truth is stranger than fiction -- this could actually happen?

    --

    There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
    Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

  30. Re:Actually, I *AM* pissed. by Joey7F · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That would be me. Of course, I live in a European country where we the people have decided to put in safeguards to stop capital owners, whom we will gladly work with, from working us to the bone. In practical terms, that means 36.25 hours per week.


    What is the unemployment like in your country?

    Can you work more hours a week if you want to? I am in school right now, but when I was working over the summer, I almost always worked 8-9 hours a day because there was a need to do so. There were days when I got off early too which was cool but it was strictly a gift from my boss.

    What I want to know is what makes you think it is your right to dictate the terms of your employment to your boss. If you don't like the offer, work for someone else.

    --Joey
  31. Re:you can buy it.. but you can't play it by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree one hundred percent. This isn't a game related comment but does involve how dangerous server-based/controlled applications can be from a user's perspective.

    I've been looking into Windows software packaging applications, in particular Jitit's Thinstall and BitArt's Fusion. Either of these products are impressive and would solve a lot of technical issues that have been plaguing us for some time (among other things I'm responsible for developing installation scripts and generating releases.) But get this: even their downloadable demos require Internet access for activation, and so far as I can tell you can't even use them unless you have permanent Internet access (one of them supposedly has to download program code in order to run, each time you start it!) I was told to evaluate what was out there and recommend one, and I had approval to on-the-spot BUY whatever I came up with. The truth is that I cannot, in good conscience, recommend to my manager that we buy either one of these products. How could I? We're talking about something will become a key part of how we build software distributions, and if the software ever fails to run we (and in particular, I) would be thoroughly screwed. It's amazing how these companies think: they don't trust US to actually BUY their products so they implement ridiculous protection schemes, yet we are supposed to trust that they will always be there to give us permission to use that for which we've already paid! Hell, where I work our Internet connection (powered by SBC, what does that tell you) is a little flaky: I would get upset if I couldn't get my job done because my application couldn't do the ET thing. Just absolutely stupid, and they're losing business ... if I could have even RUN one of their demos I would have picked one and BOUGHT it! I guess these are the kind of business people that lose sleep at night that someone, somewhere, might be using their product without paying for it. Boggles the mind. It's funny, but this kind of thing was used very heavily back in the early eighties (copy protected discs, you know, with the bad sector marks and laser burns and all that crap) but the software industry woke up and realized that they were only hurting their honest customers and themselves. Now it seems like they're taking a step backward and using the Internet for the same thing. I think a lot of it is for the same reason that dogs lick their balls: because they can. You can pull this off if you're a monopoly: when you're in a competitive market it's a risky proposition. In this case, it is driving me to a less sophisticated but safer solution, one that doesn't have any authentication crap.

    Now look at Valve. $89.00 for their Gold version of Half Life 2. That's a lot of bread for a game. And I don't like the idea that I might someday be unable to play it because Valve isn't in business anymore, or just decides that they don't want me to for whatever reason. Yes, yes, I'm sure there will be a "no authentication" crack out shortly if it isn't already, but it still pisses me off. I bought it, leave me alone. If you want to charge me a fee for the use of your servers, that's fine, that's a value-added service. I personally believe Half Life 1's phenomenal success as an online game was due to the fact anyone could run a server, join a server, and that the master list was available for free.) If Valve wants a repeat of that success they'd best not be too greedy.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  32. Steam and DRM by obi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't care about the content distribution aspect of steam. I'd even opt for it, because the money would go straight in the maker's pocket, and not in the shop/distributor/publisher/whatever.

    What gets me fired up however is the ridiculous restrictions they have on STEAM. Want to give your old half-life version to a friend or your little brother? No can do, only option is give your account and password to them (at which point, you might not be able to play your new game at the same time, if they're on the same account)

    Want to play your half-life 2 in 10 years, to reminisce or whatever? Good luck.

    What I don't like about this scheme is that the consumer gets zero protection for their purchase.

    If they fix these issues, like NOW, and not "maybe at a later date". I'd be ok with it. (transfering/detaching CDkey from an account, sunset clause in license about games being unlocked in 5-10 years etc)

    1. Re:Steam and DRM by obi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You misunderstood:

      If you have HL2, and HL1/CS:CZ connected to the same account, and you want to transfer only HL1 to another account; You can't. If you give the login/password, you got two problems: I can't play HL2 while he's playing my ex-HL1, and the whole point is that I have an account on Steam I can chat with, find friends, connected to _my_ email address. Beats the point if I either have to make several accounts (one for each game - and you can't login to multiple accounts at the same time) , or share my account with other people.

      As for "in 10 years": I have games right here on my desk, of about ten years ago that I recently started up and played a bit; this is not a "hypothetical" case, it happens to me and my friends from time to time. Sometimes old games really are good, despite being graphically dated.

      I hear the HL2 CDs have the game content, but are lacking the executables, so without the help of Valve you won't be able to play it even if you preserved your original CD's.

      This reeks of DIVX - style DRM, I wonder why it's more acceptable for games as compared to movie rentals?

  33. Re:Way to go by mr_zorg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll admit I don't play Valve's games, so I'm not familiar with Steam or what it is, but according to the linked articles you need to authenticate through Steam before you can play the game. Even if you bought it from a store. It doesn't sound like this is about distributing through Steam, but authenticating through it. And, in my book, shipping a game that requires authentication through a service you won't allow is lunacy...

  34. Re:Actually, I *AM* pissed. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I work a 25 hour week... I'm damned if I'd *ever* work 100 hours (that's 14 hours a day 7 days a week!). How do you ever have time for home life/fun/hobbies?

    What's the point of having stock options if you have no life?

  35. Have fun not playing HL2! by steeef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Personally, I think it's garbage too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to try to make a statement by not buying it.

    As if Vivendi/Valve would listen to one non-customer's complaint and not millions of people who actually purchased the game. That attitude, dude, is also garbage.