Slashdot Mirror
Ubisoft And Starforce Parting Ways?
Ars Technica posts about the possibility of Ubisoft ditching StarForce in the wake of some very bad PR for the copy-protection company. From the article: "'To return from there good on an important subject, that of Starforce, here information which should interest you: it was decided that protection anti-copy used on the very new Ubisoft plays would not be the Starforce software...Yes, that relates to Heroes as well!' The translation may not be pretty, but the news is. Starforce should be considered malware if you ask me, and treated accordingly. If this really does mean Ubisoft is going to stop using it on their new releases we can all do a little dance of joy."
...that the NEW anti-piracy system will not be Starforce. It doesn't mean it won't be copy protected or that the new system will be any less malicious than Starforce.
Something in me hopes the system will also be bad and eventually Ubi will announce that copy protection is impossible, finally acknowledging what we all knew for ages.
^_^
Some idiot decided to run French text through Babelfish and post as-is. Sigh.
LOAD "SIG",8,1
I'm happy that this decision was related to bad PR. Starforce posted links to torrents of pirated games that didn't use their protection, they blew off legitimate complaints as whining from pirates, they held an unwinnable contest (regarding hardware failure) that didn't address the most contested issues (software failure), and the CEO is a pompous loudmouthed ass.
I have the utmost respect for the programmers of Starforce as it is a creative solution to a widespread problem, but such talented engineers are working for the wrong company. I truly feel bad for the programmers because their brilliance is overshadowed by their managers' childishness.
There is always hope that the next scheme is decent... and not destructive. I know that game developers have released games without copy protection, and after that experience, went back to copy protection. I honestly think that you need some minor form of protection, to keep the clueless from just copying the product. I think you really run into 2 classes of gamers. The casual, "I put the CD in the drive, and it runs" crowd, and the rest that know at least how to go to a crack site. :-) I think the former crowd is generally much larger than the latter, which is why copy-protection really does work.
... they'll see an improvement in sales. I used to only do one thing when I purchased games -- check a couple review sites to see what the general opinion of the game is, and to make sure I'm not buying something fatally crippled.
Now, I do two things... the aforementioned review checking, and checking to see what kind of copy protection scheme it uses. I refuse to buy Starforce "protected" games, and I refuse to install it on my computer. To me, they aren't gaining anything. At best, they're preventing pirates from installing their games and playing for free, but that doesn't net them any profits... because I seriously doubt those same pirates go "Oh well, I guess I'll buy the game!" and go out and purchase a copy.
I won't lie, I download games. But I also buy any game that I intend on playing. Generally I download to either get it sooner, or have something to do until pay day, or just to make sure the damn thing isn't a train wreck. But I also have several CD cases filled with hundreds of games I've legally purchased. I don't know very many other pirates who pirate exclusively, or who won't purchase a game they really like. All Starforce does, is make them refuse to purchase the game at all out of anger.
I don't understand why these companies think that by preventing piracy, these people are going to suddenly decide that they've seen the error of their ways and start buying software. It's not. You just piss potential fans off.