Slashdot Mirror


Spore, Mass Effect DRM Phone Home For Single-Player Gaming

Tridus writes "The PC version of Mass Effect is going to require Internet access to play (despite being a single-player game), as its DRM system requires that it phone home every 10 days. Sadly, Spore will use the same system. This will do nothing to stop piracy of course, but it will do a heck of a good job of stopping EA's new arch-enemy: people playing their single player games offline." Is this better or worse than requiring a CD in the drive to play? Update: 05/07 17:17 GMT by T : According to a message from Technical Producer Derek French (may require a scroll-down) on the Bioware forums, there is indeed an internet connection required, but only for activation, not for all future play. Update: 05/08 04:10 GMT by T : Mea culpa. As reader David Houk points out, the 10-day window is in fact correct as initially described, so don't count on playing this on any machine without at least some Internet connectivity.

17 of 900 comments (clear)

  1. My worry by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I worry that this portends a day when consoles (and even blu-ray movie players) will REQUIRE an internet connection and do something similar to verify their games/movies. While piracy isn't as big an issue with console games/DVD's/Blu-ray's, it could set the precenent for a world where every piece of media we play would have the equivalent of a "Windows Genuine Advantage" check to function.

    And, of course, this isn't unprecented (on the DVD side, at least). Something very similar was done with the evil DIVX format in the late 90's

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:My worry by moderatorrater · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I worry that this portends a day when consoles (and even blu-ray movie players) will REQUIRE an internet connection and do something similar to verify their games/movies I worry about the same thing, but there's a counter-movement right now from many media companies where they're trying to add convenience and features rather than regulate them through DRM. These companies realize that DRM just means they're product is inferior to what pirates can put out with a minimum of effort and are trying to combat that.

      DRM is always going to be around because companies are always going to try to protect themselves from unauthorized copying. When the measures they take get to onerous, they tend to be scaled back or changed so that people can use the products again. We're at or nearing a peak in DRM technologies, and pretty soon more companies will be giving up DRM than are taking it up. In three years time I expect us to be reading headlines about one of the last companies giving up strenuous DRM in favor of more lax restrictions or no restrictions at all.
    2. Re:My worry by Dog-Cow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That analogy is completely flawed. People have been renting videos for decades. People are well aware that when they stop paying, the video goes away. I really doubt there are any Netflix subscribers who believe that Netflix are selling the movies to them.

    3. Re:My worry by Toonol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just like nobody plays games from the 70s and 80s?

      My kids play SNES games on the emulator every bit as much as they play their Wii. That's not nostalgia, because they weren't around to play the games in the first place. They are just good games.

  2. FFS by ShedPlant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For goodness' sake, you must be joking! I've pre-ordered the game but now I'm considering leaving it on the shelf and playing a pirated version. Sounds way easier!

  3. Turn everyone into criminals? by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It will just make the people who would normally not look for cracks go and find them. These people will then see that they didn't have to buy the game in the first place and EA will turn their paying customers into non-paying ones. Great job!

  4. Worse. by Carik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's worse than requiring a CD. I can easily carry a CD with me. I can't easily carry my network connection with me. And since I had been thinking about getting rid of my home network connection, it may mean I won't buy the game, or can only play it at work. What's the point in that?

    Yet another brain-dead attempt to prevent piracy...

  5. Annoying by Danse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mostly because it won't do a thing to prevent piracy. I really don't understand how they can keep coming back to this idea of requiring a CD in the drive or an active internet connection for single-player games. It makes no sense and only inconveniences their customers. The pirates just replace the executable with a cracked version and have no trouble at all.

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  6. Worse. by Elemenope · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this better or worse than requiring a CD in the drive to play?

    Worse. The state of my CD/DVD drive is my business and basically under my control, while my Internet connection is dependent upon staying in the good graces of a ISP company that may or may not have their shit together on any given day.

    --
    All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
  7. Re:Summary has it a bit wrong, again by Malevolyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So they want you to report the fact that their licensing system is defective? Sounds to me like they already know.

    --
    Your ad here.
  8. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by Reziac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And there may be your solution for when a company dies and takes their DRM with them, along with your purchase's bought-and-paid-for usefulness.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  9. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by Necroman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly what I was thinking. What happens 10 years down the line when I try to play a game or watch a Movie that has some funky DRM on it, but I can't because the company is out of business or has shutdown the DRM server.

    This sounds like a horrid idea.

    --
    Its not what it is, its something else.
  10. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by tambo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What happens 10 years down the line when I try to play a game or watch a Movie that has some funky DRM on it, but I can't because the company is out of business or has shutdown the DRM server.

    You'll scoot on out to GameCopyWorld, or whatever equivalent of it exists in 2018, and you'll get yo'self a NoCD-hacked executable. Or, you'll just fire up your GigabyteTorrent client, hit an oldwarez site, and find the hacked-to-smithereens version.

    Either way, you'll be able to run Spore there in your DosBox v500.0 emulator under Microsoft Windows 12.5 on your 1,024-bit processor. And it will work just dandy, even though the internet by which the original wanted to activate itself will have ceased to exist five years prior.

    Why do I know that? Because you're posting on Slashdot. The odds that you have the technical wherewithal to defeat these lame-brain schemes are very good.

    But for the average user (who - *gasp* - might never have visited Slashdot) will be out of luck. And that's very sad.

    - David Stein

    --
    Computer over. Virus = very yes.
  11. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by billcopc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course they say that, but that doesn't mean the acquiring company will actually follow through on those promises.

    Game houses rarely "go out of business", they bleed for a couple of years then get blob-sorbed by a big media conglomerate like Vivendi or Sony, and you already know how those big guys love to "do good".

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  12. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by residieu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never trust any rights given to you in an agreement that can be unilaterally changed by the other party.

  13. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by multisync · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What happens 10 years down the line when I try to play a game or watch a Movie that has some funky DRM on it, but I can't because the company is out of business or has shutdown the DRM server.


    Which again demonstrates the true purpose of these schemes: to prevent you from enjoying the media you purchased ten years down the road. They don't want us listening to our old music collections, or re-playing classic games. They want us to buy the flavour of the month today, and again tomorrow. They want us to pay something every time we listen to a piece of music, watch a movie or play a game.

    DRM is always about access control, not copy protection. CSS exists to prevent you from playing a movie in a region not approved by the studio, or from skipping past commercials. It does nothing to stop you from making a copy. The DRM in this game essentially forces the player to ask permission every time he wants to play the game he purchased.

    At the company's whim, that answer may one day be "no." I'm sure this is written somewhere in their EULA. If it isn't, what the hell, they can change it at any time they like without notice.

    --
    I don't care why you're posting AC
  14. Re:Bigger Worry: A backdoor is worse than a CD. by tambo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Just imagine, you spend $20.00 on a DVD. Then you have to go on the Internet to register the DVD and provide a credit card that can be billed when you watch the DVD. Then every time you pop the DVD in the player it runs a check to verify that you have registered the DVD and have a valid credit card that is charged $5.00 every time you play it.


    Already cookin', chief.

    "Software-as-a-service," a/k/a/ "software rental model"... translation: you never own anything - you pay and pay and pay and pay and pay, and if you stop paying, they turn off your rig. This is the holy grail for companies that don't really feel like developing new software, or in updating their software with appealing new features that you might actually buy. They'll just sell you the same thing for eternity.

    Of course, two other trends will also have to occur:

    1) Consumers are used to owning software, and won't voluntarily walk into a rented-software model. So they'll offer rentals as an additional option alongside purchasable software... but the MSRPs for purchasable licenses will slowly climb into the stratosphere, until cheap rentware doesn't look half-bad. Sort of disproves that whole "lipstick on a pig" thing, doesn't it?

    2) Want to just run a hacked version, and do away with the messy activation stuff? Nope, sorry, won't run on your new Trusted Computing machine (which is kind of a funny name, since you can't trust it at all to do what you want, isn't it?) It only runs software (and music, and movies, etc.) that's been cryptographically signed with a limited-duration certificate. But you do want to play Halo 4, right?

    Folks... I've gotta fess up. After 20 years of running MSIntel systems (dating back to MS-DOS 3.2), I am closer to jumping ship and Ubuntu-ing out than ever before. There are dark clouds on the computing horizon, gentlemen... there's a storm a-brewin', and it's gonna cloudburst probably around 2014 or so. "When did Noah build the ark? Before the rain..."

    - David Stein

    --
    Computer over. Virus = very yes.