Slashdot Mirror


EA Loosens Spore, Mass Effect DRM

An anonymous reader writes "In response to recent criticism, EA has decided to eliminate the periodic validation of Mass Effect and Spore. 'Specifically, EA's plan to dial in to game owner's computers every ten days to check whether they were running a legitimate version of their software has been scrapped, ShackNews reports. EA had planned to use the validation method for upcoming titles Mass Effect and Spore. EA now says that validation will now only occur when a user attempts to download new content for either game. Chief among the voices in opposition to this measure were members of the armed forces, who pointed out that they could not rely on having an internet connection every ten days.'"

35 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Sudden outbreak... by thealsir · · Score: 5, Funny

    of common sense?

    --
    Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
    1. Re:Sudden outbreak... by DittoBox · · Score: 5, Funny
      --
      Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
    2. Re:Sudden outbreak... by rob1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      - Announce heavy-handed DRM
      - "Listen" to backlash from fans
      - Announce less heavy-handed DRM
      - Pat yourself on the back when the fans lavish praise on you, knowing you still got your foot in the door anyway

      Sudden outbreak of common sense, my foot!

    3. Re:Sudden outbreak... by ppanon · · Score: 4, Funny

      They said that one of the primary objections were from soldiers. I think looking unpatriotic/unAmerican/unSupportTheTroops would be very bad for business.
      Maybe another factor was the realization that a large number of soldiers are coming home from Iraq with PTSD and good weapons handling skills and that it could be bad for more than business.
      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    4. Re:Sudden outbreak... by chrisb33 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was thinking the same thing - could they really have been serious about the 10-day DRM? It wasn't as if people's reactions were unpredictable, so I find it hard to believe that they honestly thought people wouldn't complain. As you pointed out, this seems more like a conscious "Door-in-the-face" technique than a legitimate retraction.

    5. Re:Sudden outbreak... by Skylinux · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Nice, if I had a mod points I would give one to you. http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/9/ is very funny ... still laughing

      The DRM still only allows three total installs for the lifetime of the game How is this better then constant validation? So if I install it on my Desktop, Laptop and maybe at work ... I would only play it on one computer at a time.
      Now if one of the machines crashes, I am thinking about my Gaming (win XP) Desktop here, it has become unstable and needs a reload soon .... I would have to beg to get one more install.... keep your game!
      --
      Everyone who buys Wild Hunt will receive 16 specially prepared DLCs absolutely for free, regardless of platform.
    6. Re:Sudden outbreak... by chris_mahan · · Score: 4, Funny

      (Apologies in advance to those this may offend.)

      A new psychological condition is predicted to appear among service men and women serving in combat in Iraq: PEASD (Post-Electronic-Arts-Stress-Disorder).

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

  2. Pictured? by WK2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    > EA had planned to use the validation method for upcoming titles Mass Effect and Spore (pictured).

    Those games look a lot like a joystick.

    --
    Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  3. Publicity by Emb3rz · · Score: 5, Informative

    The original story on this garnered attention from quite a large crowd (even just in the scope of Slashdot). It would have been foolish on their part to plug ahead when, as was pointed out by a poster on the original thread, their customer service was already trained with what to tell people who didn't like the model: 'complain so that we don't make the same mistake with our next game release.'

  4. Phew! by kaos07 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was worried I'd have to actually buy Spore.

    1. Re:Phew! by Perseid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know about everyone else, but protection like this makes me MUCH less likely to buy a game.

    2. Re:Phew! by Clockwork+Apple · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was more worried I would have to boycott Spore. Checking in when I DL content is ok cause then I am connected, but if the game is going to stop working due to extended lack of access to a connection, well... fuck em.

      --
      "Doctor, it's not the voices I hear in MY head, but the voices I hear in YOUR head that really frighten me."
    3. Re:Phew! by Kingrames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was worried I'd have to pirate it.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    4. Re:Phew! by statemachine · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ...after the intial install an online registration you never have to bother validating your copy of the game if you don't want to get new patches or play online... they dropped the overly silly requirement of having the CD/DVD in the drive while playing the game

      Shelving the new requirement of needing a connection every few days, and then dumping the old requirement of occupying my DVD drive with a disk, is excellent news. Alcohol 120% will be out of business, but I'm glad I won't need them.

      This is a win for both sides. Company saves money on non-game related development and infrastructure; customers' frustration level drops.

  5. The Horror by nick_davison · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Chief among the voices in opposition to this measure were members of the armed forces, who pointed out that they could not rely on having an internet connection every ten days. 1914/18... Trenchfoot becomes rife due to lack of access to dry footwear/socks.

    1939/45... Troops freeze through the Battle of the Bulge, across Russia.

    2008... Access to certain videogames sometimes limited in certain situations for a few days until net access can be resecured.

    I know "Won't anybody think of the troops!" is second only to "Won't anybody think of the children!" and can thus never be questioned unless you're a terrorist as well as a paedophile.. but there comes a point where the rallying cry is used for such ludicrously trivial things that it just devalues everyone involved.
    1. Re:The Horror by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um, what? Nobody is comparing it to trench foot or freezing in the winter because you're stuck outdoors and people are shooting at you. However there is a large class of people who go without internet connections for long periods of time, and that class of people doesn't appreciate this kind of DRM scheme. It says nothing about other bad things they may experience.

      Your argument could be used to justify almost any bad treatment.

      "Sarge, this stew tastes like horse meat!"

      "Shut up and eat your stew, Private. Just be glad you don't have trench foot!"

      Or, what the hell, I guess I shouldn't ever complain about anything, because some of my ancestors had to live through famines.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  6. Um, there's a problem with this. by raving+griff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    EA now says that validation will now only occur when a user attempts to download new content for either game. Spore is built on downloadable content. Throughout the game, the creatures you encounter, the worlds you visit, the buildings you see--they are all player-created objects and will all be downloaded in the background while the game is running. Spore is a game that only works well with downloadable content, and if I have to enter a validation code every time the game decides to download a creature or a planet, I'm not sure the promising gameplay will be worth the hassle.

    1. Re:Um, there's a problem with this. by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that by definition, if you're downloading new content, you have an active net connection. The 10 day thing was arbitrary. A user might be without net connection at that time, at which point they wouldn't be accessing such content but would still be barred from playing the single player game.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. I've said it before, I'll say it again. by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DRM has no right to exist, and anyone who implements it should be severely punished. DRM should be resisted by any and all means necessary. We deserve a DRM free future, but we will have to fight for it. Do everything you can to end DRM today.

    1. Re:I've said it before, I'll say it again. by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't want to come of as pro-DRM, but I have a simple question for you?

      Do you plan to purchase or play this game?

      Considering that it's a heavily anticipated game and generally recognized as being one of the more creative and innovative titles to come in in a while, it's probably reasonable for me to expect that you want to play Spore. Your stated hate for DRM leads me to believe that you couldn't bring yourself to actually pay for any product that comes with any type of DRM. Assuming that you both want to play this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it?

      If so, you're contributing to the reason why these companies think they need to have DRM. I can understand why people will pirate things when cost is a factor since I did it myself once upon a time, but if you pirate this game simply to spite the paid version which has DRM you're probably not doing the cause any help.

      I appologize in advance for potentially mislabeling you or constructing a situation involving you from so little information, but I have a feeling that there are a few people who will pirate the game just because they dislike the notion of DRM despite the fact that they're going to play the hell out of it and had the money to easily purchase it.

    2. Re:I've said it before, I'll say it again. by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly, I think you have it a bit backwards. This might be how The Industry thinks, but the lessening of DRM suggests that they've actually realised it's not quite so simple as that.

      You state it yourself: Assuming that you both want to play this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it?

      The answer to that is clearly "yes", which means "I would have bought if it weren't for the DRM". Publishers are realising that not only do most copy protection schemes not hugely inconvenience pirates, but it actively inconveniences your paying customers.

      if you pirate this game simply to spite the paid version which has DRM you're probably not doing the cause any help.

      If you buy it regardless of the DRM, what incentive does that give the publishers to stop using it?

      I think it's more accurate to say that this is the ONLY thing* you can do to help, but it only helps if you make sure they know that they are losing sales specifically because of the DRM measures. Mentioning it on forums is a good and semi-anonymous way to get the point across. If they're reading "yeah I love the game, the copy protection is annoying but it's worth the hassle" then they'll get the message that ... their paying customers think it's worth the hassle, and they'll keep using it so long as they think it helps reduce piracy*. If they're constantly reading "I would've bought it, but the protection was too invasive" then their attitude toward it will change.

      What it comes down to is that they make a list of pros and cons for and against their protection schemes. In the pros list, they have "might reduce piracy, for a little while". In the cons list they have "increases development and support costs, inconveniences users".

      So, make sure they add "reduces sales" to the cons list, and it starts looking like a very poor return on investment.

      * - since nobody knows how many people have pirated a game, not buying it is effectively the same as pirating it. The fact that any piracy figures are (by necessity) made up means that it gets the blame any time sales are lower than hoped.

  8. Life goes on by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There probably isn't a lot of love for EA around here (or many parts of the internet in general) but you do have to admit that they responded fairly well to the situation. From what I've read the approach that they're planning to take now is actually pretty good, if not better than what most of us are probably used to dealing with. The fact that I don't need to have the CD in the drive while playing the game is a nice touch, especially for anyone who likes to switch between games frequently.

    The only thing that you could really complain about is the necessity of an internet connection to validate on install. The only other time it bothers to validate is if you're downloading an update or using some other online feature which means you're already connected to the internet.

    As someone who was a little put off by the overly encumbering DRM that was originally planned to be included, I'd like to tip my hat to EA for listening to their customers and making a wise decision.

  9. How about? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You don't like their policies or practices then don't fucking buy it. Thats the loudest thing you can say.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:How about? by Rasit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't like their policies or practices then don't fucking buy it.

      You need to start thinking like a Suit guy.

      Most of them seems to think they have a God given right to sell as many games as their marketing department projected, if they don't meet the projections then it s clearly due to Piracy and weak DRM.

      If we don't make sure to tell them why we are boycoting them then we will eventually end up with something like this.

  10. Uhhhhh by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that the real reason is because military personnel are non-trivial consumers of entertainment products. When you have a bunch of young people, with a good deal of free money on their hands (if you are deployed in a combat zone you get more pay, and generally have few expenses since everything is handled), and a situation that sucks, well that's a good target for entertainment goods. I know when one of my ex roommates graduated and was getting ready to go off he got a nice laptop and plenty of games and movies. The guys who do Red vs Blue said Iraq was one of the top countries ordering their DVDs. Wasn't Iraqis ordering, it was troops.

    Thus it would be dumb for EA to shut out a large market. Especially since both of these games have strong single player components, and thus are of interest when you aren't going to have net access.

    It isn't being used as a rallying cry, it is that the soldiers were honestly concerned they wouldn't be able to get their game on.

  11. I DID IT! IT'S ALL ME! by Aphoxema · · Score: 5, Funny

    In a drunk fit last night I actually sent a rant to them about it, I don't remember what I said exactly but I pointed out that DRM has actually driven me to download games instead of pay for them and if I couldn't expect to defeat the copy protection bullshit then I just wouldn't play the game.

    Nothing no one's thought or said before, but I'm sure if enough gaming curmudgeons drank enough smirnoff ice at the same time while listening to EBM then there would surely be a rival to the mass mailing botnets that don't actually have anything useful to tell anyone.

    It's freaking hot in here and Qwerty pisses me off. I'm going to drink some vinegar and go to bed.

    --
    "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  12. More to worry about than that by sweatyboatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only thing that you could really complain about is the necessity of an internet connection to validate on install. As with any complicated software system (especially one acting over the internet), there's a lot that can go wrong. If it doesn't work for any reason, they'll have spent a lot of money turning happy customers into angry returners.

    A wise decision would be to forgo the DRM altogether, and apply the savings to reducing the retail price of the games. I guarantee that will have a far greater effect on sales than any DRM scheme ever would.
    --
    It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
  13. Re:Sudden outbreak... No not Really by arthurpaliden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, more like reacting to bad publicity. Sort of like what our elected officials do. Float a trial balloon and then act according to the poll results.

  14. It's still bad, even if it's a little better by Mark+McGann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the things about being god awful bad at something is you can improve a lot and still stink.

    The DRM still only allows three total installs for the lifetime of the game (although you can call EA tech support and ask for more, no guarantee though). I have many games that have existed on more than three of my personal computers. Just glancing at my shelf I see 1830, Star Fleet Command, Transport Tycoon, Starcraft, Rome Total War and the list goes on. I don't want to have to beg tech support every time I upgrade my game machine, many of these companies don't even exist anymore.

    The fact of the matter is that DRM that limits the total number of times you can install the game is unacceptable. They may have fixed other problems with the DRM, but this issue remains.

    1. Re:It's still bad, even if it's a little better by IKnwThePiecesFt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think a good compromise for this would be if they limited installs within a given period of time. Like three within a month. That would massively curb a cd key being shared online in a large pirate ring but would effect very few customers.

    2. Re:It's still bad, even if it's a little better by Mascot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Until they turn off the activation server. And eventually, they will.

      This has bitten consumers in the ass when it comes to music, don't let it get a foothold in gaming.

  15. This is blowing my mind by sweatyboatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Assuming that you both want to play this game and don't want to deal with the DRM, would you pirate it? The DRM is meant to prevent people from pirating the game, but he's going to pirate the game to avoid the DRM, which justifies EA's use of DRM, even though without the DRM he would buy the game.

    Actually, you know, that's probably exactly how the execs over at EA think.
    --
    It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
  16. Horse meat is great by patio11 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't knock it until you've tried it. Cooked it is really quite similar to a very lean cut of beef, but raw and with just a dash of soy sauce it is really, really good.

    Please don't all go PETA (OMG think of the ponies!) at once. They're dumber than pigs and pigs are delicious, too.

  17. Just an illusion by dupont54 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This "loosening" is just to make people accept, even praised, "online activation/harware tying", which is in my mind the worst kind of DRM for purchased content (though it is a perfect fit for renting).
    By accepting this DRM, you agree to have you ability to play a single player offline game controlled by an online server. There is no such thing as a one time only activation, as each time the system detect your computer has changed (which can be triggered by simply using a different windows account with crappy DRM), it will ask for activation again, eating your previous activation credit.
    Nothing guarantee the auth server will be there when you want to play. Even if it is there, nothing guarantee it will give you the right to play because of some "normal usage" rules implemented on it (and which can change over time). And don't expect too much competence and generosity from a consumer service, especially a few months after launch.
    The software, music and video industries are full of horror histories about activation servers going down or being simply dumb and rigid.

  18. Here's where the 10 day thing comes from by Digital_Quartz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The 10-day thing is required. Here's where it comes from.

    BioShock released with an earlier version of this system; SecuROM with Product Activation. After outcry from people then, publisher 2K Games promised a "deactivation" tool (which isn't enough for me to rent their game, but I guess it was enough for some). The problem with this tool goes a little something like this:

    Step 1: Install BioShock
    Step 2: Activate BioShock. SecuROM server now thinks you have "n-1" activations left. Your game is activated, and BioShock will never phone home again.
    Step 3: Ghost/clone your hard drive image.
    Step 4: Deactivate BioShock. SecuROM server goes back up to "n" activations left. Your game is deactivated.
    Step 5: Restore your harddrive from the image you created in step 3. Now your game is activated again, but the server doesn't know that, and still thinks you have "n" activations left.

    This is obviously a bit of an onerous process to go through, but it isn't hard to imagine someone automating this process (or even just automating the important part; finding where the activation is stored on your drive, backing it up, and then restoring it after the deactivation process is finished updating the server).

    I strongly suspect the "phone home every 10 days" was an attempt to "fix" this. If 30 different machines are all phoning home every few days with the same key, then you know people are using this (or a similar technique) to pirate the game, so you can ban the key and kill all those installs. Without the phone home part, this activation scheme is essentially worthless.

    The CORRECT fix, of course, is to get rid of product activation, because it's stupid, invasive, and is pushing your formerly paying customers into circumventing your copy protection.