Spore DRM Protest Makes EA Ease Red Alert 3 Restrictions

Crazy Taco writes "The heavy Amazon.com protest of Spore's DRM appears to have caught the attention of executives at EA. IGN reports that DRM for the upcoming C&C: Red Alert 3 will be scaled back. Unlike previous Command and Conquer games, the CD will not be required in the drive to play. The online authentication will be done just once (rather than periodic phone calls home), and up to five installations will be allowed, as opposed to three for Spore. While I still think five installations is too few (I've probably re-installed Command and Conquer: Generals 20 times over the years for various reasons), EA says they will have staff standing by to grant more installations as necessary on a case by case basis. So, while this still isn't optimal, at least we are getting a compromise. Hopefully, if the piracy rate for the game is low, perhaps EA will get comfortable enough to ship with even less DRM in the future."

Comments

How is this a compromise?

[ccguy]

They are just saying 'OK, Spore hurt too much and the customers are making too much noise. Let's use a smaller dick with the next game'.

What they should do is be honest and describe the limitations in the box.

-Warning: Zero resale value.
-This game can only be installed 5 times.
-This game will refuse to run when other applications are running or installed.
-Some applications will be installed to verify playing rights. These applications will be running even when the game is not.

Would that hurt sales? If they think they are offering a reasonable 'compromise' then they should just do it, and no one will have a reason to complain.

If they think it would be suicidal to do it, then they know they are still fucking their customers. So expect no sympathy.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, Spore can only be installed three times. Red Alert 3 can only be installed five times.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Ubahs]

Spore can only be installed three times. Without making phone calls, it's three installs ONLY.

RA3, will be able to be installed five times.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[LrdDimwit]

Agreed. They still programmed the game to self-destruct. On purpose. So it's still unacceptable; If there's even a chance that, should I want to replay the game in 10 years, but I pop the game in and can't install it, then I'm not buying it. And if your game isn't good enough I'd want to play it twice, it's probably not good enough I'd want to play it once either.

Fundamentally, there is an important point with DRM on works of culture that's not applicable when applied to the things DRM is usually applied to. At work, for example, the provider of our middleware application has implemented license checks that could cause the same kind of issue. But a middleware app won't work cause it won't activate anymore? It's probably out of support anyway, time to move to a new version.

Businesses don't usually need a particular version -- and if they do, and it's a big enough showstopper, the vendor comes out and does a hot fix so new-version does what old-version did better. (Yes you can, I've seen it. You just have to need it badly enough.)

Games are different. Halo 2 is not the same as Halo. Twilight Princess is a very different game from Zelda 64. The "upgraded" original Star Wars trilogy cuts are widely seen as inferior to the original versions. Then there are games like Planescape: Torment, which is essentially unreleaseable (Interplay died, D&D license expired, uses 2nd edition, content wouldn't pass Hasbro's restrictions). So while enforcing obsolesence on middleware *might* be OK, it's definitely not OK to make video games that are essentially guaranteed not to work in 10 years.

So nice try, EA. Good, but not good enough. Games have an aesthetic quality; a given game is totally unique and irreplaceable -- that's why we like them.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[hansamurai]

And EA still has no obligation to fulfill more than 3/5 installs. 10 years from now when I want to play Spore will those staff still be standing by to help me out or will they instead suggest to buy Spore 3 and go screw myself?

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Ubahs]

I'm pretty sure it's the latter..."go screw yourself, but give us more money first."

I'm recommending to everyone I know that they should buy it and pirate it at the same time. It inflates the piracy numbers making EA slightly more scared, you still show your support for certain aspects of the project (the core game) - and you're protecting your financial investment by future proofing it against EA's decisions.

That and there is a good chance the retail game won't work in a decent percentage of the population's DVD-ROM's...so, downloading the game is the only way many people are even able to play their purchase. For example, my roommates year old laptop wouldn't spin up the game, she had to go through three DVD-ROM's to be able to install the damned game. This is after a nightmare OS/HD wipe and reinstall. No game should cause you to do that, just so you can install it.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see how they consider it "easing restrictions" by going from 3 installs to 5. That's the only change here. That you can play without the CD? So what? I can play a LOT of PC games without the CD (and even more if you count digital downloads). And that isn't easing anything anyway. Spore can be played without the CD and Red Alert had always been expected to be playable without a CD. Further, this "five installs" was in place for Red Alert BEFORE the whole Spore DRM issue. This is a non article, really.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[wondershit]

Very true. The answer remains no.

Solar Empire has no copy protection at all and has sold half a million copies.

There is something very wrong. I don't want to ask for permission to use something I legally bought. DRM server crashed? Sorry, no gaming for you today as it happened with Bioshock. There is absolutely no excuse for doing such a thing. Not piracy and nothing else. At least not in the way it is handled now (and I don't know of any unintrusive alternative).

Re:How is this a compromise?

[claytonjr]

So nice try, EA. Good, but not good enough. Games have an aesthetic quality; a given game is totally unique and irreplaceable -- that's why we like them.

How is this even considered a nice try? How is this considered good? It is not good. Its fucking pathetic.

Not that I endorse it, but piracy exists for a reason. EA is just adding fuel to the fire, by treating their customers like they are crooks. As if the people that pay money, for this crap, can not be trusted.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[im just cannonfodder]

they are trying to destroy the second hand game market.

have you read this?

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169899

FTA: Even on the same PC, extra copies needed for each family member who wants a new profile.

As if there was any need to further incite angry gamers with Spore's DRM issues, The Consumerist yesterday ran a story on how -- in addition to the many other restrictions the game's DRM presents gamers with -- a copy of Spore provides you with only a single game account. In other words, if you've got multiple people in the same house who want to play Spore and have their own individual online personas, you'll have to buy an additional copy of Spore for each person.

Forget what you may have read on the manual -- particularly that part on page 53 which reads, "You may have multiple Spore accounts for each installation of the game." An EA spokesperson going by the name "EA_Violet" has clarified questions regarding the matter on the official Spore forums, providing us this disappointing revelation:

"That section in the manual was a misprint and will be corrected in future printings of the manual. There is one Spore registration/account per game/serial code so you are correct in that you cannot make multiple accounts at this time. I have sent your guys' feedback to the game team though since I can understand the desire to share a game on a system that you entire family uses."

For a "misprint" the language seems pretty clear, and it is common practice for games to allow different user profiles so you can login and play with your own data/saves(naturally, with only one instance of the game running at any given time). One can't help but wonder whether this feature was removed so late in the process that the manual had already gone to print. Regardless, if this policy sticks after the game team reviews the feedback noted in the post it will only fan the fires of gamers frustrated with EA's handling of Spore. While we stand staunchly against piracy, requiring each member of a household to buy their own individual copy of the game seems like one of those policies that could backfire, driving people who otherwise wouldn't dream of it to potentially consider it as an alternative. But maybe this is simply an example of not having thought things through.

Should it hold true, this revelation also calls the game's strict installation restrictions into question. If each game serial code only authorizes a single account registration that should render how many times you install the game fairly moot.

We've contacted EA for a comment on the story but have yet to receive a response.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[fastest fascist]

EA has no motivation to give a damn about your playing the game in the far future. For them, the ideal would be to sell you a 50 currency-unit game that you maybe start once and then never play again. The instant you pay for a game that game starts to eat into EA's revenue because as long as you're playing it, you have less incentive to buy a new one. (And they have to ship bug fixes, maybe run servers etc. depending on the game.) That they have to provide you with a reasonable amount of content to get you to play the game is an unfortunate reality.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Goldberg's Pants]

Please get your facts right, or at least fill things out more. You get 3 installs OUT OF THE BOX. If you need more, you have to contact EA. This is no different than a lot of other online licensing mechanisms. (Trymedia for example.)

I bought Spore, downloaded the crack and used that. Game works fine, online works fine. No authentication needed so I've used zero activations. Don't give a flying shit about anything else EA has in the pipeline so they can sell the games with zero authentications for all I care.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[0111 1110]

Yes. Because the typical gamer only owns one computer in their lifetime and never upgrades that computer.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[PotatoSan]

One could argue that EA might interpret that as "people happy with the game and are buying it, but there are more people pirating it even with this level of DRM, so we need to make it more restrictive." Unless they can correlate people using cracks with the people buying the game, that's not going to get your point across.

Rather than (or perhaps in addition to) taking this passive-aggressive route, why not contact EA directly and say "Hey, I bought this game, I like it, but I can't deal with these bullshit restrictions." That way you make your opinion known unambiguously without having to rely on their interpretation of pirating information.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[cjb658]

It would be interesting to get EA's reaction to having a ton of people buy the game and never activate it (due to using the crack).

If you go this route, make sure you register it so that EA knows you bought it!

Re:How is this a compromise?

[ccguy]

Warning: you don't BUY software.. you rent a right to use license.

Sorry, no. I could be *BUYING* a license (plus physical media) which are then mine to resell.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[aywwts4]

Exactly, and that's IF EA still exists! I can't think of a single PC game I own that hasn't been re-installed over 5 times. Lets play a game, Going through my old PC game library, I can just imagine how some of these calls would have gone down had these kind of restrictions existed when I was a kid.

"Hello, Interplay? Yeah, I need to re-authorize Descent and Conquest of the New World, whats that, There are like, ten people working at your company and you are mostly bankrupt? Getting evicted from your offices? That sucks" (side note, interplay has no way to contact them at all on their years old single image webpage, though they have apparently sold some assets recently)

Hello, Vivendi Universal, yeah I need to authorize some of my games, Well it was a Sierra game, you know, before you bought Sierra, oh you know that, good. well actually Sierra bought this company a decade before that, so can you authorize it? Oh they took those servers down years ago along with the multiplay lobby? Right...

Hello, Activision, I know this might be a long-shot, But I was trying to re-install some of my Infocom games and, well you shut them down in 89... Yeah, you own their games, really, never heard of it? Zork? Nothing? Well I'm wondering if you can activate it for me, why are you laughing? What's so funny?...

I love playing games old and new, and I certainly expect that just as I can pop in super mario bros or sonic into my old systems, that I can also reinstall old PC games forever and ever, (on the OS they were designed for) The games industry is a volatile place, the rock solid big player of one decade is the next decades dinosaur, becoming a forgotten footnote in a companies IP portfolio.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[DJCacophony]

Or buy it, don't open it, and return it, to inflate their return numbers.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[jkerman]

It says in the spore EULA that you /can/ transfer the license 'one time' to a new party.

that new party should then be bound by the license in full, and also be able to transfer it to a third party 'one time'

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Tacticus.v1]

You have to call to get more activations
and in .au that's 2.95 a minute to wait on hold while some stupid frakking helldesk tool flips a coin to decide if you get to use your game or not

plus costing 100 USDish :(

Re:How is this a compromise?

[mrchaotica]

I'm recommending to everyone I know that they should buy it and pirate it at the same time. It inflates the piracy numbers making EA slightly more scared, you still show your support for certain aspects of the project (the core game) - and you're protecting your financial investment by future proofing it against EA's decisions.

I'd rather pirate it and then send $50 anonymously to Will Wright, with a note explaining why I did that instead of buying the game. Or pirate it and donate $50 to the EFF in EA's name. Or not play it at all.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[crossmr]

On the other hand, I bought a game called the Omega Syndrome. Independent developer. I went to play it again and he had closed up shop. I had my key but needed the files (it was shareware, after you bought it you activated it and applied a couple more exe packages to install the rest of the content). I managed to track his name to a developer forum and find an email address for him and he got back to me with the files.

I hate to say it but regardless of which companies that go out of business The Pirate Bay and Gamecopyworld will always be around. If there is some game you're still playing 10 years from now and the company has folded, the multiplayer scene is likely going to suck anyway so that aspect really isn't that much of a concern. It doesn't excuse them, I just don't think you'll ever genuinely be in a position where you can't play your games.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[insomniac8400]

What exactly does calling them on the phone do to stop piracy? People will just lie on the phone to get the activation. All they have to do is say they reinstalled windows for blah blah blah reason. What if you reinstall windows every couple of months? Are they really going to eventually tell you no when you tell them you reinstalled windows and you need another activation? If not, there is no point to put this restriction in the game. If so, their activation limit basically is giving them a way to ban your use of the game for any reason. In the end there is not one good reason for this kind of activation limit.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[SanityInAnarchy]

What they should do is be honest and describe the limitations in the box.

No, what they should do is stop fucking over their customers.

Who's up for organizing a similar protest around Red Alert 3? I would like to think that we won't accept the "just throw 'em a bone" strategy.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[Benaiah]

Exactly.
They customers wrote shit reviews for spore, and this is no fucking different. 3 vs 5 is not the problem. Even if it was a more reasonable 10 times, its still telling us the consumer that we are not trusted. And they want to shaft us out of value. Are we buying a product or a temporary license?

The kind of shit these companies try to get away with just wouldn't fly in any other market. If you buy a Car from GM you can only fill the tank at BP or you have the engine wont start. Buy a vacuum cleaner, and it will only work in the house that you first plugged it into. Try it elsewhere and you have to get it factory reset first. This costs $10 for the privilege. Its stupid. We can all see it. Why cant they?

Re:How is this a compromise?

[H3g3m0n]

I also very much doubt the EA help desk is going to respond to "I brought it 2nd hand." in any circumstance. I also get the feeling "I wanted to see if it worked on Linux under Wine, then I tried Cedega and CrossOver and now I want to try XP and Vista" will get you very far either.

Also this is hardly an easing of the DRM due to the protests, its exactly the same as it was going to be *BEFOURE* Spore was released (then again Slashdot is slower to get news than Digg/Reddit), back when there was only some limited grumbling about the DRM. RA was already going to be 5 installs and Spore doesn't require the CD either, the only difference with the Spore system is 2 more installs, that is hardly a major change.

Since Spore release and since that RA announcement there has been heaps more consumer backlash over the system with many, many people pirating it to spite the DRM and several Digg/Reddit front pages.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[cgenman]

Can we have a DRM bill of rights?

1. DRM will remain invisible to the end user unless they are attempting to pirate the game.

2. The DRM system will be obvious, uninstallable through normal means, and will not make an effort to hide itself.

3. DRM will *never* run when the game is not running. (Performance is bad enough without 40 versions of a poorly-written software running around.)

4. DRM will never fail to authenticate due to the existence of tools with legitimate uses, although the DRM may require said tools be closed before the game will run. The DRM will never alter functionality of your system when not running.

5. DRM will never require the user to call the manufacturer for any reason.

6. Manufacturers are responsible for maintaining their DRM system on the latest version of the operating system for a minimum of 8 years after release.

7. If the DRM does phone home, it will do so without any personal data unrelated to the basic mechanics of managing rights.

8. Phoning home should not exceed once per month, with a one-month window for the player to have an internet connection. "Requires Network Connection To Play" will be prominently featured on the box and all related marketing material.

9. If a network verification server is ever end-of-lifed, the software manufacturer must either universally unlock all software that is no longer being verified or refund the original purchase price for all users.

10. All purchasers of digital downloads will have the right to re-download for up to 8 years after the original purchase. This must include some format which can be archived in a format that can be directly installed (pending verification server, if applicable).

11. All DRM restrictions will be clearly listed on the box and related marketing material in plain english in no less than 9 point font.

Re:How is this a compromise?

[jp10558]

The worst part is spore isn't revolutionary at all. In fact, it's a huge dissapointment to me. NOTE: I've only played 3 of 5 levels/parts of the game.

It isn't a simulation like say, Sim City was. It's not even really like The Sims. It's been 3 minigames so far:
1) PackMan
2) CRPG style grind
3) Weak RTS similar to a stripped down WarCraft 1.

I can't imagine what the later 2 stages really are, but I'm mostly bored. The worst part is I've spent maybe 6 hrs to be almost done with Stage 3 (and what's holding me back is being unable to beat a basically equivelent in all ways enemy to advance).

Where is the simulation??? Where is me being suprised? If I wanted some funky pack of half assed games that have been done before, I'd just get one of those combo packs...

We will not compromise

[MindStalker]

No, securerom is a resident program on your computer, I should also not have to get permissions to install more than a few times. Spores limit of one account as well is ridiculous. I will not buy another game with securerom ever.

Re:We will not compromise

[hairyfeet]

Damn,here they go,making sure i won't buy their damned game. Do they have ANY idea how much money we old guys have spent on the C&C games? I bought RA I&II,and C&C:Renegade. Then when I heard about the Decade Pack I went out and bought it since I wouldn't have to fool around and deal with a bunch of discs when I wanted a C&C fix. Now here I was,all jazzed up to buy C&C:RA3,and then they have to do that limited activations crap. There is NO WAY IN HELL I'm going to get on the damned phone and do a little monkey dance for EA just to install something I PAID FOR!!!

I bet the pirates are laughing their asses off at the way EA is screwing themselves and turning off their customers with their limited activation "Secure Starforced Buttraper V2.0". It is like they are saying "Hmmm. Well we left a few customers able to walk after the Spore crap. Lets take something really cherished like C&C and stick it to them hard!". And lets face it: This has NOTHING to do with piracy,NOTHING AT ALL. This is about EA always hating the used game market. If you care anything at all about your right of first sale DO NOT BUY this game!!! I hope EA is happy,as I won't be buying another piece of software from them,I don't care if I found Spore and C&C 3 in the $1.99 bin. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

Re:We will not compromise

[Jorophose]

Then do things the right way, and flood their phones telling them they can't install their AIDS on your computer because they've hit their 0 install limit and need to beg YOU to get the game installed on your computer, or you're stealing it the proper way, cracking it, distributing it to all of your friends, and periodically calling them to let them know you're playing the game.

Actually, do that more. Everytime you load up Spore/C&C/MassEffect, call EA and tell them, "hi, I'm playing your game". Bonus points if you let them know you're running a cracked version.

Every time you play.

S'about time you give them twice as much crap.

Re:We will not compromise

[Shihar]

I agree, I think EA is blowing its own foot off. I spend a LOT of money on games. I spend a lot of money on computer games. I am in the process of building a new machine from scratch is basically a gaming computer spawned from hell. I like games.

I also never pirate. The last time I pirated something I was 16. Buying things is quick, easy, and without hassle. Pirating on the other hand is a pain in the ass, time consuming, and risky. My time is worth more than what it takes to pirate. I have a large disposable income because I don't spend my money on cars, HD TVs, or anything like that. I'll buy a game if I have any interest it and I won't feel bad if I decide I don't like it. I have never resold a game. I am the perfect guy to sell games too.

I won't be buying Spore, C&C3, or anything with this absurd DRM. I am not going to have a game install crippleware onto my computer, and then limit how many times I can install games. I have reinstalled Starcraft, Fallout, and Knight of the Old Republic more times than I can count. Hell, I will burn through three installs in under a year. I will easily kill 5 installs in a year when I make/buy a new computer.

So, EA can continue down this path, but I won't go with them. It isn't going to stop piracy (as Spore has shown). If anything, it will increase piracy as the pirated version is the non-crippled version. So it won't stop piracy, but it will stop someone like me who merrily blows a few hundred dollars a month on games from buying.

Re:We will not compromise

[mpeskett]

Buying things is quick, easy, and without hassle. Pirating on the other hand is a pain in the ass, time consuming, and risky. My time is worth more than what it takes to pirate

I have the exact opposite leanings. To go buy a game I have to go out to some shitty games store (the ones around here are all shitty, your mileage may vary) and that takes time out of my day. At the very least I have to go online and buy it, and then it takes a few days to arrive. Pirated copy... takes minutes to find a torrent, then I can leave it downloading in the background and when I come back later it's done

Hell, it's not worth my time to not pirate stuff

Re:We will not compromise

[Meagermanx]

I'm sorry that you haven't been fully informed about the release of the new Command and Conquer: Red Alert game.
While there is, indeed, a version with restrictive Digital Rights Management(DRM), there is also going to be another version completely free of DRM. I'll run you through a quick comparison of the features of both versions, so that you, the consumer, may make an informed decision regarding how to spend your money.

Version 1.
-Can only be installed 5 times.
-Installs spyware on your computer.
-Comes with box and manual.
-$49.95

Version 2.
-Can be installed any number of times.
-Does not install spyware on your computer.
-Will likely be released several days before Version 1.
-Available for download from the comfort of your own home.
-$0.00

Have a consumptive day.

Re:We will not compromise

[Smoke2Joints]

i dont know about you, but piracy these days is a piece of proverbial piss.

1) download iso
2) mount iso, install game
3) enter cd key in .nfo file included with iso
4) copy crack from CRACK dir in cd root dir
5) enjoy your game without DRM

do the above, and you will have pre-2000 gaming experience with regards to copy protection. its amazing that these companies still actually think their DRM actually stops pirates. as i recall, spore was released to the pirate community days before the actual release. if it can be cracked, it will be. why punish the actual customers?

Re:We will not compromise

[Firehed]

That's great if you're fine with playing it in a few days, or maybe your torrent performance is always fantastic on all torrents. I grabbed the torrent of Spore, and after waiting for several hours while doing other stuff, it was still at 1% or so (I was averaging under 5kbps - yes, my settings are fine, other torrents can zip right along). I got fed up to the point where I just went out and bought the thing. Popped it in the drive, installed, done, playing before the torrent hit 5%, and played through most of the game before 10%. It finally finished up a couple of days ago.

Point being that when I want to play a game, I'm looking for something that I can play _now_, not wait hours or days for a download to complete to save some money. Buying it did get me that, even if it got me little else. I did have to go out and hunt down a copy at a physical store which I always hate doing (especially when you forget that most stores close at 6pm on Sunday; luckily (or not) Best Buy stays open till 7 here), but it DID still satisfy that urge for something to do that evening.

Now having said and done all that, I'd have rather waited as it certainly didn't live up to the hype. It was fun, but the interesting parts don't last nearly long enough and each stage keeps changing the gameplay style very awkwardly. I don't have an issue with having paid for it, but it was worth maybe $20-25 for the entertainment value it provided. It has reaffirmed my opposition to EA though, for reasons unrelated to the DRM (though that certainly doesn't help).

Re:We will not compromise

[TheRaven64]

I find it morally wrong to pirate something and keeping it if I like it instead of buying it and showing my gratitude for hours of fun with that purchase

Totally agree. I have legal copies of the first four C&C games. I won't buy the next one because of the DRM. If I pirated it, I'd probably enjoy it, and then I might tell other people that I enjoyed it, and they might buy it, and so pirating it would indirectly lead to EA profiting from releasing a game with unacceptable DRM. Since I have no intention of EA profiting in any way from my actions, even indirectly, while they continue to pull this kind of stunt, I'll spend my entertainment money on other things.

Re:We will not compromise

[Meagermanx]

Nonsense. You are gaining utility without compensating the creators, and that's not right."

Elaborate on why that is "not right".
If you cannot demonstrate your point, then that is simply your personal ethical opinion. I see no reason why your imposing moral visions should effect my actions when they harm no one, as I've already demonstrated.

I'm certainly not harming the creators in any way. I'm not stealing their bandwidth, packaging, or money any more than I would by simply ignoring the product.
The only thing wrong with software piracy is it decreases sales of a product. That's only my concern if I want the product, or the publisher, to succeed. While that might convince me to put my $50 vote in on a product from a different company, it is simply not a motivating factor for me here.
 
In this case, I'm rather hoping the product fails, and I'm certainly hoping the company fails, so that argument does not apply to this situation.

Re:We will not compromise

[Uberbah]

If your morals permit stealing

For the trillionth time, copyright infringement != stealing. And EA can whine about morals when they drop crippleware rootkits and limited installs.

Re:We will not compromise

[brkello]

Really, this gets modded insightful? The pro-piracy people on this site get too many mod points.

Why does anyone have to elaborate on "not right" when it comes to piracy. It is freaking obvious. But fine, if you are really that dense. Just simply do the "other shoes" thing. If you spent years of your life working on something, how would you feel if someone just took your work without compensating you for it? You would be upset...and if you are trying to say you would be cool with it, you are being intellectually dishonest.

The best way to protest is to not buy their product and give your money to someone who does what you consider right. The people like you, the pirate, are a large part of the reason that DRM exists and that we all have to suffer. If people did the "right thing", then DRM would not be an issue.

You probably think I am anti-piracy...and I really am not. Do whatever you want. But don't try to fool yourself or others that you are morally in the right. That's just one of the stupidest things I have to read on this site on an almost daily basis.

How to make them understand... the fun way!

[Bragador]

Hehe you know what I'd do if I had the game?

Install it again and again, then call them to be able to reinstall it once a week (back up your saved games of course). Tell them it's because of windows and you had to reinstall it since some other unstable programs tend to screw the OS.

Lulz for everyone!

But they'd get the message ;)

Re:How to make them understand... the fun way!

[GryMor]

At which point you return it, or (check your CC terms), dispute it if they decline to accept a return on a defective product, or after properly documenting everything, file a an action in small claims (this presumes you were not reinstalling it for spite, but instead, actually having problems).

If the piracy rate is low?

[sdhankin]

I don't see how that affects their decisions. Spore has reportedly been pirated half a million times - how has the DRM changed that? All it's done is piss off the paying customers, who are being treated like criminals.

DRM doesn't work against pirates. It only works against the honest people. When will companies learn that?

Re:If the piracy rate is low?

[Aereus]

To the contrary, I think it's probably driven MORE people to pirating the game just so they can say "screw you" to EA for the excessive DRM.

Re:If the piracy rate is low?

[hairyfeet]

Because this has NOTHING to do with piracy. I repeat: NOTHING at all to do with piracy. This is a plan by EA to take out the used games market and take away your right to first sale. So if you care about your right to sell games you no longer want then DO NOT buy this game or Spore! Until EA removes ALL the limited activation crap and gives us back our right to first sale I will no longer buy ANY EA game. No MoH,No Madden,nothing. And if enough of us do that then we can fight EA where it hurts:in the wallet.

Also be sure to stick bad reviews pointing out the limited activation DRM into Amazon and every review site on the web you can find,because I would have gotten "Spored" if I hadn't noticed the negative reviews and I'm sure I'm not alone. If we don't then every other company will see EA get away with it and think they can do it too. Do you WANT to have to sit on the phone for hours doing a little monkey dance for all the different game companies when Windows borks? But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

Re:If the piracy rate is low?

[Devout_IPUite]

If they get a lower piracy rate to sale rate with Red Alert 3, it will tell them that DRM harms sales. Simple.

Re:If the piracy rate is low?

[Jorophose]

I was going to buy the Spore "Collector's Edition" if it wasn't for SecuROM. I'm sure I'm not alone. Even if most people would have waited for it to be 30$ or 20$, a lot of my friends were considering buying it. I told them not to, that we'll just get a cracked version.

I don't think anybody who wanted to buy the game and knew about the DRM actually bought it. Or if they did they're running a cracked version and bought the game due to troll's remorse or received it as a gift.

Less Piracy - Less DRM? WRONG!

[Ambiguous Coward]

Hopefully, if the piracy rate for the game is low, perhaps EA will get comfortable enough to ship with even less DRM in the future.

That's not how it works. If the piracy rate is low, they will herald their measures as a success, and it will only serve to increase the amount of DRM in the future.

-G

a small victory.

[Anonymous Coward]

it's a step. keep protesting and keep pirating and one day we'll see a more consumer-friendly business model.

DRM, the snake oil of content producers

[David Gerard]

No airtight DRM is possible (and Spore's already been cracked). But content producers are so obsessed with absolute control that they'll beg people to take money to sell them snake oil. Of course, this always works. Yeah.

Others speculate the real target of game DRM is to kill the second-hand market. But, of course, that does no good when the competition is the cracked copies. Piracy: The Better Choice.

Re:DRM, the snake oil of content producers

[Creepy Crawler]

So what about First Sale Doctrine?

I have a RIGHT to sell whatever I want, especially what I buy from a boxed store.

Re:DRM, the snake oil of content producers

[Creepy Crawler]

Pirates are a cost of business. And even many companies have encouraged pirates (Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia--prior to buyout). Even Metallica supported them, until their Napster blow-out.

What they ought to fear is Customers switching over to the evil side. Crap like DRM encourages behaviors like no-cd cracks, serial gens, and other fixing tech. When the real paying customers realize that the pirate Arrrr versions are without anti-user tech, and simple to install... Well, why pay for crap quality when you can get better quality for free?

That's why I'm pro-DRM. 200 Million pissed off no-longer-buying customers WILL change copyright law and anti-user tech.

Re:DRM, the snake oil of content producers

[nog_lorp]

Yea, you have the right to sell it. But they have the right to turn it into a coaster before you do, if you agree to the license terms. If you don't agree to the license terms you aren't installing it anyways, so you can resell it.

Activation? What Activation?

[Anonymous Coward]

The version I just got off of usenet didn't ask me to... oh, nevermind, that's right, DRM is only meant to piss off ACTUAL customers.

I'll be enjoying my drmFREE game now. kthxbye.

You're fixing the wrong problems!

[91degrees]

Having to have a CD in the drive is a minor inconvenience. Easily solved (put the CD in the drive. any legitimate user will have one).

Having to call EA to persuade them to let you install the game a sixth time is a potential inconvenience. EA may not exist in a year or two. I might still want to play the game if EA doesn't exist! We're still leasing. Just because we're leasing on more generous terms doesn't mean we're getting a better deal. They've clobbered any potential resale value.

If piracy is low, EA will assume this works and use this scheme every time.

Pirate this as well!

Re:You're fixing the wrong problems!

[UncleTogie]

Having to have a CD in the drive is a minor inconvenience. Easily solved (put the CD in the drive. any legitimate user will have one).

I see... Just how how many copies of ONE game should I buy due to disk wear?

I had to buy ANOTHER copy of C&C:Renegade to replace the disk worn from years of use... just so I could PLAY the game I supposedly had rights to play. I wish people would quit assuming that the only people that use no-CD cracks are those that're pirating the game.

Has anyone confirmed three activations on Spore

[DingerX]

Because there are reports circulating that Spore actually has five activations.

In any case, "relaxing to five" is still a kick in the crotch, or would be if EA didn't censor that part of my creatures.

Thanks for the warning

[the eric conspiracy]

Limited installs is not acceptable. I am off to cancel my Red Alert preorder and leave a nasty review.

Re:Thanks for the warning

[VVrath]

If you like supporting indie developers that don't piss you off with DRM, it might be worthwhile looking at Multiwinia!
</spam>

Re:Yeah, sure its because of some comments on Amaz

[garett_spencley]

"I'm not really sure what's the way to go on it, but I know posting some BS FUD on Amazon like "SONY ROOTKITTED ME OMG!" and claiming victory when they raise the install limit to 5 is not the way to go."

I buy from Amazon a lot.. and I've also been waiting anxiously for Spore. So I went on over to Amazon the other day to pre-order it and was a little shocked to see 1 star ratings. So I read the reviews. They were a very far cry from "SONY ROOTKITTED ME OMG!". They were thorough, intelligent, well thought-out and actually educated me on the whole securom thing as I haven't been on /. that much lately and missed the article(s) about Spore's DRM.

Anyway, the comments actually persuaded me to not buy the game. I don't feel like paying hard-earned money for something that will only install X number of times (even if the number is 1,000 I don't care. Like other people I've still got games that are 15+ years old that I install every once in a while for old-time's sake) and will phone home and require an Internet connection every time I play it etc.

Customer feedback is the single most important thing that a business needs to pay attention to in order to succeed. Restaurants can not grow without reading comment cards and responding to their customers complaints and suggestions. Game companies can not grow by pissing off their customers. If EA ignores the negative feedback about this DRM then they deserve to be out of business in a couple of years. I was going to e-mail them to explain why I decided not to buy Spore but I couldn't find a contact address. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Not about piracy...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hopefully, if the piracy rate for the game is low, perhaps EA will get comfortable enough to ship with even less DRM in the future."

It's NOT about piracy, it's about removing the ability to transfer your game to someone else (used game sales, lending to a friend, etc).

DRM in games must go!

[LoRdTAW]

Why is it we still have silly piracy protection like starforce and securom? Just the other day I was fighting with Crysis, it suddenly would hang when launched. What was worse was that damn securom CD icon that hijacks your mouse cursor wouldn't go away until a reboot. So what did I have to do? Go to game copy world and download a patched "no DVD" exe for a game I BOUGHT WITH MY MONEY! Now what is sad. The execs should pull their heads out of their asses and see that they are wasting dev time and money with buggy and possibly destructive DRM. Piracy cant be defeated with silly cd check mechanisms, cd keys, phone homes, or dongles. It just doesn't work and will be cracked within days. Please stop screwing us after we already paid for the software.

Fuck EA and all their studios that bow under pressure to "protect" their IP. Spore sounds like an amazing game but that will be marred for many who have to fight with suckrom constantly crashing. Looks like another legit game that will have to be cracked to work. And ONLY 5 installs? What happens after 5 years if I want to play again? Will there be someone at an EA support desk to give me a new key? What if EA goes under? Unbelievable.

Re:DRM in games must go!

[Creepy Crawler]

---Now I don't hesitate .... except when confronted by this kind of DRM.

Thats precisely what I mean.

There's NO, and I repeat, NO reason to financially reward any company that uses anti-customer software against them. I still get it and use it. They just dont get my money.

What improvement?

[BarneyL]

Spore gave us infinity minus three too few installs.
Red Alert 3 will give us infinity minus five too few installs. Not an improvement in my book.
I don't think the install limit is really about piracy anyway, it's a method to force you to buy the game more than once and to prevent you from buying it second hand.

So its exactly the same

[Tridus]

Everything on RA 3 is exactly the same as Spore, except with a 5 instead of a 3. Nothing has changed. Its clear that EA doesn't get it, and they'll need a few games to completely bomb before they do.

Some Compromise!

[Lord Kano]

EA says they will have staff standing by to grant more installations as necessary on a case by case basis. So, while this still isn't optimal, at least we are getting a compromise.

This is like a rapist saying that instead of anally violating you, he'll settle for oral. It's a shitty compromise.

LK

Re:Some Compromise!

[WDot]

I disagree. The compromise is infinity times less shitty once he removes the requirement of anal violation.

Re:Generous terms ? Compromise ? Haha.

[mxs]

I can see a tiny bit of a case for the CD-check (though quite honestly, no, I do not agree with it -- it's YET ANOTHER thing that pirates don't have to deal with. If you have kids, you will definitely not want them to handle unprotected (physically) media too much -- the scratches will be a killjoy; Legitimate owners of games have been using NoCD-patches for AGES; it's ineffective, it inconveniences your customers (the ones that PAY you for the game, no less), etc.

The leasing is not really on any "generous" terms; 5 installs is exactly as bad as 3. 10 would be as bad as 5. Having to justify why you want to install the game again in a few years' time is laughable. Again, pirates do not have to deal with that crap. At all. Generosity would start at services such as you being able to download the entirety of the game if your media is scratched, perhaps by way of submitting your CD key or a picture of the receipt. But hell, that would actually make life easier for customers. Can't have that.

Yes, the submitter seems to be a shill for EA, painting this in a positive light and encouraging not to pirate to show them we appreciate it. No. I do not appreciate it. I own several C&C games. I will not be buying the next one. Congratulations EA, you just lost another sale.

Re:Yeah, sure its because of some comments on Amaz

[jma05]

I would gladly take CD checks over limited installs any day. Red Alert series is known for its replayability and people play it for years on end, unlike most games. Limited install don't cut it.

EA, let us pick our poison. Enable limited installs only if the I choose the disk check to not bother them. However, the problem seems to be that disk checking is now seen as an unreliable method by the companies.

Also, do these companies plan to ultimately release patches that remove DRM after a set period of time?, say 3-5 years when they won't be running authentication servers or just simply decide that you don't own the game anymore?

Re:Yeah, sure its because of some comments on Amaz

[pipatron]

How on earth will this make any more money to them? Do you think that the lawyers that will handle the closure of the company will care a single bit about releasing a patch? Do you think the programmers that has not been payed for 3 months will care to help out the company one more time? I'm sorry, but you seem to live in some strange universe. Unless there's a signed contract between you and the company, there's a very small chance that they will do anything at all just for goodwill, when they are already in debt and shutting down.

"At least we are getting a compromise"

[Reed Solomon]

EA says they will have staff standing by to grant more installations as necessary on a case by case basis. So, while this still isn't optimal, at least we are getting a compromise. Hopefully, if the piracy rate for the game is low, perhaps EA will get comfortable enough to ship with even less DRM in the future."

No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.

COMPROMISE? Yeah, instead of renting a game for 3 installs, you're renting it for 5. WELL WHOOPDEEDOO. I'm not paying for what amounts to a RENTAL. Maybe EA thinks they can buy copyright legislation and force DRM down our throats, but I won't be a part of it. They've pushed me too far.

If the piracy rate is low for their DRM'ed program perhaps they will have one with no DRM? What is wrong with you? NO! If there is ANY DRM AT ALL then it is fair game to pirate. I won't pay for a refrigerator with a lock on it that I can only get food out of if its plugged in to a GE power supply. Screw DRM. Any limits on our consumer rights are crimes against humanity.

This was the stupidest, worst reasoned article I've ever read on slashdot. And I remember the days of Jon Katz.

Boycotting DRM

[Artemis3]

Unless DRM is dropped, I'm not buying games anymore. It was painful enough to deal with "CD must be in drive" hoping for a good no-cd crack to be released by the community; but now this... XP style activation? Limited number of activations? Unacceptable.

DRM = Digitally Restricted Media

[sdo1]

Exactly. I was interested in this game and I surely would have bought it had I not learned of the DRM issues. Thank goodness for all of the outcry and press on this otherwise I might have fallen into the trap. I'm not much of a gamer, but the reviews of this game made we want to get it (the complaints hard-core gamers had of it actually made it appeal to me). I like how Will Wright's games are about "playing" rather than "winning".

But the DRM issue made me reconsider. I surely wasn't going to just buy it and install it. I'm just fundamentally opposed to buying things that would prevent me from exercising first sale doctrine. To me, I had two options. Buy it but download the non-crippled pirated version or do nothing. I've decided to do nothing. Buying it would give them $ and they won't learn. Instead, they don't get $50 from me.

EA has done nothing to prevent piracy and by doing this they lowered the intrinsic value of the game and pissed off would-be paying customers. Nicely done, EA. This issue is costing them millions. Good.

-S

It's All About

[Nom du Keyboard]

It's all about one thing. Absolutely killing the rental and resale market. You can't even give it to your kid brother when you're done with it.

Be honest! Spore is nothing more than a very expensive rental game now -- not a purchase.

And the only way to make this all go away is to absolutely refuse to buy their product because other manufacturers will follow suit.

I've never pirated a game, but if I wanted to try out Spore I'd pirate a cracked copy of this one.

Re:It's All About

[rsmith-mac]

This is definitely true, but it's worth nothing who is being targeted here. It's not the consumer EA is going for, it's the retailer that EA is after. Gamestop and their ilk, who up until fairly recently have largely been traditional retailers, have heavily gone in to the used game business. It's very profitable for them, they buy a game for pennies and then resell it for MSRP-$5, pocketing a nice profit in the process.

The Entertainment Software Association and its members have taken great offense to this, not on the grounds that a used game market hurts their profits (it does, but then again it has existed for years) but rather the amazing conflict of interest it has created with retailers. Gamestop doesn't want to sell you a new game, there's no profit in it for them, they want to sell you that used game that they got for next to nothing. And it's expanding, Best Buy and Walmart want to get in to the game too. In short, the guys that are selling games in meatspace are doing everything they can to drive customers away from new copies of the game and towards used copies.

It's this that has EA and the other publishers in flames. Their sales of single player games are getting murdered, and in some cases the meatspace retailers are making more money than the publisher did, because the same game is being circulated 2-4 times giving the retailer the chance to make a profit nearly equal to the retail price of the game, 2-4 times over. The problem is a simultaneous loss of revenue on the publisher's side, along with watching someone else co-opt your product and make far more money (virtually all profit) by driving away your customers.

So this is why we're going to see things like SecuROM and other DRM schemes that prevent second-hand copies from being playable, along with platforms like Steam and Impulse, and games with a MP component that requires account activation. All of these make reselling a game impossible. Until digital distribution can completely usurp meatspace sales, they're going to want to shut down Gamestop's activities as much as possible through other means. And while the consumers aren't the target, they'll be the ones to suffer the most.

What's going to be most interesting is how the next-generation consoles are going to deal with this. These changes are coming to the PC first because it's an open platform that allows such a change immediately, while there's no way to close the hole with consoles. Publishers are going to want to put an end to retailers engaging in second-hand sales with their console games too, so I'm left wondering how they'll go about it since the physical media has always been considered a valid token of game ownership.

Re:What

[Mascot]

Why can't they use NO DRM, and see how that goes?

Because it would probably lead to higher sales and show the world they have been complete idiots for a very long time.

The Brad Wardell interview from a bit back lays it out nicely. Removing DRM gave higher sales. Allowing the return of games for full refund gave higher sales.

DRM + High Cost = Piracy

[houbou]

The last 2 big games I bought was Doom 3 and Return to Castle Wolfenstein.. and the expansion pack for Doom 3.

And that's been a while, I know, I know.

But whatever the protection on these games are, I certainly don't mind. Got to register, have the CD in the first time, that's pretty much it.

But paying for a game, and having the amount of times I can re-installed it controlled is not good, and forcing the CD in the game at all times, without being able to even make a legitimate backup isn't good either.

I will never buy games like that. This DRM is causing pirating in the first place, that and the high cost of the games.

Because I loved the Doom franchise, I didn't mind forking out the 70$ back then, when it came out. Same for Wolfenstein, although as I recall, I only paid about 45$ for the game.

But in the end, when a game is more than 30$ for PC, Unless it's got a killer review and I mean a KILLER review, I will more than likely not going to buy it and no matter how cheap the game is in price, if I have to suffer that level of DRM, such as limited amount of installs and having the CD in at all times, I'm keeping my money and spending it on console games like the Wii.

Anyways, that's how I see it.

EA management

[gaspyy]

Sometimes I get the feeling that the management of a company seems determined to undermine their position and drive their company to the ground... ... or maybe the EA execs never played a game in their life.

Take Red Alerts' main competitor: Starcraft. There are people still playing it, now, more than 12 years after its release (and I understand there'sa huge community). I still have Red Alert 1 on a shelf and I actually played it a little last year, just for the good time's sake.

I have many games I cherish, despite not having a lot of time to play. Last month I replayed Lucas Arts' Full Throttle (through Dos Box).

Limiting a game to 5 installs is more idiotic than limiting a movie to 5 viewings (I don't watch again 90% of the movies, and there are only 1 or 2 I saw 5 times) and I doubt that those who actually bought Spore were fully aware of the implications. Not to worry, they will learn. And when they do, EA will have less customers...

Time To Use Big Content's Methods

[FSWKU]

It's time to use Big Content's methods against them. Will Wright and Maxis should file suit against EA for illegally damaging the sales of this game through the use of malware. Find every 1-star review of the game that pledges not to buy the game on every online retailer that carries the title. Treat EVERY one of these as a lost sale. Is it really a lost sale? Probably not. But if they want to argue that 1 download = 1 lost sale, then they should adhere to this as well. And since merely giving money equal to the sale is not enough, according to the industry, set the damages at some arbitrary level. Let's say $5000 per lost sale due to DRM issues. From Amazon alone, that should be about $10,000,000 USD in damages.

If the content industry wants to ruin people's lives under the assumption that downloading games/movies/music inderectly harms the artists that create them, they need to be held accountable by the same rules. People refusing to buy due to publisher meddling is DIRECTLY harming the artists and developers in this case. They (the publisher) need to either admit that they were wrong and greedy, or be painted with the exact same brush they seem to want everyone else painted with.

Someone needs to send a message to these assholes that treating your PAYING CUSTOMERS like criminals will NOT be tolerated.

Re:Yeah, sure its because of some comments on Amaz

[Firehed]

This is the magic of running a business as something than a sole proprietorship (which I assure you Valve is doing). Customers can sue the company for whatever reason, but the employees themselves and their assets (from the janitorial staff through the C-level execs) are completely protected*. If the company falls over dead one day, precisely what do you expect to receive as the result of winning a class-action? They have no assets for you to collect on. Maybe you could pick up a cardboard cutout of Gordon Freeman that was inadvertently left in a closet. They may not even have enough remaining infrastructure to release that patch that frees everything, never mind have any money left to pay out lawsuit winnings (oh the beauty of bankruptcy). With luck, one of their former coders could whip something together and throw it on TPB, but that could well be the extent of it.

I don't see this happening to Steam for quite some time, but it applies pretty much everywhere. Dealing with a dying company isn't likely to accomplish a whole lot.

*Protected from lawsuits relating to their employer, anyways. Obviously if they've personally wronged you, it's a different story.

Hypothetically.

[PhotoGuy]

Hypthotically speaking, from what I've heard about the game, even my youngest (6) would enjoy the game (and would even progress this past weekend to the start tribes level herself). My second youngest would also love the game, and make it even further than that, loving the game. My 15 year old would also enjoy many hours in the game. Myself and my girlfriend would also have truly enjoyed the game, and make it to the tribes level, although not as far as my kids, and are looking forward to playing it further. All ages would seem to enjoy the game, and find value in it. Hypothetically.

If it were sale for $30, and no silly DRM, we would have bought a copy, but we didn't. The online game play looks very interesting, but with the DRM we won't bother to find that out, sadly. The torrented version (I hear) plays fine for single player, with no authentication hassles.

I bought Half-Life 2 a few years back, when I was living in a small cottage. Years later, no chance in hell of finding the box, my son asked me to play the game. After failing to find the original discs, I started a torrent going (I mean at least I could, hypothetically), but remembered that along with the lost boxed copy of Half-Life was an associated Steam account. I guessed at my probable username/password, and got in successfully. I realized I could now not just download patches (which used to take forever on my satellite internet in the boonies :), but I could also install the whole game from scratch. On multiple computers in the house. (With four kids, mobility between the PC's is very helpful). I ended up installing it on four different computers. We never used (and presumably couldn't) use more than one copy at once. That's fine. We weren't looking to abuse our purchase. We weren't looking to run more than one copy at once. We just wanted to play our one copy, when and where we wanted, and Steam allowed just that, and with very fast downloads. We had many, many hours of enjoyment going through the levels together, taking turns. If they had chosen EA/Spore-like DRM, this would have never happened. That has a *huge* amount of value to me.

Plus, there was a fair bit of additional content (forgotten highway, Counterstrike, etc...) that weren't in my original box. And some pretty reasonably prices for some additional promotional games they had running.

To even lump Steam into the pile of steaming DRM out there seems insane to me, when I see someone criticize it. It lets me download and play the game I bought, anywhere, anytime, even though it's a big honkin' game.

I wish EA would wake up and smell the roses. Steam has proven that license management doesn't have to be offensive to users, but they still persist. Such a waste, especially for such a cool game. Sure, check my account's validity and in-use status when I run it (no two-copies-at-once for a single account) but let me download and run it from anywhere. I'm happy, you're happy. It's not freakin' rocket science in this day and age...

Pay 'Em with DRM'd Money

[bratwiz]

Pay 'em with DRM'd money. Put the bucks in a plastic bag with a EULA on the outside they can read that tells them under what conditions they can use the money you're sending in exchange for their DRM'd game.

When they receive enough DRM'd bucks they'll get the message.

In fact, I propose paying for all DRM'd media that way.

Fuck 'em. If they can do it to us, we can do it right back.

Lets still the cries of the users.

[mongrol]

It's clear to me that this new DRM scheme has nothing to do with users and everything to do with the used game market. Spore would be pirated whether it had DRM or not, EA aren't stupid. Those are lost sales either way. However, the DRM scheme basically removes Spore from the used game shelves so any potential players that come along later on when it hits the bargain bins, will have to buy the legit EA copy and not the five dollar cheaper used. That's money out of Gamespots pocket and into EA's.

Online activation will be a win for EA and developers, they just have to get the balance right, and/or for the users to get used to it. Meanwhile, EB and Gamespot will be hurting.