Slashdot Mirror
PC Grand Theft Auto IV Features SecuROM DRM
arcticstoat writes "Game developer Rockstar has revealed that the forthcoming PC version of Grand Theft Auto IV will feature the controversial SecuROM 7 DRM system. Unlike some of EA's recent titles, such as Spore and Mass Effect, GTA IV won't limit the number of times that you can install the game, although SecuROM will be impossible to remove without leaving 'some traces' on your PC. Anyone hoping to avoid SecuROM by downloading the game form Steam will also be disappointed, as Rockstar says that all versions of the game will feature SecuROM, including digital versions online. On the plus side, Rockstar says that it's 'working with SecuROM to post information on our support pages regarding how to remove these inactive traces of the program for users who wish to do so.' Has Rockstar gotten a better balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here?"
No. Fuck them.
Sellout bitches. First M$, now SecureROM.
The game lacked content.
Fuck you guys again.
Not quite all, I imagine.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
Has Rockstar gotten a better balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here?
Not unless they have a version of SecuRom that doesn't screw up one's legitimate apps/activities like the current versions do...
The pirates will have the game cracked and available as a torrent in 24 hours.
Usual car analogy: Forcing legitimate users into a bumper to bumper traffic jam, while users who break the law by blowing past a "do not enter" sign end up being able to travel home at full highway speeds.
I'm sure most people don't care (or know) and the ones who do will just grab a "DRM-freed version".
I like to think that DRM is the cause of and not the solution to Piracy :)
crazy dynamite monkey
"Has Rockstar gotten a better balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here?"
No. The fact that any sort of DRM that requires access to some other device out on the interwebz when you install it means that someday when Rockstar gets bought/sued out of existence, you might be able to install the game ever again. Until, that is, someone releases a crack for the scheme.
I have games from my DOS days that I can still freely install. THAT is software freedom. Anything less is not.
Bearded Dragon
There is no hint of irony here. None at ALL.
Need an automatic screenshot taker? Try here.
Too bad, I was planning on exceptionally buying the game, but it looks like once again the pirated version will probably be less hassle than the retail version.
You just got troll'd!
I have a simple comment on activation in GTA IV PC - I would appreciate if you could pass this to a relevant person / department (preferably not "Deleted Items").
Do I need to activate this game online?
Rockstar: Yes, but to be clear, if you install the game on a computer that isn't connected to the internet, you can perform certain steps to activate your game on another PC with an active internet connection. Once the game is distributed, information on this method will be available on a GTA IV support page.
Some of my favourite games were written decades ago by companies that no longer exist. GTA IV with its unique story line is an all-time classic, but the activation requirement will at some point in the future render the game unusable. It is for this reason that I refuse to purchase any game that requires activation.
Thank you for your time.
The companies will not learn unless we do not USE it. Don't pirate it. Don't buy it. And most certainly, don't INSTALL it.
Why not use something like iLok which is essentially a USB key that stores your licenses required to run certain software?
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Franklin
What's even the point of this protection? All it's supposed to protect will be cracked before you even get to put the DVD in your computer. So, what's the point at all?
You just got troll'd!
Why didn't they ask more interesting questions? From the article: "Having copy protection allows us to protect the integrity or our titles and future investments". Why wasn't the question asked: "If this is so important, why haven't you used a copy protection method that actually works, ie: one which isn't cracked within days of release, if not before release"?
I'm not a fan of having additional crap like GFWL & This Rockstar Games Social Club, whatever the hell that is, forced upon me during game installs but the real question for me is whether or not it'll let me run Process Explorer (Which long since replaced Task Manager for me) and play the game at the same time (I'm looking at you, Bioshock, amongst others).
Also, why screw over the customers using Steam by including SecuROM? Steam *is* a copy protection mechanism in that restricts the game to a single user and it's not easy to duplicate a legit copy to another Steam account (Harder than downloading a cracked copy anyway). I had enough bad experiences with StarForce to be wary of anything that installs hard-to-remove driver hooks to control application usage.
I think people may be missing the human side of the problem. Let's say your an engineer and your manager comes to you and says "zomg! piratez! they r eatin ma soupz!" And being that you're the guy they're paying the big bucks to impliment features, it falls to you to stop people from "pirating". Now, being an engineer you know that there's no way to keep a game from being copied, but your boss is frothing at the mouth and pseudo-geek talk is coming out of his mouth while he runs through the office with a stack of trade magazines -- so you have to do something. So you call up Xyzzy company and tell your boss to pay them a lot of money and the problem goes away. Your boss collapes on his desk in a deep sigh of relief, signs away several million dollars, and -- blammo, SecuROM.
It's called "feel good security". It's the same kind of security you run into in large corporations. You know, you have to use a randomly generated 18 character alphanumeric password and it changes every 90 days... which is great except that when you go to do your timesheets you have to enter your LAN password... which goes over the wire plaintext encapsulated in an HTTP POST query. Oops. Also, because not everybody's memory is so great, it becomes common practice to keep the 18 character passwords written on sticky notes.
This is the true genesis of DRM... Ignorance and management fretting over money. It will be viewed as good as long as they "save" more money than it "costs" them.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
The main problem with buying a PC game is that you're pretty much stuck with it.
What I mean by this is: if you buy a game for a console, you can be assured that if it turns out to be a bag of shit, you can take it back to where you bought it and either get store credit or just exchange it for something else.
You can't do this with PC games (not to my knowledge anyway). Once you've bought it, it's with you forever.
The risk involved in buying a game to play on your computer is far to high - It might be crap, it might not run properly, it might not run at all. There's too much risk.
I think what PC games really need is some sort of subscription system, whereby the user will pay a certain amount of money per month or year to download a set number of titles at any one time (let's just say 3 titles). Effectively you'll be renting the games, rather like when console gamers trade in their old ones to buy new ones.
Once you're bored of the game, you just revoke your lease on it and then get a different one instead. The data could stay on your hard drive in case you change your mind (and also so you don't have to download 6GBs each time you want to play).
Doing so would eliminate a great deal of the risk attached to buying a game that basically turns out to be rubbish.
(oh, and by the way - GTA4 is shit. That and Devil May Cry 4 are the worst games I played this year. You'll not care for either.)
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
Rockstar says that all versions of the game will feature SecuROM, including digital versions online
All versions except the pirated versions that is.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
This is crap, someone will crack it. I don't see why It need to be in the Steam versions, but someone will crack it non-the-less.
How things change in just over 15 years.
1992:
Buy Doom after getting to try 1/3 of the game first.
* Be able to play it via dialup modem or LAN for as long as you have the working equipment.
* Be able to sell the game after you're done with it and have that second user have the game be just as usable to them.
* Enjoy playing thousands of user-created maps and mods -- anything from a monster health editor to a porn graphic replacement mod.
2008:
Buy game X.
* Require internet permission to install it. Hopefully you haven't committed the mortal sin of installing it more than three times.
* Require internet permission every time you wish to run the game.
* Require CD checking despite the above.
* Unable to sell the game to people who want something more than a coaster.
* Multiplayer server for Game X goes down after year because Game X 2009 edition is now out. People who still want to play the original Game X via LAN/hosted internet games are SOL and anyone hacking together hosting capabilities likely receives notice from lawyers.
* Have some type of over-zealous security check built into the game mess with your computer, internet connection, or both.
* Deal with an over-moderated/sterile mod community.
Really dude, give it a rest.
The game is garbage. It was heavily gimped to fit on the 7 gigabyte 360 DVD format and no standard harddrive and the graphics are shit thanks to being downgraded to run on the weak 360 graphics hardware.
Development of obviously a mess when you had Rockstar developers continually complaining about what a nightmare they were having dealing with the 360 hardware and development tools.
And regardless of the 360 nightmare the main character and story is the lamest of all the GTA by a huge margin. GTA IV is the type of crap you would expect to happen when a company farms out development to another small no name studio to save development expenses.
I can guarantee you that copies from thepiratebay.org and btjunkie.org will be shipping without intrusive DRM or sales tax. Fast delivery. Why would you pay extra to get your machine raeped?
Blah blah blah before the dumb replies, I'm not advocating piracy from companies that treat you with respect, like Stardock. I just won't be buying (or torrenting) this game, period, but this will surely increase the number of people doing the second.
And just to be extra petty and remind you what evil bastards they are, whenever you see 'SecureROM', that's Sony just doing what Sony normally does. Screwing unaware legitimate customers.
I'll stick with my copy of GTA4 for X360. At least I _know_ what I'm getting into DRM-wise and I can sell the game to someone else without any attempt on the part of the game maker to limit my resale right.
... of incorporating DRM into any product with "Grand Theft" in the title somehow escapes me.
Have gnu, will travel.
So they still intend to make a mess with their install but they'll graciously provide instructions on how to clean up after them.
They should try walking their dog in someone else's yard. When the inevitable happens, offer to loan the angry homeowner a shovel and just see how happy that makes him.
No one caught the irony of:
"You wouldn't steal a car". lol!
THL phish sticks
You sir, are an idiot. GTA IV rocks. The graphics are outstanding, the new physics engine is mind blowing, the story is brilliant and the main character, Niko, is in my humble opinion the best one yet. A no nonsense regular joe with an acid humour, trying to escape the ghosts of his terrible past all the while being a gun for hire, to try and make ends meet. I felt empathy for the guy from the get go.
The only idiot move on R* part regarding GTA IV was dumping Niko for that shitbag biker guy for the DLC pack.
Yes - it is possible. In this case, pirated copy is better than original - and free. No, I'm not calling for mass pirating, just stating the facts. No DRM vs DRM - easy choice.
What we need is a friendly rootkit that the other rootkits and DRM hook into that makes... umm I dunno what would happen from that point. Maybe the friendly rootkit can recognise the evil rootkit and rootkit the evil rootkit. Hang on. Delete all that. I'd better sleep.
Thanks to Resident Bush I'm a happy Codeweavers+HL1+Expansions+Orange-Box Steam customer who is playing these games on a Linux system. Forcing the installation of SecuROM DRM over Steam will stop me ever being able to purchase GTA4.
is weather it will beat spore in terms of piratebay downloads
i vote yes
One false belief most customers seem to be under, is that DRM is for the sole purpose of stopping those nasty pirates from swiping their game. Many game companies use DRM like SecureROM to halt the resale and rental of games, which any (honest) game company will tell you is a MUCH larger hit on their profits, than the horrors of piracy that people like EA would have you believe. This is not to say that this justifies using DRM which treats your customers like criminals, but that a better DRM system is needed, to curb these markets. To date the best system I have found is one in use by Daemon Tools, which requires you to log onto their site to generate and download and encrypted key file. There are no install limits, and if you format you computer you simply go to the site a create a new key. This system not only DELAYS (you can't beat them, you know) pirates, but makes the resale of games worthless unless you are the actual owner, and is NON-INVASIVE.
Bioware us one of the few gaming companies trying to create alternative DRM such as code-hooks to delay pirates during the initial release. If they paired that with a Daemon-Tools like key system for their games, they could delay pirates, restrict game resales, and in the process not piss off their customers. Really all this system needs is a website which allows you to register (which all game companies have) and a small program to generate CD-Key based encrypted files which the game EXE will check. Honestly the biggest killer here, is that game companies are too willing to take the easy route and lease out their protection to Third parties, who make money selling to the studio themselves, and not the game purchasers. There is no shortage of good ideas out there for companies who are willing to listen and retool their DRM model, but more and more big corporations like EA are buying up smaller studios and slapping their 'one size fits all' DRM onto them.
I will not buy the game, but I will play the warez, because I don't want to infect my computer with a rootkit.
-Woof woof woof!
They have lost another sale from me then I refuse to have my pc infested with unwanted processes and restrictions.
Next they will be wanting every pc to have a coin slot I've the feeling pc gaming will soon be dead completely.
On the bright side though most of the older games are better anyway. Deus Ex or Xcom anyone.
I'm gonna just download it and use this as an excuse as to why i'm not paying for it. Wouldn't have paid either way anyways.
stormy?
From everything I have seen (playing the game), read and heard, you hold a fairly extreme minority view here.
In this case, the developer and the publisher is pretty much one and the same
Sort of. The actual developer of the GTA series is Rockstar North (notice the "North"), a fully-owned subsidiary of the publisher, Rockstar Games (which, in turn, is owned by Take-Two Interactive).
Here's a sample DRM model using PKI off the top of my head: When a customer buys the software, the server sends a license key file. This file is keyed to that license and the product's serial number, and the customer should be able to back up that file so that it can be re-installed later (since every Windows user should re-install Windows from scratch every ~9-24 months anyway). When the software launches (and perhaps at certain major intervals in the software), it sends the license key (and a randomly generated "salt") to an SSL-encrypted server hosted by the manufacturer, which verifies the key and the fact that nobody else is using it at the time, then sends a PKI-signed "okay" message (with the date and salt for uniqueness) back to the software.
By moving the authentication to a trusted server, the hackability of DRM should be almost completely removed since you can't forge the signature (so the only way to hack this model is to break the launcher to bypass the lookup). The only downside is that internet access is needed when the program launches, which could conceivably be solved by launching the program at home and pausing it or suspending your laptop before bringing it to wherever you're going without internet connectivity.
That said, I would still never use software or media encumbered by this or other forms of DRM, and I feel nothing wrong with buying it (hopefully used) and then breaking it for my own use. Aside from Quake III for Linux, I don't think I've purchased (used or not) or even "stolen" any software since the 90s. I also debate the "stealing" connotation here as nothing is being taken, including potential payment, as "pirated" content cannot be assumed desirable enough to purchase. (Remember shareware?)
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
I wasn't going to pay for it before and I am still not going to pay for it.
You are either:
1. Doing a decent job of trolling
2. One of the poor sods who worked on the turd that is GTA 4
3. A retard
This is what gets me, is that no one attempts to sprearhead and channel all the users and traffic here.
What if CmdrTaco made a post on the front page tomorrow asking every visitor to Slashdot to send EA a message that they will refuse to purchase any game with DRM. One email won't do it. 100 emails won't do it. But a few thousand emails in a single day is hard to ignore. How many people visit Slashdot in a day? Is a few thousand emails unreasonable for a coordinated effort from the Slashdot community on an issue we all largely seem to agree on?
And perhaps another day CmdrTaco posts a request asking everyone to email Nvidia about their Linux drivers.
Seriously, right now we're an unorganized group of people bitching to each other about issues we agree on as opposed to an organized group expressing our opinion to the appropriate parties.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I'm really thankful for this news. Just like Spore and Red Alert 3, I had planned to buy GTA IV at release, but I'll now enter it onto my no-buy-list. I simply won't buy any game that requires activation, installs irremovable crap on my computer, and/or can only be installed a limited number of times.
And I won't pirate it either.
Microsoft is the one to blame for letting the PC games industry come to this sorry state with their pointless and incompetent foray into the console market with the Xbox fiasco.
...whut?
A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.
I was only giving loose thought to purchasing GTA4 when it came out for PC, but now there's no chance in hell; even if I got the game free I'd sell it on ebay for $15 and then go download it anyway. To any and all companies trying to push this DRM crap on it's "customers": FUCK YOU
Retard says whut?
What kind of country do you live in?
Slashdot headquarters is in Dublin, Michigan, United States of America.
/ same bullshit slashdot arguments, different thread.
I gave up running games on my PC a long time ago. I can buy a $500 video card or I can run a workstation with 8 gig's of RAM, a mediocre video card and a hardware RAID card. It's insanely fast for applications, development, etc. If I want to play a game... I fire up my Xbox (which I paid for) and pop in my game (that I paid for) and it just works. Everytime. The difference is if I try to build or install something on linux... sometimes it takes some work. With the Xbox I just hit "start" and I good to go. My workstation is for work and my console is for play.
because there are no install limitations. The industry does have the right to protect against piracy, but not at the expense of making a legit owner purchase a 2nd time. This fixes it.
This whole "DRM" thing is Newspeak. They call it that because "copy protection" has become a dirty word. Therefore we should *always* call it copy protection. We should call it the ugly, technology-breaking thing that it is.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
In all seriousness, why do they keep doing more and more to make piracy more and more appealing to a ever increasing portion of their customer base?
2 things are a given. The first is a truth of software development, the latter a truth of trade in general:
Any kind of copy protection can be removed.
Any goods bought legitimately must be worth more than stolen goods, because their price is higher.
And the latter is true with every good I can think of right now except DRMified software. When I buy a piece of hardware, I have warranty, I have certain consumer rights, I may be eligible to additional downloads, maybe I get other hardware cheaper. All that is not available when I bought it from someone who "found" it after it fell off some delivery truck.
With software, it's more and more the exact opposite. You get more out of the product when you steal it. Usually, it's even a better product. There are some copy protection schemes that actually clog your system so far that you lose 10-20% of your processing power, i.e. your software runs slower than the pirated copy. Other copy protection messes with your system enough to screw it up completely. Without, there is no CD requirement, no limitation on how often you can install it without dealing with very motivated support hotlines, no internet connection necessary. All that and more (I'm not even talking about the price difference, i.e. retail price vs. zip) is what you get when you do not buy the product but instead rip it.
And the more and more draconian copy protection gets, the more people start looking around the internet for solutions, find people talking about no CD needs, no activation hassle, no installation problem due to "too many installs" and they look, ponder and realize: I am actually better off if I do not buy it but instead P2P it.
So yes. DRM promotes piracy.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Grand Theft: Software perhaps?
UT 1 removed the CD checking and still has servers up also you can run your own sever as well.
I'm attempting to get a refund from steam, judging by their support page, it looks like it should be possible because the game is pre-ordered. They also shipped it with GTA:VC for free as a package deal, it makes you wonder if they did that so when they inevitably got requests for a refund they could argue that you had already used part of what you paid for (even though it was 'free'.) Luckily for me I haven't installed VC though, I'll let you know how I get on...
Buy it, then download and use a cracked version. The developer/publisher gets paid and you don't end up with a crippled version of the product. It's win-win.
I've never had a game with securom yet (haven't grabbed anything for a while), but I"m upgrading my rig soon and might grab some of the latest games.
It's one thing to do some bs to try and prevent copying, using a crack etc, but to limit my installs?! That's like 'buying' a dvd and only getting 10 plays.
What do you get like 5? Someone could buy a game, and a month or two down the road want to upgrade their machine for the best graphics, and right there they've used two installs. Say I want to revisit a classic game from time to time a few years down the road, but might want to uninstall it between these non-playing gaps for drive space.
.
Congratulations.
You have just re-invented the crap flood.
The lobbyist's mass mail-in campaign is as old as the postage stamp. It is the longest running gag in MAD magazine: The form letter in which you insert your favorite cliches and bits of jargon. It is the review geeks post in full mob force to Amazon.com before a game has been released.
Defective by design.
On that note, anyone know where/how we should send this message?
I WAS looking forward to purchasing this game. I've got all of the previous GTA series games on the shelf behind me, purchased legitimately. Cracked some of them, so that I could play them on my laptop while on break at college and leaving the CD/DVD at home, and safe. (Hint: The disc checks only serve to piss people off)
There is a significant portion of the population that avoids piracy. We like having a real copy, it's just we don't want to risk it. So, we do an install, and at that point want to put the disc away, for safe-keeping. We don't want to risk scratching it or breaking it, or even worse - losing it. I have an old game from a decade ago now (Star Trek: Birth of the Federation) published by Microprose. They no longer exist, absorbed by I think Atari. (Doing a Google search shows the brand went through several transactions) If this game required a phone-home to install, I would pretty much be hosed.
I still play the game. To keep the disc safe, I made a disc image, or an ISO, of it. This way I can install it and play anytime I want, without risking the CD.
Rockstar, from now until you realize the mistake you've made here by choosing to implement not just copy protection, but a very draconian, check-in-needed copy protection, I won't be purchasing any of your future titles. Don't worry, I won't pirate them either.
Rockstar, I'm taking my ball, and I'm gonna go play with someone else.
sandboxie?
http://www.sandboxie.com/
I was going to be this off of steam like many other games. I'm fine w/ steams DRM methods because I get something in return (I can re-DL when ever I want, a very nice feature). Granted, they could go out of business and leave my hanging but at least I get some short term benefit.
But now...Why SecuRom + Steam validation??? Why!!!
I'll be downloading this game...but for 49.99 less than what Steam is charging.
My biggest worry was whether or not I'd have to update my video card (the spec says a minimum of 512MB of video memory). They've turned this into a non-issue. I will not buy defective products, and DRM is a defect- especially if it's of the SecurROM variety.
In our quest for balance between people who want to punch you in the face, and you not wanting to get hit in the face, we've reached a solution: After you've been hit in the face, we're working on coming up with a way to put something up on our web page about how you can use band-aids.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Download RegDelNull - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897448.aspx - and place it in C:\
Go to "Run" and type in "cmd", then type the following:
cd C:\
regdelnull hkcu -s
regdelnull hku -s
The two regdelnull calls above will scan the whole of HKEY_CURRENT_USER (abbreviated to HKCU) and HKEY_USERS (abbreviated to HKU). It's possible you may find other null registry keys during the scans, since you're not targeting *just* the SecuROM keys doing it this way. regdelnull will prompt you with the full pathname of every key it finds though, which will contain the name "SecuROM" if it's one of the ones you're after, so you can check names and only respond "y" to delete those two.
Removal of the Securom service and related utilities.
Open a Windows command prompt and:
cd c:\windows\system32
Then type:
uaservice7 /remove
This will stop the Securom user access service, and clean up its relevant registry entries. On the Windows command prompt type:
regsvr32 /u cmdlineext.dll
Reboot and then manually delete the files:
c:\windows\system32\uaservice7.exe
c:\windows\system32\cmdlineext.dll
Note: Both of these files are Securom installed files which can be verified by checking their file properties (Right click - Properties).
Removal of Securom files under "C:\Documents and Settings".
Securom installs a hidden directory with 6 files under "C:\Documents and Settings\*Your Administrator name*\Application Data\Securom". The first 4 ordinary text files can simply be manually deleted once Windows explorer has been configured to show hidden files and folders. The two remaining malformed nominally unremoveable files require a special method to delete: Invoke a Windows command prompt with full Administrator privileges by typing the following into a Windows command prompt:
at *your current time + 1 minute* /interactive %systemroot%\system32\cmd.exe
e.g.
at 9:02pm /interactive %systemroot%\system32\cmd.exe
This will open a new Administrator command line when the time set has been attained. In this new command prompt change directory into the Securom folder:
cd C:\Documents and Settings\*Your Administrator name*\Application Data\Securom
Issue the following command to show the two remaining hidden malformed files:
dir /A
To delete the two remaining hidden malformed files issue the following command:
del /F /AH *
Confirm "yes" for each of the two file deletions of the malformed files. Finally, the directory "C:\Documents and Settings\*Your Administrator name*\Application Data\Securom" can be deleted as per normal practice from within Windows explorer.
Double check your registry files. Still see any keys under HKEY_CURRENT_USER---Software---Securom? Just delete the suckers. Won't blow up.
If that damned SecuRom folder still can't be deleted, even after correctly following the instructions above, download DelinvFile from http://www.purgeie.com/delinv/dldelinv.htm . Run the executable and find the C:\Documents and Settings\YOUR NAME HERE\Application Data\Securom folder and open the sub-folder. On the right, choose each malformed file and delete. Go back into My Computer and delete that SecuRom folder for once and all.
I think people may be missing the human side of the problem. Let's say your an engineer and your manager comes to you and says "zomg! piratez! they r eatin ma soupz!" And being that you're the guy they're paying the big bucks to impliment features, it falls to you to stop people from "pirating". Now, being an engineer you know that there's no way to keep a game from being copied, but your boss is frothing at the mouth and pseudo-geek talk is coming out of his mouth while he runs through the office with a stack of trade magazines -- so you have to do something. So you call up Xyzzy company and tell your boss to pay them a lot of money and the problem goes away. Your boss collapes on his desk in a deep sigh of relief, signs away several million dollars, and -- blammo, SecuROM.
It's called "feel good security". It's the same kind of security you run into in large corporations. You know, you have to use a randomly generated 18 character alphanumeric password and it changes every 90 days... which is great except that when you go to do your timesheets you have to enter your LAN password... which goes over the wire plaintext encapsulated in an HTTP POST query. Oops. Also, because not everybody's memory is so great, it becomes common practice to keep the 18 character passwords written on sticky notes.
This is the true genesis of DRM... Ignorance and management fretting over money. It will be viewed as good as long as they "save" more money than it "costs" them.
We are talking about Grand Theft Auto, right? The series with goals centered around stealing? (as well as murder, etc...)
Repant. Thy end is sheer.
Did anyone read the article all the way through, and specifically this bit? Emphasis mine.
/. and didn't see it mentioned.
GTA IV PC uses SecuROM for protecting our EXE until street date has passed, to ensure the retail disk is in the computer drive, and is used for Product Activation of the title. Product Activation is a one time only online authentication when installing the game. GTA IV has no install limits for the retail disc version of the game, and that version can be installed on an unlimited number of PCs by the retail disk owner.
I just searched through the comments here on
I've already ordered GTAIV and am looking forward to it. I assumed it would have all kinds of DRM crap, but that's why I now buy only one PC game a year (and I don't own a console.) I used to buy two or three per month, but I don't like digging around for the CD/DVD and I don't like having crap running in the background on my PC.
Hal Spacejock: Science Fiction with Nuts
It also says "I think I am more important than you, and that what I want is more important than what you want, and I am willing to break the law to act on my self-centered desire"
Well, that's also 100% true. In fact, I have difficulty thinking of anyone who doesn't fall into that category when confronted with excessive asshattery... Fortunately, we work within the framework of our civilization anyway most of the time, because most individuals/groups also work within the social contract. DRM typically does not, so circumventing it in those cases makes sense.
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
There is no excuse for leaving traces of the DRM behind.
Unacceptable.
I am the maverick of Slashdot
I installed Quake4 and my slow, old, computer couldn't play it. I don't regret purchasing the game because it came with a custom T-shirt, and I gave the game to a friend with a better computer.
Quake4's (.exe from the install) requiring of the DVD being inserted to play really turned me off too. It wasn't until after I had downloaded a no-DVD crack (after I got a new computer that could play it) that I learned there was an official update that didn't require a disc to be inserted.
Maybe they should throw in a custom T-shirt only available through buying the game, and remove all the bullshit that pisses consumers off.
So it's Microsoft's fault that publishers put DRM on their PC games because they made a console?
Can you justify that position with some actual logic?
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
"...balance between draconian DRM and fair copy protection here..."
That's like asking about a balance between McDonald's and a cow.
Just who exactly are SecureROM? Does anybody here know?
Maybe I forgot to put on my tinfoil hat to avoid the beams from outer space, but it feels like an awful lot of developers are jumping on the SecureROM wagon despite all their flaws and dislike from a certain demographic. It feels conspiratorial.
I always felt that EA and SecureROM were in bed together from the start. I'd bet good money a few people in EA's executive have shares or stake in SecureROM so they are always going to promote that company to the other (which I think is illegal but not sure).
But now Rockstar is on board and I just can't imagine anyone from there having anything to do with SecureROM beyond a formal business relationship.
Doesn't anyone else here get the heebie-jeebies with SecureROM?
Another (porbably) great game i will download.
Usually i make it a point to support publishers that procduce good games. But with SecuRom, never!
Sorry, but after years of "undetectable, non-removable" rootkits--which have all been removable, and detectable, even while still in memory--I don't really believe this claim.
Newer != Better
New != Perfect
You can always remove these things from your system. It just takes some nice tools and a bit of manual labor at most.
This is one of those amusing situations where stealing the game online is no different than stealing it in a store. Suppose you'd shoplifted the CD instead of grabbing it from a torrent, would you be saying that it makes a statement that "If you beefed up security here, you'd get more money from me"? Would you be saying it makes the statement that "If you got rid of the rent-a-cops I'd buy the game"?
The only message it sends is that you want the game but for whatever reason are unwilling to pay for it.
Rockstar says that it's 'working with SecuROM to post information on our support pages regarding how to remove these inactive traces of the program for users who wish to do so.'
First of all, why the hell do they have to "work with" SecuROM to get a proper uninstaller? Are they saying that SecuROM doesn't even have one to begin with, so Rockstar had to ask for one? That's some hefty bull, right there, and really lets you know how seriously they (meaning both companies) take uninstallation. I was encouraged by the flak Sony BMG took over the root kit fiasco. Something tells me people have been a bit desensitized since those days.
Second, there is no such thing as an inactive trace, IMO. No, I don't care about technical definition. If they are specifically pointing out uninstalled leftovers as "inactive traces", then chances are they are a bit more troubling than your typical junk registry keys.
Third, even if the companies are still around in a few years and their DRM servers are still online, will SecuROM still work on a next-gen platform? This kind of stuff buries itself deep into the OS, so I'd imagine that, like anti-virus software, something will be far less forward-compatible than your typical graphics engine.
This computer is my system, not theirs. They can take their crap and GTFO.
Why not just play the same word game that gave us "Piracy".
"copyright infringment"=="piracy"
so....
"DRM"=="Rape"
They're even close in their usage: Pirates take stuff which doesn't belong to them, and rapists force themselves on people.
Logic even a Fox News anchor could follow.
This is unacceptable and potentially criminal (computer sabotage). Unfortunately, commercial sucess is likely despiete this.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Clearly, the 'official' version is defective by design. It won't take long until someone produces a 'patch' correcting the SecuROM defect.
I'd wait for that, and since the game is clearly not usable as is. The developer certainly wouldn't expect any customer to tolerate such invasive crap on their PC, so they clearly aren't interested in having customers, and clearly do not want paid.
Why don't customers insist that we get to install our own invasive DRM on the machines of those who sell such crap? I'll be happy to write a kernel mode driver with a security flaw as my contribution.
The official version will carry SecuROM
I'll save 49â by getting the non SecuROM version.
Game publishers need to understand that paying customers are fed up with paying for a product worse than the one you find for free.
For US Support
Phone: 1-866-405-5464
Email: usa@rockstarsupport.com
For Canadian Support
Phone: 1-800-269-5721
Email: canada@rockstarsupport.com
For UK Support
Phone: 08701 200060
Email: uk@rockstarsupport.com
-Woof woof woof!
i want see the response from rockstar after a scene group breaks its securomshit
I can't count the number of times the kids or some friend has asked me to help with a fscked PC and when I look at it there is some sort of DRM happening. SecureROM being the most usual. Even if the problem is actually caused by something unrelated I still have to discount the DRM first. What a complete pain the entire thing is.
"Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
I'm not advocating, I am just thinking. There are two ways to send the message that you hate DRM trough "buyer action"
1) You refuse to buy or pirate (basically play) the game in any way
This sends the message that:
a) The game is crap
OR
b) The protection system (DRM) is unacceptable
2) You pirate the game
which sends the message
a) The DRM was actually needed, but it was not strong enough (we can squeeze out more buyers with stronger DRM)
XOR
b) DRM protection systems never work against piracy.
Now lets see the most likely scenario of advocating Message 1:
From a practical standpoint, at this stage message 1b is probably lost in noise because of its rarity. Message 1b is also not the full message - the full message includes the 2b part too.
Most people ignore advocacy of message 1 because they want to play the game anyway. Some of those will pirate the game, some will just put up with the DRM. Those that accept the message will probably not be in big enough numbers. Basically 1b will remain noise, because publishers just want to blame piracy.
On the other hand, the most likely scenario of advocating Message 2:
Many people already pirate games anyway, and contributing to their numbers increases the strength of the message. As a result the DRM schemes become even more restrictive and invasive. Bigger and bigger portion of the people that don't pirate the games can't bother to put up with the DRM crap. An increasing amount of people become aware of what DRM really is and how it complicates things for them (this is already happening). At some point the DRM becomes so invasive that the people that pirate games largely outnumber the people that actually buy games.
There will inevitably be a significant split in companies, the ones that decide to go ahead with stronger DRM measures, and the ones (possibly even new ones / raise of the Indie ones) that decide to drop (or just start without) DRM. IF this happens, Message 2a and 2b are fighting against each-other equally, trough market competition of companies, and very soon message 2b will win. IF this doesn't happen (all companies decide for stronger DRM), game companies will simply go out of business at some point.
Of course, this assumes that all DRM will be always broken (circumvented), which is a pretty good assumption to begin with...
Then I'll get the competing "bittorrent" release, the one without DRM bullshit. It's also free.
Seriously, there's a number of games now that I would have gladly bought, if it weren't for the DRM. When will game publishers learn that their competition isn't other games, but the pirate releases of their own games? If the bittorrent release is a) free, b) available the same day or (sometimes) even earlier and c) comes without encumberance - give me a reason to buy your game. Seriously. a) is the least important point to me, I earn ok money. So I'm willing to spend the money, if what I get in return is worth it.
DRM'ed crap isn't.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Seriously, only a complete imbecile would play games on a PC. If you have a PC load Linux or BSD and forget about the incompatible and obsolete Microseft system.
could it be that they don't want anybody to buy it on the PC and drive up the console sales instead? Might be in the MS contract...
Buy a copy, then download a warez version, and install the warez version. Send a physical letter to the manufacturer with the UPC from the box and the receipt, and explain that you had to download the warez version in order to keep your computer stable. Scan the whole thing before you send it, and put it on the Internet for everyone else to see so they can't ignore it.
If you actually pay for their product and still go to the trouble of installing a warez version without DRM, that will send a much stronger message than pirating or not buying the game at all.
at least it's the same DRM rather than another one I have to deal wi th.
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
In a decade, when I decide I want to replay it, and SecureROM has been bought out by another company and the SecureROM servers been turned off because no games in the last five years have used it (They're using SuperSecureROM3) and it's now just a money sink, will I still be able to play the game? No? Rock Star can suck a dick.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
ummm, no!
securom is unacceptable. I wish someone would remove securom from existance. It poses a security threat.
They're using their grammar skills there.
come back jack! all is forgiven.
Yeah, you did.
Rockstar didn't learn the EA lesson. Bad for them.
I'll not buy this game due to the DRM. I'll not pirate it and I'm selling my Playstation 3 copy.
First EA, now Rockstar... who more wants to be in my BIG blacklist?
To any company thinking to use DRM: you will "not" have my money!!!! Never!!! Use DRM and you'll have 1 customer less. Got it?
Well I was going to purchase this game through Steam...
Not anymore. Absolute bullshit. Steam provides a good service without fucking with my computer or with me, and I'm willing to pay as thanks. The idea of stacking SecuROM on top of Steam's anti-piracy measures is completely absurd.
I bought every other Rockstar game on Steam, but I will not purchase IV as long as they insist on using that crap. Sale officially lost.
I was so prepared to buy this game for pc, but not now, not if its going to authenticate every time I play. Same reason I didn't buy or play spore. I haven't made a single Sony purchase since a music CD installed that rootkit on my computer. I would have liked to buy a PS3 also, but screw Sony. Would you buy a car if it had to connect to the dealership everytime before you drove it, and logged your location and personal data before you could drive somewhere?
I have no response to your first reason. It's completely valid. The question is merely how much of a corner-case people like soldiers in Iraq really represent and then doing a cost-benefit analysis ... of course, such a study typically proves that the DRM is so ineffective that you're losing more money than you're saving, thus resulting in the argument that consumer-grade software should not contain DRM ... Moving on...
Sure I have. I'm merely assuming that product activation is actually where the sale is. I once worked for a game distribution company with a model just like Steam ... the execs at Sony said they were one step away from giving Everquest away for free, since it required the online service (they didn't, but I'm sure they don't really care about policing install media since you'll still need an account). The point is that if the license were tied to an activation that costs money, there is no more worry about burned CDs and protection from that. All such a copy would do is make the actual (legit) license purchase EASIER for the potential customer ("pirate").
What authentication code? The license key file? It's merely a database entry on the server. If it gets abused, it gets removed. Or do you mean the verification code itself, which I've already flagged as the best place to attack this model?
The coolest example of a hardware solution in a console system I know of was the Nintendo Game Cube, whose disks actually spin the opposite direction (IIRC).
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
No, this is not how Steam works ... or at least, this is not now the similar product I used to work on functioned. Basically, it works by ensuring you never have any of the actual data that doesn't require computing; the data actually streams off the network. In this model, since it's impossible to have all of the data, no DRM is needed. This model also requires a big pipe to the internet since you're effectively running it off an internet-mounted hard drive.
My model does only a quick check online, about the same level of bandwidth as an email. Some companies use a model similar to what I've described and guise the license-tracking bit as a "check for updates." This is significant because it means you can play over a dial-up modem or cell phone, you can start it and pause it for later, and most importantly, maintaining the servers on the manufacturer's side is trivial since there's no massive pull for the data like Steam et al.
Also, I should point out that my model was half-baked, coming right off the top of my head. There are surely areas to improve it. It's merely an example of DRM that works at least as effectively as the current models, but there is no need for hidden data.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
No, I'm talking about one key per end-user, not per distributor. Salted encryption is necessary to avoid man-in-the-middle attacks that capture the all-clear signal, which could be repeated even if you can't decrypt it (if just time-stamped, the clock could be altered).
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
It's a very simple equation:
1. Neither SecuROM nor any other form of copy protection will be installed on my computer.
2. If I want to play a game I will and there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it.
3. I PREFER to support companies by purchasing their software.
Game developers would be wise to keep this in mind. However it's far more likely they'll continue to ignore the criticism and thus alienate their customers and eventually develop solely for consoles or evaporate.
Lastly, it's amusing when developers threaten abandoning the PC in favor of consoles due to piracy concerns. Console piracy is alive and well albeit relatively insignificant. But guess what will happen if all game development moves to consoles...
I refuse to purchase DRM-infected games, video or music. Period. Problem solved for me.
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
Okay, now I understand. Two problems:
1. A man-in-the-middle attack isn't a good model for cracking DRM since one side in the exchange is totally compromised.
2. The user keys have to be entered by the user since all mass-produced disks are identical. This isn't necessary but it helps.
You can decode the client messages by feeding the software a user-created public key whose private key you also possess. You can decode the server messages using a legitimate key that you purchase. The all-clear message must be algorithmically related to the client message and the algorithm must be contained in the client -- otherwise the software couldn't recognize it due to problem #2 above. With the message formats, the algorithm, and a pair of user-supplied keys, you can fake a validation server. Crack accomplished.
In real life, I doubt anyone would actually do this. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure it would be far easier to change the part of the client software that checks for a valid message to always return the all-clear. Nothing on the internet can prevent you from doing that.
Visit the
Using DRM make a game more difficult to pirate, this drives up sales, particularly in the 18-30 age group.
The number of people who will actively boycott a title because of DRM is extremely small and below the level of the publishers 'Do I care about this ?' radar.
We're either on the same page, arguing the same thing, or you're missing some basic priciples of PKI. Salted encryption is needed so a man-in-the-middle attack can't replicate the all-clear signal.
I recommend reviewing the system of public key infrasctructure (PKI), which ensures the encrypting technology never sees the client system, and thanks to fingerprinting, you can't create a fake validation server with a new key for a man-in-the-middle attack. Everything you present as a hole is a rather basic tenet of PKI.
1. A man-in-the-middle attack is not possible within PKI because the private key is never exposed, and since its fingerprint is already known by the software, you cannot introduce a new private key pretending to be the legit one. Compromise the network all you like, you can't forge the encrypted transaction without breaking PGP. (Without the timestamp and salt, you don't need to break the encryption ... just send the same traffic from your man-in-the-middle server that you captured from the first legitimate transaction. With that timestamp and salt, your copied traffic doesn't fit, and thus the attack fails.)
2. If by "entered by the user," you mean downloading a key file from the server after a financial transaction, yes. The mass-produced disks would indeed be identical. The unique bits come from the initial online registration process.
The client messages likely don't even need encryption (if they do, they would use the public key to encrypt something only the upstream server's private key can read). There is no user-created key in the equation, and there is no place for a man-in-the-middle key either. The server messages are not encrypted, only signed. Nothing needs encryption here, it can all be transparent. Since you can't forge the signature, there's nothing to encrypt beyond it.
The all-clear message merely contains the string of randomly generated characters (the "salt") and the time-stamp (both presented by the client system) plus the words "all clear," all without encryption. The security comes from the cryptographic signature, which ensures the validity of the above statement, and repeating the salt and timestamp ensures it was legitimately created in response to the client's query (rather than merely copied from an earlier request). The "secret algorithm" you elude to is PKI itself, secured by the signature and nothing more. You cannot reproduce the signature without the private key, which you'd have to hack the upstream server to get. No way around that.
The network level of my model is secure. As I said earlier and you repeated yourself, the best way to break this DRM model would be to crack the program's startup binary so that it doesn't send requests and doesn't need to receive the all-clear message to start the game.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
1998
Games came on two disks.
Games took an hour to install
2008
Games came on two disks
Games took an hour to install
Bah, the more things change the more they stay the same. PC gaming is not dying, its been declared dead more times than lazerus but has survived 7 console generations and seen three console makers go out of business. PC Gaming is still the most profitable for publishers and developers due to its open nature (no need for the console manufacturer to approve games, no per unit license fees to pay) and will continue beyond the Xbox and playstation lifetimes.
Now I cant say all is well in the PC gaming arena but things are not as bad as people are predicting. PC Hardware is still cheaper then ever, the cost of a console and new HDTV is almost equalling the cost of a new PC and console graphics still cant compete with PC (don't get me started on the hobbled controllers.). EA is not the paragon of PC gaming, far from it in fact so we should stop using them as an example of what a PC gaming publisher looks like. Publishers like Valve and Stardock are examples of the future of PC gaming, whilst I have my issues with steam (the minute and a half it takes steam to load is long enough for me to find something else to do) its a good idea poorly implemented. The current economic crisis is going to shake up the gaming industry, this is a good thing as it will cut away the dead wood such as the big publishers who sink as much money into advertising and paid reviews as they do into actual game development. Companies that produce games that can stand on their own merits without the media blitz will do well while crappy titles such as Far Cry 2 (yes, graphics were shiny but gameplay was as annoying as hell) and Red Alert 3 (Tank rushing game designed for retards who cant go for 25 seconds without killing something let alone spend a whole 30 seconds developing an actual strategy) will start to fail horribly.
The average PC gamer is generally a little bit smarter than the average console gamer and will see through the BS a bit faster.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
By including DRM into the game, making it impossible for me to justify spending money on it....
I will be playing the game for free with a hacked version I get from Bit torrent.
Will many millions of people be doing this? Yes. Could you have sold a few more games by not including DRM? Yes. Will you learn from this egregious mistake? Maybe by the time GTA 5 comes out. I'm not holding my breath....
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
I've been lookig forward to this game for quite some time (played all previous versions and liked them). But by now I've found that I much rather prefere Indy games - the cash goes straight to the developers, no DRM at all, lower prices, and (often) actually a lot better.
A classic example would be The World of Goo http://2dboy.com/games.php - I've been playing computer games since 1981, and I've never laughed as much while playing one ;)
Cheap, fun, no DRM idiocy, good support - tell me again why I should bother with the multi-million-dollar companies?
So, it's actually a Good Thing that the management fools have decided to use the hated SecuROM - it'll cause me to not spend time and money on Grand Theft Auto anymore. I can buy several indy games with that money, and enjoy myself a lot longer.
Besides, for ALL games there's a simple keyword: "SecuROM". Simple response: don't buy.
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
So another game games out with SecureROM (or whatever it is). I won't be buying this game either then. Since this technology automatically suggests that I'm a potential pirate, an insult, I won't be buying it because only a fool would pay money to be insulted.
The game developers out there better get on the backs of the publishers using SecureROM (or whatever it is) to stop using it (or else).
Buy the game, don't install from that. Download it from the hack sites that you think are clean from DRM.
Run the game.
You've now legally purchased the game without installing the draconian DRM crap. You also don't get any support from the company when it breaks (normal when you pirate). You've shown support to the developers who have worked their tails off to make the game, but you haven't exposed yourself to what you don't like.
Granted even using this tactic is considered illegal. *shrugs* The only real answer is don't buy the game to boycott their process.
The problem is the masses have already invested in the game without your boycott and anyone boycotting at this stage is wasting his/her breath. If enough people don't buy for PC, then you're basically forcing the developers to ignore the PC platform in the future because its not worth the cost.
"The average PC gamer is generally a little bit smarter than the average console gamer and will see through the BS a bit faster."
Can you cite your source on this? I love blanket, unfounded, generic statements as much as the next guy, but I've met some fairly retarded PC gamers.
When you steal something from a store, you are necessarily depriving some other person of that particular item. If I walk into Best Buy and walk out with a stolen eMachine, that's an eMachine that somebody else will never have. Granted, I'm sure there are those who would classify depriving somebody of an eMachine as "good Samitarianship" - but you get my basic point.
It should be needless to say, but by downloading the game through piratebay, I am not directly depriving anybody of that game*. So the two cases are different enough that you can't really take a "good for the goose, good for the gander" approach to this.
* - I suppose one could make the argument that by grabbing a working CD key and registering it online, I may be depriving somebody of that CD key. It'd be a technicality, but this is slashdot, after all. What remains, though, is that the eMachine in the above example is a limited resource by its very nature. The CD-key is an artificially limited construct, and while perhaps similar, I still do not feel the two situations really equate.
I hope this game gets downloaded as much as possible I hate rockstar games now I used to be an avid fan of the gta games but after they sold out to M$ they can lick my tainted nut sack.
I bought a copy of Wizardry, and it broke because the copy protection was too flakey. I got a local "pirate" to write a cracked copy over the original gold-labelled floppy, which amused him no end.
Using DRM make a game more difficult to pirate
Do most people crack games themselves? I haven't been much into games since the '80s, and back then I don't think I knew ANYONE who cracked a game themselves. They'd just wait for Bozo NYC to do it and it'd show up on the local bulletin boards. Often before it showed up in the stores.
These days it's torrents instead of BBSes, but most pirated copies are still downloaded... not cracked directly.
The best they can hope to do with stronger DRM is to hold off the pirates a couple of weeks. After that, it might as well not be there.
Pointless responding to AC but anyway,
PC features a lot of Turn Based Strategy games that require brains to play, not including the long history of adventure games which generally required a lot of problems solving.
Consoles tend to gravitate towards brainless shooters like Halo and Gears of war. These don't tend to do very well on PC because they are too dumbed down any anyone who is interested in playing them has got them on console already.
Try comparing Deus Ex and System Shock (PC) to Halo and Gears of War(Console). PC shooters were in depth games with involving backstories whilst the consoles had brainless shooters that had no story, no depth, no real dialogue and only kept people occupied by ensuring that there was always something to be shot. I pity anyone else who played Bioshock when comparing it the kind of games Levine came up with when he was PC only at Looking Glass, the System Shock and Theif series. We aren't even getting near actual thinking strategy like Galactic Civilisations and Dominions 3, compared to the crappy port of C&C3 (which was just a tank rushing game, the interface could have consisted of two buttons 1. Build Tank 2. Send all tanks at enemy base) on consoles and you can easily extrapolate that people who play thinking games prefer the PC.
Lets not even go near the adventure genre (sad that it no longer exists in any meaningful form) like Companions of Xanth, Star Control II or Mean Streets, especially Mean Streets where you had to have a notebook because the game would not keep track of clues and names and you had to (shock horror) actually type in your questions (Ask Person A about: _______) rather than having it given to you by the game itself so if your spelling sucked you were screwed.
Until consoles can match that they will always be inferior, seeing as the most popular games on consoles continue to be the most dumbed down shooters I cant see it happening within my lifetime.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
"Valve President Gabe Newell also stated DRM strategies "are just dumb" because they only decrease the value of a game in the consumer's eyes"
Wise man.
The thing with piracy and DRM is that if you YOU DON'T PIRATE OR BUY THE SPECIFIC GAME then the companies will think that PC gamers are dead and only make games for consoles. It's funny, cause i know a ton of friends who download games for the xbox360. (kind of got off topic there...)
anyway.
!@#@ off with DRM. Nobody will respect your games if you have DRM. DRM won't stop piracy. If you don't trust PC gamers, then PC gamers won't trust you. If you don't like PC gamers, then PC gamers won't like you.
Valve knows that. Pirates respect Valve. They just make brilliant games and don't pull things like that.