The license for a structural/civil engineer or architect is also so they know who is on the line if something bad happens to the structure. It's kind of a "point of action" if the building collapses/bridge falls down/etc.
Essentially, it is for a dual purpose: requirement of reasonable education, and someone to stick it on.
First of all, all you're doing is for some private organization without public accountability come in and take the role of a public organization with public accountability.
Second, you're limiting the power of prosecution to only those with enough money to see it through. If on my way home I get mugged by some random guy on the street, I won't have enough money to make sure that he's caught and put through justice.
Third, what happens when that large organization becomes corrupt itself? When I have to pay them to prosecute someone, what happens if I slip them some money to prosecute my enemies/competition? The government has to have a reasonable amount of evidence with which to charge you for a crime before the government can proceed with prosecution.
And finally, your claims, point-by-point:
"Lying government witnesses could be targeted for prosecution by defense attorneys."
What about a government witness that testifies truthfully, but then is discredited because of some pending criminal prosecution from the defense attorney?
"Police who break the law could be targeted for prosecution by civil liberties organizations."
There's so much crime within the police force that larger police departments have large sections tasked with only monitoring internal affairs. They get better access and have the government-granted power of full investigation and ability to compel witnesses via warrant. While a civil-liberty organization could have some of this, they don't enjoy the full benefits of being the police force.
"Politicians who take bribes could be prosecuted by rich constituents."
Aren't they the most likely ones to be giving the bribes? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to have a politician in office that they can easily buy off?
"Prosecutors who pull a stunt like Nifong did in the duke rape case could prosecuted for unlawful prosecution and other charges by the victim's family."
OK, you've got me on that one. Unless the wrongfully-accused perps can't afford the prosecution. Besides, there are frameworks in place that worked effectively: Nifong was disbarred, and, not entirely sure, but may be facing criminal/civil prosecution for his actions.
"The fact is that until the government loses its monopoly on trying criminal cases, the key parts of the government like prosecutors' offices, police departments and bodies politic will be largely immune from the consequences of their actions."
Except that you either (a) vote for the political official who appoints the leaders of these organizations (i.e.: the Mayor of NYC appoints the police commissioner, and the commish controls everything via his chosen advisers) or (b) you vote directly for the position (where I live, the chief District Attorney is an elected position.
--
"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine."
Thank you, your words echo my thoughts almost exactly.
Also, everyone seems to have missed that the game this will copy protection will be used on, Savage 2, is an online game. Yeah, it might have a botmatch mode, but the central game is online. So for those saying, "ooh, what about when I'm on the road?" it won't be a big deal.
With everything chipping away at PC gaming, DRM isn't the worst thing that could happen. If I had to choose between a protected Starcraft 2 on PC and Starcraft 2 on X360/PS3, I'd go for the DRM'd PC version.
That said, if presented with an opportunity to buy a non-DRM'd game over a DRM'd game, I'll take the non-DRM every time (i.e.: GalCiv II & Sins of a Solar Empire over Civ 4, Darwinia and DEFCON over C&C 3).
If a review really wants to be good, the score shouldn't be matched up against, anything alse, including graphics, sound, previous games, etc.
The most important factor in any game is the amount of FUN that you have playing it. I've been reading MaximumPC since just after the magazine started publishing, and so far they're the only ones who get that, and even then they don't get it totally. A game only gets their "Kick Ass" award if it's amazingly fun. No amount of new features or eye candy or sound immersion can replace that. They even had the nerve to give DOOM 3 a bad score (iirc, it was an 8/10) because they felt it got too boring and repetitive during the end.
Alas, they don't totally get it, and sometimes will dock points from a fun game because something technical is wrong with it (why should a game like Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield lose points for still being a realistic counterterrorist game?), but as far as I know, it's a good example for reviews.
Reviewers should also give a quick summary of the things that made a game fun or not fun at the end of the review, along with the score. A quick summary like that should be standard, and gives out so much more information and goes much deeper than just a score can. That way, if you don't like the things that make a game fun, you know not to buy the game.
PS: My review, based on FUN, of HL2 would only be about a 7, because the ending ruined it for me, and after a while the Ravenholm level annoyed me.
In a few days, all the activation BS will be dealt with (since HL2 will be out and activated by just about everybody) providing we don't bring the server down at 12:01 AM.
BTW, does anyone know what timezone VALVe considers to be midnight? I live just outside of New York City, and my midnight is different than theirs (which I believe is PST, 3 hours behind me). I'm willing to stay up 'til after midnight to play the game (I stay up that late anyways most of the time), but I'm not willing to stay up til 3:00 AM. Especially if I have physics at 9AM the next day.
Personally, I think that activation via Steam is a good idea. Look at the alternatives:
* You have an always-connected server that you have to use to play. Granted, this is the hardest form of copy protection to crack (because the server always knows when you're playing and can kick you off).
* There is a CD-copy protection scheme, like SafeDisc or SecuROM. I think this is the worst thing, considering that I have had legally purchased games not work (Superpower 2 was a waste of money for me), and that you have to have the CD in the drive to play. Since I have a laptop with a great graphics chip, and this is my only computer right now, I use it for games. It's a burden for me to drag around the CD for every game I want to play, as I do full game installs (sure, it takes up HD space, but it drastically improves performance).
With Steam activation, it gets a handle on those who have paid for it and shuts out casual warez (like sneaker-net warez), but it doesn't really affect the dedicated crackers. If the Source engine was leaked, I doubt crackers would have doubts editing that and using it for a crack. And if the engine was changed significantly to prevent that, then the crackers got a head-start with the CS:S engine, which most likely uses the same copy-protection. CS:S gave crackers a headstart (I write this as I converse with a self-proclaimed "cracker of HL2" who says that he did it and has already played the game (I will seriously injure him if he tries to give me any spoilers, because I want my view of the game to be unbiased).
All in all, I think it's the best and least-intrusive method we've seen in a long while, and I hope it works well.
Slashdot Mirror
:) /C
<br>
<br>
The license for a structural/civil engineer or architect is also so they know who is on the line if something bad happens to the structure. It's kind of a "point of action" if the building collapses/bridge falls down/etc.
Essentially, it is for a dual purpose: requirement of reasonable education, and someone to stick it on.
This sounds like a terribly short-sighted plan.
First of all, all you're doing is for some private organization without public accountability come in and take the role of a public organization with public accountability.
Second, you're limiting the power of prosecution to only those with enough money to see it through. If on my way home I get mugged by some random guy on the street, I won't have enough money to make sure that he's caught and put through justice.
Third, what happens when that large organization becomes corrupt itself? When I have to pay them to prosecute someone, what happens if I slip them some money to prosecute my enemies/competition? The government has to have a reasonable amount of evidence with which to charge you for a crime before the government can proceed with prosecution.
And finally, your claims, point-by-point:
"Lying government witnesses could be targeted for prosecution by defense attorneys."
What about a government witness that testifies truthfully, but then is discredited because of some pending criminal prosecution from the defense attorney?
"Police who break the law could be targeted for prosecution by civil liberties organizations."
There's so much crime within the police force that larger police departments have large sections tasked with only monitoring internal affairs. They get better access and have the government-granted power of full investigation and ability to compel witnesses via warrant. While a civil-liberty organization could have some of this, they don't enjoy the full benefits of being the police force.
"Politicians who take bribes could be prosecuted by rich constituents."
Aren't they the most likely ones to be giving the bribes? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to have a politician in office that they can easily buy off?
"Prosecutors who pull a stunt like Nifong did in the duke rape case could prosecuted for unlawful prosecution and other charges by the victim's family."
OK, you've got me on that one. Unless the wrongfully-accused perps can't afford the prosecution. Besides, there are frameworks in place that worked effectively: Nifong was disbarred, and, not entirely sure, but may be facing criminal/civil prosecution for his actions.
"The fact is that until the government loses its monopoly on trying criminal cases, the key parts of the government like prosecutors' offices, police departments and bodies politic will be largely immune from the consequences of their actions."
Except that you either (a) vote for the political official who appoints the leaders of these organizations (i.e.: the Mayor of NYC appoints the police commissioner, and the commish controls everything via his chosen advisers) or (b) you vote directly for the position (where I live, the chief District Attorney is an elected position.
--
"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine."
Thank you, your words echo my thoughts almost exactly.
Also, everyone seems to have missed that the game this will copy protection will be used on, Savage 2, is an online game. Yeah, it might have a botmatch mode, but the central game is online. So for those saying, "ooh, what about when I'm on the road?" it won't be a big deal.
With everything chipping away at PC gaming, DRM isn't the worst thing that could happen. If I had to choose between a protected Starcraft 2 on PC and Starcraft 2 on X360/PS3, I'd go for the DRM'd PC version.
That said, if presented with an opportunity to buy a non-DRM'd game over a DRM'd game, I'll take the non-DRM every time (i.e.: GalCiv II & Sins of a Solar Empire over Civ 4, Darwinia and DEFCON over C&C 3).
If a review really wants to be good, the score shouldn't be matched up against, anything alse, including graphics, sound, previous games, etc. The most important factor in any game is the amount of FUN that you have playing it. I've been reading MaximumPC since just after the magazine started publishing, and so far they're the only ones who get that, and even then they don't get it totally. A game only gets their "Kick Ass" award if it's amazingly fun. No amount of new features or eye candy or sound immersion can replace that. They even had the nerve to give DOOM 3 a bad score (iirc, it was an 8/10) because they felt it got too boring and repetitive during the end. Alas, they don't totally get it, and sometimes will dock points from a fun game because something technical is wrong with it (why should a game like Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield lose points for still being a realistic counterterrorist game?), but as far as I know, it's a good example for reviews. Reviewers should also give a quick summary of the things that made a game fun or not fun at the end of the review, along with the score. A quick summary like that should be standard, and gives out so much more information and goes much deeper than just a score can. That way, if you don't like the things that make a game fun, you know not to buy the game. PS: My review, based on FUN, of HL2 would only be about a 7, because the ending ruined it for me, and after a while the Ravenholm level annoyed me.
There you go, the right idea.
In a few days, all the activation BS will be dealt with (since HL2 will be out and activated by just about everybody) providing we don't bring the server down at 12:01 AM.
BTW, does anyone know what timezone VALVe considers to be midnight? I live just outside of New York City, and my midnight is different than theirs (which I believe is PST, 3 hours behind me). I'm willing to stay up 'til after midnight to play the game (I stay up that late anyways most of the time), but I'm not willing to stay up til 3:00 AM. Especially if I have physics at 9AM the next day.
~A. Scagnelli
Personally, I think that activation via Steam is a good idea. Look at the alternatives:
* You have an always-connected server that you have to use to play. Granted, this is the hardest form of copy protection to crack (because the server always knows when you're playing and can kick you off).
* There is a CD-copy protection scheme, like SafeDisc or SecuROM. I think this is the worst thing, considering that I have had legally purchased games not work (Superpower 2 was a waste of money for me), and that you have to have the CD in the drive to play. Since I have a laptop with a great graphics chip, and this is my only computer right now, I use it for games. It's a burden for me to drag around the CD for every game I want to play, as I do full game installs (sure, it takes up HD space, but it drastically improves performance).
With Steam activation, it gets a handle on those who have paid for it and shuts out casual warez (like sneaker-net warez), but it doesn't really affect the dedicated crackers. If the Source engine was leaked, I doubt crackers would have doubts editing that and using it for a crack. And if the engine was changed significantly to prevent that, then the crackers got a head-start with the CS:S engine, which most likely uses the same copy-protection. CS:S gave crackers a headstart (I write this as I converse with a self-proclaimed "cracker of HL2" who says that he did it and has already played the game (I will seriously injure him if he tries to give me any spoilers, because I want my view of the game to be unbiased).
All in all, I think it's the best and least-intrusive method we've seen in a long while, and I hope it works well.
Andrew Scagnelli