EggXpert

BIG EDIT:

Well, it didn't last long. Apparently EA got so scared of the nasty letter I was trying to send them (along with the avalanche of eflame they surely received over their decision) they've redacted their decision to use such silly copyright protection procedures with the game. For the time being at least, they will be releasing SecuROM protected games in the same way as Bioshock was released: with a single authentication check at first launch. The news about Spore came out shortly after the announcement (by Bioware, oddly enough) about Mass Effect. The OP is still below, for those wondering what the boondoggle was about before EA about-faced. I've marked this thread as "Resolved."

OP: 

First of all, in case you didn't know:

Spore and Mass Effect are apparently going to be released with SecuROM software which, instead of checking your CD Key upon install, will check it once every ten days thereafter against EA's online database. If the game has been warez'd since your original installation, your copy becomes deactivated and you can no longer play.

While reactions to this are generally negative and sometimes a little over the top, this is bad for consumers. You will be fukt out of your game or your rights as a consumer in the following circumstances:

1: If you lose internet connectivity on the wrong day.

2: If your computer cannot play it. SecuROM will tie your CD key to you and your machine for life, so there will be no option to sell either game used.

3: If someone generates your key in the process of hacking the game. 

Now, there a few things you can legitimately do to protest this:

1: Not buy the game.

2: Sign this petition.

3: Send a letter directly to EA. (I'm not quite sure who the correct contact is yet, I'll let you know if I figure it out)

Hopefully, if enough of us participate in the second and third forms of protest, EA will see the light and none of us will have to engage in the first.

There is another option, of course, which I have seen advanced several times since the announcement:

Pirate the games. 

Let me make very clear that this will NOT HELP. It will, in fact, make things WORSE. Eggxpert is generally a very smart community about this, but I just wanted to make that as clear as possible. If these games are heavily pirated (and I am sure they will be), it only ensures that the next great EA title that comes out will contain more intrusive copyright protection schemes than Spore and ME are currently projected to contain.

So please, sign the petition. 

It's okay. I will buy the game and install a pirated copy that doesn't have any of the nonsense.

Thanks MrMonroe for the links and letting us know about this. That sucks for a lot of legit users, if this does go forth I will no longer buy a EA product.

Man, is anyone else just SICK AND TIRED of EA's bullsh*t? I mean seriously, enough is enough.

Solely using the example of the Battlefield series, let's take a look at how many incredibly stupid and obnoxious moves they've made:

Plans for BF3:

Vista only: (WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY, it makes NO sense to force a crappy OS on us)
Built-in auto software updater (no more patches!): FINALLY, it's about time. It only took them, what, 10 years to figure it out? BF1942, BF2, and BF2142. It should have been done YEARS AGO for BF2.

Sorry for the rant, but I have gotten sick and tired of the constant stream of c**p that EA has given us over the past few years. BF2 was fun as hell, until you had to update the game. They finally got it right with the 1.4 patch, but by then they lost too many customers. BF2142 was cool at first, but when you release a game and can't even use one of the gameplay modes (remember, you couldn't move those Titan aircraft without crashing the server?), you know they just released it for the early money and didn't give a damn about the actual quality of the game. Then they start PMSing at everyone with pistol/knife servers, so now they've permanently lost me as a customer. Why the HELL would you release a game and then tell players "no you're not allowed to do that, even though you're the ones paying to keep the servers alive"?!?!?! Take a guess at why the Source games are constantly in the top 10 most played games and have 4-5 times the players: because of the sheer magnitude of customization available. Zombie, gun game, surf, deathmatch, slingshot, climber, soccer, etc etc etc the list goes on and on. And then EA releases new map packs and makes it sound like you're going to or***m when you play them for the first time. It's just so much bu*****t, .

One more thing: if they actually expect anyone to buy their game, they DAMN SURE better fix all the fricking lag issues that have NEVER been addressed. Seriously, what's the point of online gaming when you constantly lag?!

I gotta say, auto-updaters suck balls. Every now and again a patch comes out that wrecks machines. I want to be able to check it out online to make sure half the people playing aren't losing functionality after patching before I run the updater.

Of course they care about making money, it's a business, and it's america....capitalism.

Anyways, I don't think they do these things to screw the average customer (although they make it much harder for them to simply play the game), they do these things to screw the people trying to pirate these games (like the guy 4 posts above there).

Bottom line....they haven't figured out a good way to keep the PC games from being pirated, everything they come out with is quickly hacked by the pirates out there. With consoles you don't have this problem which is why consoles really exist in their current state anyhow.

So until EA figures out a way to make a copy protection that works for the PC they're gonna keep doing this BS, because they have no other alternative, it dosen't stop piracy but it definitly makes it harder. If they didn't have any protection on the disc. They'd sell about a third of what they do because as soon as L337_hakker figures out he can install the game and give it to his best friend without using the CD again....or better yet copy the disk, that's it.

Few people have the ethics to spend another $50 in the face of such temptation.

I think you're misunderstanding my argument. There's a difference between caring about money (making sure you can cover costs and future research/development), and caring ONLY about money (making crappy releases, unnecessarily strict rules, not fixing your mistakes for years, ignoring customer opinions/feedback, all to ultimately gain an extra buck).

Obviously they care about money; I never said they didn't. What I was trying to say is they care too much about money, and not enough about customer opinion/feedback and thorough game development. Why do more players play BF2 than 2142? Because 2142 was a piece of junk; as previously stated, they released the game before it was fully developed because they knew they would make a crapload of money off it. I bought the game because I expected it to be good, not to inflate EA's profits. EA exploited their customers and then put obnoxiously strict rules in place. No pistol/knife servers (see rant above), no widescreen resolutions (above), and once again, unbearable lag issues that have never been addressed.

Why does EA release a new Need For Speed game every 12 months? Is it so that we can go through the same boring, monotonous races as before? Or could it possibly be so they can keep a constant flow of cash, instead of actually investing time and effort into releasing a GOOD racing game?

Look at Microsoft and Vista. Everyone knows Vista was hyped up to be the "fastest, best-performing OS" when it CLEARLY isn't. Why do you think Microsoft advertised it like that? Obviously they knew people would buy it, but everyone realizes now that it's a heap of junk. SP1 didn't do much to address the resource issues that have plagued Vista from the beginning, and look at the horrible response Microsoft has received from their customers. It's the same thing with EA. They release games early and underdeveloped, they give bad updates, and they impose stupid restrictions and rules on us (what's this about a Microsoft subscription just to use your already-expensive PC's new OS?). It's obviously because they care MORE about money than creating good products, and it's why both companies are losing previously loyal customers.

Again, sorry for ranting, but EA has good ideas for games; they just make crappy releases, crappy updates, and crappy excuses to prevent us from playing their games the way we want to. They just don't even seem to TRY to care about what their customers say, and I'm not supporting a company that acts like that.

Oh no, I get your point Leon. I totally agree with you, EA has figured out that they can sell the names of these games regardless of the content. That's why they're so hot after Take-Two Interactive (GTA series developer). They have systematically eaten up all the major game franchises out there so that they can publish endless successive games confident that consumer will buy the game for the name even though the content hasen't really changed since it's first title. I mean c'mon they had how many "booster" packs for BF2? And the last one I bought for my father, whom to THIS DAY has not been able to activate the key code to unlock the content.

In my first post I was responding primarily to the original posters comments on the addition of the SecuRom and the fact that I believe EA DOES plan on using piracy protection software in an attempt to keep more of their money in pocket. So yes, they do release a lot of c**p but regardless they still plan on trying to keep as much of those c**p sales with the use of SecuRom.

I think everyone's biggest beef with EA is that they have the licenses for these great game ideas....but the games they release almost always disappoint.

I agree with Leaon and MrMonroe about several things here. EA as a company is one of the worst I have dealt with. We will start with Auto updater, the damn thing will start to download after I am in one of the games so my ping will go from 30- 59ms average and with auto updater 300 - 500ms. I rather DL the patch when I want to not when EA tells me to. 

Now some of their games I do Like BF2, BF2142 for the FPS and Need for speed series I know that most don’t like it then only thing that I would request is that they fix several known issues with the games.

The one thing that I can not stand about EA more so then most people is say you bought BF2, and a month or so down the road they (EA) wants you to buy more product to support that one game called E-packs. And if the person does not have the E-pack at all they are not allowed to play online with others with out buying it. Now to me that is F****up.

 

Gametech:

Oh no, I get your point Leon. I totally agree with you, EA has figured out that they can sell the names of these games regardless of the content. That's why they're so hot after Take-Two Interactive (GTA series developer). They have systematically eaten up all the major game franchises out there so that they can publish endless successive games confident that consumer will buy the game for the name even though the content hasen't really changed since it's first title. I mean c'mon they had how many "booster" packs for BF2? And the last one I bought for my father, whom to THIS DAY has not been able to activate the key code to unlock the content.

In my first post I was responding primarily to the original posters comments on the addition of the SecuRom and the fact that I believe EA DOES plan on using piracy protection software in an attempt to keep more of their money in pocket. So yes, they do release a lot of c**p but regardless they still plan on trying to keep as much of those c**p sales with the use of SecuRom.

I think everyone's biggest beef with EA is that they have the licenses for these great game ideas....but the games they release almost always disappoint.

Ok cool, just wanted to make sure I got the idea across correctly. And I agree about the fact that they have pretty much tried to buy out their competitors. EA can't keep up this mentality of buying out everyone who threatens them. Competition drives development and innovation, and if EA gets too big, there will be very few competitors left. And then EA won't even bother to have good ideas for game anymore

Something else that bugs me (goes along with the auto-updater) is the EA Download Manager. So, first I have to download the game, then extract, then decrypt, and THEN install it?! It took me <1 hour to download Crysis and well over another hour to extract and decrypt it before I could even install it. Piece of junk. The idea is fine and all, but it's poorly done. Steam has it right; download and install all in one process, no BS involved. You can choose when to download, when to install, everything has an option with it. I like Steam for that aspect. Now if Valve would just update the hitboxes and not the chatbox in CSS then I'd be set for a while. But seriously, EA should have the EADM as an option, but still allow regular .exe files for those of us who still want that. In other words, don't force us to use something we don't even want.

Off topic, but heh, I thought (from hanging out in chat) that Microsoft was the BIg Bad Developer pushing evreyone around? (/sarcasm)

Thanks guys for reinforcing my point, EA is the Big Gorilla of Games Dev. MS is a teeny bit player and OS maker. LOL. 

Gametech: what kind of copy protection would work? There really isn't a way to make a game 100% unpirateable, unless it's a game that must be played while connected to a server run by the developer or producer like an MMO. Even then you can pirate the game, it just sucks because you don't get to play with anyone. There is no way of preventing piracy for a single-player game.

The question is, how many customers are being lost to piracy? I'd say the answer is zero. Why? Because people who want to play a game and start by Googling "Mass Effect torrent crack" were never planning on paying for it in the first place. Are they really likely to go shell out the fifty bucks at BB or EB if they are unable to get a working torrent on release day? No, they're going to wait a week until it shows up cracked. They aren't lost sales and they aren't deterred by secuROM because they will just wait three days until it shows up on Mininova and get it that way. SecuROM will inconvenience legitimate buyers plus twenty other people: the few teams of crackers that compete to see who can beat the CP first. They will be slowed up by a few days and then it will be available to everyone, with the "winning" team lauded by the community for having beaten the new, more restrictive CP the fastest. Essentially, copyright protection schemes cost money and effect no change in the rate of piracy, so why bother with them, especially when it pisses of legitimate customers?

MrMonroe:

Gametech: what kind of copy protection would work? There really isn't a way to make a game 100% unpirateable, unless it's a game that must be played while connected to a server run by the developer or producer like an MMO. Even then you can pirate the game, it just sucks because you don't get to play with anyone. There is no way of preventing piracy for a single-player game.

The question is, how many customers are being lost to piracy? I'd say the answer is zero. Why? Because people who want to play a game and start by Googling "Mass Effect torrent crack" were never planning on paying for it in the first place. Are they really likely to go shell out the fifty bucks at BB or EB if they are unable to get a working torrent on release day? No, they're going to wait a week until it shows up cracked. They aren't lost sales and they aren't deterred by secuROM because they will just wait three days until it shows up on Mininova and get it that way. SecuROM will inconvenience legitimate buyers plus twenty other people: the few teams of crackers that compete to see who can beat the CP first. They will be slowed up by a few days and then it will be available to everyone, with the "winning" team lauded by the community for having beaten the new, more restrictive CP the fastest. Essentially, copyright protection schemes cost money and effect no change in the rate of piracy, so why bother with them, especially when it pisses of legitimate customers?

Both you and I know this is the case

Honestly I have no idea what copy protection would work, If I did I'd be working for EA, but that is my point. I think the board at EA is sitting there scratching their heads saying.....**** what do we use...SecuRom dosen't really work but at least is says we've got SOMETHING there....

And that's all I think it is, EA is using SecuRom and similar copy protection just to say there is SOMETHING there to stop casual piraters. I'm sure EA knows that their CP will be hacked within days or weeks of release but I think their intent is in stoping the casual piraters, those that don't know how to get cracks/hacks and so would normally buy the game, but if there was absolutely nothing there to stop them, then they would just share a single copy.

Not advocating it, but the two issues I see that are easily exploitable on this schema are:

Some type of locally running software spoof for the authentication.

Some type of network redirect spoof (run an auth server on ur LAN and redir the traffic to ur local auth server).

And these are just the inelegant brute force easy methods I can think of.

Copy protection in a joke. Make games people will buy, and people will buy them. I paid for Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, and I paid for CoD4, for example.
 

CheapAsianGamerGuy:

Copy protection in a joke. Make games people will buy, and people will buy them. I paid for Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, and I paid for CoD4, for example.

100% agree. This past Autumn was awesome for games. Halo 3, Guitar Hero 3, Crysis, CoD4, UT3, the Orange Box, Mario Galaxy & Metroid (Wii), etc. I purchased Crysis, CoD4, and The Orange Box. All of which I'm 100% content with. My roommate bought Halo 3, Guitar Hero 3, and the Orange Box for the 360, and he thoroughly enjoyed all those games. BF2 was a great purchase; BF2142 was like paying into the US Social Security system; it's really only worth about 30% of what you were forced to invest into it.

Game developers may think people pirate games because they don't want to spend the money, and they're absolutely right. Why would people want to pay for an underdeveloped, early released, poorly updated game with every possible loophole that allows for hackers? The answer is incredibly simple: we DON'T want to pay for crappy games like that, so maybe if they stop making bad games and only release the decently good games *surprise* people will pay the money for it! What an amazing idea, make a product that works, and people will buy it...

Ok I'm done ranting on this for the day; I've obviously overdone it

But again, people are willing to pay for games that have serious potential, not the expected annual release of an incredibly predictable and non-ground-breaking game. We'll pay good money for good games, plain and simple. That's why I think the GTA games are so successful. GTA 3, GTA Vice City, and GTA IV were hugely successful. San Andreas was good, but I didn't find it particularly fantastic. They learned from their mistakes, corrected them, tried some new things, and showed they clearly value customer feedback. It's obvious they put a LOT of time, effort, and resources into this game, and I think they clearly deserve the big sales they're getting.

Going back to the original point of this thread: Mass Effect got a lot of good ratings too, and Spore is pretty highly anticipated for the most part. I played Mass Effect a bit on the 360 and would like to get into it on the PC, as well as Spore when it's released. I know those had a lot of R&D behind them, and I think they're good games because of the investment the developers put into the game.

Man, my posts end up being SO much longer than I originally intended. Either I have too much to say, or I need to learn to say it more concisely.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/9/

Not sure about loses to copy infringers but I can say EA's SecuRom or whatever it is exactly called has cost them business.  I know 3 people that had planned on buying Bioshock but once it's scheme was made public all 3 just didn't buy it (or play it at all - didn't bother getting a cracked version either).  The same is true for Mass Effect.  I know several people that were looking forward to it but once they heard of the scheme's in store for it they are going to just ignore it as well.  The way it is going it won't be long before several people I know and myself stop playing pc games altogether if this is the c**p they keep putting on games.

CheapAsianGamerGuy:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/9/

There are also three locked threads on the forums about it.

The thing is, I don't really believe in "casual" pirates, who would buy the game if only it weren't so easy to steal. Who googles a cracked copy and then heads down to EB when they can't find one after five minutes? My guess would be just about no one. The only kind of "casual" piracy I have ever seen is a friend giving his buddy a CD so he can install on his computer. Of course, it's been ten years since I've seen that, because CD-keys effectively eliminated these "casual" pirates.

I couldn't believe I paid as much as I did for Crysis after I finished SP and spent two minutes learning to hate the MP with all the vitriol normally reserved by some people for the Jews, but that's another story. I don't, of course, consider the ending or the online play sucking balls grounds to pirate the game.

I am locking this thread, was going to delete it but the damage is basicly done.

Please follow the site rules and refraine from posting links and "helpful" instructions on this topic in the future.  The reply posts and links often if not always end up violating this forums posting tules.

Thanks