RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Bioshock 2 - DRM Update @ Blues (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9728)

Dhruin January 24th, 2010 01:43

Bioshock 2 - DRM Update @ Blues
 
Blue's has details of a back-flip from 2K on the DRM setup for Bioshock 2. In essence, the Securom install limits have been removed (though there are still GfWL limits) and it will be used as a basic disc check:
Quote:

Over the past two days, Iíve fielded a lot of questions and concerns about the DRM for both the retail and digital versions of BioShock 2. Because of this feedback, we are scaling back BioShock 2ís DRM.

There will be no SecuROM install limits for either the retail or digital editions of BioShock 2, and SecuROM will be used only to verify the gameís executable and check the date. Beyond that, we are only using standard Games for Windows Live non-SSA guidelines, which, per Microsoft, comes with 15 activations (after that, you can reset them with a call to Microsoft.)

What does that mean for your gameplay experience? This means that BioShock 2ís new DRM is now similar to many popular games you advised had better DRM through both digital and retail channels. Many of you have used Batman: Arkham Asylum as an example to me, which uses the exact same Games for Windows Live guidelines as us as well as SecuROM on retail discs, and now our SecuROM is less restrictive on Steam.

I know that the variables of PC gaming can be frustrating and confusing, and when you say there is a problem, we listen, and use your suggestions to make things better. Feedback like this does not go unheard, and while this might not be the ideal protection for everyone, we will continue to listen and work with you in the future when formulating our DRM plans.
More information.

Holly Avenger January 24th, 2010 01:43

Quote:

I know that the variables of PC gaming can be frustrating and confusing, and when you say there is a problem, we listen, and use your suggestions to make things better.
Just like with the last game… we said don't use this shit DRM again and they really listened to us and dropped all of this DRM nonsense…. oh wait….

Credit where it's due, at least EA/Bioware listentened to the feedback from Mass Effect DRM (which I didn't buy, on principal) to give us almost DRM free Dragon Age (which I did buy). Guess what I'm going to be doing with Bioshock 2…

JDR13 January 24th, 2010 01:58

I think this is hugely positive, the biggest reaction I've observed from most people was over the SecuROM install limit.

The Games for Windows limit shouldn't be an issue at all. Who's going to install a game 15 times?

Cthulhufan January 24th, 2010 02:08

Wow, I won't be buying this regardless as I did not like BioShock at all, I'm impressed. That's really good to hear.

guenthar January 24th, 2010 04:28

I know that normally you don't have to login to GFWL in order to play a game and you can make an offline account. I guess that means if you never play the game online you wouldn't have to worry about the GFWL activation limit.

JDR13 January 24th, 2010 04:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by guenthar (Post 1060994294)
I know that normally you don't have to login to GFWL in order to play a game and you can make an offline account. I guess that means if you never play the game online you wouldn't have to worry about the GFWL activation limit.


Unfortunately you have to login to be able to save your game, at least in most of the newer titles.

skavenhorde January 24th, 2010 04:56

Login as in being online or just have the program running? Either way, that's not exactly correct. At least it's not for Fallout 3. For GTA 4 you have to have the program running, but you don't have to be online. I don't know about the others.

For Fallout 3 I have to disable GFWL to enable FOSE (Fallout Script Extender). It's incompatable with Live. The reason it's incompatible is because Live functions as an anti-cheat program that does not work well with mods that mess around with the exe. GFWL is not a friendly program to use with any of Beth's games which can be modded heavily. Here is what the description says concerning GFWL for the FOSE mod:
Quote:

* FOSE is currently incompatible with Windows Live, so when running via fose_loader.exe, Live will be disabled. Live functions as an anti-cheat mechanism, so it disables itself if it detects any in-memory modifications to the executable, despite the fact that Fallout has no multiplayer component. Since Live cannot tell the difference between the modifications we make and the modifications a cheating program would make, we will probably never be directly compatible. To download DLC and updates, simply launch Fallout normally. Live stores DLC and save files in a separate folder when active, so some things may need to be moved around - see the official Fallout forums for more information.
That program disables GFWL and you can play the game just fine without it.

I don't have a program that disables GFWL with GTA 4, but at least I don't have to be online to save my game. I guess you're technically still logged in since the program is running, but I'm always in offline mode which doesn't need any connection to the internet to run it. I tested that when my connection was down and I could still play the game.

As for getting rid of the install limits (sorta), I'm wondering why they even tried to get away with this. They had to of known all that junk would cause a nerdrage storm of epic proportions. Are they testing the waters to see how much DRM the public is willing to put up with?

JDR13 January 24th, 2010 05:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by skavenhorde (Post 1060994299)
Login as in being online or just have the program running? Either way, that's not exactly correct.

Well it's exactly correct for the two most recent GfWL games I've played, which are Resident Evil 5, and Kane and Lynch. If you're not logged in, you can't save your game.

skavenhorde January 24th, 2010 05:29

That sucks big time. Have you tried playing in offline mode? You still have to have the program running, but at least you don't need to be online.

JDR13 January 24th, 2010 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by skavenhorde (Post 1060994302)
That sucks big time. Have you tried playing in offline mode? You still have to have the program running, but at least you don't need to be online.

You can play offline, but before you even start, you get a message telling you that your progress can not be saved in that mode. Afaik, GfWL automatically runs in the background anyways. Your only choice is whether or not you log in.

Grandor Dragon January 24th, 2010 10:15

The game will still be pirated, as a cracked, DRM-free version. When will publishers learn?

JemyM January 24th, 2010 10:34

I never heard about what happened to Prince of Persia that was released DRM free as a test.

Sir_Brennus January 24th, 2010 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by JemyM (Post 1060994312)
I never heard about what happened to Prince of Persia that was released DRM free as a test.

It tanked commercially, but I don't know if it was because of pirated versions or the fact that the PoP community didn't like the new direction.

The next PoP will be back in the Sands of Time world.

guenthar January 24th, 2010 11:14

In all of the games I have that use GFWL it says you have to be logged in to GFWL to save games but you can create an offline profile which you have to login to in order to save. That is what I have to do to play Dawn of War 2 since I don't play online.

PS. There have been games that didn't have DRM that were successful and also games where you can easily avoid the DRM without cracks that were successful. (the protection for Oblivion was only on the loader and not on Oblivion.exe)

Alrik Fassbauer January 24th, 2010 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDR13 (Post 1060994280)
The Games for Windows limit shouldn't be an issue at all. Who's going to install a game 15 times?

This is the wrong question, imho.

The rweal question should imho be :

What do I do if I want to install this game after - let's say - 10 years ? Will the activation servers still be active, then ?

And that MS is "a big company" and because of that the servers might last long isn't any good answer, then. Because we all know how mich they are likely to axe things down they don't see fit. The MS Windows-Soundcard, for example, which no-one remembers today.

Daddy32 January 24th, 2010 14:54

Installation limits are installation limits no matter the number. 15? No, thank you. Need to login to gfw to save? WHY would I want that? Is there any benefit for me?
Besides, Bioshock 1 was just System Shock really dumbed down.

fatBastard() January 24th, 2010 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer (Post 1060994322)
This is the wrong question, imho.

The rweal question should imho be :

What do I do if I want to install this game after - let's say - 10 years ? Will the activation servers still be active, then ?

And that MS is "a big company" and because of that the servers might last long isn't any good answer, then. Because we all know how mich they are likely to axe things down they don't see fit. The MS Windows-Soundcard, for example, which no-one remembers today.

So when does it stop? Should I stop buying movies that I would like to see just because in 10 years time even Blue Ray will have been replaced by some new system?

I have scores of games that are virtually unplayable without some kind of hardware/software "cheating" system (e.g. DOSBox and similar emulators) yet that didn't stop me from enjoying them when they came out (in fact, many of them were only enjoyable BECAUSE I played them when they were new, since most games do not stand the test of time).

BioShock may not be a game to your liking and that is fine, but if you miss out on a game that you would otherwise like to play just because of a principle that is, in my opinion, rather irrational/illogical then it really is a shame.

Daddy32 January 24th, 2010 19:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatBastard() (Post 1060994346)
I have scores of games that are virtually unplayable without some kind of hardware/software "cheating" system (e.g. DOSBox and similar emulators) yet that

And yet, you can still play them. See the difference?

GhanBuriGhan January 24th, 2010 20:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daddy32 (Post 1060994363)
And yet, you can still play them. See the difference?

Well, I can't playmy legal copies of BG1 anymore due to a scratched or aged CD, and Ultima Underworld 2 due to lack of a floppy drive. Yet I can still play them…
And I bet you will be able to with these new DRM's too. Either legally, with a final patch from the developers, or if all else fails (semi-)illegaly with the help of the deep parts of the net. But I doubt there will be more than a handful games I might really go back to.

fatBastard() January 24th, 2010 20:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daddy32 (Post 1060994363)
And yet, you can still play them. See the difference?

I'm sorry, are you suggesting that in 10 years time there will be no way to circumvent the Windows Live or Steam verification process in case either service no longer exist?

If so, I can put your worries to rest right now for you, because not only do I doubt a gaming verification service will shut down without releasing some kind of "universal unlocker", there will also be several unofficial ways to get around the problem.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 23:07.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch