Risen 2 - Using Steamworks

never had a facebook account but how are achievements social networking? does a person need to compete against someone else to achieve anything. personally steam achievements are grand to me as they add another level to gaming and no i don't own a console either. they're akin to quests and for many of you older gamers they are really no different than quest layouts in older games as they don't need voice acting or cutscenes but rather "things" to try and accomplish and many time they are just humourous deeds to try and do in a game that actually expand your gaming palette as it may be a task or skill you never even thought about without doing it. since game manuals are a lost cause even when they are in boxed game they suck it can be coupled within the game as well. the latest stalker game for example has "achievements", though not in steam, that actually give you bonuses that can accent and customize the gameplay experience even further.

hell even gamersgate seems to be trying to fit into this model with their latest update.

Heh, I shouldn't leave posts uncompleted for hours, or use the preview…

Originally Posted by JDR13
That's actually not true. Most versions of Starforce are compatible with 64 bit OSs.

Context. I used 'many' and 'old games' so, well, the context should be fairly clear. I know perfectly well that many new CIS published games still use Starforce. Starforce actually added full (ie got it certified) support for 64bit in 2006, the same year western publishers dropped them. So for anyone in the west later versions of SF supporting 64bit is pretty much irrelevant.

Most relevantly though, SC:CT, his big Starforce success story, is one of the many games that don't work on 64bit except if you use the crack.

Originally Posted by Zygo
Context. I used 'many' and 'old games' so, well, the context should be fairly clear. I know perfectly well that many new CIS published games still use Starforce. Starforce actually added full (ie got it certified) support for 64bit in 2006, the same year western publishers dropped them. So for anyone in the west later versions of SF supporting 64bit is pretty much irrelevant.

Your context sounded worse than reality. Out of 7 versions of Starforce, only 1 didn't support x64, and yes it was 2005 that it added 64bit support. It just didn't become WHQL certified until 2006.

Not all Western publishers dropped starforce in 2006, unless by Western you mean only the US.

I know Ubisoft (French) and Jowood (Austrian) dropped it in 2006, I have no idea if any major US publishers ever used it. Do you know of any that used it after (or use it still) in any primary market? In any case I think the context was fair as the vast majority of those on this board (and western users in general) would be effected by pre 2006 Starforce; two of the more infamously incompatible Ubi titles are 2005, so using 2005 as the date for 64bit compatibility certainly gives the wrong impression.

Originally Posted by Kefka
We have no way of know how a game will do with or without DRM

On that I agree. But in an article advocating DRM the onus is on the writer to show that it works, not the other way around. I don't really see any way he proves it, and much of his actual provided evidence reads far better if arguing the reverse.

CoD 5 and 6 two of the most popular and highest selling games are also the most pirated? Perhaps that has something to do with being some of the most popular games made and nothing to do with DRM?

CoD5/6 certainly were very popular, and I'd agree that popularity is a very large factor in how much games get pirated. But if them getting pirated is mainly to do with their popularity, and DRM is largely irrelevant, then (primarily) rhetorical question; isn't that really calling into question the whole point of DRM as piracy prevention?

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
It's because people are social people.

Not really I hate everyone equally. Excuse me while I buy a cabin the mountains to get away from all of you.

Originally Posted by Zygo
I


CoD5/6 certainly were very popular, and I'd agree that popularity is a very large factor in how much games get pirated. But if them getting pirated is mainly to do with their popularity, and DRM is largely irrelevant, then (primarily) rhetorical question; isn't that really calling into question the whole point of DRM as piracy prevention?

DRM is relevant if like the article saids it can last just a short period. Crysis 2 being leaked early is clearly not good for sales. And if DRM can last just for that short period when the game is fresh(just the first few days or week) I think that can have an impact on sales which matter a great deal for publishers(and this was one of the major point in the article and the one that had the most effect on changing my opinion of DRM).

While there are only a few example of DRM lasting for a significant length of time, if that can be repeated then clearly that is a good thing for publishers so why not keep trying? But even if it just last a few days it still has value.

I heard Witcher 2 had DRM for a short period then removed it, just to avoid leak versions and perhaps boost those key first weeks sales. Perhaps more companys should do this, once there DRM is clearly breech just get rid of it.

Originally Posted by Kefka
While there are only a few example of DRM lasting for a significant length of time, if that can be repeated then clearly that is a good thing for publishers so why not keep trying? But even if it just last a few days it still has value.

Every day at full price without a warez alternative is worth a lot of money for developer and publisher. Most business is done within the first couple of weeks.

I heard Witcher 2 had DRM for a short period then removed it, just to avoid leak versions and perhaps boost those key first weeks sales. Perhaps more companys should do this, once there DRM is clearly breech just get rid of it.

Atari sued CDP over this. Apparently they weren't quite in agreement that the DRM should be removed so quickly.

If every game had really tough DRM on it that was patched out within a week of the game being cracked I would never complain about it. To me that is the simple solution to DRM hate: remove it after a while. Even take a year to remove it, whatever, just do so and people will complain a lot less.

As it is now we have no idea if you will ever bother removing it, so when your company goes under you might take a bunch of our games with you. We'll then have to pirate software we bought.