View Full Version : Copy protection
Don Maddox
28 Feb 06, 17:33
With all the on-going fuss over copy protection and who said what first, some of the information already posted about Distant Guns may have gotten burried in the shuffle. I will re-post the answers to which SES has already provided here so that they are in one place. If you have a question that has not been answered yet, this is the place to post it (though I cannot say whether the developers will address your issue or not).
How will the game be registed and will there be copy protection?
Registering the game requires a one-time connection to the internet. Since we plan to sell over the internet, there has to be some kind of internet authorization scheme. We don't see any way around that. After that, if you don't mind passing up on automatic updates you never need an internet connection again.
What will happen if SES goes out of business? Will I still be able to play the game?
Speculation that the game will become unusable if we ever go out of business is incorrect. The game includes a utility that allows you to move it from one computer to another with no on-line interaction. The current implementation does require that both machines have some form of removable media (floppy, cdrw, whatever), but we may at some point set it up so that even that is not required as long as the two machines can "talk" to each other in some way.
In fact, you could register the game on a third party computer then move it to yours via the utility. Everything would work just fine on your stealth machine, we would have no record of it, and our guys in the black helicopter would never be able to find you.
So How would a LAN work. Do I need to buy 3 copies as I have three machines. Will there be the option to play with just one copy and the other two could only play multipler games?
Each machine participating in the lan game would have to have it own copy.
Copy protection doesn't work does it? So why have it at all?
There does not seem to be much point in stepping into the philosophical argument over whether designers deserve to actually see some return for their work. Suffice it to say that if copy protection were not both necessary and at least somewhat effective, folks like me wouldn't bother with it.
But is it effective?
Contrary to the apparent opinion of some portion of the gaming community, we developers do not devote time to protection only to amuse ourselves by pissing off our customers. No type of copy protection is completely free of problems, but some form of protection is absolutely necessary for a commercial game. Boxed games can get away with artfully corrupted media and check schemes, and downloadable products require at least one external interaction to be effective. That's why I have devoted something over 10% of my entire development effort in Distant Guns, and more than half of my communication time with gamers to the issue. Any suggestion otherwise is simply a variation on the argument that intellectual property should be free.
I have a very slow Internet connection and can't download large files. So will SES make DG available on CD-ROM?
We have taken your situation into our deliberations well over a year ago and you will be pleased to know that we plan to have a Customer Service CD available that you will be able to purchase for a nominal fee. It will contain the same Demo versions of our games that you would download.
These can be played in Demo mode for the pre-specified time and then converted to the full version in an instant with the slowest of modems!
Can my friend download me a copy, burn it to disk, and then make me a copy?
Not a problem. The downloadable will function in demo mode for anyone. The more the merrier. Individual users register for full access, and that could be done at 300 baud. If you don't remember watching text marching across the screen with 300 baud connections, you're younger than me...
So if at any time you should go out of business for any reason, then if our system crashes, no more game, correct?
No,
If we go out of business, we release the code to remove the copy protection, as stated eailer by Norm...
If someones system crashes, we can activate a new installation. The old one is now deactivated and can never be updated or play multiplayer with purchased l copies. The legal copies are also notified that someone with a hacked version is trying to join a game.
Can I move my game from one computer to another?
You can move from one computer where the demo game is installed to any other computer where the demo game is installed without connecting to the SES server.
This way you can move it to yor laptop for yor trip, then move it back when you are ready! When you move the activation, the install becomes a demo again.
Still a pity that for a LAN you need to buy a copy for every machine............:cry:
Often you will see the likes of the Combat Mission series. No CD then you can only "Join a MP game" of which the Host has a copy.
Oh well I will have to look at it as an investment.
Lempereur1
28 Feb 06, 20:13
ETF:
If you like the ground breaking games that Talonsoft produced, you will love what we have coming down the pike. If you think TOAW I & II, Ivan will knock your socks off.
At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding. If people like the game, they will buy it. If they dont like it, they wont buy it. The best part is that everyone can try it for free!
As for the copy protection, the play testers have not even noticed it!
Ivan Rapkinov
28 Feb 06, 22:31
Jim,
forgive me for being dense - but with all the hullabaloo about copy protection, I have a question or two.
If I buy the game - install it - activate it etc. And then uninstall it as I go through my usual gaming cycles; it's no longer on my machine. Ither than just reinstalling and then using the online utility to reactivate - is there anything else that I'm missing?
- I don't have to be online to play?
- I don't have to pay for another activation?
- I just load up the game, when it asks for the activation code - I connect to the net, and it sorts itself out, correct?
seeing as I use the interent everyday - and as most people concerned with this are expressing said concerns on the internet - the only issue I would have with online activation would be if the company ceased to exist, and that has already been covered.
seriously what's the big deal?
Lempereur1
28 Feb 06, 22:51
The copy protection is designed to give you as much flexibility as possible.
If you want to move it to another computer, you use the included utility to transfer the activation (without connecting to SES)
If you want to unload it short term, you simply hold the activation on the floppy disk until youo want to re install it.
Simple. clean, easy.
There really is no big deal, only those who have an agenda.
seriously what's the big deal?
I cannot speak for the others, but what I wonder about is how the movement to another machine is achieved without de-activation and re-activation. Obviously, if you make a full backup of the original machine before the move and restore later, you now have two working copies.
It is likely that the copy protection attempts to prevent that, and from a technical standpoint that can only be done in very very ugly ways, aka messing with your machine in "inappropriate" manners.
You see, the harmless variant presented in this thread would be useless as a mean to do actual prevention of piracy. If what we have heard so far is all there is then the pirates could just put a "movement kit" onto their ftp servers and be done with it.
Lempereur1
28 Feb 06, 23:05
WHen you install the demo, you have installed 99.9% of the game.
You DO deactivate the first install when you move the activation and it returns to Demo mode. The second demo install then becomes active when when you move the code.
Clean and sweet.
If we go out of business, we release the code to remove the copy protection, as stated eailer by Norm...
If someones system crashes, we can activate a new installation. The old one is now deactivated and can never be updated or play multiplayer with purchased l copies. The legal copies are also notified that someone with a hacked version is trying to join a game.
Ah. So if something - anything - happens to the installation, then the paying customer finds himself on the telephone with someone from SES, pleading that he's not a crook and begging for them to - pretty please! - reactivate his software.
Why, I bet "Your Call Is Very Important To SES. Please Stay On The Line."
As to the ludicrous claim that a business going bankrupt - or just having been sold, say, to Hasborg - would bother to release copy-protection-ending patches, let me just observe that only people who believe in the Tooth Fairy are going to believe this.
John R.
Sorry, boys, but this has got to be a No Sale.
WHen you install the demo, you have installed 99.9% of the game.
You DO deactivate the first install when you move the activation and it returns to Demo mode. The second demo install then becomes active when when you move the code.
Clean and sweet.
What's to stop someone from just copying the "transfer" media 500 times in between removing it from Activated Machine 1 and putting it in About To Be Activated Machine 2?
Folks, something doesn't make sense here. Either there's something else to the process they're not telling us about, or this is the silliest, least useful copy protection scheme ever devised.
John R.
Ivan Bajlo
01 Mar 06, 08:14
Can we please stop this, if the game is good as it claims to be and starts selling big to wide audience there will be a crack available that removes all traces of copy protection after week or two. :laugh:
OTOH if it sucks no amount of copy protection or removal of the same will save it. :p
... I'm thinking about starting "thread to finish all protection threads forever" :mad:
Yeah I showed up get over it :)
If there is a mechanism to move the game from point A to point B, then there is a mechanism to rampantly pirate the game.
No one is saying this, but that's the reality.
You can't move a non movable game. And if the game is movable, your copy protection is limited to a person either being willing to not make multiple installs or not. Thus, all you have protecting your game once it becomes an activated copy, is an honour system.
That's the way I read it.
So in the end, a person will need to activate a sold copy, but will only need to download an activate code for a non sold copy. That's yet another example of only real customers being annoyed copy protection.
Those activation codes WILL likely appear out there in download land. It just remains to be seen if the game is sufficiently good to make anyone in download land care to circulate it. Boring games don't get downloaded nornally.
Thus, paradoxically, not being downloaded is more of an insult than anything else.
WHen you install the demo, you have installed 99.9% of the game.
You DO deactivate the first install when you move the activation and it returns to Demo mode. The second demo install then becomes active when when you move the code.
Clean and sweet.
But again, this does not explain how you prevent people from doing a full backup on PC 1, then restore it after deactivation, going back to an activated version on the original PC.
I do not have a strong opinion against your copy protection, in fact it sounds rather moderate from what I have seen and I do not want to be counted among the "bashers" here.
But still, from a technical standpoint there is a hole in the logic here. And that hole will either be filled with "no protection against this" or "crazy hack attempting to prevent this". I would like to know which it is before I make a decision.
Also, the above contradicts what I seem to remember saying that the move to a new PC does not require re-registration and being online. I might misremember something.
Lempereur1
01 Mar 06, 15:40
I think the topic has been exhausted.
Bloodstar
01 Mar 06, 15:49
I think the topic has been exhausted.
BTW, Jim, is there any history of TalonSoft available on Internet. I know that Talonsoft had ads in PC Gamer back in 1995. or something... That would be cool if someone could write history of Talonsoft, how many games were sold, difficulties, happy times...
Mario
Lempereur1
01 Mar 06, 16:15
Bloodstar:
Due to contractual non disclosures, I have to be careful what I say about Talonsoft.
What I can say is that stores had a negative impact. Takins 6 to 8 months to pay, delisting titles after a month because they are not doing mainstream numbers, demanding pre-print money for Sunday National ads, etc.
From a $60 list price game, Talonsoft was lucky to get $18-$21 a copy after everything was deducted.
One of the main reasons we had several "versions" of TOAW and the Campaign Series was to trick the stores into thinking it was a new version. This way, when they shipped back the recently shipped version, we would replace it with the "New" version.
Bloodstar
01 Mar 06, 16:27
Bloodstar:
Due to contractual non disclosures, I have to be careful what I say about Talonsoft.
What I can say is that stores had a negative impact. Takins 6 to 8 months to pay, delisting titles after a month because they are not doing mainstream numbers, demanding pre-print money for Sunday National ads, etc.
From a $60 list price game, Talonsoft was lucky to get $18-$21 a copy after everything was deducted.
One of the main reasons we had several "versions" of TOAW and the Campaign Series was to trick the stores into thinking it was a new version. This way, when they shipped back the recently shipped version, we would replace it with the "New" version.
Thank you very much Jim!
This also explains many things...
:)
Mario
OK another query on LAN'S........ will I need an online connection for each LAN machines? If I do not want to play online but just "in-house" I take it each machine has to activate a copy. Is there anyway for example like Nortons to phone in an activation key?
Restoring your hard drive achieves nothing!
You realize that this is only possible if you write an authentication marker into the CMOS memory used for the computer's BIOS?
You see it is claims like these that create people who feel uncomfortable with your copy protection.
If you mess with the CMOS I won't buy the game. If you don't you can as well save your troubles with the protection scheme.
You realize that this is only possible if you write an authentication marker into the CMOS memory used for the computer's BIOS?
You see it is claims like these that create people who feel uncomfortable with your copy protection.
If you mess with the CMOS I won't buy the game. If you don't you can as well save your troubles with the protection scheme.
Could also be a rootkit, installed and running on any machine infected with "Distant Guns." You'd think the recent Sony debacle would warn developers away from this avenue, but there's only so many ways to get into the system at a low enough level to do the sort of things they're claiming this can do.
In the main, there's simply a huge credibility gap between the protections the developers are saying this affords them, and the completely worthless and easily defeated system they're describing.
Users should be warned; if they're using a rootkit, the code will be in the demo. That's the only way the system can be made semi-airtight. So you wouldn't even need to buy the software to completely compromise your system.
John R.
Could also be a rootkit, installed and running on any machine infected with "Distant Guns." You'd think the recent Sony debacle would warn developers away from this avenue, but there's only so many ways to get into the system at a low enough level to do the sort of things they're claiming this can do.
No, a complete backup and restore, and I mean sector-wise over the whole harddrive including bootsector and partition tables, would take care of that.
As I said, if they want to guard against that they gotta write something somewhere else than the harddrive. There are not many places, and the CMOS for the BIOS settings and the CMOS for the BIOS itself and pretty much the only ones.
There are also more questions not answered, such as how a PC is identified. If you change your video card or CPU, do you have to re-register?
Also, can somebody reminds me whether the original claim was that you can move to a new PC without re-registering online?
No, a complete backup and restore, and I mean sector-wise over the whole harddrive including bootsector and partition tables, would take care of that.
It all hinges on what Rose means by "restoring the hard drive." I took that as meaning, "setting a restore point and restoring" via the largely-useless Windows restore. A rootkit could circumvent this by altering the code at or below the point the Windows restore system resides.
If it means reloading the drive completely, then you're exactly right. In this instance, I think everyone should go with your theory, since it represents the worst-case scenario.
John R.
It all hinges on what Rose means by "restoring the hard drive." I took that as meaning, "setting a restore point and restoring" via the largely-useless Windows restore. A rootkit could circumvent this by altering the code at or below the point the Windows restore system resides.
If it means reloading the drive completely, then you're exactly right. In this instance, I think everyone should go with your theory, since it represents the worst-case scenario.
Well, maybe I'm spoiled from my non-Windows operating systems but doing a sector-wise backup (using a different OS installation that was not connected previously) is common since around 1988 with "partitionmagic".
Today many virus "rollback" programs do the same thing completely automatically for you. If this copy protection is circumvented by this it is not very effective.
I would really like to see my other questions answered, namely what changes can make to my PC without invalidating my current key.
Lempereur1
01 Mar 06, 22:48
Pufff....Ignore
Bloodstar
02 Mar 06, 02:15
It all hinges on what Rose means by "restoring the hard drive." I took that as meaning, "setting a restore point and restoring" via the largely-useless Windows restore. A rootkit could circumvent this by altering the code at or below the point the Windows restore system resides.
If it means reloading the drive completely, then you're exactly right. In this instance, I think everyone should go with your theory, since it represents the worst-case scenario.
John R.
Don, can we just BAN this guy chetnikk?
He reminds me of Gifty on Usenet - maybe is he his student? Or he is he.
Hey chetnikk you have done nothing but attacked developers on this board - I would have banned you days ago if I was moderator!
Don, please use your mod powers and ban this user. Forum must be place for constructive discussion - not attack on developers or anyone else. This paranoia about copy protection have gone too far.
Those who rant about copy protection WAIT AND SEE... I will post first hand experience with that after I buy the game....
Fof God sake...
Mario
He reminds me of Gifty on Usenet - maybe is he his student? Or he is he.
His English is too good for Giftzwerg - he must be a secret operative working for a rival company ;)
Bloodstar
02 Mar 06, 05:45
His English is too good for Giftzwerg - he must be a secret operative working for a rival company ;)
Ah, the ecex's at Staten Island are trembling :laugh:
Mario
Don, can we just BAN this guy chetnikk?
That would certainly confirm my appraisal of a typical web-forum's committment to truth, honestly, and discussion; banning someone for the terrible offense of asking a developer a question.
Hey chetnikk you have done nothing but attacked developers on this board - I would have banned you days ago if I was moderator!
If you dislike my questions, then I would suggest that you simply killfile me - just as the developers have done.
That this isn't enough for you suggests the degree to which the developers and the fanboys are desperate to silence anyone pointing out the obvious about this software - that it employs a paying-customer-hostile protection scheme that will cause buyers fits and compromise their systems.
Don, please use your mod powers and ban this user. Forum must be place for constructive discussion - not attack on developers or anyone else. This paranoia about copy protection have gone too far.
Determining the exact degree to which commercial software opens a user's PC to attack isn't "paranoia" anymore - it's simple common sense. Unsuspecting users who installed Sony-BMG's rootkit-infected CDs probably thought everyone was "paranoid" for pointing out the terrible vulnerability, but after the matter became public, it turns out the "paranoid" people weren't so paranoid as first thought.
I'm sorry if it upsets you that these questions keep coming up, but you need to realize that this issue "won't go away" because the developers haven't fully addressed it. Their posts are riddled with doublespeak, and the only glimmers of truth seem to emanate from offhand remarks ("Restoring the hard disk won't help").
This is not the way to put the matter to rest.
John R.
I would really like to see my other questions answered, namely what changes can make to my PC without invalidating my current key.
And how does our brave developer - who styles himself "L'Empereur" - reply?
Bye Bye Redworlf
Pufff....Ignore
People are seriously considering buying software from these gentlemen, and installing it on their systems?
<gulp!>
John R.
Pufff....IgnoreThe 'ignore' feature is hardly a way to deal with a legitimate question.
If you don't want to answer, say so - just don't try to de-legitimize the questioner.
Worth about 0.02 €
Pufff....Ignore
Remarks and or attitudes like the above mark this individual as insufficiently professional to have any reason to expect any respect and or future curtesy from me.
You may join the ranks of people I have no interest in supporting with my wallet.
Lempereur1
02 Mar 06, 09:38
Any menions left?
Any menions left?
I'm not sure what a "menion" is, but a while back, someone (Wodin, IIRC) raised the question of whether developers should expose themselves to their customers in forums. The behavior of this developer leads me to a few rapidly-firming conclusions:
First, unless the developer has editorial control over the forum itself - or the moderator is totally complaisant in the developer's agenda - it's difficult for the developer to build the sort of one-way street he's looking for. A developer wants the publicity and marketing exposure of a forum where he appears to be happily answering enthusiastic, adoring questions from the desperate-to-buy-his-product minions. What the developer doesn't want is anyone asking the hard questions.
Second, the behavior of the developers when such tough questions are asked is a profound bellwhether of how the developers will respond after the product is purchased and users find - and report - the usual bugs and troubles.
Third, it's clear to me that the answer to Wodin would have to be, "Developers who can't manage not to act like five-year-olds should stay out of forums at all costs."
The second point is especially relevant here, given that the preferred method SES adopts towards critics is to smear them, attack them in ad hominem ways, killfile them, and studiously ignore their questions.
Is this how they will respond to their customers after purchase? "Puff! Another troll ignored!! Any minions left?"
If this is how they address potential customers - and how they're willing to be viewed by a much larger audience of prospective buyers - would it surprise anyone if their behavior became even more juvenile after they have your $50?
John R.
Well, given that the discussion seems to be over, here is my summary:
Moving to a different computer will require online registration again, which in turn will require faith in the online service not going away after the developers moved on to other things.
Since the PC architecture does not have any "hard" way to identify one particular PC, the copy protection must use a scheme that is either rooting itself deeply into a Windows installation (in which case reinstall of Windows requires re-registration), or by cataloging hardware, in which case changes to the hardware will require re-registration.
The copy protection will not protect against a sector-level backup (safe guess because messing with the CMOS is too hard to do on a wide variety of mainboards).
I do not want to give instructions how pirate networks could redistribute this so I'll stop here.
Overall this is still not too bad, we have seen much worse copy protection schemes. But the reluctancy of developers to put hard facts on the table is disturbing.
Any minions left?
The ignore function, quite a pointless function really. All someone has to do is quote me, and he's forced to add yet another person to his ignore list.
Eventually he has no alternative but to ignore everyone but those which merely wish to faun all over his remarks.
Sort of like him talking to himself, at which point he might as well be just talking to himself.
But it is likely he won't have to ignore me much longer. Losing a desire to associate with people only interested in hearing their own viewpoint, or carefully screen dialogues.
I might as well just go back to reading books.
Overall this is still not too bad, we have seen much worse copy protection schemes. But the reluctancy of developers to put hard facts on the table is disturbing.
You'll know just how much "worse" it is once you're on the telephone, begging them to reactivate your software, and Empereur Killfile tells you, "Get lost, troll. You're banned. Stop attacking our product. Puff!!"
John R.
This whole copyright protection issue with wargames is stupid.
Yeah, I can just imagine the massive amount of sales that are going to be lost on a turn based game involving a game on Japanese/Russian naval battles for example.
It's being paranoid and it's being ridiculous.
Anything you do to make copyright protection can and will be cracked by the pirates in hours if they choose to do it. If it even takes them that long.
The end result is always the same. The paying customer always gets screwed. :blab:
We can't make backups for our legaly bought games to replace lost or damaged copies.
And this internet access activation blows.
If people are like me they uninstall and reinstall games sometimes. Sometimes we need to reformat our PC's.
If we have games that require this internet activation and the company goes under in a few years we get f*cked.
So the only thing your pirate paranoia is doing is screwing over paying customers.
Well, given that the discussion seems to be over, here is my summary:
Moving to a different computer will require online registration again, which in turn will require faith in the online service not going away after the developers moved on to other things.
Actually, this is wrong. It won't be as simple as "another online registration," because the online registration servers will have a record of your software installation as Already Activated. You can only register/activate online once.
No, when it's time to re-activate, you'll be explaining yourself to some nice fellow (who probably speaks fluent Belgian, and little else) who will want to sniff you nice and close to see if you're a criminal.
Heaven help you the third time you have to call!
John R.
Gary McClellan
02 Mar 06, 12:32
On the other hand, wargame companies are even more vunerable to piracy than mainstream game companies. If a game only expects 6000 units sold, and 500 more copies are stolen, then suddenly the company has lost a great deal of money that they cannot afford to lose considering the margins involvled.
While I do wish that Mr. Rose would be a bit more upfront about the concerns involved with this scheme, I have no problem with his right to have a strong copy protection scheme, so long as it doesn't endanger the security or stability of a customer's system.
Bloodstar
02 Mar 06, 14:00
Chetnikk,
I see your arguments, but you forgot to add that if Devil himself brake his leg, it will be fault of Storm Eagle Studios! :p
Another thing that you forgot - if you install Distant Guns! there is slight chance that hackers can use your PC to start thermonuclear war (same as seen in old game Nuclear War by New World Computing)
Beware my son, the end is near! :laugh:
Mario
On the other hand, wargame companies are even more vunerable to piracy than mainstream game companies. If a game only expects 6000 units sold, and 500 more copies are stolen, then suddenly the company has lost a great deal of money that they cannot afford to lose considering the margins involvled.
How do all the battlefront.com offers get away without copy protection?
If a game only expects 6000 units sold, and 500 more copies are stolen, then suddenly the company has lost a great deal of money that they cannot afford to lose considering the margins involvled.
This presupposes that all 500 software pirates would have purchased the game if they couldn't have stolen it. This makes no more sense than proposing that every thwarted carjacking results in the foiled thief heading off to the Lexus dealer.
John R.
How do all the battlefront.com offers get away without copy protection?
Good point.
Going back to what I said earlier, there is no mass demand for wargames. You can't sell copies of "War in Russia" on the street corner like copies of the latest hit pop singers albumn.
Know what I mean?
All this copyright protection for wargames is just frustration for the buyers.
The latest good experience I had with a company is Slitherine. I bought "Spartan" through digital download. They sent me an activation code and thats all I needed. No online activation, don't need the CD in to play the game or all that garbage. I made 2 copies. One sits here on my desk and the other went to a desk in the bedroom incase the original gets broke, hot coffee on it or whatever. So I tip the hat to Slitherine for that.
Despite the lax copyright protection my understanding is the game is a sales sucess and still sells.
The bottom line on the issue though is any copyright protection is going to be cracked. Sooner rather than later. It's that simple. These guys love to crack copyright protection, it's a sport for them.
Why not go after the sites where the illegal copies are being offered for download instead of giving us buyers a big hassle? :confused:
Why not go after the sites where the illegal copies are being offered for download instead of giving us buyers a big hassle? :confused:
The Europeans do that but it seems American authories can never make up their mind whether the fed or state or country or city should go after identified pirates. Also, in the U.S. it is not as easy as in the E.U. to obtain address information for IP addresses, the laws are different. Download sites located outside the U.S. and Europe are also commonly used.
However, it remains a fact that what is offered for download on these sites, no matter where it is located, is a version that has all copy protection and CD checks removed, so that people downloading the games are not subject to any of the associated hassles.
It is pretty clear from context that the main objective of copy protection is not to reduce the download from pirate download sites. The main objective is to prevent non tech-savy people from giving a copy to a friend.
Don Maddox
02 Mar 06, 16:38
This presupposes that all 500 software pirates would have purchased the game if they couldn't have stolen it. This makes no more sense than proposing that every thwarted carjacking results in the foiled thief heading off to the Lexus dealer.
John R.It may be flawed reasoning according to your point of view, but considering that you have publicly stated on multiple occasions that you will not purchase this product, what exactly is your purpose here? To rant and rave endlessly about a game you don't even own?
Before you waste my time further, allow me to point out that you still have not posted a single positive comment about any game, any developer, and anything related to this forum.
I don't care if you ask hard-hitting questions of developers or provide them with critical feedback. Our staff of writers do that all the time and I have never yet had a developer or publisher complain to me about it.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.