More DG licensing woes

[Bloodstar]

Hmm..

Hadn't thought of that. Perhaps should have. The copy protection rights don't evaporate when a company goes under. They have value and may not be able to be "thrown away"(if viewed that way--I personally wouldn't). Plenty of examples there for decades..

Myself, I would consider it honoring a contract with your customers/purchasers as it has been posted in writing. But hey, I'm now even close to a lawyer..lol.

Well I hope that Jim Rose will employ some lawyers here and shut the mouth of some people because I have seen how Eddy Sterckx (carp fisher :laugh is telling the same story OVER AND OVER AGAIN at wargamer.com forums. Check his post on CM: BB thread.

If BFC and SES are lying to us legitimate customers then I would like to know in advance. If they are not lying then Eddy Sterckx is a liar.
Simple as that.


Mario

 

[Redwolf]

So you are now giving out bad rep to people stating the truth, Bloodstar?

If you previously argued the DRM is required to keep the business alive when it was your business, and you remove DRM when that business belongs to the creditors or is in chapter 11, you commit a crime.

Slider6, the contract with SES doesn't specify that they open up the DRM when they die. This information is only in assorted Internet posts. I would be surprised if SES would put it into the EULA in the future. That would actually make the above legal because now there's a contract.

 

[Bloodstar]

To remove their copy protection scheme? Whatever method it may be?

Yup, a shelf full of em with not even close to the same level of activation/protection scheme.

I didn't said THAT. Those companies didn't PROMISED that they will remove copy protection.
Of course I will like also to see that Jim Rose make some contract or something - just to blow this argument from some people because it is used to scare people away from games that use DRM. Lousy and pathetic method.
The same people buy Bioshock and openly said that they bought it.

So if DRM is of so much concern why they don't boycott DRM games alltogether? No, they know that they will inflict much damage to wargaming companies and they know that they cannot bring Take 2 or EA down. LOL
All very "ethical" people really.


Mario

 

[Redwolf]

So if DRM is of so much concern why they don't boycott DRM games alltogether? No, they know that they will inflict much damage to wargaming companies and they know that they cannot bring Take 2 or EA down. LOL
All very "ethical" people really.

I buy games with Battlefront's eLicense because it works and there are practically no complaints on their technical forums. I posted the links earlier.

SES on the other hand does not have a technical forum and the forum they hang out on is full of problem reports.

They also have, by policy, the most restrictive and most intrusive copy protection of them all, short of Starforce - which was dropped by the major publishers. And you don't even consider that the number of problems has anything to do with that.

Anybody got a link to the wargamer discussion? Their SES subforum seems dead.

 

[Slider6]

Slider6, the contract with SES doesn't specify that they open up the DRM when they die. This information is only in assorted Internet posts. I would be surprised if SES would put it into the EULA in the future. That would actually make the above legal because now there's a contract.

I don't think anyone here is lying guys. It's opinioins, Let's not get mean.

It seems to me if a representative of SES has posted it in writing (verbal in some states), you maybe in gray enough teritory to call it a contract. At least give them an excuse to do it.

Your right, puting it in th EULA would make sense if that is their intent. That is where it should be.

 

[Cherper]

Bloodstar this issue that you are getting worked up about is part of US law. SES is a US company and would be bound by US law. It may be different in Croatia.

Even speaking to a lawyer now isn't going to change anything. When a company heads into bankruptcy, everything gets thrown to the sharks devious: I mean lawyers) and things snowball from there.

 

[jdkbph]

First you are not givin anything as a gift because customer bought the RIGHT to use software. Suddenly he cannot USE that software.

And secondly any good attorney can blow your story like a zeppelin of the sky.

Thirdly I am not here representative of SES so I hope that they will clear this out... but I don't believe you nor Eddy Sterckx not a word about this.

For people that are blinded of hate toward DRM OF COURSE that nothing work out. And argument that I've heard somewhere in this discussion that DRM will force people to become pirates is really funny - you can laugh till your belly hurt how this is funny. If some people are pirates they are pirates - they don't need excuse of DRM to be pirates. Well, maybe those who have bought Bioshock have pirated Distant Guns lol. (some of them have been cheap in shelling 65 $).


Mario

I think we need to give Mario the benefit of the doubt here. Whatever he's using as a translator is apparently not very good. I think he's losing a lot of the nuance - the underlying meaning - of what's being said. And I'll presume that much of what he's saying in response is being corrupted by this process as well.

Also, it doesn't sound like he has any experience with the US legal system.

Cheers Mario.

JD

 

[Bloodstar]

So you are now giving out bad rep to people stating the truth, Bloodstar?

If you previously argued the DRM is required to keep the business alive when it was your business, and you remove DRM when that business belongs to the creditors or is in chapter 11, you commit a crime.

Slider6, the contract with SES doesn't specify that they open up the DRM when they die. This information is only in assorted Internet posts. I would be surprised if SES would put it into the EULA in the future. That would actually make the above legal because now there's a contract.

What truth?

I am not saying that I know all answers but neither I am talking some irresponsibile things which are not proven 100%.

It is really bold and maybe naive to call everything a TRUTH. And it is easy to act like a scarecrow.

If you want that in writing then bugger Jim Rose to give you that in writing.

But you didn't even bought the game and act now just like a simple scarecrow - let's scare potential customers because BRRRR DRM is a boogie man!

I just want quality games to be published - with or without DRM. I have objection about reselling the game but OK if it is not possible - OK. In any case DRM is not so big problem as some people try to portray it. Of course I also want it hassle free but I don't approve any lynch and harrange toward companies that use it.

If Jutland will be such a good game they will have my money with or without DRM. They made a decision that it will have DRM so be it.

I really don't know who is at bigger loss - guys who hate DRM and don't want to buy games with DRM or guys who look at quality of games and will bear with publishers and buy their games with DRM?

In any case I don't want to be limited in my choice of purchasing games.


Mario

 

[Slider6]

So if DRM is of so much concern why they don't boycott DRM games all together?

Lol. It is called consumer choice. It is their call based on their perception, values, no matter how anyone else decides they should see it. Your not going to change there mind or make them give you money They (consumers) don't want DRMs...companies will adapt or die. Good games will get produced because there is demand for these customers money. There will always be a PC game market no matter what corporate delusions exist.

DG is my only purposeful DRM that is this restrictive. Sorry no bioshock. There is exceptions (surprise-not all game companies are honest). There is no LAW that makes them put a warning on the box for these aggressive DRMs. Just a EULA that has something buried on the 5th page in legalize..lol

Mario, you certainly have the right to purchase whatever games you wish and DRM is apparently not an issue with you. It is with me and the shelves of games I've purchased

 

[jdkbph]

Slider6, the contract with SES doesn't specify that they open up the DRM when they die. This information is only in assorted Internet posts. I would be surprised if SES would put it into the EULA in the future. That would actually make the above legal because now there's a contract.

Maybe, maybe not. EULAs aren't necessarily enforceable. Most of them trample all over state consumer law which takes precedence. Check out the disclaimers for Implied Warranties (eg, merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose) documented in the pamphlets for every $10 + commercial consumer product you've ever bought. So much kindling in any state (and I think that would be most of them) that prohibits implied warranty disclaimers.

JD

 

[jdkbph]

BTW, what's with Bioshock? I played Bioshock through twice.. never had a DRM related problem with it. Never even noticed it was there. If that's supposed to be an example of extreme DRM, I can only wish DG's DRM was like Bioshock!

JD

 

[Bloodstar]

I buy games with Battlefront's eLicense because it works and there are practically no complaints on their technical forums. I posted the links earlier.

You on the other hand do not have a technical forum and the forum you hang out on is full of problem reports.

You also have, by policy, the most restrictive and most intrusive copy protection of them all, short of Starforce - which was dropped by the major publishers. And you don't even consider that the number of problems has anything to do with that.

Anybody got a link to the wargamer discussion? Their SES subforum seems dead.

What me? :laugh: LOL I see that you are smoking some good stuff, and I hope that this will be legalized soon here lol :smoke:

I see that this thread is going to be hillarious, but hey I like that!

Ok, seems that you are not so aggresive like some guys from Usenet!
They ignore SES, BFC, and Gamersgate etc... lol

I don't work for SES I just say my opinion on this like everyone else.


Mario

 

[Redwolf]

Maybe, maybe not. EULAs aren't necessarily enforceable. Most of them trample all over state consumer law which takes precedence.

Well, that, too. I was just pointing out that the promise to send out a patch disabling DRM on publisher death is even more worthless when it's only appearance ever is in an Internet post. You can't show up with that in a lawyer's office. Everybody who's a moderator or hacked into that user account can put that text.

%%

Anyway, so why do people beat up SES over DRM and buy other DRM-infected games?

Because there's too much trouble reported, because it is documented to be the most restrictive and the developers said it's deep enough in the system to disable obvious backup/restore tricks. That's why.

I buy Battlefront's eLicense games because other people went in before me and make it through OK, guessing from their tech support forum (which they have in the first place). I rated their DRM as OK and buy their games.

I bought the first LO:MAC because people said it was cool (turned out it wasn't but that's besides the point) and people didn't report technical problems. I didn't buy the extension because it has Starforce. I rated Startforce as unacceptable DRM and didn't buy the game.

If SES wanted to get through with their copy protection scheme they should have made more effort to make people happy before they reported their problems here. Didn't happen so the situation is what it is right now.

How much development time did they put into this nonsense, anyway? Could as well have used it for something more productive.

 

[Bloodstar]

BTW, what's with Bioshock? I played Bioshock through twice.. never had a DRM related problem with it. Never even noticed it was there. If that's supposed to be an example of extreme DRM, I can only wish DG's DRM was like Bioshock!

JD

And I didn't have any problems with Distant Guns DRM AT ALL.
I guess that I will be buying Jutland as this period of history is very interesting.


Mario

 

[jdkbph]

How much development time did you put into this nonsense, anyway? Could as well have used it for something more productive.

I'm guessing it's licensed. Having a substantial financial investment in the scheme would go a long way toward explaining the otherwise baffling hard line stance taken by the devs.

JD

 

[Bloodstar]

Bloodstar this issue that you are getting worked up about is part of US law. SES is a US company and would be bound by US law. It may be different in Croatia.

Even speaking to a lawyer now isn't going to change anything. When a company heads into bankruptcy, everything gets thrown to the sharks devious: I mean lawyers) and things snowball from there.

Let's not bring Croatia here as Croatia is 100 years behind everything possible lol
We are now talking about SES, not Croatia.

OK then ball is at Jim Rose, he will answer this - not me.

BTW, I am slightly feeling that some people will never be satisfied. So what we have here - will I boycott Jutland because of this. NO.

If I get enough enjoyment out of that game then no DRM will stop me from buying it and as we see it will be even better than now. I will call DG purchase then just as a THANKS to Norm Koger & Jim Rose for all enjoyment I had from TOAW. And COW was sent to me from press office at Take 2 UK so I call this all fair even if I don't find Distant Guns as so enjoyable game (mostly because of lousy interface!). For Jutland I will take even lousy interface just to sink British fleet hehe.


Mario

 

[Bloodstar]

I'm guessing it's licensed. Having a substantial financial investment in the scheme would go a long way toward explaining the otherwise baffling hard line stance taken by the devs.

JD

No. It was produced by Norm Koger. But I guess that they find it as investment in all future games. I hope that Norm will return to that IVAN project (real TOAW 3 ) after Jutland. That's why I am giving them my money, to see good games like IVAN etc... Jutland included. DRM in all this story is not even important like 5%.


Mario

 

[Bloodstar]

I think we need to give Mario the benefit of the doubt here. Whatever he's using as a translator is apparently not very good. I think he's losing a lot of the nuance - the underlying meaning - of what's being said. And I'll presume that much of what he's saying in response is being corrupted by this process as well.

Also, it doesn't sound like he has any experience with the US legal system.

Cheers Mario.

JD

Heh, but I am thinking that my English is in fact quite good. LOL

OK, then let's chase that rabbit out of woods regarding US legal system. But don't make fire before that rabbit is caught.

Cheers!


Mario

 

[jdkbph]

And I didn't have any problems with Distant Guns DRM AT ALL.
I guess that I will be buying Jutland as this period of history is very interesting.


Mario

That's what puts me in such a quandary. I've read at one time or another - going back several decades - everything I could get my hands on related to this subject. Spent hundreds of hours in just about every library in Connecticut rifling through dusty stacks for long retired reference materials on the ships of the period. Played every computer game ever released on the subject. I'm infatuated by the technology.

And the one and only game in town is doing everything possible to make what should be an easy "can't wait to jump in" decision for me, difficult and angst laden!

Unbelievably frustrating...

JD

 

[Bloodstar]

Lol. It is called consumer choice. It is their call based on their perception, values, no matter how anyone else decides they should see it. Your not going to change there mind or make them give you money They (consumers) don't want DRMs...companies will adapt or die. Good games will get produced because there is demand for these customers money. There will always be a PC game market no matter what corporate delusions exist.

DG is my only purposeful DRM that is this restrictive. Sorry no bioshock. There is exceptions (surprise-not all game companies are honest). There is no LAW that makes them put a warning on the box for these aggressive DRMs. Just a EULA that has something buried on the 5th page in legalize..lol

Mario, you certainly have the right to purchase whatever games you wish and DRM is apparently not an issue with you. It is with me and the shelves of games I've purchased

OK, I respect your decision. I am big democrat.

BTW, no, I don't agree with you.

People look at this like some sort of revolution. This is not Riots in front of White House against war in Vietnam! Some just look at this THAT way!

"Everything young is revolutionary because it fights for a better life and better positions. With establishment the enthusiasm disappears. In the sixties, the western establishment nearly lost control over music. But a counterattack began and still exists, what we can see in this monotonous music for brainwashing called rap, voice and drum, music for monkeys."

(they say that they killed Morrison, Janis Joplin, Hendrix, Lennon etc...)



But, we are now talking about computer games. As we see EA is moving toward DRM. Probably Sim 3 will have DRM. So I have question for you:



Do you really think that people (women, kids, average Joe's...) will boycott EA in sufficient numbers to make Sims 3 bomb because of hated DMR in it?


I guess that you are still not get it. It is like those BORG's coming and telling "Resistance is futile!" LOL :clown:

DRM is here to stay whetever we like it or not. And I am not blaming companies for that because this is just Empire Strikes Back game after all.





Mario