Topic: Questions on DRM (Read 4376 times)

Thad · « **on:** September 15, 2009, 03:58:07 PM »

First, I'd like to note I don't intend this as a thread for debating the merits of DRM. We have threads for that, and besides there aren't any.

What I have is a couple of questions on recent games that I would like to purchase but whose DRM concerns me. The games in question are Street Fighter 4 and Batman: Arkham Asylum.

On SF4: apparently the retail version has SecuROM. I've read it only phones home once at installation, and I've read it's a simple disc check. But I'd like more information. If the thing runs as a daemon, I'm not running it. It's also available on Impulse; I've heard the Impulse version is SecuROM-free and I expect it probably is, but some confirmation would be nice.

On Arkham: I think this one's SecuROM too; I haven't been able to find much on the nature of the copy protection other than it cripples the game and makes it unwinnable. (I have seen several blog posts praising this as a very clever DRM implementation. Like it was when Mass Effect did it and it was broken within a month, I suppose.) It's not available on Impulse, but Steam has it and claims not to have any additional DRM beyond Steam's own authentication. OTOH, I've read that Valve has made this claim before and has, well, lied.

So! If anyone knows a little more about this than I've managed to work out from hearsay, Wikipedia, and Google searches, please share.

TA · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2009, 05:23:22 PM »

Sounds like the downloadable versions of Arkham have SecuROM and phone home.

Dunno about SF4, but apparently the Steam version has SecuROM so the Impulse version might as well.

Brentai · « **Reply #2 on:** September 15, 2009, 05:39:33 PM »

Pirates undid the bug(s) about 6 days ago, so good job stopping the thieves for a total of two weeks by breaking the fuck out of your game.

Though they did catch a bunch of

who were stupid enough to call in for tech support.

JDigital · « **Reply #3 on:** September 16, 2009, 02:19:20 AM »

Supposedly, two weeks is enough. A major percentage of total sales happen in the first two weeks after launch.

Detonator · « **Reply #4 on:** September 16, 2009, 05:19:18 AM »

With all the hubbub about DRM, I'm surprised there's no devoted site to listing the specific types of DRM found in new releases.

Smiler · « **Reply #5 on:** September 16, 2009, 06:23:15 AM »

Quote from: JDigital on September 16, 2009, 02:19:20 AM

Supposedly, two weeks is enough. A major percentage of total sales happen in the first two weeks after launch.

If I have read correctly, the problem is that the game was leaked two weeks before launch.

Envy · « **Reply #6 on:** September 16, 2009, 10:56:49 AM »

~~Impulse version does not have SecuROM.~~

I was wrong it has it's GOO DRM.

Thad · « **Reply #7 on:** September 18, 2009, 11:55:45 PM »

Quote from: TA on September 15, 2009, 05:23:22 PM

Sounds like the downloadable versions of Arkham have SecuROM and phone home.

Quote from: TFA

A quick Google and a few hours of sifting reveals that it's SecuROM, but Jason Walker who seems to be Head of Mastering on the game has stated: Yes disc based versions will use the disc for authentication, not PA.

Please note the very specific version of the game he's referring to. If you're planning on buying the game digitally (Steam, Direct2Drive) then it will make use of PA (SecuROM online activation). To be safe I'd wait for the third party guys that evaluate these things (whom I won't link to here for safety's sake) to vet the DRM when the PC disc/retail version goes on sale.

If the retail version really just uses a disc check and doesn't require online activation I might consider playing (and hence buyng) it. There's still the small matter of SecuROM's malware-like behaviour that I'd have to get over, though.

...so it's possible the disc version is actually LESS DRM'ed than the Steam version?

Guess I'll have to wait for the third-party guys that evaluate these things too.

Quote from: JDigital on September 16, 2009, 02:19:20 AM

Supposedly, two weeks is enough. A major percentage of total sales happen in the first two weeks after launch.

The PC version was released 3 days ago.

You're also assuming that piracy translates to lost sales; I think the heavily-pirated, high-selling Spore and Sims 3 have gone a long way to contradict that notion and I expect this game will do the same. But as I said, if we want to have that conversation I'd just as soon have it in one of the threads we already have for that.

Quote from: Brentai on September 15, 2009, 05:39:33 PM

Though they did catch a bunch of who were stupid enough to call in for tech support.

Which is swell, but now that the game's actually out, what happens when the hooks start throwing false positives?

Quote from: CandleJack on September 16, 2009, 10:56:49 AM

~~Impulse version does not have SecuROM.~~

I was wrong it has it's GOO DRM.

Um...so does it have SecuROM or not?

GOO is a little silly but benign by DRM standards. It is not the same thing as SecuROM.

Guess I'll have to wait for the third-party guys to evaluate this thing too.

Pity. My birthday is in two weeks.

Bongo Bill · « **Reply #8 on:** September 19, 2009, 12:05:50 AM »

Yeah, I am interested in the outcome of that. A daemon or any online activation beyond Steam means I'll be getting a console version.

Detonator · « **Reply #9 on:** September 19, 2009, 11:17:54 AM »

I got it on steam, and was required to activate it online the first time I played. I'll let you know if it causes any problems.

Thad · « **Reply #10 on:** October 09, 2009, 04:17:20 PM »

...so okay. I THINK the Impulse version of SF4 is GOO-only. So that's good.

As for Arkham, it sounds like SecuROM's only there for disc check (which falls in my "stupid but acceptable" category for DRM), but the game, by default, runs in online mode and associates your saves with a Games for Windows Live account. I've heard conflicting reports as to whether you have to actually be online to access your save files. Apparently there's an offline mode; I haven't been able to determine whether that's a simple flag you can set in your options or if it requires something more arcane and obnoxious like disconnecting from the network or blocking the program in your firewall.

And in not-DRM-but-still-bullshit news, apparently the only gamepad it supports out of the box is the Xbox Live controller. Now, given that there is a universal HID driver, and that it would be trivially fucking simple to add a "configure joystick" menu option, I would definitely say this points to MS being up to its old tricks and saying "If you want compatibility with the software EVERYONE IS USING, you need to support a less-popular one of our products." As I recall, that's what got the courts to...I don't know, my memory's hazy. Bake them a delicious pie? I'm pretty sure it was a pie. It certainly wasn't any kind of punishment or deterrent, or MS would have stopped doing it afterward.

So, Arkham drops another rung on my "things I would like to buy" list, and an Xbox controller gets consigned to my "things I will never buy, because FUCK Microsoft" list.

(Yes, it's possible to replace some config files and get a Cordless Rumblepad 2 working with the game. But that's exactly my POINT -- it would have been TRIVIAL to bake generic gamepad support into the game, and they deliberately chose not to.)

Burrito Al Pastor · « **Reply #11 on:** October 09, 2009, 04:30:20 PM »

Ironically, I've been considering getting a 360 controller as a PC gamepad, because it's a de facto standard. Open standards are all well and good, but it's awfully tempting to be able to just click the button that says "Hey, I'm using a 360 controller!" and everything is configured for me.

Brentai · « **Reply #12 on:** October 09, 2009, 04:42:46 PM »

Getting XInput (the "new" API for controllers which basically only works for the 360 controller at present) and DirectInput to both work is not that difficult, so either it's a *gasp* issue with lazy porting or yeah, Microsoft offered them a kickback to just gloss over adding DirectInput support. It could be either or! But I'm pretty sure it's not some fuckup Microsoft built right into the platform.

Bongo Bill · « **Reply #13 on:** October 09, 2009, 04:50:15 PM »

I ended up getting the console version because I happened to find it for cheaper.

Thad · « **Reply #14 on:** October 25, 2009, 05:15:32 PM »

Quote from: Brentai on October 09, 2009, 04:42:46 PM

Getting XInput (the "new" API for controllers which basically only works for the 360 controller at present) and DirectInput to both work is not that difficult, so either it's a *gasp* issue with lazy porting or yeah, Microsoft offered them a kickback to just gloss over adding DirectInput support. It could be either or!

It's not even necessarily a kickback. It's just saying "You have to use XInput if you want the GFW sticker." And given the choice, yeah, the vendor's going to be lazy and only go with one API rather than two.

It's just like the 1990's. OEM's COULD put BOTH IE and Netscape on the desktop if they WANTED to, but why would you?

Back on-track (well, sort of):

Quote from: Bongo Bill on October 09, 2009, 04:50:15 PM

I ended up getting the console version because I happened to find it for cheaper.

Yeah, console route is certainly path of least resistance, and the new PS3 price point is attractive. But I just don't have the free time for gaming that I used to, and I have a very expensive computer which I only use to a fraction of its potential.

Thad · « **Reply #15 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:23:56 PM »

Some questions on Dragon Age.

I am given to understand that the retail version only has a disc check. Is this true?

Also, while Wikipedia claims that the DLC is free with the retail version, Penny Arcade's been telling a different story. Is it free or is it pay?

And what's the DRM on the DLC? The Wikipedia article says you need to be logged into a BioWare account to use it, but has a [citation needed] afterward.

TA · « **Reply #16 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:26:34 PM »

It installs a goddamn service. Problems with that Content Updater service are why Max was having troubles convincing it that he actually owned the DLC he owned.

Thad · « **Reply #17 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:33:06 PM »

Retail too, or just the download version?

I mean, I assume if you're playing it you didn't buy it from Steam, but I can't actually tell whether you're playing it from the context of those few posts.

TA · « **Reply #18 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:35:28 PM »

I'm not playing it yet, I know folks who are, and the service gets installed with the retail version as well.

I'm being told to tell you to not get it through Impulse no matter what, as it's nigh-unpatchable through them somehow.

Thad · « **Reply #19 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:53:08 PM »

Hrm, pity, Impulse is usually good about DRM. Goo is silly but at least respects first sale doctrine, or such is my understanding.

Via a thread on GOG:

Quote

DRM free
The Edge
Embri's Many Pockets
Helm of the Deep
The Lucky Stone
The Lion's Paw
Amulet of the War Mage
The Wicked Oath
Blood Dragon Armour
Mark of Vigilance

DRM-protected (even if bundled)
The Stone Prisoner
Warden's Keep
Feral Wolf Charm
Guildmaster's Belt
Band of Fire
Dalish Promise Ring
Collector's Edition Item pack (Bergen’s Honor, Grimoire of the Frozen Wastes, Final Reason)
Memory Band

Apocryphal, but sounds likely.

News:

Author Topic: Questions on DRM (Read 4376 times)