Topic: SecuROM (Read 21486 times)

McFrugal · « **Reply #20 on:** May 08, 2008, 12:44:29 PM »

Apparently Hellgate: London has SecuROM in it, for the Single Player functionality. I guess that explains why it simply failed to run a few times.

It also gives me a new reason to hate the devs of that game.

Bal · « **Reply #21 on:** May 08, 2008, 01:06:16 PM »

SecuROM and other similar anti-piracy software packages serve only to punish purchasers of the game, and embolden pirates.

Kazz · « **Reply #22 on:** May 08, 2008, 02:10:35 PM »

The devs weren't at fault for Hellgate: London's failures. EA forced it out the door way before it was ready.

Zaratustra · « **Reply #23 on:** May 08, 2008, 02:16:59 PM »

Quote

SecuROM v4.84 and beyond includes "Trigger Functions" which allow the developer to program multiple and fully customizable authentication checks throughout the entire application. As the protection places itself between the application's code and the OS, it can alter the behaviour of selected system functions.

So to play the game you have to install a program that changes the behavior of system functions, is closed source, and can't be removed unless you use a third party tool. If there's one security fault in this thing, your computer will turn into a spam-relaying drone faster than you can say 'PRINCE ABAKALIKI OF NIGERIA'.

McFrugal · « **Reply #24 on:** May 08, 2008, 02:33:48 PM »

Quote from: Kazz on May 08, 2008, 02:10:35 PM

The devs weren't at fault for Hellgate: London's failures. EA forced it out the door way before it was ready.

Oh, is that why it was so buggy at launch? Honestly I was okay with the bugs present at launch, though the installation problems I had later really pissed me off. The problem I have now is that they're taking their sweet time fixing bugs, while at the same time spending time adding new content into the game that you only really get to see if you pay the monthly fee. I never planned on subscribing, and they apparently never plan on making the game any better for people like me.

Kazz · « **Reply #25 on:** May 08, 2008, 02:40:38 PM »

Ask anyone who was present at launch about the Guy Fawkes Day bullshit. They had a special subscriber-only event less than two weeks after the bug-ridden launch. Part of the event involved collecting recipe scrolls, which, as it turned out, caused items in people's inventories to disappear.

Their priorities were all backwards. I didn't envy the developers one bit; they were getting saddled with the job of enticing subscribers when the basic game had glaring bugs that needed immediate attention.

The story I heard was that EA picked a date and Flagship had to print a gold no matter how finished the game really was. It needed at least six months of polish.

Thad · « **Reply #26 on:** May 08, 2008, 02:54:46 PM »

Quote from: Zaratustra on May 08, 2008, 02:16:59 PM

So to play the game you have to install a program that changes the behavior of system functions, is closed source, and can't be removed unless you use a third party tool. If there's one security fault in this thing, your computer will turn into a spam-relaying drone faster than you can say 'PRINCE ABAKALIKI OF NIGERIA'.

And it bears repeating at this point that there is no such thing as a program with no security faults.

Brentai · « **Reply #27 on:** May 08, 2008, 03:29:47 PM »

Quote from: Kazz on May 08, 2008, 02:40:38 PM

The story I heard was that EA picked a date and Flagship had to print a gold no matter how finished the game really was. It needed at least six months of polish.

EA does that for every title though. Most of them manage to be at least playable (at least if you exclude the entire EA Sports brand).

Detonator · « **Reply #28 on:** May 08, 2008, 03:36:19 PM »

I think I'm still in denial over this, I believe that Will Wright is smart enough to realize what a bad idea this is and insist the game be SecuROM-free. I'm not as concerned about Mass Effect because I have a damn 360, but Bioware probably has less control over the content of a port compared to Spore which is being developed mainly for the PC.

McDohl · « **Reply #29 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:33:23 PM »

I know there was a big stink a few months/years back about a similar anti-piracy thingy that was in a bunch of games that caused all sorts of nasty things to happen. What was that?

Bongo Bill · « **Reply #30 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:33:52 PM »

Bioshock.

Edit: or maybe Starforce, an even worse kind of copy protection middleware.

McDohl · « **Reply #31 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:36:51 PM »

STARFORCE. That was it. Thank you. That would've been bothering me all afternoon.

Bongo Bill · « **Reply #32 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:38:12 PM »

Brentai, there's hope! My research is suggesting that the Visual Studio thing might be a false rumor. If we had a SecuROM-infested stooge, we could get him to test it for us with one of the Express editions.

Brentai · « **Reply #33 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:40:21 PM »

Well, as it turns out, I AM a SecuROM infested stooge, if it's really a part of BioShock.

Not that I have it installed right now, but... if you can confirm that it's really the same thing, I'll load it up again and see what breaks. If nothing else it'll prove to any zealous law-types who hit this thread that I'm not actually that worried about my privacy.

(Then again, I've installed the game twice already, so OOOOOOPS I may have a $50 brick in my closet.

)

McDohl · « **Reply #34 on:** May 08, 2008, 04:41:54 PM »

Kinda like that guy who puts his social security number on ads for his identity theft protection service?

(except you can't change your social security number without doing illegal things damn it brentai stop editing your posts)

Bongo Bill · « **Reply #35 on:** May 08, 2008, 05:14:53 PM »

Hm. Seems that Oblivion also used SecuROM.

So it seems it does play nice with Visual Studio after all, and I just must never have tried to use Process Explorer before playing it. It'd explain the difficulties I've had in uninstalling these old Windows 3.1 games, too.

Well, fuck. Guess I don't have anything to lose after all.

Though these are all older versions of SecuROM. Things might have changed.

Hmm. Principles... or Spore. Principles... or Spore. This is gonna be a tough one.

Brentai · « **Reply #36 on:** May 08, 2008, 05:20:35 PM »

Seeing as how I've apparently already been fucked by this thing I guess it can't be that bad. Like AIDS, there's not much point in avoiding it once you've got it.

Sorry, Will Wright's Pee. Let's kiss and make up.

Classic · « **Reply #37 on:** May 08, 2008, 05:22:32 PM »

This explains a fair amount.

Fredward · « **Reply #38 on:** May 08, 2008, 05:53:52 PM »

Yeah, I remember when I heard about Bioshock's copy protection. I was sure that I would pirate it. Then I bought it and installed it.

Burrito Al Pastor · « **Reply #39 on:** May 08, 2008, 09:14:19 PM »

Quote from: Kazz on May 08, 2008, 02:40:38 PM

The story I heard was that EA picked a date and Flagship had to print a gold no matter how finished the game really was. It needed at least six months of polish.

I suspect there's an additional layer to the story. Flagship Studios largely consists of the developers formerly known as Blizzard North, including CEO Bill Roper. Roper was also the executive producer of Diablo II, and Diablo II shipped almost two full years after its original launch date. (And it was fantastic at launch.) I have a nagging suspicion that Flagship Studios got screwed on Hellgate partially because they were unused to working in an environment where their producers wouldn't delay the game until it was 100% ready for launch.

News:

Author Topic: SecuROM (Read 21486 times)