Anti DRM & CP day!

it's easier said than done. Vista is all about DRM and the new hardwares are on the ship. as a PC gamer the choises are basicly non excisting sinse windows is the only OS that all devs are making games for. I could choose linux or apple but those are definitly not gamer OSs. people don't go for windows because it's the best out there but it's the most used one. if i want a Virtual drive on my comp so be it. if i want a non certifide prg on my pc so be it too. if i wanna take the risk bomb my PC with viruses and spywares then let me. I, and i think most of us, don't need anyone to tell us what we should do and what programms we can use or not nor is it anyones business what i do on my comp. If it is up to the dev and user if they want to use a product or not then it would be a different story. i could say i won't buy any games with SF anymore and i won't. But with DRM being a build in Vista it's forcing you to do as they say. It#s not only bad for users but also for some prgsters and devs too who are not on the ship with it. their prgs are more likely to go down for not being a part of it.

Well you are right about the Vista thing. I was watching "Click" a tech show on BBC news and they spoke about Vista. Apparently, the core operating system is not accessible by any 3rd party software. This is good because it does a whole lot to prevent infections etc however, it also prevents some programs that you may want to not function correctly. For instance, many of you will be happy to hear the SF cannot access the core operating system. But for the same reason, Kaspsersky cannot either.

So you are right that you do not have much of a choice here. However, this is not really DRM either. This is how the new OS Vista works. It prevents certain types of software (3rd party that require access to the core of the OP) from functioning correctly. But the reason is not a protection of DRM. It is to counter the insane amounts of hacking and security exploits in MS Windows. Windows has been beaten to a pulp by this for practically a decade.

But you are right in that your choice of OS is limited. It always has been limited to Windows. Nothing new there.

Would the world be better if there were multiple OS to choose from that were fairly evenly matched? They each had an equal market share? Yes because you would get more choice. But also no because development costs for games would skyrocket if they had to provide games on multiple platforms. I know there are multiple platforms now (Xbox, PS) but I mean that the PC market would fracture into many pieces. Right now you make a game and "x" number of people buy it on PC. With multiple platforms, "x" number of people are still buying it on PC but the developer has to do much more to put it on the different PC OS's.

Originally posted by KamisoriX@Oct 4 2006, 12:24 PM
it would be enough if they would make more open source OS compatibility. That's all there is to it. then i would live happy with linux. sure, the more there is the harder it is to develope for them all. But we can say that linux is a well recognized alternative by now but they can't even get things working for apple OS so i don't see a future there unless it's DIY or using someones scrips which is also getting sparce lately. Well, MS is the monopol and they do as they please without anything able to stop them, for now. DRM is a part of TCPI and the structure of certifide prgs only is based on it. And it is not only software but hardware as well. if you play an old game that is not on the lest the graphic card won't prcess it even it could.

As it stand I'm against it as a regular user because it limits my controll over my things. For you as a Dev representative it appears to be good since you can make sure all the copies that are played are paid for. The thing is that this is limited to you as comercial industry but not for the freeware com.

I think you make a few good points. Yes, MS does have a monopoly on the market. It always has. I don't see them willingly giving up their market share either. Linux is well established and known, as you say. But ultimately, what is required is that gamers and computer users make the shift away from Windows towards Linux or Apple (a matter of choice, not DRM). However, there is a danger there in that hackers attack Windows because it is the most popular. A lot of them do it out of hate for MS.

But, hacking has also attracted the real criminal element that do it for profit and to steal information. Most of this activity is directed at Windows but the attacks on Linux are growing. So as Linux grows in popularity, will it be able to withstand these attacks? Especially as its source code is fully available? It has done a pretty good job of staying under the radar for now but as it becomes more popular, it will become more hack-worthy.

Now as for why games are not made for Linux, I think it really is a question of cost effectiveness. Does the expense justify the reward. I think I remember Neverwinter Nights being available on Apple (but not the toolset) and I think they covered Linux too. But it has been a long time since I read about that so I am not sure. I think I remember lots of talk around patch time about the Linux version of the patch.

As for old games on newer systems, we see that right now with our old and free title SWINE. Some folks with the latest vid cards have problems because their cards are too advanced for a simple game. Sounds nutty doesn't it. But we had this case a few months ago with a fella who downloaded SWINE and couldn't get it to work. All that added functionality...

Freeware: I would assume that anyone (pro or volunteer) could make software for Vista. I am aware of the exception which is the programs that install to the core. But I think that all is equal here, at least in terms of games. Now when it comes to antivirus, you might find yourself in a trickier situation. Maybe Norton will be the only AV program to work with Vista (another monopoly). So you are probably right about any program that requires access to the core. But games should be ok.

Edit: Spelling

My two cents...

CDV Europe is going down, because it rehashes the same old tripe year after year.

My view of the anti-DRM battle is that you shouldn't be that bothered about it as a gamer. The reason it exists is to protect the publisher from unlawful copying, thats all. If people stopped downloading gigabytes of illegal downloads from P2P and Bittorrent networks it would have no need to be used!...

... Play fair and buy it for Christ's sake!

Originally posted by [SR]Caveman@Oct 4 2006, 08:24 AM
Re: CDV

http://www.cdv-forum.de/cdvboard/english/s...ead.php?t=55419

And no it wasn't SF that did it. But nice try. :thumbup:

And as a bonus, a little about Atari:


http://www.gamespot.com/news/6159134.html


With a choice quote: "Today's news ends the search for a buyer, and provides Atari--which hasn't posted a profit since 1999--with much-needed capital."


And I think to mention the big name publishers skirts the issue a little too much. Any one of you who has been in gaming for an appreciable amount of time knows of developers that went out of business.



But I think that it should be decided if this thread is about anti-DRM or if we are going to talk exclusively about CP again (i.e. Starforce). That link is to anti-DRM day. Personally, I think a change of topic would be a good thing here. Those anti-SF threads are suffering from a major case of fatigue.


This isn't really about piracy either. This is about professional development companies being paid for their work and owning their creations. That is what the removal of DRM is about. Ownership and legal rights over their intellectual properties. Now if games and other types of software become legally free (anti-DRM) it is not longer a question of piracy. Pirates become legitimate users.

Now I think I can speak for the majority of people in the video game industry in that they, like me, work for a living and expect (like everyone else) to be paid for their work. I have worked on mod teams for games and went into it as a hobby with complete understanding that there was no financial reward for it. I happily gave my spare time for it. But if it is my full time job I expect to be paid. Otherwise, I must find a new job. And the only way I get paid is if the company I work for gets paid.

I fully support the free software making guys and gals out there. And if the gaming industry is free for all then it should be voluntary. It should be the modders out there making indie games. Those that willingly sacrifice their spare time to make games for others for free. Like I have done in the past.

However, it is unrealistic to expect people to not earn money to pay rent, eat etc. just so someone else can have it for free.

Society does support both free software and paid (owned) software. If you really want to do away with paid (owned) software, then the solution is already there. It is the free software. I wouldn't worry so much because the people who make video games (programmers, artists etc.) like doing it so I reckon they will still do it in their spare time. So the number of people making games will not change. Just the resources to make games will change (money, organization, time spent etc.).

What it boils down to is your either support the current system, pay for the software and reap the benefits of professionally designed and supported software or you take what is currently free and settle for that or you can support an initiative to make it all free and settle for what folks can make in their spare time.


Edit: Spelling

Hmm, I really don't see the end of cdv in this. Sure they sold some titles that might be big sellers in the future but if they needed money for other projects I can't blame them for selling these titles. I really think they are just doing that, lets not forget they made alot of money with big titles like the ten million different games of Blitzkrieg (rolling thunder, green devils, stalingrad and the list goes on and on even today) and your Codename panzers. But perhaps youre right, would be a shame.

Atari hasn't released much interesting lately and that lack of good innovative gameplay is going to be their downfall (the matrix sucked so bad...)

I found this link in a newsarticle on that swedish guy who had just cracked the I-pod security so any musicstore can now sell to I-pod users and thought the link was interesting to post. Judging by the number of replys in a short time I was right to do so. Ofcourse I could have chosen to highlight the drm part which is also being demonstrated against but this is a gamingsite and not I-podhell here Caveman, thus making it about the cp because it's the most interesting part of the global protest.

As long as you'll make a good product, then money will come into your company no matter what. Just look at a comparable game like Company of heroes, in global lines it is in the same genre as Rfb is. They only have a cdkey as protection to prevent pirates to play online and that's it. No need to put in a cd or anything... Awesome game btw, hopefully the next patch or new atidriver will solve some graphical issues but other then that..awesome. Surely the game is probably on every warezsite right now, but who cares. The publisher sure doesn't because the game sells extremely well. The game get's compliments and excellent press allover and there you guys are getting bad press about Starforce in your game all over the net (I've seen you post on alot of sites about this subject). Perhaps you guys should reconsider your policies and stop hurting those customers who legaly buy your product.....

You are right about the dead horse part in another respose btw, best way to prevent having another topic filled with anti sf on this site would have been not to respond on this topic anyway.

Originally posted by Darkmoon@Oct 5 2006, 03:35 PM
@Caveman
For someone working in this industry you are woefully misinformed. What am I referring to? Just a few days McAfee criticized Microsoft about that piece of bloatware called Vista. They are accusing Microsoft of hindering the Anti-Vir/security Companies to develop new software for that piece of crap OS. And contrary to your post earlier, Symantec has made the same claims.!

...and unlike you, I can back my claim up!!
http://www.gmx.net/de/themen/computer/soft...58061tuDIi.html

Yeah I know its in german, so if you can't read it, learn some german or use a translator program. :P


PS: and don't give me that piece of crap about DRM protecting the intellectual property rights of artists, when any school-kid knows the only thing it is really protecting, is the wallets of the fat-cats running these companies!!

Wow. Hold on there Cowboy. ;)

I don't think what you are saying differs from what I said. I said that Vista restricts access to the core system for 3rd party programs and specifically mentioned Antivirus programs. I think that matches what you are saying too.

What I think confused you in my post was my reference to Norton AV. I did not say that Symantec had obtained exclusive rights to offer AV for Vista. I simply mentioned that a company that obtained those exclusive rights would be a monopoly. The only reason why I said NAV was that they are a big player and unless MS offers their own AV, they would be a likely candidate. McAffee would be another likely candidate.

But I did not say who had obtained exclusive rights.

You gotta read a little closer sometimes. :thumbup:


Edit: Forgot about the fat cats part.

Have you ever made anything software related that you designed for the purpose of earning some extra money to improve your (and your family's) lifestyle? I'm not talking about stuff you made for free and distributed for free, I'm talking about stuff that you made with the intention of making some more money for yourself. If you have, then what right have you to charge money or prevent someone from downloading and distributing it for free. You don't own it, it is not yours anymore. As soon as you upload it, it is not yours anymore. Now I don't know about you but if those were the conditions of the world, I wouldn't make the effort to sell any piece of software that I made over the internet (or retail for that matter).

I don't think it is necessary to make excuses for whatever problems a Publisher might be having. To be honest, their accounting books tell a far better tale than we could. I think the best we can do is simply to acknowledge the fact that the sunny picture of everyone doing just grand in the publishing world is not accurate and leave it at that. I wouldn't say that piracy is the cause of a Publishing houses woes and still wouldn't list that as a reason. But more importantly, the small developer should not be glossed over. The financial fragility of the smaller business is far more relevant that a gigantic corporation that can withstand times of financial hardship. And as GM said, CDV Europe is going down.

And your article is not "the drm part which is also being demonstrated against". It is anti-DRM day. In big letters on the page. As for posting this article, I think it was a good idea as it leads to some interesting points being made (for instance by KamisoriX). But I wouldn't call the CP the most interesting part seeing as there are two dead SF threads and one dead SF poll within easy reach. I joined this discussion because it was not a dead horse but instead a digitally owned and created horse protected by copyright. you may say "anti-cp day" but the link you provide does not.

As for Company of Heroes, I think they made a great game. I also am amazed at the truly brilliant marketting job they did. I am still trying to figure out how they did it. They threw a lot of capital into promoting that game and it worked really well for them. I think there is a lot to be learned from that. But we didn't get any bad press from SF. We recieved good reviews on Rush for Berlin. As you can see by the anti-SF poll here, it doesn't have much impact at all on sales. And I haven't been fighting the SF battle in as many places as you claim. There is this site, the official site and two more places. That hardly covers the whole internet. You do have a tendency to overblow (and distort) things which I don't think is necessary (i.e. anti-DRM day becomes anti-cp day).

So I may as well ask you Gazz: Do you want to change the name of that day from Anti-DRM day to Anti-Copy Protection day and make this thread about copy protection? If you do then it is boring and doesn't interest me. There are two more threads here on cp that I can talk in already. Just let me know and you can continue on with your anti-cp rants without me.

Here is a link you may like:


http://fepy.sourceforge.net/license.html#d...-public-license


Do away with the boring legalese.

@Caveman
For someone working in this industry you are woefully misinformed. What am I referring to? Just a few days McAfee criticized Microsoft about that piece of bloatware called Vista. They are accusing Microsoft of hindering the Anti-Vir/security Companies to develop new software for that piece of crap OS. And contrary to your post earlier, Symantec has made the same claims.!!!

...and unlike you, I can back my claim up!!
http://www.gmx.net/de/themen/computer/soft...58061tuDIi.html

Yeah I know its in german, so if you can't read it, learn some german or use a translator program. :P


PS: and don't give me that piece of crap about DRM protecting the intellectual property rights of artists, when any school-kid knows the only thing it is really protecting, is the wallets of the fat-cats running these companies!!

"You gotta read a little closer sometimes."

That is exactly what you should do! Why do you think I provided the link!...and if you can't read german use a translator!
The Anti-Vir Companies accuse Microsh*t of keeping them out on purpose, so that MS can sell/bundle their security/anti-vir program with Vista! I guess MS hasn't learned their lesson yet in Europe and wants an other asskicking.

...and my post stands about the fat-cats on the DRM issue. You know damn well who is the main force behind it. Does the name MS ring a bell with you??