horzo

October 03, 2008 at 10:01am

Who cares about DRM when the game sucks? I lost interest in Spore halfway through the Galaxy stage, and went back to playing Sins of a Solar Empire.

This is why I yawn when major devs threaten to go console-exclusive. Most AAA titles these days are crap. I have no doubt that if Spore ultimtaely doesn't meet sales expectations, EA will blame it all on piracy. The fact is, they spent millions on a game that just isn't very good.

 

BrookV

September 25, 2008 at 9:23am

I can understand the "commisioning a pc" thing when it involves your bank account being used often. Such as purchasing songs or videos, but a game?? Is EA losing so much money to pirating that it warrants this as well? Someone else posted and said it best when they said it feels like your renting the game. For $50! Ouch!

 Instead of punishing the masses in order to squash the pirates, they should reward the honest masses with incentives to purchase and use a paid copy. Extra online content or downloads etc...

 

EA ticked me off when they decided to drop Massen from their PC releases.argh!  However, I'm LOVING warhammer so that kinda makes up for it!

Humpfester

September 23, 2008 at 12:31pm

I think it's a little too late now for EA to stop the tidel wave of torret downloads, They should have put some thought into this before releasing the game. "Develope it's in the game and they will crack it", should be EA's new logo. lol

Orionsword

September 22, 2008 at 8:24am

I don't get what this company is thinking the Drm in Spore and Crysis Warhead has already been cracked by pirates sad part is Crysis Warhead was cracked in 15 minutes  so why even bother to keep using Drm against cutomer's who want to lagally purchase these games

skhills

September 22, 2008 at 7:49am

Personally, I am more likely to buy this game now.  I was pretty turned off by the original DRM scheme, but if what they are saying holds true, I think it is an acceptable solution.  If everyone's real motivation for the thrashing they gave EA was the limited number of activations for paying customers, this takes away that ammo.  If the online accounting works, frequent upgraders could reinstall the game every time they upgrade their hardware without a problem.

On the other hand I understand the argument that we don't want malware/rootkits disguised as DRM installed on our systems.  If someone can come up with a better way to try and avoid piracy, I hope that the game companies would implement the solution.  But as long as there are consumers who buy the game and sell it after installing on their own computer, or that buy a copy and pass it around to all their friends, the companies are justified in trying to implement some measure of control.

KGWagner

September 20, 2008 at 4:50pm

I look at DRM-infested games the same way I look at Apple applications for a Windows-based machine - they're just not an option. I don't even look at them, and will never buy them. To me, they're just irreparably broken. I won't even copy repaired versions from those who make them available.

I_Jedi

September 20, 2008 at 12:47pm

This is an okay start, in my opinion, for EA to make this move; however, I do feel that by continuing to put more and more restrictions on software, gaming and computer companies are only encouraging the development, spreading, and usage of online tools to break around such barriers. In effect, their goal to protect their software is ultimately backfiring on them, rather than giving them the edge they’re seeking to protect their investments. If EA truly wishes to see a more gradual decline on pirating of their software, in my opinion, then they must significantly ease back on their restrictions of their games. Pirating is always inevitably going to happen, but given the current situation with the game Spore, it only goes to show that the gaming community will not stand idly by and allow itself to be pushed around by bullies.

Ultimately, the decision rest upon computer software makers, like EA, to make the choice about the path they wish to follow. They must consider, though, that the path they choose to walk will reflect their company, how their products are used, and finally the feedback they get from loyal customers and the likes.

duncan426

September 20, 2008 at 8:56am

I'm not buying this game because I have no interest.  Still the DRM is such bullshit.  I wish companies would stop blaming pirates for enforcing DRM.  If they would put out a great game at a great price people will buy it (Cyrsis Warhead?).  Until the prices come down and quality improves people are gong to pirate everytime.  This DRM scheme is like a bill going through congress.  Ridiculous!!  Get rid of DRM, drop the prices and make better games!  That is the fucking answer!!!  I will buy EVERYTIME!!

zioburosky13

September 20, 2008 at 7:38am

EA just fucked every honest and hard working customers with they bullshit marketing plan again.
Right now there are more DRM-cracked torrent circling around the interweb.

SecuRom my ass.

ajuhawk

September 20, 2008 at 5:00am

Let me begin by saying I was never going to buy this game, so take these comments for what they are.

 Publishers that keep insisting on crazy DRM schemes for PC games do not take the PC Gaming industry seriously in the first place.  In fact, they would probably be tickled pink if PC gamers just went away so they could totally focus on the consoles where they don't have near the issue with pirated software because of the consoles built-in DRM.

If you want to have DRM, make it for multiplayer only!  Even then I'm not sure it's necessary.  A bunch of us used to get together and play a LAN game and we'd do what it took to make sure everyone could play.  Eventually everyone ended up buying the game so we could play on the net.  But it sure was nice to be able to expose people to the game without having to buy it 10 times.  

 No DRM means nothing for hackers to hack...which means they eventually go away and do other things.  Keep throwing new challenges their way and they're never going to go away and people will continue to play the games without buying it.

Rltyg

September 19, 2008 at 11:43pm

EA please fold up and go away...

Keith E. Whisman

September 19, 2008 at 6:20pm

Well I figure they can do whatever they want to with their software. If I don't want to play with their software the way  they want me to then I don't need their software. 

All we really do anymore is purchase a license to use their software but now that is changing, now the license you purchase can be time limited. I mean that that license can expire at the software publishers whim so I just don't need to give them my money. I don't need their software.

If it's totally awsome and I can't live without it then I may have to accept whatever rules the publishers provide. As long as it's their software I have no say in it.

Why complain then? Do things the old fashioned way. If you don't agree with something then don't buy it. The publisher wants your money so they will change till they can get you money again. We just have to get the publishers worried about not getting our money.

Thats what a republican does at least. 

Fenthic

September 19, 2008 at 5:43pm

I do not want a game that has to be activated. If they want a activation when i go to online play thats fine but if i intend to just play the game local I dont want the activation process. I still pick up and play games 10 years old. I am sure they said they would release a patch if they ever took the authentication servers offline but I dont know if they can be trusted in 10 years they will most likely feel there isnt enough of a base left to warrant the release and besides they already have your money.

 I am sure some might compare this to just like the Windows activation but i beg to differ. The OS's i use rarely outlast any games I play. I have one system still around runnign 98 just so I can play some of those older games.