For shame, Ubisoft.

[ARTgames]

@Art:  True point, one that I overlook.  Could always purchase it then just crack it.  Not sure I like the idea of them getting the money and thus encouraging them that their DRM is accepted, though...

Your taking away money for people who work hard on something. Not every one who made this game was part of the team who made the drm.

also

By not buying the game your also not encouraging them to make fun pc games. Which is worth more to you?

[Chaos]

@Art:  True point, one that I overlook.  Could always purchase it then just crack it.  Not sure I like the idea of them getting the money and thus encouraging them that their DRM is accepted, though...

Your taking away money for people who work hard on something. Not every one who made this game was part of the team who made the drm.

also

By not buying the game your also not encouraging them to make fun pc games. Which is worth more to you?

Not true.  I buy fun PC games that I enjoy.  Case in point, I have never pirated any Sims 2 or Sims 3 product.  Why?  Because I love the series, and have proven themselves to be excellent (except for Sims 3 now, which has proven to be a buggy mess).  And I own ALL the Sims 2 expansions.  Hell, I just purchased 4 of the Stuff Packs for Sims 2 just yesterday (they were used copies from a local bookstore, but I purchased them nonetheless).  

I own a legitimate copy of every Splinter Cell game.  I had every intention of purchasing Conviction, until I heard about this.

The thing is, I encourage and support the games that have proven to be fun and enjoyable to me.  I don't appreciate being screwed over by a company, and god damn, I will gladly screw them back.

[ARTgames]

Chaos i was not stating something about you. I was asking you a yes or no question.

Is not buying this under the fear of this encouraging DRM worth more to you than supporing them to make a PC game?

[Chaos]

Chaos i was not stating something about you. I was asking you a yes or no question.

Is not buying this under the fear of this encouraging DRM worth more to you than supporing them to make a PC game?

Incidentally, "Which is worth more to you?" is not a yes or no question.

As for your question:

Yes.

[ARTgames]

Chaos i was not stating something about you. I was asking you a yes or no question.

Is not buying this under the fear of this encouraging DRM worth more to you than supporing them to make a PC game?

Incidentally, "Which is worth more to you?" is not a yes or no question.

oops my bad. :P well i get mixed up some times.

As for your question:

Yes.

ok, just wanted to know.

I guess i need to convince meiun to take off that drm on so 3.

[Chaos]

I guess i need to convince meiun to take off that drm on so 3.

GOD DAMNIT MEIUN!


:P

[Cactuscat222]

@Cactuscat:  I make no excuses.  As I said before, there is no question about should I get the game or not.  I'm getting it, period.  If they release Conviction without this DRM, I will buy it.  If they release Conviction WITH this DRM, I will pirate it.  If they release Conviction with the DRM, and later decide to patch it to remove it, I will go purchase it at that time.

Is this legally okay?  No.

Is this ethically okay?  No.

Do I give a shit if this is legally or ethically okay?  No.

I know - I expected that much of you, I meant to make a clause that I wasn't pointing fingers at you, because you I trust.

@Jake: .........What? I wasn't trying to impose my morals on you at ALL. I was stating how I FEEL about them, based on my own moral choices that I have decided for myself. Whether or not they are shaped by society, that doesn't matter.

I feel you are insulting my intelligence, like saying me following part of society is wrong. Like you said, we all make our own choices, and I have made my own. Don't tell me that I shouldn't say anything to you about them, then go on to insult the way I think about things. That is incredibly hypocritical. On top of that, when I said you do not have control over the product, I meant what happens or how that product is created. In that case, you do NOT unless you work for that company.

"Hate me for actually having the intelligence to make my own choices." Are you saying I haven't? God dang, that is so arrogant. Just because I don't follow your same way of thinking, I'm wrong? And yet you are telling ME to be open minded? What the hell is that?

If I decide that killing is fine, and morally okay in my mind - is it then? You would argue no. Why? Who cares, because we are all allowed our own moral choices right Jake? No, the law is in place to set the standards, and I believe it does a basic job of that.

Don't tell me I shouldn't tell other people how to think or act when you are doing the exact same thing.

EDIT: And you know what,  I bet most of your morals and ethics you have today are in some-way-shape-or-form molded by society and/or religion. The fact that you may believe killing is wrong is because our society dictates so. If we grew up in a lawless society where killing is okay, then our view may be similar or the same. You can be your own person, but no matter which way you look at it, you are always effected by your surroundings and society. And to say following society is always wrong... is just plain stupid. Society is you, and you are part of society.

[Jake]

@Jake: .........What? I wasn't trying to impose my morals on you at ALL.

Ehemm...

...you all know its the wrong thing to do, to take something without proper payment for it. (And don't go on the entire "Its not stealing, its copyright infringement" tirade. I know, and I've heard it a thousand times. Legally its different, ethically its the same.)

I'm not activist, and I don't mind pirates, as long as they are open about it or know its wrong

I hate people who try to justify it as legal or moral

According to these quotes, you hate me if I don't believe what you believe about piracy, and somehow you don't think that's imposing your beliefs on us? Don't try to hide behind your wall of "That's how I FEEL about them". You clearly told every one of us how we should feel about it and somehow think you were justified for doing so. Please read your first post over again so you can see why I replied the way I did.

I feel you are insulting my intelligence, like saying me following part of society is wrong. Like you said, we all make our own choices, and I have made my own. Don't tell me that I shouldn't say anything to you about them, then go on to insult the way I think about things. That is incredibly hypocritical. On top of that, when I said you do not have control over the product, I meant what happens or how that product is created. In that case, you do NOT unless you work for that company.

You misunderstand my point. You can believe what you want to believe about piracy, but don't expect everyone else to agree with you. I never insulted your particular views on piracy, only your views on other people's views of piracy.

"Hate me for actually having the intelligence to make my own choices." Are you saying I haven't? God dang, that is so arrogant. Just because I don't follow your same way of thinking, I'm wrong? And yet you are telling ME to be open minded? What the hell is that?

You misinterpreted that statement. I meant that specifically within the context of me. I made no reference to your beliefs regarding piracy. You specifically said "I hate people who try to justify it (piracy) as legal or moral" and that was my response to that. You implied that you hate me because I made my own choice on the matter rather than follow society blindly (not saying that you did).

If I decide that killing is fine, and morally okay in my mind - is it then? You would argue no. Why? Who cares, because we are all allowed our own moral choices right Jake? No, the law is in place to set the standards, and I believe it does a basic job of that.

There is no universal right or wrong. If somebody believes killing is fine, then that's their choice. My own moral system says that it's not fine. Do I hate these people for believing that way? Nope. Will I tell them that their morals are flawed? No, because I cannot say their morals are right or wrong because right and wrong is up to each and every individual. Law is extremely important for setting standards. We need law for society to function. Does that mean everyone needs to agree with law and form their morals based on law? No. Is it often times the natural outcome? Yes.

Don't tell me I shouldn't tell other people how to think or act when you are doing the exact same thing.

I'm simply telling you that I will think and act how I want, despite what you say.

EDIT: And you know what,  I bet most of your morals and ethics you have today are in some-way-shape-or-form molded by society and/or religion. The fact that you may believe killing is wrong is because our society dictates so. If we grew up in a lawless society where killing is okay, then our view may be similar or the same. You can be your own person, but no matter which way you look at it, you are always effected by your surroundings and society. And to say following society is always wrong... is just plain stupid. Society is you, and you are part of society.

You are correct in that many of my morals and ethics are molded by society. The difference between me and other people though is that I have reflected on my moral choices and why I have these beliefs rather than having these beliefs simply because everyone else does. Following society is not wrong, but I think it's important to know why you're following society in the first place.

[Scotty]

@chris, how is an anti-piracy tool not a deterrent? It is set in place to deter people from pirating a game. I'll use my previous barb wire example. A person lays out barb- wire to prevent tresspassing.  Someone is determined enough to tresspass, so they drive back home, grab the bathroom rug, drives back, throws the rug over the wire, and walks across.  That is a deterrent.  Now let's say we have someone who stumbles upon the land and realizes that he would like to get on the land. So now he has to find the owner by trailing the wire to the house, talk to the owner, and get permission to pass freely. Owner says yes, so now anytime he wants to cross, he has to speak with the owner, who will never say no to this man out of gratitude for him actually doing the right thing and asking.  Is it a inconvenience for the man who wants to pass with permission? Yes, but I guarantee that if there was no wire at all, there would be a lot more tresspassers.  And you can't say that the man pit up the wire thinking it will prevent ALL tresspassing, that's just silly, but it does cut down on tresspassers who don't have a rug or wire cutters.

@Jake, so if the tresspassers are killing and stealing his livestock, he shouldn't put up barbwire amongst other thing to prevent tresspassers? Because it's not fool proof? Ok, how's this then: barb-wire, electric fence, and a maze of landmines, in that order. That seems pretty effective. Why not with our games today, implement barb-wire, electric fences, and 200 square miles of land mines around our game, and then we'll also poison the livestock to ensure ultimate compliance with our DETTERENTS. Cause that is what all that is. Someone is going to bring a rug, insulated wire cutters, and a mine detector, as well as a cure for the poison to get away freely.

So again, for all you who bitch, I've yet to see a more effective idea for preventing piracy come from any of you. So until then (and now I'm freely imposing) shut the shit up.

[DarkBlade325]

I gotta agree with Chaos. If a company decides to screw over their buyers with some patch to their game that !@#$s it up, they deserve to be screwed the same unless they actually listen to their fans and fix it. I buy games from companies that deserve the money. If a company like Ubisoft decides to !@#$ over their buyers, they don't deserve my cash. Oh, and I'll be pirating their game as a little sign of that.

Also, pirates aren't hurting their profits anymore than the people who just don't have enough money to buy the game. Pirates will download the game and play without paying, people who don't know about pirating and don't have the money for the game won't pay either. You can counter my point by saying "Pirates ARE hurting profits, they should wait for the price to go lower". But the companies ARE getting money aren't they? CoD:MW2 was and I believe still is the most SELLING game on the market. I believe it also had the most piraters on first days of release. Infact, Infinity Ward encouraged piraters to pirate the game because of their shitty matchmaking system. Pirates could play online with legit players. So there was even MORE of a reason to pirate that game, and yet IW is still swimming in money. Know where all that money comes from? Consoles. Think IW is just lucky that most people like consoles? Nope, take a look at VALVe. VALVe built their company on PC gaming offering some of the best game titles to date, and yet they're still up and running aren't they? They're even gracious enough to offer free DLC to those who play on the PC. Even with all the cracked versions of Steam for online play with other pirates, they're still up and running.

PC Pirates are barely hurting profits as most gamers are on consoles at the moment and they are the guys pumping all the money to companies. And pirates won't wait for a game price to drop to buy it. Humans have a limit of patience. It doesn't matter if you say it's wrong to pirate, or if the government says its wrong to pirate, one way or another it will continue. If it was really a serious problem, then I'm sure that the law would have jumped on pirating alot more eons ago. As of now you have a better chance of driving off a cliff into a pit of lava than getting caught by officials for pirating. And even if you do all you get is a slap on the wrist.

[Scotty]

Heheheh, no. I believe meiun can vouch for an acquaintence that is financially ruined as well as his children and possibly grandchildren for pirating. How many millions was he fined meiun?

[Chaos]

@chris, how is an anti-piracy tool not a deterrent? It is set in place to deter people from pirating a game. I'll use my previous barb wire example. A person lays out barb- wire to prevent tresspassing.  Someone is determined enough to tresspass, so they drive back home, grab the bathroom rug, drives back, throws the rug over the wire, and walks across.  That is a deterrent.  Now let's say we have someone who stumbles upon the land and realizes that he would like to get on the land. So now he has to find the owner by trailing the wire to the house, talk to the owner, and get permission to pass freely. Owner says yes, so now anytime he wants to cross, he has to speak with the owner, who will never say no to this man out of gratitude for him actually doing the right thing and asking.  Is it a inconvenience for the man who wants to pass with permission? Yes, but I guarantee that if there was no wire at all, there would be a lot more tresspassers.  And you can't say that the man pit up the wire thinking it will prevent ALL tresspassing, that's just silly, but it does cut down on tresspassers who don't have a rug or wire cutters.

Well, hey, if you want to keep using that analogy, perhaps we should complete it, yes?

You plop a barbed wire down there.  Along comes this man who wishes to come through.  But no, forget the rug.  He builds a BRIDGE over the barbed wire.  Incidentally, this is a strong bridge, so the owner is powerless to destroy it.  So, the guy builds this bridge, then walks on through.  Now, other people come along to this barbed wire, and hey, someone has built a bridge going right over it!  Congratulations, you managed to deter all of one person.  And you DIDN'T, because they merely saw it as a challenge, and built their bridge anyway.  And now, you have an unbreakable bridge that anyone who comes across your pretty barbed wire can simply walk over.

THAT'S what you're calling a deterrent?

Heheheh, no. I believe meiun can vouch for an acquaintence that is financially ruined as well as his children and possibly grandchildren for pirating. How many millions was he fined meiun?

Pirating WHAT, though?

[Scotty]

Simple enough, only now let's finish the analogy that you didn't bother to complete. Now let's say the owner got fed up and called in the big guns because someone now has built a bridge on Unauthorized territory. Transition to real life now, now isp's and the government are getting involved with "taking down you inpenitrable bridge." do you REALLY think your mindset and justifications are above the law, because if you want a FOOL-PROOF method to stop pirating software, THAT is my solution (since none of you care to think on your own). I say we up the enforcement, the fines, and the punishment, and remove all drm. Let em steal it, but pay with financial ruin. That is my solution, care to think of anything else?

And I will go ahead and say you over exaggerated arrogance is quite annoying. Again, read my first post and tell me your analogy is NOT making a mountain out of a mole hill.  Riddle me this chris, if you are playing AC2 on your desktop at home, when are expecting to not have Internet exactly?

[Chaos]

Simple enough, only now let's finish the analogy that you didn't bother to complete. Now let's say the owner got fed up and called in the big guns because someone now has built a bridge on Unauthorized territory.

I didn't 'finish the analogy', because not only did you just take the train off the tracks, you bolted bloody wings on it and took to the sky.

Not once have I argued the legality.  I clearly stated, plain as day, my stance is that DRM does nothing.  I imagine you can't refute this, seeing as you decided to change the subject entirely.  

Transition to real life now, now isp's and the government are getting involved with "taking down you inpenitrable bridge."

Let me rephrase this analogy.  It's not an unbreakable bridge. However, with a snap of the fingers, you can make an exact duplicate.  Also, they are camouflaged.  Good luck destroying them.

do you REALLY think your mindset and justifications are above the law,

Is this legally okay?  No.

Is this ethically okay?  No.

Do I give a shit if this is legally or ethically okay?  No.

because if you want a FOOL-PROOF method to stop pirating software, THAT is my solution (since none of you care to think on your own).  I say we up the enforcement, the fines, and the punishment, and remove all drm. Let em steal it, but pay with financial ruin. That is my solution, care to think of anything else?

Funny, I don't recall once saying I ever cared about having a fool-proof method.  DRM isn't even a method, however, because IT DOES NOTHING.

My solution?  Stop using DRM.  You'll get the exact same effect on the pirates, and NOT piss off and annoy the people who are actually BUYING your product.  Beyond that, I don't give a shit.

And I will go ahead and say you over exaggerated arrogance is quite annoying.

I assure you, the irony of reading this after seeing your post is not lost on me.  I appreciate how, instead of refuting my statement with logic, you're deciding to fling poo.  Classy.

Again, read my first post and tell me your analogy is NOT making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Are you !@#$ing listening to yourself?  Allow me to repeat myself YET again.

Stop using DRM.  You'll get the exact same effect on the pirates, and NOT piss off and annoy the people who are actually BUYING your product.  It's not a deterrent if it does NOTHING.  Actually, if anything, it's a deterrent to PURCHASE the game.

Riddle me this chris, if you are playing AC2 on your desktop at home, when are expecting to not have Internet exactly?

Irrelevant, and oddly self-centered towards me, but okay.  How about any time my internet isn't working?  Or, hey, how about when I'm on a laptop on the road and want to play my !@#$ing game?  Or, hey, how about 10 years from now, when the game is old, and Ubisoft decides they no longer want to support a server?  Or, how about when Ubisoft's server potentially goes down for a period of time, and I'm left unable to play my game until it's fixed?

Does that answer your question?


EDIT:  I really don't know if I can make this any clearer to you, but by !@#$ing god, I will try, because it saddens me to see someone who, as I've known him thus far, has exercised great logic and reasoning, and yet is unable to understand simple psychology.

de?ter
   /dɪˈtɜr/ Show Spelled[dih-tur] Show IPA
?verb (used with object),-terred, -ter?ring.
1.
to discourage or restrain from acting or proceeding: The large dog deterred trespassers.
2.
to prevent; check; arrest: timber treated with creosote to deter rot.

For DRM to deter people, it has to actually discourage or restrain them from pirating.  It DOESN'T.  Therefore, it is not a deterrent.  DRM DOES discourage or restrain people from PURCHASING the game, therefore, it IS a deterrent from getting the game legitimately. 

DRM does not stop people from pirating.

DRM DOES stop people from purchasing.

I can't make this any clearer!


GET RID OF DRM.  Does it stop pirating?  NO.  Does it stop purchasing?  YES. 

!@#$ING STOP IT.

[Jake]

@Jake, so if the tresspassers are killing and stealing his livestock, he shouldn't put up barbwire amongst other thing to prevent tresspassers? Because it's not fool proof? Ok, how's this then: barb-wire, electric fence, and a maze of landmines, in that order. That seems pretty effective. Why not with our games today, implement barb-wire, electric fences, and 200 square miles of land mines around our game, and then we'll also poison the livestock to ensure ultimate compliance with our DETTERENTS. Cause that is what all that is. Someone is going to bring a rug, insulated wire cutters, and a mine detector, as well as a cure for the poison to get away freely.

So again, for all you who bitch, I've yet to see a more effective idea for preventing piracy come from any of you. So until then (and now I'm freely imposing) shut the shit up.

I believe the best way to stop piracy right now is by removing DRM completely. Upping fines and punishment on the other hand will do nothing, considering they already do this to make an example out of people. You get upset with us by not offering an alternative, yet you have failed to provide a good one yourself. These publishers are pretty much saying "well we don't know how to fix piracy so lets add a system that doesn't work and shit on the people who are paying for the product!". My logic in this scenario is that if a system doesn't work and is pissing off your customers, GET RID OF IT. Whether or not I know of an alternative to DRM is a null point, so I will not "shut the shit up", but thanks for asking.

I'd go on in detail to refute your analogy regarding barbed-wire, electric fences, etc, but Chaos has already driven the point home more than enough. I am awaiting your rebuttal on that before I continue.

Oh, and one shitty alternative to completely get rid of piracy is cloud gaming. If that ever takes over as the main way of distributing games, I will cry tears of blood.