Game News BioWare caves to pressure over Mass Effect copy-protection

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: BioWare; Mass Effect

How many people can I piss off by making a third thread about this? Hopefully a lot. <a href="http://rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=24107&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=25">BioWare have seen the light and caved in to peer-pressure</a> over their proposed copy-protection shenanigans:
<br>
<blockquote>There has been a lot of discussion in the past few days on how the security requirements for Mass Effect for PC will work. BioWare, a division of EA, wants to let fans know that Mass Effect will not require 10- day periodic re-authentication.
<br>
<br>
The solution being implemented for Mass Effect for the PC changes copy protection from being key disc based, which requires authentication every time you play the game by requiring a disc in the drive, to a one time online authentication.
<br>
<br>
BioWare has always listened very closely to its fans and we made this decision to ensure we are delivering the best possible experience to them. To all the fans including our many friends in the armed services and internationally who expressed concerns that they would not be able re-authenticate as often as required, EA and BioWare want you to know that your feedback is important to us.</blockquote>
<br>
Thank the military. There's another 10 or so questions over there about it as well.
<br>
<br>
Thanks <b>StarWars</b> and <b>cazsim83</b>!

 

[DefJam101]

Ahh, another victory for the internet against those fascist pigs!

 

[Fez]

Damn you DU! I just spend ages typing up a news post and pressed preview to see this pop up at the bottom.

This isn't a total victory though as I believe it is still limited to 3 PCs and requires a one-time authentication before play.

 

[Jedi_Learner]

Q: Did BioWare and EA change their mind on requiring that the game be re-authorized every 10 days?

A: BioWare has always listened very closely to its fans and we made this decision to ensure we are delivering the best possible experience to them. To all the fans including our many friends in the armed services and internationally who expressed concerns that they would not be able re-authenticate as often as required, EA and BioWare want you to know that your feedback is important to us.

Anyone else think Electronic Arts and Bioware planned this all along for attention? Not that they need it, but I have a feeling...

 

[NiM82]

Q: Did BioWare and EA change their mind on requiring that the game be re-authorized every 10 days?

A: BioWare has always listened very closely to its fans and we made this decision to ensure we are delivering the best possible experience to them. To all the fans including our many friends in the armed services and internationally who expressed concerns that they would not be able re-authenticate as often as required, EA and BioWare want you to know that your feedback is important to us.

Anyone else think Electronic Arts and Bioware planned this all along for attention? Not that they need it, but I have a feeling...

I'll second that. The copy protection bullshit was a major story and drew a lot of attention to ME coming to the PC, more so than the original announcement. The bending over instantly turned all that bad PR into good PR. Behold the new consumer friendly EA that listens to the little guy!

 

[MetalCraze]

I agree. they still will rape us in the ass with installation limit but now they are looking like good guys for actually not changing anything.

 

[tunguska]

The bending over instantly turned all that bad PR into good PR. Behold the new consumer friendly EA that listens to the little guy!

Being the cynical guy that I am, this also occurred to me. But bad PR is bad PR even if good PR follows. Regardless of whether it was planned or not, it does make the still very extreme DRM that remains look not so bad. Very clever in that sense.

 

[Acleacius]

It's hard to believe so many are falling for this metamarking bullshit. They clearly knew people would get pissed off and are just playing a systematics game, to stroke egos.

Bullshit, Copy Protection in game? Check.
Free Marketing, due to intentionally created Shit Storm? Check.
Stroking boners, to extend the Free Media attention? Check.

 

[WalterKinde]

Its the same copy protection like Bioshock if i read it right.
From the same company securom as Bioshock,
Limited installs like Bioshock and still requires online activation/internet even though its a single player game like Bioshock.
So nothing changes except the 10 day check.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

Who cares about having to connect to the server every ten days? They still have the fucking limit on the number of installations.

 

[bezimek]

Good to hear . Maybe there is hope for Bioware.

 

[Krancor]

Bioware have?

Am u speak english?

 

[aries202]

I really think that the US military has helped us here, guys. It would be sort of ironic if the soldiers in Irak couldn't play a game where the main character is a --- soldier....

There a NO limited installs. You can install the game as many time as you want as long as you install it on the same computer without having changed this computer significantly. The problem with Bioshock was that you ONLY ould activate it on two user accounts on the same computer. The game and securom are tied to your hardware configuration, not your user accounts, on your computer.

You can activate the game via the internet through a valid cdkey through a one time online activation.
I'm fine with this. This is similat to what I had to do when I signed up at TTLG forums a few weeks ago.

 

[thesheeep]

A conspiracy by Bioware to get more attention?

lol, guys.... Sometimes you are more than amusing

 

[thesheeep]

Double post. wtf?

 

[tunguska]

We're talking trial balloon here folks. Now I really am going to feel noble in downloading my DRM free copy from TPB. Vote with your dollars. That is all that EA is going to understand. This looks like a real chance to fight DRM in future games. Buying their game is going to be sending the message, "Please give us more DRM!". If they reach record sales on MEPC we are fucked. Time to take a stand. Bioware may be on our side but EA most certainly is not. I can't believe there is a thread like that right on Bioware's own forum. +1 for freedom of speech I guess. So Bioware is anti censorship even when people are recommending a boycott!

Since this protection will probably only be effective for the maximum of a week before a crack is released. How about you release an update that removes SecuROM once the crack is available? That way you don't continue to alienate (pun unintended) your customers and you still retain those initial precious first few days of non-piracy.

Indeed.

Check out this gem. Posted by d0dak. Not sure I should repost it here but the argument is just so well put. This is just an excerpt. You should really read his full post in context.

The whole concept of DRM and copy-protection is based on three fundamental assumptions:

1. It is possible to design a technical DRM / copy-protection solution that is resistant against attacks long enough for it to have a measurable effect. Exactly how long that is, is a matter for case-by-case consideration.

2. Sufficiently hard-to-crack DRM / copy-protection, which is able to resist attempts at cracking for long enough, will transform otherwise would-be pirates into paying customers.

3. Sufficiently hard-to-crack DRM / copy-protection, as defined above, will not at the same time (due to inconvenience and restrictions) transform too many currently paying customers into ex-customers.

If any one of the above assumptions (note: ANY single one) doesn't hold, the whole concept fails.

Some details for each point, in order:

1. It is impossible to design an uncrackable system, for locally installed non-networked applications. Hence the only thing possible to strive for is sufficient resistance in the system, where "sufficient" is some defined amount of time. Seeing as most attempts at designing these kinds of systems are cracked very quickly indeed, this is no easy task, and is a very real concern.

2. Somehow, the application which is now uncrackable for some amount of time (say two weeks, to be realistic) will due to its uncrackability transform people with formerly no intention of buying the application into honest paying customers. I am extremely skeptical as to the degree this will actually occur. But this is critical. If *this* particular transformation does not happen, no (I repeat: zero) additional sales will happen. I have never seen any reliable figures as to the extent to which this conversion actually takes place in reality, if at all.

3. The uncrackability must not inconvenience real paying customers so much that any measurable portion of them decide against buying the product with the thusly designed protection mechanism, in order for the loss of former customers to not outweigh the inflow of transformed pirates as described in point 2. As we can see in this thread, there is such a thing as too much inconvenience, so this point is a very real concern.

Now, whether it's in reality possible to fulfill all three points as described above or not, that is the core crux of the matter.

We know that all protection schemes are cracked, in a matter of time, commonly very quickly.

We also know, from this thread, and other recent stories for other games, that too much inconvenience really drives customers away, as well as creates really bad PR.

What we *don't know*, then, is the extent to which otherwise would-be pirates are transformed into paying customers by a tough-enough protection system.

It has to be a sizable portion, for it to be worth it.

This is pure business: If the cost of doing something outweighs the gain from doing it, you will not make money from it. Instead, you will lose money. That would be bad business.

If the numbers don't add up, then the road walked currently by many gaming companies, towards ever stronger and more intrusive DRM / copy-protection schemes, is the wrong road to be walking, and an alternative approach ought to be explored.

If they do add up, then there should be no problem for the PC gaming industry, now should there? Afterall, this is the same road that the industry has been walking since ... well, forever, more or less.

And how well has it worked out, I ask?

Feel free to discuss, theorize, dig out actual numbers/statistics for or against, and see what you can come up with. I am truly interested in seeing some *real* figures here, since most data that has been published so far has ... very dubious sources.

An alternative way to explore, is the one I've mentioned before, and it's so simple that I'm probably viewed as naive:

Stop caring about the pirates, and focus instead solely on making a product that customers want to buy, and make sure that it is a better product than the one the pirates get.

That, right there (above) is where many companies go wrong, in that they sell a product which is, everything considered, worse than the one offered for free by the pirates.

 

[Fez]

There a NO limited installs. You can install the game as many time as you want as long as you install it on the same computer without having changed this computer significantly.

If someone changes their PC components a couple of times then they have a dead game. That seems like a limit to me.

 

[DemonKing]

It's hard to believe so many are falling for this metamarking bullshit. They clearly knew people would get pissed off and are just playing a systematics game, to stroke egos.

Bullshit, Copy Protection in game? Check.
Free Marketing, due to intentionally created Shit Storm? Check.
Stroking boners, to extend the Free Media attention? Check.

Very cynical...

It's not beyond the realms of possibility but on the other hand even pretending to do an about-turn on something does make you look a bit weak, although of course as you say they still have got their crappy copy protection in place.

Mind you - it will be nice to play an EA game without the disc in the driver, for once!

 

[Noceur]

The real problem from my point of view was always the "Install on 3 Machines only" part of the DRM. It makes me feel like I'm not really buying the game anymore, more like I'm renting it for a year or so.
Then again, what'd be the point of checking on-line if you don't have a limited number of installs?
If Troika and Black Isle had this DRM back in the day I'd be pretty cooked in shit right now (as none of the games would be working on my current hardware, and good luck with calling tech-support).

Anyway, It's not impossible that they pulled this two-phase stunt to get rid of the negative feedback Bioshock got for its DRM, while still using the same DRM Bioshock had.

 

[WalterKinde]

Yeah thats probably true.
And since when do we allow video games to operate like its an OS install of windows where changing the hardware (say changing every bit of hardware except the hard drive) results in you being hit with a "oops you nasty pirate register me AT ONCE"?
It was a bitch in XP but not insurmountable (the corp version of xp had no such restrictions) and became even worse in vista if the reports are true, if you didn't register the OS ran in limited mode with only Internet Explorer and notepad working then shut itself off ater 30 mins.
So people are just going to roll over with this?
I can't wait for the thread locking and bannings to begin over at the bioware forums when people start posting about problems with the drm.
And Again why put yourself through this when you KNOW whether its on the day of release or 6 months from now it will be on the p2p networks?
Until this game is thoroughly cracked EA Bioware is not seeing any cash from me.
And by thoroughly cracked i mean never having to register it online, its a single player non internet game.

 

[Norfleet]

Until this game is thoroughly cracked EA Bioware is not seeing any cash from me.
And by thoroughly cracked i mean never having to register it online, its a single player non internet game.

Why would they see any money from you at ALL if that's the case? You'd be a complete moron to give them money after that.

 

[WalterKinde]

What can i say
i bought Oblivion didn't I?
Plus on the p2p side of things i don't fancy spending 24hrs downloading a game assuming mass effect is more than 4gb.
I'll wait for others from both camps legit and p2p users to review and say how it is and the crack before going to buy.
I had the opportunity with NWN2 after reading the reviews and opinions of both camps i decided the game was not worth buying or even getting off a p2p network. Same with Assassin's Creed (include the system requirements as well for a reason for not getting it)

 

[Lemunde]

At the very least this news tells me they don't really believe they can get away with anything. The limited installs thing still sucks but by the time it becomes a problem there will be ways around that. It's ironic. If it weren't for the pirates I wouldn't even consider buying these games.

 

[Acleacius]

WTF, why do some of you keep saying this is Bioware, retarded much?

Publishers decide about copy protection, this can be mimed for an additional charge.

 

[MetalCraze]

ah but sure - how can it be a Bioware fault at all? its all bad bad publisher EA
lets not forget that Bioware voluntarily decided to suck on EA's cock for money - so they very much agreed themselves to anything EA would want from them. and they've agreed on this copy protection now as well.
this is the fault of both EA and Bioware - so blaming anyone of them is correct. and besides it was bioware's member protecting the CP on forums "because we don't want our game stolen"