Assumption: DLC protected by technical means and consequences

[Commander Bello]

Ok.

So, as far as I see it by now, the majority seems to expect the following scenario (talking about D2D purchases, obviously):
1) purchase via D2D
2) either download via D2D or
3) get a registration key from D2D and download via Steam
4) download all available DLC for the game
5) enter the registration key for any such DLC, if you have such a key
6) now you have a registered game and some registered DLC

correct so far?

That means that the registration must be kept somewhere on the local installation, as otherwise I would not be able to play in the socalled "offline mode". There it is checked each time I start the game (and most probably the check covers all DLC, too).
This will result in some kind of internal table like this:
Game: ok
DLC#1: ok
DLC#2: ok
DLC#3: no
DLC#4: ok
DLC#5: no
and so on....

Since people think that all DLC's are downloaded no matter if they are bought or not, the owner of just the standard version seems to get quite some (unknown) quantity of data stored on his HD.
The same would happen in case of installing the game on any other computer (or to a different windows user - think of a family pc).

Since we are talking about a big selling game, these DLC's would all have to be uploaded around a million times, although it will be unclear how many people are actually making use of it.

Will this really be a likely scenario?
Or would it be more likely that DLC's are just uploaded "on demand"?

Personally, I tend more to the latter option.

 

[Shurdus]

The latter option would probably be more friendly in bandwidth, but maybe not what actually happens. We shall see. What does it matter anyway?

 

[Tylerryan79]

I'm thinking everyone will have to download dlc that can be used in multiplayer. That way if I have no dlc I can still play with people who do. Unless they don't allow people with dlc to use their dlc in mp, but I think that would sell
less, people would want to use their new dlc against friends etc.

Also I don't think we would dl the game through d2d. I think they will give us a key on our userpage, with a link to steam, and instructions to install it, and where to put the key. Then after buying we do all that, and steam will show we have the game, but we can't download it yet until release.

 

[Commander Bello]

The latter option would probably be more friendly in bandwidth, but maybe not what actually happens. We shall see. What does it matter anyway?

It matters in which kind of copy protection functionalities will be imposed on even a user who does not buy DLC.

If DLC would not be uploaded "no matter what", than it has to be protected against ripping and distributing it.
Since any user could be a "pirate", you would have to check with any user, which in case of being online all the time might be easy but might require some more investigations in the user's system during the so-called "offline mode".

 

[Shurdus]

It matters in which kind of copy protection functionalities will be imposed on even a user who does not buy DLC.

If DLC would not be uploaded "no matter what", than it has to be protected against ripping and distributing it.
Since any user could be a "pirate", you would have to check with any user, which in case of being online all the time might be easy but might require some more investigations in the user's system during the so-called "offline mode".

 

[Dale]

It matters in which kind of copy protection functionalities will be imposed on even a user who does not buy DLC.

If DLC would not be uploaded "no matter what", than it has to be protected against ripping and distributing it.
Since any user could be a "pirate", you would have to check with any user, which in case of being online all the time might be easy but might require some more investigations in the user's system during the so-called "offline mode".

Tin foil hat?

Moderator Action: Like annoucned, infraction handled for trolling.

 

[Commander Bello]

Would you mind telling us at which point you think I have been wrong?

 

[2K Greg]

Your explanation now reads like Steam shows any games on the computer, at least which are related to the user.
That in turn would mean that for a family/shared computer you should also have different windows users?

Imagine this scenario: I come over to your house, log in to my Steam account on your computer, and install some game that I own and you do not, so we can play it. Then I leave, never to return, and you log back in to your account. The reason my game will show up in Steam when you log in (under a different section so it's easy to differentiate) is to allow you to uninstall that game. If it didn't show up, it would be difficult to tell that 6 gigs of your HDD space is being used up by a game you don't have access to.

 

[Earthling]

1) There won't really be DLC, and Firaxis won't try to protect pre-order bonus's.
2) They will use the in-game modding distribution interface they have talked about to restrict mods replicating DLC.
3) People will be able to make mods of DLC, but only people who have paid for the DLC will be able to use it to get on online, in-game, scoreboards.
4) They lied and the game won't be as mod-able as they claim.

Can anyone think of any other method? Of the ones I listed only #1 seems like a good idea.

Can't think of another good option, but of the ones listed, I wouldn't be surprised if #4 is actually true...

 

[Commander Bello]

Imagine this scenario: I come over to your house, log in to my Steam account on your computer, and install some game that I own and you do not, so we can play it. Then I leave, never to return, and you log back in to your account. The reason my game will show up in Steam when you log in (under a different section so it's easy to differentiate) is to allow you to uninstall that game. If it didn't show up, it would be difficult to tell that 6 gigs of your HDD space is being used up by a game you don't have access to.

I would assume that I can see such programs by normal Windows functionality, wouldn't I?
The first thing I would be thinking of: Start > System > Programs and Functions > Deinstall

In any way, I cannot see where the benefit of having a second list for de-installing (and does the Steam client allow to do so, directly, or would I have to go to Programs and Functions anyway?) over the annoyance to have to look at a list of unplayable games is.
Not taking into consideration that I expect you to be a careful visitor and deleting your games at the end of your highly welcomed visit at my humble home.

 

[2K Greg]

I would assume that I can see such programs by normal Windows functionality, wouldn't I?
The first thing I would be thinking of: Start > System > Programs and Functions > Deinstall

In any way, I cannot see where the benefit of having a second list for de-installing (and does the Steam client allow to do so, directly, or would I have to go to Programs and Functions anyway?) over the annoyance to have to look at a list of unplayable games is.
Not taking into consideration that I expect you to be a careful visitor and deleting your games at the end of your highly welcomed visit at my humble home.

Yes, I believe you can see installed Steam games in the "Programs and Features" list in Windows. But you can also remove games directly inside the Steam client which is great for users who aren't as computer savvy as your average CivFanatic

 

[YoHo]

Isn't this just exiting functionality of Steam we're arguing about now? Isn't it a little late for that?

Anyway, as for pirating. I assume that the model is similar to that for Xbox Live. Hack at your own risk. Basically sure, they might not be able to catch all the offline users of hacked DLC, but they will concentrate on the online users and act appropriately.

 

[Commander Bello]

Isn't this just exiting functionality of Steam we're arguing about now? Isn't it a little late for that?

I don't know? Is it?

Anyway, I am actually wondering about what kind of copyprotection might be inflicted upon me as not being a DLC purchaser.

And actually, as far as this topic is concerned, I don't care whether it will be inflicted upon me by Steam or D2D or whatever other service will come up in the next days.

 

[Dale]

Tin foil hat?

Moderator Action: Like annoucned, infraction handled for trolling.

I assume you infracted yourself for labeling me a troll then?

Moderator Action: Warned - trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[ArcadicGamer]

I don't know? Is it?

Anyway, I am actually wondering about what kind of copyprotection might be inflicted upon me as not being a DLC purchaser.

And actually, as far as this topic is concerned, I don't care whether it will be inflicted upon me by Steam or D2D or whatever other service will come up in the next days.

I would love to answer this question, but i believe that will have to be answered properly by 2k's legal department/Modding FAQ. However, i honestly don't see any DLC being fuctionally different from the base game. All we've seen is map packs and Civs. If your doing a total conversion mod, these probably wont matter at all. If its a mod to the structure and functionality of the game, your mod can probably ignore DLC bundles. There might even be a tool for modders to allow them access to all content to mod, or have the mod tools to handle DLC.

I always thought that via Steam you could organize your (own) games?

Your explanation now reads like Steam shows any games on the computer, at least which are related to the user.
That in turn would mean that for a family/shared computer you should also have different windows users?

Yes, i omitted a sentence there. STEAM automaticlly handles every game in the STEAM folder. My brother's account had installed and purchased games my account had not. Therefor, STEAM denied me access based on my account info, stored locally. STEAM can also be used in lieu of other shortcuts for games. I have shortcuts to every non-steam game in my STEAM library, as few as they have become. I believe you can even shortcut programs through STEAM as well, but i've never tried.

 

[Tylerryan79]

It matters in which kind of copy protection functionalities will be imposed on even a user who does not buy DLC.

If DLC would not be uploaded "no matter what", than it has to be protected against ripping and distributing it.
Since any user could be a "pirate", you would have to check with any user, which in case of being online all the time might be easy but might require some more investigations in the user's system during the so-called "offline mode".

Regardless if you only download dlc if you pay for it, or if they make everyone download it in a patch it won't matter. Think of the dlc as a game, within a game. It will be under the same scrutiny as any steam game. Imagine you go into offline mode, then you illegaly download a steam game, and somehow install it into your steam apps folder. You click steam to play it, in offline mode, but it won't let you! When you first told steam to start in offline mode it took a snapshot of your games and settings etc. It knows the game you added wasn't there before, and will tell you to sign onto steam to verify it before you can play.

Dlc will act in the same way. When bought we will either have it unlocked through steam, or if bought through d2d we will be given a key to enter to unlock it. In the scenario where we only download dlc if we have payed for it, if you got your hands on a copy through the web, and try to put it into your steam folder for civ v, steam will see this, and make you sign on to verify it. If you can't then you either won't access it or maybe they will close your account. If it's where everyone downloads it regardless, you'll have the files and will need a key to play it.

Then there is the last scenario, illegal copy with illegal dlc. They won't have to worry about steam, and will be playing with it all. Also I'm sure some smart people with a legit game can trick steam into using the dlc somehow, bit sooner or later they will get caught, and loose all their games.

 

[Tylerryan79]

Sorry for double post

Also there is nothing stopping anyone from copying games and folders from steam. Right now I can copy my steam folders and post them all over the net if I wanted too. They just aren't anygood to anyone because of the above mentioned post. There will always be people to crack games etc, but for "honest" users, who think they can just copy and paste dlc into steam to use, it won't happen. For some games you can do that, but not ones using steamworks.

Edit: well I think a missunderstood your post. If your saying someone could dl the dlc, then basicly make a mod with the contents, then I guess they could? Not knowing how to mod, I'd say anythings possible. Maybe they have hidden markers in the dlc in certain parts, that if steam sees will alert them to give it more scrutiny, or to ask you to sign on if in offline mode. Your guess is as good as mine.

 

[Jamuka]

Edit: well I think a missunderstood your post. If your saying someone could dl the dlc, then basicly make a mod with the contents, then I guess they could? Not knowing how to mod, I'd say anythings possible. Maybe they have hidden markers in the dlc in certain parts, that if steam sees will alert them to give it more scrutiny, or to ask you to sign on if in offline mode. Your guess is as good as mine.

That's exactly what i'm saying. Civ 5 will actualy be somewhat of a first. There hasn't really been a game before that has both DLC and the ability to easily make mods of what's being sold in the DLC. From what I gather:
1-No amount of DRM will be able to prevent a mod replicating DLC from being made
2-Steam isn't going to check your mods
I work in the game industry, and my co-workers and I are all baffled at how Firaxis plans on doing this.

 

[Souron]

But the planned DLCs aren't a game withing a game. It's a few maps, scenarios, and civilization data. Aside from analyzing the file data or the file name, there's no way to know it is part of a particular DLC. Unless of course DLCs are somehow distinguished from mods, which would imply a limitation on mods, which we are assured there isn't in this regard. And analyzing the data is easily circumvented, because a slight change could easily alter the hash without changing the appearance.

 

[Souron]

Another thing, even without programic protection, DLCs limit modders, who want to include the DLC content in their own mods. For instance, it is perfectly reasonable for a person to want to create a colonization scenario that includes Spain. But likely Spain will only be available though DLC. Creating one's own version of Spain would result in an inferior product, because it's hard to do quality leader models and model animations. So the scenario developer, and every one who wants a quality colonization scenario (including 2k, because the success of civ is tied to the quality of scenarios made with it) would want to include Spain from the DLC with the scenario. But now there is a question of is such a scenario allowed, and what restrictions exist on distributing it. Ideally, it would be allowed to distribute the scenario with DLC Spain to people who don't have that particular DLC. But unless this is explicitly allowed, it is disallowed, and the official mod hosting sites of steam/2k/fireaxis (if they will exist), as well as high visibility reputable sites like civfanatics may not host such mods.