Here is how you should manage DRM :

[Akka]

Firaxis should really take some lesson here. Unlike the Steam debacle raging here, it seems that Sega found a good way to compromise between the rights of their consumers and the need to protect their own product, Alpha Protocol.

In a case of poetic irony, it's precisely the huge disappointment at seeing how Civ V had jumped the shark when it comes to DRM, that I went to check how AP would be protected. And then I was pleasantly surprised to see what could be a good alternative.

Sega was very honest and upfront about how DRM would be implemented (credits given where credits are due, Firaxis at least was also honest and upfront about Steam, so I won't hold them any grudge on this point), openly posting the information on their official blog. Doing so is a good move to instate consumer confidence.

Here is the method :

* Alpha Protocol uses Uniloc: SoftAnchor.

* Uniloc: SoftAnchor requires an internet connection to activate, though you don't need to always be connected to play the game, and the web site offers a work-around if you don't have an internet connection on the PC you install it on.

* The PC version of Alpha Protocol uses an internet based licensing system, where, after installation, the user is required to enter a product registration code (license key) in order to begin playing the game.

* You do not have to have the disc in your drive to play the game.

* The game does not user SteamWorks, and the Steam version of the game will use Uniloc DRM.

* The game can be installed on up to 5 different computers at any one time using the license key the game comes with.

* There is a limit to the number of computers you can use Alpha Protocol on at any one time, but Sega says that the company is not restricting the number of computers you can install the game on over the life of the product.

* Sega will provide a version of the game without DRM using a future patch that it expects to make available 18-24 months after the game's release.


You can notice, it looks a lot like Steam in the basic method : online activation. But there is two main differences, which are precisely what people are up in arms about Steam.
First, it obviously doesn't require to permanently install and run Steam.
Second, as the last line tells it : this DRM is temporary. Some times later, when the game has made the vast majority of its sales, they will release a patch that will deactivate the DRM.

Of course, I'm ready to eat my words if Sega act like a-holes and never release this patch. In this case, well, shame on them, and I've been ripped off. But if they are true to their words, then I have no complaints.

Take heed, Firaxis. THAT is an amount of DRM I'm fine with. THAT is NOT the "locked up" method Steam provide.
In fact, AP WILL be sold through Steam. And still not require Steam.

The end result is here : I have in my hands the AP box. I will never have Civ V one. One more sale for Sega, one less for you.

 

[Jugalub]

What about for those of us who actually like Steam and find it a disappointment when games aren't fully integrated into Steamworks?

---

Yes I'm unlurking to join the idiotic Steam war.

 

[eireksten]

I don't believe for a second that most anti-Steam people would be happy about a DRM like this either.

edit: Just to add, for those who actually like Steam, this has at least two problems.
1) No integration with Steamworks (kind of a big deal for online functionality), and
2) Additional DRM on top of Steam... Including limiting activations to 5 different computers.

I still don't understand the problem with having the Steam client running in the background either. If there was no explicit Steam client, but the functionality provided ran (as possibly a separate process) as part of the game, that would be OK?

The main problem with Steam, the way I see it, is that you need to register with them. This is not solved here.

 

[AZSportsFan]

* There is a limit to the number of computers you can use Alpha Protocol on at any one time, but Sega says that the company is not restricting the number of computers you can install the game on over the life of the product.

How do they pull this off without an [Steam-like] internet connection?

 

[deanej]

My problem with steam is that I need to install someting on my computer just to use the game. I don't care about online functionality (and civ is a single player game, so most people here don't either), so steam offers me nothing.

So here's an anti-steam person (by the way, I'm not against steam entirely, just it being mandatory) who likes this method of DRM.

 

[BobDole]

People would still flip out about htis because they don't want to install DRM related stuff on their computer at all, and people would still complain about the 5 computer limit (I've seen other games that did this, and people flipped out....even though I really don't think it's a big deal personally).

 

[deanej]

What DRM related stuff? This system doesn't have any extras like steam (or SecuROM's rootkit). Don't see why anyone should care about a 5 computer limit. I've only ever used one computer at a time when it comes to games.

 

[Mercade]

What about for those of us who actually like Steam and find it a disappointment when games aren't fully integrated into Steamworks?

---

Yes I'm unlurking to join the idiotic Steam war.

Welcome and congrats on your first post, lurking Jugalub.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Yes I'm unlurking to join the idiotic Steam war.

Welcome, Comrade!

 

[tom2050]

* The game can be installed on up to 5 different computers at any one time using the license key the game comes with.

This limit is only bad if the game has the ability to play over LAN, etc with more than 5 people.

What about for those of us who actually like Steam and find it a disappointment when games aren't fully integrated into Steamworks?

Steam is a comprehensive data-mining system of your computer, can check Non-Steam EXE files to determine if they are legal, and a point into the direction of 'You don't own your software, Valve does" "You play it if we let you play it" rental mentality. Much of what Steam does is probably not even legal. EULA is not above the law.

If they left out the good things (chat with friends), I could see no one wanting Steam.


Our friends 2K Games have Ubisoft mentalities as well when it comes to DRM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

2K: Tell your brother to buy his own Bioshock, you didn't buy it for the whole family.

2k Tech JT writes:
The other way to view this, is one USER has purchased the game. Not the whole family. So why should your brother play for free?

2K and its custom-made SecuROM 7.+ coupled with an initial 2 Installation Limit which were enforced by an irremovable RootKit. No warning giving on the software box at all. We should trust 2K as much as we should trust Valve.

The only reason Firaxis is going the Ubisoft-Steam route, is because of 2K. 2K loves intrusive DRM schemes. Valve has fooled many into thinking that Steam is not a intrusive DRM scheme (and even that Steam is not DRM at all) by adding some nice features over it.

 

[deanej]

I remember thinking that the lack of DRM on civ4 complete was the beginning of a new era where games would not have DRM.

Looking back, I'm thinking the only reason it didn't have DRM is because 2K didn't want to pay for it with civ5 soon to be announced.

 

[Senethro]

I remember thinking that the lack of DRM on civ4 complete was the beginning of a new era where games would not have DRM.

Looking back, I'm thinking the only reason it didn't have DRM is because 2K didn't want to pay for it with civ5 soon to be announced.

Perhaps... perhaps DRM doesn't make sense in all situations! Perhaps its more complicated than ARGH! DRM BAD! even for publishers.

 

[The_J]

I don't believe for a second that most anti-Steam people would be happy about a DRM like this either.

For me you're right .



btw, didn't buy Two Worlds last week, because it needs internet activation and can only be installed on 3 computers.

 

[arstal]

I'd be ok with it- though I'd prefer GOO or no DRM. If it was bad, I just wait two years worst case.

A game mucked up with Steamworks is flawed forever.

 

[Akka]

How do they pull this off without an [Steam-like] internet connection?

You can install the game. It just requires to authentify itself on an online server to be able to run.
The important part (that I've already explained for people who actually manage to read before asking) is that :
1) It doesn't install anything but the game (AFAIK), so no data-mining or useless background application.
2) It will be removed after a time.

 

[AZSportsFan]

This limit is only bad if the game has the ability to play over LAN, etc with more than 5 people.



Steam is a comprehensive data-mining system of your computer, can check Non-Steam EXE files to determine if they are legal, and a point into the direction of 'You don't own your software, Valve does" "You play it if we let you play it" rental mentality. Much of what Steam does is probably not even legal. EULA is not above the law.

If they left out the good things (chat with friends), I could see no one wanting Steam.


Our friends 2K Games have Ubisoft mentalities as well when it comes to DRM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


2K and its custom-made SecuROM 7.+ coupled with an initial 2 Installation Limit which were enforced by an irremovable RootKit. No warning giving on the software box at all. We should trust 2K as much as we should trust Valve.

The only reason Firaxis is going the Ubisoft-Steam route, is because of 2K. 2K loves intrusive DRM schemes. Valve has fooled many into thinking that Steam is not a intrusive DRM scheme (and even that Steam is not DRM at all) by adding some nice features over it.

Can you explain to me what you think you are buying when you purchase a game? I understand that you want the right to play it whenever you want. I am totally with you there.

But you are purchasing a license to play the game. Not the game itself. The receipt (the EULA) will spell this out clearly. Just like a license to drive a car is exactly that - not the car itself, but the right to drive it. Why would you think that purchasing said license would allow, for instance, your group of friends to all play at the same time on your license? Do you think that this is legal, or should be, per terms of the EULA? If you don't agree with the EULA, that's one thing, but then at that point it is a moral issue. You entered the contract by your own choice. Whether or not you choose to honor it is also your choice, but don't be surprised by the other party attempting to force complicity with the contract.

I understand the fears, whether warranted or not, about Steams ability to get information from your/my system. I understand people not wanting Steam on their system. I understand not wanting Steam to bother them. But when people puchase a game and then pretend that there is no EULA or say that it is not legal or whatever or complain that someone/thing is attempting to enforce the contract, it kind of baffles me.

 

[AZSportsFan]

You can install the game. It just requires to authentify itself on an online server to be able to run.
The important part (that I've already explained for people who actually manage to read before asking) is that :
1) It doesn't install anything but the game (AFAIK), so no data-mining or useless background application.
2) It will be removed after a time.

I did read. That is a huge "AFAIK". Their code may be more complex/buggy/resource-intensive than Steam for all we know. Steam has been "working" now for a number of years. It may also be an exe. If not, it will run for every game with this particular DRM, which is worse than Steam. So your #1 is no different/better than Steam, imo.

#2, on the other hand, is great should Sega decide to do so. I hope they do.

 

[The_Coyote]

so no data-mining

I´m a bit lazy today so there no research by me, but reading this

* The game can be installed on up to 5 different computers at any one time using the license key the game comes with.

* There is a limit to the number of computers you can use Alpha Protocol on at any one time, but Sega says that the company is not restricting the number of computers you can install the game on over the life of the product.

Seems to me, both can´t be completely true. To identifiy the five different computers where you are allowed to install the game they need some information that uniquely identifies (Machine-fingerprinting) the pc.

Also if there shall be no restriction in the number of computers you can install the game over the lifetime (ok five installs in five years should be enough for 90% of all customers, but whos knows), there must be a reset of the information stored at the server (by time or throu sending information while uninstalling).

So to claim that there is absolut no data mining there should be at least a passage in their Eula or privacy policy that cleary states that they will use and collect this data soley for the DRM and no other use of this data is allowed and will be done.

btw can someone explain me the sense of this sentence

The only reporting and analytics for license analysis, feature usage and hardware profiling

(Source)

At least the Softanchor feature list doesn´t sound that good

 

[deanej]

Just like a license to drive a car is exactly that - not the car itself, but the right to drive it.

Since when do you only get a licence to drive a car? Last I checked, you actually buy the car.

As for games, you SHOULD be able to purchase a game like you purchase a book. Sadly, you can't, but only because the game publisher lobbyists have managed to make it so. EULAs shouldn't even be considered contracts. You don't even get to read it until after purchase, and it's just "accept these terms or don't use the product". A true contract would be you and a representative of the company haggling over terms.

 

[AZSportsFan]

Since when do you only get a licence to drive a car? Last I checked, you actually buy the car.

I am referring to a driver's license, and you are referring to the title, I believe.

Since you can't "electronically transfer" a bound book, there is no need on the concern of the publisher. No one is going to go out and copy the book to give to their friends, or even to sell to others. That would cost real money. That is why the EULAs are what they are. You can reproduce software cheaply. Let's say that you had a magic machine that for $1 would reproduce any vehicle that you put into it. Do you think that GM, FORD, BMW, etc would have a problem with that? Would they make sure that you couldn't sell copies of their cars, or just make a bunch to give to friends? Of course they would. The example is extreme, but that is why we have EULAs. They didn't exist 20 years ago, at least not that I can recall. There was no legitimate concern to their published works.