WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
Bet you anything that WabeWalker is a pirate himself
You got me. I'm in denial. All this posting is just a cover up.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ubi DRM: Their side of the story
- Thread starter polonyc2
- Start date
- Status
You got me. I'm in denial. All this posting is just a cover up.
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
This is what I was responding to. How, exactly, did I misread this? Go back and re-read what I wrote.
Pirates don't think like this.
This argument is just plain silly. Make a great game, release it on time, without bugs, etc. etc., and the pirates will buy it?
Um... no they won't.
sweetreddyd
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2009
- Messages
- 144
Yeah I put that deadpool wannabe guy on ignore as well. I realized he's just posting to get a reaction out of people. I've thrown enough money at valve and steam at this point in my life that I'm pretty much beyond reproach.
If you have enough titles to fill up a 2560 screen vertically? Yeah, you can't really be called a pirate. And that dude called us all pirates with no proof other than our opinions on drm. He seemed so ignorant of how drm actually works that it was amazing.
Seriously, my steam folder consists of 336 gigabytes, 254,541 files, 15,864 folders. I won't listen to anyone who calls me a pirate based solely on my desire for less obtrusive DRM, when I've spent at LEAST six months of pay on my game collection.
Obviously a troll who can't accommodate any opinion but his own illogical one.
If you have enough titles to fill up a 2560 screen vertically? Yeah, you can't really be called a pirate. And that dude called us all pirates with no proof other than our opinions on drm. He seemed so ignorant of how drm actually works that it was amazing.
Seriously, my steam folder consists of 336 gigabytes, 254,541 files, 15,864 folders. I won't listen to anyone who calls me a pirate based solely on my desire for less obtrusive DRM, when I've spent at LEAST six months of pay on my game collection.
Obviously a troll who can't accommodate any opinion but his own illogical one.
No where did he say that no one would pirate it. You are simply reading what you want to read. You are the only one in this topic that didn't understand what he said.
Mines at 228 GB. That isn't all my Steam games though. Still have a few to backup.
You also have to take into account AC was released well after its console variant. Many of the people who would have bought it on PC would have already caved in and bought it on Xbox or PS3 instead. I'm guessing the same is true of games like Star Wars: Force Unleashed.
Many people these days own several platforms, if you release on one of those platforms several months later, you can't expect it to do brilliantly. Especially if it comes out so much later that the console versions are actually CHEAPER than the PC version.
I actually think AC sold a lot more than 40k copies. I know I bought it, but no way in hell did I buy it on release, I waited until it was in the bargain bin before I bought it.
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
Okay, here's the perfect example of somebody who is 'reading what he wants to read'.
I never said that 'everyone' here is a pirate. I never said that. Anywhere.
What I said was, let's just use plain logic. If 17 gamers pirated Assassin's Creed for every one person who bought a legitimate copy, then it only stands to reason that at any given public gaming forum, if you were to start up a thread about Assassin's Creed then the vast majority of people posting, given those numbers, would be pirates. That's just plain logic.
I never said that such and such a person was a pirate. I never started accusing people 'without proof'.
Seriously, do you expect me to believe that none of the people posting in this thread pirated Assassin's Creed? That's utter nonsense. And judging by the numbers in this particular case (I've already provided links to my source for this - so don't ask me again) it's not just a small percentage of people who pirated AC, it's a significant number.
Yeah, talk about 'reading what you want to read'. Perfect example, right there.
And those of you putting me on your ignore list - hey, go right ahead. But one thing I have noticed in life is that when a person decides to press a button so as to block another person from even speaking, almost every single time that person possesses the qualities of a dictator. This guy who has blocked me, for example, has COMPLETELY misunderstood everything I've written.
And can we please just ditch the troll argument - this argument is the single most tired argument that gets posted at internet forums.
For the one thousandth time, a troll is somebody who deliberately attempts to promote discord.
Sorry, but I post what I feel to be true. If you think that I'm sitting here maliciously trying to work out how I can get a rise out of people, and that I don't actually give a damn about computer gaming at all, then yeah, maybe you should put me on your ignore list. But please can it with the troll argument. It's just tired.
PrincessFrosty
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,905
Will a great game released "on time" with no bugs stop pirates from pirating a game. NO
However, it will stop legitimate customers from pirating the game instead of buying it. Either you're a potential customer or you aren't...some people will pirate the game irregardless of the developers actions and they're not potential customers. However there definately are millions of potential customers...and just because they're a potential customer doesn't mean they're above piracy, you can still drive away legitimate customers by your actions. One of the forces to drive away legitimate customers is draconian DRM like this.
On the flip side of the coin, DRM does not stop piracy, it's proven not to stop piracy, even when the game is released and there is no crack yet, just a copy of the dvd hits torrent sites people still download it by the thousands simply in preperation for a crack.
DRM does not stop piracy, but it does encourage it, if you want your game to sell the best and get pirated the least then tone down the DRM so it doesn't effect sales.
However, it will stop legitimate customers from pirating the game instead of buying it. Either you're a potential customer or you aren't...some people will pirate the game irregardless of the developers actions and they're not potential customers. However there definately are millions of potential customers...and just because they're a potential customer doesn't mean they're above piracy, you can still drive away legitimate customers by your actions. One of the forces to drive away legitimate customers is draconian DRM like this.
On the flip side of the coin, DRM does not stop piracy, it's proven not to stop piracy, even when the game is released and there is no crack yet, just a copy of the dvd hits torrent sites people still download it by the thousands simply in preperation for a crack.
DRM does not stop piracy, but it does encourage it, if you want your game to sell the best and get pirated the least then tone down the DRM so it doesn't effect sales.
17 people did NOT download AC to every 1 person that bought it. Those numbers are only from the first month and you can damn well bet sales have improved. Plus, there is NO FUCKING WAY to track UNIQUE downloaders. PERIOD!
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
You guys just don't get it, do you.
You keep on saying that Ubisoft is going to lose customers over this, yada, yada, yada - what you have utterly failed to grasp is that Ubisoft has virtually nothing to lose whatsoever by doing this.
They lost $30 million dollars in sales from Assassin's Creed due to pirating. AC was pirated at a ratio of 17 to 1. Ubisoft had no support whatsoever.
For crying out loud - how many times do I have to post the same god damned statistic. Ubisoft, in its first month, sold 40,000 copies. 700,000 were pirated. The argument that Ubisoft is going to lose its following over this is so stupid it makes my brain hurt.
THEY NEVER HAD A FOLLOWING TO BEGIN WITH!
Jesus. Un-frickin'-believable. People say that I'm the repetitious one. How many times are you guys going to advance the same argument. I've seen it at least 30 times now.
You keep on saying that Ubisoft is going to lose customers over this, yada, yada, yada - what you have utterly failed to grasp is that Ubisoft has virtually nothing to lose whatsoever by doing this.
They lost $30 million dollars in sales from Assassin's Creed due to pirating. AC was pirated at a ratio of 17 to 1. Ubisoft had no support whatsoever.
For crying out loud - how many times do I have to post the same god damned statistic. Ubisoft, in its first month, sold 40,000 copies. 700,000 were pirated. The argument that Ubisoft is going to lose its following over this is so stupid it makes my brain hurt.
THEY NEVER HAD A FOLLOWING TO BEGIN WITH!
Jesus. Un-frickin'-believable. People say that I'm the repetitious one. How many times are you guys going to advance the same argument. I've seen it at least 30 times now.
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
It was proven in court, Derangel. So it's actually a fact. Now you're just making stuff up.
What the hell are you talking about? The only thing the RIAA civil court cases have proven is that they can track a specific user that is uploading specific files. There has NEVER been anything proven that they can track unique users downloading unique copies over multiple different download sources. When companies give out these numbers its an estimate based on the number of downloads they see on each tracker. Those early pirate reports you see are the same way. Its not a count of the unique number of users downloading.
Shalafi
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 22,956
Ubisoft is indeed going to lose it's following over this, WabeWalker is their champion though, who knows, he could turn the tide
jubalskeiki
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Messages
- 454
They aren't just talking about not buying AC2 (which who knows..maybe you are right they have nothing to lose). They are talking about not buying Ubi games at all. Even the ones that did have a strong following (Rainbow 6, Splinter Cell, Silent Hunter, Prince of Persia, Ghost Recon). Those games historically have very strong sales. I am a huge fan of the Silent Hunter and Ghost Recon series in particular, but I won't be buying the new versions if they use this DRM. (Despite owning at least one copy of all of the rest of the series). This will hurt Ubi, perhaps not amongst AC fans, but there is much more at stake here than just 1 game. And when you start talking about some of those game series (especially Silent Hunter) they are wildly popular amongst groups of people that aren't considered hard core gamers and who would be more on par with the national average for high speed internet.
It is horrible logic to say that because there were 700k downloads they lost any number of sales numbers. Not only is it impossible to check how many were unique downloads but it is even more impossible to track how many of them would have purchased the game had they not downloaded it.
There is a difference between saying that "If 17 gamers pirated Assassin's Creed for every one person who bought a legitimate copy, then it only stands to reason that at any given public gaming forum, if you were to start up a thread about Assassin's Creed then the vast majority of people posting, given those numbers, would be pirates." or in other words "the majority of people in this thread who don't agree with me must be pirates" and what I quoted above. With the number of people who posted sure maybe a few of them were pirates, but honestly (as has been said multiple times before) pirates in general don't really care too much about DRM schemes since they won't have to mess with that at all..it's a non-issue for them. Logically, they'd be less likely to see a thread like this and say much besides "lol...you tools actually buy games? wtf cares about DRM?"
I agree you aren't going to please everyone, but at this point I wouldn't buy any of the new games because my internet right now is very dicey. I have gotten to be very mobile and I only have internet sometimes so for me purchasing a game that requires that I have it is a waste of my money. I think this is more common than you want to admit, and I'd buy the 5-10%. From a business standpoint when you are alienating that large a percentage of your customer base...that's huge. Not to mention the people who likely wouldn't have issues but who boycott the publisher/developer based on the principle that such measures are ridiculous and that percentage grows even more.
Good thing Assasin's Creed is the only game Ubisoft has ever published.
Mr. Pedantic
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,707
There is a massive, massive difference. To post here, the forums don't require me to be online the whole time I'm typing my message. It requires me to be online when I'm downloading the page, and when I'm uploading my message. That is all. And same with IM. You don't terminate your conversation if the connection goes down, the client stays up, lets you read through your history, type anything you want, and in the meantime, retries a connection. The only thing you cannot do is send anything, because that physically requires a connection.
As I said before, on another thread, I doubt anyone with dialup or any kind of wireless connection to the internet will want to buy these games, because the connection is so unstable. Even my connection, which is probably one of the fastest 1-5% residential internet connections in New Zealand, isn't stable enough to stay online the whole time I'm playing a game.
Most people pirate games because it is either cheaper, or more convenient for them to do so rather than buy the game, either online or physically in a shop. This new DRM will be cracked, even Ubisoft admits it. From what I know of other games' cracks, it's usually as simple for the end-user as copying a file into the game root directory or launching an executable. It's piss-easy. However, someone who buys the game will still have to contend with their internet connection going down at inopportune moments for whatever reason, or Ubisoft's servers going down for whatever reason. And it's suddenly a whole lot more convenient for a person to download the rarred .iso, install the game, use Daemon Tools to run it, and copy a couple of files compared to the inconvenience of actually buying the game, installing the game, and finding out you can't play the game because your internet isn't as stable as you first thought.
Your argument makes no sense, because of the limitations of any DRM system - namely, that it can, and will be, cracked or worked around. If someone made up a DRM system that physically, for whatever reason, could not be circumvented, you would be right on the money. As it stands, however, your argument does not hold water.
SS_Wehrwolf
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
- Messages
- 632
Has anyone looked through the privacy policy or terms of use of any game shipping with the new DRM? Id be more interested in that. By forcing you to be constantly connected to the internet when you play this game, it becomes another statistic that Ubisoft can sell to their partners and others along with your personal information. How long do you play, at what times, what days dont you play at this time, your days off are probably _________, if we market a game what times should we announce it... etc. etc. etc.
You do not get a dime, and you have no recourse what so ever if your personal information is used, and absolutely zero compensation. So they can be pirated 17-1, and they are still making money over decades with your personal information. I think throughout the industry, that really needs to be looked at and factored into any game review ever written. If you think they are doing anything more than using pirating as an excuse to spy on you more often, you are naive. Does pirating happen? Absolutely. Do you really think anything based on statistics is even remotely accurate? There is absolutely no way to verify this information. TPB said this has been downloaded 28979 times in the last month.. yada yada.. what the hell does that prove? Do you think each person unpacked and played the game? Do you think each download was uncorrupted? That each person was knowledgeable to even get the game up and running?
Trust nothing, and investigate the "Claims" yourself, i can guarantee you will come to a different conclusion based on the available data.
Oh and btw.. i cancelled my pre order to AC2 because of this. Ubisoft can pound sand.
You do not get a dime, and you have no recourse what so ever if your personal information is used, and absolutely zero compensation. So they can be pirated 17-1, and they are still making money over decades with your personal information. I think throughout the industry, that really needs to be looked at and factored into any game review ever written. If you think they are doing anything more than using pirating as an excuse to spy on you more often, you are naive. Does pirating happen? Absolutely. Do you really think anything based on statistics is even remotely accurate? There is absolutely no way to verify this information. TPB said this has been downloaded 28979 times in the last month.. yada yada.. what the hell does that prove? Do you think each person unpacked and played the game? Do you think each download was uncorrupted? That each person was knowledgeable to even get the game up and running?
Trust nothing, and investigate the "Claims" yourself, i can guarantee you will come to a different conclusion based on the available data.
Oh and btw.. i cancelled my pre order to AC2 because of this. Ubisoft can pound sand.
Assuming 100% of them would have actually purchased it if stealing wasn't an option they did. Another flaw in the figure as mentioned before was AC was pirated before it was released. Since it was prior to an official release there is no way of knowing how many people purchased the game after Ubi released it.
Welcome to the real world. We get stopped at sobriety checkpoints, carded at bars, and will have virtually nude pics taken of ourselves at airport detectors shortly.
And as long as people roll over because "that's just the way it is" you can expect more of these sorts of things.
Great!
most people dont know anything about DRM... they just want to play.
And that's fine until the DRM makes itself known in such a manner that it's no longer as simple as just fire up the game, play, and forget about it.
This sort of DRM being a potential case in point.
PrincessFrosty
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,905
NO, WRONG.
Ubisoft have not "lost $30 million dollars in sales from Assassin's Creed"
There is no proof anywhere that any of those illegal downloads are lost sales, they are only lost sales if people would have bought the game had there been no alternative. The idea that every pirate copy is a lost sale is completely unproveable.
This is complete rubbish, first of all sales in the first month do not represent overall sales, especially for the PC where sales aren't as aggressive in the first few months and tend to last longer.
The idea that ubisoft didn't have a following to begin with is just asinine, the fact the game had a sequel speaks volumes about the game and about Ubisoft who are still alive and successful.
None of your points negate these 2 FACTS
1) DRM doesn't stop piracy
2) DRM causes a drop in sales
For the entire length of this thread I've never yet seen these two points touched let alone refuted with anything concrete and meaningful and I know that I never will.
UBI isn't naive to think DRM will stop piracy. Knowing that game sales tend to typically spike after initial release I think all they're hoping is it's enough of an obstacle (even if short lived) during that critical initial spike to offset the drop in sales.
Put another way, if *no* DRM was used would the 'good will' that would translate into higher sales be adequate to offset what will certainly be higher piracy? I dunno, the busiest torrents tend to be focused on the newest releases.
A few things publishers need to do:
1) stop forcing devs to release an unfinished product.
2) stop releasing a product to group A one week, group B the next week, group C the next month.
3) I'm sure there's more...
But I'm not much of a gamer, but 1 & 2 lost someone some income back when Crysis came out... I had it pre-ordered, but it somehow got leaked on the 'net, and people downloading it from EA games (group A) got it before me (group B or C), and had it cracked...
It's the only game the last few years that I've really wanted to see on day 1, so I can't imagine how this is for gamers...
So, I tried it out before my copy (I had already paid for it) arrived... And I realized how unpolished and etc it was... So, I tried to play it, gave up, waited for a patch or two, which never came, then it was announced support was dropped...
So, my $60 pre-order (that I returned) turned out in the end to be a $15 grab off Ebay later...
Had the devs been allowed to release it when they wanted, they would have had my $60... Had it been released at all at the same time, they'd also still have my $60, as they'd have my money for an opened package that I now couldn't return...
But the games simply wasn't complete, and I've never bought a game on day of release (and never considered a pre-order) since...
They're wasting money on DRM when they should be spending it on more dev time... (Ignoring the DNF story...)
1) stop forcing devs to release an unfinished product.
2) stop releasing a product to group A one week, group B the next week, group C the next month.
3) I'm sure there's more...
But I'm not much of a gamer, but 1 & 2 lost someone some income back when Crysis came out... I had it pre-ordered, but it somehow got leaked on the 'net, and people downloading it from EA games (group A) got it before me (group B or C), and had it cracked...
It's the only game the last few years that I've really wanted to see on day 1, so I can't imagine how this is for gamers...
So, I tried it out before my copy (I had already paid for it) arrived... And I realized how unpolished and etc it was... So, I tried to play it, gave up, waited for a patch or two, which never came, then it was announced support was dropped...
So, my $60 pre-order (that I returned) turned out in the end to be a $15 grab off Ebay later...
Had the devs been allowed to release it when they wanted, they would have had my $60... Had it been released at all at the same time, they'd also still have my $60, as they'd have my money for an opened package that I now couldn't return...
But the games simply wasn't complete, and I've never bought a game on day of release (and never considered a pre-order) since...
They're wasting money on DRM when they should be spending it on more dev time... (Ignoring the DNF story...)
Parmenides
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 6,578
I think EA has learned this lesson (hopefully). Maybe after this round of bad sales, Ubisoft will learn too. But more likely they will probably just go console exclusive.
But I will say, I don't think the "I only download games I wouldn't buy anyways" argument justifies piracy. I guarantee you that if you found all the people who say, "I only download games I wouldn't buy anyways" and cut off their access to torrents, we'd see a surge in game sales. Sure, there are the few who will stick to their principles... they would play games less (or quit gaming altogether), but most would start shopping a little more, even if it's only a couple extra purchases per year.
Or they would find alternatives to torrents. Torrents aren't the only way to download stuff.
I think you're right that if they couldn't pirate, sales would increase, but only slightly. Maybe 5% of pirated games would have been bought if they weren't able to pirate. People would buy far less games than they would pirate. They'd actually think twice about buying a game opposed to pirating it, and after thinking twice you realise most new release games aren't worth the money.
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
You believe that if people couldn't pirate a game (we'll assume this to be true, for the sake of argument) that the sales for that game would increase by only 5% - really?
Okay, let's do the math.
According to Ubisoft, Assassin's Creed sold 40,000 copies during its first month on the PC. According to you, sales for this game, if the pirates had been unable to crack it, would've come in at 42,000 instead (a 5% increase in sales).
Interesting.
Because 700,000 people illegally copied Assassin's Creed during its first month alone. You're telling me that if those 700,000 people had been unable to copy Assassin's Creed for the PC that just 2,000 of them would have gone out and bought the game, and that 698,000 would've just walked away and not played the game?
You're entitled to your belief - but I can't agree with you here.
EDIT: And I think it's probably worth mentioning that in its first week, on the 360, Assassin's Creed sold 2.5 million copies. Seriously, if the PC version had been un-hackable, and you had said to me, based on that number, how many copies do you think will sell for the PC - I would've said, probably slightly less than one third of that number. Guess what, 700,000 is roughly one third of that number.
http://www.ubi.com/US/News/Info.aspx?nId=5017
Last edited:
SS_Wehrwolf
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
- Messages
- 632
Do you have any clue about the mindset of most pirated games and software? There are a lot of packrats out there who download it for no other reason than, well maybe i will check it out, and then do nothing with it but delete it 2 months later, never even unpack it. Then you have the number of people who dont know what they are doing who download it and screw with it and nothing happens, so they delete it and move on to something maybe easier. Of course we cant leave out the people who have problems with the download, those who find malicious software in it upon scanning, or the people who believe 100% in their updated virus scan that this is "Probably" something malicious. Then you have the people who download a few games at a time, skip half of them and just go back to playing their old stuff, or who are raiding in WoW, etc. etc..You have just factored out atleast 50% of the people who downloaded the game.
Now throw in, whos statistics are we using here for the number of people who supposedly downloaded the game? Are those COMPLETE downloads, or just active people attempting to download the game who have part of the file downloaded via bit torrent? Who the hell comes up with these figures? This is like looking at the amount of money some douchebag claims was lost due to a virus, you can NEVER, EVER, provide evidence that this money was lost.
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
Your argument doesn't measure up.
First month of sales for Assassin's Creed on the 360 = 2.5 million copies.
First month of sales for Assassin's Creed on the PC = 40,000 copies.
Why can you not see the humongous discrepancy there? Don't tell me that of the 700,000 people who pirated Assassin's Creed in the first month, only 2000 of them would have bought the game.
We can see from the 360 numbers that that absolutely would not have been the case? Who do you work for? Your logic skills suck.
Plague_Injected
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 6,621
WabeWalker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
You guys keep rattling on about these so-called loyal Ubisoft customers - what loyal customers are these? With Assassin's Creed for the PC these 'customers' were virtually non-existent - that comic strip is just dumb.
Assassin's Creed on PC came out long after the Xbox version. Most of the people who would have bought it for PC would have already bought it on Xbox or PS3. And that's only 40000 sales near release, not many people would pay full price for AC on release on PC when its already been on sale on Xbox for so long that the price had come down. I know I bought AC, but certainly not at release. You can't be a retard about how you release a game then blame piracy.
defiant007
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2006
- Messages
- 3,497
Regurgitating the same crap over and over does not give your arguments anymore credence, on each and every occasion that you have been called out you have failed to refute legitimate observations concerning the veracity of Ubi's assertions.
Firstly, it was known well in advance of the release of AC1 on PC that it was by all accounts a shit game. Ubi can thank their own ineptness at game design for that and their decision to delay the release of the PC version.
Secondly, complaining about sales for the first month of release is asinine, if not completely and utterly stupid. Those figures give zero indication as to how well AC1 sold over the life of its release on PC, and further no information is given as to whether those sales comprise digital downloads. By extrapolation, if AC1 maintained that momentum of sales, it would have sold 480,000 copies in 12 months....not bad for a shit game released 6 months late on PC.
Thirdly, AC1 did not sell 2.5 million copies in the first week on the x360 alone, it was in a period of 4 weeks and comprised sales on both the 360 and the ps3! (http://www.ubi.com/US/News/Info.aspx?nId=5017)
Fourthly, even if Ubi's claim is true that AC1 was downloaded over 700,000 (which I seriously doubt), as other users have observed there is no way to ascertain whether those are 700,000 unique downloads, and further it is impossible to determine the location of the end user. If 99% of those pirates are located in China, South East Asia or Russia, then what difference do those downloads make to Ubi's bottom line given that they unlikely fall into a demographic targeted by software companies?!
Fifthly, from recollection Ubi did not make available any demo of the PC version. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong on this point.
Sixthly, we get down to basic arguments repeated ad nauseam that a download does not, and cannot reasonably represent a lost sale w/out further information concerning the circumstances behind and rationale for the download.
Finally, this DRM like every other form of DRM ever conceived will be reverse engineered and split wide open. Ultimately the resources, money and time expended on DRM is a colossal waste and would be better directed at improving the end user experience or making the product cheaper. Or better yet, if they want to save money get rid of half the marketing department and stop wasting money on bullshit marketing campaigns which have blown up to nearly 60% of a games overall development cost (MW2 for example had a larger marketing budget than Avatar).
- Status