No CD Petition

[Locutus]

Originally posted by MadDjinn
did you download the no-CD patch from the makers of the games? likely not.

therefore you're trying to get around some very simple and basic protection illegally.

So? As long as I bought it, who cares what I do with it in the privacy of my own home? If the game makers would provide a decent alternative I wouldn't have to. Believe me, I don't enjoy browsing spyware-, virus-, porn- and ad-infested sites and programs looking for no-CD cracks...

mild inconvenience.

I've worn out 2 CD drives on my current PC (the third being well on its way) and countless of CD disks already, for a large part because of CD protection mechanisms requiring the CDs to be in the drive all the time. And publishers don't send you new CDs when their protection wears them out either, you just have to buy the game all over again. That's a lot more than a mild inconvence in my book.

Companies want to make sure that the people who are playing the game, bought their own copy. This is the only legitimate argument to make about the issue.

I don't consider bothering paying customers in a completely ineffective battle against pirates a legitimate argument, that's harassment and destruction of property if you ask me.

then there are those paying customers in the middle who need to make moral choices about what they do.

There is nothing immoral about preventing wear and tear on your precious CDs, CD drives and sanity. Saying that legitimate paying customers are in some way morally wrong for using the game the way they want to use it in the privacy of their own home is absolutely proposterous...

and if people aren't going to stop cracking the games, then it is entirely likely that we'll see more and more online pay-to-play games exist where the companies will be able to fully control who plays the game. but then they'll be robbing you blind for pay-services.

Highly unlikely, those types of systems only exist for MMORPGs and the like, noone would buy Civ5 if it required a monthly subscription to be able to play the SP game. More aggressive mechanisms only lead to boycotts that end up hurting the game makers themselves. UbiSoft's recent decision to drop StarForce was 100% the result of consumer pressure.

[MadDjinn]

Originally posted by Locutus


So? As long as I bought it, who cares what I do with it in the privacy of my own home? If the game makers would provide a decent alternative I wouldn't have to. Believe me, I don't enjoy browsing spyware-, virus-, porn- and ad-infested sites and programs looking for no-CD cracks...

The makers of the games still care. you signed a license somewhere that likely said something about not tampering with (exceptions re: open mods) the product. It's not that you a purchaser of the product is the problem if you choose to find a way around the CD requirements, but it's the 1000X more people who would not buy the game if all they needed to do was download it from somewhere for free. a 'no-cd' patch makes that very, very easy to do, especially for people who wouldn't normally consider that option.

I've worn out 2 CD drives on my current PC (the third being well on its way) and countless of CD disks already, for a large part because of CD protection mechanisms requiring the CDs to be in the drive all the time. And publishers don't send you new CDs when their protection wears them out either, you just have to buy the game all over again. That's a lot more than a mild inconvence in my book.

I actually saw one developer send out copies of their game to paying customers when their publisher had put StarForce on the CD, because it had caused issues. this was a rarity obviously. But the choice for CD protection methods is slim at best. if it's something not invasive, it's quick to hack, and massive sales are lost. If it's invasive, then people get upset, and sales are lost.

Boths paths lead to issues, but if publishers basically give up as you and the original poster effective suggest, then they may as well save their money and not produce games.

I don't consider bothering paying customers in a completely ineffective battle against pirates a legitimate argument, that's harassment and destruction of property if you ask me.

then your standards for 'harassment and destruction of property' is fairly low... A customer *must* expect and live with security features while there are people out there making it easy for people to steal. Last I checked, stealing was a 'bad' thing. We don't live in a perfect society, so somethings need to be done.

There is nothing immoral about preventing wear and tear on your precious CDs, CD drives and sanity. Saying that legitimate paying customers are in some way morally wrong for using the game the way they want to use it in the privacy of their own home is absolutely proposterous...

choosing to circumvent security features *is* a moral slip in the wrong direction. What's next? It's only proposterous to those who think it's ok.

Highly unlikely, those types of systems only exist for MMORPGs and the like, noone would buy Civ5 if it required a monthly subscription to be able to play the SP game. More aggressive mechanisms only lead to boycotts that end up hurting the game makers themselves. UbiSoft's recent decision to drop StarForce was 100% the result of consumer pressure.

nothing's unlikely. If the only way that companies could make sure that all users of their games actually bought it (ok, go for 80-90%) was to do some sort of online thing, or connection to the database (no CD's, redownloads allowed to the same computer, or something... etc) then they'll consider it. If all the Publishers and developers say that it will happen, no amount of boycotts will stop them. (since it'll only be a small % of the market that will boycott)

They will still make money from consoles.

and StarForce caused issues. it was a CD protection system that caused more damage that it was worth.

[greenday_234]

Wondering if others feel the same as you do on any given topic (a no-cd patch, in this case) is doing something that lacks substance? What then are forums for? It's not like it's the end of the world either way.

Okay I suppose your right. But my point was why do people insist on dragging out this same subject and beating a dead horse into pulp. I've heard that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. No matter what side of the isle you fall on the cd requirement is not going away. All the other solutions I've heard fall into 2 categories: 1. something that most major publishers are not going to ever do (cd patchs) or 2. is an annoying system that requires you to flip through the manual to look for an answer which I might add is far more time consuming than the issue that you guys are already complaining about.

Besides even if hell froze and the major software companies like 2k and Firaxis started putting out official "patchs" then we'd be seeing petitions to do away with the annoying patch requirement.

[armchairknight]

Originally posted by greenday_234


Okay I suppose your right. But my point was why do people insist on dragging out this same subject and beating a dead horse into pulp. I've heard that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. No matter what side of the isle you fall on the cd requirement is not going away. All the other solutions I've heard fall into 2 categories: 1. something that most major publishers are not going to ever do (cd patchs) or 2. is an annoying system that requires you to flip through the manual to look for an answer which I might add is far more time consuming than the issue that you guys are already complaining about.

Besides even if hell froze and the major software companies like 2k and Firaxis started putting out official "patchs" then we'd be seeing petitions to do away with the annoying patch requirement.

Yeah, and do the patches have to be so darn big? Can't they code in smaller words or something?

Seriously, though, about the recurring themes, we don't all visit these forums every day (or even every week) and some of us might simply miss a similar thread (or we might even be just a little oblivious sometimes ), you know?

So...I guess this means you're not going to sign the petition...eh? That's alright. We'll catch you next time.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Aro


Agreed...
Civ, Civ II, Civ III and CiV.

And SMAC

[Adagio]

No-cd petition? Sure, I'll sign it... chances of it happening is lower than me winning millions in the lottery


All the hassle with inserting the cd into the drive just to play a game, is not the worst thing about copy protection. "Often" a copy protection makes it impossible to play a legit copy, when the drive fails read the cd correct. The last game I played with a cd still in the drive, I noticed something weird in the game, making the game unplayable. A little search around the net, I found out it was because of the copy protection this weird stuff happened. After a little more search I found a no-cd crack, and finally the game worked as it was supposed to
I have no idea how often the above happens, as I never play a game with the cd in the drive anymore, but I still hear about it from time to time, where the game asks for the cd, even though it's in the drive

[pupfiction]

Some people might want to check out Game Jackal 2. I think it's on offer for about $12 or something at the moment. I think you can create small (~8meg) profiles of your games to run them without the cd. Piracy issues are averted because you make the profile by running the game with the disc in, once, then the profile is locked to your hardware.

Could be ideal for you laptop users.

By the way, i don't have it or know loads about it, so i dunno if Civ IV is definitely compatible, but thought it'd might be worth a look for some of you.

[Aro]

Originally posted by Adagio
No-cd petition? Sure, I'll sign it... chances of it happening is lower than me winning millions in the lottery

Signed, and I agree...

[Aro]

Originally posted by Zoid


And SMAC

I'm sorry, I don't know about what you're talking...

[Locutus]

Originally posted by MadDjinn
The makers of the games still care.

Why do they care? Do they lose money by it? Are they in any way disadvantaged by it? I already paid for the product. Legally they can't touch me, that license won't survive a courtroom. For one thing they would have to prove that they have somehow suffered damages from me using a no-CD crack, which of course they can't. They could if I made a no-CD crack and put it online, but just downloading one and using it as a legitimate customer in no way disadvantages a developer or publisher. That other people use it for more nefarious purposes isn't my problem...

Boths paths lead to issues, but if publishers basically give up as you and the original poster effective suggest, then they may as well save their money and not produce games.

Oh? Then how come Stardock games are selling so well?

A customer *must* expect and live with security features while there are people out there making it easy for people to steal. Last I checked, stealing was a 'bad' thing. We don't live in a perfect society, so somethings need to be done.

Why *must* I do that? Do have I have deal with this crap when I buy a car, a house, a TV? It's the game maker's problem, not mine as a customer. I don't mind them protecting their goods (I've worked in the game industry and designed commercial software myself, I share their interests), but a solution that punishes legimate customers while rewarding pirates is NOT something I must put up with.

And software piracy is hardly the same as theft. Theft means you take something away from the original owner, this is not true for software piracy. It's a bad analogy that's completely wrongly being used. Piracy and theft are two completely different things, the main things they share is that they are both illegal and morally wrong. There's nothing physically taken away with piracy and the fast majority of pirates wouldn't have bought the product if they couldn't pirate it anyway. Solutions to piracy should be aimed at increasing sales, not at reducing piracy.

choosing to circumvent security features *is* a moral slip in the wrong direction. What's next? It's only proposterous to those who think it's ok.

Then you have a messed up set of morals. You'll find that many, many people will not agree with you.

nothing's unlikely. If the only way that companies could make sure that all users of their games actually bought it (ok, go for 80-90%) was to do some sort of online thing, or connection to the database (no CD's, redownloads allowed to the same computer, or something... etc) then they'll consider it. If all the Publishers and developers say that it will happen, no amount of boycotts will stop them. (since it'll only be a small % of the market that will boycott)

No it won't, if people don't buy their games they'll go out of business. The profit margins in the game industry are minimal already, they can't afford a boycot even if it only affects their sales by 10%. It's hurt UbiSoft enough to go back to a less invasive system, other companies will expience the same if they tried.

They will still make money from consoles.

Console games are just as easy to pirate.

and StarForce caused issues. it was a CD protection system that caused more damage that it was worth.

Exactly, and so do other more invasive systems like online checks. And yet the reason UbiSoft dropped it is not because of these issues (they've been known for years, even since before UbiSoft started using Starforce), but because of customers complaning to and boycotting UbiSoft over it. There's a piece of professional graphical software out there (don't remember the name) that does just what you suggest: it recently started using online checks. Immediately a vast number of users started to either boycot the product or using cracks to get around it, because it's causing all kinds of problems (and these people are all professionals who make a living in graphical design, not teenagers and geeks who use it for casual entertainment). Customers simply will not stand for anything much more invasive than the current CD protection systems, and no anti-piracy system is uncrackable.

The fight against piracy is a battle that in the end only costs the games industry (and by extension its customers) a lot of money but it's never gonna accomplish anything. Piracy will never go away (have theft, violence or drug use ever gone away by fighting them?), it's simply a part of life. The way to fight it is by rewarding legitimate customers (like Stardock does, with goodies and frequent updates and all that), not by punishing them.

[Verrucosus]

I don't think this is hopeless at all. If I remember correctly, Alpha Centauri's original version required the CD to be in the drive, but after the game was out for some time this requirement was quietly dropped by a patch.

From what I read here - I'm too lazy (or not lazy enough?) to get one of these no-CD-thingies to spare me this minor nuisance - it doesn't seem to provide a lot of protection against illegal piracy. Maybe this is really a paternalistic feature to prevent us from playing the game at work. You know, you're working on your laptop, get stuck on something and your thoughts start to drift. If you didn't need the CD, Rome is only two clicks away and once you are in Rome ... it's just one more turn. However, even as a job-protection-feature, it's imperfect for people like me who still have Civ1, Civ2 and SMAC installed.

Finally, who else has fond memories of the quiz-style protection measures in the original versions of Civilization, Railroad Tycoon and Pirates? ("By any chance, do you know when the Silver Train arrives in Gibraltar, Mr Verrucosus?") These little tests must have been torture for software pirates who got a glimpse of a great game, but were unable to really play it.

[marvinkosh]

I don't really mind having a CD or DVD in the drive to play a game.

What really ticks me off is that it must be spun up to check that it really is that CD or DVD, and then spun down again. This promotes unnecessary wear and tear on both drive and media, leading to a progressive shortening of their lifespans.

By all means, keep the existing rubbish protection system for older drives, but have the decency to develop something a bit less primitive in conjunction with drive manufacturers. The amount of data you need for a CD check is small enough that you should be able to do it without spinning up the disc (earlier I said that using a magnetic strip would be an idea, but that is perhaps not such a good idea considering how easy it would be for the data to be accidentally erased).

Obviously it costs money to develop, but consider the opportunity cost of not innovating

[padillah]

@Locutus: I like the expansion into true theft. When car makers have to deal with thieves do they make it harder and harder for us to get into our cars? No, they give us remotes and pasive security chips in the keys. Non-invasive measures to deal with the issue.

However, copyright protection is quite extensive and pretty much amounts to "anything the publisher did not agree to do with their works". I make wedding videos and I have to be careful when I tune up a reception because I could get sued from the music the DJ is playing being on the tape. I have to take special steps to prevent complications and I have to warn the customer that, while creating a copy of my work may be rather easy, he real threat will come from the record companies when they find you have copied their songs.

I have heard stories of a videographerthat lost everything because one of the friends of a couple was a recod company big-wig and they sued him for copyright infringement for distributing a copy of their song.

It's pretty much "if the publisher didn't intend for you to use the works that way, it's infringement".

And before someone starts in on me, no profit doesn't matter one bit. You'll notice the copyrght warnings in the beginings of movies say "even infractions with no material gain". So it doesn't matter. It's Locutus' point that it's not true theft, you are not taking someTHING, you are obstructing the company's ability to make more money.

And when it comes to money, a company will do anything to protect it's money.

Tom P.

[Akaoz]

Originally posted by padillah
And when it comes to money, a company will do anything to protect it's money.

That, by itself, don't give them the moral high ground though.

Problem with debates like this is:

People confuse legality with morality, and forget that what is legal in some areas of the world is illegal in others and vice versa.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Akaoz
People confuse legality with morality, and forget that what is legal in some areas of the world is illegal in others and vice versa.

Same with morality