AfterDawn: Tech news

Amazon deleted Spore user reviews?

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 13 Sep 2008 13:52 User comments (44)

Amazon deleted Spore user reviews? Earlier this week we reported that Amazon users were slamming the blockbusters game Spore for its SecuROM DRM which only allowed 3 installations and required authentication to an EA server.
Over 2200 reviewers have given the game a 1-star rating (on a 1-to-5 scale) with most of the complaints completely against the DRM and not at the actual gameplay.

Last night and earlier this morning though, all the reviews disappeared and angry customers began slandering the company for apparently giving in. The company has said the temporary take-down was nothing more than a glitch and all the reviews are back up now.

"There's just a glitch on the site that ended up wiping those reviews clean," said Amazon.com spokesperson Tammy Hovey. "So we're working on putting them back up. I don't have any details (on what happened). But we're working on it so all the customer reviews will be back up on the site."

When asked if they reviews were taken down on purpose then put back thanks to the bad PR, Hovey added, "customers always have their opinions about all the products on our site, and we don't censor them, whether they're favorable or unfavorable."

Previous Next  

44 user comments

113.9.2008 14:48

Fecking DRM..one of the devs on Mass Effect forums said an EA suit told him that "going forward, all of our games will have SecuROM". That means Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Crysis Warhead, etc. GTAIV and Mafia 2 will probably have it as well since Bioshock had it.

That DRM really prevented those titles from being pirated, eh? ;)

213.9.2008 15:14

People will still buy the games. The suits see the numbers of downloads going on torrent sites and think of those as lost sales. Most of those downloading would never buy the game. These DRM policies are scaring away the people that would have bought the game in the first place. Pirates are going to get the game no matter what.

313.9.2008 18:11

A little translation from MBA-speak:

"Glitch" means "employee who took a few C notes from the title manufacturer, but forgot to erase the audit trail and wipe the backup."

Oh, all right.
Maybe it's just a glitch, but they seem to happen with suspicious frequency in connection with DRM protests.

413.9.2008 19:08

I think they wanted to see if anyone cared enough to notice and say something about it. Isn't that the idea behind this new future of ours to change truths to variations of truth and hope no one cares enough to stand up and say no. After all we all have a.d.d (adult deficit dis... something like that, my mind went on to something else) and as such are easy to manipulate.

513.9.2008 19:20

Originally posted by mspurloc:
A little translation from MBA-speak:

"Glitch" means "employee who took a few C notes from the title manufacturer, but forgot to erase the audit trail and wipe the backup."

Oh, all right.
Maybe it's just a glitch, but they seem to happen with suspicious frequency in connection with DRM protests.

Yep, sounded like that...

613.9.2008 19:47
jony218
Inactive

Amazon is just having some "minor" computer problems, which they fixed right away, when it was brought to there attention.

Whats the big deal anyway? didn't EA recently make a change that you can installed the game up to 5 times (instead of 3). This should be more than enough for even the most "hardcore" gamer. EA heard the complaints and remedy the situation for the customer and the "bottom line".

713.9.2008 20:18

Originally posted by jony218:
Amazon is just having some "minor" computer problems, which they fixed right away, when it was brought to there attention.

Whats the big deal anyway? didn't EA recently make a change that you can installed the game up to 5 times (instead of 3). This should be more than enough for even the most "hardcore" gamer. EA heard the complaints and remedy the situation for the customer and the "bottom line".
And you my friend are very manipulated, i should be able to install it until the disc melts to my dvd tray, There loaning you a game its not yours thats why they tell you what you can and cant do with it.

if i wanted to borrow a game i would get it from my friends, back-it up and apply a nice thing called a crack. Deviant Still makes some of the best.

813.9.2008 20:19

The limit on download is to prevent resell of used games. EA and all want to get the money, not give the original buyer some back for selling to a friend/colleague etc. This could/would effect all used game stores and employees if it is/can be done to the console games also.

913.9.2008 23:35

Originally posted by jony218:
Whats the big deal anyway? didn't EA recently make a change that you can installed the game up to 5 times (instead of 3). This should be more than enough for even the most "hardcore" gamer. EA heard the complaints and remedy the situation for the customer and the "bottom line".
That was for Red Alert 3 from what I read on AD. The problem is that if you legally buy it, you should be able to play it forever. If your computer crashes and you have to reload the game, there goes 1 of your 5 installs. If you have more than one computer, there goes more installs. If you decide to purchase a new computer, there goes another install. It's the 5 install limit that really bothers me. And any game that I find that has it, I will tell my friends and family not to buy it. I'm fine with a business that wants to make money, but the consumer has a right IMO to not be taken advantage of.

1014.9.2008 5:54
13thHouR
Inactive

Amazon.co.uk deleted over 300 negative reviews and never reinstated them, but the onslaught of notifying consumers continued, one good thing about the uk is that if there is any form of DRM on a product the customer has to be notified so a few quick letters to friends and trading standards and Amazon.co.uk had to put a response from EA in PDF format on the product page, Product details section, but Amazon.co.uk have still tried to hide this information by placing it inside a pdf and not on the page itself

the PDF is worth a read just to show how low these (EA) scum bags have sunk.

EA you will never get a penny from me again.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Electronic-Arts-...21384542&sr=8-1


Under European Law, Amazon.co.uk has a duty to inform customers about DRM on product descriptions. Indeed, so does EA!

DRM Consumer Guide -> http://www.indicare.org/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=195

Here's a quote from page 9:

Quote:
The duty to inform consumers about DRM

General consumer protection law specifies the kind of information that must be conveyed to consumers. In the context of digital content and DRM systems, sellers of goods and services have to provide all information that consumers need to make an informed decision. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:

* the fact that DRM technology is being used;
* whether this means that you can play CDs, DVDs or downloaded pieces only on a particular player device, and or with particular software;
* whether you can make copies of files or not;
* whether a product installs additional software on your computer;
* specific software or hardware requirements;
* whether the DRM monitors your behaviour;
* whether there are restricted listening time in case of online-content;
* whether you can burn a downloaded content only a certain number of times.

If the seller keeps back such information - and you make a decision that you would not have made if you had known these facts - a court could consider the behaviour of the seller impermissible.
here is a interesting link posted to the amazon.co.uk spore page and worth a peruse: http://reclaimyourgame.com/


here is a great creation from the front-page of the above link:
Quote:
We figure everyone needed to end the week on a laugh. One of the Spore players Twobit has created a creature called EA's DRM policy. The head appears to have dissappeared up it's arse. We had hysterics when we saw it, and we knew you would too..
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 14 Sep 2008 @ 5:59

1114.9.2008 6:01

Originally posted by windsong:
That DRM really prevented those titles from being pirated, eh? ;)
No but what it did do is stop the COMPLETELY LEGAL re selling

1214.9.2008 7:40
varnull
Inactive

This makes me think of the first lines in 1984

"who controls the present controls the past"
"who controls the past controls the future"

Luckily the past was near enough in this case for people to remember what was there... if they were to have left this 3 or 6 months/weeks/days the outcome would have probably been very different.

1314.9.2008 11:57

This whole EA drm scheme is ridiculous, now you can install the game 5 times instead of 3... That still doesn’t solve the underlying problems. Like many have stated before the true goal is to prevent reselling of the title.

For those who are not as technologically inclined or lazy like myself wiping the hard drive every 6 months to a year is an easier solution than trying to pluck out every pesky virus/malware or fix registry errors. Is that the best solution no but I would have to use one of my allowed installs every time. If I had two pc's I would be out of installs in 2 to 3 years and have to ASK for more.

The real question is who's really pulling the strings behind the curtain? How much money does EA need? They pump out the same sports games every year and those titles sell like hot cakes. This seems similar to the MS vista experiment "let’s see how hard and far we can push this before people get upset or even notice".

I wonder how the developers feel watching their game sales stagnate because of the company signed with. It's not up to them anymore it's all on EA and drm peddlers. Hopefully the corporate suits will get the memo and see that not only is the game not selling but this boneheaded move actually increased piracy.

The magical formula is quite simple actually: make a good game and people will buy it.

1414.9.2008 15:12

What about 10-15 years from now, when somebody wants to buy a Spore DVD and can only find used copies, only to find they've all been registered the maximum of 5 times?

Or maybe by that time EA's registration server will already be nonexistent, rendering the game completely useless without a crack.

1514.9.2008 15:54

Originally posted by AparoidX:
What about 10-15 years from now, when somebody wants to buy a Spore DVD and can only find used copies, only to find they've all been registered the maximum of 5 times?

Or maybe by that time EA's registration server will already be nonexistent, rendering the game completely useless without a crack.
Agree! I know i have gone & reinstalled C&C Red alert The original a few times! i recently (within 6 months) installed it on an older laptop for travel fun! i would be pissed if i couldn't do that case the server was gone or what not! It will have probobly been my 10th install over the years & many computer upgrades!

1614.9.2008 22:59

You know.
I have always beleived in paying for a good product.

In this situation. FUCK YOU EA. FUCK YOU.

I will not be limited on how many installs i do of a game.
i still play baldur's gate 2 from years ago. I still play diablo 2. etc.

Those games. no limit. This is in an attempt to fuck over the common user.

Well let me put it this way. Why bother buying a game when i can steal it?

1715.9.2008 2:01

Originally posted by jony218:
Amazon is just having some "minor" computer problems, which they fixed right away, when it was brought to there attention.

Whats the big deal anyway? didn't EA recently make a change that you can installed the game up to 5 times (instead of 3). This should be more than enough for even the most "hardcore" gamer. EA heard the complaints and remedy the situation for the customer and the "bottom line".
Remedy? The only thing i can think of that they would have remedied is...oh wait thats gonna be nothing...i cant even count the amount of old games that i have reinstalled five times or greater...yes reinstalled.

It will be dark times when reinstalling becomes a thing of the past. corporations will go out of business (EA), less and less games will be made due to the "pirate factor" and the game industry will have to start again in the dark ages...you know like the consumer actually owning the game they bought...

Ok, maybe not that dramatic but EA deserves to belly up after this shit their trying to pull. Hopefully this serves as a great example as what not to do.

1815.9.2008 5:35

Sad fact is, average users won't know about this whole DRM crap until it slaps them in the face in a couple of years when they try to install and play that classic they loved so much back in the late 00's.

I've gone back and played loads of older games for my pc and usually the biggest problem is getting it to play on newer operating systems.

Sad fact is, EA won't feel a dent in their profits until people boycott them - since profits are the only language they speak, and that includes console games too for them to take notice, otherwise they will just claim people don't want to play pc games anymore, or piracy killed the platform off. But - nobody will want to skip a version of crysis or fifa to send a message to them, which is sad really, because they will just carry on doing what they are doing.

1915.9.2008 8:43

Your all missing one thing. If you read the small print which accompanies the game i'm sure there is a part which says "this product is the sole property of EA Games" which means you are only leasing the game from them.

Also when you buy the game in disc format you get exactly the same as if it were a digital download which means EA saves money by not having to change authentication between the two types.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 15 Sep 2008 @ 8:47

2015.9.2008 11:01

Originally posted by Bradderss:
Your all missing one thing. If you read the small print which accompanies the game i'm sure there is a part which says "this product is the sole property of EA Games" which means you are only leasing the game from them.

Also when you buy the game in disc format you get exactly the same as if it were a digital download which means EA saves money by not having to change authentication between the two types.
Yes - as with all software, the creators are not selling you the software (source code/ownership) when you buy a game, they are selling you a license to use the software, and it used to be that that licenses were open ended timewise in games. It's been done that way since day one with games, but now it's changing with people like WoW and other online games selling subscriptions.

But if EA insist on using the rental model instead of the license model via their DRM authentication using servers that wont be active in 5 years time I'm betting) then they should give time scales until software can no longer authenticate, on the front of the pack, so you know what you are paying for, and clearly label the other restrictions on the box too (activation limits). Companies like EA are changing the PC game model of buying a dvd/cd and legally being able to use that at your own leisure for as long as it lasts - they are essentially now pushing the rental model without making it clear that you are no longer buying the same thing you were buying 3 years ago. That's the issue here - I'm guessing if they licensed the game using a subscription model of £5 a year they would sell tons, even though the restrictions would apply, if not be worse... but they are selling it for £25 up front, and not telling you how long you can use it for or how many times you can install it before it becomes annoying to install it (phone calls are very inconvenient when lines are open 9-5, and you are trying to play at 2am).

2115.9.2008 13:50

On the front of the box should be a warning label that says the game is a rental. There also needs an expiration date printed clearly.

2215.9.2008 14:18

Originally posted by BludRayne:
On the front of the box should be a warning label that says the game is a rental. There also needs an expiration date printed clearly.
agree, but not only that, also usage limitations. Too bad it wont happen, because that would force them to lower their prices...too bad no one told them if they lower the prices demand will raise, more volume will be sold and it will make up for itself and then some.

Seriously if that were to happen...i dont know say the price of a game was reduced to $10 for three installs...who is going to bother pirating a $10 game...im sure there are people out there that would, but it would not be me, or even the majority of the public i would imagine.

2315.9.2008 14:21
varnull
Inactive

People will still look for the cracked versions.. because they offer unlimited installs.. they are a better product without stupid pointless restrictions.

2415.9.2008 14:46

Originally posted by varnull:
People will still look for the cracked versions.. because they offer unlimited installs.. they are a better product without stupid pointless restrictions.
Agreed, then some With a crack comes, No-CD/DVD patches, and when broken enough CD-keys.

Corporations Only care about total revenue, As EA is a Corporate Entity which snatches up development teams, for there own gain. im sure most Developers Would rather not cripple there game with this stuff,but thats no longer there call.

2515.9.2008 15:13

Originally posted by varnull:
People will still look for the cracked versions.. because they offer unlimited installs.. they are a better product without stupid pointless restrictions.
true, but with a $10 price tag it aims at 2 types of consumers, the ones who play it through and are done with it, and the people who want replay value later down the road, whether they buy another copy to support the game manufacturer and the developers that put in long hours to come up with the final product, or they get shortchanged and a crack applied

You think someone would crack a $10 game, i mean...how many bargain bin games at game stop do you see crazily seeded on the bit torrents, with the argument that bargain bin games are old set aside, people still play them, proof of which was the several post of the old C&C series earlier.


Originally posted by dxr88:

Corporations Only care about total revenue, As EA is a Corporate Entity which snatches up development teams, for there own gain. im sure most Developers Would rather not cripple there game with this stuff,but thats no longer there call.

true, but isnt that a goal for everyone, making money? If there's no profit, whats the point?

I dont know about you but i sure dont go to work for my health, or out of the goodness of my heart...its for that paycheck.


BTW: i am using the $10 mark as merely a hypothetical situation which was explained earlier up...people actively reading the post will know this already but i can already foresee someone questioning my numbers.

I am Lord Bladerzor.

2615.9.2008 15:43

Quote:
true, but isnt that a goal for everyone, making money? If there's no profit, whats the point?

I dont know about you but i sure dont go to work for my health, or out of the goodness of my heart...its for that paycheck.
Indeed, but if you where aware of the way almost all the development teams where attained, your opinion would change. Whens the last time you played a Game that wasn't Part of Microsoft Studio's, Sony Computer Entertainment's, Or EA Games Franchise.

I think of it like a Arm's Race, Those 3 Companies Are Expanding at a really fast pace. all 3 of them think alike (How can we Screw The Consumer why'll getting a nice fat check)

those three Cooperate Entity's will eventually have a good 90% of all development teams, 3rd party or not.

2715.9.2008 16:32

Quote:
I think of it like a Arm's Race, Those 3 Companies Are Expanding at a really fast pace. all 3 of them think alike (How can we Screw The Consumer why'll getting a nice fat check)

those three Cooperate Entity's will eventually have a good 90% of all development teams, 3rd party or not.
Yeah, the bigger studio's suits are like that - but there are still a good number of startup's/independants that are producing some decent games... and I'm pretty sure the majority of the developers themselves are doing it because they love gaming, development in games industry is cut throat, the only way you can survive in it is if you love it, long hours and job insecurity, not best mix... although they do get enough for it. Got offered a development job once for a gaming company once, nice pay packet, but I liked having a social life outside work! ;)

I can see where you're coming from though - last pc games I played were Crysis, GoW and Sim Societies - I think that's 2 EA's, and one sponsored by M$... although I tend to spend most of my time on the 360 now because I'm sick of all the extra bumph and drm they stick on with the games, plus m$ forcing Vista only releases on studio's now! :(

2815.9.2008 17:54

Any peogram that u buy an original copy of that has a 3 or limited installation is not worth your money. i can understand if its bootlegged or something but if u buy legit then u should have no restrictions and if the reviews are 1 star it must b worth that poor rating.

2916.9.2008 23:01

Originally posted by DXR88:
Quote:
true, but isnt that a goal for everyone, making money? If there's no profit, whats the point?

I dont know about you but i sure dont go to work for my health, or out of the goodness of my heart...its for that paycheck.
Indeed, but if you where aware of the way almost all the development teams where attained, your opinion would change. Whens the last time you played a Game that wasn't Part of Microsoft Studio's, Sony Computer Entertainment's, Or EA Games Franchise.

I think of it like a Arm's Race, Those 3 Companies Are Expanding at a really fast pace. all 3 of them think alike (How can we Screw The Consumer why'll getting a nice fat check)

those three Cooperate Entity's will eventually have a good 90% of all development teams, 3rd party or not.
correct me if i am wrong, but you are questioning my opinion that all people want to make money?

If anything your, statement would only strengthen my opinion. The 3 companies you name of want to have a sole ownership over the industry.

Once again, correct me if i am wrong, but i would imply that that is because they want to make more money?

I am Lord Bladerzor.

3017.9.2008 2:16

like i said EA is a box, within this box is a group of development teams that where once there own company, acquired by EA do to bankruptcy, selling out. EA the box, now controls how there games are marketed.

Some developers have no want for drm to be on there product, but EA looks at the developers and goes who the hell are you, get back to work.

EA wants money alright, how much of that revenue really goes to the developers, probably about 20%-the rest goes to EA.

MS studio's, Sony entertainment, and EA. all are like prison for developers more than anything.

there in lies the problem, those three company's exist to do one thing, crush any small developments teams dreams, by stifling the market.

MS studio's is like Warner.
Sony entertainmentis like Loews (MGM).
EA is comparable to Paramount Pictures.

its as plain as ice, there trying to conform gaming into the next big five. they destroyed the Movie industries. now they want to destroy gaming.

give it 5 years and gaming, will be referred to the gaming industries.

and its always about the money, devs don't see there worth.

3118.9.2008 21:35

which i never objected to any of those things, i had merely proposed a solution that would allow for the drm, yet still make sense for people to buy the product.

as for developers...last i heard they make $70,000+ a year on average
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18406129/#storyContinued
Its an old article but still from a major news source

when you compare that in ratio to a 12.5 billion dollar industry, it sure dont sound like much, but think of how many people were involved, all of them making a very healthy 5 digit figure.

On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people, there is much more in the computer industry than just video game development. If developers are being treated so badly, why aren't they pursuing other computer related fields.


I am Lord Bladerzor.

3219.9.2008 6:50

Originally posted by DXR88:
like i said EA is a box, within this box is a group of development teams that where once there own company, acquired by EA do to bankruptcy, selling out. EA the box, now controls how there games are marketed.

Some developers have no want for drm to be on there product, but EA looks at the developers and goes who the hell are you, get back to work.

EA wants money alright, how much of that revenue really goes to the developers, probably about 20%-the rest goes to EA.

MS studio's, Sony entertainment, and EA. all are like prison for developers more than anything.

there in lies the problem, those three company's exist to do one thing, crush any small developments teams dreams, by stifling the market.

MS studio's is like Warner.
Sony entertainmentis like Loews (MGM).
EA is comparable to Paramount Pictures.

its as plain as ice, there trying to conform gaming into the next big five. they destroyed the Movie industries. now they want to destroy gaming.

give it 5 years and gaming, will be referred to the gaming industries.

and its always about the money, devs don't see there worth.
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.

-------------------------------------
XXXxxx Only The Strong Survive xxxXXX
-------------------------------------

3319.9.2008 8:56

Well...all I know is that I'm the type that likes to go back and replay games sometimes after a few years and I think that accepting this DRM would set a dangerous precedent. I also reload computers from time to time for various reasons and uninstall games to make room for new games. From the commercials, Spore doesn't look good enough for me to want to replay over the years, but it was interesting enough for me to consider buying.

The DRM was definately the deciding factor not to buy it.

3419.9.2008 9:13

Originally posted by IguanaC64:
... The DRM was definately the deciding factor not to buy it.
Same here... shame really because the game looked quite fun.

3519.9.2008 11:49
13thHouR
Inactive

Originally posted by AtiLaw:
Originally posted by IguanaC64:
... The DRM was definately the deciding factor not to buy it.
Same here... shame really because the game looked quite fun.
In part i agree but the DRM is easily bypassed, what i disagree and will boycott all titles with this anti-consumer approach is that the DRM restriction is being censored by Amazon and other retailers and EA have not put any of this information of the retail box, all that is stated in the UK is;

"INTERNET CONNECTION, PERIODIC ONLINE AUTHENTICATION AND END USER AGREEMENT REQUIRED TO PLAY"

This is just disgusting and deceptive, IMHO this is "bait and switch"

3619.9.2008 21:57

Quote:
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.
Never said anything about developers being dumb, but hey if thats what you wanna read into by all means go ahead.

So who do you develop for? You must really like this drm there installing on your games, huh?
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 19 Sep 2008 @ 22:04

3720.9.2008 5:20

Originally posted by DXR88:
Quote:
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.
Never said anything about developers being dumb, but hey if thats what you wanna read into by all means go ahead.

So who do you develop for? You must really like this drm there installing on your games, huh?
You implied they were dumb by claiming they were basically bullied into accepting things like drm, and like little programmer sheep could be herded and exploited by the industry - helplessly being bought against their will by the big software houses, and it just doesn't happen like that.

Can't say who I program for, and I absolutely hate DRM - I stopped buying music when Sony started shipping CD's with rootkits and digital costs twice the amount, I stopped buying DVD's when I had to sit through unskippable piracy warning adverts - even though it's a legit DVD, and I've stopped buying games that ship with unfair restrictions on them, like spore has.

The problem is that they won't give up on DRM in games, but they also don't want to change their pricing model - and they can't keep selling games at the same price in the same packaging, but put unfair restrictions on how you can use it... people will react.

-------------------------------------
XXXxxx Only The Strong Survive xxxXXX
-------------------------------------

3820.9.2008 7:20
13thHouR
Inactive

Originally posted by AtiLaw:
The problem is that they won't give up on DRM in games, but they also don't want to change their pricing model - and they can't keep selling games at the same price in the same packaging, but put unfair restrictions on how you can use it... people will react.
See here is the thing, people hate DRM once they either learn of the restrictions imposed, or are already aware.

People then will stop purchasing their malware infested creations and they lose money.

There is then two outcomes, the game industry starts to see lower revenue being taken, because people are either fed up and choosing to pirate, or just not purchase their empty restrictive licences.

So the companies can decide whether to continue to screw over the customers or they can listen and change just as the music industry has with digital downloads. If people can make enough noise, which will start to filter down to ill or misinformed people, the corporations will have no option.


Amazon and EA are both guilty here of being anti-consumer corporate pigs because of "Guilt By Omission".

Both should inform customers of the restrictive DRM but both failed, on the retail boxes all that is stated is;

"INTERNET CONNECTION, PERIODIC ONLINE AUTHENTICATION AND END USER AGREEMENT REQUIRED TO PLAY"

And the EULA can't be read until you open the game an go to install it, so by this time you are too late to be able to return the software.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 20 Sep 2008 @ 7:23

3920.9.2008 20:30

Originally posted by AtiLaw:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Quote:
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.
Never said anything about developers being dumb, but hey if thats what you wanna read into by all means go ahead.

So who do you develop for? You must really like this drm there installing on your games, huh?
You implied they were dumb by claiming they were basically bullied into accepting things like drm, and like little programmer sheep could be herded and exploited by the industry - helplessly being bought against their will by the big software houses, and it just doesn't happen like that.

Can't say who I program for, and I absolutely hate DRM - I stopped buying music when Sony started shipping CD's with rootkits and digital costs twice the amount, I stopped buying DVD's when I had to sit through unskippable piracy warning adverts - even though it's a legit DVD, and I've stopped buying games that ship with unfair restrictions on them, like spore has.

The problem is that they won't give up on DRM in games, but they also don't want to change their pricing model - and they can't keep selling games at the same price in the same packaging, but put unfair restrictions on how you can use it... people will react.
it was never implied or even said, by either dxr88 or myself that developers are stupid, never once did either of this said.

maybe you should read my post again

Quote:
which i never objected to any of those things, i had merely proposed a solution that would allow for the drm, yet still make sense for people to buy the product.

as for developers...last i heard they make $70,000+ a year on average
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18406129/#storyContinued
Its an old article but still from a major news source

when you compare that in ratio to a 12.5 billion dollar industry, it sure dont sound like much, but think of how many people were involved, all of them making a very healthy 5 digit figure.

On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people, there is much more in the computer industry than just video game development. If developers are being treated so badly, why aren't they pursuing other computer related fields.

ok if you take a deep breathe and read it slowly...
it says "On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people,"

ANYTHING BUT stupid...doesnt sound like there is any implication that they are studid, if anything they are very smart people.

so, you seriously dont have any clue in what your writing, or are you just guessing? perhaps, you are just here to create a stir.

I am Lord Bladerzor.

4020.9.2008 20:47

The funny thing is if EA really care there will probably be law suits and stuff going out to people who download games illegally and they can charge an exstortionate amount because of it, as is the latest trend in the uk, £300 for a game which cost like £12 to buy. This means that they will have increased revenue for sueing the public who disagree with DRM.

Unfortunatly EA wants to make money and protect its product, where as the people who actually sit down and make it just want to make a great game.

I can't wait for the next sales figures to see how badly the DRM has penalized EA.

I for one am glad i spotted something saying about the DRM as i was going to buy the game but because of it i'm not. Surely EA realise that because they are over protective of there game they are losing out on alot of £30 - £40 sales, for something stupid.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 20 Sep 2008 @ 20:49

4121.9.2008 4:38

Originally posted by Bladerz05:
Originally posted by AtiLaw:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Quote:
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.
Never said anything about developers being dumb, but hey if thats what you wanna read into by all means go ahead.

So who do you develop for? You must really like this drm there installing on your games, huh?
You implied they were dumb by claiming they were basically bullied into accepting things like drm, and like little programmer sheep could be herded and exploited by the industry - helplessly being bought against their will by the big software houses, and it just doesn't happen like that.

Can't say who I program for, and I absolutely hate DRM - I stopped buying music when Sony started shipping CD's with rootkits and digital costs twice the amount, I stopped buying DVD's when I had to sit through unskippable piracy warning adverts - even though it's a legit DVD, and I've stopped buying games that ship with unfair restrictions on them, like spore has.

The problem is that they won't give up on DRM in games, but they also don't want to change their pricing model - and they can't keep selling games at the same price in the same packaging, but put unfair restrictions on how you can use it... people will react.
it was never implied or even said, by either dxr88 or myself that developers are stupid, never once did either of this said.

maybe you should read my post again

Quote:
which i never objected to any of those things, i had merely proposed a solution that would allow for the drm, yet still make sense for people to buy the product.

as for developers...last i heard they make $70,000+ a year on average
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18406129/#storyContinued
Its an old article but still from a major news source

when you compare that in ratio to a 12.5 billion dollar industry, it sure dont sound like much, but think of how many people were involved, all of them making a very healthy 5 digit figure.

On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people, there is much more in the computer industry than just video game development. If developers are being treated so badly, why aren't they pursuing other computer related fields.

ok if you take a deep breathe and read it slowly...
it says "On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people,"

ANYTHING BUT stupid...doesnt sound like there is any implication that they are studid, if anything they are very smart people.

so, you seriously dont have any clue in what your writing, or are you just guessing? perhaps, you are just here to create a stir.
Not once did I claim you said they were stupid, infact, I was even sort of trying to back you up because I had read your posts, which I thought were pretty spot on.

I do like to create a stir though. :) I think I just got spurred on by some things DXR88 was saying, like throwing made up figures of "only" 20% revenue going to developers showing how hard done to they are, or that M$Studio, EA etc are prisons for developers.

One bit he did write made me laugh though, because it sort of happens to most developers at one time or other when upper management get involved - in any industry, so is most accurate thing he said, and that was:

Quote:
Some developers have no want for drm to be on there product, but EA looks at the developers and goes who the hell are you, get back to work.
Add to that the sound of a cracking whip at the end and a muffled scream, and it's my office on a Friday morning! ;)

-------------------------------------
XXXxxx Only The Strong Survive xxxXXX
-------------------------------------

4221.9.2008 17:09

Folks,

Again I reiterate,

The folks that spent all the hard work and time, energy, blood, sweat, tears and effort have all been paid or were given another game to work on or just simply given the pink slip.

Corporations have 'paid them'. The corporations are the ones looking for the bloated paycheck off the skins of their slaves.

Talk about, "The more things change, the more they stay the same..."

This is the way things have been done for eons. Someone busts their ass to make something, a fat cat comes in and buys it cheap, then does no more work than to place it on a shelf and wait for some one to pay 3x's the original value.

The only 'real' people being hurt by piracy is the bastards that didn't do a days work at all getting something to market.

THAT, is the cold hard facts of business.

Peace
.
PS, I forgot to mention. Couple of folks mention that there is a big push on technology once purchased by a conglomerate. That isn't completely the truth. Look at the music industry. A young group hungry to make it in the big leagues gets eaten up by the corporation. Been going on for decades with no end in site. Why do you think groups never make it past 2 albums.

The original fire and spontaneity is bought and forced to market only to be squashed out under ridiculous time constraints and forced creativity. The young company folds and the corporation states it as a huge loss on their tax budget to the shareholders and rake in a huge tax break.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 21 Sep 2008 @ 17:18

4322.9.2008 17:50

Originally posted by AtiLaw:
Originally posted by Bladerz05:
Originally posted by AtiLaw:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Quote:
You seriously have no clue about the industry - do you even know any developers who work in the industry, or are you just guessing how it all works? I know people in the industry, I'm also a developer - and trust me, they get a hell of alot more money than other developers.

And yes, the gaming industry (and don't fool yourself, it's been a big industry for years) is consolidating into larger development companies, and yes, there exist some shady guys in suits pushing technology they don't understand fully, like DRM, but the developers are not helpless victims here - they want to protect their investment as much as the next guy. Infact, there are companies now not even developing for the PC because they can't figure a good way to stop piracy, so it's easier and they get more money just targeting consoles.

So don't kid yourself, they arn't helpless, they arn't stupid - and they are not the victims. Most startups actually want to be acquired by larger companies, some dream for it - it's a good way to get a massive cash-injection to push the boundaries in your game, or often the only way you can afford to finish making it as it's not cheap to create games. Unlike other types of companies you don't get to earn money while you are developing a game, so for years you are actually just draining money and resources, in the hope that when you sell it will cover those costs, and some startups never finish their game, because the costs are just to high - either they underestimate the development costs, or they just never had the money to begin with.

It takes massive resources to create modern pc games, and the only people who have those resources are massive companies or extremely rich startups. I'm not talking about some mario brothers 3 clone written in flash with maybe a single designer for the drawings, and an engineer for the nuts and bolts, I'm talking next gen stuff like Crysis, that take massive teams of people over years to create. Or are you proposing developers should stop making games like COD4, GoW, Civilisation and Halo, and instead work years without pay living in their parents house for several years, because you don't like the EA stamp or MSStudios stamp on your game?? Grow up... DRM is bad, but only when they take the p*ss with the restrictions and are not upfront with it all - which is what's happening here at the minute.
Never said anything about developers being dumb, but hey if thats what you wanna read into by all means go ahead.

So who do you develop for? You must really like this drm there installing on your games, huh?
You implied they were dumb by claiming they were basically bullied into accepting things like drm, and like little programmer sheep could be herded and exploited by the industry - helplessly being bought against their will by the big software houses, and it just doesn't happen like that.

Can't say who I program for, and I absolutely hate DRM - I stopped buying music when Sony started shipping CD's with rootkits and digital costs twice the amount, I stopped buying DVD's when I had to sit through unskippable piracy warning adverts - even though it's a legit DVD, and I've stopped buying games that ship with unfair restrictions on them, like spore has.

The problem is that they won't give up on DRM in games, but they also don't want to change their pricing model - and they can't keep selling games at the same price in the same packaging, but put unfair restrictions on how you can use it... people will react.
it was never implied or even said, by either dxr88 or myself that developers are stupid, never once did either of this said.

maybe you should read my post again

Quote:
which i never objected to any of those things, i had merely proposed a solution that would allow for the drm, yet still make sense for people to buy the product.

as for developers...last i heard they make $70,000+ a year on average
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18406129/#storyContinued
Its an old article but still from a major news source

when you compare that in ratio to a 12.5 billion dollar industry, it sure dont sound like much, but think of how many people were involved, all of them making a very healthy 5 digit figure.

On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people, there is much more in the computer industry than just video game development. If developers are being treated so badly, why aren't they pursuing other computer related fields.

ok if you take a deep breathe and read it slowly...
it says "On top of that, (i think you would agree) developers are anything but stupid people,"

ANYTHING BUT stupid...doesnt sound like there is any implication that they are studid, if anything they are very smart people.

so, you seriously dont have any clue in what your writing, or are you just guessing? perhaps, you are just here to create a stir.
Not once did I claim you said they were stupid, infact, I was even sort of trying to back you up because I had read your posts, which I thought were pretty spot on.

I do like to create a stir though. :) I think I just got spurred on by some things DXR88 was saying, like throwing made up figures of "only" 20% revenue going to developers showing how hard done to they are, or that M$Studio, EA etc are prisons for developers.

One bit he did write made me laugh though, because it sort of happens to most developers at one time or other when upper management get involved - in any industry, so is most accurate thing he said, and that was:

Quote:
Some developers have no want for drm to be on there product, but EA looks at the developers and goes who the hell are you, get back to work.
Add to that the sound of a cracking whip at the end and a muffled scream, and it's my office on a Friday morning! ;)
well then, that would be my mistake, and i owe you an apology for my lashing out.

things being cleared up, agreed

I am Lord Bladerzor.

4423.9.2008 5:54

Agreed! :)


-------------------------------------
XXXxxx Only The Strong Survive xxxXXX
-------------------------------------

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive