Online Activation: What're your thoughts?

[LJF 0]

So, to get straight to the point: does anyone know if ArmA II will have online activation?

It really annoys me when a game has online activation: with a game downloaded from the internet (like Mount and Blade for example) I can understand (since it's the only real method of copy protection available), but when I spend 100AU on a game from a shop, I expect to install and play it, not have to go online and get permission to play it.

In a recent video it was mentioned that A2 will be using SecuROM, I don't really know a lot about it myself, but I hope that doesn't mean what I fear it does.

In my opinion, online activation/DRM doesn't do anything at all to stop piracy other than the average user giving it to a friend/playing with a brother etc. No matter what protection is used the game will be cracked by the major groups anyway. All it ends up doing is annoying the end user, and since it's they (not the pirates) who are the ones funding the actual developers, I think it's rather odd to be imposing restrictions and headaches on them.

I really do hope A2 doesn't do anything like that, I own every single game/expansion by BI so far (with the unfortunate exception of QG) and thoroughly intend to buy A2 upon release date.

Also, there is a poll, for those who wish to express their opionions on the matter - and of course, as everyone knows, polls are fun ;).

There is an old thread from 2002 or something but I thought it was a bit dated:D

[mant3z 1]

I don't need another DVD's

I don't need another BOX

I don't need extra stuff, instructions, maps etc. which are goes sooner or later to the trash.

Everything O-line: YES!

[Jorge.PT 10]

For me it all depends on what means are used to activate. If it's with 3rd party software like Steam, I'm against it.

[celery 8]

Only for multiplayer.

[wipman 1]

Hi, i don't like that online activation thing; but if the ArmA2 gonna use securom, i won't buy

it and i'll tell anyone that i know to do the same. The securom sucks. Let's C ya

P.S: I do want manuals, the box & a DVD to install/reinstall directly when i want or need

instead have to download again the X.Gb that the game may take, wich is slower that

don't be that lazy and laid and take the DVD and put it into the drive. Some people take

care of the game's boxes, their CDs/DvDs, their manuals etc; i care for what i pay.

[Balschoiw 0]

Don´t care about mechanism, unless it´s not starforce. Restrictive online activation ( only 3 installations possible and such) is nonsense. Also keep in mind that companies sometimes do not exist forever. This could also mean that if BIS for any reason goes bancrupt or is bought by another campany it could mean that you can´t install or play your game anymore. There are really old games that I still play and the comapnies that have made them do not exist anymore. In that case it would leave me with a DVD I paid for but can never again use. Another point are the Up/Downstream problems some may face with automatic versioncheckers that do install updates automatically. The patches get bigger and bigger while in some areas there is no or little bandwidth connections available. Those users are doomed if they have to download huge patches.

Just my thoughts.

[Jorge.PT 10]

Don´t care about mechanism, unless it´s not starforce.

Oh boy, I didn't remmenber starf***, I think BI would never want to do business with those guys. I hope.

[kegetys 2]

if:

- It works without an extra application running (Steam) or some junk that tries to hide itself from you into the depths of the OS (SecuROM, Starforce)

- There's an unlimited number of total activations you can use (ie. you get new activations monthly or weekly)

- When the game ages the protection is removed to ensure the game works in the future

Then it is OK for me. Live for Speed has a good system for example: It is entirely contained in the game code itself, and you can unlock it basically twice per week for as long as you like (ie. you have two unlocks, which are reset every friday back to two if you used them).

Having only a pre-set amount of unlocks is a definate no-buy for me, even if its ArmA 2.

[bravo 6 0]

I completely agree with Balschoiw.

I want my DVD box (with respective key) for good memories like i still have OFP box's so i can install it when ever i want.

[LJF 0]

But does anyone know if ArmA2 will have online activation?

As for the debate, I found this article to be very interesting. It also gave me hope that more developers might come to the same conclusions.

"http://www.positech.co.uk/talkingtopirates.html"

Some companies however, such as EA, without a doubt, will continue this war against piracy, though I feel they are only fueling the problem. In particular, and one method which really disturbed me, was the proposition to make consumers activate the game once every 10 days. Although eventually removed, the intention was still there.

Having only a pre-set amount of unlocks is a definate no-buy for me, even if its ArmA 2.

Definitely. Well, I'll even go with ordinary online activation if the game is distributed via the internet.

However, if I buy a game, then I don't see how making me activate online stems piracy. For example, Spore (by the infamous EA), was ranked as the #1 most pirated game of 2008 despite the anti-piracy measures used. So, millions of illegal downloads that cause the user no problems and which are easier to use than the versions that are attained legitimately ... I fail to see how this is a good policy.

Internet activation for games distributed over the internet, maybe, but not for hard-copy DVDs.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Is there a serious reason for any kind of online activation in games if someone likes to play missions offline and use editor/tools to create sth? Or is more for data mining and trading??

[Nazul 10]

I really dont care so much if it has online activation but one thing i do care about is install limits. Looking back i must've installed Opflash 10-15 times over the years over the 3 totally different pc's that I owned and played it on. Games like Spore only have a limit of 3 installs!!! Instant use-by date.

On a different note, i'd love to get a refund for Empire Total War, I've had it for 2months and played it about 10hrs all up, continuous CTD really pissed me off. Its absolute garbage the way they released such untested game, but i cant because the key is linked to my steam accnt...

[NeMeSiS 11]

I dont care about online activation as long as i can do it as often as i want. If there are limited installation possibilities i will consider not buy ArmA2.

EDIT: Like above, i reinstalled my games countless of times in the last few years. I would have had to buy i dont know how many extra copies and that is unreasonable.

[De_little_Bubi 1]

big NO for general online registration from my site (registration for online play (not lan) ok )

looks like you guys have internet everywhere and everytime.

maybe this little situation: You are on a lan party (mostly there isn't internet connection), ArmA2 isnt installed but you have the bag of cds. You found some guys who wants to play ArmA2 and you have to install it...

another fact against online registration is the instability of our economy. who can garanty me that there are will be registration server in 10 years? nobody, thats still the truth

[alef 0]

This is what I think happens:

* It's up to the distributor choosing a "copy protection" mechanism.

* BI should be forced in the contract with him to agree that mechanism, like if it were a kind of insurance for the distributor itself.

* BI will have different builds of the executables for each "copy protection" system imposed by each distributor. This should be the reason behind the inital ArmA1 patches being so many.

* BI have essentially no power deciding a "copy protection" system, for what above, unless they sell their game directly.

* It should be only a matter of contracts BI have signed, or are going to be, for their core business.

* Such kind of polls/question should be directed to distributors, not developers. Having opinions here remains opinions, that are however good.

[Jorge.PT 10]

This is what I think happens:

* It's up to the distributor choosing a "copy protection" mechanism.

* BI should be forced in the contract with him to agree that mechanism, like if it were a kind of insurance for the distributor itself.

* BI will have different builds of the executables for each "copy protection" system imposed by each distributor. This should be the reason behind the inital ArmA1 patches being so many.

* BI have essentially no power deciding a "copy protection" system, for what above, unless they sell their game directly.

* It should be only a matter of contracts BI have signed, or are going to be, for their core business.

* Such kind of polls/question should be directed to distributors, not developers. Having opinions here remains opinions, that are however good.

Alef but even if is the distributor who decides the protection, BI as capacity to negotiate another.

[Deadfast 43]

I'd be nice if sources are stated with such important discussion.

It's from the latest video I translated - the

with Jan Pražák.

Transcript:

Interviewer: What about the necesarity to activate the game or installation limit? Do you plan anything like that?

Jan Pražák: Usually people ask from the fear of StarForce. Even though I personally had no problems with it in ARMA 1 we decided there will be no StarForce in the end. We will use SecuROM, which speaks for itself. That means it is needed to activate the game, you need to have an original copy. That's what you need.

[Placebo 29]

I'm going to move this to ArmA2 Suggestions as it seems more fitting, lots of publishers with lots of decisions to make as to how to protect/distribute ArmA2.

As frustrating as it can be for some people there's not one single world wide publisher, you do at least have far much options as the consumer as to how you will buy ArmA2 and in which format ;)

[Deadfast 43]

I'd also like to state my personal opinion.

Personally I think copy protections are completely useless - they will be cracked eventually so it's just the honest customers who get annoyed by them in the end.

However in the light of the fact we could also be stuck with StarForce a part of me is actually happy...

BTW, with the way distribution works the video is probably only directly relevant to the IDEA Games version (Czech Rep. and Slovakia).

The other publishers may choose their own protections. However even there SecuROM seems likely (most used protection ATM).

[Undeceived 392]

but if the ArmA2 gonna use securom, i won't buy

it

Something tells me not to believe you... ;)

But nevermind. :)

[twisted 128]

i don't mind online activation. but do not limit the number of activations - i will pay good money for a good game that i want to play unlimited times no matter how many years go by or how many time i upgrade my computer.

case in point - i have gone through 3 graphics cards, 2 pcs and 2 motherbaord/cpu upgrades since arma came out.

thanks to BIS smart patching and non-intrusive copy protection i have been able to play arma throughout. and believe me arma is the only game i have played consistently since it came out.

[mr.g-c 6]

Online Activation is total control - i'm fully against it!

Legal users getting felt like being suspicious or something, like if there is no "benefit for the doubt", in other words you are getting generally considered as guilty for being a "software-thief" and you have to prove the company then that its different, by online activation whenever your hardware changes and stuff....

I always wonder why software companies are so blindfolded and using this kind of stuff/tracking, how can anyone support this growing big-brother at all?!

It were so far only the super-greedy companies like the one from GTA4 or HL2, where they invested like 100million+ into development and want to have at least that as return...

But now that also BIS will use it, is really sad.... i thought they were really independent and/or "different"....

And like Deadfast said, Copy protection for the medium they are bruned on are useless. They are cracked within days and only cause problems for the legal buyer.

And:

What can software thiefs do anyway without a proper cd-key? I say they can do Nothing important....they get no patches, can not online play = game useless = delete from disk... and thats good so!

[cole 0]

As someone already said over here, as long as it isn't StarForce (or a 3rd party application like Steam, but used only for ArmA2), I don't really care what protection will be used.

The only protection I ever had issues with was CrapForce.

[Wolfrug 0]

Online activation seems pointless if they've got SecuRom + CD key anyway (which, frankly, is used on practically all games these days, and hasn't ever bothered me). Besides, it's standard practice for all BIS games to do away with the DVD after a couple of patches (around 1.14 I think for ArmA) anyway, and after that SecuRom doesn't even DO anything :p

So, hey. As long as there're no online activations or installation limits or Steam accounts (I echo the sentiments about ETW >_<), I'm all good!

Regards,

Wolfrug

[Stimpak_Addict 0]

I don't mind SecuROM all too much. But, please; No CD key. I hate those. I can't stand always being paranoid about them, and thinking, "Oh, damn. Where's the CD key" when I have to reinstall a game. But in that "Talking to Pirates" article someone posted, it says that the reason some people pirate is because of the anti-piracy. And they don't have to deal with the anti-piracy on pirated versions. In reality, all anti-piracy is, is a problem for paying customers. And in some cases(like GTA IV), it can also make the performance suffer from all of the anti-piracy.