Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by shmerl
It's actually completely reversed. DRM is much more like placing a policeman in your house to watch what you do, just in case you decide to do something illegal. I.e. since DRM is present on your own computer and in your system, it's like an intruder whose purpose is to spy on you and treat you like a criminal. I doubt many would find it ethical if a police camera would be placed in their own home, yet for some reason they accept DRM as a normal practice.


Let's run with that analogy for a moment. When you buy a physical item, the store doesn't need to send a guard to watch what you do with that item, because once you give it away, you no longer have it. There is one item, and you can't have it in two different locations.

Digital items are a completely different story. You buy a digital item, and you can make 2, 20, 200 or even 2,000,000 copies, and still have access to the original. I don't believe DRM does anything to stop the truly determined, so I'm not arguing for DRM, but at the same time I can understand corporations that want to at least place a measure of security to prevent casual copying. Ultimately, Steam's DRM is the least intrusive of any of the choices out there, and I - for one - am perfectly content to accept it until such time as it proves otherwise.

Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Originally Posted by shmerl
Originally Posted by Horrorscope
See it's all a perspective and an opinion. No one is right or wrong. I'm not saying I'm pro DRM, but some people think any little bit is as bad as any DRM ever like StarForce. At one point it was redonkulous. Steam DRM, totally get it. We are trying to foster an industry so we get more content. Some things are just part of doing biz.


No, no DRM ever gets it. As I explained, DRM is always unethical because of its nature. It's violating privacy because it treats all users as criminals by default and the most dumb part of it is that it doesn't even work, since all DRM does is hindering users who pay for what they use, while having no effect on pirates who pirate the same thing with DRM being scraped off and never worry about it. That's surely never should be a "way of doing biz".


That is your opinion on it. You feel you have it nailed down case closed, ok. I don't live in that world even if I am wrong.

Here is my biggest issue with PC's and Security that have affected me. Friends and families installing things and missing the little checkboxes installing other crapware. Then I have to go fix it for them, tell them to really look good and read it well sometimes yes means no. But it's been a lot cleaner in general over the past many years now for me.

When I drive by Ask in San Jose, I can't believe people don't egg the shit out of that place daily. The gal they have to put their name on a building, all they do is whatever it takes to get their search browser on your system without you knowing.

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by jimnms
Steam is just a digital distributor of games. Steam doesn't force developers to use DRM on their game. Steamworks and its components are entirely optional. If a developer chooses to publish their game on Steam, they can use features of Steamworks WITHOUT implementing the DRM part, as D:OS does.


Valve owns Steam. Valve uses DRM in their own games. So, they don't hide their approach to this issue.

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
Digital items are a completely different story. You buy a digital item, and you can make 2, 20, 200 or even 2,000,000 copies, and still have access to the original. I don't believe DRM does anything to stop the truly determined, so I'm not arguing for DRM, but at the same time I can understand corporations that want to at least place a measure of security to prevent casual copying. Ultimately, Steam's DRM is the least intrusive of any of the choices out there, and I - for one - am perfectly content to accept it until such time as it proves otherwise.


So, because of the "different story" of the nature of the digital goods, somehow overreaching policing becomes ethical and dropping presumption of innocence becomes OK as well? I don't think so. That's a very poor justification of using abusive policing.

And DRM doesn't stop anything at all. "Truly determined" and technically adept pirates break that DRM (which happens quite quickly), and the rest of undetermined pirates simply copy the DRM-free result from the above. Purpose defeated. I.e. pirates enjoy the DRM free result, while paying users are punished with having to deal with DRM restrictions and risks. So "smart" really.

Last edited by shmerl; 03/07/14 11:32 PM.
Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Originally Posted by shmerl
And here is an example of what DRM can easily become because of its very intent.


We get that, and we buried it. But we don't have to always slippery slope everything. We have taken to task and eliminated the worst offenders, Starforce, Sony Root etc. The reason why we aren't attacking steam as a overall community because it isn't intrusive, it isn't in the way for most.

It's like (cripes analogy time again Peter) getting in a group fight and there is a point it is over but one person doesn't get it they just assume you fight until who knows when, they are all dead? But the rest stop... then have to grab that last person and tell them. Josie Whales, the wars over.

Last edited by Horrorscope; 03/07/14 11:33 PM.
Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Horrorscope
Originally Posted by shmerl
And here is an example of what DRM can easily become because of its very intent.


We get that, and we buried it. But we don't have to always slippery slope everything. We have taken to task and eliminated the worst offenders, Starforce, Sony Root etc. The reason why we aren't attacking steam as a overall community because it isn't intrusive, it isn't in the way for most.


You didn't get my point. Example with Sony only demonstrates the fault of the intent and invalidity of the "all are guilty by default" approach. I.e. that's what it can become (malware). Does it always become that? Not necessarily. It easily can though (with any DRM). Again - because of the intent and the core idea of DRM itself.

You said "non intrusive" DRM is better. Think about it for a minute. Going back to a police camera analogy. Obtrusive one would be some camera which sits on the obvious spot in your house and makes you think about it. I.e. kind of "scaring tactics" for preventing crime. Unobtrusive one would be some hidden camera in your house which doesn't interfere with your activities... it just secretly spies on you. I think the second is actually much worse, because you wouldn't pay attention to it and would accept it as something normal (while it's not).

Originally Posted by Horrorscope
The reason why we aren't attacking steam as a overall community because it isn't intrusive, it isn't in the way for most.


A lot of users prefer DRM-free distributors like GOG, precisely because they reject DRM.

Percentage of those who reject DRM (i.e. wouldn't buy any goods with DRM) can be actually quite high as some studies show.

Last edited by shmerl; 03/07/14 11:52 PM.
Joined: Nov 2003
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2003
Originally Posted by jimnms
(the Steam client itself is not running with admin privileges).
The Steam client has Local System privilege which exceeds that of Administrator. And it has (and needs) network access which makes it far easier to exploit remotely than a game (or other program) with Admin privilege and no network access.
Originally Posted by jimnms
UAC is not designed to "annoy programmers and users into storing data outside the Program Files folder." It is designed to separate programs running with user access and full system access.
That was certainly Microsoft's intention. And if not, then why doesn't UAC allow users to define exceptions for older programs? Why does it alert on trivialities like creating junctions within Program Files? And why doesn't it alert on common malware techniques like dual-extension files? (still very much in use thanks to Microsoft's default "hide file extensions" setting).
Originally Posted by jimnms
The Steam service has a signed security certificate. If some kind of malware or virus infects it, you will know...
Not if code is injected via an overflow they won't. And if intruders breach Valve's security to the extent of being able to obtain their private key, they can sign any changes they make as if they came from Valve (as happened with Adobe).
Originally Posted by jimnms
GOG's games aren't signed, and having users run them as admin won't know if they become infected.
Well, Steam's games are in a similar position. But the main risk is the client software used to access them which is compulsory for Steam and optional for GOG (and just to make things clear, I would not recommend running GOG's downloader since that requires higher privileges - including loading multiple drivers - than a downloader should in my eyes).
Originally Posted by jimnms
...You standing up for GOG's lack of security concern and setting every program up to run with administrator privileges, while blasting Steam for having a digitally signed service running just shows your bias against Steam.
I'm biased against any service that requires the use of client software that can be remotely compromised. Steam is clearly the most popular but I don't doubt that similar comments could be made about other services like GameFly, GameTap or GamersGate. Desura requires a client to create an account, but thankfully you can get rid of it thereafter and download most content using a browser.

However D:OS is not available on these services which is why you are only reading comments from me about Steam.

Last edited by Stargazer; 04/07/14 01:47 AM.
Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Stargazer
and just to make things clear, I would not Some studies show that recommend running GOG's downloader since that requires higher privileges - including loading multiple drivers - than a downloader should in my eyes).


Luckily you can use better alternatives: https://github.com/Sude-/lgogdownloader

Unfortunately Galaxy is going to be much more complex, and if GOG won't open it up (or its protocol and API), making an open alternative would be much harder.

Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Originally Posted by shmerl
A lot of users prefer DRM-free distributors like GOG, precisely because they reject DRM.

Percentage of those who reject DRM (i.e. wouldn't buy any goods with DRM) can be actually quite high as some studies show.


I know all of this like the next PC gamer. That said Steam has a lot more users than GOG and I use GOG and like GOG but not because it is DRM free, it is because they have the game I want at the price I want. That said, I know you are right there are some like that, as you are, there is no argument there.

No one is changing anyone's mind today, you will always be in fear of the "gotcha" for me to learn I will have to be "gotcha'd". I do happen to work like that in many things in life. While you tend to take the opposite approach perhaps. There are beni's and negs to either approach in life.

Joined: Nov 2003
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2003
Originally Posted by shmerl
Luckily you can use better alternatives: https://github.com/Sude-/lgogdownloader
I did look at that when having the 404 problems on GOG with D:OS - unfortunately there's no precompiled Windows build and I didn't fancy getting down and dirty with MiniGW.
Originally Posted by shmerl
Unfortunately Galaxy is going to be much more complex, and if GOG won't open it up (or its protocol and API), making an open alternative would be much harder.
Join me! Vote here! laugh

Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Stargazer
I did look at that when having the 404 problems on GOG with D:OS - unfortunately there's no precompiled Windows build and I didn't fancy getting down and dirty with MiniGW.


If you don't have a Linux machine running, you can always make a VM and compile it there with gcc or clang. It shouldn't be hard.

Originally Posted by shmerl
Join me! Vote here! laugh


I think that's not a reasonable thing to expect from them, since such updater client is a positive thing (it improves usability). Its problem is in the lack of trust. So it's more reasonable to ask them to open the client or at least to document the protocol.

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 12:42 AM.
Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Horrorscope
No one is changing anyone's mind today, you will always be in fear of the "gotcha" for me to learn I will have to be "gotcha'd". I do happen to work like that in many things in life. While you tend to take the opposite approach perhaps. There are beni's and negs to either approach in life.


Just to clarify. For me it's not a question of "fear of gotchas", but the question of rejecting an unethical approach (DRM). Same way let's say one would reject police state approach to society.

So avoiding distributors who proliferate DRM goes along that, as "voting with one's wallet".

Last edited by shmerl; 04/07/14 12:55 AM.
Joined: Jan 2011
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2011
Fair enough... I'm going to exit this conversation. We all got our reasons.

Joined: Apr 2014
F
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
F
Joined: Apr 2014
Originally Posted by Jito463
Originally Posted by shmerl
It's actually completely reversed. DRM is much more like placing a policeman in your house to watch what you do, just in case you decide to do something illegal. I.e. since DRM is present on your own computer and in your system, it's like an intruder whose purpose is to spy on you and treat you like a criminal. I doubt many would find it ethical if a police camera would be placed in their own home, yet for some reason they accept DRM as a normal practice.


Let's run with that analogy for a moment. When you buy a physical item, the store doesn't need to send a guard to watch what you do with that item, because once you give it away, you no longer have it. There is one item, and you can't have it in two different locations.

Digital items are a completely different story. You buy a digital item, and you can make 2, 20, 200 or even 2,000,000 copies, and still have access to the original. I don't believe DRM does anything to stop the truly determined, so I'm not arguing for DRM, but at the same time I can understand corporations that want to at least place a measure of security to prevent casual copying. Ultimately, Steam's DRM is the least intrusive of any of the choices out there, and I - for one - am perfectly content to accept it until such time as it proves otherwise.


All those things like easier patching / corporates need to protect themselves etc etc are a massive load of bullshit though.
Gaming worked for 30 years without DRM, patching was never a problem since Diablo 1 times and pirates never made anyone cry.
So since there is no need, I don't think anyone should be "content" with any level of intrusion, but whatever.

This game employed very low-level DRM but still, Steam affiliation could have been avoided - or at least we should have some alternative.


Joined: Jul 2013
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Jul 2013
Originally Posted by shmerl
Valve owns Steam. Valve uses DRM in their own games. So, they don't hide their approach to this issue.


Half-Life 2 and Portal are made by Valve and don't use DRM. Take a look at the List of DRM-free games on Steam.

Joined: Jul 2013
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Jul 2013
Originally Posted by Stargazer
That was certainly Microsoft's intention.<snip>

You can't even be bothered to read an article you quote to back up your "opinion." You obviously didn't even finish reading the first sentence. Their intention was to
Quote
put pressure on third-party software makers to make their applications more secure.
A few paragraphs later
Quote
...annoying users had been part of a Microsoft strategy to force independent software vendors (ISVs) to make their code more secure, as insecure code would trigger a prompt, discouraging users from executing the code.


Basically, like I said earlier, properly written software won't trigger UAC. As for the rest of your rabble, there's so much wrong, so much ignorance, I just don't know where to start, and honestly I have better things to do (like play D:OS).

Joined: Jun 2014
A
member
Offline
member
A
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Falcus
Originally Posted by Jito463
Originally Posted by shmerl
It's actually completely reversed. DRM is much more like placing a policeman in your house to watch what you do, just in case you decide to do something illegal. I.e. since DRM is present on your own computer and in your system, it's like an intruder whose purpose is to spy on you and treat you like a criminal. I doubt many would find it ethical if a police camera would be placed in their own home, yet for some reason they accept DRM as a normal practice.


Let's run with that analogy for a moment. When you buy a physical item, the store doesn't need to send a guard to watch what you do with that item, because once you give it away, you no longer have it. There is one item, and you can't have it in two different locations.

Digital items are a completely different story. You buy a digital item, and you can make 2, 20, 200 or even 2,000,000 copies, and still have access to the original. I don't believe DRM does anything to stop the truly determined, so I'm not arguing for DRM, but at the same time I can understand corporations that want to at least place a measure of security to prevent casual copying. Ultimately, Steam's DRM is the least intrusive of any of the choices out there, and I - for one - am perfectly content to accept it until such time as it proves otherwise.


All those things like easier patching / corporates need to protect themselves etc etc are a massive load of bullshit though.
Gaming worked for 30 years without DRM, patching was never a problem since Diablo 1 times and pirates never made anyone cry.
So since there is no need, I don't think anyone should be "content" with any level of intrusion, but whatever.

This game employed very low-level DRM but still, Steam affiliation could have been avoided - or at least we should have some alternative.



The game does not use any DRM, you can freely copy the game as you like. The game uses the steam framework for a good deal of functionally, those features naturally might be not working without steam. And this was already a source of great tears for some of the users of the current gog.com version, because many comfort functions are right now not working there. Once gog galaxy is finished we will see most or all of those functions in our gog versions of the game, but we will have similar infrastructure running in the background as well.

For the alternatives, the gog version is live for kickstarter backers and should come soon for new customers too. http://www.gog.com/game/divinity_original_sin
As like with all gog.com games it will be 100% DRM-free and unlike with steam gog-galaxy does not have a switch to turn-DRM on. But again, that DRM-Switch is not used in the steam edition either, it just uses steam as installer and steam is int his regard as much of DRM as Windows Installer is.

Joined: Jul 2013
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Jul 2013
Originally Posted by Falcus
Gaming worked for 30 years without DRM, patching was never a problem since Diablo 1 times and pirates never made anyone cry.
So since there is no need, I don't think anyone should be "content" with any level of intrusion, but whatever.


You either haven't been gaming long, or you have really thick nostalgia glasses. Have you forgotten about copy protected floppies, code wheels, and worse; games that made you look up things in the manual randomly during the game or at level changes or to save your game? Enter the 34th word from the 5th paragraph on page 98 to continue playing the game. Then if you accidentally type the wrong word, you lose all progress.

Patching games before the internet was a nightmare. Basically it boiled down to finding someone that was lucky enough to have a newer copy and copying theirs, that is if it didn't have copy protection on the disk.

Then came BBSes, which required you to dial up the companies BBS to download the patch, and footing the bill for long distance charges. Even when the internet became mainstream it was still a pain to keep up to date with patches. We used to have weekly LAN parties here before there was high-speed internet gaming. Not a single session went by when someone had a different version of a game we were trying to play.

Like it or not, without Steam, PC gaming would have died out or we would still be plagued by things like the Sony root kit, Starforce, SecuROM, disk checks and GFWL. Steam is just a distributor, not the problem. They don't force DRM on games sold through their service, but they offer an optional, non intrusive DRM to publishers as part of that service. I would much rather put up with Steam's DRM than any of the previously mentioned DRM so many have forgotten about. Some publishers choose to add extra layers of DRM to their games on Steam, and those publishers don't get my money. Any publisher that chooses to release on GOG too always gets my money.

Joined: Mar 2003
A
veteran
Offline
veteran
A
Joined: Mar 2003
Originally Posted by LordCrash
The Steam version is (almost?) DRM-free as well.


Big mistake :

Steam *IS* DRM !

So you cannot say "Steam is DRM-free" - because Steam IS the DRM !

It's like saying "the river is water-free".

Steam the the very first DRM fully accepted by gamers worldwide ! And big game publishers know that ! That's why UPlay and Origin exist !
Because EA & Ubi use an exactly similar DRM model like Steam uses !
Only that Valve isn't "the bad boy" !


Originally Posted by jimnms
You either haven't been gaming long, or you have really thick nostalgia glasses. Have you forgotten about copy protected floppies, code wheels, and worse; games that made you look up things in the manual randomly during the game or at level changes or to save your game? Enter the 34th word from the 5th paragraph on page 98 to continue playing the game. Then if you accidentally type the wrong word, you lose all progress.


I have an original (used" specimen of "Micro Machines" at home. It's copy protection consists of black symbols printed on vblack background ... The only way to tell both apart of that the symbols are ... glossy ? is this the right word ? ... whereas the black background is a dull black colour.

Originally Posted by jimnms
Originally Posted by shmerl
Valve owns Steam. Valve uses DRM in their own games. So, they don't hide their approach to this issue.


Half-Life 2 and Portal are made by Valve and don't use DRM. Take a look at the List of DRM-free games on Steam.


Since Steam = DRM, one just cannot say "DRM-free on Steam". It's like saying 1 + 1 = 3


Last edited by AlrikFassbauer; 04/07/14 03:16 PM.

When you find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it.
--Dilbert cartoon

"Interplay.some zombiefied unlife thing going on there" - skavenhorde at RPGWatch
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer
Steam *IS* DRM !


I think we're getting sidetracked on the DRM vs Copy-protection argument. Many people (and I'm guilty of this, too) are using the term DRM interchangeably with copy protection. Yes, Steam is technically DRM. Just as GoG's downloader is DRM, and their login service on their page is DRM. GoG Galaxy will also be DRM. DRM simply means "Digital Rights Management", so that term can classify any number of systems. The question is whether it will have copy protection. I think though, for the sake of this argument, we can accept the term DRM in lieu of the term copy protection.

Is that acceptable?

Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5