Battlefront.com DRM

[Yskonyn]

Just to be complete to my last post...here is a thread with BFC mentioning the Win 8.1 DRM issue.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=113446

I dont see where this thread is an example.
The question is asked wether the user is able to enter the main menu, but is not answered. If he can enter the main menu (as assumed in the thread) then this is not a DRM issue at all.
This is part of the reason why these discussions can get so heated if people blame DRM for other issues.

[RyanE]

If you read the entire thread, the BFC support guy, schullencrat or something like that, states in the second post they typically have license issues in Win 8.o to 8.1 upgrades.  It not an example as much as an admission.

Sorry I didn't realize I wasn't specific enough

[Nefaro]

The only entities that come out ahead on DRM are those that sell the DRM.

Yup.

Unfortunately, they have numerous publishers fooled into believing they absolutely need it.  ::)

[RyanE]

The funny thing is the thread I posted is worse than an example.  It shows the DRM issue has happened enough to cause BFC to casually admit the DRM is "over-functioning".

I am not dead set against DRM. I am against poorly designed and executed DRM and a company unwilling to fix it.

[sandman2575]

I am not dead set against DRM. I am against poorly designed and executed DRM and a company unwilling to fix it.

Definitely agree.  Companies like Battlefront are their own best judges of whether the cost of having 'over functioning' DRM is worth it, in terms of being effective in cutting down on piracy.  But no question that these types of stories keep me away.  I wonder how many potential customers they lose by having DRM that, by all accounts, steps over the line of what is acceptable.  I'm one of the them, anyway.

[Asid]

Definitely agree.  Companies like Battlefront are their own best judges of whether the cost of having 'over functioning' DRM is worth it, in terms of being effective in cutting down on piracy.  But no question that these types of stories keep me away.  I wonder how many potential customers they lose by having DRM that, by all accounts, steps over the line of what is acceptable.

Quite a few i bet.

[SgtRock]

One has to wonder, if they are one MS patch or OS version away from all of their products to stop working, if they have no control of it!

Let's just hope they eliminate it or find a way to tone it down (way down), so it's not an issue with CMRT!

[Nefaro]

The funny thing is the thread I posted is worse than an example.  It shows the DRM issue has happened enough to cause BFC to casually admit the DRM is "over-functioning".

I am not dead set against DRM. I am against poorly designed and executed DRM and a company unwilling to fix it.

LOL @ "over-functioning". 

Sounds like misdirectional politician-speak.

[Zonso]

You may think it is mostly theoretical issues and misinformation but, as RyanE and tech support issues have shown, there can be serious problems with false positives.  From what I've seen reported, this isn't uncommon for such types of DRM. 

Because you haven't had to deal with it is no justification to sweep it under the rug and pretend it's not there or even accuse such people of misinformation, intentional or otherwise.

Unfortunately false positives have had an initial tendency for publishers using such things to suspect that anyone having such issues may well be attempting to pirate their software and become rather testy with those requesting resets.  At first, they tend to sound accusatory and get defensive about the situation.  As RyanE mentioned, they eventually figure out that their DRM is buggy and somewhat unreliable so they become easier to deal with in this regard.  I wonder why they even bother using it at that point, as it's just creating more work on their end, besides pissing some of their customers off.

Well I hate to break it to you, but the issues listed above are the exception, exceptional imo, not the norm. For what it's worth, I and others have done many of those same things with no issues whatsoever. As for reported problems, I surely do not see drm issues dominating the support forum as you allude to, in fact they are in the definite minority. Your anti drm or anti BFC issues blind you to the fact that most users have no problems with this drm which is mostly benign, or playing the game because of it, and likely understand certain realities regarding why a developer chooses to implement it. <shrug> In the end, the drm never enters the equation for me period. If it does for you or others, then great, move on; but this isn't what this is about anymore is it?

[Asid]

In the end, the drm never enters the equation for me period. If it does for you or others, then great, move on; but this isn't what this is about anymore is it?

For me it is only about understanding the DRM and not about grinding teeth... or an axe even ...

[RyanE]

If I was the only one having an issue, I would say it is something I am doing, but in their forum and my private conversations, they have been pretty open about these issues not being rare.

In ten minutes I was able to show two threads still on page 1 of the tech forum.  AT one time there were constantly half a dozen or so requests for gsclean on the first page.

I see no point in saying it doesn't happen to one individual.  I have shown it is not just me, it has happened to other people, and BFC has admitted it and stated they are not happy with the DRM they are using.

[RyanE]

Just to make sure, I did a quick search on "gsclean" on BFC.  for all of CM2 titles (CMBN and CNFI) there were 11 threads since October where gsclean was the solution.  In a couple, there were multiple people with issues.  Since June there were about 24 threads.  I know I have never posted.  I only use the help desk.  I assume a lot of other people have the same approach.

So while its not common, there is a pretty good chance if you tinker on your computer a lot, you will trip the DRM.  And this is only where gsclean is needed.  You basically have 4-5 activations before you get to that point in most cases.

And that also doen't count the number of activations used up through new laptops.  I get a new laptop at least once a year.  That uses up that extra one you get right away.

[Nefaro]

You may think it is mostly theoretical issues and misinformation but, as RyanE and tech support issues have shown, there can be serious problems with false positives.  From what I've seen reported, this isn't uncommon for such types of DRM. 

Because you haven't had to deal with it is no justification to sweep it under the rug and pretend it's not there or even accuse such people of misinformation, intentional or otherwise.

Unfortunately false positives have had an initial tendency for publishers using such things to suspect that anyone having such issues may well be attempting to pirate their software and become rather testy with those requesting resets.  At first, they tend to sound accusatory and get defensive about the situation.  As RyanE mentioned, they eventually figure out that their DRM is buggy and somewhat unreliable so they become easier to deal with in this regard.  I wonder why they even bother using it at that point, as it's just creating more work on their end, besides pissing some of their customers off.

Well I hate to break it to you, but the issues listed above are the exception, exceptional imo, not the norm. For what it's worth, I and others have done many of those same things with no issues whatsoever. As for reported problems, I surely do not see drm issues dominating the support forum as you allude to, in fact they are in the definite minority. Your anti drm or anti BFC issues blind you to the fact that most users have no problems with this drm which is mostly benign, or playing the game because of it, and likely understand certain realities regarding why a developer chooses to implement it. <shrug> In the end, the drm never enters the equation for me period. If it does for you or others, then great, move on; but this isn't what this is about anymore is it?

::)

This is absolutely about DRM.  I complain about this kind regularly, as many can attest, and that has been the topic of this thread until you came with some vague accusation.   

[Tuna]

Then there's always the "You know us Grogheads we like to play our 'old games'" What happens if BF disappears or goes under, you're screwed..

Happened to me with my copy of Civ IV from Direct 2 Drive.. they said "Oh, you can download it now and you'll have it for later".. Well, later, I was going to rebuild my machine.. tried to reinstall Civ IV and it went to an activation server that didn't exist anymore... really pissed me off.. went and bought a 'third' copy on Steam ...

Now that's a great game bought it Three times.. DVD.. Direct 2 Drive then Steam..

[Grim.Reaper]

I have kind of gotten lost in this thread.....

I don't think anyone would say the current form of DRM is good or desirable in Battlefront's games....think that likely is a universal opinion.  Not sure I have seen anyone debate it is a good DRM system and they like it over other DRM systems.

-so-

not sure what this accomplishes.....if you want to play these games, you have to accept it.....if you can't accept it, then you can't play the games....seems pretty straightforward to me.