Steel Beasts pro is protected by dongle.
The dongle is quite secure and for Software with a long lifecycle the few euros / dollars more shouldn't matter.
It seems privacy has a price nowadays.

Dongles use a USB port do they not? I remember that "RoboCop 3" for my Amiga 500 had a dongle (which was of shitty quality and it broke, and a friend's father repaired it for me). If it uses a USB port, that is not a good thing. Having to keep track of that dongle is also unecessary annoyances for the consumer.

Dongles do 'something', don't remember what exactly, read some details of one for some audio software once. And that too could be and was cracked - some user made software interfaced and behaved just like the dongle did, enabling anyone to use the application without a dongle.

I find no moral problem with any entrepreneurs using all kinds of (legal, non evil) methods to encourage people to give them money for the software they developed. But the way some go about it is just hostile to consumers, and so consumers choose not to give them their money, which is not immoral either, especially in that circumstance.

Gaming this way would make no difference to me. I usually play online where a decent connection is required anyway. I also think the industry recognizes that establishing a multiplayer online community is the the key to longevity of a game.
I can't think of a strictly offline game that i would play more than a month or two and for that reason i tend to not even buy those games.

I can't really say much about this approach, but i have no reason to bash it either.
I suppose people are turned off by the idea because it scares them that they have less control as an end user. The way i see it, if i can play a sim with less lag or bugs because it requires every user to have a connection, then i'd be all for it. I get really irritated with some games and the amount of bugs they have even with out such a system.

I don't think the sim world has much to fear with this approach being that most coders and programmers as well as video game producers are aware of the tech side of the industry.
It would only hurt their game if they limited the capacity to utilize the newest sticks, or TIR functions. I just don't see that happening.

The player that loses out is the offliner. As in, no connection. i don't see a user with a computer and no connection being PC savy to the point where gaming would be important to them. I see a lot of negative views toward this approach, but most of you do have a capable connection if you are able to post a rant that opposes it.
Given the world internet market, the 2 percent that don't buy into this idea will not hurt the gaming companies that use this. If I had to lose 5 percent of my customers to shield 30 percent of my profits from piracy then i would do it.
This may also deter other damages that can be incurred on the user end through out the life of the game as its interworkings and exploits are realized.


SOW, as i understand it, will have subsequent planes added to it which can be purchased much like RoF now. What would keep a consumer from buying a plane and disributing it to other players at no cost or lower cost?

What would be the alternative, if you hate the idea of a required connection so much?





Bill

What gives you that idea?

Yes please, let us know!

If I understand it correctly, Storm of War will be just like Il-2, with the difference we won't get new planes and maps in patches.

So, just like you bought Pacific Fighters and added it to your Forgotten Battles, or played it stand-alone, you'll be able to buy your Storm of War: Korea and install it over Battle of Britain, or play it alone. This will be the way we'll get new planes and maps, nothing really new.

The difference: you won't get many maps and etc. we got on free patches and upgrades.

Did I get it right?

i read this in one of his many interviews. It was along the lines of third party development and that subsequent planes could be added to the game.

http://www.simhq.com/_air11/air_341a.html
http://www.simhq.com/_air11/air_341b.html

This also doesn't discourage the release of patches to the game that offer new maps and planes just the same.
If i'm misquoting, then forgive my ignorance. Its not something i follow word for word, nor am i holding Oleg to something he said some time ago.

This isn't really the issue i was getting at.

With out detracting from the issue of the thread any further, what would be a better alternative to protecting software from piracy or other user end abuses?

I get the impression that most people who play games on a PC also have the internet, and as mentioned before, the video game producers realize that games have longer shelf lives when they can compete in a multiplayer online game.

I urge you to read my earlier post for clarity. :)

Bill

Violent flight sim community vigilante justice.;)

Flyingbullseye

Oh yes... I'd prefer any StarForce to that new thing they call "sevice". And I'm really glad that neoqb removes the online necessity in the next update.

The Grunch pointed out one issue: Connection problems. Not just WLAN, but also ISP. Some people have no problems, others have lots. Not to mention the still big amount of "pre-DSL" users that still have to pay for every single minute they're online.

After all I don't want to see my personal data (=savegames) being stored on a server somewhere in the net. If I need them elsewhere, I'll take an USB pendrive anyway.

And if I buy something that I might not like... I want to be able to sell it to someone else if I can't give it back which would just be possible as goodwill gesture.

I wouldn't mind some kind of online activation (well, Win has it since XP in 2001), and maybe even something like a weekly check that just needs a connection for a minute.

Just check the latest news :)

http://riseofflight.com/Blogs/default.aspx

Well, i have had a DSL line for the past 5 years or so, starting from 384Kbps and gradually going to a (nominal, not actual) 24Mbit download/1Mbit upload ADSL line. Everything was fine and although i wasn't getting the full 24, i could routinely get 16-18Mbits of downstream. Until the local power company started doing construction work nearby and everything went to hell. Downstream varies from 1 to 9 Mbits and i get more than 30 disconnects on a bad day. On a good day it will synchronize between 9 and 11Mbits but i still get disconnects, most of the time when i'm about to press the "submit post" button, or the "check inbox" button, or generally doing something that needs to be done at that precise moment.

So for the past 5 months, my net access is stable enough (although marginally) to post a rant about online-protected games, but the fluctuations in actual speed create so much lag that i get ping-kicked out of every single IL2 server on Hypperlobby and the disconnects mean i wouldn't be able to stay on anyway. It's highly likely that i'll have to pay to have a new cable drawn to my house from the terminal box, or have the phone company dig up the roads nearby to fix my problem if it's behind the box (which is their area of responsibility to pay for).

As you can see, even in places where you do have ADSL service and a good one at that, there's just so many random things that can go wrong in a network that making it a mandatory requirement seems a bit silly to me. I'm not buying anything with such a requirement until they either lift it themselves or it's cracked, at which point i can buy a game and apply a crack to remove the things that annoy me. Of course, the irony in this is pretty strong, but since we've reached a point where the pirated games are more stable than the stock versions it's something to be expected. The more draconian DRM becomes, the more sales will be thanks to pirates who bypass DRM, instead of lost because of them.