CDV Officially Drops Starforce Copy Protection 80
simoniker writes "Publisher CDV has officially announced that it is dropping the controversial StarForce game copy protection scheme from its games, and is using the TAGES protection scheme instead, in what it calls 'response to consumer demand'. This follows Ubisoft's dropping of the scheme in April, as controversy continues about StarForce's allegedly negative effect on PCs. However, it's notable that the StarForce drivers have just passed Microsoft's 'Designed for Windows XP' certification programme, according to the company's official website."
CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:4, Insightful)
Publisher CDV [...] is using the TAGES protection scheme instead, in what it calls 'response to consumer demand'
Funny, I would have assumed 'consumer demand' would demand no copy protection at all!
This is just substituting horse shit with cow shit then having a PR hack spray it with perfume to make it smell like the company is doing you a favour.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll take dropping Starforce, thanks.
No not really (Score:5, Insightful)
So no they aren't giving consumers what they want, but they are giving them what they require. I won't boycott all copyprotected games, I can live with Safedisc and such. I did, however, boycott all Starforce games because they are problematic.
Re:No not really (Score:2, Funny)
Oh my, I hope you get over that cold soon....
Either that, or like me, sometimes the "fat finger" slips a bit on the keyboard.
Re:No not really (Score:2)
Re:No not really (Score:2)
However more than that is generally obtrusive, thigns like code wheels, and such. Those have gone away since consumers DID
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2, Insightful)
Number 1 on my list is games that work and don't crash my computer by secretly installing a broken device driver. Starforce doesn't meet this demand.
Quite a bit lower is a total lack of copy protection. Like the other poster said, I'll take the removal of Starforce, thanks.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Not trolling, I know all about StarForce.
You feel content to put the original disc in your drive to play a game, go for it. Don't whine when a publisher won't replace a scratched or missing disc.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:5, Insightful)
You are required to constantly move CDs around because all the games require the CD to be in the drive to play.
If your toaster gets scratched or takes some slight damage, even just wear and tear, it stills works fine.
You scratch the wrong sector off of a CD, it's toast (haha punny).
It would cost them what, $20? $30?, to replace a toaster.
It probably costs a publisher $0.50 for a pressed CD. If that.
If they're going to require me to put the CD in the drive every damn time I want to use their software (it could sit safely in its case on my shelf if it weren't for the copy protection), then yes, I do expect them to replace it when it finally stops working.
ND
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1, Insightful)
Consoles don't (well, didn't) have hard drives and aren't multipurpose machines. Computers are.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
The drive tray hasn't been opened in two months now. I rip images of my games and send them over the network to the PS2. I could glue the tray shut and never have to worry about it.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2)
I was once a great customer to our local Software, Etc. during my high school years. I purchased the fi
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Unless the game company puts the copy protection requiring a CD into the game, you could simply leave the CD in the case all the time, except the odd time you have to reinstall it, giving it almost no chance to be damaged. There is absoloutely no reason to require a CD simply to use a program besides the copy protection.
With something like an iPod, you have to actually pull it out to use it, etc, with the CD the only reason you have to pull it out of the case to use it is because
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
If you don't like it, don't buy them. You are agreeing to their terms by purchasing them. Period. End of story.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
In theory.
In reality, for console games you need a mod chip installed, which the companies are quite against, and for DVD movies you have to break the CSS/other copy protection the companies have put on there to prevent exactly that.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Of course not. I'm concerned about the intangible bits off the disc. A backup or crack protects you in the eventuality of damage or loss.
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:1)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2)
Re:CDV shit on your head, thank them for the hat (Score:2)
Sunbeam sold me my toaster, I own it. It's my property, and my responsibility. The game publishers sold me a license to play a game . . . I believe that most of them (the licenses) include a media replacement clase (for a cost almost equal to the selling price of the game at release).
However, I don't see scratching CDs as something that is that big an issue. If you're adult enough to play PC games
replacing damaged CDs (Score:2)
Re:replacing damaged CDs (Score:2, Insightful)
Thank you (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope many more companies see fit to follow suit.
Re:Thank you (Score:3, Insightful)
How is it a big step forward? The only people who ever jump through copy protection hoops are the legitimate consumers. Even then many, myself included, use a no-CD/DVD crack so the originals are kept safe in the package.
Re:Thank you (Score:1)
I fail to see why anybody would need to make copies anyway. You can argue "backups", but that's just a cheesy excuse. If you destroy the product somehow, it's not really unfair if you have to rebuy it. In that sense, the ability to make backups would be a benefit of the medium, but the fact that it's so exploited by theives negates that benefit.
What I really hate is having to have the CD in the tray. Onc
Re:Thank you (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny, game companies are always telling me I'm buying a "liscence" to use the game, not an actual product. Therefore, I have the right to sue for a refund if they are not holding up their end of the liscence by providing me with the software, correct?
Re:Thank you (Score:1)
Re:Thank you (Score:2)
Re:Thank you (Score:1)
Am I the only one who remembers earlier games on floppy where the first thing the manual said was "BACKUP THE DISKS!" Why the hell shouldn't we be allowed to do that now? I've got stuff I've bought online that uses Elicense. First chance I had, I downloaded warezed versions. If Elicense ever goes tits up and I want to reinstall the software, by not brea
Re:Thank you (Score:2)
I'm sick of having a fully functional game on my system that I can't play becaue the CD has a scratch over the 50 bytes of data that "proves" I really do own the bloody thing.
Ummm...
Re:Thank you (Score:2)
Everyone who drives a car should be required to wear a helmet for protection.
The requirement to wear a helmet didn't kill the motorcycle industry, so if we make everyone wear helmets, they shouldn't complain.
Re:Thank you (Score:1)
Care to go for the Trifecta of Failure and toss in a personal insult?
Re:Thank you (Score:2)
I responded to this AC [slashdot.org].
Do you have your comments set to re-parent?
Re:Thank you (Score:1)
We should combine our powers now and create the superherioc Failman, who's only adversary is the dastardly success of digg.com.
We will be second in coolness only to Captain Planet!
Demand! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny - usually when PR types talk about "consumer demand" it's a bunch of unimportant hyperbolic nonsense.
"Due to consumer demand, we've brought back those yummy red M&Ms!"
"We now make our stylish womens' sweatpants that say 'juicy' across the bottom in sizes up to 40, thanks to overwhelming market demand!"
"Disney is releasing Lion King 8: Simba Mauls a Wildebeest because the fans demand more Hakuna Matata!"
This is one of those rare occasions when the consumers, as a whole, demand something of an industry and get it.
Re:Demand! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Demand! (Score:2)
Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:5, Insightful)
One would assume that Microsoft Internet Explorer and Office Word are 'Designed for Windows XP'. I also suspect that some spyware, viruses and trojans could pass if the authors paid to have it cerified as 'Designed for Windows XP'.
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:2)
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:2)
True, but it means that it meets minimum standards so that it can be easily removed and won't critically destroy system stability beyond repair. One of the requirements is to pass verification testing - where the driver itself is tested (details not shown.) This isn't the main concern.
This is simply after-the-fact damage-control, since most versions of Star
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:1)
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:2)
Yes, but it is a 'Designed for windows XP' trojan now...
MS probably uses just a few test systems to run its test on.
How many drivers are WHQL certified but are still crap? A lot of them.
Certification of starforce is another example that their certification means absolutely nothing.
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:1)
"T1.2 Kernel mode drivers must pass verification testing"
I'd like to know what they mean by this. Does it mean the drivers have go through HCT and been signed. I'd guess not as test
"T1.3 Device and filter drivers must pass Windows HCT testing" isnt included on the list.
Re:Certifying crap makes it certified crap (Score:1)
coming to that.. i see hardware - regular keyboards and serial port mice with a works with XP tag on it! that's a laugh!
TAGES (Score:5, Informative)
A quick Google brought me to their site [tagesprotection.com]. It's mostly corporate PR-speak fluff, but there are some hints there:
I don't buy the whole "physical impossibility" part. If you can read the data off of the disk with their special APIs and drivers, then those drivers can be reverse-engineered and someone else peel the data off and distribute a hacked version. The data is there, on the disk, they're just storing it in a way that the system can't normally access, without special code that they license out and allow software developers to integrate into their protected application. It's the same thing that game developers have done for years -- there were some old Apple II titles that did strange things with the floppy drive in order to pull off similar tricks.
*yawn* At any rate, just more security through obscurity. Not that I care, particularly, as I don't run Windows (or, for that matter, play games), but I find the whole area interesting enough to keep an eye on.
Your right not to buy it (Score:3, Informative)
Then again, ALL of them have been defeated so is there any point in being the one that took the most time?
Is TAGES however friendlier to the paying customer? Since none of the copy protections systems work the only thing that can be hoped for is that they inconvenience the paying customer as little as possible.
Offcourse no copy protection at all would be the easiest way not
TAGES of the AGES (Score:2)
Can anyone do better?
Re:TAGES (Score:2, Informative)
Theres enough info there to understand the way it works.
Have a read of it [cdfreaks.com]
Its all about how the disk is corrupted by having 2 index links on the disk both point at a a sector with the same identifier, but that when the disc head is travelling in one direction (as the disc rippers do) it misses completely the data hidden in the duplicated sector.
The only way
TAGES Forever (Score:2)
Copy protection has been (and will always be) an idiotic race between the tortoise (legions of hackers) and the hare (copy protectionists)
Tortoise wins every time.
Re:TAGES Forever (Score:1)
Tages works to prevent casual copying and thats the main area of concern.
If its implimented with a cleaner system footprint then it is doing its job.
Re:TAGES Forever (Score:1)
Re:TAGES Forever (Score:2)
Now, perhaps I am displaying a personal bias here, but I generally don't expect a whole lot from such spinoffs. They have one core technology, and they're going to milk it for all it's worth: dress it up in whatever clothing they can, call it whatever names they can invent for it, and generally run with it as far as
StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point, even if they could prove beyond a shadow of doubt that their protection methods don't cause any harm, their reputation is effectively ruined. Enough game players are savvy enough to find out if the StarForce protection is on a desired game, and avoid that title if it is present. And game publishers are figuring this out.
The industry may be a multi-billion dollar one, but these guys aren't about to kiss off customers over a single protection scheme, when there are so many others out there. They will lose more revenue from potential paying customers than they will lose to customers that are soley interested in a pirated copy.
Besides, just about all games are released with enough bugs that a patch is pretty much a necessity. Look at how Stardock handled Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords. No copy protection, but if you want to update that game, you better enter a serial #. Any pirated CD is basically a demo, and once you patch it, it is the full version.
At this point, I'm just happy with any game that doesn't want the CD/DVD in the drive. I switch games too often.
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's the ultimate answer. Game companies will begin to use publishers like Valve and systems like Steam.
Now, I'm not saying Steam is perfect; no protection system ever is. Hell, I see the "full version all steam games" torrents up at TPB. Never having tried, I can't attest to their workability.
However, as a consumer, having one central app that lists games avalable along with prices is great. I can do three clicks before bed and have the game ready to play the next morning. And that's on slow DSL. I don't have to drive to the mall or wade through Wal Mart. I don't have to dispose of 5 layers of wrapping or figure out a way to store a CD and keycode.
But, as much as I love online distros, lots of companies are going to die because of it. A perfect example is rFactor. Now, I like racing sims. I'll throw them on the PC, play them a few weeks, then go on to something new. After a month of WoW, I'll go back to the racing sim to kill some time. However, even though I bought the download edition of rFactor, I only get 5 installs. I've had it under a month and I've already used two of them. I'll never get anything from that publisher agian. Limiting installs for online distros is not a step forewards; it's a huge fucking leap backwards.
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:2)
And Steam is why my latest computer is a Mac and not a gaming PC. I *REFUSE* to allow Windows machines on my network any direct net access, no exceptions. I don't do multiplayer, and there should be no requirement for single player to have net access. Since I wasn't getting a computer for HL2 any more, there was no need to stick with PCs
So I'm on consoles now for all my gaming.
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:2)
Then you are an idiot. Bad admins can fuck any system. Good admins can secure any system. Sure, zero-days do exist, but the vast majority of those are propigated via "click me now" or "open this funny email".
Saying Windows is bad just lumps you in with all the other conspiracy theorists.
>>I don't do multiplayer, and there should be no requirement for single player to have net access.
And there isn't. Aft
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:2)
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:1)
> get 5 installs. I've had it under a month and I've already used two
> of them.
You only need to use a new "install" if you install the game on a new computer (or a heavily upgraded one). Reinstalling on the same hardware does not cost you an "install" if you care to read the support forums.
Let's assume you change computers once a year. That means you can play the game for 5 years before you need to worry about running out of fre
Unreasonable protection! (Score:2)
Re:Unreasonable protection! (Score:2)
Further if you download and install third party mods they are automatically integrated into the steam system... complete with auto-updating.
Honestly, there isn't much of a better system out there for dealing with mods. Maybe Oblivion comes close, but even it
Re:Unreasonable protection! (Score:2)
Re:Unreasonable protection! (Score:2)
Just in case.... Oblivion is not a Steam game, and both can be heavily modded.
Sigh,
Friedmud
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:1)
Re:StarForce will be changing it's name soon... (Score:2)
StarForce is still very successful in the corporate sector (non-game software). However, if they need to change anything (and they do), it's their PR. They've accused people with legitimate complaints of being worthless software pirates, they staged a fraudulent unwinnable contenst to prove their product's stability, and they posted bittorrent links
Excellent (Score:2)
Haven't played game with copy protection in years (Score:2)
Re:Haven't played game with copy protection in yea (Score:1)
I also abhor the idea of a game installation stashing ring 0 drivers on my system without my knowledge or permission. My computer and operating system are *m