jarito030507 - Slashdot User

Blizzard Boss Says Restrictive DRM Is a Waste of Time 563

Posted by Soulskill on Friday May 28, 2010 @03:24AM from the what-about-lan-play dept.

Stoobalou writes "Blizzard co-founder Frank Pearce reckons that fighting piracy with DRM is a losing battle. His company — which is responsible for one of the biggest video games of all time, the addictive online fantasy role player World of Warcraft — is to release StarCraft 2 on July 27, and Pearce has told Videogamer that the title won't be hobbled with the kind of crazy copy protection schemes that have made Ubisoft very unpopular in gaming circles of late. StarCraft 2 will require a single online activation using the company's Battle.net servers, after which players will be allowed to play the single-player game to their hearts' content, without being forced to have a persistent Internet connection."

What Game Devs Should Learn From EVE 270

Posted by Soulskill on Thursday May 20, 2010 @06:27AM from the watch-out-for-volcanoes dept.

An anonymous reader passes along this excerpt from Gamesradar about EVE Online's Council of Stellar Management (CSM), a group of elected player representatives that serve to facilitate communications between the developers and the community: "On the last day, the devs announced that after the earlier discussions about improving the CSM’s ability to effect change, the CSM was being raised to the status of its own department within CCP. This is revolutionary; in one swift move, the CSM went from what could be considered a glorified focus group to what CCP considers to be a 'stakeholder' in the company, given equal consideration with every other department in requesting development time for a project. That means the CSM — and the entire playerbase it represents — has as much influence on development projects as Marketing, Accounting, Publicity and all the other teams outside of the development team. This is, of course, the stated intention. But has any developer gone to such lengths for its fans?"

Comment Re:Why caps can be good (Score 1) 382

by jarito030507 on Monday April 13, 2009 @09:06AM (#27555365) Attached to: Time Warner Transfer Caps May Inspire Fair-Price Legislation

This is crazy. Basically what you are saying is that caps are good because the super awesome cable company is nice enough to pick the things you are allowed to watch and do. What if you don't want the same things they do? Why on earth do you want to have a company pick your media for you? You think they have your best interests at heart? Or just maybe they are picking media they have a vested interest in having you consume? If your companies had spent more time and money building infrastructure to increase the size of the links to the rest of the world instead of screwing you guys over for so long, you'd have better service would you not? So explain to me again how having Time Warner decide if I'm allowed to watch stuff on Netflix or Tivo is a good idea. I know I sure to enjoy $10 PPV that I can't pause or rewatch.

Slashdot Top Deals