SimCity to use always-on DRM, no mod tools at launch
SimCity will use always-online DRM, even for private, single-player matches, and won't support mod tools at launch.
SimCity looks to finally scratch that itch after a long absence -- with some new features to boot -- but the times they are a-changing in some less favorable ways as well. The game will use the contentious always-online DRM method, even during private, single-player games.
Our own in-depth preview noted the decision to include the DRM restrictions. This keeps players connected to the game's global economy and leaderboards, whether they're playing with others or not. Including always-on DRM has caused backlash at other publishers, most notably Ubisoft for promising not to include the measure and then taking a half-step back in its direction.
The preview also noted that the game won't support mod tools at launch, but Maxis acknowledges the value of adding that functionality. "The data set in Glassbox is modable," said artistic director/creative director Ocean Quigley. "The mod community re-created [SimCity]. We recognize it. We're not idiots."
For more on SimCity, check out our interview with lead producer Kip Katsarelis.
From The Chatty
-
Steve Watts posted a new article, SimCity to use always-on DRM, no mod tools at launch.
SimCity will use always-online DRM, even for private, single-player matches, and won't support mod tools at launch.-
-
-
Or just pirate it... as I posted elsewhere below: "I was going to buy Sim City V, but if it has always-online DRM then I'm just going to pirate it. I don't want to be connected to the global economy or leader boards. I don't want to see or know what other people are doing in the game. I want my game to be my own secluded and personal space."
So it looks like pirating will give me what I want, where a legit purchase won't.
-
-
-
-
-
Nope.
I think these, they crack in record time because the groups see it more as a challenge, while the companies that pay respect to their consumers rather than treating them as enemies, they don't even bother or recommend them.
I know I respect companies that encourage sharing the game, like blizzard with starcraft. I remember you could pass the cd around and install shell games on every bodies computer.
And even further the good will generated from companies that spend more on the development rather than trying to deter potential game copiers.
I call them copiers, because they aren't stealing. They are fans that want to play the game. They could be turned into future sales. I think companies should maximize on that. -
Pretty much all DRM gets broken eventually. At this point, it seems like the point of DRM is just loss prevention for the first few days of sales before a crack is available. Sometimes these groups have people who work for distributors that can get them a copy before the street date and release a crack the day of release.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
LOL, nice replies guys (not sarcasm).
Well I do not think your opinions are wrong.
Anyway, I'll elaborate my Pirate theory and include a comparison.
OK, I look at this way, the person downloading a pirated game is a consumer of what the pirates are distributing. For a comparison, I look at it like the relationship of a drug pusher (supplier) and a drug user. You would not call a drug user a supplier, because all he (the user) is doing is consuming the product, not distributing it. Or even in comparison to someone who steals physical products, and then people buy the stolen goods. Yes, you are encouraging (and condoning) the crime of theft, but you are not he one actually doing it, in the eyes of the law, the authorities will come down on much harder to the people at the top of the chain.
So, a pirate is a distributor, a user (downloader only) is the consumer.
(btw, I'm not saying what is right or wrong, there is no right or wrong (it's a perception) , just what is illegal and not illegal)
/rant-
I should have also said, even though I kinda touched on it in the last bracketed bit, is that I am not saying downloading a pirate game is legal, because it clearly is illegal... I am just saying that there ware different levels of crime, and illegally downloading a game does not make you pirate.
Yeah, I'm bored, (and have plenty of spare time) but I kinda like debates, so long as all sides actually listen to each other and not just come out and say "you are wrong" and that's it. Agree or disagree with my theory, it doesn't matter.... but your and my theory (opinion) does.
I like to think outside the square.
/rant (again.. lol)
-
-
-
-
-
You bought the game, so you're not pirating that bit.
One can argue that distributing a modified executable that works around the built-in DRM is copyright infringement because it contains material that the developer/publisher owns exclusive rights to (although I'm not sure if simply downloading it is). You also might be breaking some terms of the EULA and the company might retain the right to invalidate your license to the software.-
-
no, because that would be covered in the EULA if it was sanctioned by the developer or publisher. Steam's EULA has a clause for the Source SDK, which can be used to make mods. Otherwise, yeah that actually would be copyright infringement according to laws as that would be a derivative work.
http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/
C. Source SDK. Your Subscription(s) may contain access to the Valve software development kit (the "SDK") for the computer game engine used in Half-Life 2 and other compatible Valve products (the "Source Engine"). You may use, reproduce and modify the SDK on a non-commercial basis solely to develop a modified game (a "Mod") for Half-Life 2 or other Valve products compatible with and using the Source Engine. You may reproduce and distribute the Mod in object code form, solely to licensed end users of Half-Life 2 or other compatible Valve products, provided that the Mod is made publicly available and distributed without charge on a non-commercial basis If you would like to use the Source SDK or a Mod for a commercial purpose or activity, please contact Valve at sourceengine@valvesoftware.com.
and later
E. Restrictions. Except as otherwise permitted under Section 2(C) with regard to the SDK, you may not, in whole or in part, copy, photocopy, reproduce, translate, reverse engineer, derive source code, modify, disassemble, decompile, create derivative works based on, or remove any proprietary notices or labels from the Software or any software accessed via Steam without the prior consent, in writing, of Valve.
-
-
-
-
-
So what about this comment from the interview posted earlier? http://www.shacknews.com/article/73061/one-on-one-with-simcitys-mayor
KK: I don't want to go too much into offline, but since we're asynchronous, you pull your plug out, it's not catastrophic. -
-
-
-
You know what? I want them to do it. I want them to take their flagship moneymaker brand and slap this ridiculous impractical limitation on it so that millions of moms, uncles, grandpas, and every non-nerd in-between who wants to play "that new SIMS game" flood their support lines and make them spend millions more in damage control.
In short, I want them to learn their lesson, and the only way it's going to sink in is when it hits their bottom line. -
-
-
They could eliminate 90% of the complaints and problems by switching to a daily check instead of needing a constant connection.
For something like Diablo 3 I understand it's more of a client server situation but for a single player game it seems like overkill.
Lets compromise and authenticate at x interval instead of constant 100% connection.
Down the road they could extend the grace period to a week or even 30 days.
This would also provide some breathing room if the auth servers fail or need to go down for maintenance.
Crazy talk sorry
-
-
-