Norm peeks in
Norm Koger
A quick update...
I've wrapped up my work on the Matrix Edition of TOAW. The files were
transmitted today. As mentioned before, my contribution was pretty
much limited to fixing a number of obscure bugs (things like
eccentricities in movement of helicopter units when entrained, a crash
in the editor scenario text dump feature when certain scenarios were
dumped, etc.) and changing a few strings and registry keys to Matrix
specified values. Basically, it's a somewhat cleaned up version of
the 1.07 update. "TOAW classic" is in their hands now. Let's see what
they do with it.
On another note, the RJW game is looking better every day. The final
sound files were dropped in late last week, and I spent some time
working on the water surface effects over the weekend. That's pretty
much final, so the thing is waiting by the door - trying to get out.
It's getting hard finding excuses not to release :)
Norm
Kev Sparrow
wrote:
Cool, Distant Guns looks knda very interesting. I really enjoyed
Fighting Steel and still play it with all the NWS mods which really
enhanced the game. I hope Distant Guns is as good, and by the sound of
it, it will be. The strategic/operational component also sounds neat,
hope your working on that as well ;)
Kev
Mike Kreuzer
news:qrhvm19pe7o8lntif...@4ax.com...
> Hello Guys,
>
> A quick update...
DG's prompted some discussion in your absence!
>
> "Server based software allows sales, support, and intellectual property
> protection options previously unavailable."
> - From the stormeaglestudios website
>
> I'm not sure I like the sound of "server based software." And that it's
> used in the same sentence with "intellectual property protection" tends
> to *really* start the alarm bells clanging.
>
> What, exactly, is meant by this term? In my world, "server-based" means
> software that cannot function independently of a central server
> somewhere. Is this the case with DISTANT GUNS?
>
Care to comment?
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Dav Vandenbroucke
wrote:
>eccentricities in movement of helicopter units when entrained
Do helicopters ride on trains very often?
Dav Vandenbroucke
davanden at cox dot net
Epi Watkins
dav_and_france...@compuserve.com says...
No, no. You got it all wrong. He's talking about
training helicopters so that they perform better.
--
Epi
----
There's a toy store near me that doesn't allow
unattended children.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
Epi Watkins wrote:
> In article <p3mvm1tuo5c6o8hr0...@4ax.com>,
> dav_and_france...@compuserve.com says...
> > On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:32:21 GMT, Norm Koger <nko...@austin.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >eccentricities in movement of helicopter units when entrained
> >
> > Do helicopters ride on trains very often?
> >
> > Dav Vandenbroucke
> > davanden at cox dot net
>
>
> No, no. You got it all wrong. He's talking about
> training helicopters so that they perform better.
That's weird - why not train the pilots ? :)
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Mike Kreuzer
news:1131403813.5...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
That wouldn't be eccentric ...
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Oleg Mastruko
wrote:
>On another note, the RJW game is looking better every day. The final
>sound files were dropped in late last week,
Back in Talonsoft days, it was Jim Rose himself, who did sound
effects for TS games... if I am not wrong (which I might be, given the
passing of time)...
O.
Epi Watkins
It wouldn't be silly either.
Norm Koger
>> software that cannot function independently of a central server
>> somewhere. Is this the case with DISTANT GUNS?
I think I know what has you worried. I felt the same kind of
concern over Valve's Steam service, and waited months before playing
Half Life 2. In the end, I really became enamored of things like
automatic updating. We aren't nearly as formal or intrusive as Steam,
but the experience has changed my mind about the evils of actively
supporting users.
It's a matter of sales and maintenance. DG works just fine
without an internet connection once it's been registered. And unless
you choose to register the demo (a one-time thing), the unregistered
trial / demo version doesn't call home at all. Interaction with the
server is not required. The fully registered version does "phone home"
for updates if it finds a connection, but you always have the option
of refusing updates. I think the sheer coolness factor of not having
to worry about finding the right patch, looking around to see if
updates are available, etc., should win most folks over. The server
side is very nifty. It supplies exactly the right update package to
bring any particular installation up to current standard, and the user
doesn't have to do anything but click "yes".
>>eccentricities in movement of helicopter units when entrained
>Do helicopters ride on trains very often?
I wouldn't think so. That may be the reason it was an
outstanding bug in a very mature game.
>Back in Talonsoft days, it was Jim Rose himself, who did sound
>effects for TS games... if I am not wrong
You're not wrong. Jim has been a busy boy.
Norm
Epi Watkins
nko...@austin.rr.com says...
I really do look forward to this game.
Greg Breslin
Norm Koger wrote:
>>>What, exactly, is meant by this term? In my world, "server-based" means
>>>software that cannot function independently of a central server
>>>somewhere. Is this the case with DISTANT GUNS?
>
>
> I think I know what has you worried. I felt the same kind of
> concern over Valve's Steam service, and waited months before playing
> Half Life 2. In the end, I really became enamored of things like
> automatic updating. We aren't nearly as formal or intrusive as Steam,
> but the experience has changed my mind about the evils of actively
> supporting users.
>
> It's a matter of sales and maintenance. DG works just fine
> without an internet connection once it's been registered.
Norm, just one important question.
Can I install DG on a portable which isn't on the internet and will not
be connected at any time? Greg
eddys...@hotmail.com
> Norm, just one important question.
> Can I install DG on a portable which isn't on the internet and will not
> be connected at any time? Greg
"DG works just fine
without an internet connection once it's been registered. "
In other words : no
The same method transplanted to TOAW would mean you couldn't install it
anymore on a new computer as the company/server went under.
Think I'll pass on this one.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Bloodstar
Uh, Eddy with all due respect but you all exaggerating things. Norm, I will
support your development whatever this "bunch of old ladies" :)whine about
server hell etc...
I will choose to support game developers like Norm - between that and some
illusionary privacy scary shit... It's a matter of trust, do you think that
Norm will steal something from your PC? :)
Mario
Bloodstar
> that Norm will steal something from your PC? :)
Uf sorry I see that you are afraid that you will not be able to install game
after few years on new pc - I think that Norm have business model that will
not allienate customers on that way, that is contraproductive.
But, in start choosing to not buy game from independent, good developer is
not good in my book.
I will in any way support Norm in buying his game. Hell, if nececary I will
buy 2 games! :)
Mario
eddys...@hotmail.com
Bloodstar wrote:
> > illusionary privacy scary shit... It's a matter of trust, do you think
> > that Norm will steal something from your PC? :)
>
> Uf sorry I see that you are afraid that you will not be able to install game
> after few years on new pc - I think that Norm have business model that will
> not allienate customers on that way, that is contraproductive.
A business model that will not let me install a game when (note : when
- not if - no company lasts forever) the developer/publisher goes out
of business and the registration-server dies with it is not one I will
support.
If TOAW had been based on the same "technology" nobody would have been
able to install it in the last 4 years ...
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Ron Peterson
into it, as an old TOAW II beta tester.
Ron
Greg Breslin
bullshit. When I buy a game, I intend to own it, not borrow it from the
organisation I paid the money to. Norm, he's no friend if he's joined
the Half Life crew. I wonder if you saw the stuff on "strategic" a few
months ago. No point getting into that argument but it's not just a few
little old ladies. It's lots of them. Norm's not who you thought he
was. He's a new Norm. Greg
Greg Breslin
I've read, like many other people, where Norm's come from, with other
organisations controlling his software. He's determined to be in charge
this time. The game sounds very good. I hope he leases many copies,
many more than Silent Hunter lll, for that matter. Really. Greg
Briarroot
>>>What, exactly, is meant by this term? In my world, "server-based" means
>>>software that cannot function independently of a central server
>>>somewhere. Is this the case with DISTANT GUNS?
>
>
> I think I know what has you worried. I felt the same kind of
> concern over Valve's Steam service, and waited months before playing
> Half Life 2. In the end, I really became enamored of things like
> automatic updating. We aren't nearly as formal or intrusive as Steam,
> but the experience has changed my mind about the evils of actively
> supporting users.
>
> It's a matter of sales and maintenance. DG works just fine
> without an internet connection once it's been registered. And unless
> you choose to register the demo (a one-time thing), the unregistered
> trial / demo version doesn't call home at all. Interaction with the
> server is not required. The fully registered version does "phone home"
> for updates if it finds a connection, but you always have the option
> of refusing updates. I think the sheer coolness factor of not having
> to worry about finding the right patch, looking around to see if
> updates are available, etc., should win most folks over. The server
> side is very nifty. It supplies exactly the right update package to
> bring any particular installation up to current standard, and the user
> doesn't have to do anything but click "yes".
I will never purchase a game that requires a Steam-like validation
system. Period.
As for auto-updates: Please include a check box that turns off automatic
updating. I am not so brain-dead (yet) that I am unable to locate
patches; nor (since I learned how to read) have I failed to notice any
that become available. I don't want any software on my system to "phone
home" *until* I tell it to do so. I have never worried about finding
the right patch and I detest software that assumes that I'm an idiot.
The point is that I want to be the one to decide when my software needs
to be patched and I want to choose a time that is convenient for me.
These decisions are mine alone and neither the program nor the developer
(nor publisher) have any right to intrude. I won't complain if you make
auto-updating an option but if you make it mandatory, I may very well
decide not to purchase.
Giftzwerg
> >> What, exactly, is meant by this term? In my world, "server-based" means
> >> software that cannot function independently of a central server
> >> somewhere. Is this the case with DISTANT GUNS?
>
> I think I know what has you worried. I felt the same kind of
> concern over Valve's Steam service, and waited months before playing
> Half Life 2. In the end, I really became enamored of things like
> automatic updating. We aren't nearly as formal or intrusive as Steam,
> but the experience has changed my mind about the evils of actively
> supporting users.
Ah. So you're using activation. The software will refuse to operate if
it cannot be "activated" by contacting some master-server somewhere and
verifying the user's pedigree - regardless of how much money the user
has spent.
While it's (somewhat) nice to know that DG isn't going to require a
*permanent* connection to the slavemaster system, I think you need to
realize that some of us consider activation to be *massively* "formal"
and "intrusive."
[And - please - don't try to sugar-coat the most annoying copy-
protection scheme of all as being for reasons of "actively supporting
users." We'll get along just fine FTP'ing patches from a URL somewhere,
thanks.]
> It's a matter of sales and maintenance. DG works just fine
> without an internet connection once it's been registered.
Oh? And what happens a month from now when I plug in a new video card?
Re-activate?
What happens three months from now when I move the game to my new
laptop? Re-activate? And find it *won't* re-activate, because it
"thinks" I'm trying to pirate it, and I have to <insert stunningly
intrusive and fabulously annoying hoops to jump through here>.
What happens five years from now when I decide to revisit DG, and the
activation server is long-gone? Time to make some phone calls? Send
some emails? Post messages in forums and USENET?
Just throw it out?
> Interaction with the
> server is not required. The fully registered version does "phone home"
> for updates if it finds a connection, but you always have the option
> of refusing updates.
What happens if I tell one of the outgoing firewalls, "Don't let this
application talk with anyone. Ever." Does it fail gracefully?
> I think the sheer coolness factor of not having
> to worry about finding the right patch, looking around to see if
> updates are available, etc., should win most folks over.
I think the sheer awfulness factor of activation and all the misery it
brings will have most of your most avid customers - myself number one -
deciding that it's not worth it.
Speaking for myself, and my $50, I will not buy games that include any
sort of ridiculous "activation" schemes. I have to sit still when
business programs I absolutely require pull this nonsense, but I draw
the line at games.
No sale.
> The server
> side is very nifty. It supplies exactly the right update package to
> bring any particular installation up to current standard, and the user
> doesn't have to do anything but click "yes".
I think this user is poised to click "no."
--
Giftzwerg
***
"There is no question about [Supreme Court Nominee Samuel] Alito's
qualifications. Democrats can only oppose him for his record, which will
alarm a narrow segment of lunatics commonly known as 'the Democratic
Party base'."
- Ann Coulter
Giftzwerg
says...
No. But I do think:
(a) Norm's a game programmer - not a winternals expert or a security
specialist[1]. If hackers and viruses can find holes in code that
multibillion dollar systems companies produce, what's my exposure with a
$50 game?
(b) Most game companies last about as long as mayflies. That "server"
I require to activate the software might disappear next week. Then what
do I do? I'm pretty sure Adobe and Microsoft are gonna be around in two
years to activate my copies of CS and XP. But Talonsoft? Take 2? SSI?
AH?
(c) I change my computer as often as some people change their socks.
*Nothing* pisses me off more than having to fucking "activate" a half-
dozen programs every fucking time I upgrade - and then have to fiddle-
fuck with emailing or phoning in pleas for leniency because the software
*won't* activate. "Oh, dear, already activated! Call customer
disservice!" Business applications can shove this tactic up my ass
because I can't do without them. I can do without this.
(d) There are enough good designers out there who aren't pissing me off
with "activation" that I'm willing to support the ones who don't.
[1] I once let a security auditor play with Taldren's "upgrading"
routine for STARFLEET COMMAND 2. After disassembly, he reported that,
security-wise, whoever programmed it couldn't find his ass with both
hands and a flashlight.
Giftzwerg
says...
> > illusionary privacy scary shit... It's a matter of trust, do you think
> > that Norm will steal something from your PC? :)
>
> Uf sorry I see that you are afraid that you will not be able to install game
> after few years on new pc - I think that Norm have business model that will
> not allienate customers on that way, that is contraproductive.
And, also, he's decided to sprinkle himself with Magic Pixie Dust that
will protect him from <insert any of a million reasons businesses
disappear here>?
Giftzwerg
gbre...@nspambigpond.net.au says...
> When I buy a game, I intend to own it, not borrow it from the
> organisation I paid the money to.
<applause>
Well put.
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> If TOAW had been based on the same "technology" nobody would have been
> able to install it in the last 4 years ...
Powerful point, and great example.
And it becomes all the more appropriate when I consider *all* the
software I'm still actively using despite the fact that the
developer/publisher is long gone.
As an aside, I would mention one thing Matrix did that I very much
appreciated. On a couple of boxed games I purchased from them (KP /
HTTR, and another one, I think...), a later patch included code that
removed the necessity of having the CD in the drive. This is something
that developers might consider; employing a more-intrusive protection
scheme during the early months of release, and then removing this in a
much later patch.
The dirty little secret, of course, is that I purchase a good deal of
software that requires "activation" only *after* I find that an
activation crack is available. I recently upgraded to ACDSee 8.0, for
example, after I found a working crack for the bullshit "phone home"
scheme. And I won't upgrade to Photoshop CS2 until I find that there's
a crack out there.
With niche products like wargames, though, I can't be sure an activation
crack will ever appear. So it's no sale.
Frank E
<george.w...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Think I'll pass on this one.
>
>Uh, Eddy with all due respect but you all exaggerating things. Norm, I will
>support your development whatever this "bunch of old ladies" :)whine about
>server hell etc...
Not much to whine about, my money will just be spent elsewhere. I'm
sure both Norm and I will get over it. <g>
>
>I will choose to support game developers like Norm - between that and some
>illusionary privacy scary shit... It's a matter of trust, do you think that
>Norm will steal something from your PC? :)
Well, you are right about one thing, it's a matter of trust:
- Do I trust this company to still be around in a couple of years?
- Do I trust that they know how to program this without leaving
massive security loopholes?
- Do they trust me enough to let me install this on my desktop and a
laptop for when I'm on the road.
- Do they trust me enough to let me upgrade my PC without having to go
through the hassles of activating this again?
So yeah, it's about trust. They don't trust me enough to just sell me
the software and I don't trust them enough to waste my time jumping
through the hoops of an online activation scheme.
Rgds, Frank
eddys...@hotmail.com
Giftzwerg wrote:
> In article <1131441566.7...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> eddys...@hotmail.com says...
>
> > If TOAW had been based on the same "technology" nobody would have been
> > able to install it in the last 4 years ...
>
> Powerful point, and great example.
>
> And it becomes all the more appropriate when I consider *all* the
> software I'm still actively using despite the fact that the
> developer/publisher is long gone.
I think that in Mr. Koger's case the pendulum has swung the other way a
tad too far.
His previous project ended with him having no controll whatsoever on
his creation, in his new project he'll have total controll and can pull
the plug at will.
He might reconsider given that the wargame business is not the same as
it was 4 years ago - the overall quality of wargames has increased a
lot, given gamers more good games to chose from. Passing on a game
becomes easier if there's a lot of choice. And the 4 main publishers
(Matrix, HPS, Battlefront and Shrapnel) are steering well clear of this
Software Activation fad, StarForce and other "Bad Ideas" (tm). In fact
some have even *downgraded* their protection schemes. As they are in
close contact with their customers through forums their perception of
what is needed and acceptable might be a bit different from someone who
has been effectively out of the business for some years.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
eddys...@hotmail.com
Hi,
I've read the follow-up mail on this but let me tell you a little story
about how counter-productive this is.
I've posted in here about ProSimco's The Star and the Crescent wanting
to "phone home" at game startup - blocked at my firewall - and the game
continuous without problems - all's fine you would think, until ..
Last saturday this machine was disconnected from the Internet as we
were using it at the Crisis 05 wargame convention and I wanted to show
the game to Grouchy. The game refused to start giving me a blank
browser page as the only feedback. Guess how he now thinks about this
game and what the chances are he will buy it ...
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Epi Watkins
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
I have a feeling this decision was made with the
software or gaming industry in mind, but not the wargame
niche in particular. It's pathetically easy to steal a
game if you want to. It's much easier for the more
popular games though
I'll buy this game anyway, just because I want to play
it. Hopefully, with the "koger" name, there will be a
crack out there for it.
Does anybody have any idea what it costs to keep a
server running for activation?
eddys...@hotmail.com
>
> I have a feeling this decision was made with the
> software or gaming industry in mind, but not the wargame
> niche in particular. It's pathetically easy to steal a
> game if you want to. It's much easier for the more
> popular games though
>
> I'll buy this game anyway, just because I want to play
> it. Hopefully, with the "koger" name, there will be a
> crack out there for it.
These 2 paragraphs in itself are proof the entire setup is a waste of
money.
1) gamers who don't buy the game because of the server activation =>
you lose money in the short run
2) gamers who buy the game will get a crack, or become disgruntled when
no crack appears and their game won't install anymore => you lose money
(and credit) in the long run as well.
> Does anybody have any idea what it costs to keep a
> server running for activation?
Did a quick calculation based on if I had to run a truely basic one out
of my garage. $2000 for the server, $500 a year for the internet
connection, $??? for electricity, $??? for the OS, activation software,
firewall, virus checker, .. And then there's opportunity cost. Every
minute you're spending helping actual customers who have a genuine
problem or soothing angry customers in forums.
Short : I don't *think* it's a waste of money, I *know* it's a waste of
money.
Even in a corporate environment - the software we wrote has an
auto-update feature which we have turned off, not because it doesn't
work properly (it does), but because users *really* hate the software
deciding to do an upgrade when they need some data quickly.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> > I'll buy this game anyway, just because I want to play
> > it. Hopefully, with the "koger" name, there will be a
> > crack out there for it.
>
> These 2 paragraphs in itself are proof the entire setup is a waste of
> money.
>
> 1) gamers who don't buy the game because of the server activation =>
> you lose money in the short run
> 2) gamers who buy the game will get a crack, or become disgruntled when
> no crack appears and their game won't install anymore => you lose money
> (and credit) in the long run as well.
And - worst of all - there's:
3) Gamers who, at long last, having been pummelled by activation
schemes and similar bullshit *ad infinitum*, finally say, "Screw it.
Fuck these people. If I'm gonna have to go to the red-light district
and get the crack *anyhow*, I'm just gonna save the $59.95 up front."
> > Does anybody have any idea what it costs to keep a
> > server running for activation?
>
> Did a quick calculation based on if I had to run a truely basic one out
> of my garage. $2000 for the server, $500 a year for the internet
> connection, $??? for electricity, $??? for the OS, activation software,
> firewall, virus checker,
Of course, the significant danger here is that the busy developer will
farm out the server slice to some server-operation-company somewhere ...
who might have, shall we say, "interesting" ideas about security and
privacy and customer service - and ideas that might differ from the
developer's.
> Short : I don't *think* it's a waste of money, I *know* it's a waste of
> money.
Norm was looking at probably $200 of my money from this project,
assuming DISTANT GUNS, and the projected WW2 and WW1 packages. Now he's
looking at $0.00.
It's a small thing, $200. A somewhat larger thing is that here's a
developer who, in one fell swoop, has managed to move himself from the
"Buy, Sight Unseen, Day 1" column to the "No Thanks, I'll Pass" list.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"[A]s the Washington Post's headline put it: 'Rage of French youth is a
fight for recognition'. Actually, they're very easy to 'recognise':
just look out the window, they're the ones torching your Renault 5."
- Mark Steyn
Bloodstar
will make so many reactions. I will reply later...
In short - I can see your arguments. I mean for all involved. It's Norm call
now, as in game of poker :)
Mario
Epi Watkins
> auto-update feature which we have turned off, not because it doesn't
> work properly (it does), but because users *really* hate the software
> deciding to do an upgrade when they need some data quickly.
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
Reminds me of AOL.
Windows' auto-update can be fun. All of the sudden
something won't work right for seemingly no reason.
Epi Watkins
> of my garage. $2000 for the server, $500 a year for the internet
> connection, $??? for electricity, $??? for the OS, activation software,
> firewall, virus checker, .. And then there's opportunity cost. Every
> minute you're spending helping actual customers who have a genuine
> problem or soothing angry customers in forums.
>
> Short : I don't *think* it's a waste of money, I *know* it's a waste of
> money.
>
> Even in a corporate environment - the software we wrote has an
> auto-update feature which we have turned off, not because it doesn't
> work properly (it does), but because users *really* hate the software
> deciding to do an upgrade when they need some data quickly.
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
Are those calculations based on having your own
dedicated server? Wouldn't buying some shared space
somewhere be ok for activation?
I really think publishers go about this the wrong way.
They need to use a carrot instead of a stick. A lot of
people would actually like the auto-update feature.
Maybe require activation for that. That probably
wouldn't be a big enough carrot itself, but like that.
Maybe more scenarios with activation too.
Eddy Sterckx
news:MPG.1ddaa3773...@news.east.earthlink.net:
>> Did a quick calculation based on if I had to run a truely basic one
out
>> of my garage. $2000 for the server, $500 a year for the internet
>> connection, $??? for electricity, $??? for the OS, activation
software,
>> firewall, virus checker, .. And then there's opportunity cost. Every
>> minute you're spending helping actual customers who have a genuine
>> problem or soothing angry customers in forums.
>>
>> Short : I don't *think* it's a waste of money, I *know* it's a waste
of
>> money.
>>
>> Even in a corporate environment - the software we wrote has an
>> auto-update feature which we have turned off, not because it doesn't
>> work properly (it does), but because users *really* hate the software
>> deciding to do an upgrade when they need some data quickly.
>>
>> Greetz,
>>
>> Eddy Sterckx
>
> Are those calculations based on having your own
> dedicated server? Wouldn't buying some shared space
> somewhere be ok for activation?
See Mr. Giftzwerg remarks regarding this "farming out" ... I agree
completely with him.
> I really think publishers go about this the wrong way.
> They need to use a carrot instead of a stick. A lot of
> people would actually like the auto-update feature.
> Maybe require activation for that. That probably
> wouldn't be a big enough carrot itself, but like that.
> Maybe more scenarios with activation too.
Where's the carrot in that scheme ?
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
--
"Ceterum censeo Belgicam delendam esse."
(Cato, 'Pro Gerolphe')
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> > I really think publishers go about this the wrong way.
> > They need to use a carrot instead of a stick. A lot of
> > people would actually like the auto-update feature.
> > Maybe require activation for that. That probably
> > wouldn't be a big enough carrot itself, but like that.
> > Maybe more scenarios with activation too.
>
> Where's the carrot in that scheme ?
Indeed. Simply not being whacked with the stick doesn't exactly amount
to a "carrot," does it? <g>
Which is sorta what Watkins is proposing; making users "activate" to
have access to the patches and scenarios that properly belong to the
price of admission isn't giving them something *extra*, it's withholding
something they already bought until they "activate."
The whole idea here seems more like a "demo/registered version"
arrangement; I didn't get the final two levels of DOOM until I bought
the game. But if I'd paid full-boat price up front for the game, it
would have pissed me off to need to "activate" in order to play the
levels I already friggin' paid for.
Giftzwerg
epica...@hotmail.com says...
> > Even in a corporate environment - the software we wrote has an
> > auto-update feature which we have turned off, not because it doesn't
> > work properly (it does), but because users *really* hate the software
> > deciding to do an upgrade when they need some data quickly.
> Reminds me of AOL.
>
> Windows' auto-update can be fun. All of the sudden
> something won't work right for seemingly no reason.
Which is why everyone pretty much filters Windows update through their
own WSUS server, so they can dole out the various critical and security
patches to a test subset of PCs before releasing them into the
production environment.
Epi Watkins
> > They need to use a carrot instead of a stick. A lot of
> > people would actually like the auto-update feature.
> > Maybe require activation for that. That probably
> > wouldn't be a big enough carrot itself, but like that.
> > Maybe more scenarios with activation too.
>
> Where's the carrot in that scheme ?
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
The scenarios and auto-updating are the carrot. You
could have a whole club-like thing you belonged to with
activation. You would get scenarios and other game-
related goodie. I'm not saying I have the answer. It
should be something like that though.
eddys...@hotmail.com
Epi Watkins wrote:
> > > I really think publishers go about this the wrong way.
> > > They need to use a carrot instead of a stick. A lot of
> > > people would actually like the auto-update feature.
> > > Maybe require activation for that. That probably
> > > wouldn't be a big enough carrot itself, but like that.
> > > Maybe more scenarios with activation too.
> >
> > Where's the carrot in that scheme ?
> >
> > Greetz,
> >
> > Eddy Sterckx
>
> The scenarios and auto-updating are the carrot. You
> could have a whole club-like thing you belonged to with
> activation. You would get scenarios and other game-
> related goodie. I'm not saying I have the answer. It
> should be something like that though.
There's a host of problems with auto-update, just to name a few :
1) I never install a patch on the day it is released - I've seen too
many patches getting retrackted after 48 hours because a critical flaw
was discovered .
2) Sometimes a patch never gets installed here because it "fixes"
something I don't like to be fixed. I can remember a couple of TOAW
patches that fell into this category ...
3) OS versions / driver incompatibilities - the game stops working
after an auto-patch and you're essentially screwed as there's no way
you can just reinstall it and/or go back to the previous version as the
auto-update will trigger again.
4) Where's the advantage for the *developer* ?
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Epi Watkins
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
A lot of people would like auto-update. I never said it
should be forced. I said it wouldn't be enough on it's
own as well.
The publisher's advantage is to sell more games and not
have them stolen. If you can come up with a good enough
reason for activation, some people will buy instead of
steal the product. Less ill-will with the carrot
approach as well. I really haven't come up with what I
think is a good idea for the carrot, but the best carrot
would be one where a crack isn't as likely to help.
Bloodstar
that you Norm listen to Admiral Gifty, General Eddy Grant, Feldmarschall
Watkins and other gentlemen involved.
:-)
Mario
eddys...@hotmail.com
> The publisher's advantage is to sell more games and not
> have them stolen.
That's the crunch of the matter : do the additional sales i.e. people
buying the game who would otherwise have pirated it outweigh the
customers you lose + costs you endure in such a scheme.
I don't think so, but everyone can run his own business as he likes as
far as I'm concerned.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
kev9000
No, it's a matter of my liking to own my software, no strings attached.
I am looking up at a shelf-ful of games that would have been long
binned had they depended on an umbilical cord to an active,
in-commission server out there somewhere.
No purchase here. And that's a shame because I would have loved this
game and I would loved to have supported the people behind it.
James D Burns
"kev9000" <ryand...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131481536.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
My feelings exactly, if I support this venture with my money then they will
simply continue to use this kind of server basesd activation crap, so I'm
forced to say "no sale". And I was really looking forward to this game. :(
I suspect their going to lose far more sales than they could ever hope to
protect with this scheme. They should learn from Edensofts failure with Red
Thunder, they may be looking at the same kind of debacle for themselves
here.
Jim
paul...@yahoo.com
>assuming DISTANT GUNS, and the projected WW2 and WW1 packages. Now he's
>looking at $0.00.
Yup, count at least one more lost sale.
My buddy went thru "activation hell" with Turbo Tax. Never Again!
Fortunately from his experience I avoided Turbo Tax and went with Tax
Cut. But after hearing about all his problems,
I'm still avoiding all Intuit products - even though they backed off
their activation scheme from their products.
It boggles the mind that gaming companies didn't learn lessons from
companies like Intuit and the Turbo Tax fiasco.
Epi Watkins
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
You seem to be misunderstanding my scheme. It uses
honey to encourage people to buy. It forces nothing on
anybody. People would still be able to patch (the
patching is just a small part of it BTW), just not
automatically. My idea takes away the negatives of the
stick approach. You're really not understanding me.
The idea is to make people want to buy the game for the
extra benefits, instead of forcing them with some copy-
protection scheme.
Mike Kreuzer
news:1131489792.4...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Forget not learning from a tax software company, what about learning from ex
wargame companies like Edensoft & Talonsoft, both of which were champions of
the zany copy protection scheme? No one's mentioned the Jim Rose connection
in all this yet ... so I may as well be the first. <g>
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
Epi Watkins wrote:
> In article <1131477412.908698.52140
> @g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
> says...
> > Epi Watkins wrote:
> >
> > > The publisher's advantage is to sell more games and not
> > > have them stolen.
> >
> > That's the crunch of the matter : do the additional sales i.e. people
> > buying the game who would otherwise have pirated it outweigh the
> > customers you lose + costs you endure in such a scheme.
> >
> > I don't think so, but everyone can run his own business as he likes as
> > far as I'm concerned.
> >
> > Greetz,
> >
> > Eddy Sterckx
>
> You seem to be misunderstanding my scheme. It uses
> honey to encourage people to buy. It forces nothing on
> anybody. People would still be able to patch (the
> patching is just a small part of it BTW), just not
> automatically. My idea takes away the negatives of the
> stick approach. You're really not understanding me.
> The idea is to make people want to buy the game for the
> extra benefits, instead of forcing them with some copy-
> protection scheme.
I'm sorry, but even after re-reading it all I still can't see the
benefit of this approach versus the current practice of serial number /
disk must be in the drive copy protection schemes. Not from the gamer's
and even not from the developer's pov. An (expensive) solution looking
for a problem I think.
If you're simply talking about a menu option "check for updates &
install them" in a game then I'm in favour on the condition that the
same can be accomplished manually - i.e. there are patch files that can
be burned on a cd and filed away for future use.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Epi Watkins
eddys...@hotmail.com
> I don't remember Edensoft.
Which if you think it through is a bit the point ... :)
http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=3726
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Epi Watkins
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
There are two benefits:
1. You won't piss people off achieving the same
thing.
2. If it's done right, people will want to be a part
of it, and not just get the benefits of some
crack. Battlefield requires a UNIQUE serial number
to play online. I imagine this gains them a lot
of sells. This is not about activation.
Activation might be used though.
Were's this big cost you're talking about coming from.
Money is already spent on other copy-protection schemes.
Companies already spend effort on boards and such.
Epi Watkins
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
I guess I missed that game.
eddys...@hotmail.com
What *exactly* are you achieving by tying people to a server ? I mean,
other than bothering your actual paying customers ?
>
> 2. If it's done right, people will want to be a part
> of it, and not just get the benefits of some
> crack. Battlefield requires a UNIQUE serial number
> to play online. I imagine this gains them a lot
> of sells. This is not about activation.
> Activation might be used though.
Battlefields is an online game - it's only reason of existence is
online gaming - comparing apples and oranges here I'm afraid. I'm not
complaining about my browser going "online", but I see no good reason
why I would allow a game to access a server beyond my firewall.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Mike Kreuzer
news:MPG.1ddb016af...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> In article <1131492575.575601.225590
> @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
> says...
>> Epi Watkins wrote:
>>
>> > I don't remember Edensoft.
>>
>> Which if you think it through is a bit the point ... :)
>>
>> http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=3726
>>
>> Greetz,
>>
>> Eddy Sterckx
>
> I guess I missed that game.
It only had that one game out before it went under -- Red Thunder -- their
head honcho's still around, the eponymous one at Jeff Lapkoff Games, he's
also at HPS, I think.
There were several issues with the game, but the main one was (from memory)
a requirement that you ran the demo to get hardware information (the hard
drive serial number, I think) before buying it; your copy of the game was
then tied to that HDD. That was around 99/00. I would have gone through
three or four drives since then & the company's long gone. The game was
re-released since, without the original copy protection scheme, so strictly
speaking it's not abandonware, but the original copy protection scheme sank
it & the company.
It's not a coincidence, I think, that the crop of game publishers that grew
up out of the rubble of Talonsoft are all light on copy protection schemes.
It seems less like a coincidence all the time that the co-founder of
Talonsoft's new company is into them.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Epi Watkins
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
I'm not talking about the game accessing the internet.
It could.
Epi Watkins
Whatever happened to dongles (or whatever they're
called)? It seems like they would be better with USB.
You could just chain them.
Giftzwerg
epica...@hotmail.com says...
> Battlefield requires a UNIQUE serial number
> to play online. I imagine this gains them a lot
> of sells. This is not about activation.
> Activation might be used though.
Yeah, but online-play-for-pay software is *a priori* chained to a
slavemaster-server. Thus it makes no sense to discuss it in this
context.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"The Fitzgerald indictments are an embarrassing confirmation of the old
Washington rule that, when special prosecutors can't prove a crime, they
indict the target for obstructing the investigation."
- Jeff Rosen
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> 1) I never install a patch on the day it is released - I've seen too
> many patches getting retrackted after 48 hours because a critical flaw
> was discovered .
Sometimes it's a bit of a nail-biter. Do I release this crucial
security patch for XP to the whole network and pray it doesn't break
some crucial client? Or do I push it out to a few systems only for
testing, and pray some 15-year-old Chinese kid isn't going to finish his
deadly network worm at 5:11 this evening?
Mike Kreuzer
> In article <4371...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>,
> mikek...@SAMEAGAIN.com says...
>> "Epi Watkins" <epica...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1ddb016af...@news.east.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <1131492575.575601.225590
>> > @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
>> > says...
>> >> Epi Watkins wrote:
>
> Whatever happened to dongles (or whatever they're
> called)? It seems like they would be better with USB.
> You could just chain them.
[snip]
They exist, but AFAIK they cost about $10 each and would also rule out
buy-by-downloading. We're talking about $25 games here remember, not
national security. I'd put them in the over-kill basket, right next to
server chaining.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Epi Watkins
mikek...@SAMEAGAIN.com says...
> "Epi Watkins" <epica...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1ddb09cf2...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> > In article <4371...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>,
> > mikek...@SAMEAGAIN.com says...
> >> "Epi Watkins" <epica...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.1ddb016af...@news.east.earthlink.net...
> >> > In article <1131492575.575601.225590
> >> > @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
> >> > says...
> >> >> Epi Watkins wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >
> > Whatever happened to dongles (or whatever they're
> > called)? It seems like they would be better with USB.
> > You could just chain them.
> [snip]
>
> They exist, but AFAIK they cost about $10 each and would also rule out
> buy-by-downloading. We're talking about $25 games here remember, not
> national security. I'd put them in the over-kill basket, right next to
> server chaining.
>
> Regards,
> Mike Kreuzer
> www.mikekreuzer.com
You're right I think, but I still think we need to move
to cartridges. My old Atari computer had them in the
early 1980's.
Annette Brooks
> I've posted in here about ProSimco's The Star and the Crescent wanting
> to "phone home" at game startup - blocked at my firewall - and the game
> continuous without problems - all's fine you would think, until ..
>
> Last saturday this machine was disconnected from the Internet as we
> were using it at the Crisis 05 wargame convention and I wanted to show
> the game to Grouchy. The game refused to start giving me a blank
> browser page as the only feedback. Guess how he now thinks about this
> game and what the chances are he will buy it ...
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
Eddy, I'm very disturbed to hear this. I've been a member of Shrapnel
Games' customer support team for more than five years and have not
heard of an experience like this with any of Prosim Co.'s titles or any
other game we have published. The Star and the Crescent should not
require an internet connection in order to play. If it does, we'll do
what it takes to make it right. Please visit our customer support
center at
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/service.htm or write to me personally at
ann...@shrapnelgames.com.
eddys...@hotmail.com
> Whatever happened to dongles (or whatever they're
> called)? It seems like they would be better with USB.
> You could just chain them.
Just as easy to crack and a costly affair to produce - there was a
reason why only high-end & costly applications - like CAD programs -
had them : not economically viable for cheap software, like games.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
eddys...@hotmail.com
And how did you apply a patch to those games ?
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
eddys...@hotmail.com
> The Star and the Crescent should not
> require an internet connection in order to play. If it does, we'll do
> what it takes to make it right. Please visit our customer support
> center at
> http://www.shrapnelgames.com/service.htm or write to me personally at
> ann...@shrapnelgames.com.
Hi,
I'll make a nice package tonight with screenshots, my hardware/software
list and how to reproduce the error and send it to you.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
AnnetteBrooks
>I'll make a nice package tonight with screenshots, >my hardware/software
>list and how to reproduce the error and send it to >you.
>Greetz,
>Eddy Sterckx
That would be great. Thanks, Eddy.
Annette
eddys...@hotmail.com
Hi,
Tried to recreate the error, but couldn't get it to fail again - we
(Grouchy and me) certainly weren't dreaming when we tried to run it and
found out we couldn't, so note this one down as a case of Murphy
striking at the wrong time.
To be really clear on this : The Star & The Crescent *does* work when
disconnected from the internet and I will have a good look at it (and
post in here) as soon as Cota is out the door.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
kev9000
pproc...@yahoo.com
You're a real stand-up guy! Most people would just discover there was
no problem and never update their post, leaving the dubious bug report
out there. Thanks!
I think their is a misconception out ther abou The Star and the
Crescent's internet check. There is no "remote validation", "server
piracy protection", or anything else going on. All that the game does
is see if you have an internet connection, and if you do, update the
help and ATF Arena links. If you do not have an internet connection,
or if you firewall block the game, it will chug along silently and
normally.
This having been said, I know some people are just adamant about not
wanting any of their software communicating in any way without their
explicit permission. I can understand that, and we are working to
remedy this situation.
Thanks, again, Eddy.
Pat Proctor
President, ProSIM Company
http://www.prosimco.com
jari k
> A lot of people would like auto-update. I never said it
> should be forced. I said it wouldn't be enough on it's
> own as well.
I liked autoupdate in Galactic Civilizations II, well not auto but just
"press ok to download and install". This makes it possible for developer
to make lot of small patches and makes it easy for user to get them.
But I think GC2 had option for downloading bigger patches later from
website, where you had to register with your code.
--
jarik
eddys...@hotmail.com
pproc...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Eddy,
>
> You're a real stand-up guy! Most people would just discover there was
> no problem and never update their post, leaving the dubious bug report
> out there. Thanks!
No problem - tell it like it is is the easy way to go through life.
> I think their is a misconception out ther abou The Star and the
> Crescent's internet check. There is no "remote validation", "server
> piracy protection", or anything else going on. All that the game does
> is see if you have an internet connection, and if you do, update the
> help and ATF Arena links. If you do not have an internet connection,
> or if you firewall block the game, it will chug along silently and
> normally.
As I posted :)
> This having been said, I know some people are just adamant about not
> wanting any of their software communicating in any way without their
> explicit permission. I can understand that, and we are working to
> remedy this situation.
Exactly - I objected to the program trying to do this behind my back -
it's not mentioned in the manual either - a menu option "get updates"
would get you kudos, the current implementation is simply "not done" in
the current day and age of spyware & malware
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
AnnetteBrooks
>(Grouchy and me) certainly weren't dreaming when >we tried to run it and
>found out we couldn't, so note this one down as a >case of Murphy
>striking at the wrong time.
>To be really clear on this : The Star & The >Crescent *does* work when
>disconnected from the internet and I will have a >good look at it (and
>post in here) as soon as Cota is out the door.
>Greetz,
>Eddy Sterckx
I'm very happy to hear the game is working as it should. I had asked
Patrick to be on stand-by, so he is pleased as well! Please don't
hesitate to contact me if you run into further trouble or questions. Best
wishes with CotA.
Annette
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> Exactly - I objected to the program trying to do this behind my back -
> it's not mentioned in the manual either - a menu option "get updates"
> would get you kudos, the current implementation is simply "not done" in
> the current day and age of spyware & malware
Witness the current saga of winternals expert Mark Russinovich and the
Sony DRM *rootkit* that some nameless shitty music CD installed on his
system:
Vincenzo Beretta
> Sony DRM *rootkit* that some nameless shitty music CD installed on his
> system:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/auyjl
For those unaware of the follow-up, this splendid "copy-protection" scheme
is currently allowing to World of Warcraft cheaters to bypass the security
measures of Blizzard's MMORPG and cheat at will.
Bloodstar
> Patrick to be on stand-by, so he is pleased as well! Please don't
> hesitate to contact me if you run into further trouble or questions. Best
> wishes with CotA.
>
> Annette
Annette,
Glad to see that you read Usenet. BTW, I bought Dominions 2 from Shrapnel
and looking forward to Dominions 3 - I hope that is progressing well!
Best,
Mario
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
And if you'd like another layer of rich, buttery irony, the DVD-copy-
protection-ripper I use (Slysoft's ANYDVD[1]) strips off the Sony
rootkit before it can install itself.
I understand why people might call me "paranoid" for being so solicitous
of my online security and privacy issues, but this ain't bean-bag
anymore, folks. Even us paranoids have real enemies - and sometimes the
enemy is a well-funded entity like Sony.
[1] Which is a fabulous little product that just makes all the copy
protection go away, and leaves you with a nice video_ts directory all
warm, fuzzy, and accessible. Oh, and you can strip off all the
advertisements and other bullshit, too. Not bad for $29.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"As the French intifada spreads into its second week and across the
country, the French government has a dilemma. To whom does it
surrender?"
- Jack Kelly
AnnetteBrooks
>Glad to see that you read Usenet. BTW, I bought >Dominions 2 from
Shrapnel
>and looking forward to Dominions 3 - I hope that is >progressing well!
>Best,
>Mario
Thanks for that, Mario. Yes, Dom 3 is quietly casting it's spell :-)
Annette
Epi Watkins
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
You're focusing too much on the auto-updating. You
would apply a patch in the normal way. You wouldn't be
penalized by not doing it automatically. The auto-
updating doesn't even have to be a part of it.
Here's what I'm saying:
People should be encouraged to honestly buy the game
with perks for doing it. The stick method isn't working
too well. At least not for popular games, it may work
better for wargames.
There is a Battlefield comparison. With Battlefield the
reason to buy is already there. What I'm saying is that
developers need to create a reason when it's not already
there. A positive reason, because the stick ain't
working.
eddys...@hotmail.com
No, just wondering how you'd apply a patch to a cartridge game :)
> Here's what I'm saying:
>
> People should be encouraged to honestly buy the game
> with perks for doing it. The stick method isn't working
> too well.
If you agree that the stick isn't working, isn't the really money
saving option from a publisher's pov then not minimizing costly
security and get bigger customer satisfaction in the process ?
"Costly" as in : SafeDisk et al are not free, time&money taking care of
real customers who can't get the game they just bought to run, bad pr
on the forums, ...
>From the evidence I'm seeing all publishers have already done their
math.
Unless you can come-up with a *really* tasty carrot that would nullify
the above
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Epi Watkins
Would flash work?
>
> > Here's what I'm saying:
> >
> > People should be encouraged to honestly buy the game
> > with perks for doing it. The stick method isn't working
> > too well.
>
> If you agree that the stick isn't working, isn't the really money
> saving option from a publisher's pov then not minimizing costly
> security and get bigger customer satisfaction in the process ?
>
> "Costly" as in : SafeDisk et al are not free, time&money taking care of
> real customers who can't get the game they just bought to run, bad pr
> on the forums, ...
>
> >From the evidence I'm seeing all publishers have already done their
> math.
>
> Unless you can come-up with a *really* tasty carrot that would nullify
> the above
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
I don't know. I'm getting kind of tired of talking
about this. How does offering perks piss off customers?
It's been done before. To a certain extent (SP?) at
least. Can't comment much on it because I don't know
much about it. Both or the latest Sims.
ppro...@prosimco.com
> math.
>
> Unless you can come-up with a *really* tasty carrot that would nullify
> the above
Our games come with a 150 page printed manual that doesn't appear
electronically on the CD. I thought this might curb piracy. I also
thought that, considering the wargaming market is more mature and
affluent than the gaming public at large, customers would rather just
purchase the game than be hassled with trying to find it, pirated,
online from warez sites.
But we get about 3 e-mails a week from people who have "lost their
manual" or "didn't receive a manual with the game" (confusing since the
manual IS the packaging for the game) who would like us to e-mail it to
them electronically. When we request that they send a scanned image or
photograph of their game disk, we never hear back from them, so I must
assume that these are people who got our games through piracy.
I don't get too worked up about it because a) our development studio is
made up, solely, of people with "day jobs" (i.e. lost revenues does not
equal starvation) and b) we build wargames because we love wargames,
not to get rich (if we wanted to get rich, we would wouldn't be making
wargames).
But there are alot of companies, especially other small development
houses, who's very survival depends on their sales. Most development
houses close after one title, unless their first title is a hit. So I
would just ask that, when you are frustrated by the use of hardware
keys or codes or other security devices, that you remember that some
companies are DESPERATE to protect their revenues, lest they go out of
business.
eddys...@hotmail.com
pproc...@prosimco.com wrote:
> > >From the evidence I'm seeing all publishers have already done their
> > math.
> >
> > Unless you can come-up with a *really* tasty carrot that would nullify
> > the above
>
> Our games come with a 150 page printed manual that doesn't appear
> electronically on the CD.
By a happy coincidence the manual for The Star and the Crescent got
promoted to Official Toilet Reading Material the day before yesterday -
don't be fooled by the crappy denomination as that's the highest status
any piece of dead tree can get in my casa.
A few remarks :
1) The manual is a must - I can't see anyone playing this without
having read the manual - so a printed manual is probably a very good
anti-piracy measure. The fact that frustrated pirates ask for the
manual shows their frustration. Some of them might even have bought the
game after they got your standard treatment.
2) Production value of the manual : the text comes too close to the
binding so you have to bend the pages a lot - doesn't make for
comfortable reading. It could do with an index at the back - and I keep
having to hunt for the TOC at page 3.
3) Content of the manual : tops so far - I always try to read most of
the manual of a game before diving in. 3 hours with the manual is more
efficient than 3 hours clicking in the game trying to figure out
everything by yourself.
> But there are alot of companies, especially other small development
> houses, who's very survival depends on their sales. Most development
> houses close after one title, unless their first title is a hit. So I
> would just ask that, when you are frustrated by the use of hardware
> keys or codes or other security devices, that you remember that some
> companies are DESPERATE to protect their revenues, lest they go out of
> business.
Well, I don't have a problem with copy protection measures, only with
counter-productive ones that hurt their customers and not the pirates.
I keep hearing the cost of a printed manual is prohibitive and I
personally don't need it either as I can just as well print the
pdf-file myself, but I can see it as a viable anti-piracy measure.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
ppro...@prosimco.com
> math.
>
> Unless you can come-up with a *really* tasty carrot that would nullify
> the above
Our games come with a 150 page printed manual that doesn't appear
electronically on the CD. I thought this might curb piracy. I also
thought that, considering the wargaming market is more mature and
affluent than the gaming public at large, customers would rather just
purchase the game than be hassled with trying to find it, pirated,
online from warez sites.
But we get about 3 e-mails a week from people who have "lost their
manual" or "didn't receive a manual with the game" (confusing since the
manual IS the packaging for the game) who would like us to e-mail it to
them electronically. When we request that they send a scanned image or
photograph of their game disk, we never hear back from them, so I must
assume that these are people who got our games through piracy.
I don't get too worked up about it because a) our development studio is
made up, solely, of people with "day jobs" (i.e. lost revenues does not
equal starvation) and b) we build wargames because we love wargames,
not to get rich (if we wanted to get rich, we would wouldn't be making
wargames).
But there are alot of companies, especially other small development
houses, who's very survival depends on their sales. Most development
houses close after one title, unless their first title is a hit. So I
would just ask that, when you are frustrated by the use of hardware
keys or codes or other security devices, that you remember that some
companies are DESPERATE to protect their revenues, lest they go out of
business.
Pat Proctor
President, ProSIM Company
Giftzwerg
ppro...@prosimco.com says...
> But there are alot of companies, especially other small development
> houses, who's very survival depends on their sales. Most development
> houses close after one title, unless their first title is a hit. So I
> would just ask that, when you are frustrated by the use of hardware
> keys or codes or other security devices, that you remember that some
> companies are DESPERATE to protect their revenues, lest they go out of
> business.
Fine, but I'm DESPERATE to protect the integrity of my systems - which
are used for far more than gaming - and I can't abide some Sony BMG
scumbag tossing an exploitable rootkit on my PC without my permission
*or knowledge*.
"It's very important to remember that while it's your intellectual
property - it's *not your computer*. And in the pursuit of protection of
intellectual property, it's important not to defeat or undermine the
security measures that people need to adopt in these days."
- Stewart Baker, Assistant Secretary for
Policy, Department of Homeland Security