Jump to navigation
Sponsored by Alienware tracer
Advertisement

EA responds to Spore DRM concerns News

PC News by Robert Purchese

17 September, 2008

EA has tackled, point by point, a number of concerns made by Spore owners regarding PC anti-piracy software SecuROM.

"There's no viruses, no spyware and no malware," an EA spokesperson told MTV Multiplayer. "We have located a download off of one of the Torrent sites that is a virus.

"The thing I would say to the consumer audience is that, if you're concerned with a virus on your computer, the chances of that are infinitely higher when you're downloading off of a hacked version than it would be downloading the authentic game.

"We would never put any spyware on anyone's computers. That's not going to happen," said the spokesperson.

Fans have argued that hacked versions of Spore can be more appealing because there is no limit on the amount of times they can install the game - the legitimate copy only allows three installations.

However, EA said there will be a patch soon to disassociate computers where the game has been uninstalled, in order to free up some installations. This is similar to iTunes.

The EA spokesperson further tried to dampen the installation limit by offering statistics taken from samples of Mass Effect PC, Spore Creature Creator and Spore owners.

Apparently less than one per cent of owners for each game have used all three installations, while less than 25 per cent have installed twice. Perhaps this is because people are trying to save their installations.

Another valid concern was that, years down the line, EA support for Spore may be closed and additional installations become impossible to obtain.

"If we were to ever turn off the servers on the game, we would put through a patch before that to basically make the DRM null and void," added the EA representative. "We're never walking away from the game and making it into a situation where people aren't going to be able to play it."

Spore owners were also thrown off track by the game manual, which wrongly claimed users can create multiple online accounts from a single copy of the title. Lucy Bradshaw, executive producer for Spore, has already apologised for this "misprint", but EA failed to respond to why this restriction was put in place to begin with.

EA recently came out and said Red Alert 3 would use a "more lenient" version of SecuROM in order to simultaneously appease fans and block pirates. This, basically, boiled down to five installations rather than three, plus one-time activation and no CD needed to play.

However, this not only failed to appease fans - who appear to be holding back from buying games protected by the SecuROM software, but also apparently does nothing to stop games being pirated. Spore, we're told, had been hacked before the official release date.

Instead, fans argue that these measures have been put in place to tackle the pre-owned, trade-in games market.

Advertisement

Are you excited about Spore on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 82 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Midian
17/09/08 @ 08:54
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Grrr - The "Misprint" they are refereing to is also actually in the game on the Login Form (as it allows you to Log-Out to change your account) and was functionaility that was in the Creature Creator and has apparently been "removed" from the full game.
Maximilian
17/09/08 @ 08:54
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If the game is cracked, freely available on torrents everywhere and has been (I heard) downloaded over 500,000 times, then what exactly is EA achieving with DRM in this case. Why don't they answer that question.

I doubt the DRM here has prevented a single act of piracy.
neilka
17/09/08 @ 08:55
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
off of
kangarootoo
17/09/08 @ 08:56
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The usual feeble scaremongering.
JonFE
17/09/08 @ 09:00
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"...fans argue that these measures have been put in place to tackle the pre-owned, trade-in games market..."

Taking into consideration the limit on the number of installations, the restriction on multiple online accounts and the fact that SecuROM failed to stop Spore from been hacked before release, the above argument seems a lot more valid.
Eraysor
17/09/08 @ 09:00
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Apparently less than one per cent of owners for each game have used all three installations, while less than 25 per cent have installed twice."

Suely they realise these games have barely even existed long enough to use up three installs with the average person. Idiots.
drchocapic
17/09/08 @ 09:00
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Fear. It works !"
actionfitz
17/09/08 @ 09:03
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No mention of "why the fuck is there no UNINSTALL option for securom?!"
when we remove spore... securom stays. And its not spyware?
wankers.
spout off all the statistics you want - I regularly upgrade, change the hardware in my PC, i've gad to reformat a few times this year.

I am not calling a premium phone line for permission to play my spyware ridden game after i've already bought it.

you fail.
do not pass go.
do not collect $200 etc.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 10:04
Xerx3s
17/09/08 @ 09:07
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"There's no viruses, no spyware and no malware,"

"Apparently less than one per cent of owners for each game have used all three installations, while less than 25 per cent have installed twice. Perhaps this is because people are trying to save their installations."

Hmmmmzzzz....
Mentalist(air)
17/09/08 @ 09:10
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"who appear to be holding back from buying games protected by the SecuROM software"

Is there any evidence to support that, other than the prevalence of militant forum whingers?
DFawkes
17/09/08 @ 09:15
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It was that last point about future support that concerned me the most, I'd probably consider it.

I was swept away by the scaremongering, and appreciate it can genuinely screw your machine up (my last PC really didn't like it), but since I found out some of my favourite games use SecuROM, albeit less restrictively, I can live with it. I still call it malware though.

kangarootoo
17/09/08 @ 09:16
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Xerx3s

Hehe, +1
Machetazo
17/09/08 @ 09:17
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Another thing they'll have done by using this clearly controversial technology on their PC titles, is placed a targeting reticule right over future releases. If some hackers believe there's notoriety to be had from breaking the security and distributing software early. Especially true, if EA tightens measures - they'd probably see it as more of a challenge. As most people suggest, I think that's another reason to imply that the DRM tech has backfired spectacularly.
sergeantdisco
17/09/08 @ 09:19
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
EA in 'actually money-grabbing bastards' shocker.

I will never buy a game with restricted installs if I can help it. I hate to think how many times I've installed some of my favourite games.

MY favourite games.

MINE!
sickpuppysoftware
17/09/08 @ 09:21
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Apparently less than one per cent of owners for each game have used all three installations, while less than 25 per cent have installed twice. Perhaps this is because people are trying to save their installations.
I'd imagine there is also a fair percentage that bought the game and have used up no installations by download the DRM free pirate version to avoid all this crap.
JonFE
17/09/08 @ 09:25
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Xerx3s:

Great catch, but does Spore have a non-secret online activation? Because, if it does, EA could be using that to gather their statistics and not some form of spyware...
paulf
17/09/08 @ 09:25
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
'Fans have argued that hacked versions of Spore can bemore appealing because there is no limit on the amount of times they can install the game - the legitimate copy only allows three installations.' - nothing to do with the hacked version being free then

Mr_Dodger
17/09/08 @ 09:30
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Plus yo-ho'ers are funding terrorism.

Fact.
gmjapan
17/09/08 @ 09:32
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Mentalist(air) "Is there any evidence to support that, other than the prevalence of militant forum whingers? "

There are 3 big games I have definatley avoided because of the 'security' associated with the install (Spore is one). These are games that I would have definatley purchased but didnt. There are also other games I was interested in but just never bothered to find out more when I found out what security was used.

Games like GalCivII are such a breath of fresh air.
jaywalker3010
17/09/08 @ 09:36
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
there is an uninstall option for securom. go to a dos prompt, change to directory for the game, type `gamename.exe /uninstall` this should remove all traces of Securom from the machine.
Commissar
17/09/08 @ 09:41
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"EA said there will be a patch soon to disassociate computers where the game has been uninstalled, in order to free up some installations."

THANK YOU.
Was that really so hard?

I've no issue with SecureROM (or whatever other system they like to use as long as it's not going to break anything) but an install limit in this age of cheap hardware upgrades and multi PC ownership is just bloody ridiculous.
Sweetmate
17/09/08 @ 09:55
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I cancelled my preorder of Crysis Warhead this week because of this and I'm not a forum militant, just an informed consumer who will not accept this bullshit.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 10:55
Ravenger
17/09/08 @ 09:56
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Glad to see there's going to be a patch to deauthorize activations - my biggest problem with the DRM. Now can we have one for Mass Effect please, and any future game that uses this DRM.
penhalion
17/09/08 @ 10:00
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It starting to look like DRM is actually one of the contributing factors of piracy! A lot of stigma has grown up around the fact that legitimate users are getting penalised for buying DRM enabled software. Software that requires you to put in a CD key and then have the CD handy for actually using the game. I get asked all the time "Why the heck did I need a CD key if I then still need the CD to play?" and it's a legitimate question. Another question that often crops up is "How the hell are you dictating how many times I can install the software I paid for?". As I feel the same way about such things, I had no answer to that. I'm not sure what problem there is as long as there is only one copy of the game active at any given time. I always thought that this is what online registration was meant for.

Ironically, someone once asked me to my face why it was easier to play a pirated version of a game I had worked on than to play the legal copy. I had no answer for them even though it made me pretty angry to hear them say it.

Edit: I actually uninstalled Spore once I realised it used Securom. I returned it to Game and got a refund. They were arguing that they don't give refunds on PC games but, I pointed out that consumer law was on my side and I'd nip outside and get a policeman to explain it to them if they liked!

Edited 2 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 11:15
Skurmedel
17/09/08 @ 10:03
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Their statistics is bollocks. It doesn't matter if "a small percentage" is actually using up all the installs, it's the possibility of using them up in the first place that sucks.
shinki
17/09/08 @ 10:05
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Good form of them to respond, this seems to address all of the problems with the DRM iteslf. The question still stands though... why bother when it obivously hasn't stopped pirates at all.
hiddenranbir
17/09/08 @ 10:06
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
EA are wrong.

Stardock are right.

I cancelled my preorder of Crysis Warhead this week because of this and I'm not a forum militant, just an informed consumer who will not accept this bullshit.

Get it on Steam.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 11:15
chicknstu
17/09/08 @ 10:28
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Red Alert 3 would use a "more lenient" version of SecuROM in order to simultaneously appease fans and block pirates"

I'm going to say this once....

YOU CAN NOT BLOCK PIRATES

ok, fact. you can not stop people pirating games. Pirates can obtain ANY game they want, through piracy. There is no game that has managed to remain piracy free. We now KNOW this is impossible.

Now, given that you can NOT stop people pirating games, exactly what is the benefit of DRM to anyone? and DON'T say it's to stop people pirating games.
Commissar
17/09/08 @ 10:50
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Umm. The UK and EU versions of Clear Sky don't use Starforce, they use TAGES.
kipper
17/09/08 @ 10:52
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Mr_Dodger: How can someone fund terrorism if they pay _no money_ for a pirated/stolen game?
thesombrerokid
17/09/08 @ 10:57
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
and don't say it's to stop the resale of the game because a few months later to take off the straight jacket allowing anyone to resell it if they like.

you're more likely to get malware off pirates trust us the massive money grabbing conglomerate with your privacy and information we promise we'll not use it against you despite what our Licence agreement says, don't trust those thieving wretches who made us reclassify the legal definition of theft and force the governments of the world to make innovation in the IT sector illegal.
chicknstu
17/09/08 @ 11:04
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Why is money a part of this too? Way I see it, all that can possibly come from EA using DRM is that they lose money.

- They lose money through everyone pirating it out of principle
- They lose money thhrough having to actually pay for the security software
- They lose money from bad press and word of mouth putting people off a purchase

Someone please explain, how does using DRM actually make them any money? They're hoping people will buy it twice once their 3 installs are gone? erm... good luck with that!

Hopefully someone high up at EA will see this post, and a suit will get fired.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 12:05
peak_performance
17/09/08 @ 11:08
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Limited second hand sales = Increased first hand sales?
IneptPercy
17/09/08 @ 11:13
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Install limits are fine with me if they can be reversed, alos as mentioned they will basically release the 'hack' themselves when servers get switched off.

THe excuse of DRM justifys stealing a game makes me laugh.
chicknstu
17/09/08 @ 11:18
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@IneptPercy

"THe excuse of DRM justifys stealing a game makes me laugh. "

I agree with you, although I have heard a number of tea-leafs using this as an excuse, probably to make themselves feel better. Like they wouldn't have downloaded it if it didn't have DRM! yeah, my arse!

That said, I have a legitemate copy, but as soon as I hit my '3 install limit', I'm going crack-hunting. Senseless.
johnnybrn
17/09/08 @ 11:27
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
And they wonder why PC gaming is dying

Another thing is that PC games have the highest depreciation of any console. So companies have to recover their investments quickly to make a return.

I'm going to hold off getting Spore until its under £20 which will be in a couple of months
Gearskin
17/09/08 @ 11:35
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Blah Blah Blah, the internet fanbase strikes again. I bought SPORE, I installed SPORE, I play SPORE.

Stop moaning like a bunch of bitches. If DRM is enough to stop you buying a game you want... there is something wrong with your brain.
jmg123
17/09/08 @ 11:45
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If they must use DRM, then why not do it via steam (or at least in the same way) at least that system works.
penhalion
17/09/08 @ 11:46
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@gearskin

If installing DRM software that may or may not send back a list of everything you have installed on your machine everytime it logs onto the internet to verify your copy of the game, isn't a worry for you then that's fine. After all Sony's rootkit was harmless wasn't it......
Gearskin
17/09/08 @ 12:09
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
But you've no problem putting your credit card details onto the web? Or your email? Or you name when registering on forums?

Securom is a very small part of the potential HORROR that could befall you.
Magic Panda
17/09/08 @ 12:19
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
From the Spore Forums DRM FAQ:

Why even bother with this new process? It seems like a hindrance… will it benefit the players?

Yes, it will benefit players. The new system means you don't have to play with the disc in your computer. Losing discs can always be such a pain, so requiring players to authenticate online can be a huge benefit.
chicknstu
17/09/08 @ 12:32
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Why even bother with this new process? It seems like a hindrance… will it benefit the players? "

Wait... you don't have to put the Disc in the drive to play?!?

I didn't know that. That's actually really awesome.
Magic Panda
17/09/08 @ 12:42
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
and losing discs can be such a pain...
Edited 1 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 13:42
dsmx
17/09/08 @ 12:55
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No matter how you define a virus securom is one therefore every legitimate copy of spore is infected with a virus.
Ranger101
17/09/08 @ 13:17
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I love how Gearskin is arguing the points of DRM with a games developer who has had it in his own products and dislikes it with very specific and knowledgeable reasons...


"If I ain't got nuffin to hide, I ain't got nuffin to fear..."

Fuck you. It's that sort of thinking and mentality in this Country... nay this Continent, that has led us to such a loss of Privacy that a significant amount of people think giving up their DNA is less worse then having pictures of yourself naked spread around and kept on file. Yes, this is in context. What I do with my computer, with my software and the way I use it - even if it is in flagrant abuse of any license agreement - is my responsibility and my choice. You have the right to enforce any punishment on me for doing so, but it is absolutely unacceptable for you to track my habits and behaviour in case I 'might' abuse your license.

Do you see the difference there?

By buying a DRM enabled software and supporting it, you are legally stating that there is the possiblity that you are infact a Copyright Infringer; that there is a chance that you might breach their Terms and Conditions and you need help in regulating yourself. This also means you're automatically liable, without much of a defense, if you accidently breach their T's & C's.

In other words, they're saying informally, "You're probably a 'thief', we don't trust you, so fuck you, we're going to babysit how you use the game...we like your money though. Thanks. You Fool.".

No, Fuck you. I have acquired a license for you game, I want to use the license for this game in a manner that suits me, and in a way that doesn't invade my privacy or limit the actions I can perform on MY OWN hardware. Otherwise, no sale.
Ranger101
17/09/08 @ 13:20
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Gearskin, your analogy with Online Credit Card fraud is irrelevant and a completely different matter. Apples and Oranges. Does not compute.
Skeletor
17/09/08 @ 13:29
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Maximilian

"If the game is cracked, freely available on torrents everywhere and has been (I heard) downloaded over 500,000 times, then what exactly is EA achieving with DRM in this case. Why don't they answer that question."

Have you actually read the article? This is NOT about preventing piracy!
"Instead, fans argue that these measures have been put in place to tackle the pre-owned, trade-in games market."

DRM is a lie...
FooAtari
17/09/08 @ 13:39
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Ranger101

+1

100% agree on both your posts.

I can't possibly understand why any consumer would ever be ok with this crap.
Ranger101
17/09/08 @ 13:42
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
(in response/followup to Maximillion)

Well... technically this DRM is enforcing their T's&C's - most software companies don't allow you to resell a licence to their product, and this enforces that.

It's just a very poor area to enforce as a recent case concerning the resale of Autodesk/AutoCAD software has shown that the prevention of resale of software cannot be upheld in court, due to it being too common and accepted in society.

By enforcing this type of DRM, EA are going against the grain of Consumer expectation - which holds enough weight in court on most occasions.

Technically it's against most EULA's for you to trade in an Xbox or Playsation game in store like GAME etc. But no software company has done anything about it because it just won't hold up in court.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 14:45
Chauncy
17/09/08 @ 13:50
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I love how each EA statement released relating to this DRM debacle never really covers the issues, but then I suppose that's to be expected.

Personally, I'm completely against having to ask permission to use something I've paid money for, be it via the software itself, or a premium rate phone number, grovelling for a new activation. The news that a patch will allow you to reassign these installs is a step in the right direction, but I think we all know that the only real solution is to dispense with these kinds of measures that present more hindrance to legitimate users than pirates.

Especially when the real reason for them including it is pretty clear: EA: Second-hand sales are a "critical situation"

I've already decided against buying Spore because of this, and I won't be getting Red Alert 3 either, even with the new 'lenient' DRM. It would be really interesting to see the kind of sales EA is loosing because of this, in comparison to what they would have lost in second hand sales.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 17/09/08 @ 14:51

Comments: 1-50 of 82 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Metaboli

X View gallery