Drm, Fc2 And Ubi

[WhiteKnight77]

It appears that Ubi will be using SecurROM and limiting the number of installs by PC users. As seen in the DRM on FC2 thread about half way down, LooperNor posted the link to the FC2 Product page states:

This video game is protected by the digital rights management software SecuROM which installs additional components required for copy protection on the user's computer and limits the number of installations of the game. During the installation and/or the first launch, an online connection is required to unlock the game.

I didn't see this on the US page, but apparently, this information is coming and going on the above linked page. There are already questions as to how much support Ubi will give this game and with the above limited installs, it does not look good for long term support, even though such claims are being made.

Gamers are already cancelling preorders for this game too.

[Dannik]

Just to clarify (and certainly not to defend SecuROM use) the five installs doesn't mean it can only be installed five times. It means that when installed on one machine, it phones home, reducing the available hardware profiles by one. If one machine's install is uninstalled (which may require the use of a tool provided by SecuROM and/or Ubisoft), it returns that available install back to the pool. That's the theory, anyway.

The game can be installed on five different systems simultaneously, not only five times total.

This is the same technology that was included with Bioshock and Spore, though Bioshock's "five concurrent installs" rule was lifted via an almost unnoticeable patch a few months ago.

[WhiteKnight77]

Bukowski113, one of the Ubi forum managers posted this tidbit shortly before I posted this here and at BFS it seems:

Some DRM points that will hopefully answer some of your questions and will clarify some misunderstandings about our DRM and SecuROM:

- You have 5 activations on 3 separate PCs.

- Uninstalling the game refunds an activation. This process is called revoke, so as long as you complete proper uninstall you will be able to install the game an unlimited number of times on 3 systems.

- You can upgrade your computer as many time as you want (using our revoke system)

- Ubisoft is committed to the support of our games, and additional activations can be provided.

- Ubisoft is committed to the long term support of our games: you’ll always be able to play Far Cry 2.

It ooes appear that you can install it on 3 PCs at the same time (though I may be wrong) and up to 5 times each on each system. But one has to wonder why one would uninstall a game prior to a reformat anyway. Do not most of us just reformat and reinstall if we do go the reformat and reinstall route?

How will the revoke system work? Will the game call back to the Ubi DRM servers to say that the game is uninstalling before it actually does?

[Sup]

Will the game call back to the Ubi DRM servers to say that the game is uninstalling before it actually does?

Okay, why would it ever do that when it can just as easily send back to the ubi servers after it uninstalls all the files?

[krise madsen]

There are variations of the "install limit" theme on the various SecuRom protected games. It would seem that this one on one hand limits the number of PC's it can be installed to to 3 (others have 5), and on top of that limits the number of activations on the same PC to 5 (I haven't seen that one before). On the other hand, it has the revoke system (not found on Spore's SecuRom).

Whatever. I can't be bothered any more. I'll just stick to the niches of the industry that doesn't treat it's customers like criminals and braindead lemmings.

Respectfully

krise madsen

[WhiteKnight77]

Will the game call back to the Ubi DRM servers to say that the game is uninstalling before it actually does?

Okay, why would it ever do that when it can just as easily send back to the ubi servers after it uninstalls all the files?

Six of one, half dozen of the other. How every you put it, how does the Ubi authentication servers know that you have uninstalled the game and are to get back whatever number of activations you have left again?

[KRP 56]

Here we go again! First Crysis Warhead now Far Cry 2. Must be connected to net to activate/unlock the game before you can play. Problem is my PC that is able to play these games has no net connection. Crap like this almost tempts me to become a PC game !

[Sup]

Will the game call back to the Ubi DRM servers to say that the game is uninstalling before it actually does?

Okay, why would it ever do that when it can just as easily send back to the ubi servers after it uninstalls all the files?

Six of one, half dozen of the other. How every you put it, how does the Ubi authentication servers know that you have uninstalled the game and are to get back whatever number of activations you have left again?

... it'll call back to the ubi drm servers right after you uninstall?

The part worth complaining about is how this necessitates an internet connection, not how it works.

[thales100]

I will buy Far Cry 2 anyway, with DRM or not, just cant lose this one.

But i would like to know why they insist to use this kind of "copy protection" system that simply wont work to prevent what they may call "professional" piracy.

[Sup]

simply wont work to prevent what they may call "professional" piracy.

There's no professional about it, anyone can go and pirate a securom protected game -- it just takes one person to crack it for millions to play it.

It's as simple as a case of publishers and 'suits' being out of touch with the issue.

[krise madsen]

I'm drawing the line at SecuRom. It installs stuff at Ring 0 (i.e. deep, deep inside your OS) that you have no way of identifying. Remember another DRM that did the same thing? That's right. StarForce.

It's not like Ubi is jumping through hoops to make games I like in the first place. This folly just ensures they don't get a purchase from me.

Respectfully

krise madsen

[Dannik]

I'm drawing the line at SecuRom. It installs stuff at Ring 0 (i.e. deep, deep inside your OS) that you have no way of identifying.

I've seen this claim a few times. Formally, SecuROM installs at Ring3. Do you (and I really trust you do) have confirmable evidence that Ring0 is where SecuROM's resident resides?

I'm not defending -anything- here, but I hate misinformation, as in common opinion being held as fact.

I'm not calling you out, I just ask that you have done your own research, or at least found good sources.

[thales100]

There's no professional about it, anyone can go and pirate a securom protected game -- it just takes one person to crack it for millions to play it.

It's as simple as a case of publishers and 'suits' being out of touch with the issue.

Oh really ??? . Thats pretty obvious for me, but doesnt seem to be for SecuROM, i.e..

"SecuROMâ„¢ technology suppresses CD-ROM to CD-R copying, DVD-ROM to DVD-R copying, Internet image distribution, and professional piracy."

http://www.securom.com/support_faq.asp

Its obvious too that this can only stop if they really create a protection system that couldnt be cracked, or at least would require months for it - nothing like DRM of course.

[JJUK]

We at tug dont have a problem with this, personally if anything happened i would call them up and like most companys within the computer industry they will send me another i have no doubt. I dont see an issue really but i havent had any problems before whereas some may have, the game will be cracked anyway but that doesnt interest me as im buying. I cant see what all the fuss is about they have to try and protect there product somehow, we then either buy it or not. This game i think will fill the xmas gap then hopefully some other company will improve enough to release a great game, untill then see you all online

My comp is used for gaming alone and most people i know are the same a hardrive cost nothing these days a reformat is a few hrs if you dont like the game this is what i would do to rid myself of whatever is on my comp. Obviously if you guys use your comp for a lot more you have a lot more to consider.

Lol i see the Xbox version is already available for pirated DL and im sure the Pc will follow soon

Edited October 16, 2008 by JJUK

[KRP 56]

Lol i see the Xbox version is already available for pirated DL and im sure the Pc will follow soon

That always gets me how the companys fuss about PC piracy but anyone can look on the file sharing sites and see console versions everywhere.

[krise madsen]

I'm drawing the line at SecuRom. It installs stuff at Ring 0 (i.e. deep, deep inside your OS) that you have no way of identifying.

I've seen this claim a few times. Formally, SecuROM installs at Ring3. Do you (and I really trust you do) have confirmable evidence that Ring0 is where SecuROM's resident resides?

I'm not defending -anything- here, but I hate misinformation, as in common opinion being held as fact.

I'm not calling you out, I just ask that you have done your own research, or at least found good sources.

I misspoke (or is that "misposted" ). It should have read "SecuRom alledgedly installs stuff at Ring 0".

I'm really monkey see, monkey do when it comes to technical issues. I misspoke because I am personally convinced that they (i.e. Sony) would do something like that (Ring 0 install) and lie about it without batting an eye. But confirmable evidence? No. Heck, I wouldn't even be able to tell you which version of Windows XP I'm using!

I would probably never have known something like Ring 0-3 existed had I not talked to the manager of an internet/gaming cafe. They ran images of their games (legally purchased/licenced, of course) from a central server, allowing registered cafe members to save profiles, saved games etc. regardless of which PC they actually used. This involved cracking a lot of copy protection schemes (this was back when most PC DRM required the disc in the drive) including StarForce and SecuRom. As a regular customer, I often chatted with the manager, sometimes about new games they were getting. For one game (honestly can't remember which one, probably a shooter), he told me that they wouldn't be getting it because "it does really spooky things, deep inside Windows" (he was not a simpleton on PC's but trying to explain it to one, i.e. me ), and that this was a new version of SecuRom.

I didn't pay much attention to it (not really knowing what it meant at the time), but for some reason remembered it when this SecuRom-Ring 0 thing came up with the Spore DRM lawsuit. And so I happened to talk to a guy (who's more into anti-virus stuff than games and DRM) who tried - and failed - to explain to me what the kernel was. He also noted that Ring 0 stuff or something "hidden inside Windows" (don't ask me for details) could explain why SecuRom was apparently quite crack-resistant. "Besides", he noted. "They already did it with the music rootkit, didn't they?".

So I personally believe that SecuRom installs sh.. erm, "stuff" at Ring 0 (or somehow hides it in Windows) and they are lying through their teeth about it. But it's my personal suspicion/conviction. So sorry for the missing "alledgedly". My bad

Respectfully

krise madsen

[JJUK]

Lol Krise, i think what we need is someone who actually knows exactly what it does and how it can affect your comp, hopefully they can explain it so we all fully understand it then we can make a better choice if its a bad thing or a good thing :0

[Sup]

1- it doesn't hurt your computer.

2- most users will not have it impact their ability to play/reinstall the game

3- those who have that misfortune are screwed

4- ubisoft does not care if securom prevents you from playing your game

5- if that happens, it's easier to just pirate it and get a version without all the hassle -- hell, even if have a boxed copy to sitting on your desk

6- ubisoft isn't evil, they're just annoying

7- whether you buy the game or not, whine less. No one is making you play it, and nobody is preventing you from playing it either legally or illegally.

[WhiteKnight77]

One other thing to remember, even if you uninstall the game, SecuROM doesn't. You have to get a special tool.

Even this come from Wikipedia, there is this

SecuROM v 7.x

Latest SecuROM Versions are all 7.x versions which are released and updated continuously.[citation needed]

SecuROM 7.x, if run under a non-admin user account, installs its own service called UAService7.exe, which works in ring 3 of the computer's operating system.[citation needed]

Securom has said: "it has been developed to enable users without Windows administrator rights the ability to access all SecuROM features."[3]

[edit] Known problems

The version of SecuROM that comes with Armed Assault, S.T.A.L.K.E.R (European release only), Neverwinter Nights 2, Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (patched to v1.04), Tomb Raider Anniversary (demo and full version), Overlord, BioShock (demo and full version), Hellgate: London (single player mode), Rayman Raving Rabbids (PC version), World in Conflict (single-player campaign only) and Spore (full game and Creature Creator) prevents the game from running at all if older versions (before v11) of Process Explorer, a free tool by Sysinternals/Microsoft, has been run since the previous reboot. However, a workaround for this SecuROM detection bug (v9.25 is not affected) can be found here. Microsoft has worked around this particular bug with Process Explorer v11.0.

Under Windows Vista, this same version of SecuROM also prevents the game from running if Explicit Congestion Notification is enabled in Vista's networking configuration.[4] The workaround is to disable ECN by running the command netsh interface tcp set global ecncapability=disabled.

The version of SecuROM that is installed with the first German retail version of the game Das Schwarze Auge: Drakensang installs a shell extension that makes explorer.exe crash at least on some systems running Windows XP. The same can be seen in systems running Windows Vista with the version of SecuROM that comes with Neverwinter Nights 2 (see forums). SecuROM is hosting a fix to the issue that apparently removes the extension. As of version 1.0.1, this fix is not included in the official patches.

So much for not causing problems. The wiki also has links to the 2 class-action lawsuits against gaming companies for using SecuROM. Both are reminiscent of the lawsuit against Ubi for Starforce to the tune of $5,000,000.

Quote:

HKLM\S-1-5-21-854245398-507921405-1957994488-1003\ Software\SecuROM\!CAUTION! NEVER DELETE OR CHANGE ANY KEY* 29/01/2007 00:06 0 bytes Key name contains embedded nulls (*)

This is a registry string for SecuROM. Source

[krise madsen]

Lol Krise, i think what we need is someone who actually knows exactly what it does and how it can affect your comp, hopefully they can explain it so we all fully understand it then we can make a better choice if its a bad thing or a good thing :0

Explaining it so I fully understand it is probably asking a bit much

Besides, as much as I might find it offensive, DRM stuff that goes on in my PC is, TBH, not horribly important either. If it really does cause severe problems then SecuROM will become a PR disaster of StarForce proportions.

The real issue is having to deal with an endless stream of DRM schemes (activations, revokes, online verification bla. bla. bla.) that is, from a paying customers perspective, unnecessary. It's an extra layer of "stuff" that I really don't want to be bothered with. Just making basic stuff work on a PC is tough enough for me!

The industry is asking us to trust them ("we won't shut down DRM servers") but giving us very little reason to do so. Trust would be a patch to remove the DRM-hoops-to-jump-through once the initial release buzz has died down (at which time any hope of DRM doing anything about piracy is gone) or releasing a DRM removal patch once it's obvious that a game is easily pirated. It would be not having SecuROM DRM on Steam releases (and yes I know there are issues, and I really don't give a hoot).

And the fact that the sudden popularity of install limits coincides nicely with making used game purchases an iffy proposition (something the games industry isn't happy about) doesn't really instill trust in us gamers either.

That is, not the whole industry is doing this. Like Stardock. Their recently released 2008 Customer Report contain, among other things, includes a revised version of the Gamers Bill of Rights. Which basically boils down to "No douchebaggery. Stop screwing over your paying customers". Also, the fact that Stardock is enjoying roaring sales of their DRM-free games kinda flies in the face of any pro-DRM argument.

I'm just tired. Tired of having drive-killing StarForce replaced by installation limiting SecuROM. Tired of having to deal with a new DRM issue with every game. Tired of hearing industry leaders tell me piracy is to blame one week, and something entirely contradicting the next week. Tired of publishers raging against piracy while refusing to release demo's of their games (which, at least could curtail the "just want to see if it works on my PC" piracy that some claim as their reason for piracy). I'm tired of seeing the games industry repeating the mistakes of the music industry. For me, it means that the portfolio of games I would even consider buying gets much smaller. For others, I'm sure, it means a visit to their favorite bit torrent site.

Respectfully

krise madsen