Command & Conquer Copies Ubisoft's Awful DRM

[jelli]

:no: what an incredible clusterf**k this has become. It's such a shame to see a beloved brand get so totally wiped out by not only a change in format, but DRM also.

+1 I am not going to even bother with it, as someone who bought C&C all the way from the original to C&C3 (also including the re-release C&C First Decade) I am bitterly disappointed with the way the franchise has been managed.

[ANON86364]

i didnt realise the laptops couldnt connect to the internet....

That's just being dense. You know how much the game is played offline for whatever reasons? Like on a laptop in transit or for someone without mobile internet access. Hell, what happens if my ISP screws up and my internet is down? Now I can't play the game I have paid for?

[forster]

:pirate: (Y)

[HoochieMamma]

:pirate: (Y)

Arrrrr me Matey.....Arrrr :yes:

[kheldorin]

DRM isn't going to revive PC sales. Avoid the PR nightmare and just don't release it for the PC. Let the pirates have their victory. Even after all these years, console sales are still going strong, and at a time where PC should be gaining on consoles they aren't. PC is so niche that the Mac market isn't relatively niche anymore. I guess Valve did their research. Developers should just spend their resources on making great games for the console.

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/13100931-post163.html

Hell even the fact that Bad Company 2 has more players on the PC wasn't even true.

The developers' of Supreme Commander decision to make an RTS work with a console controller may appear dumb at first but definitely not dumber than just relying on PC sales. Not releasing it on the PC may end up increasing console sales anyway since alot of people do have both a PC and a console. Without the free PC version, more people would buy the console version. Funnily enough, the best DRM is indeed no DRM...and no PC version.

[Singh400]

Yeah, not bothered. This isn't a real CNC game anyway. No base building = not CNC.

[PGHammer]

:no: what an incredible clusterf**k this has become. It's such a shame to see a beloved brand get so totally wiped out by not only a change in format, but DRM also.

A persistent Internet connection is DRM?

Please; what's next? Is *Yahoo Messenger* or other IM software going to get whacked for requiring a persistent connection?

EA was very up front about that requirement (as in going back to last year, before the closed beta started).

That argument is disingenuous at best, and flat-out specious at worst.

Online gaming (and multiplayer online gaming in particular) is also a *social experience*; why else do you think XBLA and Sony's PSN are so wildly successful? (And why is Blizzard going the same route with Starcraft 2, and getting hammered for the same reason?)

Why do you think social networks are getting serious love as far as gaming goes? (In addition to fans of C&C and Starcraft talking about those games on Facebook, EA and Blizzard have *official* Facebook sites for C&C 4 and Starcraft 2, respectively.)

It may be hated, but it's no more DRM than the same requirement for Starcraft 2 is.

[pasty2k2]

A persistent Internet connection is DRM?

Please; what's next? Is *Yahoo Messenger* or other IM software going to get whacked for requiring a persistent connection?

EA was very up front about that requirement (as in going back to last year, before the closed beta started).

That argument is disingenuous at best, and flat-out specious at worst.

Online gaming (and multiplayer online gaming in particular) is also a *social experience*; why else do you think XBLA and Sony's PSN are so wildly successful? (And why is Blizzard going the same route with Starcraft 2, and getting hammered for the same reason?)

Why do you think social networks are getting serious love as far as gaming goes? (In addition to fans of C&C and Starcraft talking about those games on Facebook, EA and Blizzard have *official* Facebook sites for C&C 4 and Starcraft 2, respectively.)

It may be hated, but it's no more DRM than the same requirement for Starcraft 2 is.

Irrelevant, I want to play this game without having to connect to the internet first. Simple. I could do that before with other games, I can't with this one, so I won't buy it.

Comparing that to "whats next, an IM client"? I dont think that argument has much meaning.

Not my only reason not to buy - it's got none of the C&C magic left in there, nothing like any other C&C game. Shame, but who is honestly surprised considering its EA now.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Irrelevant, I want to play this game without having to connect to the internet first. Simple. I could do that before with other games, I can't with this one, so I won't buy it.

Comparing that to "whats next, an IM client"? I dont think that argument has much meaning.

Not my only reason not to buy - it's got none of the C&C magic left in there, nothing like any other C&C game. Shame, but who is honestly surprised considering its EA now.

To be the devil's advocate here: When is your PC not connected to the internet? Apart from outages on the ISP's end my computer is always online.

[PGHammer]

To be the devil's advocate here: When is your PC not connected to the internet? Apart from outages on the ISP's end my computer is always online.

That, my friend, is precisely my point!

It's not the time of the first C&C, when nobody (except for medium or larger businesses) had anything above dial-up Internet access, and the local BBS was still king.

When I first started playing C&C (and I came in late, with Red Alert 2; however, I *would* go back and grab Theater of War within a year) I didn't play multiplayer *at all*.

In fact, I largely *don't* play even RTS games multiplayer; however, it's mostly not because it's badly done.

I don't play online multiplayer RTS because it's by and large degenerated into spamfesting (and user-created maps, with loaded resources, merely make that bad situation worse). The only real way of attacking spamming is to either cap resources (economy capping) or unit capping; and both require the developer to do it as part of building the game. That was something that *Westwood* actually did with C&C Tiberian Dawn, Tiberium Sun, and Firestorm (along with the Red Alert cycle and even Generals, though Zero Hour offers ways to end-run the economic cap), so while Westwood (and later, EA Los Angeles) didn't implement UNIT caps, there was still a cap (but economic in nature).

I would wager that a lot of the folks griping about that persistent Internet connection are ones that (like me) gave up on online MP because of unit spamming. C&C 4 has actually attacked that issue head-on, so it may well be worth it to give MP a chance. Because C&C 4 has no real economy (which I, in fact, pointed out in an earlier post), they had no alternative BUT to implement unit caps.

Also, they actually had storyline-based *reasons* for the unit caps. (Yes; the caps actually fit into the game's plot!)

As bad as things were after we chased the Scrin off Earth, they have since gotten worse. MUCH worse.

Tiberium is literally about to eat the Earth.

Populations are in rapid decline - GDI, Nod, even the Forgotten. *Everybody* is taking it in the gonads.

That's why not even GDI is building big bases any more - who will they get to staff them?

(NOD, on the other hand, has never been a believer in the large base - if you've followed previous games in the Tiberium cycle, NOD has consistently, and largely successfully, painted GDI as an *army of occupation*. NOD bases, like their units, are largely models of both economy and efficiency by design and out of necessity. You wonder why GDI went that way? Same reason, of course - necessity.)

[Nagisan]

To be the devil's advocate here: When is your PC not connected to the internet? Apart from outages on the ISP's end my computer is always online.

Many people use laptops to play single player games for just that reason, they are not always connected to the internet.

So sure, a desktop is likely going to be connected for quite awhile, but online requirements affect laptop users who travel often and do not always have internet access (which, if you use a laptop more than a desktop, chances are you travel quite often as you needed the mobility). On top of that, it also affects anyone who does not have a constant always on connection or at the least, an unstable connection.

[Ironman273]

Arrrrrrgh! 3 times within 10 minutes I've gotten the stupid "You've been randomly disconnected from the Internet, your progress will not be saved blah blah blah" message (when my web access is actually perfectly fine) so I've not got past the first 3 minutes of gameplay yet as I refuse to lose what I've done. Why oh why EA?! Stupid ****ing move :angry: Never have I regretted a purchase so quickly :(

EDIT: Oh and it gets even better - the commandandconquer.com website is now down so I can't even go and rant at the official support forums.

A persistent Internet connection is DRM?

Please; what's next? Is *Yahoo Messenger* or other IM software going to get whacked for requiring a persistent connection?

EA was very up front about that requirement (as in going back to last year, before the closed beta started).

That argument is disingenuous at best, and flat-out specious at worst.

Online gaming (and multiplayer online gaming in particular) is also a *social experience*; why else do you think XBLA and Sony's PSN are so wildly successful? (And why is Blizzard going the same route with Starcraft 2, and getting hammered for the same reason?)

Why do you think social networks are getting serious love as far as gaming goes? (In addition to fans of C&C and Starcraft talking about those games on Facebook, EA and Blizzard have *official* Facebook sites for C&C 4 and Starcraft 2, respectively.)

It may be hated, but it's no more DRM than the same requirement for Starcraft 2 is.

I decided to quote the post I was replying to since you quoted me. What's wrong with it? Well, just read the post. It's not just checking to see if you're online. If you blacklisted the EA servers then you couldn't play so it's much more than that. It's an online check to make sure you are a legal player, which is not bad at face value, but when you start having the problems scokem has, then it becomes intrusive. Also, although I don't travel much anymore, Red Alert 2 (with Yuri's add-on) was a staple on my laptop for my business trips for years when I traveled overseas to places without internet.

[PGHammer]

I decided to quote the post I was replying to since you quoted me. What's wrong with it? Well, just read the post. It's not just checking to see if you're online. If you blacklisted the EA servers then you couldn't play so it's much more than that. It's an online check to make sure you are a legal player, which is not bad at face value, but when you start having the problems scokem has, then it becomes intrusive. Also, although I don't travel much anymore, Red Alert 2 (with Yuri's add-on) was a staple on my laptop for my business trips for years when I traveled overseas to places without internet.

However, the requirement was not hidden. And folks are buying the game anyway (even before the offline server workaround was pushed out the door).

If any person that bought the game had been having Internet connection issues, than *any* game that requires a persistent connection (including MMOs) would be a bad bet.

It would be one thing if they weren't aware of either their Internet connection issues, or the game's requirements in that regard. However, where one or both are known well ahead of purchase time, and the game gets bought anyway, I don't blame the developer, or the publisher. I blame the *purchaser* for insufficient due-dilligence.

[spaceelf]

However, the requirement was not hidden. And folks are buying the game anyway (even before the offline server workaround was pushed out the door).

If any person that bought the game had been having Internet connection issues, than *any* game that requires a persistent connection (including MMOs) would be a bad bet.

It would be one thing if they weren't aware of either their Internet connection issues, or the game's requirements in that regard. However, where one or both are known well ahead of purchase time, and the game gets bought anyway, I don't blame the developer, or the publisher. I blame the *purchaser* for insufficient due-dilligence.

And I blame EA for making such a weird game. It's fun, but weird.

I like it a lot more than Dawn of War 2 and appreciate having my progress saved online so when I switch between desktop and laptop it doesn't matter, I can say that.

I think everyone knows how much I care about having to be connected to the internet to play by now.

[Smigit]

However, the requirement was not hidden. And folks are buying the game anyway (even before the offline server workaround was pushed out the door).

If any person that bought the game had been having Internet connection issues, than *any* game that requires a persistent connection (including MMOs) would be a bad bet.

Why keep bringing up things like MMO and IM clients? They are a whole different type of product.

People have given reasons why they shouldn't need a connection (laptops being a big one) and i see no reason that they should have ever had an internet connection as a requirement. If they want to retain stats just cache them and upload when you next run with a connection as consoles do with achievements and the like. Your right, the requirement wasn't hidden but that doesn't mean people have to like or live with it...single player games for decades haven't required a connection and unless there is a worthwhile server component that effects the actual gameplay its completely unnecessary.

Another example was when me and some friends moved house and had to wait two weeks to get a net connection. We looked to do some LAN gaming since we couldnt play anything that required an online connection. That would rule out a game like this which again traditionally would have functioned fine without the connection.

[spaceelf]

People have given reasons why they shouldn't need a connection (laptops being a big one) and i see no reason that they should have ever had an internet connection as a requirement. If they want to retain stats just cache them and upload when you next run with a connection as consoles do with achievements and the like. Your right, the requirement wasn't hidden but that doesn't mean people have to like or live with it...single player games for decades haven't required a connection and unless there is a worthwhile server component that effects the actual gameplay its completely unnecessary.

And yet it does. The items you unlock during gameplay are unlocked for single player and multiplayer. The way you suggest it, people would just hack their way to having everything and drive off legit players.

[Smigit]

And yet it does. The items you unlock during gameplay are unlocked for single player and multiplayer. The way you suggest it, people would just hack their way to having everything and drive off legit players.

Again, cache that. Sync the online account when they next connect. Thats not exactly something special and other games/systems do similar things.

[spaceelf]

Exactly how would that stop what I suggested would happen?

If by 'other games' you mean 'nothing randomevent has ever played' sure.

[Argi]

I think the concept of a singleplayer game requiring a constant internet connection to be rather counter-productive. For me at least I love to play Warcraft 3 and other non-net games on my laptop while travelling, not to mention if my net at home goes out I'll have to bust out the sp games to pass the time (when I'd normally be playing multiplayer). I understand the issue with unlocks and wanting to prevent people from cheating the system (which as you pointed out would be difficult if data is cached locally) but there's no reason the player can't have an "offline only" profile that they could use if they don't intend to play online.

So, like Ubisoft, the intention here is to hamper the 0-day piracy rather than actually provide something for users no matter how they be spinning it now (as stated explicitly by Ubisoft re AC2 and that EA are working to get an offline mode into the game post-release).

[spaceelf]

Now that I agree with, and would've preferred. On the other hand, the new system encourages people to play online. I already used my unlocked stuff in coop mode with my friend.

Also, the thread title is misleading. C&C4s always on connection was announced before Ubisofts platform was.

[Smigit]

Exactly how would that stop what I suggested would happen?

If by 'other games' you mean 'nothing randomevent has ever played' sure.

Ok then, how does requiring an internet connection stop people cheating? Countless games are plagued with cheats regardless of the setup or whether they are connected to dedicated servers or whatever. Requiring a net connection doesn't stop cheating or working around limitations really.

Anyway Micsotofts Live services "sync" achievements when you log in next as far as I'm aware which is what I was referring to. Maybe it isn't flawless, I don't know, but I doubt CNC4's system will be bullet proof either. I have at least one iPhone game that can do that too if you dont have a data connection active (don't ask which one, I can't remember...I read it in the release notes but when it was updated).

[Axel]

Are EA so confident that there is there absolutely no workaround for this DRM? Somehow modifying the game so it doesn't need to connect to the net perhaps? Reason I ask is that as soon as someone pulls it off - all EA are doing is punishing loyal customers again!

[spaceelf]

I didn't say they wouldn't cheat. I said they would be less likely to.

If EA notices someone who had no/few units unlocked suddenly has many more without actual playtime occuring, gosh, thats a clue.

[soldier1st]

adding this drm garbage only puts off buyers who will pay for games that have no drm garbage in em and forcing users to have internet just to be able to play the game is just dumb, thats another game off my list but if drm is removed then maybe.

[Xerxes]

Well I'm striking C&C4 off my list, I don't see the point of renting a game at full retain price (as this is essentially what this is). I'm actually not so much bothered it requires an active internet connection but more what is gonna happen when EA shuts down the servers? they can't run them forever obviously, so the real question is how long after release before the game disc becomes a coaster?