Ubisoft Drops Starforce Copy protection!

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Mike 'Red Ocktober' Hense

two questions...

1- do we get a chance to buy a version of SH3 sans SF for $5, or will they be sending us a free copy in the mail?
--Mike

I don't think so, Ubisoft is not known to use less invasive or no copy protection on their budget titles.
So don't get your hopes up on this.

[Soulcommander]

Neal, this statement you wrote:
What if they make a copy protection that is crack proof? Will people find something to have a witchhunt over?
Is why I made the comment a campaign of "hackers"
What does that statement you made make a person think of?
That all of us were after Starforce because it was hard to crack, thats what it makes me think of.

So next time if thats not the point you are tring tomake then be more specific and on target.

As far as my comment about being thankful you site isn't dead....
If you need clarification, here it is.

You have traffic on your site. BE THANKFUL you do and your not the only only one sitting in front of your monitor staring at nothing but your own posts.

And as far as this thread is concerned....
I see moderators working here to keep things jumping and keep posters posting.
Take my first post for what it's worth. Nothing more or less.
Sure post your happiness over the news, sure post your unhappiness over the news but why throw the topic way off into a discussion of what customers will do next.
Wait and see.

See this post please for those of you wondering about the news of Ubi's Un official announcement: http://r-force.org/modules.php?name=...iewtopic&t=142


:rotfl: for now im feeling like a burden has been lifted and customers have possibly won only becasue they were unfairly treated and disrepected by Starforce Tech.

[Drebbel]

The fact that you and the mods always appear to defend SF is, in my opinion, starting many more fires than you're putting out.

That is mainly because we not whimps or pussys, we not afraid to start any fires.

Most moderators will be in favor of copyright protection, but most moderators are against errors in SF or possible malicious code. Therefore (and me speaking for myself now) we would like to see an improved SF that adresses the concerns of the people. But we are not shouting from the roof tops that we hate SF and never will get a game again with SF.

Just seems that lot of people are just jumping on the "I hate SF bandwagon without thinking about it. Is quite a eye opener for me that it is so easy to assemble a huge crowed to attack and kill something ...............

Drebbel (with my moderator hat on)

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by DeepSix

I think you misunderstood him, Neal. Unless I'm mistaken, Skybird means that you're assuming guilt until they're proven innocent. He's not saying anybody wants to be a pirate or that they don't have convictions.

Exactly. And Neal, you are right, your simple claim that SH3 broke your system would not mean much to me. but if you describe the way it did precisely, and then we see that others share the same experience, and they are not few, but many, and the pattern repeats itself time and again, then... let's say some cognitive processes start to come into higher gear... as I said, the question is not if the problems had been documented or not. The documentation is there, since long, repeatedly, time and again, again and again and again. The question is if one wants to see it, or if one wants to ignore it.

I must unfortunately agree concerning the suspicious position of moderators, who always, no matter what the cost is, seem to be in favour of SF. If Drebbel thinks this is because they are brave and courageous, then he must have lost his senses. For me the debate about Sf certainly had nothing to do with courage and balls, such argument is ridiculous in this context. Having been engaged in several of such harsh fights about this myself, I remember too well how frustrating this stubborn ignorrance is we often were facing from the side of always the same names. It's as if one is speaking to walls. Whatever one was saying, got ignored, or turned in one's mouth. Argument was ignored, or distorted. Information was ignored, and wiped off the table. If these wall-like guys would have had their ways, we still would have SF, and would have it for the years to come. The question was often on my mind what benefits these people do have from seeing sales of SF-infested software being unharmed by any hindering discussion damaging SF's credibility.

But all this is no more needed. UBI, as one of the biggest players, abandones SF, and that will be the starting shot for others to follow. SF is doomed to fall. And it is not really interesting anymore if Neal, Drebbel and Gizzmoe like that or not.

Come up with another copy protection scheme, less intrusive, and less negative for the functionality and efficiency of my system, and the security standard of my internet activities. You will not hear any complaint from me (like for example noone ever heared me complaining about SBP coming with a dongle - a deadly sin for many people when mentioning in their presence the word "dongle"). Copy protection is not something I have a problem with. Starforce in special was the thing that was unacceptable for me, due to repeated bad experience that had been replicated and confirmed by oh so many people thorughout the world.

[DeepSix]

That is mainly because we not whimps or pussys....

I wasn't suggesting that you were.

Most moderators will be in favor of copyright protection, but most moderators are against errors in SF or possible malicious code.

I'm in favor of copy protection. I'm opposed to invasive or malicious copy protection, and I consider SF to be in that category (see my post on page one). So we sort of agree on that.

Just seems that lot of people are just jumping on the "I hate SF bandwagon without thinking about it.

Maybe some are. But I've been opposed to SF almost since the day I bought SH3. Look at when I joined subsim and search my posts on SF. I have definitely "thought about it."

[kiwi_2005]

I make backup copies of the original, providing I still got the original i fail to see what is unlawfull about this? nothing wrong with using a fix to avoid having to throw in the original disks everytime. Im not a pirate nor make copies and hand them out. I just make backups of my games. Same as if making backups of your important data, games to me are very important data! Ive had over the years drives chew the disks or ingrain deep scratches on them where they become unplayable the drives at times will not read the disk properly so the disk spins at high speeds and jumps when this happens you can garrantee there be ingrain perfect circle scratches on it which the disk then becomes unplayable. Its history. Its not my drive as she'll play other disks perfectly. I was using the original sh3 disk for a couple of months before i made a backup of it, the original has small scratches already on it. One day they might create disks where sratches will be impossible to occur, only then i'll have no need to do backups.

[Gizzmoe]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I must unfortunately agree concerning the suspicious position of moderators, who always, no matter what the cost is, seem to be in favour of SF.

All you did in the past 365 days or so is to b1tch, whine and moan about SF. Not to forget posting wild analogies. You did absolutely nothing to help people, NOTHING! I tried to be there for our community, I tried to post helpful advice, I helped dozens of people with their SF problems. And I tried to put things into perspective and ask critical questions when someone posted negative informations about SF. I wanted to find out more about SF, I spent hours on the phone talking to Soulcommander.

You, Skybird, can be proud of nothing in that regard.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Neal, with all due respect, can't we all agree that Starforce .... the company was notorious for refusing to acknowledge any problems, throwing accusations at the players themselves, and just general bad PR. It was impossible to hold Starforce accountable on anything, and their location in Russia only helped them on that.

Sure, I agree with that. I took them to task over this:
Starforce forum admin publishes torrent links

Starforce wouldn't be singled out if there weren't any reason for it. There is no other protection scheme that has gathered this much hostility that I know of - even if they occasionally caused trouble for legit users. I don't think it's fair to say that "Anti-Starforce = Anti-Copy-Protection". But everyone will be happier if there is a fairer, less invasive copy protection scheme with a more responsible company. Frankly, I'd be quite satisfied if SHIV arrived with a USB key.

I hope you're right.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by DeepSix

I think you misunderstood him, Neal. Unless I'm mistaken, Skybird means that you're assuming guilt until they're proven innocent. He's not saying anybody wants to be a pirate or that they don't have convictions.

Neal, you have a terrific site, and I don't think you have to worry about it dieing anytime soon, but there is, on the part of those who operate it, a pronounced lack of impartiality where the subject of SF is concerned. The fact that you and the mods always appear to defend SF is, in my opinion, starting many more fires than you're putting out.

Sorry, that's just my observation. I'm not trying to tell you how to run your site, so I'm shuttin' up now. Delete me, ban me, do whatever, but that's how I see it.

I hope I am not giving the impression that any banning is going come out of this discussion, certainly not you. Your opinion is given in a calm, straight-forward fashion.

What I understood Skybird to say is people don't want to become pirates but "maybe they will" if angered or something (I guess)... "potential pirates that are not yet pirates but maybe, eventually, who knows, could become pirates".... I'm not sure what he's getting at with all those potential future possible maybe's.

The mods are entitled to decide how they see this on an individual basis. I don't think I have asked any of them to agree with me, I have asked them not to let a possibly excessive amount of potential anti-SF ranting, who knows, maybe, eventually disrupt normal forum decorum. :hmm: I mean, discuss it but not let it dominate the discussion in a forum about a game, not copy protection. For example, Soulcommander's posts are almost all anti-SF posts, but he's been free to post.

thanks for your thoughts
Neal

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I must unfortunately agree concerning the suspicious position of moderators, who always, no matter what the cost is, seem to be in favour of SF. If Drebbel thinks this is because they are brave and courageous, then he must have lost his senses. For me the debate about Sf certainly had nothing to do with courage and balls, such argument is ridiculous in this context.

No, you are a moderator and you are not in favor of SF. Have I ever told you, because you are a Subsim moderator, to change your opinion? Did I ask you to change your Steel Beasts Pro review because it had a mini-rant about SF? No, I did not.

What Drebbel is saying is some of us don't fall in line with a mob. You yourself have stated, it takes balls to stand with one's convictions.

But basically, you're wrong in general..."the suspicious position of moderators, who always, no matter what the cost is, seem to be in favour of SF". I have not asked the other forum moderators but as for me, I am not in favor of, nor against SF. You seem to think we've made up our minds and chosen sides. It seems to you, not to be against SF must mean we are for it. Sounds like your favorite President, eh?

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Soulcommander

Neal, this statement you wrote:
What if they make a copy protection that is crack proof? Will people find something to have a witchhunt over?
Is why I made the comment a campaign of "hackers"
What does that statement you made make a person think of?
That all of us were after Starforce because it was hard to crack, thats what it makes me think of.

So next time if thats not the point you are tring tomake then be more specific and on target.

As far as my comment about being thankful you site isn't dead....
If you need clarification, here it is.

You have traffic on your site. BE THANKFUL you do and your not the only only one sitting in front of your monitor staring at nothing but your own posts.

Ok, fair enough.

Although it may appear to some that I "support" Starforce, it is more accurate to say I support copyright protection and that I am leery of accepting the claims that SF is evil and invasive to lawfully equipped computer systems. Let me state it again: I don't reject these claims, I simply have yet to see substantiated, legitimate testing from unbiased parties with established credibility. If SF is that bad for that many people, I have to think it could be proven so under controlled circumstances.

Am I biased in favor of SF? No. Remember, I made the posting about SF's forum moderator putting up a pirate link to a game. (You were surprised I would post that). That pointed out one of SF's clumsy and borderline-stupid PR maneuvers, of which there have been several. On the other hand, as I said earlier in this post, I get Google News Alerts on "Starforce". Some of these "press" websites show a lot of bias, they fail to make retractions, and they appear to be in sympathy with the anti-SF crowd. They must be from the Dan Rather school of journalism. In my eyes, that does not help the anti-SF movement, it makes them appear willing to say or do anything to bring SF down, and I would think the goal is to bring SF down IF it is guilty as charged. Not to trump up evidence.

I've been approached by several players and asked to come out in opposition to Starforce, but I cannot do that any more than I could champion Starforce, because Subsim is just a simple review and discussion website. We're not equipped to make the necessary tests and evaluations to validate or reject the claims that SF can "mess up" PCs. How would I know? I have three SF-equipped games and have not experienced any problems of note. A couple months ago my DVD burner stopped recording normally. I updated the firmware and drivers and it has been fine ever since. But I don't forget that I have experienced these kind of problems with computer-related hardware long before SF existed.

If MSNBC, PC Gamer, Forbes, WSJ, etc published accurate tests that proved SF was invasive and destructive, Subsim would accept the results in a second. It's not responsible for us to do otherwise without better evidence.

In some respects, I am glad Ubisoft may/will drop SF, because I am tired of hearing about it from both sides. I sure don't want it cluttering up the discussion about SH4. Pack a USB key with each game, like CCIP suggested. (Is that foolproof, by the way?)

cheers
Neal

PS: If Ubi does not use SF for SH4, is everyone in the Western world going to buy a copy to show support?

[DeepSix]

Neal, re all of the above - Fair enough for me; good points and well said. Still think you misunderstood Skybird, but I understand where you're coming from.

"They must be from the Dan Rather school of journalism."

:rotfl: Well, in that case I just have one word for you. "Courage."

And yes, at this point I am planning to buy SH4.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

No, you are a moderator and you are not in favor of SF. Have I ever told you, because you are a Subsim moderator, to change your opinion? Did I ask you to change your Steel Beasts Pro review because it had a mini-rant about SF? No, I did not.

What Drebbel is saying is some of us don't fall in line with a mob. You yourself have stated, it takes balls to stand with one's convictions.

But basically, you're wrong in general..."the suspicious position of moderators, who always, no matter what the cost is, seem to be in favour of SF". I have not asked the other forum moderators but as for me, I am not in favor of, nor against SF. You seem to think we've made up our minds and chosen sides. It seems to you, not to be against SF must mean we are for it. Sounds like your favorite President, eh?

Fair enough. I was talking on impressions being given, repeatedly. what I said had been asked by others before, too. It sometimes was ridiculous indeed. I have especially one name on mind with whom I repeatedly collided over this, even personally. And Drebbel's last post, combining a factual issue with qualities like courage or cowardliness, did not really help to tame angry thoughts. Concerning SBP, fact is: if it would have come with SF, there wouldn't have been a review, for I wouldn't have bought it, and never would.

Let's leave all this behind.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Gizzmoe

All you did in the past 365 days or so is to b1tch, whine and moan about SF. Not to forget posting wild analogies. You did absolutely nothing to help people, NOTHING! I tried to be there for our community, I tried to post helpful advice, I helped dozens of people with their SF problems. And I tried to put things into perspective and ask critical questions when someone posted negative informations about SF. I wanted to find out more about SF, I spent hours on the phone talking to Soulcommander.

You, Skybird, can be proud of nothing in that regard.

Trying again to start one of your useless fights? Accusing people pointing at the risks and dangers of SF being unconstructive? While you all too willingly all the time gave the impression that it is harmless to run into this unprepared? Always having ignored constructive information being pointed out to you? Accusing me of personally attacking you while point for point invalidating your heavily biased, always one-sided remarks and generalizations of how bad customers must be by character if they do not accept SF being there? Holding all of them responsible for being eager to out themselves as pirates? Threatening me with moderator's sanctions if I do not submit to your superior "knowledge" of how harmless and overhyped it all is, labelling my resistance as a personal attack on you, accusing me of telling lies about you or SF? Claiming to be personally offended? Remember how it ended the last time with all this? And even now you cannot help yourself to start it all over again? Start the name-calling again, while I thought about you above, but did not mention you, to let it rest? Your perspective never has been different from that all critics are piriates, Sf is completely harmless, and that there is no valid information at all out there. All links, information, construcive counterargument - always ignored, never adressed. You always ignored any constructive reply saying something different then what you want SF to be perceived as. I was not the first and not the last whose suspicions you raised with your very obvious bias, at the same time saying you were not in defense of SF - good joke. I also was not the only one with whom you seek fighting, though you probably collided with noone more massively than with me.

Warning people about dangers - not being a help for people. Your own wordings speaks volumes. I criticised SF - and you talk of "not being of help for the community". That tells all about you, and it never was different. From now on, concerning SF you are fighting a useless fight. Go ahead, waste your time. But I let play you alone from now on.

[Gizzmoe]

What a load of complete and utter nonsense. I have nothing more to say about this.