Civ 2 Game Piracy

from GalCiv2 Forums
I just wanted to say a big "Thank You!!!" for omitting the annoying piracy protection on Gal Civ 2.

People who buy the game are no less than annoyed by copy protection.

People who download the game will do so regardless of any copy protection.

It's my belief that (modern) copy protection actualy encourages the distribution of cracks. I've DL'ed and searched for cracks for all of my store-bought games to protect my original disks. I know a lot of computer-retarded people who DL cracks, too, who would otherwise think of the plumber (or cable guy ) if you mentioned a crack

I think that copy-protection by the means of unique cd-key checks for multiplayer games and game updates is a good idea. It keeps the honest people honest, without making it annoying.
20,863 views 16 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
Amen to that
SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Especially if they start pushing copy protection into the realm of "Used Game Sales Prevention."

Sony had a patent for that back in the late 90's. It basically disables all of your games if your console dies and needs to be replaced, for example.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The sick twisted irony is that a game without copy protection is busting out record sales. It's doing awesome on the sales so far.

I venture to guess that games who use the atrocious new copy protections (like Starforce) are going to have bad numbers.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Indeed. Many thanks for this.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yes Starforce definately alienates the informed. Some publishers currently won't use it due to it's bad stigma. Others fully embrace it and other drm simply because they believe it will protect their sales numbers for the first few weeks a game is out on the shelves and/or believe it will prevent the customer from installing on multiple machines in their home. The problem is that drm is about getting you to pay more. Its about trying to get more money out of the market. Its about greed. Its about business. Publishers never seriously consider that harsh drm and drm in general actually only encourages:
1. Flat out piracy. (Stardock has proven TWICE now that no drm actually lowers piracy and improves customer relations)
2. people to circumvent drm for compatibility issues
3. circumvent drm for freedom to install on another machine in their house
4. creates a culture where people feel drm circumvention and piracy is a legitimate practice to get what you paid for
5. Alienates more paying customers year after year as people become more educated on the matter.
6. creates a poorer economic situation by making customers more cautious before buying. So they don't get as many early buyers.
7. Wasted resources that could be spent on other things.
8. harms developers customer relations.
9. Allows publishers to potentially get more revenue from customers.
10. risking harm, hijacking, or controll on users systems all in the name of bringing in a few extra bucks.
11.. to many other things to take the time to list.

Drm is stupid but it will only be realized when it causes the industry to implode over some scandle. With the exception of some maverics out their most of the industry is poised to take even more drastic measures in the future. Ubisoft is in bed with starforce so I'm sure they will love the idea of rootkits in the future as well. It's not about making a product you can enjoy anymore its about making a product that will allow its creators/publishers to control your wallet.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
When there's no copy protection to crack, major pirating groups will not make a release.
Ironic isn't it?
Games released recently that do use copy protection have been cracked and distrubuted within a day, GalCiv 2 took a week before there was a whiff of an illegal version floating around.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I've seen some links where i grab my TV programming for GalCiv II. Do I mind? Naah. Sure, I could have just downloaded the game there, but I like the way the GC2 crew is doing things. I was actually *more* interested in owning this game because of their anti-anti-piracy stance. I hate having to fire up Alcohol to mount images of the games I do own, just so I can play without having to swap discs all the time.

Money well spent, I tell you.
Reply #11 from Stardock Forums Top
You know what also decreases piracy? Frequent game updates... Considering how often SD releases patches for the game, it'll be quite impossible for the crackers to keep up...
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It is nice not to be treated like a criminal; thanks Stardock!

My laptop has an issue with "Safedisc"--no game with this protection will run at all. So I'm forced to download no-CD cracks to be able to run my legally purchased games.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
HoMM just lost another sale due to Starforce.
I quit playing AoWSM a few months ago due to not being able to find a no-CD for the last patch. Civ4 sealed it, as Aow:SM wasn't that good.

The thing is, I don't think DRM costs that many sales either way, it just drains profits that go to the DRM leeches instead of the company.

What's really going to kill the game industry someday is lack of originality- though the PC market won't be as affected due to the abundance of indy developers, it's the PS4/Xbox3 that will suffer.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I like it that GalCiv2 has no copy protection, it's a pretty cool game and people understand that the makers deserve the cash, if EA published this game people would spread it around illegally like wildfire.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
For me, it's about the sheer ethics of DRM.

Honestly, how many people will really turn down buying a game due to DRM? The same number of people who wouldn't buy DVD's because of the useless region number restriction: very few.

The RIAA has visciously abused the fact that, like games, each title is uniquely valuable. For most corporations, if a DRM solution has no impact on sales and has an impact on piracy, then that's all execs need to hear. The margin gets bigger. This is despite the fact that the DRM solution might be 300% more difficult for end-users and 2% more difficult for hackers and illegal distributors. It's an unethical decision based on numbers that are not concrete.

Back to the ethics of the situation, here is what I find to be etically wrong with current DRM (Included what's been around since before DRM was coined):

1) DRM assumes the customer to be a criminal.
2) Companies that implement DRM don't care how difficult they make the end-user experience, because it doesn't affect thier bottom-line.

There are four audiences to consider when speaking of DRM: the person selling games out of the back of his truck, Peer to Peer file sharing, a single person installing the game on all of his friend's computers, and the honest user. The first two are unavoidable: I don't care how good your DRM is. The third one can be addressed by non-intrusive DRM, such as CD-Key registration.

CG2 will be assimilated into the P2P networks the same way every other game is. DRM only defines how much time it will take before it gets there. Ultimately DRM won't start hurting the bottom line until it starts to violate privacy, which is the direction I see it going (and something Sony has dabbled in). Until then, there's no reason people like EA sports and will stop using intrusive DRM, and we just have to applaud our champions, like Stardock.

Thanks for understanding stardock
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Exactly. most games I try before I buy as I bought C&C Renegade and BF: Vietnam and I want my money back for both. However this one I was willing to take the chance on it just because I liked the original and admired the approach. I've already told two of my friends that if they want easy updates they should buy the game rather than ask me for a copy of the update.