Assassins Creed Origin DRM Hammers Gamers’ CPUs

[leadeater]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

You're asking to prove a negative: it has nothing to do with who owns what it has everything to do to prove something that it's just not possible to prove. Religion was only an example not a debate, what you are asking for has no basis in logic or argumentation: this is not a legal argument or whenever or not piracy should be illegal so bringing ownership rights into questions it's meaningless: it has no bearing on actually supporting the position of "Software/Game piracy directly impacts game sales"

 

The IP laws are 1) Not infallible and 2) Not necessarily based on any evidence based assertion. I won't give you any more examples since you'll probably mention again that politics aren't allowed to get out of a difficult conversation. 

 

So an analogy: I don't care if a company declares that a special kind of water cures cancer I have no reason to believe it does until conclusive evidence is shown. People still are free to buy the magic water if they want, it doesn't means it actually does anything beyond being a placebo. 

 

Offer evidence or admit that it's a made up claim.

The problem is you're basing this mostly on a philosophical basis when it's a legal matter, the laws are there to brake the balance you are saying exist and that is always to the IP owner.

 

4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

So an analogy: I don't care if a company declares that a special kind of water cures cancer I have no reason to believe it does until conclusive evidence is shown. People still are free to buy the magic water if they want, it doesn't means it actually does anything beyond being a placebo. 

This is a different matter. Proving something does what it claims is not the same as the legal right to the special secret water formula that may or may not work as they claim. That is a different area of law all together.

[Misanthrope]

8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The problem is you're basing this mostly on a philosophical basis when it's a legal matter, the laws are there to brake the balance you are saying exist and that is always to the IP owner.

 

This is a different matter. Proving something does what it claims is not the same as the legal right to the special secret water formula that may or may not work as they claim. That is a different area of law all together.

I never questioned whenever or not it's a matter of law that they can persecute anybody they want. However do I need to remind you how many morally abhorrent and scientifically inaccurate laws have been abolished? I'm entertaining what it's repeated as a certainty simply because companies claim it so without supporting evidence and could conceivable be used to demand IP laws that actually make more sense.

 

But fine let's just say it's beyond the scope of the thread to cut this pointless nay saying and dodging session short.

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

But fine let's just say it's beyond the scope of the thread to cut this pointless nay saying and dodging session short.

I take issue with this assertion as I am not dodging anything and from my point of view you are. You seem unwilling to realize why IP laws exist and why they are important. This isn't about a big company doing bad things and what is moral about piracy or anything around that type of thing at all.

 

Creators need protection so they have the freedom to create and profit from their creations, laws were created to ensure this protection. Without these less people will create things. The owner and the creator should never be the party to have to prove the illegal taking of their intellectual property is damaging to them, it is theirs and not for people to take without giving the requested compensation for it.

 

Even in the situation where you can prove it is not damaging to them they still have the right to protect their intellectual property, that doesn't change.

[Misanthrope]

38 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I take issue with this assertion as I am not dodging anything and from my point of view you are. You seem unwilling to realize why IP laws exist and why they are important.

 

48 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I never questioned whenever or not it's a matter of law that they can persecute anybody they want. However do I need to remind you how many morally abhorrent and scientifically inaccurate laws have been abolished? I'm entertaining what it's repeated as a certainty simply because companies claim it so without supporting evidence and could conceivable be used to demand IP laws that actually make more sense.

 

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

I'm entertaining what it's repeated as a certainty simply because companies claim it so without supporting evidence and could conceivable be used to demand IP laws that actually make more sense.

They make perfect sense though, in what way do they not? Allowing provisions for people to obtain copies of IP without the right to do so, but only when it does not hurt the IP holder? That makes no sense at all, actually think that through properly and how that can be enforced.

 

You do not need evidence as the IP holder it is yours you set the conditions for access, if you break those you have broken the law. You can't argue around this and try and prove you did not harm the IP holder, you broke the law.

 

Just like you are innocent until proven guilty, unless you do no support this, if you have admitted guilt or found to be guilty then you are. You do not get convictions dropped because the crime you committed did not harm anyone or anything, that is not an argument you get to make in court. You can present that as mitigating circumstances for a reduced sentence but you are still guilty of the crime.

 

Say if I decided to get a lawn chair and go to your property and sat at the very edge out of the way so it's not possible to effect you in any way at all. I'm doing nothing other than sitting, maybe having a non alcoholic drink. You come out and ask me to leave your property, it is yours after all, and my reply was "No I'm not leaving, I'm not hurting you in any way". Should you need to prove that I am hurting you in some way or should you have the ability to call the police and get me removed by force because I am trespassing on your property without your consent?

 

If you are not happy with the above then you cannot be happy with anyone obtaining copies of software/games without paying for it or complying with the conditions of access set out by the owner/creator.

 

IP laws are there to protect the owners/creators and only for that purpose. If you want consumer protection laws then talk about those. I'm also not saying that IP laws can override consumer protection laws or vice versa.

[LAwLz]

Just gonna throw my two cents out...

 

1) Piracy is not stealing. It is illegal, but calling it stealing is incorrect. 

There is a big difference between physically removing something from someone, thus making them have less of said product, and secretly making a perfect duplicate of it while keeping the original intact.

 

2) Piracy has been proven to not have a negative effect on some industries by research conducted on the behalf of the European Union. In fact, it has been proven to have a positive effect on some industries. The gaming market was one of them.

 

3) IP laws are shit. Things should go into public domain much faster than they currently does. There is no reason why for example Mickey Mouse is still owned by Disney. It's flat out corruption that got us the laws we currently follow.

 

4) DRM is not meant to prevent piracy. At least not in the movie business. It's meant to impose restriction that keeps the consumers' in check, forcing them to view the movies in certain ways. Not being able to skip the commercials for example. I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same on the gaming market. Forcing you to use Uplay where they can upsell you, or track your usage for example.

 

5) Ubisoft are fucktards for doing what they are doing. Making your product worse is not the way to make people stop pirating. Making a good game and not being a horrible piece of shit in the eyes of your consumers is the way to go.

 

5) "The laws are dumb" is no excuse for breaking them. (Although I have to admit I do it all the time)

[MyName13]

9 hours ago, MageTank said:

 

Where in my post did I say I feel sorry for companies? Where in any of my posts did I say I didn't care about poor people? Entertainment is not a human right that is protected by law. As for your points, there are FREE sources of entertainment available everywhere for those that already own a PC and have an internet connection (two of the requirements for them to be able to pirate in the first place). Steam has an entire catalog of free games, and you can find plenty of free indie titles to beta test as well. Plenty of free to play MMO's to sink hours/days/weeks/decades into (see my Silkroad Online post earlier). 

 

You keep saying I don't understand that people have other responsibilities to pay for, yet I've made that exact same point in almost every post I've made in this thread thus far. It's called being an adult. I pay for my bills before I buy games too. As does any other responsible adult. I would advise you spend less time overreacting to my words, and more time reading my posts. It would save me from having to repeat myself.

1)You didn't, but your defense of companies implies that.

2)Neither are food, water, shelter, etc. in some countries.

3)Do you even play any of those?You still haven't told anything about "stealing" ebooks and other educational materials, is it because books aren't a human right?

 

You keep saying/implying how it's more fair to buy than steal, but let me ask you few things.Do you live in the USA?If you do, why should someone pay something to companies in the US, that pay taxes and therefore increase your standard of living?Do you or publishers in the USA care about other countries?Nope, they don't even adjust the prices, everyone is supposed to pay the same price, this doesn't happen in any other market (food, electronics, clothing...).You keep talking about entitlement, tell me what makes you feel entitled to pay lower price than others?Instead of buying one unit/copy, buy two or three times more because that way you will spend the equivalent of someone in an inferior country, you will also help those poor little multi million dollar companies.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

Can we please stop the whole "piracy is hurting sales" nonsense?  It simply isn't true.

 

https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/22/eu-suppressed-study-piracy-no-sales-impact/

 

[jagdtigger]

4 hours ago, lilbman said:

I'd argue that people that illegally download games do it because they lack the funds to buy it, so 1 download ≠ 1 lost sale.  If the means to illegally download it didn't exist, they wouldn't buy it anyway because they either don't want to or lack the funds.

And that is why 1 download != 1 lost sale, you just contradicted your own statement...

 

@Captain Chaos

Tell that to the industry, oh wait. They already read it thats why it got suppressed...

[Prox1ma]

I wonder how long these companies will continue to stay in business. I will never buy any title that has a DRM on it ever.

[Prox1ma]

22 hours ago, leadeater said:

I would like to remind everyone that as per the stance of the Community Standards piracy is not acceptable, so with this in mind I would request that all conversation around the justification of it end. As always try to also to respect other members opinions and keep things civil.

 

 

There are plenty of discussion points to explore on this topic that don't involve promoting or legitimizing piracy.

From what I understand, the terms mention more about "actual links to pirated content and/or discussing about how to pirate a content". Perhaps you should include "justifying piracy is not allowed" or something of the like, (unless it was mentioned elsewhere and I didn't read)

[leadeater]

27 minutes ago, Ezilkannan said:

From what I understand, the terms mention more about "actual links to pirated content and/or discussing about how to pirate a content". Perhaps you should include "justifying piracy is not allowed" or something of the like, (unless it was mentioned elsewhere and I didn't read)

It actually doesn't say links in the guidelines at all, we can't add every possible interpretation to the guidelines otherwise it would get very long. It shouldn't need a lot of explaining however, it's fairly evident why the rule is there and what it means. The forum itself cannot be seen as supporting illegal activities and that is a core reason the guideline exists, not the only reason.

 

Most of the discussion have been fine however, it's just not acceptable so say "It's fine to pirate games and here is my reason why" or similar to this. It's illegal therefore it's not acceptable on the forum. Discussing DRM, it's effectiveness, IP law and it's bounds, effect of piracy on the industry etc are all fair game and can be discussed as much as people want the line is at saying it is acceptable to pirate software.

 

Here is the actual guideline again, it was actually in full in the post you qouted

 

Quote

• Talking about piracy in general, broad details, is acceptable however the posting or discussing pirated/hacked/cracked or otherwise nefariously obtained content is not. This includes Windows content, games, hackintosh, etc. Also discussions regarding ways to avoid or block legitimately installed monitoring/tracking software or the like is also not allowed.

 

[Prox1ma]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

It actually doesn't say links in the guidelines at all, we can't add every possible interpretation to the guidelines otherwise it would get very long. It shouldn't need a lot of explaining however, it's fairly evident why the rule is there and what it means. The forum itself cannot be seen as supporting illegal activities and that is a core reason the guideline exists, not the only reason.

 

Most of the discussion have been fine however, it's just not acceptable so say "It's fine to pirate games and hear is my reason why" or similar to this. It's illegal therefore it's not acceptable on the forum. Discussing DRM, it's effectiveness, IP law and it's bounds, effect of piracy on the industry etc are all fair game and can be discussed as much as people want the line is at saying it is acceptable to pirate software.

 

Here is the actual guideline again, it was actually in full in the post you qouted

 

 

by links I meant the "content" which was specified in the terms but I still do not see it saying anywhere that "piracy should not be justified" or "you should not post any justification for the act of piracy". I feel that should be mentioned. The terms still suggest that "Talking about piracy in general, broad details, is acceptable" which I presume involves talking about both sides of the argument.

"however the posting or discussing pirated/hacked/cracked or otherwise nefariously obtained content is not. This includes Windows content, games, hackintosh, etc. Also discussions regarding ways to avoid or block legitimately installed monitoring/tracking software or the like is also not allowed."

seems to imply more like I cannot say "Hey I found a new pirated copy for this content & Here's how you can get it!" or "How can I pirate this content?" and not that I should not say "People pirate because xxxx reasons and I agree with that"

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, Ezilkannan said:

by links I meant the "content" which was specified in the terms but I still do not see it saying anywhere that "piracy should not be justified" or "you should not post any justification for the act of piracy". I feel that should be mentioned. The terms still suggest that "Talking about piracy in general, broad details, is acceptable" which I presume involves talking about both sides of the argument.

"however the posting or discussing pirated/hacked/cracked or otherwise nefariously obtained content is not. This includes Windows content, games, hackintosh, etc. Also discussions regarding ways to avoid or block legitimately installed monitoring/tracking software or the like is also not allowed."

seems to imply more like I cannot say "Hey I found a new pirated copy for this content & Here's how you can get it!" or "How can I pirate this content?" and not that I should not say "People pirate because xxxx reasons and I agree with that"

It's right there in the part I bolded, " or discussing pirated/hacked/cracked or otherwise nefariously obtained content is not". Discussing is intentionally broad so it can cover as much as possible so if we see something that is deemed not acceptable it need not be explicitly mentioned.

 

It should also go without saying, anything illegal is not acceptable on the forum. This doesn't need stating.

 

Edit:

11 minutes ago, Ezilkannan said:

"People pirate because xxxx reasons and I agree with that"

Also yes in a general sense this would normally not be that much of an issue, however when a significant number of members and posts are all voicing support piracy then it is not.

 

This would mostly come under this

Quote

The rules outlined below are only the minimum expectations of members, and not every issue can be predicted and addressed here, so conduct could still be considered out of line even if it isn't covered here specifically

 

[Prox1ma]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Discussing is intentionally broad so it can cover as much as possible so if we see something that is deemed not acceptable it need not be explicitly mentioned.

Ah, ok. I thought you said, as per the guidelines, justification/positive opinion of piracy is not allowed.

[leadeater]

20 minutes ago, Ezilkannan said:

Ah, ok. I thought you said, as per the guidelines, justification/positive opinion of piracy is not allowed.

That post I made was also more to try and steer the conversation away from piracy itself and more to DRM, I'm actually rather disappointed how much the topic has focused on this. Not only is the DRM aspect more the actual topic that was posted it's a much more interesting discussion point, at least I think it is. Piracy obviously falls in to that narrative but it doesn't need to be the focus point.

[Prox1ma]

Just now, leadeater said:

That post I made was also more to try and steer the conversation away from piracy itself and more to DRM, I'm actually rather disappointed how much the topic has focused on this. Not only is the DRM aspect more the actual topic that was posted it's a much more interesting discussion point, at least it think it is. Piracy obviously falls in to that narrative but it doesn't need to be the focus point.

Well we got ourselves a train wreck

[jagdtigger]

8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That post I made was also more to try and steer the conversation away from piracy itself and more to DRM, I'm actually rather disappointed how much the topic has focused on this. Not only is the DRM aspect more the actual topic that was posted it's a much more interesting discussion point, at least I think it is. Piracy obviously falls in to that narrative but it doesn't need to be the focus point.

Lately i have a feeling that the R in DRM isnt standing for rights, but restriction. The case where my phone got banned because of root, low res streams in anything other than IE and edge, locking down 4k to the newest HW, the attempt with xbone to deny playback when more than x viewer recognized by the camera, etc...

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, Ezilkannan said:

Well we got ourselves a train wreck

Sometimes I forget to bail out soon enough 

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Lately i have a feeling that the R in DRM isnt standing for rights, but restriction. The case where my phone got banned because of root, low res streams in anything other than IE and edge, locking down 4k to the newest HW, the attempt with xbone to deny playback when more than x viewer recognized by the camera, etc...

Restricting rooted phones is certainly something that shouldn't be allowed. Your device that you paid for, even more troubling is when support for it gets dropped so you don't get any more security updates then you are left with three terrible choices: Upgrade at your expense, root the device and get punished for it, live with the risk.

 

Companies really are losing sight of the importance of user experience. I'd rather go back to having to have a disc in my DVD drive than have some horrific DRM thing chewing up my CPU.

[Drak3]

3 hours ago, Captain Chaos said:

Can we please stop the whole "piracy is hurting sales" nonsense?  It simply isn't true.

 

https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/22/eu-suppressed-study-piracy-no-sales-impact/

 

A single study =/= concrete evidence or final word. For all we know, the study is not accurate and the methodology is riddled with mistakes. So, without having other sources reaching the same conclusion, claims like yours are basically meaningless.

[NovusBal]

I find this incredibly ironic. I bought this game and noticed it was hammering down my processor, so refunded it as I don't want to play a mediocre game with incredible amounts of resource usage.

 

Guess i'll just wait for the pirated version since it'll be better than the official one...Owh what a backwards world we live in.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Lately i have a feeling that the R in DRM isnt standing for rights, but restriction. The case where my phone got banned because of root, low res streams in anything other than IE and edge, locking down 4k to the newest HW, the attempt with xbone to deny playback when more than x viewer recognized by the camera, etc...

Maybe with that standard DRM for HTML coming to the limelight, we will see less situations where 4k is limited to edge (Still hate that its a private blob that we can't inspect legally)

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Restricting rooted phones is certainly something that shouldn't be allowed. Your device that you paid for, even more troubling is when support for it gets dropped so you don't get any more security updates then you are left with three terrible choices: Upgrade at your expense, root the device and get punished for it, live with the risk.

 

Companies really are losing sight of the importance of user experience. I'd rather go back to having to have a disc in my DVD drive than have some horrific DRM thing chewing up my CPU.

I've lost count of how many games/apps refuse to even run now. For some reason, it seems like big name Japanese games tend to be more likely to enforce this. Maybe @Drak3 knows more on why. (For some reason I though this would be something you knew)

[MageTank]

5 hours ago, MyName13 said:

1)You didn't, but your defense of companies implies that.

2)Neither are food, water, shelter, etc. in some countries.

3)Do you even play any of those?You still haven't told anything about "stealing" ebooks and other educational materials, is it because books aren't a human right?

 

You keep saying/implying how it's more fair to buy than steal, but let me ask you few things.Do you live in the USA?If you do, why should someone pay something to companies in the US, that pay taxes and therefore increase your standard of living?Do you or publishers in the USA care about other countries?Nope, they don't even adjust the prices, everyone is supposed to pay the same price, this doesn't happen in any other market (food, electronics, clothing...).You keep talking about entitlement, tell me what makes you feel entitled to pay lower price than others?Instead of buying one unit/copy, buy two or three times more because that way you will spend the equivalent of someone in an inferior country, you will also help those poor little multi million dollar companies.

I didn't imply any of that. You are simply assuming that my words are in the defense of companies because you don't like the fact that what I said is true. I never argued that food, water, and shelter is a human right, I said those are key to survival, not a human right. My mention of human rights was only to contrast the entitlement aspect of piracy, where you people implied that it's unfair for those less fortunate to not have access to entertainment due to their lower economic status. 

 

As for "do you even play any of those", yes, yes I do, lol. MMO's is my preferred genre, and growing up, I played the free ones exclusively. It's where the name MageTank came from. I eventually moved on to the ones you pay a one time fee for (Guild Wars 2, Elder Scrolls Online, etc) but my point is simple. Free alternatives for games exist, so that aspect of your argument falls flat.

 

What do you mean "haven't told anything about stealing ebooks"? That all falls under the extremely simple point I have been making this entire time. It's wrong to take/consume what does not belong to you, period. That includes ebooks and other educational materials. Does this mean I agree with the absurdly high prices they charge for schooling and these educational materials? No, but I certainly don't agree with taking what doesn't belong to you either. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

I also never said it's "more fair" to buy than to steal. I am simply against the defense of piracy, not the act itself. If you feel entitled to have something without paying for it, by all means, take it, just don't sit here and try to retain any moral high ground for doing so. You have consistently changed the context of my words to fit a narrative of yours that simply does not exist. You keep saying I don't care about other countries and the poor, which at this point, is baseless accusations. You can keep assuming I am this monster that hates the poor and wants to see the big guys stomp on the little guys, but it changes absolutely nothing. No matter what you say, it won't change the fact that piracy is indefensible from a legal/moral standpoint. 

[Drak3]

43 minutes ago, tjcater said:

I've lost count of how many games/apps refuse to even run now. For some reason, it seems like big name Japanese games tend to be more likely to enforce this. Maybe @Drak3 knows more on why. (For some reason I though this would be something you knew)

Nationalism via game dev and region locking. Beyond that, I don't know jack shit behind Japanese DRM and region locking practices.