It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Steam has failed you, yet again.(355 posts)(355 posts)
(355 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
15
17
18
19
20
21
24
This is my favourite topic
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: Uninstalling SecuROM, with the official uninstaller, will cause any installed SecuROM-enabled games to stop working.

Unless you bypass SecuROM, which can be done.
avatar
melchiz: Uninstalling Steam will prevent the user from accessing his games.

Unless you bypass Steam, which can be done.
We're not arguing the legalities of those actions here, this is just a blanket statement in response to your undefined blanket statement.
avatar
melchiz: That is a significant difference.

Only when arguing legalities. If someone has legally purchased the game, that person is very unlikely to care about the legalities.
avatar
melchiz: Please demonstrate how Impulse itself is DRM before you support a claim that it is such.

If the system manages how you use the product, it's managing your "digital rights" to that product. While Impulse does not do this when you are playing your game, it does do it when assessing your "rights" to install the game, backup the game and to patch the game. If it wasn't a method for managing your rights to a game (which can be revoked at any time -- see those "free" copies of Sins as an example of that) it wouldn't be required when performing any actions connected to your game.
It may not be as restrictive as some DRM systems, but it's still DRM.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
bansama: Only when arguing legalities. If someone has legally purchased the game, that person is very unlikely to care about the legalities.

I'm fairly certain that this statement alone disqualifies the foundation of your arguments, as it is nonsensical, meaningless, and simply illogical. How can you even assume that, let alone use it support a series of claims?
Also, you need to work on this "ignoring" thing. Let's see some willpower!
EDIT:
Let me add this, (again) to help clarify a few things--
Your views on DRM (whoever "you" might be) are irrelevant. DRM has an established meaning and purpose. If a system is not designed as DRM and does not function as DRM (intent and function are necessary to qualify), it is not DRM. Copy protection is not DRM. Download managers are not DRM platforms. Serial numbers/keys (old Battle.net style, required to install or play online, but not involved in activation or install count limitation) are not DRM. These things may be part of a DRM system, but they do not constitute DRM alone.
Please attempt to understand DRM before speaking so passionately about it.
Post edited November 29, 2009 by melchiz
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: I'm fairly certain that this statement alone disqualifies the foundation of your arguments, as it is nonsensical, meaningless, and simply illogical. How can you even assume that, let alone use it support a series of claims?

Where in your posts did you set the criteria that legalities had to be taken into account? Would you like to show us a direct reference to that? As unless you specifically state that such a notion cannot be considered, it's fair game.
Let me remind you of what you asked: How can you consider something to be DRM if the so-called DRM can be removed and the software still functions?
Where in that question was there mention that specific methods of removing DRM was void from the discussion?
DRM has an established meaning and purpose
Yes. Digital Rights Management. A system for managing Digital Rights. It doesn't get simpler than that. Different DRM solutions do this in different ways. Impulse does it by primarily managing access to backups and patching.
avatar
melchiz: Also, you need to work on this "ignoring" thing. Let's see some willpower!

Just fine thanks, I'm enjoying you scurrying around as your statements crumble all around you, thanks to your inability to cover all bases.
Now, let's seem some truly logical statements coming from you that are bound to the actual actions of people in the real world and not the fantasy world you seem to be living in. You know the one, the one where you automatically assume that people who have purchased a game are not going to look at arguably illegal methods of removing components of their legally purchased software that they do not wish to install/activate.
Post edited November 29, 2009 by bansama
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
bansama: Where in your posts did you set the criteria that legalities had to be taken into account? Would you like to show us a direct reference to that? As unless you specifically state that such a notion cannot be considered, it's fair game.
Let me remind you of what you asked: How can you consider something to be DRM if the so-called DRM can be removed and the software still functions?

I'm not certain if any response could satisfy you, because you will simply remove it from its context, distort its meaning, and present it as a pseudo-contradiction to other statements. Let me attempt to humor you, however:
Please consult the following,
http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/steam_has_failed_you_yet_again/perm=260/#p_b_260
...Ah, the life and times of the Internet tough guy.
Step 1: Act like a self-rightious twit until someone calls you out
Step 2: Whine about being called out and claim that this "someone" is not worth your time, and will be ignored
Step 3: Stalk said person and jump into any arguments he may enter, and attempt to exploit any inane logical loophole you can find
Step 4: When confronted with reason and evidence, return to step 2
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: stuff

You're hilarious! It's like watching a kitten attack a piece of cellophane.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: *snip*

Weren't you the one who got all upset over the idea of people attacking the poster instead of their points? And yet, here you are, trying to do exactly that. Why is this? No longer able to counter the arguments and yet also unable to admit that you are unable to continue on?
I do find this comment of yours funny though: Act like a self-rightious twit until someone calls you out
As the only one here acting like a self-righteous twit is yourself. Thus, I'm calling you out on it.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
ceemdee: You're hilarious! It's like watching a kitten attack a piece of cellophane.

Indeed. Usually, the cellophane is shredded and useless after the kitten has its fun, no?
I'd hate to be the cellophane, in that case.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
ceemdee: You're hilarious! It's like watching a kitten attack a piece of cellophane.
avatar
melchiz: Indeed. Usually, the cellophane is shredded and useless after the kitten has its fun, no?
I'd hate to be the cellophane, in that case.

*whoosh*
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
bansama: Weren't you the one who got all upset over the idea of people attacking the poster instead of their points? And yet, here you are, trying to do exactly that. Why is this? No longer able to counter the arguments and yet also unable to admit that you are unable to continue on?

Actually, I'm calling you out on stalking me because you still can't get over our past arguments.
Bawww. :(
avatar
ceemdee: *whoosh*

*snap* *crackle* *pop*
Post edited November 29, 2009 by melchiz
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: *snip*

If you think that replying to posts is an act of stalking, then perhaps you should not reply to the person you don't want a response from?
Then again, perhaps you should simply not post anything that warrants a response.
Post edited November 29, 2009 by bansama
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
bansama: If you think that replying to posts is an act of stalking, then perhaps you should not reply to the person you don't want a response from?
Then again, perhaps you should simply not post anything that warrants a response.

If you can enlighten me as to what your goals are, as someone who has promised to ignore my every word at least twice, I would be delighted.
It seems that you cannot resist an argument with a self-perceived adversary. If I am such a fool, you should have kept ignoring me. You must believe that I am impervious to reason. Why waste your time with such a stubborn, dense character? Clearly, you feel a need to confront me. Perhaps we should examine that.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: If you can enlighten me as to what your goals are, as someone who has promised to ignore my every word at least twice, I would be delighted.

Did I really "promise" to ignore you for all eternity? I don't think, until this very post, I have ever used the word "promise" on this forum in regards to any action I may or may not take.
That said, my "goals" are quite simple really. To post when I feel like it, to respond to people when I feel like it, to ignore people when I feel like it (and for as long or little as I feel like it) and so forth. You know, like most others here. What then, are your "goals"?
Post edited November 29, 2009 by bansama
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
bansama: What then, are your "goals"?

To kiss and make up with you because, based on this thread, everything has been a total misunderstanding and you are nothing but a sweetie.
I bet you could make me pull a Tiger Woods and drive into a tree if we were married, right? It's fine with me, because I know that the love would be genuine.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
melchiz: I bet you could make me pull a Tiger Woods and drive into a tree if we were married, right? It's fine with me, because I know that the love would be genuine.

Sadly, we will never know.
Posted November 29, 2009
avatar
Lucibel: Actually, I can't seem any reference to Sins of a Solar Empire having any (or GOO) DRM, so it appears my digital download might be "DRM-free". But then if it can only be installed and activated with the Impulse client, how is Impulse therefore not DRM to some extent?
avatar
melchiz: Sins doesn't have any sort of DRM (this was widely publicized at the time of release). You can run the game without Impulse. The game does not require activation. The game has no install limits.
Do you consider an install package to be a form of DRM? Because the unpacked files cannot simply be copied between machines and used to play most games. I still cannot understand your reasoning. How is a download manager/installer a form of DRM? It is not required to run games.
Must I repeat that point? How can something be DRM if it does not run in the background when launching or running software? The Impulse process remains dormant. You can uninstall Impulse after downloading/installing your game. Do you wish to upgrade your game? Install Impulse, update, and dump it again.
Do you understand what constitutes DRM? Design is part of what determines if something is DRM. Impulse is not designed as a DRM platform. It is not intended to stop piracy or protect content. This fact is evident for several reasons, including:
-Stardock produces a DRM system known as GOO; why use Impulse as "DRM" if they have GOO?
-Impulse doesn't have any copy-protection fuctions outside of bundling vendor DRM (such as SecuROM and GOO) at the behest of publishers
-If Impulse were DRM, it would be pretty worthless, because it can be uninstalled by users with no consequence whatsoever to software functionality
You may feel that Impulse is DRM, but it is not. I could use many of your arguments to claim that InstallShield is DRM, or that my old Super Nintendo carts employ DRM.
Note:
You may find the following link helpful--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

Yes, I know what DRM is. It seems like you're too hung up with definitions to recognise instances of it in the real world. Impulse backs-up into a proprietary format with which I need to have the Impulse client and logged in with an email and password. I just discovered though that I CAN download a standalone installer for an offline computer, but that's redownloading several gigabytes when I already have the game files. Plus, I need to have the Impulse client when installing even these, even if I'm not logged in, so it's a third party process that's required even when installing.
Why bring Installshield into it? that's just an install wrapper that allows people to install programs on their computer. I don't need to login to it with an email and password before installing programs with it incorporated.
Paraphrasing your wiki link, it controls access to my games, albeit for just install and updates. It does function as DRM, whether you like it or not.
Pages:
1
5
10
15
17
18
19
20
21
24
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Steam has failed you, yet again.(355 posts)(355 posts)
(355 posts)