Online Gaming Is Dying....

Lil_Hacker · #1 14-05-2002, 12:29

I just wanted to start this thread to let some people know what they are doing.Pc gaming is taking a hard hit.Anyone whos played online lately knows that cheating(hacking)is rampant amongst online games.What fun is it if ur skill is really not skill?!?Your cheating is doing two things...Making you look like a dummy,and destroying the fun of online gaming.I have a few games Counter-Strike for one,that i myself will never play again because there is so much cheating.Its getting just plain ridiculous.Think b4 you do it "Do i really want to be a lame cheater,or do i want my skills to be my own"And on another note...All this iso sharing and stuff is hurting too.Do you think its free for software companies to produce games?If everyone stops buyin games then there will eventually be no more games,cuz the software company will eventually be out of buisness.I myself love online gaming and want it to prosper not die out.What are you gonna do to help?!? BUY THE GAMES AND DONT CHEAT OR USE LAME HACKS<-----------<<<-

It really pains my bunghole to see so many destroying such a great thing....

Lil Half Swell · #2 14-05-2002, 23:04

Good post. I agree 100%

podunkviller · #3 15-05-2002, 02:13

if it bothers ya, inform the server holders. blizzard bans people. im not sure about CS, though. i stay outta that whole region of the internet

ShaMan · #4 16-05-2002, 11:35

I also believe:

1. Software makers should keep the prices more reasonable.

2. Stop being dirt bag tricksters by trapping customers with
their "license agreement" which you get to know and read
about AFTER you open the box, at which point, you're screwed
wether you agree to it or not, since the stores won't give you
back your money and the software makers won't either, since
they warrant the "media only" and the content is sold "as is".

3. Software makers should not use protection which forces
customers to require the use of nocd cracks and alike, not to
mention, tend to screw the functionality. Sure, some will abuse
this, but the majority won't, so the majority and the legitimate
customers get to pay and be treated as criminals whether they
are or not, guilty without trial. They protect their rights while
stepping all over the customer rights.

4. Customers should not need special hardware to make a
ligitimate backup of their original game discs, or otherwise,
get a replacement after paying a S&H charge within 90 days,
and thereafter, pay S&H and a disc fee, which is usually so
high, it's best to just buy the game new. How about when
they don't offer the service anymore?

I could go on this issue for quite some time, but I believe I have
made my points for now.

emptyeighty · #5 16-05-2002, 15:04

Well, let me give you an example from Germany:
Starcraft
no protection, just CD-Key
It was sold about 100,000 times.
There are a suspected number of 1,000,000 pirated copies going around.
How much more money would Blizzard have made if it had protected the game with lets say Safedisc?
Of course you can download NoCD cracks and fixed .exes almost the minute a new patch is released, but novice copiers who dont know places like GCW exist bite their tail off trying to copy it.

Well, im not in favor of copy protections eighter, but i can understand that the software companies do it.

ShaMan · #6 16-05-2002, 15:47

You make a valid point. However, I believe, we would both agree that:

1. Out of that alleged 1 Million copies, a good number of them, would not have sold at all, if in fact, there are that many copies floating around, it's mainly due to people tend to sample something quicker when free than when not.

2. If, there are that many copies floating around, it will most likely tend to indirectly not hurt Blizzard's next release, due to its free publicity, as some who would not have given the title a chance, due to price, appearance, etc might do so after having sampled it. For every negative, there's usually a positive and viceversa.

3. The novice copier and average consumer is not going to put a significant negative dent in sales, regardless of protection or not.

4. Regardless, of what protection is used, the pirate community will most likely not be stopped by it, therefore, the objective of the software maker is largely defeated by the same reason and in the process tee off a lot of legitimate consumers.

5. The way they sucker people into the "license agreement" mouse trap and their SOL attitude, if you for any legitimate reason, are not satisfied with the product and want a refund, is to say the least, questionable in my opinion.

As with most else, there's always going to be pro and con arguements on basically any issue, this one will surely not be an exception.

emptyeighty · #7 17-05-2002, 07:17

1. I agree. They wouldnt have sold 1 Million. But maybe 200,000 to 300,000. That would be at least twice as much.

2. If they dont sell enough there will be no next release. Of course not in Blizzards case though.

3. Im not sure about that. I know a lot of people who buy their PCs in supermarkets these days. They come with a writer and the people have no idea about copy protections, that they can be cloned etc. But if there is absolutely no protection they can just burn with the program that came with the PC, like Nero or CDRWin.

4. You cannot stop pirates! Impossible! Even the free public gets cracks and fixes for almost all games (GCW, Gamefix, Megagames, Siedler...)

5. Not only questionable! Its just plain unfair. They ought to keep their promises!

Yep, this ones no exception. Im just saying there is no real reason for companies to stop using copy protections.

podunkviller · #8 17-05-2002, 09:02

blizzard is smart about it. if you want to pirate their software, its fine, good for you. but you cant play on battlenet with it *the hook*

emptyeighty · #9 17-05-2002, 10:09

Well, theres BNETD for example.

ShaMan · #10 17-05-2002, 10:12

@emptyeighty

1. Agreed, it's a reasonable projection.
2. Agreed, it would take more than that to bump off Blizzard.
3. You have a valid point. But they can implement safeguards and protection, such as mentioned by podunkviller, which wouldn't make it near impossible in some cases and for some people to make and have a backup copy of their legitimately owned (errrr "licensed" that is) software, not to mention, more often than not, screw your system up for good measure while they're at it too.
4. Agreed.
5. Agreed.

@podunkviller

Very good observation and point.

simpson5215 · #11 17-05-2002, 16:03

Very good topic!. I have four kids and the only way they can ever play a game I buy is if I can make a working backup of the game ( they have cost me a small fortune in re-buys. I do not have the patience to wait for the company to send me another working copy, LOL) Once the companies started using protection I started doing searches to see if there was a place I could find to make legitamate copies of the software I have already paid my hard dollar for. I have no problems with companies wanting to get all the money they are entitled to for a good product ( I have bought many games that I gave to my kids to turn into useless coasters, it is part of the gamers world as it is in watching movie reviews to decide on which movie you would like to see.). As for licencing agreements everyone knows that when they buy software they are buying into the agreement of the company, I can see there side... for instance I can go buy starcraft and since it only has a cd-key barrier all I have to do is copy the game write the cd-key down, rebox the origional and take it back to the store to get my money back. That would destroy there business if they had to give refunds. Cheers

ShaMan · #12 17-05-2002, 20:58

@simpson5215

Well, everyone(?) may perhaps know and/or assume based on prior premise they are buying into a license agreement, AFTER they buy their first software, until then there is no reason to think that there should be a license agreement in the first place. Not to mention, the vast majority of the consumer does NOT even know the difference between a licensed product and a purchased one, much less, what the license entitles them to or not to have in the way of rights, etc. The average consumer, the majority, do NOT even read a warranty statement, much less, a license agreement, nor even know the difference between the two.

The product is "sold" like a purchase, "taxed" like a purchase and paid for like a "purchase" in the mind of the average consumer, technically and legally therefore, one would have no reason to believe this is a lease/license based transaction.

Once you open the box you get to find this out, whether or not you agree thereafter, you're SOL at that point. You're not getting your money from the retailer and you're NOT getting your money from the software maker. The "license" in most cases, can be revoked at any time, without reason, if they so wish to, so you're paying for what exactly, the media???

They warrant the "media" but I'm not paying $30, $40, $50 or more just for a CD Disc, are you? I'm buying it for the "content", aren't you? isn't everyone?

The consumer pays the money for the "content" on the "media" yet the "content" is not warranted, it used to be warranted though, but not anymore.

If, you apply your method of thinking, then there should be no reason to examine, question, discuss or negotiate any agreement then, not for your apartment lease, home mortgage, car loan, etc, etc, etc since "everyone" knows there's an agreement involved, right? Yet this isn't the case.

In order to have a legal and binding agreement, all parties involved need be aware of the said agreement and its content BEFORE a transaction based on the same is finalized. This is clearly NOT the case with the license agreement method being employed currently.

If, you're saying that you would rip off the software companies given the opportunity and you represent the majority, then I guess, yes we should have our rights taken away and the software maker should treat us all as potential thieves, as they currently do, and do exactly what they're doing.

The very fact that you're on this forum, by your own admittance, seeking out methods of circumvention on software protections, says you're obviously not happy with the way things are, otherwise, why would you be trying to have more than what is being gracefully licensed and warranted to you.

Anyhow, I believe, I will retire from this thread now, I can be a passionate bastah (in case you haven't noticed

) and I could go on forever on this issue, but this has gotten old already.

NeXT!

emptyeighty · #13 18-05-2002, 05:24

Good point. The money should be transferred the moment you agree to the license, not the moment you "buy" a product you dont really purchase.

podunkviller · #14 18-05-2002, 18:01

licensing is just them reminding you of laws that apply to any program that isnt open source, usually, except in the kazaa eula, where you agree to help kazaa defend itself in court if the need should arise

scu_316 · #15 18-05-2002, 18:57

Sad how cheating destroyed a mod like Counter Strike