Bad Company 2 Steam Patch

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is preparing for its first patch.  The Bad Company 2 (BFBC2) patch is already out on the console and standalone-PC versions of the game and is slated for a release shortly on the PC-Steam version.

Shacknews has the details that SecuROM DRM is being removed from the Steam version.  Also, multiplayer will be unaffected by the patch vs. non-patched players:

Thankfully, multiplayer servers have not been patched so Steam users will be able to play with non-Steam users despite not having the latest client version. SecuROM CD/DVD copy protection will also be removed from the Steam version, which has no disc.

The removal of SecuROM from the Steam version is another bonus for buying the game through Steam.  Steam itself is DRM and the reason why developers feel the need to package their own DRM on top of Steam has always alluded me.  Fortunately, in this case, it can be laid to rest.

The rest of the patch note/fixes are quoted below:

Single Player -
Fixed: Graphical issues on some systems on SP_03 (at start and when displaying background mountains at “Up river”)
Fixed: Character voice issue during cut scenes in SP_03b (only affected Spanish)
Fixed: Hang when killed using TOW Launchers in SP_05
Fixed: Graphical issue on some systems on SP_05 (displaying background mountains)
Fixed: Voice volume in cut scenes on SP_06
Fixed: Unexpected dialog at start of SP_08 (only affected Italian)
Fixed: Random crash in SP_09 cut scenes

Multi Player -
Fixed: Server Browser - Joining a password protected server results in a connection timeout
Fixed: Server Browser auto updating server list when reopened causing a timeout issue
Fixed: Password issue during Friend invites
Fixed: Password text field issue on joining a password protected server
Fixed: “Flickering” ship on Arica Harbor
Fixed: Clan tags that use numbers in them displaying a “0” on the Select Spawn Point screen
Fixed: Display issue on long server names
Fixed: Mortar Strike icon not updating (Beta issue)
Fixed: No “Exit Game” menu option appearing at the end of some rounds.
Fixed: Flickering user rank icon (appeared as an animated gif) when user reaches rank 10.
Fixed: Flickering trees and “Red Box” on Laguna Presa
Fixed: User is logged out when failing to create a new soldier
Fixed: Zeus stationary weapon not appearing in stats
Fixed: Zu23 not appearing in stats
Fixed: BMD3 AA not appearing in stats
Fixed: Friend request displaying incorrect Veteran stats
Fixed: End of Round screen displayed incorrect “UAV_Station” – now displays correct localized text.
Fixed: K/D ratio displays in the Front End
Fixed: K/D ratio displays correctly when “comparing”
Change: Server browser now defaults to list via Ping first
Change: News Ticker font support for Spanish, Polish, Russian and Japanese
Change: New message for server full (reported as “I get no message when I try and join a server, it does nothing”)
Change: New message displayed for attempting to join a password protected server without providing a password (reported as “I get no message when I try and join a server, it does nothing”)
Change: Displays version number on Front End Legal Screen
Change: Display of weapon icon during loading screen

Calm Down! SecuROM DRM in Battlefield: Bad Company 2

I hate DRM as much as the next person, SecuROM being one of the worst offending DRM schemes out there.  However, the heat that Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is taking for including this DRM is out of proportion to the facts of the DRM works.  Fortunately, we have level-headed redditor, SnakeDiver, to steer us through the fog.  He posted a great response to a comment in /r/gaming over on Reddit.com.

I've capture the comment in its entirety:

If you have been following BF:BC2's blog then you would have read How BC2 Uses Copy Protection .

Of course it's going to be disabled by pirates. It's inevitable. All it is is a deterrent. But SecuROM doesn't run like it has in the past in BC2.

• It runs only when the game runs, and really only does anything on first launch.
• It's a wrapper contained within the EXE. Launch the EXE and SecuROM does it's check and game goes
• It doesn't install anything into the Kernel

In reality PB is more invasive then this SecuROM. The only thing annoying is the download limits. I wish they'd have a smart activation server, not just a "limit to 5 installs" server. With the smarts being, unlimited installs but if you install X times within X geographically dispersed locations within X amount of time, we're going to block your key.

Complain about real piss-poor DRM such as UbiSoft's "always-on DRM". BC2's DRM is, for the most part, non-invasive as DRM should be. I don't care if they want to protect their code as long as it doesn't get in the way of my use of the product (or of other products).

Again, I don't like DRM. Pirates are already playing BFBC2 on pirated servers, days before the official launch. However, DRM is a fact of life for PC gaming and voting with my wallet is the only way I can let game companies know what I think of their DRM schemes.

I vote for Valve's games on Steam, because Steam offers more than just DRM protection for the games. I didn't vote for EA's last DRM disaster, Spore, and its originally planned "phone home every 10 minutes" DRM. I will NOT vote for any of Ubisoft's new "always-on DRM". I will and have voted for the new SecuROM bundled with BFBC2. its not perfect, but its not as terrible as it once was.

Heartless_ Game Review: Borderlands

Borderlands, from Gearbox software, blends FPS with RPG and tickles the loot center in every gamer’s brain. Borderlands is a good game, but misses greatness in every single category. Fortunately, there is a shitload of guns to make up for it.

Borderlands the RPG

Borderlands has all the makings for a great RPG: interesting characters, progression, and a story. Unfortunately, Borderlands is the king of “almost”.

The characters, like Dr Zed, come with great introduction scenes, but are quickly limited to dialogue boxes only. Other NPCs stand still, not moving, and often blend so well into the scenery that players walk by without noticing them. The only characters that stand out are the R2-D2 inspired robots nicknamed "claptraps" and some random chick that appears on screen to provide dribbles of information throughout the player's journey.

The story is fun to think about, but is not a draw for the game. It ends abruptly and does not make use of the characters or game world very well. The world itself will often make a better story than what is being sold by the random chick that pops up on the screen. The pieces are there, but the story is never put together firmly.

Character progression is handled via talent trees where players can specialize their skills in various weapons and skills. It's a well rounded, but average system. Each character recieves their unique class skill at level 5. After that, there were not any milestones that made me feel like I was achieving an important step in my characters life. Weapon skills are raised by using various weapon types

The loot is really the only RPG staple that stands out in Borderlands. It randomizes the look, stats, and effects of each weapon. With any randomized system, there is a lot of junk that is worthless, but getting a rare weapon is a treat. Getting to use that weapon to take down a giant mammoth-like Rakk Hive is icing on the cake.

How About You Ask The Pirates?

Ars Technica is running a piece about Borderlands and the fact some players were able to snag a boxed copy of the PC version days before launch only to be greeted by failed authentication attempts preventing them from playing the game.

Borderlands was a highly anticipated release on the PC, but a one-week delay of the PC launch meant that console gamers were able to enjoy the gun-collecting goodness ahead of their PC gaming brethren. A few gamers were lucky enough to find stores that were willing to sell the boxed PC copy of the game before the street date, however, but when they installed the game and tried to play, they found that without the title being authenticated online, the disc and key were worthless.

The problem? They forgot that buying a PC game doesn't involve a product, but a license.

Gearbox big wig, Randy Pitchford, responded:

"I don't know if something can be done to unlock copies for people that somehow get a copy before the street date... I certainly can't do anything about it, but I understand and am sympathetic to the frustration,"

He doesn't know. The man responsible for the game doesn't know if it can be unlocked before its street date. Maybe he should have asked the pirates that were playing Borderlands DAYS before the official street date.

It constantly amazes me the things that Publishers and Developers push off on piracy. Pirates don't buy games. Stopping them does not generate any revenue. There is not a single developer that has proven that piracy hurts their game sales. In some cases it has proven to help sales just as a free copy of a ebook often spurs sales of the hard copy!

Yes, piracy does hurt the bottom line when pirated versions are allowed to negatively affect the community and service built around a game. However, rarely, if ever, does a pirated copy equal a lost sale. That is NOT my opinion, its proven fact. Unfortunately, few companies are willing to admit this.

One time, just one time, I would like to see these companies learn a lesson from piracy. Make the game easily accessible, with no restrictions, and allow players to play as soon as they have their hands on a copy. This makes for happy and repeat customers (an educated person may have noticed that pirates tend to come back again and again to the same hacking communities that put out the best product).

NOTE: I do not pirate games or endorse piracy.

Mass Effect DRM Problems

Here we are, discussing Mass Effect's DRM, but this time, the predictions about the DRM fucking over legitimate customers have actually come true.

Fuck anyone that believed the announced DRM for Mass Effect and Spore would not cause problems.

Whats truly sad is that once again the CRACKED version of the game has NO PROBLEMS, but the LEGITIMATE copies, bought and paid for, have a plethora of issues locking gamers out of their games.

I am seriously backed into a corner now regarding Spore. I absolutely want to play the game, but I do not want to "vote" for the DRM that will be attached by buying the game.

I'm tech savvy, deal with software licensing issues for a living as an IT guy, and probably could solve or avoid most of the problems. That isn't my concern. My concern is the majority of gamers that are not educated on this sort of DRM and who may get pushed out of the market by stupid, unfounded anti-piracy efforts.

Failure To Understand DRM

Digital rights management (DRM) is an umbrella term that refers to access control technologies used by publishers and copyright holders to limit usage of digital media or devices.

A World of Warcraft account is NOT DRM. Tobold argues otherwise, but fails to use harsh language. An account to an online game is simply a means of accessing a service. When a player decides to play an MMO they do so fully understanding they are purchasing access to a service. If they don't, they should quickly learn.

An MMO, without DRM, can be pirated. Illegal servers can be brought up to provide the service portion "for free". Someone, who has stolen the game, could then easily log onto the illegal server and play. Requiring an account for the official service does not in any way stop piracy of an MMO and therefore the account CAN NOT be considered a form of DRM.

DRM, if it exists for an MMO, would be placed on top of the requirement to have an account to access the official service. For example: the game requires having the physical media in a drive while playing, or non-account-related authentication of the files installed on the computer. This is why I've commented before that online, subscription-based games somewhat defeat piracy in the first place by selling a SERVICE, not a "pile of code".

It is not a lack of understanding about DRM. It is an unwillingness to spend money, in essence voting, for a "pile of code" that is reliant upon a remote source for local authentication before it will run. It is complete bullshit and I will continue the harsh language and posture towards it until I see fit that it is not a detriment to LEGITIMATE purchasers.

In the case of Spore, where access to online content is a feature, the tried and true system of having an account to access the online service is the perfect solution. One purchase = one access key = money earned by EA/Maxis. I don't see how they would even think of using another system, especially with their plans to rank content and allow players to vote for their favorites. Mark my words: there will be some sort of control, outside of the DRM, to access online content. Therefore, the DRM is serving a POINTLESS role while accessing online content.

The accounts system is not perfect. Accounts can be shared, stolen, etc. etc. However, it ensures at some point that a copy was purchased and that players looking to play legitimately. Plus, with current technology, it is not difficult to sniff out and stomp out shared accounts. Sure, it takes effort, but so does maintaining an authentication server for years. Not to mention the ass whooping customer service will receive if that authentication server goes tits up on launch day.

This leaves only the initial installation DRM, which will be cracked within days of release. Personally, I have no problem with installation DRM that authenticates remotely or does some magic to ensure I have purchased a legitimate copy. Steam is a great example of properly implemented and friendly DRM, coupled with an account system to manage access to the digital distribution service.

DRM can exist peacefully, but it is obvious that is not the goal for EA. EA is trying very hard to present a show of force against the evil pirates. Unfortunately, it is resulting in further alienation of an already alienated PC gaming playerbase.

NOTES for Tobold: I do not play MMOs all the time. I play games all the time, MMOs some of that time. I just talk about MMOs more.

Spore can be installed three times total. Good luck having it installed on multiple machines for any length of time.

Fuck, Fuck, Fuck

I've talked up Spore around the Internet as possibly one of the most defining games of all time for the PC. My bravado for the game has taken a -50 DKP hit today with the following announcement:

All it’s taken is one little post and a landslide of others follow. At least that’s what’s happened when Bioware’s Derek French reveals that Mass Effect and Spore will be coming with a fairly hefty piece of DRM attached. It won’t just activate online when you first install the game - it’ll also have to check in to the server regularly to continue working. If ten days go by without a check-in working, the game stops working. In other words, major lengthy internet outage, no playage. Since RPS-comrade Rossignol is going to be having that kinda length of time offline shortly, this has to be frowned at.

DRM kills games for me. I have avoided weighty DRM, and promoted avoiding it, for a long time. I simply refuse to buy games tied down by DRM. What the fuck is EA thinking? DRM that checks in repeatedly, not just upon installation?

My stance on Spore, as a game, is taking a sudden back seat to this DRM issue. I will most likely NOT BUY the game if this DRM makes it through to the final release and there are no alternative ways, such as Steam, to purchase the game.

So, as my title states, fuck.

Another Reason to say NO to Battlefield 2142!

From the Dubious Quality blog:

EA released a patch for Battlefield 2142 today, and I noticed this while looking through its ReadMe: "Players who have the Windows security update KB917422 installed may suffer from an application error when running Battlefield 2142. This error can be solved by uninstalling the KB917422 update."

And what does the Windows security update KB917422 do?

From Microsoft: "A security issue has been identified in the Windows Kernel that could allow an attacker to compromise your Windows-based system and gain control over it."

First spy ware; now this. It is amazing what EA is trying to pull over on gamers with Battlefield 2142.

A lot of people are saying that gamers are just overreacting, but the truth is gamers never overreact as a whole. Gamers repeatedly buy bad games and continue to buy games where developers slip in such things as Starforce or the EA spy ware. This just promotes further bullshit from these developers. Starforce was only shutdown because of the Sony BMG DRM fiasco. If that didn't occur, I bet my best two cents that Starforce would still be in full force.

EA will weather this security patch storm and keep on marketing away the concern. They will make their money off the dimwits that haven't done their homework before buying. It's a sad tale that can be sung a thousand times over.

I only hope, with this and other posts, that we've somewhat slowed the advance of spy ware in games.

Update: 5 May, 2009 - Edited post and updated labels.

MO5 - The SOE effect... part II... MMORPG madness

Mouthing Off 5

If you play Everquest 2 currently, I would quit. Why? Because the SOE effect is going full tilt and the ole’ captain over at SOE, John Smedley, has lost the lock to his spigot: err, mouth. Read the clown’s: err John Smedley’s new interview over at Gamespot.

To quote the clown:

"One thing that I love about our company is that there is no 'quit' in this company. It's about making sure that we have pride in what we do. People within the company feel so much pride in this game that they want it to beat the crap out of World of Warcraft. That's something we feel very passionate about. We know we are capable of making the best stuff out there, and I'm proud to say that with the changes we're making in Galaxies, I think we're headed in the right direction."

They love your company so much that the Star Wars Galaxies team has lost numerous leads, developers, and technicians?

They are so dedicated that they somehow are going to rebuild a 2.5 year old game into a World of Warcraft killer? You can “want to beat the crap out of World of Warcraft”, but I would think it a bit silly to actually believe you can. It is said though, confidence is a key to success.

Enough about Star Wars Galaxies, let us get back to Everquest 2. As I have previously defined the SOE effect I will connect some dots. In April ’05 Star Wars Galaxies underwent the Combat Upgrade to mixed reviews and a slight murmur in the crowd. Players stayed and lived with the changes because it was not GAME ALTERING or DRAMATIC. Fast forward to November and the BOMBSHELL known as the NGE was dropped inside a two week period.

The numbers are not in or they are very closely guarded, but the word around the Internet is that the NGE has killed Star Wars Galaxies. Actually, effectively killed would be a better statement. No amount of marketing or positive PR spin will sway a large group of new players to pick up Star Wars Galaxies sans a complete re-launch under a new name.

Now, back to Everquest 2. EQ2 already had a major revision to it's combat system and class balance. Once again, there are some murmurs in the player base about the changes. People are still playing though. However, what will happen when SOE decides that the game isn’t Everquesty enough?

Smedley claimed that their sandbox approach didn’t work with Star Wars because it wasn’t Star Warsy enough. Everquest 2 isn’t a sandbox game, but it’s no Everquest either. SOE so far has swayed from making a better Everquest all the way to making change after change to open the game up towards what I like to call “the World of Warcraft player”. Not just casual gamers, but gamers that like to solo MORE than group. Obviously World of Warcraft has found A LOT of gamers that fit this mold.

If SOE is so CONFIDENT that they can turn Star Wars Galaxies into a World of Warcraft killer then what do you think they will believe they can do with Everquest 2, which is still rumored to be short of pulling a profit due to high development costs. Is Everquest 2 in for a major shake up because it somehow doesn’t fit the mold that SOE believes it should?

If 300,000+ accounts at SWG’s peak wasn't good enough then what is the threshold for Everquest 2 before SOE mandates it be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up? Did SOE learn with Everquest 2 that sequels don’t work in the MMO market and did that scare away the idea of a Star Wars Galaxies 2 implementing their new features? I don’t know about everyone else, but it seems like the SOE effect is getting worse.

With SOE’s parent company, Sony, already hurting in the public relations department with the DRM fiasco, will they be willing to take any more negative press as the story of the Star Wars Galaxies NGE debacle starts crossing into the New York Times?

Everquest 2 players: get while the getting is good. Don't say "It will never happen", because it already has. As much as you may hate the idea, you can't deny the obvious trend that SOE has set. How many more games do they need to kill to prove it?

Update: 3 May, 2009 - Edited post and applied labels.