To put it straight: I refuse paying for starforced games.
I am very disappointed with ED decision... You lost a customer.

I have enjoyed LockON very much, but I have not bought Flaming Cliffs, and I will not buy Black Shark again exclusively because of SF.

Put it on STEAM and you have my money same day.

[Admin Comment - take the discussion of another forum back to the forum, not here]

" Sorry, but Flaming Cliffs has not been effectively pirated"

Yeah. You keep on believin' that.

I am ROTFF_LMFAO right now SO hard. What a NOOB.

edited for obvious reasons.

Might I suggest that being as you cannot post your views on Starforce on DCS website, then you email

support at digitalcombatsimulator dot com

and tell them why you are not buying it.

Regardless of whether the trolls in this thread think it's right or not to voice your opinion, DCS have the right to know why their game is not making it into certain homes...whether that's 5 homes, 50 homes or 5,000 homes.

I have already sent my email.

The problem is that they won't listen, they conducted a poll themselves some time ago, over 50% of the people who responded said they would not purchase their product with SF, another approx 20% said they were up in the air AND yet they still chose that CP. ED doesn't care what people think, should they or not is a matter of debate, but it is quite obvious that they don't.

I have asked the question here of the beta testers that tested SF, of how many other CP schemes did they test during the beta of BS and have not received a response, because perhaps they would have to admit they never tested any except SF and IMHO, ED had chosen that CP all along and had no intention of going with anything else, including "STEAM".

[Admin comment - Enough Dlink. You do not know that is correct and have no proof. You are speculating. Debate starforce but do not claim speculation as truth.]

Sorry, missed that.

Our job is to test the simulation and SF is the protection they used for the builds so any testing of other copy protection was done elsewhere.

Really, that doesn't make much sense, after all, if they were going to choose a protection OTHER than SF, they would have used you guys to test.

IOW, they chose SF a long time ago, and this whole story about "no decision has been made", was a misrepresentation of the truth. They knew the reaction they were going to get and they didn't want the community to have the time to influence more people into not buying their product so they put out the story that it might not be SF when they knew all along it was going to be.

[Admin comment: and you know this as the truth how? Don't concoct a story based on your speculation. Stick with the facts that we know are true, not what you've created. We told you earlier to stop with that, and you've ignored it. Disagree, but do not create a scenario to fit your opinions. Strike 2.]

Thanks, but I assure you, ED knows. This was posted now two days a go:


http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=541125&postcount=200

If you need any more evidence as to why we decided to clamp down on the SF discussion on our forums - see this thread.

And yet they didn't test any other CP schemes and ONLY used SF with beta testers. I for one don't believe for a second that this wasn't decided a long time ago that they were going to use SF. They knew they were going to get this reaction and yet went ahead anyway. They knew if they announced a long time ago they were going to use SF they would have given the folks a chance to influence other people on the purchase of this product.

I bought FC, and was promptly turned off from LOMAC entirely because of it's inclusion of Starforce and resultant disabling of my CD burning capabilities.

Blackshark will not get my money right away. (I'm broke these days anyway, but even if I had spare money....) I will wait to hear from users first. Even though I rarely burn CD's anymore there were other bad things about Starforce.

Maybe things have changed.

The good news about them choosing SF, if it doesn't sell well, they can't blame piracy.

I haven't even read all the pages of this thread and I KNOW it's been brought up - this title isn't a piracy target. Any supposed "success story" about Starforce is totally skewed by the demographics of the entire equation.

All I can say is Starforce had better have improved it's act, or my money isn't going into this.

I'd pay fifty bucks just to have a Starforce free copy of FC - DESPITE HAVING ALREADY BOUGHT FC!

Oh crap let me take that back, dangerous, dangerous precedent setting there lol!

I think they would've went forward with testing other CP schemes, if problems were encountered with SF. But they encountered no problems, so go figure.
As for the rest of your post ... isn't that obvious? If they decided to go with SF then obviously they wouldn't want the whiners (no offense) to influence other people. It's business for them.

What I myself don't fully understand, is that why did they go with SF in the first place? Maybe it's because of positive experience with FC (it sold well?), and because they didn't want to risk a social experiment by releasing the game with no CP, or with other CPs that can be cracked easier than SF. Though I think, given the target audience, it might've worked that way...

Just thinking loudly.

Which doesn't mean they didn't explore other options.

Research of the product, talks with the CP's engineers, pricing, effectiveness, and ease of use are all factors.

The betas were protected with SF to prevent them from being leaked and used. Research into alternate CP does not have to match your idea of how it should be done in order to happen.

Hey guys,

I'm in a unique position as a simmer, developer, publisher and retailer and I see all sides to this issue. It is indeed a pickle. What I am hearing in my circle of friends, and I have no true confirmation yet, is that there has been some kind of improvements to SF that are not as harsh, but still offers good protection. I don't know any details, but that's just what I have heard. My hope is that this iteration of SF for Black Shark does not harm anyone and works ok for those that do purchase it and eventually those that have postponed purchasing it will pick up BS so we can continue to have good simulation titles.

If this version of SF does somehow cause harm, I hope ED will take quick action to fix.

Jason

I didn't appreciate the random reboots when I installed StarForce with X3.

I didn't buy Flaming Cliffs because of StarForce. Enough said.

What I think it's really important is that hardcore simmers like us, are considering not buying the thing because of Starforce, THAT should say something to ED. If people like us aren't willing to buy the sim because the copy protection system they chose then there's something wrong and they should reconsider using it.

For example my case, I have bought more than $600 worth of peripherals (CH HOTAS, pedals, mfp, throttle quadrant, TrackIR 4) and I don't think I'll be buying the thing, just because of SF.

I really want to play this sim...

Starforce=NO SALE...NO EXEPTIONS....PERIOD



Mike, owner of over 250 legitimate pieces of PC gaming software
PC Gamer since 1986
HardCore Flight Simulation Junky started on Falcon AT

I am the target audience, I have HOTAS, rudder pedals, track IR 4, a quad core system with 24" main monitor.

There is no way to know just what ED lost with their pervasive Starforce junk. I got nailed early on my Starforce with another game. Screwed my system up big time, and as I recall it even crapped my HDD. It's been several years and I don't remember all the problems, but I do recall how bad it was for a while.

I bought Lock-On and really enjoyed it, but I've never bought another in the series.

Not that I blame anyone for trying to protect their interests. It is ironic, especially since everyone knows the Russians steal and pirate more software than the rest of the world combined. They just don't want someone to steal their stuff. What a hoot! (that means funny)

Regardless, I think the meager numbers of what has been sold since Lock-On is probably not even worth a mention. Certainly, got to be a labor of love... cause they can't be making any money.

I just wish there was a better way to protect software from piracy. I think MSFT is probably going at it the best way at this time. I'm not too worried about ED and their stuff,because you don't miss what you haven't had.

In that case, from what I've just read, their arrogance in the matter is the nail in the coffin.

If a company is willing to make a decision which could affect their customers as well as alienate them and not really give a monkeys, then I don't even feel remorseful about not handing over my cash.

And by the way, who's to tell the accuracy of the poll they held? I didn't partake in it....didn't even know about it?

I can't even be bothered to wish them well.

As a side note, it is their forums and therefore their decision on what they allow and disallow for discussions...but it smacks to me as if they know fine and well that there is a very, very strong anti-starforce sentiment and they do not want it discussed because they know the full implications of the discussion.

Why they would ignore customers is incredulous and just plain arrogant. And they can take their arrogance and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

Goodbye DCS, goodbye BlackShark and goodbye Sim genre.

I'll leave y'all to ponder and bicker and fight amongst yourselves. I am done posting in the Black Shark forum until I hear Starforce has been dropped.

Oh, and for those who suggest I'm one of the few who say they will not be buying BlackShark because of Starforce but actually will??...be under no illusion...my money is stayiong in my pocket. DCS have shafted themselves in this little corner of my world. I know you aren't truly bothered with that decision...I just wanted to make it clear as there seem to be some childish, immature suggestions that the people against Starforce are just babbling and actually they will buy it. Others may do and that's fine by me...I will rest in the comfort and knowledge that not a single solitary penny or my money went to Starforce and abhorrent copy protection systems.

On the other hand, I've just ran out and bought a copy of Hells Highway which has 0 copy protection. The company that make that actually have a damn sight more to lose than DCS regarding piracy...it's a much more approachable and pircay ridden genre...but they released it with nothing and therefore have my full backing and my money.

I wonder where we'll be in a few years? I wonder how many around thw world sticking up for Starforce in such a provocative way will be crying into their pints because

• Their genre is dead in the water
• The copy protection that is out at that time has in some way damaged their hardware or made them spend countless hours trying to figure out what the hell has happened to their system
• The latest copy protection (because they didn't make a stand in the first place against the evil that is) has actually got worse and even more obtrusive than it is now, making you jump through hoops like a dancing dog for a week before you actually get to sit down and play the game.

I'm going to spread the word

StarForce Company has behaved like Thugs in the past towards legitimate customers. Eagle Dynamics knows this, but choses to continue cooperation with these thugs. Obviously for both companys, StarForce behaviour towards customers was acceptable practice. I do not support such practices with my money.

To give you an idea: http://www.onlinesecurity-on.com/protect.phtml?c=55

This is the download for the official StarForce removal tool. To quote from official StarForce text:



So basically, anyone who ever claimed that StarForce hurt his system (of which there are at least 5 to 10 thrustworthy SimHQ regulars here in this thread alone) is called a Pirate by StarForce, since their Software can't possibly cause any problems, none, ever.

Their "contest" was in fact the challenge to fly your damaged system, at your own cost, to them into Russia, personally, so they may eventually check it and if THEY decide it was StarForce, would have given you less money back than the flight cost. This is how they threat customers and (involuntary) users of their software.

It's called "principles". Same why I'll never buy stuff from Acer or Sony again. Same why I'll never eat in certain restaurants in Vienna again. If people do not punish companys for bad customs by walking away with their money, these companys will keep it up indefinitly.

UBIsoft has understood that attaching their company reputation to StarForce was a bad idea. Eagle Dynamics hasn't yet, which means they are in bed with a company behaving as outlined above. The fact that they kept the lid on their decision for much longer than it obviously took them, also means they knew they would be alienating their hardcore customer base - and didn't care.

Both companys are thus not the kind I want to do business with - even if current StarForce version would be the best in the world.