As you know, back towards the end of May, I solicited your questions to be forwarded directly to StarForce in regards to their anti-piracy software. I'm pleased to report we have received their answers and we have posted the link on the front page. You may also access it here, which points to the Article Feedback Forum:

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=89;t=000319

We encourage your thoughts on this interview. Please though, no personal attacks, no bashing, insults, etc., whether directed at other members or at StarForce.

You may have seen a thread in this forum, or elsewhere, wherein I asked for a cessation of StarForce posts, except if there was a specific issue or problem. That request is hereby lifted.

Just keep it civil. Thanks.

Thanks, Tom, for your efforts in resolving a particularly sensitive issue.

I wonder what happens if StarForce goes out of business.

At least six of the issues brought up in the interview required the intervention of SF technical support.

I just installed FC again, and was expecting that I would have only 3 activations left, but I had 13 - which is great, considering that I tried to use ED registry save, but it failed and I had to register again.

I was ready to damn this Starforce activation, but I must say that it is a simple procedure that is quite painless to use.

Quote"I suppose I represent a few LOMAC simmers when I say I will not install anything that contains a piggyback program of any kind. If I pay for a sim I consider that to be my personal property to use as I see fit on my computer as long as I don't violate any copyrights or enter into any illegal activities.

I will not purchase this new addon because of Starforce."

I feel the same way as this person. A few buddies of mine have had so many problems with software that has the starforce piggybacked on it, that I have made it a point to not buy anything with starforce on it. I enjoy playing my sims and games without having to locate the cd, I also like to make backups of my cd, for reinstalling, so I dont scratch my originals by accident ( like my Falcon4 cd's ( original and AF ones ). I also promote for those that surround me at lan's to do likewise in standing against the purchase of Starforce-backed products. Developers will merely lose more money than they plan to make due to trying to hard to protect themselves.
As for Flaming Cliffs, I will not be purchasing it at all.

SF interview replies as expected.
I am afraid the software companies are not losing much over this, only the user community does.
I did not buy FC because of it, thus missing out on a great title.
I still can't figure out why ED would not trust the simming community.
If Lead Pursuit (F4:AF) does not 'protect' their title at all (and who in their right minds would steal a study sim?) why would ED have to ?
It has become obvious to me, looking at the great feedback the people of e.g. LP can give to F4:AF and the simming user community as to why.
I'm still happily flying LO though !
FC surely is a great title. Unfortunately the SF 'protection' killed it for me.
ED, please think twice before 'SF protecting' the next installment (however I have great doubts/fears...).

As expected StarForce responded with "squeaky clean" answers to all concerns. What else did anyone think would happen?

I still will not buy anything that is CONTAMINATED with this crap.

Asking a company if their product is good will only result in a smiley face public relations response every time.

Technical issues regarding installation or operation are not relevant IMO. The software is intrusive and if the gaming community refused to purchase anything with this kind of "producer protection" then it would die out immediately.

Only the communities tacit acceptance of intrusive software can extend the life of it and promulgate it indefinately.

I think a boycott is in order against any program that includes these kinds of "protections".

And ---20MM --this StarForce thing is a "hot button" issue for many simmers ---not just LOMAC simmers. It appears that you would like to quell discussion of it on this forum. I think that is wrong and takes us another step further toward "tacit acceptance" of this kind of intrusion.

The whole simming community should be up in arms over this --as many seem to be--and the simming community forums should either lead the way or get out of the way of those who would fight against it. To squelsh discussion --either damning or technical- only plays into the hands of companies like StarForce.

I do not understand the stance you have taken in this regard.

What? You're talking about it right now, are you not? Did I not say in the first post of this thread that we encouraged feedback, as long as it's civil? Why did I post this in four forums on site?

Who do you think spent all the time getting the questions together, editing and condensing and summarizing them and sending them to StarForce and posting them here?

If you meant the request I issued for a cessation on StarForce except for specific help questions, that was for a few days prior to the answers being released because it was turning into a member vs. member and member vs. StarForce slag session.

You think I don't know that this is a hot button issue for simmers? You have no idea what it is like running these forums. None.

I don't expect a big warm hug from the community, but I certainly didn't expect a response such as yours.

Personally, 20mm I think it is great that a discussion on this issue is allowed here at all (since it has in fact nothing to do with simming in the first place).
I think it is a great idea for SimHQ to put out questions to a company like Starforce.
Whether we agree with it or not, SF type of 'protection' is NOT going away.
I wish this thing (or similar) was part of the OS, thus it would not (possibly) mess with our systems.

Pilots!

I just want to report you important information:
------------
LIMITED PRODUCT RECALL ON LOCK-ON GOLD
If you recently purchased a version of Lock-On Gold and have been unable to begin initial game play on your pc, you may have purchased a version that contains a defective game disk. It has come to our attention that a limited amount of Lock-On Gold game units have been released containing this defect, which was not the cause of the StarForce encryption. If you feel you may have purchased a version of the Lock-On Gold game containing a defective disk, please contact the following toll free number (888) 856-2424 or email lockon@creativecms.com . Upon your call we will verify if you have purchased a version containing a defective disk and provide you with instructions on where to send the defective version and how to receive a functioning version of the Lock-On Gold game.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
------------
Source: http://www.evolvedgames.com/lockon.htm

20MM ---- quote ---"You have no idea what it is like running these forums. None."

I beg to differ with you here----I was the moderator on Falcon4 Community forum for almost 3 years. I just recently gave up the job. I have vast experience with community arguments and trolls and trouble makers flaming one another.

I am sorry if I misunderstood your intentions, but I seem to have read in at least two places that you said you would not allow StarForce "bashing" anymore.

I think StarForce "bashing" is perfectly in order --not just a discussion of the results of your interview with them. My comments to you concerned "bashing" --not discussion.

George,
I'm not going to quibble with you, but I am going to clarify:

You are correct, I said "no bashing" and I meant it, whether it's directed at StarForce or another SimHQ member. I set the rules around here, not you. So if you really want to bash StarForce, I suggest you pick another site to do it.

When do critical comments become bashing? That's a judgment call, which I and our Moderators will make. You know about forum moderating so I don't have to tell you about that.

For the benefit of other members who haven't done moderating, your StarForce comments are pretty critical and I suppose harsh, but I wouldn't characterize them as "bashing". If I see someone trending in that direction I'll issue them a warning, unless it's really over the line and then the response will be more severe.

I still find it hard to believe that they expect us to accept without reservation SF's insertion of their drivers onto our system that is KNOWN BY THEM to conflict with other hard- & soft-ware.

Answers like "it's not our fault your hardware doesnt support our drivers" are unacceptable.

Would we accept the same situation if a game installed it's own video drivers then killed everything else? No we wouldnt.

But we dont have any choice, do we - and that's what really pushes my buttons.

Despite being legal owners of the software ... :rolleyes:

I think this is what 20mm is getting at. Damn them to the nth degree if you must, but do it politely.

You can register all the protests you want, but the most effective method is voting with your pocketbook. This seems to be what's keeping Falcon 4.0 Allied Force in Amazon's Top 10. A lot of people are very impressed with the product and are buying the snot out of it, and I think a small part of that is, it doesn't contain intrusive copy protection on it.

SWAT 4 has copy protection, just not StarForce, and it sold fairly well to the audience that enjoyed it. No problems have been reported by the users except for the streaming ads all over it.

Be civil about this, people. I don't think 20mm is a stockholder in StarForce, but I don't think he's opposed to people protecting their investment. Sounds to me like he may have been someone who worked for a living. He isn't a cheerleader for a Russian software security company. I don't know if he's as annoyed as the rest of us, but like it or not SimHQ is no longer someone's pet project on their little home-based server. SimHQ is a becoming a marketplace force that is now the best repository of information and professionals on the Web. As a staff weenie, he can no longer allow his opinion to rule his judgement of what's what in simming. His opinion can be interpreted as staff policy. That can be a good thing, so long as you consult with the boss before you shoot your mouth off.

My opinion? StarForce is the worst methodology in the world for software protection. My solution? Some line of code on the DVD/CD that prevents CD burning programs from copying it. Sorry about scratched CDs. Be real careful with them, and if one wears out, that's what warranty replacements are for. I hate the idea of spyware installed on my computer. Don't even get me started on device drivers that didn't specifically come from the manufacturer. It will never touch my rig.

The only other option is some sort of hardware dongle that the DVD/CD checks in with before installing. We have only ourselves to blame. Our generation invented CD burners and we've been burning stuff for friends ever since. You can't help but understand when someone puts their blood, sweat, and tears into something, they want to be properly and fairly renumerated for it. Want to know what a game's like before you buy? Either d/l a demo, read a review, or check out the forums.

The free lunch will be over soon. It's just a matter of how they'll pull us screaming from the sow's teat and make us pay for it ourselves.

pfunk

Worked, past tense?

AFAIK everyone who runs SimHQ (i.e. the admins) and most if not all of the moderators do it in their spare time. We all have real jobs that we get payed for (unlike our SimHQ jobs).

I was being facetious, Joe.

pfunk

Ok. As long as you don't work for StarForce.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but is the implication that SimHQ has taken a stance on StarForce? If I'm reading that wrong I apologize..but if I'm not I can tell you definitely 100% that SimHQ has taken NO stance whatsoever on SF. We solicted for questions from the members (including staff), submitted them to SF, and they answered however they wanted. It wasn't a phone or in-person interview where we could follow up questions that we might have felt were evasive with more probing questions..so in that regard we are at a disadvantage. But let it be clear that SimHQ has NO policy either for or against SF.

And for what it's worth, I've never been asked to suppress *my* opinion on anything at SimHQ..but at the same time I wouldn't dare presume to speak for the site as a whole either.

Personally, I've had good and bad experiences with SF. SH3 works fine..I have no conflicts with it. I bought Lock On Gold at Best Buy..Disc 2 doesn't work..so I'm waiting on that to come via mail. Not real pleased about that for sure.

Regards..

BeachAV8R

It would have been real stupid of a site such as SimHQ if they would have strongly expressed any opinion on non-simming related matters like copy protection.
The great thing about this all is the fact that companies like ED will take notice and are aware of what many here feel, also about this issue.
Personally, I can fully agree with ANY anti-theft protection (if really necessary?), except intrusive 'malware' like SF.

Arg. Sometimes I hate the internet...