This kind of protection is normally used for the protection of expensive pieces of software like Autocad. In instances like that were software runs into hundreds of pounds (or dollars) I can see the benefit as the cost of the device is a very small percentage of the actual cost of the software. But for a £30 game title the cost of the device is going to look expensive or if it's included it'll push the cost of the title up. Either way it'll have a negative marketing effect, DRMs built in to the software are one thing but increasing the initial cost of a product will cause more concern.
I've not seen "dongles" used for games in the past, I may be wrong.

I *knew* the cost of the device would be raised as an objection.... I just knew it

This is a multi-use device, in that you only require one, and can load it with many licenses for any software from any vendor that chooses to utilise high-end random .exe encryption.

It is true that traditionally dongles are a pain - each installed piece of software requires a parallel port/Serial port/USB port (on the motherboard), and the dongle for autocad only supports autocad and nothing else..

Currently the Wibu website doesn't list any USB keys for less than 49.95 Eur... but they don't offer the vanilla key, only ones with additional storage.

To my knowledge this is already used successfully by eSimGames, for their SteelBeasts Pro/ProPE software.

If I want to run BoP or SOW then I'm gonna need a new mobo, CPU and RAM for a $30-$40 game.
I'd rather be able to get away with a $5-$10 stick than a few $100's for other hardware.

OTOH I could have to run a non-copyable disc whenever I play the game, shortening the life of both
disc and player because that's somehow "better" than paying for a one-off USB device.

There's both sides to this, IMHO.

First, I have no problem with companies trying to protect their intellectual property.

Second, I have a big problem with some DRM implementations. For example, I won't be buying Black Shark, which makes me very sad. I just can't justify the cost of a new DVD burner against playing the simulation. StarForce (and the add-on LOMAC that came with it) ruined two drives - a CD and a DVD burner - at the firmware level.

I am unwilling to take the risk of having to spend time removing StarForce and the expense of replacing a DVD burner on any flight simulation, no matter how good.

I'd love to see a "Games for Windows" dongle. It would be both a PR and a sales boon! Buy a dongle and activate the game/sim online, have the dongle grab the license, and it's all complete.

On ownership/license status. Under Steam, one is buying a license for use, not purchase. It's part of the Steam EULA that one signs when downloading the software, so I'm guessing they're covered legally. The upside is that one can re-download software an infinate number of times.

Dongles are a pain. If you are worried about DRM affecting your hardware, relying on a breakable piece of hardware does not seem a like a great idea. I've seen one snap off on a notebook when moved from desk to desk. The dongle IS the software and has to be replaced. At that point does one then have to send via mail back to Russia to have it replaced for a nominal fee?

Dongles are just as crackable as any other copy protection so I really don't see the benefit.

This is really all academic anyway. No matter the method used to protect the developer's property, some one will have a horror story and issues: No matter how you slice that fly-pie.

I would think the more pressing issue for the developers is finding a publisher that will successfully market their product in the world regions and perhaps finishing the sim?


S!

Codemeter dongles have so far *not* been cracked. Even in 6 week long 'crack-the-dongle' hacker competitions with substancial prizes.

The software is the license, which can be transfered to another dongle. Wibu is based in Germany, but it has branches in the US amongst other places.

Mice, joysticks, external drives, etc can all be broken - do you avoid purchasing these items just in case?

And the dongle won't disable my DVD burner.

I can't say the same for StarForce!

The dongle can't be more fragile than a DVD one has to place in the drive in order to make a game or simulation work. One can scratch a dongle and it still works!

I did not see this as a competition about what is the best solution or possibly worst offender of protection schemes.

As I mentioned, someone will have issues no matter the solution used: You just happened upon mine. For a game it may be o.k. but I've had bad experiences working around them in a professional environment, with a specific mishap costing a client's time and my company much more money that a broken mouse or keyboard would have resulted in.

Still, if the developers were interested, I'm sure they would have dropped by Wibu's booth at Leipzig. I just can't see Neoqb pawning off the costs of such a protection scheme on military contracts like eSim, unless wood and canvas crates suddenly become relevant in modern warfare simulations.

Anyway the horse in this thread seems long since dead. Perhaps a mod should consider putting a bullet in it to make sure?

S!

How do those dongles actually work? If it is possible to download a license into one of those dongles from the Internet, who is preventing you to copy that same license into several dongles? If the downloaded license is dependent on the specific dongle you have, then buying a new dongle wouldn't help but you'd have to download a new license - in other words that's just like any other internet activation method with the exception that most activation protections are dependent on system hardware whereas the dongle protection is dependent on the dongle hardware.

I run an application that installs a licence server on my computer, computers. I start the application and run it. I can't run it on a second machine without disabling the licence on one computer and re-enabling the licence on the second, third, fourth etc machine. Everything works fine, speed of light, no piracy and the developers get their hard-earned cash

Steam games run the same way. No fuss and (usually bone-idle) thieves must work hard to steal content. Only nerdish thieves have the time to break this stuff and most thieves think of themselves romantically hence the swashbuckling pirate metaphor

I see that Black Shark has Starforce. It'll end in tears haven't these people heard about unbreakable cyphers

It's like the doctors. Most people don't like strangers poking around but we allow a degree of licence for professionals so we cooperate. Starforce is the medical student which failed its exams but learned enough to sound as if it knows what's best for us "An immediate preventive operation with gowns and everything yes and if you live you'll enjoy playing this er, whatever it is, game is it? I don't play games I'm a doctor. Almost."

Ming

You contact the vendor (either the distributor, software developer/publisher or Codemeter) and send your Codemeter control file. (basically just the Codemeter stick ID, plus the vendor code if already present)

An updated control file is returned, with the vendor code, and the new license.
You write this to the codemeter stick using the control panel, and you now have a license to use the software.

Even after all of the fuss, even after all of the grief, Eagle Dynamics still chooses to continue to use Starforce? That's a shame, because I would have enjoyed Black Shark. I guess I should stop paying attention to anything that Eagle Dynamics does from here out. (And people here wonder why I'm pessimistic about flight simulator developers and their stance on copy protection.)

FR- Not sure what to make of this remark. Because i understood it was your extrapolation!
I am basically with Benny's and Neal's arguments on this DRM thing. The manner of copy protection ha
s gone too far when the software sellers try to tell me that a disc I bought can only ever be used on one computer, and that I should not/cannot install it on a subsequent computer that I may own.
Or that I must be online with that computer to authorise installation: or that I must trust them not to mess up my computer in loading DRM which may have a rep for trouble ( eg starforce).
As I don't know the effect the DRM will have before I install, how can i choose not to install the software. Your argument of "if you don't want DRM dont install the software" results in not installing any sim, ( assuming they all will likely use DRM), does it not?

ROF is miles from release it seems, it is going to be a part sim - other parts to be purchased later; and is likely to have strong DRM.
Not much incentive for me to buy, I'm afraid. Pity, 'cos i love WW1 sims and was looking forward to
flying it.
I'll await and see reactions of those who do buy at release time, before i decide.

Cas141,

Why be so consistently against this WWI project???

A check of your postings on this forum, less the frequent adverstising you do here for OFF, contains so much hostility towards this effort. Your doubts, negative predictions, and inferences about the developers and their project, along with the repeated statements that you probably won't be buying the sim if it's released anyway, begs the question of why you continue to post here?

Is it just impatience and anticipation about waiting for this sim?

Why do you repeatly state that you want this sim, and then trash it moments later?

Today, October 10, 2008:


October 05, 2008:


May 11, 2008:


March 19, 2008:


March 11, 2008:


February 14, 2008:


January 29, 2008:


November 28, 2007:


September 30, 2007:


September 29, 2007:


September 03, 2007:

Something not out yet may be good or may be bad.

OTOH, if it runs on CFS3....

Then in the truest sense, requiring another game to run, Over Flanders Fields has always been a "part sim" (the latest phase planned as a retail add-on still needing CFS3).

Many will be comparing OFF and ROF in fact, but you're gonna need a real coaster for your beer when playing Rise Of Flight.

Unless they rewrote the CFS3 AI, no thanks.

As long as it works on my computer I'm happy.

FR - I won't display your posts ( out of the context of the subject matter of the thread in which they were written ), but you are knocking me for having doubts about some parameters of this sim, and indeed doubts as to whether it may appear at all.
You seem to have none, and indeed you have made many points e.g. as to why a retail sim inherently and by definition, must be better than any other sim add on; or that s sim issued in parts, each to be paid for, has virtues over a sim sold as complete, -which leads me to think that possibly you are professionally involved in retailing sims, and maybe even this one?.
If you are, then I sincerely wish you ( and the devs ) success with it. I would wish anyone success with a WW1 sim.
But that does not mean that I cannot express doubts about it when there are indicators that the reasons for those doubts are credible.
Anyone reading this sim forum knows that there were vast expanses of time when nothing was heard here from the devs as to what was happening, in the manner that all other threads started by devs of other sims were, and have historically been, updated. Even when posts were asking for something- anything, there was a period of ....nothing.
So my speculation and asking was unreasonable and negative? Even though I always said that i hoped a good WW1 sim would be forthcoming?

And I responded about OFF to posts which indicated that they were waiting for a WW1 sim, and seemed to suggest that the poster was not aware of a current WW1 sim being available, i.e OFF.

Then we had the revelation that ROF would have only two flyable planes, and no mission builder etc.
And, again, I was unreasonable and negative to not approve of that ?


And now I am being unreasonable and negative to be dismayed at the possibility of intrusive and/or unreasonable DRM?

So, which one of these three situations did I cause? Or was it what the devs or others initiated?


I, along with quite a few others, merely responded to those absences, revelations and speculations.- after all, this is a forum for chaps to talk about what is relevant and topical?.

I say again, FR. When this sim comes out I will buy it if it is good value and the DRM is absent or innocuous, and is sensibly loadable. By the latter, I mean that I don't have to validate online so that only the online computer can play the sim. Because I write this on a laptop, and my gaming machine ( and the next imminent one ) are not online.
Which prompts me to ask you, being as you are, I believe,close to the devs, - will my future gaming computer be able to install and play this sim?

And, finally,I'm sure you will agree, even the original doubting Thomas, hoped that he was wrong.


cheers

Cas141,

You have always misunderstood my assertion "that if it aint retail, it aint".

I have been involved with many WWI mod projects over the years, and I have seen first hand that flight sim fans generally pay more attention to retail sims than to mod projects, and this despite the excellence that might have been achieved by any particular add-on. This has as much to do with human nature, as it does with any degree of mod quality.

Now to this day, many OFF fans wonder why more attention hasn't been given to this add-on. One of the reasons is that 3rd-party add-ons to a large extent depend on the popularity (or lack thereof) of the original sim. When the Knights Of The Sky team announced three years ago their intention to make a stand-alone retail WWI flight sim, the whole prospects of a WWI resurgence materialized. There's just too much capability that can be achieved by building a sim from the ground up, and there's too many advantages and future potential if the developers are controlling the code themselves. Finally, there's that buzz that surrounds a new retail title that can focus community anticipation, and carry forth interest beyond the initial hype of a product "going gold" (if deserved).

I've read many post by OFF enthusiasts that state that ROF is going to be primarily an online sim, and this to a large extent claimed because of the designers have talked about giving multiplayer much attention. This really just begs the question though, and no one in the know has ever indicated that single-player is being ignored as a result. Rather, it's the contrast between the effort of building good online functionality, and the lack of CFS3's multiplayer performance that illuminates a glaring weakness with add-ons built to it (this fact many of us have experienced personally).

Finally, to this issue of predicting imminent failure, repeating doubts, forecasting sub-performance or system unsuitability, or that things like DRM inevitably will be included in any new game software today, I ask what's the point in repeating this stuff ad nauseam?