#2604023 - 10/13/08 10:20 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: EvilBivol-1]
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,057
Whitehead
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,057
|
" 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.
Last edited by Whitehead; 10/13/08 10:24 PM.
|
|
#2604049 - 10/13/08 11:11 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: BillyRiley]
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Dlink
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Canada
|
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.]
Favourite Website SNAFU:
Left Side of Website: OFP Editing now belongs to the Codemaster Affiliate Program
Bottom Part of Page: OFP Editing is not affiliated with Codemasters in any way
|
|
#2604051 - 10/13/08 11:15 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Dlink]
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,486
Shepski
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,486
Canada
|
[quote=BillyRiley] 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... 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.
|
|
#2604061 - 10/13/08 11:23 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Shepski]
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Dlink
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Canada
|
[quote=BillyRiley] 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... 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.]
Favourite Website SNAFU:
Left Side of Website: OFP Editing now belongs to the Codemaster Affiliate Program
Bottom Part of Page: OFP Editing is not affiliated with Codemasters in any way
|
|
#2604064 - 10/13/08 11:37 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Shepski]
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 426
EvilBivol-1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 426
LA
|
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. Thanks, but I assure you, ED knows. This was posted now two days a go: "Folks,
Looks like this needs to be stated again, enough of the SF posts. Eagle is fully aware that some people are not pleased with the decision and will not purchase Black Shark because of it. We get that and we heard you. Eagle spent many months discussing and reviewing this decision, it was not taken lightly. We respect your right to choose what you buy based on the copy protection method, but we ask that you respect our decision on how we wish to best protect our investment. This decision is final and further posts on the subject can only be viewed as trying to instigate further ranting or influence others not to purchase the project. As such, the moderators have been instructed to remove such posts as they serve no purpose other than to inflame and spam our forums. As per our forum rules, rants and flames on any subject will be dealt with warnings and then bans if needed.
Thanks, Matt __________________ Matt Wagner Producer, TFC/Eagle Dynamics" http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=541125&postcount=200If you need any more evidence as to why we decided to clamp down on the SF discussion on our forums - see this thread.
Last edited by EvilBivol-1; 10/14/08 05:08 AM.
|
|
#2604068 - 10/13/08 11:42 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: EvilBivol-1]
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Dlink
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Canada
|
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. Don't worry, ED already knows. This was posted now two days a go: "Folks,
Looks like this needs to be stated again, enough of the SF posts. Eagle is fully aware that some people are not pleased with the decision and will not purchase Black Shark because of it. We get that and we heard you. Eagle spent many months discussing and reviewing this decision, it was not taken lightly. We respect your right to choose what you buy based on the copy protection method, but we ask that you respect our decision on how we wish to best protect our investment. This decision is final and further posts on the subject can only be viewed as trying to instigate further ranting or influence others not to purchase the project. As such, the moderators have been instructed to remove such posts as they serve no purpose other than to inflame and spam our forums. As per our forum rules, rants and flames on any subject will be dealt with warnings and then bans if needed.
Thanks, Matt __________________ Matt Wagner Producer, TFC/Eagle Dynamics"
http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=541125&postcount=200If you need any more evidence as to why we decided to clamp down on the SF discussion on our forums - you have in 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.
Favourite Website SNAFU:
Left Side of Website: OFP Editing now belongs to the Codemaster Affiliate Program
Bottom Part of Page: OFP Editing is not affiliated with Codemasters in any way
|
|
#2604073 - 10/13/08 11:45 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Vulgarity]
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Dlink
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,046
Canada
|
The good news about them choosing SF, if it doesn't sell well, they can't blame piracy.
Favourite Website SNAFU:
Left Side of Website: OFP Editing now belongs to the Codemaster Affiliate Program
Bottom Part of Page: OFP Editing is not affiliated with Codemasters in any way
|
|
#2604082 - 10/13/08 11:59 PM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Dlink]
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 149
Malleus
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 149
Hungary
|
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 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.
|
|
#2604083 - 10/14/08 12:00 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Dlink]
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
GrayGhost
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
|
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. 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.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
#2604086 - 10/14/08 12:08 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: Vulgarity]
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,257
777 Studios - Jason
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,257
Southern California or Moscow
|
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
|
|
#2604141 - 10/14/08 01:50 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: 777 Studios - Jason]
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 10,343
shan2
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 10,343
Maryland, USA
|
I didn't appreciate the random reboots when I installed StarForce with X3.
I didn't buy Flaming Cliffs because of StarForce. Enough said.
You're only young once, but you can be immature forever.
|
|
#2604177 - 10/14/08 03:03 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: shan2]
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 187
El Hefe
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 187
|
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.
|
|
#2604199 - 10/14/08 03:59 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: mazex]
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 354
Combathanger
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 354
|
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.
|
|
#2604210 - 10/14/08 04:34 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: EvilBivol-1]
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 446
nearmiss
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 446
|
Great timing, guod! Now I can make an entry as well. As someone who has worked closely with ED over the past couple of years as a volunteer, I'll voice my opinion here. It is by no means official and may not even be accurate. It's simply my perspective. We have to assume that ED's choice of using StarForce in Black Shark was based on their experience in using it in Flaming Cliffs. Although we have no numerical data, everything points to that experience being a successful protection of their product. There are a lot of claims that all games, including ones protected by StarForce are ultimately cracked and that Flaming Cliffs is no exception. Sorry, but Flaming Cliffs has not been effectively pirated. Yes, there may be a pirated copy floating around somewhere (I've tested two or three myself and none were actually working copies of FC), but for all practical purposes, despite all of the clamor on the various forums, FC continues to sell well to this day and there is not a widely available pirated copy being used. From a pure analysis of this experience, ED probably feels that StarForce has protected their product well and therefore they have chosen to continue using it. However, besides that pure analysis, there is the question of customer service. To me personally, as someone who participates actively on ED's forum and helps communicate product information, this is especially important. ED had already indicated that other CP providers were evaluated and that in fact ED was in contact with Steam. This process continues and likely will continue, because everyone is looking for the best possible solution. I don't know if other CP options will become available in the future, but I can tell you that they were and in fact are still being pursued. Finally, I would encourage you not to give in to provocations by posters who insinuate that ED is out to cheat you. In many cases, these are the same people that have been banned at our own forums for exactly such behavior. On the other hand, I do support the idea of voicing your opinion on ED's choice, so long as it's done without insult and insinuation toward the developers who, believe me, work days, nights, and weekends to build flight sims. 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.
|
|
#2604268 - 10/14/08 08:29 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: EvilBivol-1]
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,656
BillyRiley
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,656
Colchester, England
|
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. Thanks, but I assure you, ED knows. This was posted now two days a go: "Folks,
Looks like this needs to be stated again, enough of the SF posts. Eagle is fully aware that some people are not pleased with the decision and will not purchase Black Shark because of it. We get that and we heard you. Eagle spent many months discussing and reviewing this decision, it was not taken lightly. We respect your right to choose what you buy based on the copy protection method, but we ask that you respect our decision on how we wish to best protect our investment. This decision is final and further posts on the subject can only be viewed as trying to instigate further ranting or influence others not to purchase the project. As such, the moderators have been instructed to remove such posts as they serve no purpose other than to inflame and spam our forums. As per our forum rules, rants and flames on any subject will be dealt with warnings and then bans if needed.
Thanks, Matt __________________ Matt Wagner Producer, TFC/Eagle Dynamics" http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=541125&postcount=200If you need any more evidence as to why wedecided to clamp down on the SF discussion on our forums - see this thread. 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
|
|
#2604277 - 10/14/08 08:57 AM
Re: STICKY: Black Shark copy protection
[Re: RedTiger]
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st
Lifer
|
Lifer
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
|
If their product has improved, who cares about the past? I mean, I could understand it if you had some large stake in their business or were emotionally attached somehow. But I assume this isn't the case. You just wanna play the game that has their software as the CSP, right? 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=55This is the download for the official StarForce removal tool. To quote from official StarForce text: The truth about StarForce drivers.
It is obvious that all the rumors around StarForce hazards are spread by international piracy groups. Our recent contest has just proven that StarForce does not damage optical drives. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|