Stormin

Why don't you guys take your pissing contest somewhere else? I'm confident that most of us don't really give a rat's ass what happened on Frugal's or any other website. This is a thread to discuss the V1.1 copy protection situation not your arguments. Bugboy, you seem intent on making this an issue and Rugg you should know better than to argue with someone who just wants to argue. Please, both of you should take this private.

Release dates are always variable. It is a mistake to set yourself up for disappointment by thinking they are fixed and reliable. There are just too many things that can happen to a software development effort to put your hopes in an exact release time. It will be released when it is ready and all the infrastructure and support is in place. I think it was a mistake for TFC/ED to even mention a timeframe for release but there will be just as many people screaming for a date if one is not provided. Just my opinion.

Good luck. You are in for an adventure. Semper Fi, Carl

Welcome. I am sure everyone (that is reasonable) appreciates your being here to clear things up.

We are all guests here with not rights. If TFC/Ed wants to delete, edit, or change the color of your fonts they can do so. This is a private-owned forum. If anyone doesn't like how it is run then don't participate here or, better yet, start your own forum. Do I need to keep repeating that I do not speak for TFC/ED and that my opinions are mine and not theirs?

@Chizh, Stormin, Wags: Is this true ? Was the posting made by this fellow deleted ? I understand that this is a moderated forum, however if somebody's messages are deleted because he shows proof for his claims, it becomes unfair and suspicious. In the end, it was nobody of the guests on this forum, who came up with Starforce in the first place - it was ED or some of the devs putting Starforce - intentionally or not - into the demo of FC. That started all this hazzle - don't punish people for stating their opinion. Very disappointing. It begins to become political here ... :x Let's get something straight, I don't work for TFC/ED and have nothing to do or say with respect to how they run their forums. Please don't ask me about something for which I have no responsibility. I sure as hell had nothing to do with your message being deleted, edited, or ignored. I also have had nothing to do with the decisions that are being made with respect to the development, distribution, copy protection, or any other aspect of the Flaming Cliffs V1.1 upgrade. I am only stating my opinions and either agreeing or disagreeing with other forum members. Stop acting like you've been slighted or repressed. If you don't like the decision that has been made then don't buy the game. I think it is silly that some of you are overreacting about something for which you don't have all the facts. Wait until TFC/ED provides exact details about how they will be using the copy protection routine. It is my understanding that how they configure it and what version they use will determine the level of protection and "intrusion" into your sensitive lives. My only criticism of TFC/ED is that they should make a statement to clear all of this silly business once and for all. Your claim that TFC/ED is making this political or that they have somehow impuned your rights is ridiculous. Nobody is forcing you to participate here or making you buy their products.

It's difficult to feel indignation without any data. Perhaps a producer who knows how many units were sold and how many uninterrupted patches were subsequently downloaded can appreciate a "feel" of the damage on an emotional level that the rest of us cannot, but for the average user to whom such figures are denied, piracy is just an abstract violation of principle. We want ED to have sales, regardless of thefts. Just because someone will steal it if they can steal it, doesn't mean they would actually buy it if they can't steal it. For all the brouhaha, studies have suggested the music download phenomenon had hardly any impact at all on actual CD sales. If copy protection had any demonstrable record of transforming pirates into honest, paying customers, that would be something we could get behind. Otherwise it all seems kind of petty, and it's a valid question to wonder who is your real target market and what the copy protection is actually for - just to deny the pirates their fun, at added expense to ourselves? Don't we have better things to do than to wrestle with pigs? Falcon 3 and 4 used no copy protection at all. Will there be more than one pirate turned into a paying customer by adding copy protection, for every customer that is lost by it? We're talking about a Su-25T add-on here, to a product that is otherwise already available without the protection. Would you make that trade yourself, Stormin? A Su-25T, in exchange for your sense of "freedom"? I'd do it, but purely out of charity for ED - a quality I doubt we will find in many would-be pirates. Of course, things may be different in Russia, where police are corrupt, pirated software is sold in public, and a lack of copy protection is perceived as an unspoken endorsement of the illegal version. If ED, living and working in such an environment, is unable to understand the Falcon 3/4 approach and how it could work in the west, I could forgive them. Fingers crossed, -SK I don't need data to feel indignation about thieves. It all a reflection of the current times. During Falcon 3 and 4 the amount of piracy was much lower and the number of sites on the internet were much fewer where you could obtain illegal copies. The technology has changed drastically in only a few short years. I'n personally not interested in reforming pirates. I would rather seem them either prosecuted or executed, frankly. :D Personally, anything that even slows down the pirates or prevents casual "buddy" piracy is fine with me. It's my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

Re: I've had enough I am not at liberty to share that information as I am bound by a non-disclosure agreement. You're just going to have to trust me. I've seen the numbers.

So you've tested the version and configuration of Starforce that ED is planning to use for FC?

Correct - it should be at the user level. Don't pirate stuff :wink: Hey, that was easy . . . . . Excellent.

Re: I've had enough Lock On sold well and was profitable.

Where have I denied anyone their right to express their opinions? When opinions are expressed that I happen to disagree with then I will most certianly be critical of them as you are doing in your posts. You are being critical of me and I am disagreeing with you in turn. That's the process, it goes both ways. I'm not upset by any of this and will be glad to continue to diagree with you if I see fit. It doesn't mean I don't like you or that I don't respect you, it means I disagree with you. Where have I "slapped" anyone? I will concur with you that TFC/ED needs to make an official statement regarding this matter. If you read one of my earlier postings I urged them to do so.

I'll try to get over it. This time! :D

This is a fart in a whirlwind. Nothing that serious, IMHO.

Maybe Stormin is entitled to have an opinion? I've posted nothing here that is controversial or inappropriate. I appreciate your wanting to hold me to some particular standard but I'm not an official spokesperson and certainly not the Oracle of Wisdom. I have opinions, feelings, and every right to express them as much as anyone else within the rules and terms set forth in this forum. I don't work for TFC/ED and I am not in any official capacity on this forum. Why is it that people get upset just because someone totally disagrees with them? That's life my friend. If I disagree with you I will tell you straight up and that is exactly what I've done here. I have not uttered the words "screw you" and that has NEVER been my intention. "Wake up" is probably a better characterization. I happen to believe that TFC/ED are doing the right thing. The obvious thing is that no matter what they do they will never be able to make all of you happy at the same time and still be in business. They have always listened to the community and their reconsideration of the copy protection scheme is a prime example. I also believe that those that are so opposed to SF and copy protection are a small, very small minority of people who will, most likely, still purchase the product. A small minority of the minority are people who just want to complain regardless. All of this is my opinion and I am entitled to just that, my opinions. My only regret is that they have not made a detailed public announcement to clear up all the confusion and speculation. I'm confident that they will do so shortly but since like you, I am just another forum user, I don't have any inside information.

Concur with my friend from Canada.

Yes . . . . . but "fair" would also be to not pirate games. If a significant section of the community refuses to play fair, and they are damaging ED by doing so . . . . . then I'm all for ED playing by the rules. I can't blame ED for wanting to be paid for their work - can you? All the information I've seen says that this copy protection will work reasonably smoothly - yes, we have to pay a bit of a price for it in terms of registering, but I find that infinitely preferable to ED shutting up shop. Well said and a valid point. Where is the indignation for the act of piracy?

Actually, I find that by reading the EULA and understanding what they contain I am being intelligent.

Wow. You're seeing a whole team of specialists for your paranoia, aren't you? :) Stormin, you may be wrong on this one, the doode may be right. To minimise the losses to "piracy" a solid protection is used to prevent casual copying. Flaming Cliffs without SF will be available in Bangkok in no time for US$5 or so. Sales will probably be lost due to activation issue. The bloodsuckers from StarForce will collect their cut one way or the other. You may have experience or even education in IT area. However unless you are a psychiatrist and have properly examined Bet, it would be appreciated if you could refrain yourself from "diagnosing" people as mentally ill just because they voiced their opinion. I am dissapointed to read such a comment from a person of your calibre. :( Please note the smile face included at the end of my comment. Lighten up pal.

TITOR. This was already addressed by Starforce and has been discussed many times, including in threads on this very forum. Strike!! 8) Does he get CWoS slang? It's actually one of the only times I've ever used it.

Wow. You're seeing a whole team of specialists for your paranoia, aren't you? :)

Why should I have to "work" with them? I bought the game. I upgrade pretty much once a year, CPU, memory, vid. So, in 5 years, I'd have to go through some as yet defined process to re-register? What if I install on a different machine? Legal, since I can only run the one copy (which is CD protected). What if ED or Starforce goes under? I really have an issue with this limit on registrations. There shouldn't be any. You're flat out punishing the legal purchasers of the software with a cumbersome setup process that will likely not curb piracy that much. As for you people who think no personal identification is being sent out, think about this: When you generate this unique key, it identifies your machine. Say you buy a couple of different games protected by Starforce. That same unique key (or some varient) is going to identify your machine as having played a different game or used a different piece of software. With that tiny, tiny, piece of information, Starforce has enough to do marketing analysis on your purchaesing habits (or on gamers as a group). They'll be able to tell what kinds of games simmers purchase, and so on. Sure, they might not know XYZZY-etc. is Vang, but they might know I bought this game and a couple of others. THAT, my friends, is privacy invasion. I'm not punishing anyone. I don't work for ED and have nothing to do with the product. I do, however, feel they are making the correct decision and I am confident that their choices in configuring SF will be wise and reasonable. My opinion. Hey, feel free to agree to disagree, I really don't care. I've stated my opinions and you yours. I find your argument about privacy to be very weak and hardly something to be concerned about. Don't buy the product, if you don't like the copy protection. But don't say I am punishing you or anyone else.

Sorry, but software is pirated and the need to protect it is a sad fact. It does not violate your "rights". Have you read any of the EULAs that come with the software you purchase? Technically you don't "buy" software, you license it. Nobody is telling you how many times you can update your rig, they are telling you that you have to make provisions regarding the software you have licensed should you change hardware.

Being able to register five times is more than reasonable. If you are making massive hardware changes beyond five times then I am sure they'll work with you.

Matt indicated somewhere that he has discussed with ED making it five registration opportunities, not three. My understanding is that ED is providing users the ability to install FC as many times as they want provided the hardware profile does not change by more than 40%. If the case where the hardware is changed more than 40% the user will have to use up one of five registration opportunities (actually four since one was used initially). That means you can then reinstall it as many times as you want with your new hardware configuration and still have the opportunity to change your hardware again three more times. I would imagine that if you have used up all of your registration opportunities that TFC/ED will provide you with the ability to contact them directly for a new registration key, but I am speculating and await the official word. All of this seem rather reasonable to me. I don't see how it is overly restrictive and I am at a loss why anyone feels restrained under these requirements. Once again I encourage someone in an official capacity with TFC/ED to make a detailed statement here and on the main website that addresses this matter.