|
| T O P I C | |
|
Walk Into Wall. Bleed. Repeat.
September 4th 2000, 04:09 MSD by andy NVIDIA owners -- rejoice! Epic have learned from their past mistakes. Owners of other video cards -- sigh in disbelief. Epic are going to make the same mistake again... Epic's Unreal engine was originally designed with 3DFX cards in mind, with its hardware rendering being based around the Glide API. This was because 3DFX cards were expected to be the de facto standard for gaming. It didn't work out that way, though, and as many other 3D cards became popular, so Epic had to adjust their engine to work with Direct3D and OpenGL. Although things got better with Unreal Tournament, and have continued to improve with patching, people still complain of poor (by comparison) frame rates under Direct3D, especially on NVIDIA cards. So do you think Epic have learned by now that it's a bad idea to target specific cards? (Cue the 'Crap masses: No!) Believe it or not -- but you really should believe it because it's true -- Epic have decided to focus their next engine on a specific manufacturer's cards. Again. This time it's NVIDIA cards, as announced in this press release:
Amazing, isn't it? Epic put themselves through a world of pain by focussing on one manufacturer when they believed it was going to dominate the market, and now four years later they're doing the same thing for the same reason. Gee, I wonder if it will all go horribly wrong... |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: Walk Into Wall. Bleed. Repeat.
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
|
Flamethrower #102: <quote>someone says "give me two quid and I'll burn you SOF". You really think they'll say no? You really think Raven lost a sale? That person has no money, no possibility of buying a game. </quote> If they have decent ethical standards, then yes I think they will say no. People must live within their means. If someone can't afford to go out and buy a new game every month, then they need to either live with that, or find a less expensive hobby. It pisses me off because it takes money away from the developers who are striving to make our gameplaying experience better (how do you think they do that? REVENUE! Money doesn't fall from the sky ya know.) As far as no lost sales, think about what you typed. Say this jerk goes around and sells a copy of SOF to 20 people at 2 quid a peice (I have no idea what a quid is, BTW). That is equal to roughly $800 in lost sales for Activision/Raven! If everyone in a town did that, then the developers would make no money at all! I'll admit that this example might be a bit extreme, but you get my point. Also, what if the "poor guy" came into some money? Would he go out and buy the legal copy of SOF? Hell no! He'll be thinking, "Why shold I pay good money for a game I got for practically free?" He would then proceed to purchase another game or spend the money on something else. That to me is lost sales if ever there were a definition. <quote>As I say, I buy games and I have to fight to get a good game compared to the thieves, and I think that's just screwed up.</quote> I agree completely. But you know what? Times are changing, and its only a matter of time before developers can come up with a better mousetrap (copy protection that is) to keep these bums from stealing money out of the coffers. I also don't feel that the "I have no money so it's ok to pirate" argument has any weight. If such were the case, should I go break into a Dodge dealership and steal a Viper just because I want one but don't have the financial means needed to purchase one? You have to look at it in a real-world context man. I'm not saying that the current situation isn't shitty. I do think it's unfair that they get the games for free and we have to pay, but I'm a firm believer in what goes around, comes around. <quote>In the UK the only way for someone with any kind of computing skills to be unemployed is to WANT to be unemployed... there is a people & skills shortage at the moment, a very boyant economy</quote> I'm moving to England! ;) [@~]Mizu <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>[@~]MizuGami</b> (#107): <QUOTE>If such were the case, should I go break into a Dodge dealership and steal a Viper just because I want one but don't have the financial means needed to purchase one?</QUOTE> Dammit, this argument is lame. I don't support piracy, but with arguments like this, it sure looks like <b>you</b> do! :P There's a critical hole there that no one ever points out: You can't borrow your friend's Dodge Viper, shove it in your CD-ROM and use your CDR to make another. You can't drag and drop the Doge Viper on to your harddrive without crushing it to peices. You can't duplicate it perfectly 10,000,000,000 times (lol, or even find a place to put them all!). <b>That's the reason most people don't feel guilty about pirating</b>... because they're not taking any physical money/material from the company. And I'd have to agree, I don't think it's stealing. But I do think it's wrong. It's kinda like not paying someone you hire to do work... you could call it 'stealing' their work, but I think that's just twisting the term. It's more like "not paying for services rendered". :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#108</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>You can't drag and drop the Doge Viper on to your harddrive without crushing it to peices.</QUOTE> LOL! If one of my CDs breaks, I'll feel no guilt about pirating the game to replace it. Technically still illegal, but I've already paid for content once and I'll be damned if I would do it again. As for "fragile" CDs... I once mistakenly replaced my AOL coaster CD with my Q3:A CD. I was setting frosty beverages on this thing for about 2 weeks before realizing what happened (my coasters sit with the data side facing up). All I had to do was clean off the gunk and that baby worked like a charm... Jeremy -- Despite your efforts to be a romantic hero, you will gradually evolve into a postmodern plot device. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#106</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>I disagree here. Matter of fact, I find that to be bullshit. I have had quite a few CDs stolen, snapped, cracked, scratched (and I mean the actual metal data layer, not the plastic), and so on. Music, game, and software CDs all. I want them back goddammit. </QUOTE> Acctauly I'd agree with warren, ever try placing a CD in a paper sleave and taking a 2 hour drive (on a nice plush seat), the CD reamins useable and in tip top shape. ALso I tend to take about as good of care to my CD's a warren does, and I've had exacly two CD's go bad on me (The7th Guest do to vary bad scraches, and C&C do to what looks like an eraser mark on the CD and no it does not come off). I've had Playstation CD's used as costers that still work correctly. For them to be snaped, cracked, or to have the foil data layer scrached off you have to be really abusing them (to the same level at people that used to find floppies erased after putting them under a magnet). I can understand them being stolen, but if had you had insurance for it (most car insurance has addon's to cover CD or it might be covered under a home owners policy even when in the car). -- None-1a. O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Well, here's an example: Failure - Fantastic Planet CD. Got it around 1996. It's been scratched enough that it's now unreadable. I have CDR copies of it however. What if we didn't have that right? You can talk all you want about taking good care of your CDs, but you cannot stop shit from happening. You can't stop your little kid from playing frisbee with your CDs in feilds near your house (ha, find THAT in the tall grass! :). You can't always stop that bitch at the lan party who tries to steal your CDs because you leave them by your computer while you get some food. You can't always warn your friend in time before he sits his fat ass right down on your Q3A CD, only to realize - you didn't lose much ;). My point is though, no matter how hard you try, you cannot prevent fatal CD damage. Even with non-fatal damage, it often introduces clicks and pops that are very minute into the audio, effecively killing the CD.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Post <b>#101</b> by Andy: <QUOTE><i> /me points out that I could have just linked to my review of the game, but I wouldn't want to promote my site. :-) </i></QUOTE> Ohh please, I start feeling stupid. Look what I've done, with two quick posts I destroyed the HTML's main advantage over printed documents - hyperlinks ;) I don't want to go and touch that pile of crap again, but no matter what I said (though I still stand by every word), it was obviously not applicable to your site or Happy Cow's site or any other site which has roots on and is relevant to 'Crap. There is a *huge* difference between constant poster who posts relevant links to his site from time to time and an occasional stranger who sometimes posts not relevant links to his site; the first person is a part of the discussion and he does his best to contribute to it, and the other one is usually not. To make it shorter, I'll pull a PlanetCrap rule of the day out of my ass: regular posters are allowed to post links to their own sites, and to sites containing porgnography, whichever is more appropriate for the curent discussion; others are also allowed to do so but they risk looking like muckers, at least to some people. Okey, now that I said that I feel better ;)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Xero #108: <quote>Dammit, this argument is lame. I don't support piracy, but with arguments like this, it sure looks like you do! :P</quote> Of course I do..I <b>WANT</b> that Viper! ;P <quote><b>That's the reason most people don't feel guilty about pirating</b>... because they're not taking any physical money/material from the company. And I'd have to agree, I don't think it's stealing.</quote> I disagree. They don't SEE any physical money/property taken from the company, but it is and it is still stealing. If it's not, then what exactly is it? It sure as hell isn't non-paymet for services rendered. ;) <b>This</b> is why I get pissed off. People know it's wrong, but still refuse to make it tantamount to thievery. I'd like someone to give me an honest definition to what they think it is. I am by far no angel, but if my shit stinks, I'll tell you it stinks. [@~]Mizu <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
what was this topic about again? anyway... copyright law says I can make a back-up copy of a copyrighted work that I legally have access to. So copy protection is simply using technology to keep me from being able to exercise my rights under the law. Same as the whole DeCSS fiasco... they are taking our rights as consumers a little at a time... 12xu out<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
:: Looks around :: Oh, shit. What have I done...? <B>#82</B> "G-Man" wrote... <QUOTE> You can't burn the first disc of UT, unless you have a drive that can really do raw writes and have about 30 hours to kill. </QUOTE> Yes on the first count, but I can't possibly see it taking 30 hours. I've done raw writes before, and they progress at the appropriate speed (8x). Come to think of it, <I>all</I> my writes are raw writes. Also, I rather doubt that I actually need the CD check information. I'm fairly certain I can just copy the files into a directory, and tell the Loki installer that that is my CD-Rom drive. I doubt that it actually reads /dev/cdrom and looks at the CD signature. Even if it does, I can always rip an image of the CD, and do a loopback mount. <B>#91,#92,#93</B> "godZero" wrote... <QUOTE> Bull***t. Raw write just has another sector size, everything else is the same, speed-wise. </QUOTE> What he said. :-) <B>#87</B> "flamethrower" wrote... <QUOTE> G'Kars is another sad story of an honest gamer getting fucked out of their money. </QUOTE> Really? Do tell. If I <I>really</I> want a working, original CD, I'm out (at worst) about $10. If having a burned copy or iso image doesn't bother me, I'm out $0. <QUOTE> You do know, G'Kar, if you'd have priated this game you shouldn't be in this mess? </QUOTE> How would it have been any different? Assuming identical conditions, instead of cracking the original CD, I would have crack the pirated burn. Either way, I'm now the proud owner of a coaster. Watch, now flamey is going to start going off on the poor quality of commercial CDs... << <I>But, G`Kar! If you had a pirated or cracked version, it wouldn't require the CD!</I> >> I <I>can</I> play the game with a no-CD crack (BTW, it doesn't speed up loading times, as far as I can tell). Loading a patch, however, requires the CD. Loading the Linux version <I>definitely</I> requires the CD. Being stuck on v.420 doesn't bother me so much as being stuck with Windows. Face it, flamey; despite your very strong desire to make it thus, this is not a sad tale of the money grubbing publishers and developers screwing their customers with a 40 cm, white-hot anal probe. My CD cracked. Because of this, I can't install the game. That's all. <B>#98</B>, "Andy" wrote... <QUOTE> I'm starting to swing over to your side of the fence, for what it's worth. </QUOTE> No, you don't oppose piracy protection. You oppose poorly implemented piracy protection. <B>#104</B> "Warren Marshall" wrote... <QUOTE> I take absolutely SHIT care of my CD's (and DVD's). I have them laying around my desk, some on the floor, some in stacks on top of my computer. They slide around, get dropped ... they slide across each other whenever I thumb through a pile to find the one I want. I have some disks where the underside is full of scratches and marks. And you know what? They work perfectly ... so don't try to sell me "fragile". :) </QUOTE> I take fairly good care of my CDs. Sometimes I'll leave them on my table data-side up, but not usually for very long. I kept the UT CD in its jewel case. Actually, I think that was the problem: whenever I extracted the CD from the case, I felt like I had to bend it just a <I>little</I> too much, and pry it just a <I>little</I> too hard. The stress was probably too much, and it just... cracked. ~~ Ignie Ferroque, Ash. - "Non Facete Nobis Calcitrare Vestrvm Perinævm" |
|
<b>#115</b> "G`Kar" wrote... <QUOTE>Yes on the first count, but I can't possibly see it taking 30 hours. I've done raw writes before, and they progress at the appropriate speed (8x). Come to think of it, <I>all</I> my writes are raw writes. </QUOTE> Unreal Tournament uses <a href="http://www.c-dilla.com/">SafeDisc</a> protection (actually it depends on the version you bought as the original retail v400 uses release 2 of SafeDisc and v413 uses release 3) which uses a digital signature embedded on the disc and also uses an executable wrapper to authenticate the game. The only way to defeat it is to crack or unwrap the executable or do a 1 to 1 RAW copy of the cd. A small minority of cd drives support true RAW (MMC DAO RAW) mode reading. The reading process itself takes hours because it is very dificult for readers to decode the protected/unreadable sectors (multiple retries and very long error timeouts etc). Yes I was eggagerating with the 30 hour figure (although on some drives it can take 8+ hours) but most drives will take around 2 hours to write an image of a SafeDisc protected CD. It really depends on the implementation (what version of SafeDisc), the burning software used, and the reader used. - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>Andy</b> (#105): <QUOTE>Man you can insult me as much as you want if you think it's somehow "bad" that I'm happy with the PC I've got, but <I>puh-lease</I> don't try to write off every single problem with every single product as "Andy's got an old computer". </QUOTE> If someone is standing there with a slow machine, and their game loads slow ... and there's a guy there with a fast machine, and his game loads fast ... how is the game at fault? <b>Flamethrower</b> : <QUOTE>someone says "give me two quid and I'll burn you SOF". You really think they'll say no? You really think Raven lost a sale? That person has no money, no possibility of buying a game. </QUOTE> It's stealing. <b>xero</b> (#111): <QUOTE>My point is though, no matter how hard you try, you cannot prevent fatal CD damage. Even with non-fatal damage, it often introduces clicks and pops that are very minute into the audio, effecively killing the CD.</QUOTE> What about VHS video tapes? Many of those (might be all now, I don't know, I haven't had a VHS machine in years) are protected against copying them. And from what I know, the tape is in direct contact with the reading head when you watch them. They wear out. They get grainy. Nobody bitches about that. Why not? :) <b>12xu</b> (#114): <QUOTE>what was this topic about again? </QUOTE> Something people weren't interested in talking about, so they changed the subject? Who cares? We're off topic ... roll with it ... <QUOTE>they are taking our rights as consumers a little at a time... </QUOTE> If people didn't steal software, you'd be able to fully exercise your rights with no hinderences whatsoever. -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#116</b> "G-Man" wrote... <QUOTE>Yes I was eggagerating with the 30 hour figure (although on some drives it can take 8+ hours) but most drives will take around 2 hours to write an image of a SafeDisc protected CD. It really depends on the implementation (what version of SafeDisc), the burning software used, and the reader used. </QUOTE> Well, whatever version the ladies at Raven used, SOF won't run on my Kenwood TrueX drive, but will on my HP 9300i - even though UnrealT runs on both. I guess Raven must've used a different version of Safedisk. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#114</b> "12xu" wrote... <QUOTE>copyright law says I can make a back-up copy of a copyrighted work that I legally have access to. So copy protection is simply using technology to keep me from being able to exercise my rights under the law. </QUOTE> And you know why those laws where enacted, because at the time the media deteriorated over time to an unusable state under normal use (ie a lot of older video tapes become completely unusable just by playing them). CD/DVD's do not have this problem, so could be considered out side of the laws intent on the issue (depends on how far each side would be willing to push it in order to get a definite legal answer as to if they still apply) -- None-1a. O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>Warren Marshall</b> (#117): <QUOTE>They wear out. They get grainy. Nobody bitches about that. Why not? :) </QUOTE> Actually that's a good example, but it's the same as my ideals: I think I should own a copy for all time, and companies be damned if they can stop me from backing it up. It certainly is illegal to make copies for buddies, but I didn't think it was illegal to make backup copies for <i>yourself</i>. There's also another reason why people don't bitch as much about VHS tapes: as the medium is, being able to backup your 100 movie collection is both very difficult, costly and very time consuming. Not so concerning digital medium. It's very hard to draw examples to help clarify the new digital world because it really is something new... laws will have to be reevaluated for the digital age to protect both consumers and companies.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>None-1a</b> (#119): <QUOTE><B><A href="spy-internal:Load/148#114">#114</A></B> "12xu" wrote... <quote>copyright law says I can make a back-up copy of a copyrighted work that I legally have access to. So copy protection is simply using technology to keep me from being able to exercise my rights under the law. </quote> And you know why those laws where enacted, because at the time the media deteriorated over time to an unusable state under normal use (ie a lot of older video tapes become completely unusable just by playing them). CD/DVD's do not have this problem, so could be considered out side of the laws intent on the issue (depends on how far each side would be willing to push it in order to get a definite legal answer as to if they still apply) -- None-1a. O forget it.</QUOTE> Bullshit. CD's don't last forever.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#118</b> "Derek Smart" wrote... <QUOTE>Well, whatever version the ladies at Raven used, SOF won't run on my Kenwood TrueX drive, but will on my HP 9300i - even though UnrealT runs on both. I guess Raven must've used a different version of Safedisk. </QUOTE> I'm not 100% sure but I don't think that SOF used SafeDisc. Activision doesn't have a licensing arrangement with C-Dilla, although I believe they used to. GT does now but they used to use Laserlock. So they most likely used SecuROM which is one of Sony DADC's daughter companies. But that is weird because they claim to be 100% compliant with yellow book specs. Of course they might have used some other non-proprietary means of protection (illegal TOC, dummy files, oversized images, etc,.) There are some interesting new development in data protection lately, with about 6 new companies and methods entering the fray. It really is an interesting field to watch. - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#112</b>, PiRaMidA: <QUOTE> Ohh please, I start feeling stupid. Look what I've done, with two quick posts I destroyed the HTML's main advantage over printed documents - hyperlinks ;) </QUOTE> Heh, no worries, I wasn't taking at shot at you. :-) But just think... the PlanetCrap server is in the US, so every time someone posts a link here, we earn some more money for British Telecom! Now would <i>you</i> want to deprive BT of all that lovely cash?! <b>#117</b>, Warren Marshall: <QUOTE> If someone is standing there with a slow machine, and their game loads slow ... and there's a guy there with a fast machine, and his game loads fast ... how is the game at fault? </QUOTE> Oooh, so close. You should have said: "And there's a guy there with a fast machine, and his game loads <i>faster</i>." It's all comparitive. Reviews that I read yesterday mentioned excessive loading times on fast machines, although I don't think they marked the game down. (Which is fine, if they didn't think it spoiled the game.) |
|
<b>Andy</b> (#123): <QUOTE>Oooh, so close. </QUOTE> Dammit. :) -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#121</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>Bullshit. CD's don't last forever</QUOTE> No but under normal use they will out last a persons lifetime, where as most older forms will detariat under that the normal uses which is was design for in a few years (I've got some moview around here are are total shit from a few years of use, where a CD will last when used for what it was made for). CD's should when used with care they will out last you. I'll just differ the rest of this to yourself <b>#120</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>It's very hard to draw examples to help clarify the new digital world because it really is something new... laws will have to be reevaluated for the digital age to protect both consumers and companies.</QUOTE> The current laws around backups where created for media that can and does become unusable by using it in the correct manner, CD/DVD do not have this problem when used as they where designed. No company should ever be required to allow you a way out from something you've done on your own, out side of it's normal use. -- None-1a. O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>None-1a</b> (#125): <QUOTE>No but under normal use they will out last a persons lifetime, where as most older forms will detariat under that the normal uses which is was design for in a few years (I've got some moview around here are are total shit from a few years of use, where a CD will last when used for what it was made for). CD's should when used with care they will out last you. I'll just differ the rest of this to yourself</QUOTE> It by no means lasts a lifetime. As I stated before, how I treat my CD's is not relevant to my ownership of the data. I should be able to snap every game CD I have in two and still retain legal rights for that information. The medium it's on and the rights to the data are two separate things. They're not charging me $40 for a CD. <b>None-1a</b> (#125): <QUOTE>The current laws around backups where created for media that can and does become unusable by using it in the correct manner, CD/DVD do not have this problem when used as they where designed. No company should ever be required to allow you a way out from something you've done on your own, out side of it's normal use. </QUOTE> It's not allowing me a "way out of something [I've] done on my own". So I suppose if someone steals the CD it's my fault? That's right. Your argument doesn't hold water, period. CD's are not invicible, and they can be stolen, burned, cracked, scratched, melted, or cut into peices. Shit happens, and it just so happens to fall on CDs as well. If my house burns down, and all my CDs are melted are you going to try telling me putting them in jewel cases and being careful not to scratch them is going to stop that?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#126</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>It by no means lasts a lifetime. As I stated before, how I treat my CD's is not relevant to my ownership of the data. I should be able to snap every game CD I have in two and still retain legal rights for that information. The medium it's on and the rights to the data are two separate things. They're not charging me $40 for a CD. </QUOTE> And you know what the publishers charge for the replacement CD's? That's right the cost of the CD and packaging (well the ones that charge). Most are not trying to recharge you again for the data on the disk, they are charging for the disk which you also payed for when buying the game (it's not like that thing if free). Since the CD is not reall required for any thing other than copy protection that CD is your backup copy. Second ever see most major businesses, they'll pay for a licence to copy the software onto there own CDs, thus giving backups a monitary value in it self (Applies most to business software, however it could easly be applied to all software) <b>#126</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE>It's not allowing me a "way out of something [I've] done on my own". So I suppose if someone steals the CD it's my fault? That's right. Your argument doesn't hold water, period. CD's are not invicible, and they can be stolen, burned, cracked, scratched, melted, or cut into peices. Shit happens, and it just so happens to fall on CDs as well. If my house burns down, and all my CDs are melted are you going to try telling me putting them in jewel cases and being careful not to scratch them is going to stop that?</QUOTE> So you did every thing in your power to stop the person from stealing it?, You reported it right? it might not have been directly your fault, however the publishers still should not be required to cover your ass from it (it's not like I have the right to go out and photocopy a book simply because some one might steal it. On the fire thing, you don't have renters insurance do you, that is your wayout in case of fire or theft from your home for any thing your own. The game publsiher should not be required in anyway to cover me from this type of thing, insurance does that or I must take responsability to replace the stuff on my own (and yes that would mean calling that little number to have a rplacement CD sent). -- None-1a. O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>xero</b> (#126): <QUOTE>It by no means lasts a lifetime. As I stated before, how I treat my CD's is not relevant to my ownership of the data. I should be able to snap every game CD I have in two and still retain legal rights for that information. The medium it's on and the rights to the data are two separate things. They're not charging me $40 for a CD. </QUOTE> Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong here, but you're not buying the software that comes on that disk. You're buying a license to use it. In the case of music, it must be similar ... surely you don't "own" the songs that are on that disk. Lord knows I'd be a rich man if that were the case. :P -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>None-1a</b> (#127): <QUOTE>And you know what the publishers charge for the replacement CD's? That's right the cost of the CD and packaging (well the ones that charge). Most are not trying to recharge you again for the data on the disk, they are charging for the disk which you also payed for when buying the game (it's not like that thing if free). Since the CD is not reall required for any thing other than copy protection that CD is your backup copy. Second ever see most major businesses, they'll pay for a licence to copy the software onto there own CDs, thus giving backups a monitary value in it self (Applies most to business software, however it could easly be applied to all software)</QUOTE> So what happens when the company in question is out of buisness? Huh? Who the fuck do I ask for a CD then? Maybe you didn't hear me: I said I own that data forever. Not until they go out of buisness, not until some dick steals my CDs. Also, they'll charge you about $10 for that new CD, and shipping for the old one and the new one. How do I know? Because I've done it. I could have saved cash by just copying the CD with my CDR. It would have cost me a grand total of 0.50 cents instead of $13. <b>None-1a</b> (#127): <QUOTE>So you did every thing in your power to stop the person from stealing it?, You reported it right? it might not have been directly your fault, however the publishers still should not be required to cover your ass from it (it's not like I have the right to go out and photocopy a book simply because some one might steal it.</QUOTE> Yes, I did report it. Nothing came of it because it's impossible to go around making everyone prove they own these mass-manufactured CDs and that they didn't steal them. So they got a bunch of free music and I got dicked. Are you so naieve you think they catch most theives? Second, yes I <b>DO</b> have the right to photocopy that book 10,000 times if I so desire. It's MY BOOK. I can make backups of all my books all I want, and it's legal. Guess that point is invalid too. How the hell is the company "covering my ass" by allowing me to make my own backups at my own cost? They're not. That's my money and my time invested in backup up my data, not theirs. It doesn't cost them -shit- for me to make backups and they sure aren't losing any sales because I <b>already bought it</b>. So they aren't cover anybody's ass, I'm covering my own. Get the facts straight.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>Warren Marshall</b> (#128): <QUOTE>In the case of music, it must be similar ... surely you don't "own" the songs that are on that disk. Lord knows I'd be a rich man if that were the case. :P</QUOTE> Actually yes I do own those songs. Those specific copies. I own them for personal enjoyment, as stipulated by fair use. I do NOT own the rights to sell those songs to others, and never claimed to. Those are two very different things.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#118</b> "Derek Smart" wrote... <QUOTE>Well, whatever version the ladies at Raven used, SOF won't run on my Kenwood TrueX drive, but will on my HP 9300i </QUOTE> I've got a Kenwood TrueX drive as well, and mine has some issues reading certain CDs. It works flawlessly on most things... but every now and then it fails to read CDs which I know to be in perfect condition; so far I've had 2 discs do this to me: the Diablo2 play disc and the Everquest Ruins of Kunark disc. Both discs worked correctly in my Toshiba 8x cd-rom. I'm assuming there's some flaw in the Kenwood drive itself; but it seems odd that for the most part it works perfectly... Jeremy -- Despite your efforts to be a romantic hero, you will gradually evolve into a postmodern plot device. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Since someone might steal my wallet, do I have the right to photocopy my money? I mean it's mine until I use it to buy things, right? . . . . *Note* In case any law enforcement officials are reading this forum, photocopying money is illegal and can be punishable by putting the person doing the photocopying into a jail cell with a big 400 lb. guy named Bubba who wants to make his new cellmate's backside his new best friend. Thank you. |
|
Warren Marshall <QUOTE>"Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong here, but you're not buying the software that comes on that disk. You're buying a license to use it."</QUOTE> Agreed, we don't BUY games. We RENT them. Therefore as a responbile developer, Warren, would you kindly ensure that you <b>never</b> again make a reference to "buy" or "purchase" but "licence" or "rent". I think that would help clear up all too many posts and articles in terms of "Why You Are Being Ripped Off By Games Publishers" |
|
<b>flamethrower</b> (#133): <QUOTE>Therefore as a responbile developer, Warren, would you kindly ensure that you <B>never</B> again make a reference to "buy" or "purchase" but "licence" or "rent". </QUOTE> Umm, why? The commonly accepted verb is "buy". I'll continue to use it, thanks... -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#117</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote... <QUOTE><quote>My point is though, no matter how hard you try, you cannot prevent fatal CD damage. Even with non-fatal damage, it often introduces clicks and pops that are very minute into the audio, effecively killing the CD.</quote> What about VHS video tapes? Many of those (might be all now, I don't know, I haven't had a VHS machine in years) are protected against copying them. And from what I know, the tape is in direct contact with the reading head when you watch them. They wear out. They get grainy. Nobody bitches about that. Why not? :) </QUOTE> VHS is a bad analogy. VHS can be copied for backup without hinderance, movi writers don't build in steps that degrade performance of honest users on the off chance that dishonest users may be stopped. VHS tapes are also considerably cheaper and there is a lot less risk - it is cheaper to buy a new tape than get a replacement shipped usually. etc etc etc<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#130</b> "xero" wrote... <QUOTE><B>Warren Marshall</B> (<A href="spy-internal:Load/148#128">#128</A>): <quote>In the case of music, it must be similar ... surely you don't "own" the songs that are on that disk. Lord knows I'd be a rich man if that were the case. :P</quote> Actually yes I do own those songs. Those specific copies. I own them for personal enjoyment, as stipulated by fair use. I do NOT own the rights to sell those songs to others, and never claimed to. Those are two very different things.</QUOTE> no you don't. At least not under either US or australian law. You own a license to use them.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>Warren Marshall</b> (#128): <QUOTE>Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong here, but you're not buying the software that comes on that disk. You're buying a license to use it.</QUOTE> I think you and I are on different wave lengths. By owning something, I mean 'having possesion of'... in this case, when I buy a game, I am buying a singular copy of the data for my own personal use, and whether my original disc is caught in a nuclear explosion or little 3yr-old Anna decides it's a nifty chew-toy, I still retain posession of the data. In this same manner, I'm allowed to make 1,000,000,000,000,000 copies of it if I so desire, for the purposes of insuring that I can keep the data. As long as I don't loan them out, or sell multiple copies, or sell while retaining a copy of my own, that's legal. So I should own a singular copy of that data until I die, or until I sell/trade/give it to someone else. You seemed to interpet this as meaning that I would own the rights to the data, and use it however I deemed fit, which wasn't what I meant to say. This is the way the law currently is, and I feel pretty comfortable with it. But I occasionally see companies trying to push into directions that would disable this wonderful ability in their own interests, and while I understand their need, there is a limit to what invasions I will tolorate. Both UT's SafeDisc and Q3A's online key-number are acceptable methods, but other methods that may be around the corner likely <b>aren't</b>. One good example? Sony tried to do some crap with encrypying digital music so it could only be used in a certain number of places at any given time (As in, one copy on a PC, one in your car, one in your MP3 pen, and you have to buy more if you want any for more devices... you can however remove one from your car however and put it into the MP3 pen for example, allowing you to have 3 copies out in the real world). All I have to say to that is: take your MP3 Pen and shove it up your ass. I'll copy -my- music as much as I want to, and to hell with you.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>Dragon</b> (#132): <QUOTE>Since someone might steal my wallet, do I have the right to photocopy my money? I mean it's mine until I use it to buy things, right?</QUOTE> Unfortunatly, money is hard to apply to this arguement. You see, money has no actual real physical value to anyone. It's just paper. The things you can <b>buy</b> with it certainly hold value, and this in turn gives money value. It's a bit different than something such as copper, which can be used in manufacturing or for jewlery, or so on. Same with data... it can entertain, or tell important information. Money however only exists in your head. Money does not actually need a physical representation to exist. In spite of the differences in concept, <b>yes</b> it would be nice to backup your money via photocopying. But here's the catch: Due to the fact that money doesn't need a physical representation (it only exists conceptually, unlike data and materials), there are far better ways of proecting your money (via credit and banking cards as an example). If not for the fact that money was conceptually different from data, your argument might apply. As it is, it doesn't. Oh, and you can't say that a credit card is also a physical presence of money. It's a physical transfer point of money, but it (just like paper bills) holds no actual value: If your credit card is taken from you, your money (or at least the current conceptual home of it) is still the bank. Whether he can get money from it depends on circumstances.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>RahvinTaka</b> (#136): <QUOTE>no you don't. At least not under either US or australian law. You own a license to use them.</QUOTE> You can call it a license to use a singular copy of the data or your can call it owning a copy of singular data. It's the same damn thing. You can say that by owning it that doesn't make the well-known stipulation that I cannot copy and share it with others (as 'license' might imply)... but that should be obvious; copying and giving it to someone who does not own their own copy is them 'stealing' as they would say because they are retaining a copy of the data without owning it. We're thinking the same terms, I'm just not using the normal legal speech. So yes I do. :P But you're right anyways, so it doesn't matter. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
"Umm, why? The commonly accepted verb is "buy". I'll continue to use it, thanks... " Of course you will, that's because the commonly accepted use of the word "buy" is to get ownership of something in exchange for credit chits. This is not the case with game, you merely rent them for the length of time the degradeable media happens to survive. However, drawing attention to this fact might point out to people that the games market is entirely stiched up against them. Publishers make rent-boys out of all of us. :) |
|
<b>#117</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote: <QUOTE>What about VHS video tapes?</QUOTE> The difference here is that VHS, even the most watched one, would get like 1 use per day (not for very long, too). How many times have you watched you favorite tape? 20? 50? I doubt it's more than that. Games are different, with random CD access being performed each time you start it, so if you play the game daily your CD would deteriorate much faster than a tape. Fortunately, I always use no-cd cracks or Virtual CD and copy full game's contents to my harddrive; switching CDs, first looking for them in the huge CD pile is a pain, and IDE CD-ROM devices are CPU bitches, so I try to avoid using them as much as possible (they are only good for single-process-running copy; track seeking and random reads put any system on it's knees). I would not get a SCSI device to play games because I don't care *that* much as to spend extra 500$ on the card, cables and drive. Oops, I went off the game pirating topic, sorry.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Xero #137: <quote>I think you and I are on different wave lengths. By owning something, I mean 'having possesion of'... in this case, when I buy a game, I am buying a singular copy of the data for my own personal use, and whether my original disc is caught in a nuclear explosion or little 3yr-old Anna decides it's a nifty chew-toy, I still retain posession of the data. In this same manner, I'm allowed to make 1,000,000,000,000,000 copies of it if I so desire, for the purposes of insuring that I can keep the data. As long as I don't loan them out, or sell multiple copies, or sell while retaining a copy of my own, that's legal.</quote> Xero, Have you ever actually read the EULA agreement that you must click on to install just about every piece of software? You have purchased the right to use that data on ONE computer. You are allowed to make ONE backup copy (although that may be difficult depending on the security involved). If you were to install the program on another computer in your house, you are supposed to uninstall it from the other one. If you do sell the program to someone else, you are required to surrender any backup copy to the buyer and promptly remove the installation from your computer prior to the sale. Buying the program doesn't give you the right to make a bazillion copies. Make 1 backup copy, and if that one shits the bed, then make another. Simple as that. There is NO court in this world that would side with you on this one, because you agreed with the EULA for that software. <quote>But I occasionally see companies trying to push into directions that would disable this wonderful ability in their own interests, and while I understand their need, there is a limit to what invasions I will tolorate. Both UT's SafeDisc and Q3A's online key-number are acceptable methods, but other methods that may be around the corner likely aren't.</quote> They have to in order to keep the hackers out. With every new security measure introduced, there are legions of hackers in dark little rooms toiling away to crack them. If we didn't have piracy, then there would be no need for security measures. If your pissed, write an open letter to the hackers of the world, don't take it out on the developers/publishers. <quote>One good example? Sony tried to do some crap with encrypying digital music so it could only be used in a certain number of places at any given time (As in, one copy on a PC, one in your car, one in your MP3 pen, and you have to buy more if you want any for more devices)</quote> This is the way I see software security going. Either that, or something much more drastic like fingerprint identificaton or retinal scan. Don't laugh, if piracy keeps up....The developers/publishers are not the enemy here. It's like in ANY retail business, losses must be covered by increased prices and tighter security, or the company will go belly-up. I'd venture to say that we'd probably be paying $10-$15 less for each game if there were no piracy...Warren, Derek, George back me up/correct me on this one? [@~]Mizu <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
PiRaMidA #141: <quote>The difference here is that VHS, even the most watched one, would get like 1 use per day (not for very long, too). How many times have you watched you favorite tape? 20? 50? I doubt it's more than that.</quote> You don't have any kids, do you? ;) My son watches his favorite tapes over and over. He has all but destroyed my wife's <i>Lion King</i> by watching it so much. <i>The Goonies</i> look to be headed down that road as well. We have tried to buy as many of the "keeper" movies on DVD as possible, but some older movies just aren't making the switch. [@~]Mizu<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#143</b> "[@~]MizuGami" wrote: <QUOTE> You don't have any kids, do you? ;)</QUOTE> I do, but my girl is 2 months old now, so all the fun is still ahead. And I see your point; But, um, can't you rent a kid's movie, plug it on repeat for three days, then return it? :) The movies you actually buy for your collection are not watched that often. Cartoons... probably.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>[@~]MizuGami</b> (#142): <QUOTE>Have you ever actually read the EULA agreement that you must click on to install just about every piece of software? You have purchased the right to use that data on ONE computer. You are allowed to make ONE backup copy (although that may be difficult depending on the security involved). If you were to install the program on another computer in your house, you are supposed to uninstall it from the other one. If you do sell the program to someone else, you are required to surrender any backup copy to the buyer and promptly remove the installation from your computer prior to the sale. Buying the program doesn't give you the right to make a bazillion copies. Make 1 backup copy, and if that one shits the bed, then make another. Simple as that. There is NO court in this world that would side with you on this one, because you agreed with the EULA for that software.</QUOTE> You actually think EULA's are enforcable? Heh... they aren't really. Some software companies tried to get some laws passed to make them fully enforcable across all states, but I don't think it flew. Until that day, those EULA's mean about jack and shit. Until then I can make precisely infinite copies, and you cannot stop me. Try. <b>[@~]MizuGami</b> (#142): <QUOTE>They have to in order to keep the hackers out. With every new security measure introduced, there are legions of hackers in dark little rooms toiling away to crack them. If we didn't have piracy, then there would be no need for security measures. If your pissed, write an open letter to the hackers of the world, don't take it out on the developers/publishers.</QUOTE> That's a pretty damn stupid argument. If I, right now, were to post an open letter asking pirates to please stop, I somehow doubt Johon over in China is going to say "Wow, xero says we should stop pirating. Since xero's just so cool and he has a huge reputation and everyone knows him, we should stop pirating." Right. Do you know how hard it is to get a legal copy of most software over in China? Ha... haha.... no, the world is not going to stop fucking pirating, period. Do you understand that? Over the course of thousands of years, man has not yet stopped killing stealing and generally commiting crimes against other humans. I do not expect them to stop any time soon. Take off your rose-coloured glasses. I won't tolerate spyware bullshit and ridiculous EULAs. When it degenerates to that point, I will proudly pirate software and crack my games. I won't even feel guilty, and I will <b>enjoy</b> it. Look down on me and sneer, and argue, and convince yourself you're better. But I refuse to tolerate abuse from companies because they can't compromise on their interests and ours. As I said, UT's disc check and Q3A's number are all fine, but push far beyond that and I just won't buy it. I don't like pirating, but it's not going to go away. Period. Companies should learn to deal with it in a different manner.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
PiRaMidA #144: <quote>I do, but my girl is 2 months old now, so all the fun is still ahead. And I see your point; But, um, can't you rent a kid's movie, plug it on repeat for three days, then return it? :) The movies you actually buy for your collection are not watched that often. Cartoons... probably.</quote> Oh you do have all the fun ahead...My son just turned 3. Yeah we could, but it's actually cheaper to go to like Wal*Mart and buy a Blues Clues tape for $6 that he'll have for months. He just has a fascination with those two movies I mentioned earlier. Yes, the movies WE buy aren't watched that often. Wait, you'll see what I mean..No free time to watch movies...LOL ;) [@~]MizuGami<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Xero #145: <quote>That's a pretty damn stupid argument. If I, right now, were to post an open letter asking pirates to please stop, I somehow doubt Johon over in China is going to say "Wow, xero says we should stop pirating. Since xero's just so cool and he has a huge reputation and everyone knows him, we should stop pirating." Right.</quote> You have to take what I said in context. Of course I don't expect you to write an open letter to hackers worldwide pleading with them to stop pirating software. I was simply trying to point out that it's not ALL the developers/producers fault. If there were no hackers, software security MIGHT not be needed. <quote>I won't tolerate spyware bullshit and ridiculous EULAs. When it degenerates to that point, I will proudly pirate software and crack my games. I won't even feel guilty, and I will enjoy it.</quote> Ahh, the old "down with THE MAN" defense. Ok, now it all becomes so perfectly clear....It's ok to pirate, but only if you are bringing down the man...bullshit. I hate spyware as well, but look at the big picture. Why MIGHT a company use such a method? Well, it needs information about users that it can sell to advertisers to recoup profits lost to pirating. This is just a possibility, but one I can see companies doing. Just remember one thing...Cash, Gas, Sex, or Games, nobody rides for free...it'll come back around....it always does... [@~]MizuGami <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>[@~]MizuGami</b> (#147): <QUOTE>You have to take what I said in context. Of course I don't expect you to write an open letter to hackers worldwide pleading with them to stop pirating software. I was simply trying to point out that it's not ALL the developers/producers fault. If there were no hackers, software security MIGHT not be needed.</QUOTE> Similar to "If no one stole, we souldn't need locks!"... It's a great idea (imagine: you can leave your doors of your house wide open and unlocked in the confidence that no one will abuse that? I've lived in places like that, and I miss that feeling), but it's a shame we're not going to see it. Depressing actually. But as I have said, there is acceptable limits to this, and after they cross them, I have no problems stealing their software. Which brings me to: <b>[@~]MizuGami</b> (#147): <QUOTE>Ahh, the old "down with THE MAN" defense. Ok, now it all becomes so perfectly clear....It's ok to pirate, but only if you are bringing down the man...bullshit.</QUOTE> Please don't do the "down with the MAN" bullshit. If you really want me to tear this up.... *sigh*. Ok, fine. I don't remember the name of the bill/legislation/whateverthefuck, but a consumer interests group and a bunch of software company lawers got together and tried to write up a legal doc to make EULA's enforcable state-to-state and so on (as they are now, it's near impossible to get anyone based on a EULA). After they worked out an acceptable compromise between companies and consumers, the bill was handed over the the companies lawers for finalizing and submission. So they did their "corrections" and turned the bill into a consumer fucking nightmare. Huh you say? Imagine this: - as soon as you break the shrinkwrap, you agree to the software license, whether you have read it or not. - you may not talk to others about the software or bugs in the software unless permission is given by the company (no reviews, and i'm sure they'll alow bad reviews) - the company is not obligated to support the product, fix the product, or ensure the product does anything mention in advertising (that feature on the box isn't in there? that's nice, fuck you.) - the owner must submit to any spyware contained within, if he does now he/she must uninstall the software and destroy their copy (no. period.) - the user is not allowed to sell, copy, trade, or give the software to anyone else. (because the EULA being what it is, they don't want people slipping out of these rules by selling the software... so they make ownership sole and permanent) - the EULA is completely law enforcable in all states that adopt the legislation (ha, too bad we're not that stupid) - the EULA becomes a fully binding legal contract between you and the company - any works produced in the software can be owned by the company if they so deem (imagine: if you want the normal version, you pay $20... if you want the version where they DON'T own your work, you must pay $90) You get the point. There was way more, but I'm sure you see that this is a large sack of shit. If this is what the trustworthy companies are doing to look out for our interests, then fuck them. Needless to say the consumer advocacy group pulled it's support and started a campaign against the bill. It probably got shot down by a majority of politicians because it was so fucking insane. What bothers me is it made it to a voting stage and even got passed in one state (where it will likely be later repealed once they figure out what it does). I'm too lazy to look up the stuff myself, but that's the basic story there. It was so ridiculous the lawers should have KNOWN they'd never get away with it, but I'm sure as you can see, the companies do not give a single solitary fuck about us. We will defend our rights or we will lose them, period. I'm not talking about little CD checks, I'm talking about bullshit legislation like this. If you think that's "sticking it to the MAN", then you can grab your ankles for the MAN all you want, but leave me out of it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#140</b> "flamethrower" wrote... <QUOTE>"Umm, why? The commonly accepted verb is "buy". I'll continue to use it, thanks... " Of course you will, that's because the commonly accepted use of the word "buy" is to get ownership of something in exchange for credit chits. This is not the case with game, you merely rent them for the length of time the degradeable media happens to survive. </QUOTE> err what are you talking about ? You are buying a license. As in you own a license and the media it comes on you just don't own the content of media. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#142</b> "[@~]MizuGami" wrote... <QUOTE>This is the way I see software security going. Either that, or something much more drastic like fingerprint identificaton or retinal scan. Don't laugh, if piracy keeps up....The developers/publishers are not the enemy here. It's like in ANY retail business, losses must be covered by increased prices and tighter security, or the company will go belly-up. I'd venture to say that we'd probably be paying $10-$15 less for each game if there were no piracy...Warren, Derek, George back me up/correct me on this one? </QUOTE> I really dislike the wrongness of this line of thought. People pirate games because there is an incentive to pirate games. Increasing price/protection schems increases incentive (luckily pirating schemes decrease accessibility or else all hell would break loose). Most people if given the option will go the path of least resistance - thus you give them an incentive to buy games and decrease incentive to pirate. Of course this means decreasing price and some value-added service on top of product. It seems many of games industry don't *get* this. MS got it long ago as did many other software companies - do you think they are suffering?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>RahvinTaka</b> (#150): <QUOTE>I really dislike the wrongness of this line of thought. People pirate games because there is an incentive to pirate games. Increasing price/protection schems increases incentive (luckily pirating schemes decrease accessibility or else all hell would break loose). Most people if given the option will go the path of least resistance - thus you give them an incentive to buy games and decrease incentive to pirate.</QUOTE> Ooo, that was well said... I think you just summed up the entire issue and the way you should solve it in the tidiest package I've seen. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#127</b> "None-1a" wrote... <QUOTE>it's not like I have the right to go out and photocopy a book simply because some one might steal it. </QUOTE> Uhh...actually you do... that is exactly the kind of thing we are talking about... you could go photocopy all of your books, put them in a fireproof safe off-site and you would be perfectly, legally, in the right... and all of them would function in the same fashion as the originals... 12xu out<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#150</b> "RahvinTaka" wrote: <QUOTE>It seems many of games industry don't *get* this.</QUOTE> Well, they definitely get this, look at Blizzard for ex. The only problem is that they create the need for an after-purchase survice artificially (i.e., product won't work at full potential without it). That's BNet I'm talking about. Yes, helps to cut down piracy. But is a wrong approach.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#142</b> "[@~]MizuGami" wrote... <QUOTE>If your pissed, write an open letter to the hackers of the world, don't take it out on the developers/publishers. </QUOTE> why not? they take it out on their customers, not just the hackers.... 12xu out<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>RahvinTaka</b> (#135): <QUOTE>VHS is a bad analogy. VHS can be copied for backup without hinderance, </QUOTE> Can they? Even back when I was using them, I remember several movies that I couldn't copy due to protection schemes used on the tapes. The resulting video had lines and such running through it, and it had no audio. <b>xero</b> (#139): <QUOTE>You can call it a license to use a singular copy of the data or your can call it owning a copy of singular data. It's the same damn thing. </QUOTE> No, it isn't the same thing. Otherwise, they wouldn't call specifically call it a license. :) <b>flamethrower</b> (#140): <QUOTE>Of course you will, that's because the commonly accepted use of the word "buy" is to get ownership of something in exchange for credit chits. This is not the case with game, you merely rent them for the length of time the degradeable media happens to survive. </QUOTE> And now we're back to "CDs degrade over time/with use". We've been over this ... I think one way, you think another. *shrug* <QUOTE>However, drawing attention to this fact might point out to people that the games market is entirely stiched up against them. </QUOTE> Yes, we're out to get you. ALL of you! <i>*jumps from shadows*</i> <b>BOO!!</b> <b>PiRaMidA</b> (#141): <QUOTE>The difference here is that VHS, even the most watched one, would get like 1 use per day (not for very long, too). How many times have you watched you favorite tape? 20? 50? I doubt it's more than that. Games are different, with random CD access being performed each time you start it, so if you play the game daily your CD would deteriorate much faster than a tape. </QUOTE> The entire surface of the tape gets touched when you watch it. It then usually gets rewound at the end of the viewing. The tape gets spun and unspun from spools on either side. All of this, direct physical contact. A few random seeks on a CD equate to this? :) <b>xero</b> (#145): <QUOTE>You actually think EULA's are enforcable? Heh... they aren't really. Some software companies tried to get some laws passed to make them fully enforcable across all states, but I don't think it flew. Until that day, those EULA's mean about jack and shit. Until then I can make precisely infinite copies, and you cannot stop me. Try. </QUOTE> There's a difference between "I have the right" and "you can't stop me". <b>RahvinTaka</b> (#150): <QUOTE>It seems many of games industry don't *get* this. </QUOTE> *FREE* is always better than paying money. That's the pirate mentality. <QUOTE>MS got it long ago as did many other software companies - do you think they are suffering?</QUOTE> No, but not every company can afford to do things like sell Microsoft Access for $100 until all other competition is dead, and then jack the price up. Or give away Internet Explorer for free until all competition is dead and then own the internet browser market (and while IE is still free, they now own many intangible things). This takes money. BIG money. Most companies don't have that kind of cash ... Microsoft is a HUGE target for piracy. They claim millions and millions in losses because of it. But they're big enough to absorb it and still make a killing. -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Funny my UT cd just snapped the same way about 3 days ago. I gotta go get another one I guess : (<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: Walk Into Wall. Bleed. Repeat.
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
| P O S T A C O M M E N T |
|
|
| C R A P T A G S | ||||||||
|
|
| There are currently 36 people browsing this site. [Details] |
Powered by blah 0.9-dev •
PlanetCrap is © 1997-2004 Hendrik "Morn" Mans
|