Command & Conquer 4: "NO DRM" = Ubisoft DRM

[MyNameDidntFit]

Well, a post on the EA forum for C&C4 says this:
First thing to be clear about, Command & Conquer 4 has NO DRM. Zip, zero, zilch, none.Awesome, right? Yes. Awesome. We love no DRM.

... but then it says this:
To play Command & Conquer 4, the computer needs to be connected to the internet.And now I'm confused. It's like Ubisoft's DRM, but with added deceit where we all pretend that the DRM isn't there.

I was willing to defend Ubisoft with their DRM, but this just goes too far. If you have DRM that imposes restrictions on where, when and how the game can be played, you should damned well tell your consumers. Saying it isn't there wont make it go away.

[Lance]

Ugh.

I agree here. Having a bad DRM is bad enough, but to openly lie about it is another. They're not only making themselves look bad, but it's an insult to the intelligence of their consumer base. I mean, did they honestly think they could just sneak something like that in to their games and we wouldn't notice?

[Konrad]

I read this just last night and quite literally burst out smiling. I can't find it anymore, but the post essentially explained just how the DRM works, that you have to be connected and summed up with: "See, no DRM at all you silly gamers."

[MyNameDidntFit]

The post. (http://forums.commandandconquer.com/jforum/posts/list/35920.page;jsessionid=FB71ECDFF1FFBFFFE294A197401D F771.015048)

[Konrad]

Ah, that's why I couldn't find it. The ridiculous parts were edited out.

[MyNameDidntFit]

Oh. I didn't even read it just then. Just c/p'd the link. Hehehehehehe now they can pretend they didn't pretend there is no DRM :D

[Konrad]

I don't think they're going to try. You have to give them props for not moderating the shit out of their forums, just take a look at one reply down.

[MyNameDidntFit]

... that's something to give props for now? I think that's a bare minimum standard for any community, not something to pat them on the back for.

[Konrad]

Certainly hasn't been the standard on most game or developer specific forums I've visited. A lot of those forums have a tendency towards masses of complaint posts disappearing, or discussion of some negative topics entirely forbidden.

That may not be how you run a good community, but it is apparently how you run an official forum.

[MyNameDidntFit]

That doesn't mean our standards, as users, should slip. If bad conduct is accepted and mediocre conduct is applauded the situation wont get any better.

For the record, the only official developer forums I'm active on are the Steam Forums and they run their forums as well as any community forum (obviously, they lack the personal touch of a smaller group, but with a quarter million members that's expected).

[Rob]

That was a pretty lame lie because any mandatory method they use to check up on who owns the game is DRM. Why do companies try to hide DRM instead of improving it to a point where it doesn't bother consumers? If that's not possible then they need to do a time limited DRM like BC2 just did. That's something I can understand and put up with. Then again I use steam for every game I own on PC so wtf I guess I put up with a mandatory net connection already. Hmm come to think of it I don't really play that many single player games.

[Konrad]

That doesn't mean our standards, as users, should slip. If bad conduct is accepted and mediocre conduct is applauded the situation wont get any better.

For the record, the only official developer forums I'm active on are the Steam Forums and they run their forums as well as any community forum (obviously, they lack the personal touch of a smaller group, but with a quarter million members that's expected).

I think it's an already established standard for developer forums. I rarely go to a developer forum and expect the same type of respect and freedom of speech as I do on private forums, but to me that's just the way things have always been. Don't know about the majority of course since that's what sets the standard, but I like to see a developer forum which doesn't censor as much. In short, to me private forum standards =/= company forum standards.

As for Steam forums, I'm occasionally active there (I treat it as great trolling grounds >_>) and from what I've seen they can be pretty harsh when it comes down to it. There is this whole big thing now in the AC2 forums where they banned a few really long time members with tons of games and what-not because they were openly rooting for pirates to crack the games.

[MyNameDidntFit]

Why should the standards be any different?

Just to be clear 'tons of games' doesn't matter at all on SPUF as forum accounts are 100% separate from Steam accounts (bar a link you may put in your profile). Being banned on the forums =! banned from Steam. Discussion of piracy is a topic that Steam Forums' staff are quite harsh on. However, most 3rd party game sub-forums that I've seen on SPUF have their own 3rd party moderators, I'd expect that the AC2 forums have their own, rather than relying on the handful of Valve-appointed volunteers.

[Konrad]

Should or shouldn't, they are. I don't like it either.

Although forum bans are not Steam bans, they're still permanent and ban evasion is not taken lightly either. The point of mentioning that he had a ton of games (over 100) was to point out that he was a dedicated user both on Steam and the forums, certainly not (just) a pirate, but none of this mattered. Even if you're not part of it, or if you're in the middle ground - rooting for the opposite team ends badly.

[MyNameDidntFit]

Uh, also for the record: Steam Forums has an incredibly lenient policy on 'ban evasion'. I've seen countless examples of members that have created a new account after being banned and stating it openly -- in threads where mods are active, no less -- and it goes by fine.

What that example comes down to, I think is that it is endorsing piracy. A game developer simply cannot have that sort of conduct on their forums, especially when their forum caters to countless 3rd party developers' games as well as their own -- it just doesn't gel. It's be like going to a Christian forum and rooting for Satanists.

[Konrad]

What that example comes down to, I think is that it is endorsing piracy. A game developer simply cannot have that sort of conduct on their forums, especially when their forum caters to countless 3rd party developers' games as well as their own -- it just doesn't gel. It's be like going to a Christian forum and rooting for Satanists.

Um... Exactly? We both agree this is the standard right?

[MyNameDidntFit]

What the standard is isn't what we're debating -- I don't know or care what the 'standard' is. I was simply following through my statement that a lack of tyrannical censoring is not something I believe deserves applause.

[Konrad]

If lack of tyrannical censorship is a deviation from the precedent then I think it deserves applause. So to me it was indeed a matter of establishing the standard.

[MyNameDidntFit]

Um... Exactly? We both agree this is the standard right?
But if what you agreed to here is the standard, a lack of tyrannical censorship is not a deviation. Because if that is tyrannical censorship, Jason is Hitler because we cannot openly admit to, nor link to, piracy here.