Trainz and DRM
- Thread starter RRSignal
- Start date
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
Negative, JR has never tried to implement any form of DRM.
False:
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?93364-Club-Car-Members-NEW-BETA-9-18-12
But, to JR's credit, you didn't follow through.
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
It was an installer though, not DRM nor did it require anything, it just installed files... Whats wrong with that? Also this has not been abandoned, just put off as I dont have time to work on it with everything else going on.
It seems i answered all of your questions here.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...embers-NEW-BETA-9-18-12&p=1042014#post1042014
It seems i answered all of your questions here.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...embers-NEW-BETA-9-18-12&p=1042014#post1042014
Read post #6 (as well as the following posts):
"The installer will be a small part DRM, but mainly to ease the ability to update and install the content correctly..."
Post #32 (Sean retroactively deleted his post, but I was able to quote it before he did):
"The future of the installer would be connecting to the webserver after a purchase, inputting the confirmation number, and then the installer downloading the files and installing/committing them. Its more or less how it works now, except the installer downloads it. Maybe "product activation" isn't the right wording for it."
Don't get me wrong, I deeply appreciate JR taking customer opinions into mind. And, although I don't expect you to remember any of this (since you didn't seem interested in human interaction) when we hung out on Gallitzin, it was clear that at least some of the other JR guys though it was a bad idea. Kudos, though, because you were right, and very responsive to your customers.
Hope that continues.
Last edited:
I don't know the background of this, but to be fair: a secure installer that takes no role in controlling the content after installation does not fit any normal definition of DRM. Even our Download Station checks that you're authorised before allowing you to download. That's just common sense.
chris
chris
It's there in the black and...um, blue.
There were also a few personal conversations when we met up in Gallitzin. Nothing damning or horrible...really the exact opposite. A few of the guys admitted that the DRM thing was a bad idea, and Mike even said he wasn't too fond of the SP1 patch...
This is not at all a bad thing; in fact, it made me respect and appreciate JR. Even if DRM had never been a solid plan, how many companies are that aware of the feelings and needs of their customers? How many are that responsive? Can you imagine what a happy world this would be if your credit card company or bank was 1/10th as compassionate and responsive as JR? People would be singing the praises Citibank and Chase!
That's why I don't feel bad about buying a Club Car membership, even though, financially, there's a pretty slim chance I'm break even with that.
Last edited:
Actually, my bank is great. Okay, they don't hand out free money, but I'm realistic about these things.
chris
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
This doesn't fit DRM how you have defined it. Since I was behind the idea I defined what would happen in the posts below. Regardless of what you interpreted before that time, the real official design was that there would be 3 levels (Sean probably removed the post because it was incorrect, you cannot cite that as any indication).
1. Installer with no outside connection was received upon purchase. (this was the beta)
2. Updater that would check your existing purchases in the store database and provide files if they were available. (requires your site login, nothing more)
3. Installer that would check the store database and allow you to re-download any purchases you have made previously at any time. (requires site login, nothing more)
none of these required any kind of activation or periodic check. just the last two required you have a user and login at our site, because really how else can you keep track of the items? 2 and 3 were likely to be integrated into the same program. All of this is described in the original thread. I don't wish to be too crass, but honestly if the other posts said that pink monkeys would fall out of your monitor and I said 'no - they won't' the official answer is 'no - they wont'. Unlike in relation to N3V, that much I can assure you of.
This is probably true, Which is why Mike does most of the talking. It isn't anything personal, I just don't speak unless I have something to say.
This probably didn't have anything to do with our installer, and even I would agree an invasive DRM is bad, I've only said it 50 times in this thread.
However I doubt this was DRM related but rather the work it takes to get the broken content working again.
Only takes a couple of purchases to make it up!
Seriously though, I wish you could understand that I am not not touting DRM here, I Think the version of it you describe is tedious and can become a problem. You only think that I disagree with you and that is why you attack me, from saying I can't understand, to that I'm getting in a 'tizzy' to saying the 'f' in my handle means something (?). What I really have said is I don't think there is a problem with anyone ensuring that you abide by the EULA regardless of the type and extent of DRM. If you agreed to it, you deserve it.
Last edited:
KingConrail76
New member
Keeping the conspiracy and paranoia going!
Here you go, Joe and Paul. You can build your soapboxes.
I'm waiting to see what the full answer is soon(tm).
John
John, I think that the "conspiracy and paranoia" comment was a bit uncalled for.
I simply said "I'll still wait for the long version", and you proptly followed up with "I'm waiting to see what the full answer is".
Tony himself said that the full explanation is taking longer to provide, because they were working to "carefully word" it. I look forward to being able to read it, as it will likely be worded in "legal-speak", and as such, in no way ambiguous. This is what we need, and what I want to see. I don't see how waiting for a precise and complete explanation is being "paranoid" in any way.
Early on in this thread, I gave explicite examples of DRM restrictions I have experienced, and I made comments that the "answers" provided so far are not complete enough for my liking. I've have been pretty quiet otherwise, and never eluded to any belief that the sky is going to fall if strickter DRM is implemented...all I said on that front was that I would not be going along for the ride if it was. I have other options.
If the "long version" provides answers I feel are acceptable, I already have set aside (what I consider) considerable funds to pledge.
You took this out of context. It was a joke meant for the other guys. Sometimes you need to lighten up.
:hehe:
John
amigacooke
Well-known member
A reasonable answer and potential good news for the KS.
cascaderailroad
New member
I just can't wait to read this "carefully worded" announcement, about the longer answer (our "policy") on DRM will be released "soon".
Last edited:
It's already HERE if you knew where to look. (sarcasm)
Various sites I had stumbled across in recent hours suggest that the "Byteshield DRM Protection System" appears to be one, if not the most highly respected by developers within the gaming industry.
Let's not border-line the straight jacket nutcase theory to assume or even speculate that N3V are considering the thought of upgrading/replacing their current DRM protection system for one that will be totally intrusive/restrictive to the freedom of us end-users.
Last edited:
amigacooke
Well-known member
Is this the system that is used by the DLC as it clearly isn't used on TS12?
cascaderailroad
New member
Microsoft-X Box removed their DRM policy, as those without a stable internet connection (such as active duty military personnel) could not play the game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wIky1ijzM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VsexLNWjNE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQE3VFcQg80
DRM was absolutely ruining the gaming industry, and was bankrupting major Corporations such as GameStop.
Various DRM removal programs are being used, and are being developed.
Why in a time when DRM is being removed from the gaming industry ... why now, is N3V choosing to employ DRM ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wIky1ijzM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VsexLNWjNE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQE3VFcQg80
DRM was absolutely ruining the gaming industry, and was bankrupting major Corporations such as GameStop.
Various DRM removal programs are being used, and are being developed.
Why in a time when DRM is being removed from the gaming industry ... why now, is N3V choosing to employ DRM ?
Last edited:
As a matter of fact; I'm unable to make any clarifications regarding the policy of DLC on SimCentral if this is clearly what you are referring to. Sorry if my observation of the protection system the game initially uses isn't imperative to the relevant topic in question.
Hi All
Byteshield was used in some of the games that we were retailers/publishers for, which were sold via the Auran.com shop at one point. From memory, none of those games are sold via simulator central (or if they are, I think they no longer have Byteshield), but it's possible some may be (if they are, they will likely have it noted on the shop page; this was the case on the auran.com shop). Byteshield, apart from having a 'help'/'description' page on auran.com, isn't linked to the Trainz software
Regards
Byteshield was used in some of the games that we were retailers/publishers for, which were sold via the Auran.com shop at one point. From memory, none of those games are sold via simulator central (or if they are, I think they no longer have Byteshield), but it's possible some may be (if they are, they will likely have it noted on the shop page; this was the case on the auran.com shop). Byteshield, apart from having a 'help'/'description' page on auran.com, isn't linked to the Trainz software
Regards
Tony_Hilliam
Trainz Plus - enjoy Trainz from just 20 cents a da
I can't quite understand the quote above, but to clarify things before they get further out of hand, I'm going to go out on a limb here and state we do not use Byteshield in Trainz and do not ever intend to. I "think" this page is dug up from a page created many years ago that was linked to from games we published for Jowood (Guild etc).
Can you guys see why I didn't post more than a few words on this topic earlier prior to having a full description ready for perusal? Any words that are written are taken, twisted and mangled into some form or other that tries to prove N3V is out to ensure their customers buy software and never get to use it because N3V are evil.
We live in a society today where the technology exists to freely copy and share digital content. Taken to the extreme, if one copy of the software is sold and freely available to anyone else who wants to use it, no-one else in the entire world need pay for that software. If the software costs $1M to create, and the single copy sold is sold for $50, it is pretty easy to figure out that no further development of that software will ever take place.
Anyone who develops digital Intellectual Property needs some way to monetize their product and some way to protect unlimited free sharing of that product. No system is perfect, and therefore a balance is required between systems that help the creator protect their IP and the customer access the IP they have paid for (or in the case of software, the IP they have licensed).
I have written this statement without a lawyer and without the team vetting the words and in all of a few minutes. I am sure that people will now spend hours analysing every word and quoting back to me when I said something on Nov 10/11 (depending on where you are in the world) about the state of digital IP.
At some point in the near future you will get to read in more detail our actual DRM policy. Until you read it, I suggest you avoid over analysing forum posts that 50 or so posts ago set out to slow this thread down until our statement is released. I should also add that DRM is really quite a long way down on our list of priorities. Developing the right product to expand the Trainz franchise is our number one priority. We have put a lot of work into planning and implementing our Kickstarter plan for Trainz A New Era and we hope that there are lots of people who see the project and believe in it as much as we do.
Not really, no. They backed down on some specific DRM implementation details relating to the use of physical media, based on terrible publicity. It was a win for some consumers, and a loss for others. They are still using DRM for the console, as are Sony with the PlayStation, Nintendo with all of their current-gen consoles, Apple with all iOS devices and Macs, Microsoft with the Windows 8 store, Google with the Play Store, Valve with Steam, and the list goes on.
Do not confuse always-on services with other forms of DRM. That's like confusing wall power for petrol. Both have their uses, but using one when you really should have used the other is a horrible idea. Driving my car with a long cable running out the back is not my idea of fun.
GameStop is a retailer. Saying that DRM is bankrupting GameStop would be like saying that electric cars are bankrupting Service Stations. It might be true (or not), but it's not a reason to avoid electric cars.
For as long as I've been using computers, there have always been copy-protection mechanisms and anti-copy-protection tools. This was a favourite, back in the day.
Well.. this is based on a demonstrably false premise, so I can't really give you an answer.
Don't get me wrong. There have been some absolutely terrible examples of DRM out there. I remember several apps that required physical dongles (Max, anyone?) and there have been a few high-profile examples where the implementations just run rough-shod over what most people would consider normal usage. Always-on-activation for any game that isn't fundamentally multiplayer is a great example of this kind of stupidity.
On the other hand, there are several examples where I think DRM has been done right. Apple and Steam spring to mind as great champions of "DRM done right", with Apple being the more family-friendly of the two. I haven't used Google Play personally, but I understand it to be similar to Apple's implementation.
Because we want to promote our payware partners in a manner that doesn't result in their work immediately being "ripped off" by large numbers of people. Content creation isn't a glorious business, it takes a lot of work and the returns are not amazing even without piracy and other similar problems. It's important to us that they don't give up, and so we're doing our bit to ensure that they profit from their work.
Of course, there are plenty of people who don't want financial gain, they're just doing it as a hobby- and that's the reason for our Download Station. No DRM there.
kind regards,
chris