Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

First Starforce, now Securom

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 12:37:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Blech. I hate games that leave their copy-protection garbage all over
my hard-drive after I uninstall them. Starforce was one of the first,
and now Securom is doing it. Games that use the newest version often
leave the UAService7 on the computer even after the program is
uninstalled. UAService also shows up in the task-manager list (I'm not
sure if this is a good thing or a bad; on the one hand, at least I
*know* when it's there, as opposed to the silent installs used for
Starforce, but on the other hand, I like a nice clean task-list :) 

At least Starforce has the decency to provide an uninstall tool to get
rid of it; Securom offers no such thing. I had to manually disable the
service, manually delete the file and then zap the registry entries
(and I'm still not sure it's 100% gone).

Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
Intrusive copy-protection methods like this do NOT endear you to me.
It just pisses me off. And worse, these methods DON'T EVEN WORK. Stop
using them. It's a waste of money and a waste of good will.

(yeah, I know they don't read these newsgroups; I just needed to
vent).

More about : starforce securom

Anonymous
June 30, 2005 12:37:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> Blech. I hate games that leave their copy-protection garbage all over
> my hard-drive after I uninstall them. Starforce was one of the first,
> and now Securom is doing it. Games that use the newest version often
> leave the UAService7 on the computer even after the program is
> uninstalled. UAService also shows up in the task-manager list (I'm not
> sure if this is a good thing or a bad; on the one hand, at least I
> *know* when it's there, as opposed to the silent installs used for
> Starforce, but on the other hand, I like a nice clean task-list :) 
>
> At least Starforce has the decency to provide an uninstall tool to get
> rid of it; Securom offers no such thing. I had to manually disable the
> service, manually delete the file and then zap the registry entries
> (and I'm still not sure it's 100% gone).
>
> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
> Intrusive copy-protection methods like this do NOT endear you to me.
> It just pisses me off. And worse, these methods DON'T EVEN WORK. Stop
> using them. It's a waste of money and a waste of good will.
>
> (yeah, I know they don't read these newsgroups; I just needed to
> vent).
>
>
Actually Starforce scheme for SC: Chaos Theory works well. There is
still no no-cd patch for that game after all these months. But it makes
me wonder why Starforce doesn't use that particular flavour for other
games because games that came out after choas theory use starforce but
they have been cracked already. Maybe guess Starforce has many products
depending on developers budget?
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 5:29:11 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"C.J." <c.j.@thehood.com> wrote in message
news:JcEwe.3168$Ai.455570@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Actually Starforce scheme for SC: Chaos Theory works well. There is
> still no no-cd patch for that game after all these months.

GCW has one dated April 7.
Related resources
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:21:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Spalls Hurgenson" <yoinks@ebalu.com> wrote in message
news:3716c1tosbp8iak65rvkepf5nndlv65ad8@4ax.com...
>
<snip>
>
> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
> Intrusive copy-protection methods like this do NOT endear you to me.
> It just pisses me off. And worse, these methods DON'T EVEN WORK. Stop
> using them. It's a waste of money and a waste of good will.
>


Good post. Copy protection schemes really only inconvenience the legitimate
customer who goes out and buys their games. Depending on how far things
continue to go on the copy protection front, I may well consider a different
hobby to spend my money on rather than computer gaming. I'm sure other
people are maybe thinking the same.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:51:10 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.

i'm sorry but its not good enough cause for each proper pc
gamer like yourself there are a thousands pirates stealing

did you know riddick only sold 32,000 units?
yes its true and unbelievably sad

obviously you and me and everyone knows much much more than
32,000 pc gamers played riddick... i bet at least half of a
million played that game... so how come only 32,000 units
were sold?
the answer is very simple... piracy

we must fight piracy! piracy damage us pc gamers
and starforce and securom are consequences of piracy

how can you blame publishers from including starforce securom
or any other copy protection if piracy is so widespread and
taking so much revenue
with such a damaging level of piracy you can't blame them

if we want starforce and securom out of pc games and i'm one
of them we must fight piracy!
we pc gamers can do something about it and fight piracy to
protect our favorite hobby

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 11:53:41 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:16:29 -0400, "C.J." <c.j.@thehood.com> wrote:

>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> Blech. I hate games that leave their copy-protection garbage all over
>> my hard-drive after I uninstall them. Starforce was one of the first,
>> and now Securom is doing it. Games that use the newest version often
>> leave the UAService7 on the computer even after the program is
>> uninstalled. UAService also shows up in the task-manager list (I'm not
>> sure if this is a good thing or a bad; on the one hand, at least I
>> *know* when it's there, as opposed to the silent installs used for
>> Starforce, but on the other hand, I like a nice clean task-list :) 
>>
>> At least Starforce has the decency to provide an uninstall tool to get
>> rid of it; Securom offers no such thing. I had to manually disable the
>> service, manually delete the file and then zap the registry entries
>> (and I'm still not sure it's 100% gone).
>>
>> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
>> Intrusive copy-protection methods like this do NOT endear you to me.
>> It just pisses me off. And worse, these methods DON'T EVEN WORK. Stop
>> using them. It's a waste of money and a waste of good will.
>>
>> (yeah, I know they don't read these newsgroups; I just needed to
>> vent).
>>
>>
>Actually Starforce scheme for SC: Chaos Theory works well. There is
>still no no-cd patch for that game after all these months.

Why bother with a no-cd when they can just release the iso and use
the common tools to run it, SC:CT was pirate released on April 1st.

Some games load data from the disc during runtime, if you have to
have the disc in the drive anyway you may as well do without the
bother of a crack, and you don't have to worry about patches either.
I don't know if SC:CT is one of those games, but it could have been a
factor.

SC:CT doesn't have any significantly different Starforce protection
than Silent Hunter 3 did, and that was cracked in no time flat.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 11:57:29 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 30 Jun 2005 22:51:10 -0700, "steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes
>
>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
>
>i'm sorry but its not good enough cause for each proper pc
>gamer like yourself there are a thousands pirates stealing

What isn't good enough, that he buys all his games?

What exactly do you expect him to do, buy extra copies to make up
for what gets pirated?

>if we want starforce and securom out of pc games and i'm one
>of them we must fight piracy!

Given that Starforce and Securom don't prevent piracy for any but
the most casual computer users and cause massive problems for those
who actually pay for the game; I'd say that even if all "professional"
piracy was completely eliminated by direct mandate from God Almightly;
we would still have Securom and Starforce protecting games.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
Anonymous
July 11, 2005 2:03:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I too, buy all my games. However, I refuse to purchase games that have
Starforce protection (and now also Securom).
I wanted "Silent Hunter 3" and "Act of War" (and even Codename Panzers), but
screw it. If anything is going to kill off the PC games industry, it's these
types of copy protection schemes.


"Spalls Hurgenson" <yoinks@ebalu.com> wrote in message
news:3716c1tosbp8iak65rvkepf5nndlv65ad8@4ax.com...
> Blech. I hate games that leave their copy-protection garbage all over
> my hard-drive after I uninstall them. Starforce was one of the first,
> and now Securom is doing it. Games that use the newest version often
> leave the UAService7 on the computer even after the program is
> uninstalled. UAService also shows up in the task-manager list (I'm not
> sure if this is a good thing or a bad; on the one hand, at least I
> *know* when it's there, as opposed to the silent installs used for
> Starforce, but on the other hand, I like a nice clean task-list :) 
>
> At least Starforce has the decency to provide an uninstall tool to get
> rid of it; Securom offers no such thing. I had to manually disable the
> service, manually delete the file and then zap the registry entries
> (and I'm still not sure it's 100% gone).
>
> Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
> Intrusive copy-protection methods like this do NOT endear you to me.
> It just pisses me off. And worse, these methods DON'T EVEN WORK. Stop
> using them. It's a waste of money and a waste of good will.
>
> (yeah, I know they don't read these newsgroups; I just needed to
> vent).
>
>
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:56:50 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

rlsuth wrote:

> screw it. If anything is going to kill off the PC games industry,
> it's these types of copy protection schemes.

wrong mister!
what is killing pc games is piracy!
why do you think publishers pay extra to protect their own
pc games? do you think they like paying more to manufacture
their own pc games?
starforce, securom and all the other cd/dvd copy protecting
exist CAUSE OF PIRACY!
only if you fight against piracy can you ask publishers to
stop using them
so my question to you is simple... what have you done about
piracy and have you fought against it?
no, buying all the pc games you play is not enough
you must also not copy and give to others your own pc games
you must also warn and if necessary criticize others if you
see them illegally copying a pc game
so its your duty and all of us to fight against piracy
do your job! and them you can complain about starforce and
securom
long live pc games piracy free!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 9:42:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1121151410.015736.58420@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> wrong mister!
> what is killing pc games is piracy!
> why do you think publishers pay extra to protect their own
> pc games? do you think they like paying more to manufacture
> their own pc games?
> starforce, securom and all the other cd/dvd copy protecting
> exist CAUSE OF PIRACY!
> only if you fight against piracy can you ask publishers to
> stop using them
> so my question to you is simple... what have you done about
> piracy and have you fought against it?
> no, buying all the pc games you play is not enough
> you must also not copy and give to others your own pc games
> you must also warn and if necessary criticize others if you
> see them illegally copying a pc game
> so its your duty and all of us to fight against piracy
> do your job! and them you can complain about starforce and
> securom
> long live pc games piracy free!
>


The trouble is that copy protection schemes are always defeated sooner or
later. The net result is that the legitimate customer goes through the
aggravation associated with copy protection. Now it's come to a point where
you have to be very careful what sort of CD/DVD utilities and burning
software you have installed lest you not be able to run a certain game or
games.

I've always been an advocate of running two computers for security reasons -
one machine that has an Internet connection, and another machine which does
not. But given the state of copy protection today, it's becoming more
necessary to have a second machine with your utilities installed so you can
keep your gaming machine "clean" to get around copy protection issues.
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 3:14:20 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

NightSky 421 wrote:

> The trouble is that copy protection schemes are always defeated

agree

> The net result is that the legitimate customer goes through the

agree

> you have to be very careful what sort of CD/DVD utilities and

i don't copy my pc games to others neither i backup my pc games
cause it's totally unnecessary and a waste of money and time
current manufactured pc games cd/dvd are the most reliable medium
available so no need for backup
so with this why do you need to have cd/dvd burning utilities?
why wasting money on them? don't you need only general purpose
single software to record? like nero?
i'm not even a bit sympathetic when someone comes to this group
flaming starforce cause they have clonecd or alchool installed

> I've always been an advocate of running two computers for security

agree although its very expensive
an alternative but not as secure would be using a dual boot system
with a working secure installation and a clean simple installation

for extra protection we could use two hard disks each one with its
own independent boot system and only connecting one each time for
full separation and security (no crossover infection between both)

> that has an Internet connection, and another machine which does not

totally agree with this one!
i really like the idea of a pc with no physical connection to
the net, it makes me feel much more save

> keep your gaming machine "clean" to get around copy protection

like i said i don't see any reason to have burning utilities
but i do agree in having two boot systems either in separate pcs
if you have the money of separate hard disks in the same pc or
even separate partitions in the same hard disk if you don't have
the cash for the other two more expensive solutions
the reason for separate boot systems is not only one you gave,
for security but also cause for true pc gamers having a games
only installation, a boot system totally dedicated to games is
the best way to prevents troubleshooting

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 12:04:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> writes:

> so with this why do you need to have cd/dvd burning utilities?

Why should somone have to justify what they have on their computer to
you? Or to a company from which they purchased a game?

Do you have a VCR? Why? What reason could you have to need to record
to tape other than pirate movies? Since you have a VCR, we won't let
you play DVDs. See how absurd that argument is when applied to just
about any other medium?

> i'm not even a bit sympathetic when someone comes to this group
> flaming starforce cause they have clonecd or alchool installed

You have a serious problem. You seem to think that you have the right
to tell people what they can and can't install on their own
computers. I'm amazed you didn't call people with CD duplication
software "traitors to PC gaming".

FOAD already.

Nick

p.s. Just for the record, I don't have any duplication software on any
of my PCs, I'm just boggling at your arrogance.

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}
July 13, 2005 12:22:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

steamKILLER wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>
>>Listen up, publishers! I *buy* all my games. I buy *LOTS* of games.
>
>
> i'm sorry but its not good enough cause for each proper pc
> gamer like yourself there are a thousands pirates stealing
>
> did you know riddick only sold 32,000 units?
> yes its true and unbelievably sad
>
> obviously you and me and everyone knows much much more than
> 32,000 pc gamers played riddick... i bet at least half of a
> million played that game... so how come only 32,000 units
> were sold?
> the answer is very simple... piracy

I'm sure piracy played a minor part, but I think there is something more
basic in play here.

I believe it's more likely that the poor sales can be attributed to the
casual gamer being conditioned over the years by horrible movie spawned
titles.

The average gamer see's Riddick sitting on the shelf and automatically
thinks, "bleh, another cheesy attempt at cashing in on a successful
movie". You can count the number of GOOD movie tie-in games on one hand
(maybe less). A good portion of the 32,000 people that did buy the game
probably read favorable reviews and decided to try it. The vast
majority of casual gamers that don't scour the review sites already had
a preconceived notion of it's quality before even seeing it on the shelf.

Unfortunately I think Riddick is a victim of the precedent set by loads
of garbage movie franchise games produced in the past.


(*>
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 12:31:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Nick Vargish <nav+posts@bandersnatch.org> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>"steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> so with this why do you need to have cd/dvd burning utilities?
>
>Why should somone have to justify what they have on their computer to
>you? Or to a company from which they purchased a game?

Isn't it just so very obvious that steamkiller has never heard of
backing up data and can only conceive of burning software being used for
piracy.

>Do you have a VCR? Why? What reason could you have to need to record
>to tape other than pirate movies? Since you have a VCR, we won't let
>you play DVDs. See how absurd that argument is when applied to just
>about any other medium?
>
>> i'm not even a bit sympathetic when someone comes to this group
>> flaming starforce cause they have clonecd or alchool installed
>
>You have a serious problem. You seem to think that you have the right
>to tell people what they can and can't install on their own
>computers. I'm amazed you didn't call people with CD duplication
>software "traitors to PC gaming".

In his own little world his opinion actually matters to other people.
Some day he'll realize that the real world and his fantasy world aren't
the same.

>FOAD already.

Nah, he needs to FOAGCIPPEDI.

>p.s. Just for the record, I don't have any duplication software on any
>of my PCs, I'm just boggling at your arrogance.

I have various bits, but then I've been backing up downloaded and
generated data for years before I ever had a cd-burner.
Savegames, game mods, demos, preview movies for upcoming games, funny
movies available for download, game walkthrus, Drivers - and that's just
covering game-related data backup.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Anonymous
July 14, 2005 11:05:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1121235260.385044.22460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> i don't copy my pc games to others neither i backup my pc games
> cause it's totally unnecessary and a waste of money and time
> current manufactured pc games cd/dvd are the most reliable medium
> available so no need for backup
> so with this why do you need to have cd/dvd burning utilities?
> why wasting money on them? don't you need only general purpose
> single software to record? like nero?
> i'm not even a bit sympathetic when someone comes to this group
> flaming starforce cause they have clonecd or alchool installed
>


Thanks for the reply, I'm glad that we agree on many points, particularly
the part about PC security and the importance of running two computers if
possible - one with Internet, and one without. I just wanted to address the
above, as well as another point you had below. Sorry for not responding
sooner.

The only piece of CD/DVD burning software that I have installed is Nero.
Even in that case, I have heard of some instances where certain parts of it
need to be disabled for some newer games to run. As I also recall, there
was even one expansion pack of one game where it would not run if you even
had a CD or DVD burner on your computer! Of course, I would expect that to
be a thing of the past, but it is an example of how lightly you sometimes
need to tread.

Also, I believe it is legal for you to make a back-up of software for your
own personal use in the event that your originals go defective. While I
have not backed up any of my software from the last five years, there have
been a couple of occasions where media has gone bad on me and where I wish I
would have made a back-up. I think this sort of thing falls under the
general category of "fair rights" use. As much as some industries would
like to see fair rights use come to an end, it's not unreasonable IMHO for
you to make a back-up of your media collection if you should feel inclined
to do so.


> agree although its very expensive
> an alternative but not as secure would be using a dual boot system
> with a working secure installation and a clean simple installation
>


I agree here. My Internet computer here is formatted using FAT32
partitions. The upside to this is that the drive is easily formatted using
a good ol' Windows 98 or ME boot disc with the FORMAT command copied to it.
I use Norton Ghost 2003 and it's awesome under DOS using the same boot
disks. An alternative, of course, is a dual-boot as you suggested, although
that's obviously not as good.

As long as you don't have big demands (like online gaming) of a second
computer, it's really not expensive to have a dedicated Internet box. In
fact, I have a PIII-933 on loan to a relative right now for use for a couple
of months and he is using it solely for Internet with great results. Buying
a PIII-level computer doesn't cost a lot and really packs all the punch an
"average" users (not into gaming or video editing) would need.
Anonymous
July 15, 2005 3:51:18 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

NightSky 421 wrote:

> Thanks for the reply, I'm glad that we agree on many points,

you're welcome and the points you talk about are very good
recomendations for any pc gamer

> importance of running two computers if possible - one with

i totally agree with you about the internet and security
another issue i'm very worried about is all this insane thing
about wireless... i don't like wireless, wireless is unsafe
i only want WIRED physically connected connections in all my
computer equipment

> Sorry for not responding sooner.

no problem

> need to be disabled for some newer games to run. As I also

copy protections that refuse to run a game cause of software or
hardware present in a pc is totally wrong and i'm against it
but for me piracy is so bad that i don't feel i have the right
to look publishers into the eye and flame them for that cause
they could flame me back for the level of piracy they suffer
i truly believe fighting piracy is also fighting against all
those copy protections like starforce
there is a reason for starforce and its called piracy so we
must do everything to end piracy in pc games
that's why i hate pirates so much cause everytime i buy a game
with starforce its cause of them

> own personal use in the event that your originals go defective

for me manufactured cd-roms are so reliable i really don't feel
the need to make backups and besides i have surpassed one hundred
games in my collection many of them with more than one cd so if
i would start backing up all it would be expensive and very time
consuming and again i really don't think its necessary cause for
me the majority of my games will out live me and be functional
well after i'm gone

> occasions where media has gone bad on me and where I wish I

i'm sorry you had problems
and obviously nothing is always full prof not even cds

with my favorite pc games i usually have two versions like a
gold edition or a budget edition and normal first edition
so for those really special titles i already have a "backup"
no need to "burn" a home made one which i really don't like
doing
call me a bit paranoid but i don't trust very much "home made"
cds or dvds

> it's not unreasonable IMHO for you to make a back-up of your

off course!
there is obsoletely no problem!
the problem is not making a copy or a backup, the only problem
is you giving away that copy
what is damaging is not backup but giving away copies of your
own pc games!

>I agree here. My Internet computer here is formatted using FAT32

i'm also a fat32 fan even with the 4gb file limitation
i still don't have any ntfs formatted partition although i have
one in fat16 my first the boot one with less than 2gb, i guess
its nostalgia for the good old dos days :) 

> a good ol' Windows 98 or ME boot disc with the FORMAT command

exactly!
i also feel much better knowing i can boot from a floppy and
lets be honest, having win98 in your pc is still necessary to
be able to run old games even windows based ones
so having fat32 plus win98 is still a must for any pc gamer

> I use Norton Ghost 2003 and it's awesome under DOS using the

exactly
again you know your trade
a partition image program is for me another "must have" in
pc games

> An alternative, of course, is a dual-boot as you suggested,

i don't know exactly if i understood how you implement your
system but for me a mix of both is the best, mixing image and
dual boot and dual operating systems
having a dual partition/dual boot win98/winxp system and both
being "imaged" into files so you can easily dump then for a
always recommended once in a while clean fresh install system
someone talked about some copy protections being very tough to
remove when you finish the game and install the game, so what
better way than applying a clean fresh image partition

> a PIII-level computer doesn't cost a lot and really packs all

agree completely
for internet and office work p3 is perfect
the problem is you no longer cannot buy a new p3 in stores and
only in the second hand market but if you already have a p3
you should keep it for your "working" machine with net and use
the new one only for games and not connected

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
!