Pretty similar to what we did for Oblivion, which was—we basically don't do any—we do the mildest form possible. I actually don't know if I even want to get into what it is that we exactly do, but we try to be really noninvasive when it comes to that stuff.

Note that Oblivion only required the disc in the drive, a restriction that even players who buy a copy are likely to overcome with a hack for the sake of convenience. Not as good for Bethesda as something more secure, but the fans will surely appreciate the hell out of it.

The Fallout 3 PC Interview: Bethesda on DRM, Censorship and Consolification [Shacknews via GamePolitics]

“This is an awesome framework for the industry to aspire to, and ultimately so that we can provide our customers with the gaming experience that they have wanted for years, and really deserve.”

Hit the jump for the full list of rights. They're intelligent, well through-out, and will never be officially instituted in a million years.

Stardock Announces “The Gamer’s Bill of Rights”
- Indie Developer / Publisher Hopes to Encourage Better Customer Service

Plymouth, MI – August 29, 2008 – Stardock announced today the Gamer’s Bill of Rights: a statement of principles that it hopes will encourage the PC game industry to adopt standards that are more supportive of PC gamers. The document contains 10 specific “rights” that video game enthusiasts can expect from Stardock as an independent developer and publisher that it hopes that other publishers will embrace. The Bill of Rights is featured on Stardock’s website (www.stardock.com) and is on prominent display in Stardock’s booth (1142) at the Penny Arcade Expo.

“As an industry, we need to begin setting some basic, common sense standards that reward PC gamers for purchasing our games,” stated Brad Wardell, president and CEO of Stardock Corporation. “The console market effectively already has something like this in that its games have to go through the platform maker such as Nintendo, Microsoft, or Sony. But on the PC, publishers can release games that are scarcely completed, poorly supported, and full of intrusive copy protection and then be stuck on it.”

Chris Taylor, CEO and founder of Gas Powered Games stated, “This is an awesome framework for the industry to aspire to, and ultimately so that we can provide our customers with the gaming experience that they have wanted for years, and really deserve.”

As an example of The Gamer’s Bill of Rights in action, Stardock instituted a policy of allowing users to return copies of The Political Machine purchased at retail to Stardock for a full refund if they found that their PC wasn’t sufficient to run the game adequately.

“The PC market loses out on a lot of sales because a significant percentage of our market has PCs that may or may not be adequate to run our games. Without the ability to return games to the publisher for a refund, many potential buyers simply pass on games they might otherwise have bought due to the risk of not being certain a game will work on their PC. The average consumer doesn’t know what ‘pixel shader 2.0 support’ means, for instance,” said Wardell.

According to Stardock, the objective of the Gamer’s Bill of Rights is to increase the confidence of consumers of the quality of PC games which in turn will lead to more sales and a better gaming experience.

The Gamer’s Bill of Rights:

1) Gamers shall have the right to return games that don’t work with their computers for a full refund.

2) Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.

3) Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game’s release.

4) Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.

5) Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer.

6) Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won’t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent.

7) Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.

8) Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.

9) Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.

10) Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.

The official Mass Effect FAQ explains it all.

For instance, you can install your copy of Mass Effect on three separate machines, but all must be internet enabled if you expect to play the game you paid for, as SecuROM will check every time you run MassEffect.exe. This sort of overprotection is nothing new, as "Neverwinter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect all use SecuROM in some manner" says the FAQ.

Concerned? Pssh! Don't be! The Mass Effect PC FAQ says EA Support is ready for a beating.

EA is ready and we are confident there will be no server problems. EA has assured us that they have their authorization systems and customer support staff in place and ready for the launch of Mass Effect for PC. Anyone having issues with getting the game activated will be able to contact EA Support and get their problem resolved.

Spore is similarly planned to take advantage of the SecuROM copy protection system, one that we're sure is going to eliminate every illegitimate copy of the game from appearing on torrent trackers for at least 48 hours. Take that, piracy! RIP! Owned! Etc!

Mass Effect for PC System Specs, SecuROM and FAQ [Mass Effect Community via The Angry Pixel]

How Many Installs Do We Get? [2K Forums - Thanks Aspen]
Image Courtesy of NoFrag

UPDATE - Elizabeth from 2K has repsonded on the forums, clarifying the copy protection issue. The key lies in uninstalling before you reinstall. Uninstalling registers the same as installing does, so if you do not perform an uninstall first SecuROM thinks you are just installing the game on different systems over and over again. Hit the jump for the full text of Elizabeth's message, and thanks for everyone who followed up on the issue.

hey guys,

first, let me say this. you DO NOT NEED TO USE THE INTERNET EVERY TIME YOU PLAY THIS GAME. it is only the first time.

second, you can uninstall and reinstall this game, and if, by chance, you have 2 computers you want to simultaneously play this game on, you also can do that.

if by some chance you are reinstalling this game without uninstalling it first, a lot, there is a chance you may have to call securom and get a key, or deactivate some older installations.

but if you upgrade your hardware next week, you'll still be able to play the game. if you revamp your system and need to reinstall bioshock, just uninstall it before you go through the overhaul, and then do your reinstall.

calling it "hardware fingerprinting" is a bit alarmist. we do not transmit any of your data to any companies.

really, the only people who will be concerned about any of these security measures are those who are rapidly putting bioshock on many pcs... if you use the game as you normally do, you won't notice this at all.

How many installs do we get ? Transfer of ownership ? [2K Forums - Thanks Seiru!]

Basically the program circumvents the checking of the software code on the disc. The kicker is that in order for it to bypass the software code, you have to first know the software code, making an extra step necessary. An extra step Muslix hasn't provided yet. In his video brag below he advises us to keep watch for source code in January.

Here at Kotaku we get constant shit for posting articles about Sony screwing up. But honestly, these things write themselves. It's gotten to the point now where it's not even funny anymore, it's just sad and confusing.

With that doleful preface firmly in place, I present to you, my darling readers, the newest Blu-Ray booboo: the disks are apparently "hard to make." They also have an additional layer of copy protection, which just makes things needlessly complicated. Gamasutra has an article addressing the most recent podcast from Microsoft's Xbox Live Director of Programming Larry 'Major Nelson' Hryb, interviewing Amir Majidimehr, whose group at Microsoft oversees audio/video compression technologies, as well as high-definition optical formats.

According to [Majidimehr], Blu-ray moves the recording surface very close to the top layer of the disc, protected by just a very thin coating, and that this makes maintaining "high reliability" of discs during the actual manufacturing process much more difficult.

This factor, according to Majidimehr, is the key difference between the two formats, as HD-DVD, like traditional DVD, protects its data between two layers of protective plastic - above and below - thus making manufacturing of the discs much more reliable.

And that extra layer of copy protection I mentioned, it's called BD+. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray both already have the AACS copy protection (developed jointly by Sony and MS), so the BD+ is redundant.

Thanks for the tip, Jason. Bad news and more bad news. Can I please just have a PS3? No? Fine... Eliza gauger

Read more here [Gamasutra, via FlickerGaming]

If you aren't familiar with the latest info on the Blu-Ray copy protection scheme, I suggest you become so now. Basically the issue is that without HDMI output, HDCP copy protection will down-convert your signal to 540p. That may be fine for the Wii market, but now that Sony has finally said "Next generation has started", we expect some pretty pictures out of our $500 investment.

One of the most important things to take away from the corporate lashing is the following:

Until Sony announces a $499 PS3 design change, we at IGN Gear can, in good faith, only recommend that interested buyers steer clear of the lower-priced PS3 model or make the purchase fully aware that they may in future suffer severe repercussions when it comes to Blu-ray movie playback — one of the key features that puts the PS3's price point above competing systems. 540p, the resolution that the Image Constraint Token will down-convert 1080p movies to in non-HDCP systems, is by no stretch of the imagination Hi-Def, and will, without major changes in PS3 design or studio policy, be the future of Blu-ray playback on the $499 PS3.

Yeah. Harsh. Keep your eyes peeled for more on Sony's plans to bait-and-switch consumers. —Michael McWhertor

Sony's Grave Error: The $499 HDMI-Lacking PS3. [IGN]

Well, our jaded brethren over at The Consumerist — whom earlier today dissed and dismissed Kotaku, so maybe you guys better go on over there and give editor Ben Popken a piece of your mind. Kotakuites Assemble! — have the scoop on the latest customer service fiasco by the wonderful morons working at Starforce.

Although we're not smart enough to understand what the technical problem was that prompted this amazing reply from a Starforce rep — something to do with network droppers or something — you don't really have to be to get a chuckle out of it. After accusing the poster of being paid to post Starforce complaints on their forums, a Starforce rep wrote:

You're lying!

IF you publish an appology on our forums for being a liar, we may continue converstaiton.

Ha ha ha. Wacky Starforce!

Starforce Tells Customer: Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire [Consumerist] (Thanks, Ben!)

Now, Futuremark has uncovered a very dangerous anti-piracy system Starforce is now using. This copy protection system installs a driver that runs at the highest level of access on the system, which gives it low level access to the PCs hardware and any drivers and processes. This driver runs regardless of whether the game runs; keeping an eye out for any suspicious activity such as attempting to copy a protected disc. If something suspicious is detected, it forces the PC to make an immediate reboot, regardless of any other applications running and whether or not the user has any unsaved work.

Gee, why would anyone not want to purchase a product that relied upon Starforce for its DRM? According to a Starforce PR spokesman, it is because they just must be members of the Russian mafia:

StarForce Technologies, for its part, often takes extreme offense to negative comments... ...When questioned, Zhidkov [SF's PR manager] told us, "The issue on StarForce is obviously sponsored by our competitors or organized crime groups that run CD/DVD piracy [operations]. We are now in close coopreration with [US and Russian officials] investigating the matter and trying to find out who stands behind the boycott campaign.

That quote was obtained from the latest issue of Computer Gaming World.

Starforce DRM Exposed And It's Not Pretty [Gadget Life]

That said, it's an intriguing look at the problems facing both customers and game makers. While customers grow increasingly frustrated with their systems being compromised by draconian copy protection schemes, game makers have a definite need to protect their software from piracy. What's becoming more and more apparent to game makers, though, is how Starforce-style copy protection is not the answer to their question, and that they can garner more goodwill by less intrusive copy protection systems... or no copy protection at all. ArsTechnica quotes Greg Vederman, the editor of PC Gamer, who believes the way forward is a greater reliance on online delivery models like Steam.

Kotakuites, what do you think the way forward for copy protection is? Let us know in the comments.

Do copy protection firms encourage piracy? [Ars Technica]

As usual, there's a discussion of the most nefarious copy protection scheme of all — Starforce. One interesting thing is that Vederman mentions Starforce's recent 'contest' to prove that there are uninstall issues with the software. Winner netted $10,000. Sounds great, right? Surely a copy protection protocol so awful that thousands upon thousands of gaming forum posts have been written complaining about it would be easy to reproduce. Vederman claims that Starforce says no one could ever prove it.

Gee, that couldn't be because the contest required you to prove it in their corporate office, could it? A corporate office located in the cold winter heart of Moscow? You'd have to be a pretty staunch opponent of Starforce to lay down 2 grand on a flight to some Muscovite office complex just to lose a 10k bet on some dreamed up technicality.

Opinion: The Problem With Protection [Next-Gen]