Spore Firestorm going on at Amazon

[~ParkerSims~]

Currently, as of this writing, there are 1,159 one star reviews on Spore. Most of them are slamming the DRM protection.

Spore at Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/Spore-Pc/dp/B000FKBCX4/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1220942445&sr=8-1)

The best review was this one, which was deleted just an hour ago by Amazon. It had, at time of deletion, 2,900+ helpful votes. It has been quoted in two news blogs that I know of before it was erased by Amazon.

Dumbed down experience and draconian DRM, September 7, 2008
By Erich Maria Remarque (Magnolia, Arkansas USA) - See all my reviews

Fun:
See these older 5-star reviews from 2006 (two years before the game was released)? Well, they had a reason to be excited. Spore was supposed to be a revolutionary experience, combining multiple genres while concentrating on evolution and genetics.

Fast forward two years and here we have the finished product, ready to be installed on our hard drives.

First of all, the game incorporates a draconian DRM system that requires you to activate over the internet, and limits you to a grand total of 3 activations. If you reach that limit, then you'll have to call EA in order to add one extra activation. That's not as simple as it sounds, since when you reach that point EA will assume that you, the paying customer, are a filthy pirating thief. You will need to provide proof of purchase, reasons why the limit was reached, etc, etc (it has all happened before with another recent EA product, Mass Effect). EA, of course, is not obligated to grant you that extra activation or even provide that service. In a couple of years they might very well even shut down the general activation servers, because "it's not financially feasible" to keep them running. What you will be left with is a nice, colorful $50 coaster. And you will be required to pay for another copy/license if you want to continue playing.

This basically means that you are actually RENTING the game, instead of owning it. The game WILL stop to function in the future. That's inevitable, because even if EA keeps the activation servers going, there IS going to be a time when EA will simply cease to exist because of financial issues or federal laws (like most business eventually do).

Second, the game was dumbed down to oblivion. Evolution doesn't even matter anymore. You can add as many legs to a creature as you want, but it won't be any faster than a one legged creature with higher leg stats. "Creating" your creatures is pointless (cosmetic only, because everything is based on stats), and brings you about the same excitement as dressing up a plastic doll.

Here are some news on this phenomenon:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080908-gamers-fight-back-against-lackluster-spore-gameplay-bad-drm.html

http://news.filefront.com/gamers-go-all-cooper-lawrence-on-spores-amazoncom-listing/

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2329934,00.asp

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/09/07/amazon-reviewers-clo.html

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169804

[miss_name_hater_SC]

1,210 now!

Shame on amazon for censoring well-written, informative reviews like that one. Especially when it talks about the game itself and not just the DRM issues. I wonder if this will have an effect on sales? I also wonder where all these people are coming from. Surely it's not a spontaneous outburst?

[HystericalParoxysm]

It's being orchaestrated by several sites and the more publicity it's given with news articles, the more people are jumping on board.

Honestly, if I were to post an Amazon review on it, it wouldn't be so much focusing on the DRM stuff as the fact that it just feels... extremely shallow, unfinished, and some of the stages (like tribal) are downright childish and boring. As soon as you get comfortable with whichever stage and are looking for more complexity, it throws you into the next stage which is completely different. I need to explore the space stage more, but you can just feel the game straining to be fun against its utter lack of depth. I'm sure expansion packs will correct this - but we shouldn't have to pay for half a dozen expansions to get the game it should have been in the first place.

[Delphy]

You know, the weird thing is that when I installed my copy of Spore, I didn't have to "activate" anything. Heck, I had to play it in Offline mode for days till they fixed the EU logins.

I fail to see what people are getting up in arms about, quite frankly. Of course, if they actually reviewed based on it's shallow gameplay, thats one thing... but this is just silly.

[1306]

DRM? I'm a little slow today, but this is like a SecuROM thing, is it?

And there are a few (and I reiterate A FEW) reviews about its shallow gameplay. Now I know that I'm not getting it--well one, it's too simple for a game, and two--DRM.

(Just a afterthought, but I don't think I've seen a single review without the mention of DRM.)

[HystericalParoxysm]

Digital Rights Management. You most often hear the term with things like MP3 downloads, but it can apply to a lot more than that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management

The DRM they're referring to in Spore is the three activations thing: you can install the game three times. After that, if you need to reinstall it, move it to another computer, whatever, you have to contact EA to get another activation - and presumably, somehow find the receipt that you got for it months or even years ago, and prove that you own the original copy.

It's upsetting to people because it means that pirating the game actually makes for a better experience than buying it - if you pirate it, there's no DRM to worry about. You can't use the online modes, but they're of limited usefulness since you can just go to the website and get basically the same things. So people are understandably annoyed that a company is making it so it's actually -better- to pirate a game than to buy it.

[chyrun]

Wow, was it really posted by Remarque? The Remarque. Isn't the guy like...dead?
Ok, off topic I know.

[1306]

I heard about this three-install limit last on Apartment Life. I think EAxis isn't thinking too straight with this. And there was this thing about the game being leaked four days before the actual date of release. So what's the use--they're just making other people turn to dirty tricks to get what they want (And what better way to show the wrongs of piracy by encouraging piracy). As I stated before, apart from the shallow gameplay, this DRM thing is the reason I'm not getting it.

Next thing you know, other gaming companies might practice this DRM nonsense.

[miss_name_hater_SC]

The DRM they're referring to in Spore is the three activations thing: you can install the game three times. After that, if you need to reinstall it, move it to another computer, whatever, you have to contact EA to get another activation - and presumably, somehow find the receipt that you got for it months or even years ago, and prove that you own the original copy.

I read that they've changed it to 10 installs, which frankly still isn't good enough.

[1306]

3, 10, 20, whatever--an install limit sucks. I wish they'd just remove it and end this turmoil.

[kinneer_SC]

Is it really that bad? Three activation? So even if I uninstall, that would not return one of the install back? This sounds like the old arcade games when you only have three lives to play. What was EA thinking when they did this?

I was not sure about getting this game initially because of the DRM. But after hearing about the bad gameplay and DRM, I will give it a miss.

EA`s new motto should be, Everyone is a pirate unless proven otherwise.

[HystericalParoxysm]

kinneer - It does not give back an install when you uninstall.

And I don't know where you read it was 10, miss_name_hater, but everything I've ever seen says 3. Got a source?

[linuslover30]

Next thing you know, other gaming companies might practice this DRM nonsense.

I believe other gaming companies have been using (recently/future releases) a similar design of DRM (from what I have read)

[~ParkerSims~]

Amazon reinstated the removed profile this morning. So they are not cowering and hiding feedback. Awesome.

[linuslover30]

Amazon reinstated the removed profile this morning. So they are not cowering and hiding feedback. Awesome.

I would imagine they would do this.....(reinstated the removed profile), but to be honest I don't think it will do a whole lot of damage. A lot of people did know about the DRM on this game before it came out and still purchased (as I did). I believe it's a sign of the times....it may change, but if it doesn't people will still go ahead and buy anyway.

[kinneer_SC]

kinneer - It does not give back an install when you uninstall.


Now that is just moronic. The DRM in BioShock, I think, was bad enough but at least, supposely, return an install for each uninstall. It did not work perfectly but that was the intention I think.

What will EA do next? Self destruct discs after one install? EULA always state that I am not buying a game, I am just buying the license to play the game. If they add something that would stop me from playing, would that be a violation of the agreement? Can I take EA to court for the violation?

[FurryPanda]

Now that is just moronic. The DRM in BioShock, I think, was bad enough but at least, supposely, return an install for each uninstall. It did not work perfectly but that was the intention I think.

What will EA do next? Self destruct discs after one install? EULA always state that I am not buying a game, I am just buying the license to play the game. If they add something that would stop me from playing, would that be a violation of the agreement? Can I take EA to court for the violation?

You could... in the US you can sue for anything (god bless america), and if you can cite the passage in the EULA and find another court precedent (there are none that I know of, all the ones I'm familiar with were in favor of the corporation, but my area of interest is traffic law) then you could defintiely go civil for breach of contract. (god bless america)
And you could probably (easily) get it to class action phase by posting liberally on places up in arms about the DRM. But finding a lawyer willing to take what is, ultimately, a nerd-boy case, and who is good enough to have a snowball's chance in heck of winning against a multinational mutli million dollar company? Not likely.

Though if you did, the bad press would fix the game. Just whoever starts the process would be out a crapload of lawyer fees. The game would have the limit removed though, probably. Being sued by a well organized entity (the gaming community) is always bad for corporations.

I still wouldn't recommend it, and thats even with only a elementary knowledge of the legal system.

[HystericalParoxysm]

lol... suing EA... yeah, unless you have unlimited funds available and really LIKE losing...

[MaryH]

Actually, the real organization to take on EA would be the FTC to take them to task over the SecuRom. They could (with enough input from customers about how it broke their computer) slap an injunction on them and a fine so big they'd regret ever having heard of SecuRom.
Remember, the FTC took on Sony and won, during the music DRM debacle. Sony ended up refunding thousands of dollars and recalling CD's that had any kind of DRM on them.
It's too bad EA and Sony are in league together for this one-eventually it will led to the ending I've suggested above-and EA will pay a lot of money to settle it.
The biggest problem is to get the attention of the government to do anything about it.

[coltraz]

I knew it was being orchestrated by groups online. They were just too into saying the same things! It's like the "vote for the worst" mentality. heh

[contessa]

I was looking forward to this, but I'm not going to get it. It's a shame when the pirated version is actually the safer version. Three installs? You're basically renting it. I'd like to ask the simmers here how many times have they've reinstalled their game? I think I've already installed sims three times. Twice on my old computer and once on this one. Maybe more. And I'm no where near done playing it so chances are I'll probably have to install again when something that I just "have to have" borks my game.

[miss_name_hater_SC]

And I don't know where you read it was 10, miss_name_hater, but everything I've ever seen says 3. Got a source?

Erm I don't know where I read it initially and a google search doesn't bring up much, so I'm probably mistaken. Google did bring up this from amazon though:

http://www.amazon.com/FUTURE-GAMING-READING-GOOD-BOOKS/forum/Fx33E4EB7NJXA02/Tx34N7VNBUDMQRR/1?_encoding=UTF8&asin=B000FKBCX4

Well the backlash moved us to a one time activation and 10 installs on new hardware

[LadyAngua]

I was a bit wary when the creature creator wouldn't start sometimes unless I was online; all this plus the $90 price tag (Australia) means I say no thanks to Spore. Pity because the creature creator is my four year old favorite game.
Another point if Sims1 had this security would I still be able to use it? As Maxis is no more.

[kattenijin]

Well, it appears that the DRM isn't the only firestorm brewing. At the "Sporum" there's a thread about the "one registration" vs. "you may have multiple Spore accounts for each intsalation of the game". Supposedly the multiple accounts is a typo that will be fixed in the next run of manuals. There are a lot of people upset because each member of a family that wants to play has to have their own copy of the game installed on their own computer.

[~ParkerSims~]

Amazon caved and deleted ALL reviews, positive and negative.

[sim-potato-711_SC]

This is craziness. If you buy, say, an iPod, Apple makes you sign a contract saying only three people can ever listen to it (haha I wouldn't be surprised if they considered this!), isn't that a MAJOR limitation to your freedom as someone who PAID for something? Not to mention impractical and annoying? Yeah.

When I buy something, I like for it to be MINE, for ME to use and manipulate and mess (and just plain USE) around with as much as I darn well please! Besides all the physical problems that come with a 3-install limit (having to re-install a game after a crash, switching computers, installing it simultaneously on another computer in your house, etc.), it's also just a way for these corporations to own their material, even after you pay them money for it.

The problem is, stupid consumers are willing to pay anyway, completely enabling this injustice. Same with encrypted iTunes songs, same with Microsoft Office, same with EA's new games. We really really want this things, apparently so much so that we are willing to "rent" them for the same price as what five years ago meant we outright owned them.

Not to mention that games like the Sims and Spore are terrible games to restrict installs. They crash and corrupt much more frequently than a song file or Windows program, which means all 3 installs can be used up on maintenance alone.

Okay, enough said. I'm boycotting all DRM-restricted games. Not being able to play a game is a small price to pay for sacrificing my right to own things outright. :eviltongu

[kattenijin]

So, the pirated versions of the game are over 500,000 copies. I'm wondering if the high amount of torenting is mainly people who for whatever reason want the game, or if it's being "helped" along by the same kind of orchestrated attack the DRM got. I do know of at least one person who is doing so, she's been downloading copies at an average of 6 per day, just to run up the total.

[Delphy]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080916-ars-puts-spore-drm-to-the-testwith-a-surprising-result.html

Interesting read. I know I've certainly not had any issues whatsoever with the DRM issue myself.

Also, Sim-potato, you realise that if you are using Windows, you dont own that, right? You are only licensing it from Microsoft :)

[kennyinbmore]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080916-ars-puts-spore-drm-to-the-testwith-a-surprising-result.html

Interesting read. I know I've certainly not had any issues whatsoever with the DRM issue myself.

Also, Sim-potato, you realise that if you are using Windows, you dont own that, right? You are only licensing it from Microsoft :)

I own my copy of Windows ;)

[HystericalParoxysm]

No, you own a license for it - you never own software, only your hard copy of the disk and the license to use it.

[kennyinbmore]

No, you own a license for it - you never own software, only your hard copy of the disk and the license to use it.
That's what you think

[simsonthemac]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080916-ars-puts-spore-drm-to-the-testwith-a-surprising-result.html

Interesting read. I know I've certainly not had any issues whatsoever with the DRM issue myself.

Also, Sim-potato, you realise that if you are using Windows, you dont own that, right? You are only licensing it from Microsoft :)

Well then I must own OS X Leopard since it does not require an install key?

[Delphy]

Just becuase something doesn't require a install key doesn't mean you "own" it. :) Even OS X is licensed just like Windows.

[HystericalParoxysm]

That's what you think

That's what I think because it's -true-. You don't -own- most software. You own whatever license you are given to use it. You purchase -usage-. You do not purchase the software itself. It's a small distinction but it is different - and it's what allows companies such as EAxis and others to do things like DRM to their products - you use it under their terms. It's still theirs - all you've bought is usage under those terms.

Even if you pirate it, you still don't own it any more than someone who photocopies a whole textbook owns that textbook. Hell, if you pirate it, you own it even less than someone who bought a usage license - they at least own usage rights. Pirates own nothing.

[Lemon&Lime]

The spore situation was just as bad over here with the UK version of amazon. Amazon kept periodically deleting all reviews, and several discussions were set up relating to Spore, in which people had posted formal letters of complaint, openly accused Amazon of censoring because EA asked them to (when people mentioned DRM, etc). Some people have even contacted the BBC and the Office of Fair Trading (to complain about amazon doing this) over here in the UK.

It has 313 views as I post, and 223 of those are 1 star. However, I'm pleased to report that Amazon is now publishing reviews like...

I wouldn't recommend anyone buys this until the stupid and unfair DRM system that everyone here is justly complaining about is removed.

Pirates get to play this game without any of the DRM nonsense, whereas honest people who PAY EA for a game have to put up with this DRM rubbish - effectively renting the game with no guarantee that the "authorisation server" will be around next time we play.

Why are EA punishing the LEGITIMATE, PAYING user?

Don't give them your money until this stupid DRM issue is removed.

So amazon has stopped censoring for now. However there might be another purge.

Edit: Just to add, Amazon have reduced the price of Spore to a ridiculously low level. It's RRP in the UK is £39.99 and amazon have reduced the price by £13.00 - it's now only £26.98 - almost the same price as the Sims 2 double deluxe pack.

[kennyinbmore]

no price drop here in the US. There are used copies on amazon for $36.00 though

[Kissamies]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080916-ars-puts-spore-drm-to-the-testwith-a-surprising-result.html

Interesting read. I know I've certainly not had any issues whatsoever with the DRM issue myself.
Unlikely that there'll be much issues now, but how about few years into future when more people run into the install limit and EA is less enthusiastic about supporting an old game? Well, maybe Spore will be kept afloat with all the expansions, but how about some less "important" game if EA starts using this stuff on every game it publishes? I'd be happier if this install limit stuff was for the first year only with a promise of a patch that will get rid of it later on when the game is past its sales peaks.

[Simsane]

I don't know if someone else has already posted this, but a class action lawsuit has been filed against EA. Here's a couple of links to read about it on the bbs:

http://bbs.thesims2.ea.com/community/bbs/messages.php?&openItemID=&threadID=12ba24691c1f1338ac5d8f3f1db68385&directoryID=2&startRow=1#2a65741a010e018a8030bc543cf6e14f

and this one:

http://bbs.thesims2.ea.com/community/bbs/messages.php?&openItemID=&threadID=ae5e59eb1ac3c40166c589e13f28484a&directoryID=21&startRow=1#11cabe9cac48060133358d3a358a6aaa

And just in case EA deletes those threads:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6198136.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1

Just thought people might be interested in reading about it.

[kinneer_SC]

no price drop here in the US. There are used copies on amazon for $36.00 though

Ah, but with at least 1 install unavailable, would they sell? There was a comment that the reduce limit was more aimed at the second hand market rather than the privates. Certainly having an install limit would make people, who are aware of the issue, less likely to purchase a second hand copy since it may only have 1 install left.

[Soeverein]

That's what I think because it's -true-. You don't -own- most software. You own whatever license you are given to use it. You purchase -usage-. You do not purchase the software itself.

I'm glad that legal stupidity is not valid world-wide.

For ages (until Apple succesfully lobbied against it when they started iTunes Store here) DRM was even completely illegal here.

These days the law is still clear that even if DRM is legal now, a consumer cannot be punished for breaking DRM. Given that DRM stops them from using the files by their full ownership rights.

Whatever license or EULA is included with the software is completely invalid, since you cannot read the EULA until AFTER you have paid for the software and placed the disk in your computer.

If they want to enforce their EULA license as a legal document, they will have to show the license before you pay for the software.

And YES. Under pressure of (mostly) Yank lobbyists, I fear this law will also change in the future. But for now at least I can legally crack and hack all I want as long as those publishers keep shoving their Digital Restrictions Management down my throat.

[kennyinbmore]

I don't know if someone else has already posted this, but a class action lawsuit has been filed against EA. Here's a couple of links to read about it on the bbs:

http://bbs.thesims2.ea.com/community/bbs/messages.php?&openItemID=&threadID=12ba24691c1f1338ac5d8f3f1db68385&directoryID=2&startRow=1#2a65741a010e018a8030bc543cf6e14f

and this one:

http://bbs.thesims2.ea.com/community/bbs/messages.php?&openItemID=&threadID=ae5e59eb1ac3c40166c589e13f28484a&directoryID=21&startRow=1#11cabe9cac48060133358d3a358a6aaa

And just in case EA deletes those threads:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6198136.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1

Just thought people might be interested in reading about it.

That lawsuit won't go anywhere

[Lemon&Lime]

EA have changed the amount of installs from 3 to 5 to try and compromise. Although I don't think it'll make its critics happier.