Customer Discussions > Fallout 3 (PC) forum

does Fallout 3 really have securom???


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-12 of 12 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 26 Oct 2008 18:45:20 GMT
Last edited by the author on 26 Oct 2008 18:51:57 GMT
B. C. Hughes says:
It seems we don't have direct confirmation of this yet I'll be very unhappy if does and will definitely be updating my review. If anyone gets direct confirmation that this does not contain "securom" ? if we can't find out before hand I'm sure reclaim your game will find out quickly

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Oct 2008 14:56:22 GMT
A. Gagliardi says:
It has been confirmed that the only form of DRM on the disk will be a simple DVD-Check. It will be identical to what they used with Oblivion. There will be NO SECUROM!

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Oct 2008 23:04:19 GMT
Last edited by the author on 27 Oct 2008 23:21:58 GMT
B. C. Hughes says:
yes but there is a lower version of securom that does a disk check. Which still leaves you with fact that it can't be uninstalled when you remove the game. Why should a game developer think they have the right to install something on your machine that cant be uninstalled with the game?, It's not their property to do that with after all. Don't get me wrong I'm not against games companies protecting the game but why with something that your stuck with for good?. How happy would they be if I walked into their offices to deliver food and then super glued myself to their floor? not very happy I'm sure so why do they think it's ok to do that to us?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Oct 2008 21:39:18 GMT
Last edited by the author on 28 Oct 2008 22:24:52 GMT
B. C. Hughes says:
Just canceled my perorder because it is confirmed this game contains securom if you look in Bethesda's forum they confirm it and many issues people are having issues even installing the game due to it.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Oct 2008 17:37:20 GMT
A. Gagliardi says:
The securom version is a simple dvd-check. Not exactly critical and no-where near as invasive as the newest version. This type of check has been in use for years upon years. Almost all games require you to have the CD/DVD in the drive when you play it. The software that performed the check was either Securom or SafeDisc. This does not limit your installs. It is only being made a big issue of because EA have treated the consumer like scum.

And with people having problem installing due to it, I have to admit I have never had any trouble installing any game on my pc. But then again, I know enough about PC's to keep it in good order. If the game won't install, it's more down to a dodgy DVD or your PC than the Securom.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Oct 2008 09:54:25 GMT
Fishman says:
Securom games have never given me any problems and I couldn't care less about it. At times Microsoft have updated your O/S even if you don't have automatic updates selected, so have you stopped using Windows as a result?

Many applications installed things without your knowledge and have done so for years, the level of paranoia over this game is astounding.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Oct 2008 13:23:50 GMT
have had no problems with any form of copy protection from any game on any of my pc's

the hysteria brewing over securom is a bit silly really.

also how many times do you really need to install a game?

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Oct 2008 13:25:18 GMT
here here

not just this game either, any game with securom is being blasted.

which is more down to mob hysteria than actual facts.

although i will be getting fallout 3 for the ps3.

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Nov 2008 05:56:25 GMT
Last edited by the author on 2 Nov 2008 06:03:24 GMT
D. Birkhead says:
"also how many times do you really need to install a game?"

Thats a good question but one you will get a very varied opinion to.
A lot of people probably never reinstall windows atall if they don't know too much about PCs and will probably not notice things like some versions of securom's limited installs catch.

However there are people who are technically minded, like me, an MCP who enjoy using our PCs for gaming aswell as work and personal use. A lot of us regularly back up our data, reformat and reinstall windows to keep our home PCs nice and smooth. Plus we upgrade components pretty often.
Now if securom decides it needs another activation just because my Hard Drive's serial number has changed as a result of a reformat thats 1 activation gone... And then wants another activation because i upgraded my CPU... Next i decide i want to reformat my PC again so i can partition it for a dual boot to try out some new operating system that i like. Whoops, thats my third activation gone... i decide i dont like that new operating system and want my old configuration back so i reformat again and have my whole hardrive as 1 partition running my favourite operating system...
Hold on whats this? No activations left? i paid 30 pounds for a game less than 3 months ago and now apparently im not entitled to play it... hmm, very fair...

This is why there is such a fuss over it. When people pay for the game they should have the right to install it on any machine that they own, as many times as they see fit without the inconvenience or invasion of privacy that securom is bringing to the table.
These games companies that say otherwise are just harming themselves and i can imagine them losing a lot of loyal customers and may even drive some desperate people to piracy. They can't be quite as dumb as they're starting to look surely... i mean who thinks these things up? It doesnt seem like they even realise that PCs don't stay identifyable as the same machine as easily as consoles do.

Some of these DRM implimentations even require an internet connection so it can authenticate every few weeks or so. And they all do to activate initially so you wont even get to play the game without an internet connection. Most shops these days also have a no returns policy on PC software once it has been opened for fear of it having been copied, so you cant even get your money back!
I know in this day and age most people have an internet connection but not everyone does, and what happens if your ISP loses their service or your modem becomes faulty and you need to go a week or 2 without a connection a day before the game does an authenticity check?

Its one thing for the software to do a disk check for authenticity, but installing unnecessery rubbish, taking up drive space, invading privacy and doing nothing to combat piracy in the process is completely uneccessary.
This DRM thing is getting seriously out of hand...

Ps. Sorry if this reads like a mindless rant but i've missed out on practically every PC game ive been looking forward to because of these things. I hope i will get to play some of them someday before they become the 'old school' of gaming lol, but i refuse to buy something that will render itself useless to me after a few months.

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Nov 2008 12:44:44 GMT
Last edited by the author on 2 Nov 2008 12:48:28 GMT
Random Task says:
"i refuse to buy something that will render itself useless to me after a few months."

This game does not have an activation limit, only a disk check. Yes it does use a version of Securom for the disk check, but not for anything else.

Here is a quote from Besthesda's blog for anyone unsure on the issue of DRM in Fallout 3:

"For Fallout 3's copy protection on PC, we use the same security model as we did for Oblivion - a simple disc check. We only use SecuRom's disc check functionality for copy protection. We do NOT limit the number of installs. We do NOT use online authentication or any other SecuROM functionality except for a disc check when you install the game and when you launch the game. We do not install any other programs and we don't have anything that runs in the background while you're playing the game.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Nov 2008 00:15:45 GMT
R. Thomas says:
What EA have done with their games with limited installs etc is appalling and I'm glad that Fallout 3 won't be restricted like that. What EA (and Ubisoft for that matter) have done doesn't really make sense to me. How does limiting the number of installs prevent piracy? Sure, have an online check at install, thats fine (well almost, still screws over poeple with no internet, or RESTRICTED internet, like people on university networks etc [like those in halls of residence]) but why limit the number of installs? Red Alert 3 for example has the install limit crap on it (didn't stop me buying it though), but the the serial number is also linked to your EA account (it uses the first one you use to sign in, so you'd better hope its not one of your mates or something), meaning only people using that account can use it. Would that (or something similar) not be enough? Apart from anything else, there was a crack available for Spore which got around the install limit on day 1, so all they've actually done is INCREASE piracy and DECREASE sales, as people refuse to give their money to EA.

I am personally more concerned about the installation of SecuRoms rootkit than the install limit. Thing is I doubt many people would have any moral objections to using a crack to extend the number of installs rather than calling up EAs premium rate customer service line. Heck, I'm sure a lot of people would probably just buy the game again if they had moral objections to cracking and really needed to play it that badly - it would probably cost about the same as the phone call by the time it came to that (for most people anyway) and you would get a guaranteed 5 extra installs (pfft 75p a minute, what a joke. They'd probably leave you on hold for about 10 minutes, so thats £7.50 already, without even getting to talk to anyone, and after all that its at the reps descression whether you get a single new activation or not).

I was thinking about it - maybe EA just wants to kill off pre-owned sales. That way anyone who buys the game has to buy it direct from them (well a retailer who has bought it off them) rather than from someone else, which looses them sales overall, even if its as a budget game. If they continue down this road then they could well do that.

Anyway, I rambled a bit there...the SecuRom on Fallout 3 is not for activation. In fact I don't even care if it installs the root-kit. Why? I bought and installed Crysis Warhead before I found out about the root-kit business so I'm stuck with it either way *sigh*. Oh well, I havn't noticed any adverse effects yet. In general though, why do they have to use SecuRom anyway? Surely they could have saved themselves a lot of greif and just made their own, less invasive system built into the game. Sure it would probably be easier to crack, but heck, its not like it stopped people with spore is it?

In reply to an earlier post on 15 Apr 2009 13:12:28 BDT
Spot on Mr Thomas,

Games developers will have to realise a few simple facts (and I think they are starting to)

* No matter what they do, someone will ALWAYS crack it and release a pirate copy
* Heavy DRM will only ever effect those who bought the game anyway
* Spore and Farcry proved that heavy DRM does adversly effects sales and increases piracy!

All this begs the question, why have DRM? Whats the point in it? It doesnt stop piracy in the slightest, it never has and I doubt ever will. It just puts off a lot of people who would of happily paid for the game, some will even then go as far as to pirate it to avoid the DRM. Spore being the prime example. Maybe Im stupid, but I just dont get it.

If anything, I would go the other way, relax it so much that encourages more people. If a pc gamer buys a game and finds its really good, theres a good chance they will want to play online with their friends. If he could legitimately share his disc with his friends to try the singleplayer or even a 'first few levels demo format' and then they could buy a licence code to unlock the game and play online then surely they have just converted 1 sale into several?! Is that not a good thing?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Fallout 3 (PC) forum
Participants:  8
Total posts:  12
Initial post:  26 Oct 2008
Latest post:  15 Apr 2009

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
Fallout 3 (PC)
Fallout 3 (PC) by Bethesda (Windows XP)
3.7 out of 5 stars   (155)