master valve said: STOP PLAYING HL2 NOW!

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> They can't ban me as I do not have a Steam account. 🙂

I see. So - are you a filthy stinking retarded pirate or are you just
like the other anti-steamers and don't have a clue what you're talking
about?

> So tell us again how an E-mail address isn't personal info?

Because it doesn't contain any info about your person.
Nor is it "giving up anonymity".
Before you go "is too!", please detail what personal info, like for
instance my name or country of residence, you can glean from this real
& fully functioning email adress: steamy_info@linuxmail.org
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

WTF? Google censored the email? I'll try again: the fully functioning
email address is steamy_info@linuxmail.com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Perhaps google doesn't stop you from seeing the email, but in case it's
as dotted for you as it is for me reading from google: the dotted word
is "info".

I had no idea google censored email addresses. Interesting.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <1107882872.869507.11940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote:

>A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code.

Actually, if it could actually do that, wouldn't that be sufficient
protection?


>A million people could be using that same code and playing single-player
>with it.

Apparently, the same is so for Steam. Your point?


>Registering your key code centrally means that whenever you go online
>to play multiplayer or to download patches, only the original
>registrant can have access to the extra content. There is absolutely no
>point in duplicating the CD or the key code. Big stroke against piracy.

But we're not talking online multiplayer (nobody's talking about that).
Online validation for online multiplayer has been generally well-accepted.

There's absolutely no anti-piracy upside with Steam over the CD-check. Both
are easily cracked by pirates... and it's as simple, if not simpler, to
casually pirate. If you don't agree, please explain to me how it isn't, but
yet you can still freely reinstall and play offline.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <42093eb1@yorrell.saard.net>, GFree <nickt4001@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Don't be an idiot. Any smart person would have made backups of the Steam
>GCF files. After an install all you need to do is pop them back in their
>original place and they'll work, since they've already been activated
>and updates.

Perhaps you have the media and the time to backup a gigabyte's worth of game
content... again and again after each patch (if you're even aware that it's
been patched). Others don't.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>>Apart from our memory issues, you completely and utterly miss the point
>>that
>>we don't find the above "problems" serious enough to warrant missing out
>>on
>>a great gaming experience.
>
> Your complete lack of objectivity noted. That was not news.
>
> So, because you don't find them to be a problem for you personally,
> they shouldn't be to anyone? How stupid and arrogant is that?

About as arrogant as someone who has never played Half-Life 2 writing FAQ's
on Steam's distribution method ?

I believe there are many, many more users who would support the "just a
game" point of view than users like yourself, with a personal axe to grind
against Valve.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

GFree wrote:
> riku wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:20:39 +0100, Walter Mitty
>> <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> What IS his gripe with one time online validation?
>>
>>
>>
>> Someone blanked your memory recently, or are you once again just
>> acting stupid? Why do you act as if this hasn't been discussed million
>> times already?
>>
>> And it is not "one time online validation" either. You'd have to do it
>> again whenever you re-install Steam/HL2. You know, when people e.g.
>> re-install Windows, or upgrade their PC? Happens every now and then.
>>
>> But of course you wouldn't know that, since you are acting stupid
>> again.
>>
> Don't be an idiot. Any smart person would have made backups of the Steam
> GCF files. After an install all you need to do is pop them back in their
> original place and they'll work, since they've already been activated
> and updates.
>
> Do you really think you know better that others? Idiot.


riku is a real ass.

So, lets see what is easier - to enter a uid and pwd to re-enable via
steam or to enter a 40 character cd key that may or may not have been lost.

laughable.


--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/3tdeu
" Format wars could 'confuse users'"
http://www.tinyurl.com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Walter Mitty" wrote
> GFree wrote:
>> riku wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:20:39 +0100, Walter Mitty
>>> <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> What IS his gripe with one time online validation?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Someone blanked your memory recently, or are you once again just
>>> acting stupid? Why do you act as if this hasn't been discussed million
>>> times already?
>>>
>>> And it is not "one time online validation" either. You'd have to do it
>>> again whenever you re-install Steam/HL2. You know, when people e.g.
>>> re-install Windows, or upgrade their PC? Happens every now and then.
>>>
>>> But of course you wouldn't know that, since you are acting stupid
>>> again.
>>>
>> Don't be an idiot. Any smart person would have made backups of the Steam
>> GCF files. After an install all you need to do is pop them back in their
>> original place and they'll work, since they've already been activated and
>> updates.
>>
>> Do you really think you know better that others? Idiot.
>
>
> riku is a real ass.
>
> So, lets see what is easier - to enter a uid and pwd to re-enable via
> steam or to enter a 40 character cd key that may or may not have been
> lost.
>
> laughable.
>
Actually I have heard of some loosing/forgotten the uid/pwd for Steam

ROFL

- Peter
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
> "riku" wrote
>
>
>>But anyway, I admit there's a logical error there. Instead, maybe they
>>should keep the Steam-only version as the "authentication required"
>>version, and the retail version as the CD check version.
>>
>
> CD check has been removed due to bugs in securom code
>
>

A long time ago too. Riku is an ass.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

Kroagnon wrote:
>
> Good for Valve but far too draconian for the end user. You seem to be
> entirely missing customer goodwill in all of this.

What customer goodwill?

Are you bunching all customers together? I certainly dont mind doing a
one time only verification that my copy is legitimate and I don't see
why anyone else would either - unless they have something to hide.

You see, I'm not PC. I do think that a lot of you out there are
thieving, pirating lamers who don't want to buy a legitimate copy. Why
do I think this? Because every day of the week someone asks to borrow SW
from me and "burn it" - I always refuse.

Online verification helps - but since all SW can be cracked, only to a
degree.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:cud9n1$657$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
> In article <1107882872.869507.11940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code.
>
> Actually, if it could actually do that, wouldn't that be sufficient
> protection?
>
>
> >A million people could be using that same code and playing single-player
> >with it.
>
> Apparently, the same is so for Steam. Your point?
>
>
> >Registering your key code centrally means that whenever you go online
> >to play multiplayer or to download patches, only the original
> >registrant can have access to the extra content. There is absolutely no
> >point in duplicating the CD or the key code. Big stroke against piracy.
>
> But we're not talking online multiplayer (nobody's talking about that).
> Online validation for online multiplayer has been generally well-accepted.
>
> There's absolutely no anti-piracy upside with Steam over the CD-check.
Both
> are easily cracked by pirates... and it's as simple, if not simpler, to
> casually pirate. If you don't agree, please explain to me how it isn't,
but
> yet you can still freely reinstall and play offline.

Several people in here have claimed that the game has been
hacked/cracked/pirated.... and not that I doubt anything that's written in
this newsgroup, but has any of the major online websites validated this?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Jeff wrote:
> In article <42093eb1@yorrell.saard.net>, GFree <nickt4001@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>>Don't be an idiot. Any smart person would have made backups of the Steam
>>GCF files. After an install all you need to do is pop them back in their
>>original place and they'll work, since they've already been activated
>>and updates.
>
>
> Perhaps you have the media and the time to backup a gigabyte's worth of game
> content... again and again after each patch (if you're even aware that it's
> been patched). Others don't.

No, but I DO have two hard drives...

In case, let's assume you want to back up your games on the lowly CD-R.
About 6 discs maybe for all HL2-material (SDK, CS:S, HL:S if you've got
it)? The Steam backup utility can easily made the necessary files to
dump on those discs. And besides, you don't have to reburn after every
update. Updates can be quite small. It's the activation and massive
updates we want to avoid doing.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> Spake Unto All:

>A long time ago too. Riku is an ass.

Personally I think difool is riku's alter ego.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Jeff wrote:
> In article <1107882872.869507.11940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code.
>
> Actually, if it could actually do that, wouldn't that be sufficient
> protection?

Not really, becasue you would just duplicate the disc and CD-key and
distribute it and every single copy would work. Hardly a barrier to
piracy becasue you can also play multiplayer as well (on a first-come,
first-served basis becasue only one instance of the kcd-key can be
online at a time) and you can patch your game and get any additional
content you want. Your pirate copy is pretty much fully functional
(unless you're the second person to try to go online with that cd-key).



> >A million people could be using that same code and playing
single-player
> >with it.
>
> Apparently, the same is so for Steam. Your point?

Really? And there was me thinking you had to register the cd-key before
you could even install the game properly. If someone's already
registered that key, you're buggered - your pirated disc is worthless.


> >Registering your key code centrally means that whenever you go
online
> >to play multiplayer or to download patches, only the original
> >registrant can have access to the extra content. There is absolutely
no
> >point in duplicating the CD or the key code. Big stroke against
piracy.
>
> But we're not talking online multiplayer (nobody's talking about
that).
> Online validation for online multiplayer has been generally
well-accepted.

OK, ignore the bit about multiplayer. I was talking about the benefits
of registering your CD-key geenrally. But if we keep the discussion
centreed on single-player games, then online validation guards access
to patches and additional content for the single-player game.


> There's absolutely no anti-piracy upside with Steam over the
CD-check. Both
> are easily cracked by pirates... and it's as simple, if not simpler,
to
> casually pirate. If you don't agree, please explain to me how it
isn't, but
> yet you can still freely reinstall and play offline.

True, you can play single-player, but you can't patch it or download
any additional content like more maps.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

<mike_noren2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1107974760.211256.111180@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Too bad you can't continue this convo without your usual personal insults -
*PLONK*.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <420a96d5$1@yorrell.saard.net>, GFree <nickt4001@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>Jeff wrote:

>> Perhaps you have the media and the time to backup a gigabyte's worth of game
>> content... again and again after each patch (if you're even aware that it's
>> been patched). Others don't.
>
>No, but I DO have two hard drives...

Not particularly reassuring, since HD's are pretty notorious for failure.


>dump on those discs. And besides, you don't have to reburn after every
>update. Updates can be quite small.

Do you always know precisely what all's been patched by an update? If so,
that's a first. How do you know?


>It's the activation and massive
>updates we want to avoid doing.

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

In article <1108029572.312615.43530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, "Chadwick"
<chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Jeff wrote:
>> In article <1107882872.869507.11940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code.
>>
>> Actually, if it could actually do that, wouldn't that be sufficient
>> protection?
>
>Not really, becasue you would just duplicate the disc and CD-key and
>distribute it and every single copy would work. Hardly a barrier to
>piracy becasue you can also play multiplayer as well (on a first-come,
>first-served basis becasue only one instance of the kcd-key can be
>online at a time) and you can patch your game and get any additional
>content you want. Your pirate copy is pretty much fully functional
>(unless you're the second person to try to go online with that cd-key).

Like most people, I don't have the capability of copying copy-protected
CD's/DVD's. Perhaps there are tools one could hunt up just like anyone can
hunt up a Steam emulator, but then you're moving beyond mere "casual piracy."


>> >A million people could be using that same code and playing
>single-player
>> >with it.
>>
>> Apparently, the same is so for Steam. Your point?
>
>Really? And there was me thinking you had to register the cd-key before
>you could even install the game properly. If someone's already
>registered that key, you're buggered - your pirated disc is worthless.

I guess you've not heard about the Steam emulator.

But, if we're just talking "casual piracy" then...

"BligMerk" posted here a while back how he actually was able to install on one
machine and then transfer it over to a buddy's machine. Google up "Moving
HL2/Steam to another HD" if you're interested in what he had to say.

Also, if I can pass along the CD key, why can't I pass along an
account/password? Valve could close it down, but then how do they know that
it's not just me (the original purchaser) reinstalling my game on my laptop or
my new computer? As long as you're judicious about who you "lend" (wink,
wink) your copy to....


>OK, ignore the bit about multiplayer. I was talking about the benefits
>of registering your CD-key geenrally. But if we keep the discussion
>centreed on single-player games, then online validation guards access
>to patches and additional content for the single-player game.

Actually, it doesn't... at least not according to those who claim how easy it
is to back up these updates. As for additional content, same could be true
for those with a CD key... but then all it takes is someone with the key (or
an account/password) to download and distribute them to you.

Anyway, do you really think that the lack of either deters casual piracy as
long as one can still play the game?


>True, you can play single-player, but you can't patch it or download
>any additional content like more maps.

Are you truly certain of this?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> Spake Unto All:

>Too bad you can't continue this convo without your usual personal insults -
>*PLONK*.

Damn shame you didn't have time to tell me which of the two you were:
a filthy stinking pirate or one of the opinionated clueless.

Oh, but we all know which anyway, don't we?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:cugabr$isd$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...

> Like most people, I don't have the capability of copying copy-protected
> CD's/DVD's. Perhaps there are tools one could hunt up just like anyone
can
> hunt up a Steam emulator, but then you're moving beyond mere "casual
piracy."

Since when is making backups of your paid-for CDs/DVDs "piracy"?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <110pl3ejnb05kdc@news.supernews.com>, "Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote:
>
>"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
>news:cugabr$isd$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
>
>> Like most people, I don't have the capability of copying copy-protected
>> CD's/DVD's. Perhaps there are tools one could hunt up just like anyone
>can
>> hunt up a Steam emulator, but then you're moving beyond mere "casual
>piracy."
>
>Since when is making backups of your paid-for CDs/DVDs "piracy"?

Making backups of software is allowed under U.S. copyright laws, but
circumventing copyprotection schemes is not... so I'm not sure who's "legally"
right. I think the clause allowing backups of software was intended to allow
users to legally backup their hard disks, where it would be difficult to avoid
backing up copyrighted material entirely. There are no such clauses for
music/movie CDs/DVDs or books.

Personally, I've never been that worried about my CDs, as I've never had any
trouble taking care of them.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:cuqd3i$imp$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...

> Personally, I've never been that worried about my CDs, as I've never had
any
> trouble taking care of them.

As careful as I am, I've scratched originals to the point where they don't
work any more. I now back up *everything* I own. Blank media is too cheap to
not do it, IMO.

Waiting for a higher capacity DVD standard so I can archive them all and cut
down on the CD/DVD stacks. 😛
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in message
news:1111ikrtfmg2cc5@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
> news:cuqd3i$imp$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
>
> > Personally, I've never been that worried about my CDs, as I've never had
> any
> > trouble taking care of them.
>
> As careful as I am, I've scratched originals to the point where they don't
> work any more. I now back up *everything* I own. Blank media is too cheap
to
> not do it, IMO.
>
> Waiting for a higher capacity DVD standard so I can archive them all and
cut
> down on the CD/DVD stacks. 😛
>
>

Has anyone tried those new CD protective covers (forgot the name of these
covers)? They slip over the CD and while they allow the light to shine
thru, they're suppose to prevent scratches. The Screen Savers had them on
their show about 6 weeks ago I think. They took sandpaper to it, and the
CD still worked.

I just googled but too many hits... 🙁
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <1111ikrtfmg2cc5@news.supernews.com>, "Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote:
>
>"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
>news:cuqd3i$imp$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
>
>> Personally, I've never been that worried about my CDs, as I've never had
>any
>> trouble taking care of them.
>
>As careful as I am, I've scratched originals to the point where they don't
>work any more. I now back up *everything* I own. Blank media is too cheap to
>not do it, IMO.

A good 250 CD case (or two) is usually sufficient to keep your gaming CD's
from scratching... provided you don't set CDs down outside of taking them from
the case to the drive and back. I've never scratched a one.

Also, most publishers have a replacement policy if they do get damaged.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:custv5$ijk$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
> Also, most publishers have a replacement policy if they do get damaged.

That costs more than making a copy yourself not to mention having to pay a
fee and surrendering anonymity.