Ban hits Half-Life 2 pirates hard

Take that you f**king piraters

Yea I saw this a while ago..... Its good thing to. Damn piraters need to get a life and buy it instead of yea....

Alright!!

hmmm wonder if any of our local drama queens got banned? :wink:

borrowing the game is one thing, i have no issues at all with it, but to cry about losing the ability to use it?? s**t its not yours, why cry?

i think its more funny than shameful personally... i actually think some of these dweebs feel cheated. :rolleyes:

They do Orph. After all, they spent all that time and effort at going to BitTorrent to download the file.. Or go on KaZaA and Limewire. I mean, all that effort. Gone to waste

/sarcazim

Steam is good at catching pirates that's for sure. But the VAC system is really going to limit creativity within the game. Mark my words, every other game maker in the industry will have thier own "steam-like" systems out soon. Not only is steam VERY much like spyware, it also uses up quite a chunk of system resources on some systems. Steam is the beginning of the end of gaming if this trend catches on. before you know it steam will have a surprise feature for us: "BUILT-IN ADS TAILORED TO YOUR PERSONAL INTERESTS!" :rolleyes: I hope HL2 gets a Dm feature soon too... :cool:

You bring up a very good point Nickelplate.

Well either way im just glad that all those stupid clowns didnt get what they wanted. thinks evil thoughts

Wildcard said:
You bring up a very good point Nickelplate.

No, he has a tumor and I possibly have one too after reading his barley
legable post. Steam is not spyware, it is a great way for Valve to
punch money-greedy publishers like VU and EA in the balls and then jump
up and down on their livers. Steam can transfer games, patches,
security fixes, and client updates instantly therefore keeping people
from hacking games easier.

Steam uses up Resources, yes, but not so much that you can't play. It
won't have spyware because they are Valves servers running Steam, and
besides, why the f**k would they have spyware...Its a mass-transit
system for game updates, not a f**king website.

Wildcard said:
You bring up a very good point Nickelplate.

No, he has a tumor and I possibly have one too after reading his barley
legable post. Steam is not spyware, it is a great way for Valve to
punch money-greedy publishers like VU and EA in the balls and then jump
up and down on their livers. Steam can transfer games, patches,
security fixes, and client updates instantly therefore keeping people
from hacking games easier.

Steam uses up Resources, yes, but not so much that you can't play. It
won't have spyware because they are Valves servers running Steam, and
besides, why the f**k would they have spyware...Its a mass-transit
system for game updates, not a f**king website.

my older machine, which ran HL/CS etc perfectly fine before, even with
XP struggles heavily with Steam running in the background.

yes, for newer machines (we cant all afford them, tax is more important
sadly!) it isnt an issue, but i know lots of old players who played
solely half-life and have had their gaming experience soured by steams
ability to eat PC power as if it were going out of fashion.

the hl2 gold is also a complete bloody rip off :razz: steam is essentially
a means to an end for valve to get their mits over all HL related
content and vacuum up anything worthwhile the community makes.

for what it is (i think its a nice system as it goes, just badly coded)

• it doesn't need to use all those resources. xfire etc do this kind of

thing so much better than steam.

also friends NEVER works properly. what an absolute farce.

Vash, they are already putting ads IN GAMES, what makes you think they wouldn't use adware/spyware to distribute games?

If it does come to that at some point... I'll start downloading hacked versions...

The good thing about Steam is that it allows self-distribution by the developer, so they are not being controlled by the publisher- not rushed to put the game out before it's ready, dumb it down, etc. So, this -might- be a good thing, too.

Guess we'll see.

Dances Go valve.....its your birthday

Steam is good at catching pirates that's for sure. But the VAC
system is really going to limit creativity within the game.

Yes, damn Valve's anti-cheating system for limiting creativity within
games. The only creativity it will be stopping will be developing
hacks.

Mark my
words, every other game maker in the industry will have thier own
"steam-like" systems out soon.

What's wrong with this? I honestly don't see the problem in having more
than one app like Steam on my system. It's not as if you need them all open at the same time. Soon enough,
the internet will become a neccessary part of life, and I certainly
don't mind if developers want to distribute games over it. Besides,
it's possible that someone will develop a third-party system that
tailors to all these developer's content delivery systems, so those who
don't like having more than one app on their system can bloody shut up.
To me, it's no different to having more than one game installed on my
system. The only difference is that you need a 'net connection, which
like I said, within a few years will become a neccessary part of life.

Not only is steam VERY much like
spyware

Where the hell did you pull that one from? The only similarity is that
it connects to the internet. It doesn't take personal information from
your system and stick it on a database without your approval.

it also uses up quite a chunk of system resources on some
systems.

Yes, but this doesn't effect the games available on Steam, because they
have been tweaked and tested to run well with Steam running in the
background. And if it slows your computer down, then you need an
upgrade buddy, your machine must be behind the times (or not taken care
of very well).

Steam is the beginning of the end of gaming if this trend
catches on.

Oh please, how is it the beginning of the end of gaming?

before you know it steam will have a surprise feature
for us: "BUILT-IN ADS TAILORED TO YOUR PERSONAL INTERESTS!" :rolleyes:

Well that's just paranoia talking buddy. :smile:
You shouldn't really be bashing a system for something it hasn't even
attempted to do yet. The only ads on Steam are the ones from people who
sponsor the content servers, and they only appear on the monitor screen.

Not to mention you can turn the ads that come up off.

I could have sworn Valve was talking to other game developers about using steam as distribution. Maybe I misunderstood what they were saying.

But, I think, if Internet connections were cheaper it'd be WAY better.

It'd be pretty cool if, eventually, there was one integrated system (like XFire and Steam combined) that allowed you to load any of your games (with no trouble) and didn't necessarily require you to be constantly connected to the net. It would distribute patches, whatever, when they're released.

Something else I think would be good would be in this list of games (which you can define from distribution rosters) games that are on that list that you don't own, you can load a demo of and play it. However, don't think they should abandon Retail packages, this system should be IN ADDITION and Alternative (in some cases) to retail. It'd be nice if the retail copies had extras and features, maybe even tutorials. (Taking that a retail copy will always cost more then a pure internet copy)

But, maybe I'm dreaming ...

...and also make steam work properly for non broadband users. Dont
expect us to be able to download hundreds of megabytes whenever VALVe
feel like it.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Crono</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>I could have sworn Valve was talking to other game developers about using steam as distribution. Maybe I misunderstood what they were saying.
</DIV></DIV>

no, i think you're right Crono. they seemed very keen on getting other developers to look at steam as a distribution platform. when steam was still in early beta, most of the info on the site was aimed at getting developers, not only from the gaming industry, in on this wonderfull new delivery concept.
well, it was them that said it that way. :smile:

If you read valves privacy policy, you'll note that they do actually collect user information.

http://www.valvesoftware.com/privacy.htm

If you read valves privacy policy, you'll note that they do actually collect user information.

http://www.valvesoftware.com/privacy.htm

Yeah, but if you read, it's nothing serious. I can't really see that
information used in anything but market surveys. And if you don't want
to, it says you don't have to share the more personal info. Plus, you
have to agree to this before actually making an account, and it also
says that valve would make you aware of what they're sharing, so it's
not as if it's spyware. :smile: I'm sure Valve wouldn't want to piss off the
community even more by sharing critical info with other people.

I gained a lot of respect for Steam after I heard Newell say this in one of his speech's:

Gabe Newell said:
With Steam, game developers will make thirty dollars
a game rather than making six dollars for every sold copy, and having
the publisher take the rest.

This'll mean companies will start taking risks because their other,
more popular games, will have given them more funding to take risks
rather than most developers who just stick to the old formula. This
will also open up a new genre and usher in games that you wouldn't ever
see because publishers think they 'wont sell too good'.

People laughed at Valve when they brought the idea for Half-Life to publishers...Who's laugh'n now bitch?

If you read valves privacy policy, you'll note that they do actually collect user information.

http://www.valvesoftware.com/privacy.htm

Yeah, but if you read, it's nothing serious. I can't really see that
information used in anything but market surveys. And if you don't want
to, it says you don't have to share the more personal info. Plus, you
have to agree to this before actually making an account, and it also
says that valve would make you aware of what they're sharing, so it's
not as if it's spyware. :smile: I'm sure Valve wouldn't want to piss off the
community even more by sharing critical info with other people.

You do realise that most of the "evil" spyware comes with the same
legalese, don't you? 9 times out of 10, when Joe Newbie hits the "Next"
button on the installer, he's agreeing to installing the spyware :smile: .

Most spyware I get ends up on my computer for no apparent reason. I
visited halflife2.net the other day, I got loads of spyware and trojans
from their adverts. Thankfully they took them down. but this is Valve,
I remember Gabe said that they don't want to screw their customers over
with Steam, so surely the idea of it being some sort of evil spyware app is just blatant
paranoia.

Most spyware I get ends up on my computer for no apparent reason. I
visited halflife2.net the other day, I got loads of spyware and trojans
from their adverts. Thankfully they took them down. but this is Valve,
I remember Gabe said that they don't want to screw their customers over
with Steam, so surely the idea of it being some sort of evil spyware app is just blatant
paranoia.

You using forefox?

Yes, I'm using Firefox. It happened a while back, it was to do with the
side-bar adverts they were putting up in the forums. They took them
down almost instantly.

Most spyware I get ends up on my computer for no apparent reason. I
visited halflife2.net the other day, I got loads of spyware and trojans
from their adverts. Thankfully they took them down. but this is Valve,
I remember Gabe said that they don't want to screw their customers over
with Steam, so surely the idea of it being some sort of evil spyware app is just blatant
paranoia.

http://www.gator.com/help/app_ps_v60.html

Everyones favourite friendly Gator. I can see a few similarities in the
privacy policies, but it's probably my prejudice showing.

I know that Steam isn't spyware so far. But just the fact that it wont
work without broadband (or rather, uncapped downloads) pisses me off to
no end. Why would valve insist on it? I still don't understand. Most of
the anti piracy techniques they use will work JUST AS WELL without
Steam, all they require is authentication with a central server. Why not let people download
stuff separately? Why do they want to control everything about the game?

well, steam on my system doesnt hog resources, it runs processor
intensive games like unreal 2 and ut2003 in high-ish detail with NO gfx
lag

and im just thinking in my head "Owned" when anyone tries to pirate hl2 or hl1

and adverts wont be coming soon, look at it this way, youve payed good
money for their kickass games, so why the hell would they throw adverts
at us? that will encourage hacked steam versions, which is bad.

and VAC limiting creativity, pfft, the SDK is already more extensive
than what most games give you, look at halo, SDK released over a year
later after the game, thats what makes half life and half life 2 so
popular except the excellent gameplay and storyline, its
modability, in fact HL2 will increase modability rather than restrict it.

It's the beginning of a revolution, whether you agree with the philosophy behind Steam-like websites or not. Software piracy (esp. for games) has gotten completely out of hand. Considering how much money the company makes for each game (and how much time and money they invest into designing each game), the price they ask for is not really exorbitant.

Just look at the movie industry. Charging $8-$12 per movie at the theater is quite expensive. Compared to games, it only provides about two hours of entertainment (versus thirty to fifty hours from a game). Relatively speaking, the games are a great deal (more bang for your buck).

And yet, rampant piracy cuts into the profit and financial backing of these game developers. This not only risk the quality of future game development, but threatens the viability of the industry as a whole. All this is important, but I haven't even mentioned the ethics of piracy. Why would anyone feel justified to use pirated software when the same individuals would feel uncomfortable if they were driving an automobile that's know to be stolen?

I am all for Steam. I know it's a s**tload of hassle, but it only became necessary after the masses have abused the system.

i'll admit that in the past, if i've been interested in a game and i can't get hold of a legit copy to have a go at it, i've dl'd pirated copies. if i liked, i bought. if it gets to the point that these 'evaluation copies' aren't available, then i'll buy fewer games. simple as that.

maybe some people can take a chance that their ?40 won't get them a pig in a poke, but not me.

Why would anyone feel justified to use pirated software when
the same individuals would feel uncomfortable if they were driving an
automobile that's know to be stolen?

I'm not justifying it, but driving a stolen car is a poor comparison to
playing a pirated game. A stolen car is a physical thing which belongs
to someone else, whereas a pirated game is merely a duplication. Owning
a pirated game doesn't actually hurt anyone directly, especially if you
never intended playing the game in the first place. Secondly, people
percieve themselves to be somewhat invunerable over the internet,
despite how easy it is to actually trace them. The repercussions are
also far greater for getting caught driving a stolen car. Getting your
steam account banned is nowhere near as severe as getting incarcerated,
although the people crying on the steam forums might convince you
otherwise.

using a copied game doesn't take money out of anyones hands, it just doesn't put any in them either. thats the complaint.

i have worked mid to upper level management most all my life\. i hate the mindset of "we are losing money", its usually they have their sights set so high that its not realistically possible to achieve.

i was in meetings, they would be discussing the years forecast profits in say January.. they projected 1.5 million, but by years end after all the bills were paid they only made 1.3 million.. i heard crying to no end about losing 200,000 dollars. they didn't lose a damned thing, they made 1.3 million after all debts were paid off :sad:

same is true about game copying, they are losing money??? nope. they are just not making it is all. i reflect fishy's sentiments.. i am not willing to fork over 50 bucks each time on a chance it will be good.

now, if they lowered it to a realistic number say 20 bucks i might give up borrowing all together, cause its a pain sometimes, and i may want the game NOW!! and buy it at 20 bucks.

borrowed games harm no one, and anyone who thinks so is... well their thinking really needs looked into.

/ 2 cents.

i'll admit that in the past, if i've been interested in a
game and i can't get hold of a legit copy to have a go at it, i've dl'd
pirated copies. if i liked, i bought. if it gets to the point that
these 'evaluation copies' aren't available, then i'll buy fewer games.
simple as that.

maybe some people can take a chance that their ?40 won't get them a pig in a poke, but not me.

thats why i dont have a console or console games, they are overpriced bits of rubbish.

I think it only feels like a victimless crime when softwares are pirated. Most obviously, it makes all of the legitimate users who bought the game pay a higher price to compensate for the company's loss from piracy.

Wouldn't be nice if the cost of games were 30-40% lower in a world when piracy is completely controlled? That way, we wouldn't be paying for someone else's wrongdoing.

If the analogy if a stolen vehicle isn't "relevant" for some, what about journalistic plagerism or copyright infringement? For most cases, it's just a "copy" that's being distributed, not a physical property. But I would think that most people would readily agree that it's wrong because the society has gotten used to the sanctity of the written words.

Not the case for the software industry. In fact, the rampant looting of software has made the general public accept piracy as part of normal and acceptable behavior. But under close observation, it's just as wrong as stealing idea from a writer and claiming it as your own.

...and I agree that no one should just pay $50 for some rubbish, but that's why we have these forums and game reviews (plus a bunch of friends who might've gotten the game already) who we can trust to give us a good idea whether it's worth our moey for a particular game.

I am very selective when it comes to purchasing games, so when I finally put in the investment, it's usually done only after careful research.

The only regret was "Riven". It's such a waste of money.

<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting satchmo</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>

Wouldn't be nice if the cost of games were 30-40% lower in a world when piracy is completely controlled? That way, we wouldn't be paying for someone else's wrongdoing.

</DIV>

I have been in meetings where the big minds are, and there just is no way you are going to convince me that in a perfect world they would willingly drop the price because no one is pirating.

its naive to even entertain such an idea.

reputation,price and demand, and quality are deciding factors to be sure, but greed drives the motive. its 50 bucks no matter what because people will pay 50 bucks.
i am not trying to say you are stupid guys if you believe such nonsense, but i do think you should look around and smell the coffee. :rolleyes:

If the competition gets tough enough, the price will go down. Just look at the example of the browser war. Despite an extremely high demand, Microsoft and Netscape gave their browsers away for free. Not even cutting price, but at no cost.

Perhaps with the increasing popularity of console games, the demand of PC games will be reduced and thereby encouraging a more competitive market. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but the bottom line is that piracy cannot be justified.

The world is driven by money, and nobody should be disillusioned enough to deny that. That's why capitalism won out and communism fell apart.

On a separate but related topic, my opinion on console game is that it's just redundant. When a console is purchased by someone already owning a computer (as most often the case), the person basically owns two computers. When most PC's already having the ability to run computer games, why is it necessary to have a whole different set of hardware just to do that? A computer is much more versatile. It allows a connection to the internet for all sorts of purpose, word processing, and connection to digital camera and other gadgets. All of which a game console would be completely useless for.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting satchmo</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>If the competition gets tough enough, the price will go down. Just look at the example of the browser war. Despite an extremely high demand, Microsoft and Netscape gave their browsers away for free. Not even cutting price, but at no cost.</DIV></DIV>

there are a few around here who would argue that Microsoft gives it away because it is so defective they couldn't sell it for no amount of money :heee:

on another note, what if Microsoft gives it away just to saturate the market with their products??

many people are dumb, they will buy a name before they will buy a quality product, just because the name is more familiar to them.
say what you will, i don't fault you for it, but piracy harms no one, and there have been studies that show it improves sales so go figure.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext> but piracy harms no one, and there have been studies that show it improves sales so go figure.</DIV></DIV>
Was that on the try before you buy angle?

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting $loth</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>
<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>but piracy harms no one, and there have been studies that show it improves sales so go figure.</DIV></DIV>
Was that on the try before you buy angle?

</DIV></DIV>
no, reno posted a link once i think to a news letter on MP3 theft.

So game companies make money off of games that they're not even selling?

Hmmmmmmmmm I think I see a problem there.....

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>
<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting $loth</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>
<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>but piracy harms no one, and there have been studies that show it improves sales so go figure.</DIV></DIV>
Was that on the try before you buy angle?

</DIV></DIV>
no, reno posted a link once i think to a news letter on MP3 theft.

</DIV></DIV>
OK, I read this article where it said that people downloaded music, and they bought it if they liked it or something, thought it might be like that.

for some, they won't buy an album sight unseen, so they download a couple songs to get a feel for the group and then buy them if its their cup O tea..

so yeah, i guess you were right.

I have downloaded probably about 80 songs in my entire life. I never downloaded entire albums but simply 1 or 2 songs from a band. Some bands just plane suck and may only have one good song that I like but I'm not going to go out and buy an entire album for 1 song. That would be a waste of my time and money. Other songs that I downloaded were hard to find ones. I think it's alright to download a few songs but when your downloading entire albums and games that's just plane stealing. Some people never bother to realise that there are people out there who worked hard to make a product only for it to be ripped off by some punk sitting at his computer sipping on his Hi-C his mother got for him outa the fridge from 5 feet away because he is too lazy and his mother has no spine.

Wow what detail I can go into things.

sounds to me like you are selective.. 1 or 2 is fine, more is stealing..

so if i take portions of your car, and not the entire thing its OK by you?

i don't sanction theft, but to borrow is another animal entirely.

point in fact, if i had a PC gamer magazine on my coffee table and you read it, would you be stealing it? if i let you take it home would it be theft? if i copied it, how does that differ from lending you the magazine for the time it takes you to partake in its content?

if you borrow my car, will GM holler foul? borrow and steal are not interchangeable, nor should they be.

basically it boils down to viewpoint i suppose, but as long as i am, in my mind, guilt free i am fine. its sorta like this, think what you will cause you will never convince those whom don't want to be.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>so yeah, i guess you were right.</DIV></DIV>
Well, the article was.

A car is different from a song but at the same time I see your point Orph. If a band wants to put out a bunch of garbage that's fine by me but once they finally come out with one good song should I be forced to by the entire album? Now of course you could say that I don't have to buy the album and that I'm not being forced but when the resource is being made available for me to get the one song I want why shouldn't I have the choice to take the one song and leave the rest to rot in a void of 1s and 0s. I don't expect you to understand anything I say even half of what I just wrote is a little confusing to myself but I think I made my point... or not.

They have been making cassette tape singles, and cd singles for years now, so the "entire album" thing is moot. either you see downloading of MP3's as wrong, or you do not.

i have never understood the difference between tuning a song in on the radio, or tuning it in online, but oh well :/

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>They have been making cassette tape singles, and cd singles for years now, so the "entire album" thing is moot. either you see downloading of MP3's as wrong, or you do not.

i have never understood the difference between tuning a song in on the radio, or tuning it in online, but oh well :/

</DIV></DIV>
Just like taping a film from TV?

There is a difference between listening to a song on the radio, where
the band is agreeing to its airplay and the number of times it is
listened to is controlled, and downloading the song without the band's
approval and listening to it as much as you like. If it is on the radio
and you like it, you will go out and buy it so you can listen to it
when you like, but if you download it and you like it, you may not
bother since you already have the means to listen to it when you like.
I'm not saying I don't download music, but thats the difference between
downloading music and listening on the radio.

As for singles meaning that you can't complain about having to buy the
entire album - what if it isn't the single you want to buy? I normally
find that the songs that make it out as singles are the weakest on the
album. Also, a huge number of bands don't bother releasing singles,
making your claim of it making the want for a single song a moot point,
into a moot point itself to be honest.

Game piracy does hurt the games industry, no two ways about it to be
honest. I am a hypocrite for being pissed off at game piracy while
committing music piracy, but it wouldn't be right to not support the
industry you plan on going into really would it.

I hate game piracy just as much as you do Reno. Would you consider burning a CD from a friend an act of moral crime? I don't remember if it is legal as long as you don't sell the the burned copy. The only game I have done this with was StarCraft. Even now I consider buying the game retail after owning a burned version of it.

Haha, good job Valve! I really like how they're doing this. This must
be the first time a game company itself does something about game
piracy. And they're doing a very good job at it.

You see that Steam can be handy? :razz: