PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

November 29, 2008 -

Say it ain't so, Houser Bros.

IGN reports that the upcoming PC flavor of Grand Theft Auto IV will install the dreaded SecuROM 7 copy protection on gamers' computers.

On an up note, however, the number of times that the game can be installed will not be subject to a limit. GamePolitics readers will recall that EA's much-awaited Spore came with a three-install limit. At least, it did until a gamer revolt prompted EA to relax the resrtiction.

Regarding GTA IV's SecuROM, an unnamed Rockstar spokesperson told IGN:

Having copy protection allows us to protect the integrity or our titles and future investments, but at the same time we have worked very hard to ensure that our solutions do not persecute the legitimate players of our games. Implemented correctly, SecuROM is the most effective form of disc based copy protection and allows us to manage authenticity on a global level for Grand Theft Auto IV...

 

GTA IV PC uses SecuROM for protecting our EXE until street date has passed, to ensure the retail disk is in the computer drive... Product Activation is a one time only online authentication when installing the game. GTA IV has no install limits for the retail disc version... and that version can be installed on an unlimited number of PCs by the retail disk owner... All versions of the game will use SecuROM for Product Activation. Downloadable versions of the game will have additional code if the vendor requires it, such as Valve's Steam program.

Rockstar also warned that pirated versions would not function properly:

Aside from the fact that warez are a great place to pick up a Trojan or key logger, using a cracked copy of GTA IV PC will result in varying changes to the game experience. These can range from comical to game-progress-halting changes.


Comments

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

oh, and i'l do my best to do it BEFORE launch date.

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

Hmm. Could be worse. I don't buy the idea that SecuROM is straight-up malware, and anyone who thinks it is should tango with Starforce for awhile. Still, they should get rid of activation at install. There is no reason to punish those who might want to install without an internet connect or might not have easy access to the internet at all. Believe it or not, those people do exist.

Rockstar's threat concerning pirated versions of the game is hilarious, though. They are freaks if they think their game is going to be the only game in the history of time to not be effectively pirated.

The Honest Game - http://www.thehonestgame.org

The Honest Game - http://www.thehonestgame.org

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

What's that? your telling me that not EVERYBODY who plays games has access to the internet at home?

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

When will people learn, most of us don't give two shins about the number of installs, its the program itself that causes the problems for some people, a program that can't be uninstalled even after the game is long gone. I'm fine with install limits, they don't bother me, but you can keep the malware. 

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

The main issue was always the install-limit from what I understand, not so much the rest.
(I don't like the rest much either, but if they want some form of authentication then that's their choice)

Yes SecuROM is damn hard to remove, yes in some cases it really messes things up, in many other cases it works just fine, you don't hear those people whine on various forums, which is why those go unnoticed.


Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

I seem to recall a lot of people complaining that whenever you update your PC in a certain way it counts as an install though so I take it that was the issue with many people.

----------------------------------------------------

 "What for you bury me in the cold cold ground?" - Tasmanian devil

---------------------------------------------------- Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

Sort of, but essentially yes. That's the effect.

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

 There's a good many issues. They offer a plethora to choose from.

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

In other words they're going to spread a lot of badly cracked versions to screw over people downloading cracked versions.


And probably install those damn nearly-unremovable drivers.

Re: PC Version of GTA IV to be Saddled with SecuROM

And those smart enough to pay attention to the VIP users for illegal downloads will still be in the clear, because they can not get a VIP rating until they uploaded enough content to be trusted enough.  I will choose the illegal version of GTA, even though I will buy a copy, because I prefer SuckROM free myself.

To the people who made the choice to do this to GTA, up yours, hard core, up yours, and go work for EA you bastards. [I am claiming that saying go to EA is worse than saying go to hell for now on.]

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenMichael Chandra - Unless I overlooked it, we haven't seen how the directive to not talk about whatever he wasn't supposed to talk about was phrased so it’s hard to say if it could have been misconstrued as a suggestion or not.10/20/2014 - 12:35pm
Andrew EisenHey, the second to last link is the relevant one! He actually did say "let them suffer." Although, he didn't say it to the other person he was bickering with.10/20/2014 - 12:29pm
Neo_DrKefkahttps://archive.today/F14zZ https://archive.today/SxFas https://archive.today/1upoI https://archive.today/0hu7i https://archive.today/NsPUC https://archive.today/fLTQv https://archive.today/Wpz8S10/20/2014 - 11:21am
Andrew EisenNeo_DrKefka - "Attacking"? Interesting choice of words. Also interesting that you quoted something that wasn't actually said. Leaving out a relevant link, are you?10/20/2014 - 11:04am
quiknkoldugh. I want to know why the hell Mozerella Sticks are 4 dollars at my works cafeteria...are they cooked in Truffle Oil?10/20/2014 - 10:41am
Neo_DrKefkaAnti-Gamergate supporter Robert Caruso attacks female GamerGate supporter by also attacking another cause she support which is the situation happening in Syia “LET SYRIANS SUFFER” https://archive.today/F14zZ https://archive.today/Wpz8S10/20/2014 - 10:18am
Neo_DrKefkaThat is correct in an At-Will state you or the employer can part ways at any time. However Florida also has laws on the books about "Wrongful combinations against workers" http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/448.04510/20/2014 - 10:07am
james_fudgehe'd die if he couldn't talk about Wii U :)10/20/2014 - 9:16am
Michael ChandraBy the way, I am not saying Andrew should stop talking about Wii-U. I find it quite nice. :)10/20/2014 - 8:53am
Michael Chandra'How dare he ignore my wishes and my advice! I am his boss! I could have ordered him but I should be able to say it's advice rather than ordering him directly!'10/20/2014 - 8:52am
Michael ChandraIf GP goes "EZK, do not talk about X publicly for a week, we're preparing a big article on it" and he still tweets about X, they'd have a legitimate reason to be pissed.10/20/2014 - 8:52am
Michael ChandraIf GP tells Andrew "we'd kinda prefer it if you stopped talking about Wii-U for 1 week" and he'd tweet about it anyway, firing him for it would be idiotic.10/20/2014 - 8:51am
Michael ChandraLegal right, sure. But that doesn't make it any less pathetic of an excuse.10/20/2014 - 8:50am
ZippyDSMleeYou mean right to fire states.10/20/2014 - 8:50am
james_fudgesome states have "at will" employee laws10/20/2014 - 7:50am
quiknkoldIt says in the article that being in florida, you can get fired regardless if its a fireable offence10/20/2014 - 7:19am
Michael ChandraIf your employee respectfully disagrees with your advice, that's not a fireable offense. If they ignore your order, THEN you have the right to be pissed.10/20/2014 - 6:49am
Michael ChandraI... Don't get one thing. If you do not want your employee to do X, why do you tell them it's advice or a wish? Give them a damn order.10/20/2014 - 6:48am
james_fudgeA leak that had me worried about being swatted by Lizard Squad.10/20/2014 - 6:03am
james_fudgeIt should be noted that the author leaked the GJP group names online10/20/2014 - 6:03am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician