Modding single player Mass Effect 3 bans you from Origin

[CardinalPiggles]

If they downloaded it then I would agree with you, but if it was a physical copy activated on Origin, then this is ludicrous.

At the end of the day we don't know enough information to make such judgements.

So digital copies are supposed to get different treatment then physical ones?

I would love to know why.

No matter if you buy it online or physically you are still buying the same license.

Surely if you buy digitally, from the Origin service, you are under contract.

If you buy from a shop you are not under contract... Actually, my derp, if you activate the game through Origin you are henceforth under contract.

Is cracking a shop bought (fully paid for) game so it doesn't require Origin illegal? If not, then you would not be bound by contract and therefore could do with it as you wish.

 

[Vegosiux]

EA can fuck all the way off with this.

I'll do what I want with the games I purchased a LICENSE for.

fixed that for ya

Well, as long as they realize that if they lose customers it's their own damn fault, I have no problem with their business practices anymore, to be completely honest.

But I have this nagging suspicion that if their numbers drop they'll find some way to blame it on the consumers and try to guilt trip them into going back.

 

[madster11]

Ahh good, ANOTHER reason for me to never purchase an EA game again and to pretend Bioware no longer exists.

I actively go out of my way to illegally download any EA titles i come across, even if i don't want them and will just delete them straight after anyway. EA can go fuck themselves so hard i take my time and effort to try and harm them.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Surely if you buy digitally, from the Origin service, you are under contract.

If you buy from a shop you are not under contract... Actually, my derp, if you activate the game through Origin you are henceforth under contract.

Is cracking a shop bought (fully paid for) game so it doesn't require Origin illegal? If not, then you would not be bound by contract and therefore could do with it as you wish.

I do believe cracking a game that you have a license for is illegal because the license usually says you can't.

 

[Canadish]

EA defense force in here.

They're absolute bastards trying to kill modding.

It's one of the best parts of gaming and the community as a whole.

The customer should never have to sign any agreements that stops them using the content they bought to their fullest in the first place.

Just stay away from their games, don't give them your money.

Inform others of these severe problems so they can make an informed decision, because these bloody gaming "journalism" sites won't give a fair perspective.

 

[Alma Mare]

I have altered the data in ways that the publishers and developers have not intended. Doing so has enhanced my enjoyment of their game.

Enjoyment? If it was only that. Dragon Age: Awakening has been left broken to this day unless mods are installed. But screw that. Ruthless enforcement of useless and arbitrary control schemes is more important than such things as fostering creativity, improving and drastically expanding the functionality and life span of your product.

 

[shemoanscazrex3]

I think its because

So... Mods in PC games are frowned upon? Seriously? And where but on the Escapist will you find people standing up and clapping? Seriously, it's like you people HATE gaming.

Even as a strictly console gamer who has dabbled in a bit of PC gaming even I know that's one of main points of buying a game on PC. The fact that people are saying, "yeah thats cool lets ruin gaming more, crappy DRM, no used or gimped used games. YEAH THIS IS TOTALLY AWESOME. Now lets all cry about an ending that the storytellers wanted to tell. Yeah we totally have the right to do that.

 

[Vegosiux]

I do believe cracking a game that you have a license for is illegal because the license usually says you can't.

What if you crack it before you agreed to the EULA? Then you legally did not breach that particular license, because you never agreed to it in the first place. In fact, you could even argue you didn't know about it and nobody could prove you did.

That's why the "License agreements" should be made before the thing is even purchased for this "you just bought the license" mumbo jumbo to even make the slightest sliver of legal sense.

 

[Vigormortis]

So...if I bought a Toyota truck and decided to put seat covers on the seats, Toyota could claim "foul play" and take the truck from me?

Sorry, but if you buy a piece of software, you are legally allowed to modify the code on your client side machine. So long as you are not modifying the code stored on or being sent to their servers, they technically have no right to stop you.

So in effect:

Texture packs, modded character models, etc. Perfectly legal.

Aim-bots and other exploits in an online game. Legal unless otherwise stated by the host company who owns the servers.

Well if the contract you signed with wherever you got the truck said you could not modify the seats in any way and you did then yes then yes they could take the truck away from you.

Sorry but legally you can only modify the code, which included texture packs, as long as the owners of the license you purchased said you could.

Except, they have no legal claim to the state of anything physically stored on your client machine. They can "legally" block you from modding content that must be shared through their network, but they have no right to block you from modding your own client-side data. Regardless of some ludicrous EULA.

 

[shemoanscazrex3]

EA defense force in here.

They're absolute bastards trying to kill modding.

It's one of the best parts of gaming and the community as a whole.

The customer should never have to sign any agreements that stops them using the content they bought to their fullest in the first place.

Just stay away from their games, don't give them your money.

Inform others of these severe problems so they can make an informed decision, because these bloody gaming "journalism" sites won't give a fair perspective.

Sadly the gaming community won't do that but they all go "hurr durr the ending is crappy lets make petitions and send cupcakes yaaaaay"

 

[SajuukKhar]

What if you crack it before you agreed to the EULA? Then you legally did not breach that particular license, because you never agreed to it in the first place.

Hmmmmm, I am not particularly sure about that.

I would suspect that they would try to use some "by buying the license you have already agreed to it, and the I agree button you get when you install it just a formality" type defence or something similar.

The entire EULA system as it is, is fucking broken, much like the term RPG.

Except, they have no legal claim to the state of anything physically stored on your client machine. They can "legally" block you from modding content that must be shared through their network, but they have no right to block you from modding your own client-side data. Regardless of some ludicrous EULA.

I would assume that they would technically own all the games data, both on the disk or installed on your pc.

If they didn't own the data on your pc then it would be yours and you would be able to make copies and give it to people, which legally your not supposed to.

 

[Vigormortis]

Surely if you buy digitally, from the Origin service, you are under contract.

If you buy from a shop you are not under contract... Actually, my derp, if you activate the game through Origin you are henceforth under contract.

Is cracking a shop bought (fully paid for) game so it doesn't require Origin illegal? If not, then you would not be bound by contract and therefore could do with it as you wish.

I do believe cracking a game that you have a license for is illegal because the license usually says you can't.

Actually, in most cases you are legally allowed to create a crack or a copy of a piece of software for use as a back-up. So long as you don't resell or share your license.

'Course, with the transition to the purely digital age, it's become a murky "gray" area, legally speaking, but it's a precedent that still stands.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Actually, in most cases you are legally allowed to create a crack or a copy of a piece of software for use as a back-up. So long as you don't resell or share your license.

'Course, with the transition to the purely digital age, it's become a murky "gray" area, legally speaking, but it's a precedent that still stands.

I knew you could create back-ups, but I assumed cracking would fall into the same area as "downloading another copy of the game online from like a pirate site if your copy broke" which you cant do. I guess if you made the crack yourself it wouldn't be illegal.

Then again as you said much of this, such as the entire legality of EULAs, is in a grey area.

 

[Vegosiux]

The entire EULA system as it is, is fucking broken, much like the term RPG.

The entirety of this "licensing business" is. The only way to make sure their licenses are legally enforceable in every case is to make it clear to the customer that he doesn't own the product before the customer purchases it, and present them with the license agreement. Again, before the purchase. But then, some people will say "Fuck that" and we can't have that now can we?

I would suspect that they would try to use some "by buying the license you have already agreed to it, and the I agree button you get when you install it just a formality" type defence or something similar.

They're welcome to, but I think it would be unprecedented to accept the reasoning that someone agreed to a contract before even looking at it. I mean, unless such a notion gets laughed out, something's really wrong with the legal system. Common law may have a bit of a bigger problem with it than civil law of course...

 

[Durgiun]

Alrighty, so I'm confused. If I'm ''buying a license'' to play the game, does that mean the publisher still owns the disc and the box? If so, does that mean I can't damage said objects in any way, since it's not my property?

 

[SajuukKhar]

Alrighty, so I'm confused. If I'm ''buying a license'' to play the game, does that mean the publisher still owns the disc and the box? If so, does that mean I can't damage said objects in any way, since it's not my property?

They technically do still own the disk and box, hell Morrowind's EULA even claimed that breaking the EULA would result in the box being taken away, but I don't think publishers care about the condition of the box/disk only if you have the ability to play the game or not.

 

[Dys]

Do you honestly think that Bioware were in a position where they could tell EA to stick it even if they wanted too or are you just saying stupid things because you're angry about being called out on being so wrong?

Over something as trivial as this?
Over an issue that EA apparently really doesn't care about because they have let other games have mods?

Yes, or are you just asking stupid questions because EA is the current "hate target"?

The current hate target? EA have been the "big bad guy" for well over 10 years. Activision briefly got some flack a little while ago...

OK. So, the main reasons why EA has power over bioware with this?
-As the publisher EA fund the game and Bioware are contractually obliged to produce it. If they were to withhold their product to protest something, EA would be entitled to amazing royalties. This would never happen though. That's because...
-EA own Bioware. EA controls all the people high up in Bioware. Bioware acts in EAs best interests.

DRM and policies with regard to pricing, distribution etc are the domain of the publisher. There's no reason for Biwoare to be involved. We've already established it would be stupid for them to have some 'protest', I don't understand why you think the developers have any influence here. EA have let other games get published both with and without mod support. Likewise they have published both with and without origin, steam, secuROM etc. In this case, it apparently would have taken more funding to get the game out in such a way that it could be modded without compromising their DRM, DLC or multiplayer interity (possibly all 3), EA decided not to allocate the funding and instead release the game without mod support.

Look, your second response didn't really make sense, but I'm guessing you're young, angry and don't like getting called out when you say something that's wrong. Just take a few minutes, actually think about it for a second, and realise that it doesn't fucking matter. At all. When someone is condescending or patronizing on the internet, it's not really a personal attack on you. It's an attack on the idea you've presented.

Alrighty, so I'm confused. If I'm ''buying a license'' to play the game, does that mean the publisher still owns the disc and the box? If so, does that mean I can't damage said objects in any way, since it's not my property?

They technically do still own the disk and box, hell Morrowind's EULA even claimed that breaking the EULA would result in the box being taken away, but I don't think publishers care about the condition of the box/disk only if you have the ability to play the game or not.

Under common law the EULA is legally inadmissable because you're never presented it until after you've already bought the game (they can't make you agree to additional terms after a contract, in this case a sale, has been completed). I assume that there are probably countrys where they can apply it, but I don't think they've even really bothered trying in many places.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Except, they have no legal claim to the state of anything physically stored on your client machine. They can "legally" block you from modding content that must be shared through their network, but they have no right to block you from modding your own client-side data. Regardless of some ludicrous EULA.

I posted proof against that claim already. Here it is again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glider_%28bot%29

In that case it was established that Blizzard owned the code to WoW not only on their servers, but also the client coding + local game data on your hard drive. Even the game code loaded into RAM.

Well what you believe is wrong (this isn't my opinion, this is a fact), the games you buy are bought and paid for, they are yours to do what you want with. Of course they place restrictions to make sure that you're not using your copy to give free copies to other people, or ruin the game for everyone else but that's not the same as renting.

I'd like to see some proof of those so-called facts. Because from what I understand, copyright extends to a work in its given state, and the right to change it from that state must be granted by the holder.