Spore Dev: DRM 'Necessary Part' of Our Business
"[Spore has] copy protection, it is a necessary part of our biz," Bradshaw told Eurogamer. "But we've worked to make it something that does not punish the legit owners," Bradshaw said.
Publisher Electronic Arts made waves last May when the company revealed that Spore would require online validation every 10 days to function. The copy protection software was scaled back following consumer backlash.
"You need to authenticate once at the first install," Bradshaw explained. "This happens online. You can install on three separate computers and you do need to register for the online features."
While Maxis' runaway success with expansions for its life simulator The Sims 2 (PC)—currently on its 8th major expansion—many have wondered what form a Spore expansion could possibly take. Bradshaw asserted that the studio is currently planning expansions, but is still exploring how they would work into the full game.
"When we started Spore, we were thinking about how we'd make an engine that had the possibility of expansion, so yes, we'll add to the experience," she said. "I think, however, we have a very cool opportunity to take Spore in a few different directions too. The editors are so cool and fun, that we want to advance those as well as the gameplay that we put into the core game."
Some of those additions include elements removed from the retail release of the game, such as the flora editor. Bradshaw said that the feature was "something we eventually want to get out there as it is fun to work with."
-
Can we just copy and past the comments from the last DRM/Piracy news post and call it a day?
-
Can it say something along the lines of:
The software will not burden legitimate users too heavily. The software will not burden illegitimate users AT ALL.
because otherwise, I fear it needs repeating :p
I'm not against copy protection really, if people want to use it on their games, fine. But copy protection should not burden legitimate users AT ALL. What is wrong with Safedisc? They seem to be the only copy protection company left that realizes that going draconian does not mean more protection, it just means more annoyances for the people filling the developers/publishers/etc. collective wallets.