Galciv 2 and the copy protection they didn't tell you about

So when exactly did Galciv 2 start requiring an internet activation, because it sure as hell was not there when I first installed it.

I’m housesitting for my grandma over the weekend and thought I’d bring along Galciv 2 to keep me company. I install it, register it and update it, but when I try to start the game I’m hit with a screen I didn’t see when I first bought it. There’s a handy little link there too.

So what the hell is the deal here? Is Stardock really sneaking in extra copy protection after release? What the hell is the problem. I bought the fucking game already, I liked the idea of a company not treating me as a criminal for once, and now they try to sneak this shit by me after I’ve already given them my fucking money.

I am very pissed off right now at Stardock. Making the game less accessible after release is a sign that they do not respect their customers.

If you read the link you so handily provided, it says that you just need to log it as a multiple account, and that they allow you to install on a couple of computers.

I agree, it’s not a big hassle. But I strongly disapprove of Stardock pulling this after launch. The lack of information about this scheme and the fact that Stardock is willing and able to redefine what I can and cannot do with the software I bought after I bought it makes me wary.

How do you know it wasn’t there when you bought it, just completely transparent?

It did not appear when I first installed it, nor did I see any information about it. While it is certainly possible that it was always there such a fact, if true, just makes me even more unhappy about the lack of information.

“There are reasonable limits on how often you can activate a given product”

Oh, but hooray, I’m kindly allowed to install the game at my other computers. As long as I have internet access, of course. I mean, what’s the point of playing games if you don’t have internet access.

Compared to other sotware, I guess the terms could be called “reasonable”, but coming from Stardock, this is very bad. I bought both GalCivs immediately, precisely because of the “we trust our customers” attitude.

You guys all relax, activation is only needed to patch your product ;).

No, activation only seems to be needed if you apply the beta patch (and probably any future updates), I’ve installed all the earlier updates from Stardock central on my home computer and have never been prompted to “activate” my game.

So basically, if you install on a computer that isn’t connected to the internet it works fine. If you install and then update with the latest patch, which by definition means you are connected to the internet, it asks you to click some sort of activation button. O NOES!!1! The amount of time you’ve spent whining about it is 10x as long as it would’ve taken to just activate the game.

I don’t think you have to activate it if the serial # is already registered to your stardock account, especially if you bought this game from stardock directly :).

The serial number is registered to my stardock account, has been since I first bought it. From a retail store no less.

Have they actually made it less accessible to you, or are you just pissed off in theory? Were you able to install and play it on your second machine? Was the activation even a minor inconvenience?

I’m pissed off because it’s yet another hoop to jump through before I get to play, but mainly I’m pissed because this was added retroactively with no information going out to me. The patch didn’t say “requires activation” when I installed it, and while I’m sure it’s possible I missed it in the patch notes I don’t recall reading anything about it there either. If Stardock wants to change the deal they made with me when I bought their product after I paid for it they should have the fucking courtesy to let me know.

You want to talk about inconvenient? I bought Front Office Football back in the day via download. Their online activation didn’t work, their 800 number wasn’t valid in Canada, and it took me something like a week of emailing to get the game working. I’m pretty sure if I wanted to transfer it to my new machine I would’ve had to somehow unregister it on my old one first. Stardock may not be perfect, but comparitively speaking they’re pretty darn close.

Comparitively speaking with back in the day?

I don’t care about comparatively speaking. I don’t like companies deciding what computers I can and cannot install my games on, but I could have lived with it if I had been allowed to make the decision.

I’d be a lot more willing to play by Stardocks rules if they let me see what they were before they charged me to play!

Kalle, as we talked about in the channel, I don’t get it. They aren’t charging you anymore money, they aren’t requiring to activate UNLESS you want to patch your game. A game that isn’t broken, imho. They are adding/changing the game at their cost and you’re upset you have to activate it on top registering it?

I don’t see the problem…don’t want to do it, don’t patch.

That’s weird, when I manually installed the beta patch it very explicitly notified me that I needed to have a serial number entered. The auto-patcher didn’t even bother me about the serial number at all.

  • Alan

On top of that, it hasn’t limited him from installing it on any computer that he’s wanted to install it on (despite his complaint to that effect), and as far as I can tell, the only inconvenience it’s meted out was an extra splashscreen during the patch install. Seems like a whole lot of nothing to be upset about to me.

I’m still not seeing what Stardock did that’s so bad. They didn’t tell you that you’d have to click an extra link? The company is not telling you what computers you can install the game on, as you were not prevented from installing or playing, so I don’t understand what “decision” you think you were unable to make.

I believe Stardock’s “rules” are that you are allowed to install and play on multiple machines. Presumably they have a limit, which they don’t want to publicize, whereby if the same key gets used more than X times they will lock out that key. That hardly seems unreasonable.