cant download CMSF because Battlefront wants more money!

[Battlefront.com]

There's one in every crowd! Except for here... there's usually far, far more than that

Steve

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Kwazydog]

Another solution might be to use something like FileShack (or whatever) to host the 600mb file, as it can't be activated without purchasing an e-key. (like patches)

Adam as there are cracks for most games out there to be found something like this would make it far easier for people to obtain an illegal copy as they will have easy access to the entire game.

Dan

[ChrisND]

I suppose what is needed (if it is not there already) is VERY BIG red print below the download button saying that it lasts for one year and to save your install files.

[mat7861]

I suppose what is needed (if it is not there already) is VERY BIG red print below the download button saying that it lasts for one year and to save your install files.

I think something of that nature might be a good idea. i had no clue until i read the elicense policy, and that fact is buried in a heap of information. It doesnt really matter to new customers, but considering this game is getting older, there will be more people running into this problem. I think it should also be printed next to the download link in your e-mail you get from battlefront, that way it reminds them everytime they download it lol.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Kwazydog]

If you're saying e-license has been cracked, that's terrible news. Sorry to hear that guys.

To be honest Im cant say that Ive looked but I would guess so...the bottom line is pretty much anything can and usually will be cracked. As an example 3D Max which is worth thousands of dollars and requires direct registration with the developer usually has a cracked version out without hours of a new version being release. I doubt that there will even be a solution to the problem unfortuantely.

Dan

[Battlefront.com]

Adam,

I guess you have a LOT of people missing their downloads, since the bandwidth must be enormous to have more than the most negligible increase in costs whatsoever.

You're missing the point. Everything has a cost attached to it. We don't sit around all day measuring bandwidth and comparing it against a list of people who are downloading things one time or ten times. But bandwidth and severs are being used by someone and the cost of that is quite high. Therefore, the more we can keep extraneous costs down the better it is for everybody. Our product product prices haven't gone up in 10 years but our costs have, so I don't think anybody has room for complaint

The bottomline is we have a very generous setup where you can download the game 10 times within a year. If you can present an argument as to why a person can't successfully download a game he's paid for within a year after 10 attempts then I don't see what the problem is. I mean, you wouldn't expect us to keep mailing you CDs every time "the dog at it", would you? It's been my observation that customers who seem to want unlimited services without any particular need for them for them tend not to have their own businesses.

Mat7861,

I think it should also be printed next to the download link in your e-mail you get from battlefront, that way it reminds them everytime they download it lol.

Notifications of policies has evolved over the years since we instituted the system. Initially we took it for granted that people would back up the software they bought as they would anything else. But it does appear that people think that since it's virtual and they have a link that they can utilize us as a backup service. As a consumer myself, I think that's a bad idea because life is full of uncertainty and the most certain way to protect my investment is to back my stuff up. I've got a 1.5TB drive which backs up my stuff every hour. Cost me $150, which is much less than I paid for a professional level harddrive recovery program before I got my extra drive

KwazyDog,

To be honest Im cant say that Ive looked but I would guess so.

Actually, to date we have not had a single crack of eLicense. We have, however, had cracks of everything we've put into retail. Which is a bone of contention between us and our retail partners, let me tell you So while nobody would download software from our website for an eLicense crack, they can theoretically download it for a retail crack. Not that I'm saying people would do that, I'm saying we don't know because we've made sure they can't

Steve

[Flanker15]

This is an interesting issue, most people (I used to) would think that the DL files from BFC would work like most DL game sites (non-expiring downloads once you buy it). I would think that there wouldn't be much of a problem if the install file was publicly distributed as it's useless without the e-licences key, which mat has. Several DL games have the whole install file as the trial version which needs a key to unlock the full game.

[mat7861]

Adam,

Mat7861,

Notifications of policies has evolved over the years since we instituted the system. Initially we took it for granted that people would back up the software they bought as they would anything else. But it does appear that people think that since it's virtual and they have a link that they can utilize us as a backup service. As a consumer myself, I think that's a bad idea because life is full of uncertainty and the most certain way to protect my investment is to back my stuff up. I've got a 1.5TB drive which backs up my stuff every hour. Cost me $150, which is much less than I paid for a professional level harddrive recovery program before I got my extra drive

Steve

yeah i agree, i usually back up everything. Didnt think to back up this because it had a link and i assumed it would be there for every. Well you know what they say to ppl who assume... Its ok though. We came to a resolution that i think is more than fair and i would like to thank you guys for it.

[Battlefront.com]

Mat,

No problem. And actually, thanks for being reasonable. It's helped us identify yet another evolutionary step that needed to be taken with our policies. They have been updated as of today!

Flanker15,

We're aware of other download services (Digital River, IIRC) which actually offer a much shorter download period BUT do offer a one time fixed price for lifetime download of that product. In other words, they are offering to be a virtual backup for the game and are charging the customer for that option. We've seen that with other services or more restrictive download periods.

We are aware that STEAM doesn't follow this model. But STEAM follows a different model entirely in that it is an online community/portal/hosting service with the game content being a necessary component. Trust me, if you have a STEAM product you're paying for the services they offer even if it isn't evident

Steve

[Wengart]

I've never purchased a game from Battlefront's online store, partly because of my ISP's download cap. However, I perused the online sales information, while I was considering the purchase of CM:BB, and I quickly found out about the 1 year download limit. But, I think a improved way of informing the user, as mat said, could be helpful. Especially when you consider the number of CMX1 players who will make the jump to CM:N.

Mat, if you could find someone to burn you a copy of CM:SF you could use that to install the game.

Unfortunately, there is no way to manually enter in a new authorization. The only way authorizations happen is through a purchase. And when that happens we, meaning Battlefront, get charged for that. So there is a cost to us in terms of our time and actual money out of pocket to work around the sort of problem Mat7861 experienced. Which is why we allow people 1 year to download instead of 1 month. Otherwise we'd likely have this sort of problem very frequently!

On a side note, from what I read earlier BFC gets charged per download?

[Battlefront.com]

I'm still baffled why this is an issue. Why should someone assume that they can redownload as many times as they want forever and ever and ever? You're buying a license and the digital content to run it. You're not buying a backup service. When you buy something from a store can you go back to the store to get a new one if you lose it? Not likely

I think this is just another example of people thinking "digital = free" and that somehow it is different than physical goods. Conceptually there is no difference. Yes, there is a practical difference and that is why you can redownload for up to a year while someone losing a CD the day after they get it is going to have to pay for a replacement. But I don't see any rational argument why it should be "forever". Downloads do cost us something even if they don't appear to cost you guys something.

As for paying per download... our original download service did indeed charge us per download. At the time we didn't have the IT infrastructure to handle hosting downloads. Now we do, after a significant and ongoing investment. So while we no longer literally pay out of pocket for each download, we do pay something for the service which is in turn based on the total volume of activity.

eLicense codes... now there is something we pay for each one handed out. Fortunately we have a LOT of control over these and that means we can do things like retrieve, reset, or even kill off licenses directly. The latter is what we do when someone, like Mat, needs a new copy since the new copy comes with its own key (no way to avoid that). Kill off the old, enable the new, all set

Steve

[Patrocles]

I'm still baffled why this is an issue. Why should someone assume that they can redownload as many times as they want forever and ever and ever? You're buying a license and the digital content to run it. You're not buying a backup service. When you buy something from a store can you go back to the store to get a new one if you lose it? Not likely

I think this is just another example of people thinking "digital = free" and that somehow it is different than physical goods. Conceptually there is no difference. Yes, there is a practical difference and that is why you can redownload for up to a year while someone losing a CD the day after they get it is going to have to pay for a replacement. But I don't see any rational argument why it should be "forever". Downloads do cost us something even if they don't appear to cost you guys something.

As for paying per download... our original download service did indeed charge us per download. At the time we didn't have the IT infrastructure to handle hosting downloads. Now we do, after a significant and ongoing investment. So while we no longer literally pay out of pocket for each download, we do pay something for the service which is in turn based on the total volume of activity.

eLicense codes... now there is something we pay for each one handed out. Fortunately we have a LOT of control over these and that means we can do things like retrieve, reset, or even kill off licenses directly. The latter is what we do when someone, like Mat, needs a new copy since the new copy comes with its own key (no way to avoid that). Kill off the old, enable the new, all set

Steve

The analogy of the store is weak! Surely you can do better. Though I do agree that it is not a game companies job to allow unlimited downloads. If a person want unlimited downloads go buy games off STEAM or Gamersgate.

I haven't looked at your download page (I'm a luddite and I still buy CDs/DVDs! haha) but maybe you should update it with big warning signs telling folks then can only download game for one year and they are strongly encouraged to make a backup of the game.

keep up the good work

[Moon]

I haven't looked at your download page (I'm a luddite and I still buy CDs/DVDs! haha) but maybe you should update it with big warning signs telling folks then can only download game for one year and they are strongly encouraged to make a backup of the game.

We already do that. The problem is retroactive however. The message about download limitations used to be much less obvious before our switch to our new (current) store software. Mat, the guy who started this post, bought his game before that switch. (Funny enough, the download limits used to be much more strict before Oct 2007 than they are now :-)) So what we're seeing is some confusion due to the transition. Going forward this should be a rare problem, because the customer is exposed to that warning at least twice during the purchase.

[Ron]

The analogy of the store is weak! Surely you can do better.

The analogy of the store is spot on, why would you consider it weak?? You buy something, take possession and then you take responsibility. What's the problem?

[Patrocles]

The analogy of the store is spot on, why would you consider it weak?? You buy something, take possession and then you take responsibility. What's the problem?

because I don't consider computer data analogous to food products on a shelf that must constantly be replenished.

If you like the analogy then good for you!

[Patrocles]

We already do that. The problem is retroactive however. The message about download limitations used to be much less obvious before our switch to our new (current) store software. Mat, the guy who started this post, bought his game before that switch. (Funny enough, the download limits used to be much more strict before Oct 2007 than they are now :-)) So what we're seeing is some confusion due to the transition. Going forward this should be a rare problem, because the customer is exposed to that warning at least twice during the purchase.

That is good to hear!

I will use the digital download for CMN when it is released for Christmas (yes?? please?? ).

[Battlefront.com]

Patrocles,

The analogy of the store is weak! Surely you can do better.

I don't need to, because you haven't shown why it's weak It's a simple concept... product/service offered for sale, product purchased, obligations for both parties. Show me why it matters what form the product/service takes and then you might have point to make. Otherwise it's the same old "it's digital and therefore it should be free" way of thinking, which is fundamentally flawed thinking. Especially if it's your business and you have to pay bills for the supposedly "free" services

Though I do agree that it is not a game companies job to allow unlimited downloads.

Ah, so you agree with me after all.

because I don't consider computer data analogous to food products on a shelf that must constantly be replenished.

Oh wait, you don't Who said anything about food? I actually used software as my analogy. If you pay $45 + S&H for a game from us, and you lose the CD ten seconds after you unpackage it, should we send the customer a new CD free of charge? And what if they lose it again 2 weeks later? Should we send another? How about 10 months later? No, no, and... let me think... no Why? Because as Ron said, it's the customer's responsibility to take care of what they purchased, not ours. And since there is a cost of replacing that CD we should not be obligated to replace it without compensation. Since the inherent arrangement is identical for any product, and there is indeed a cost to providing downloads, there is absolutely no difference what-so-ever between the two situations in terms of principles. In terms of costs... sure, the cost of the redownload is MUCH less expensive than sending a CD. Which is why we don't charge the same for the replacement services.

If a person want unlimited downloads go buy games off STEAM or Gamersgate.

Yup, because those services have that service built into their business model. Just like some games are free to download but cost money to play (i.e. subscription model). It's up to the individual business to determine what works best for them. For us, we feel our system is more than reasonable for the cost.

Steve

[Moon]

because I don't consider computer data analogous to food products on a shelf that must constantly be replenished.

If you like the analogy then good for you!

Why food products? Compare it with movie DVDs. That's just computer data, too. Or, if you like, the converse works, too... compare it with food products that you order online.

Either way, the analogy is spot on.

Perhaps the confusion comes from the fact that we allow people a "download period" at all. Maybe things would be clearer if we simply did "one time downloads", like some online stores do. Delivering a product via online download is something else entirely than a "digital storage" you can download over and over again. We do not offer the latter (at this point), and like Steve I fail to see how you can simply expect that this kind of service is implied in any way or form when you buy a game from us.

The other thing I don't really understand is why people don't simply save the file they download somewhere. I do it all the time with apps I buy online. I don't care if they would allow me to re-download or not. The best way to make sure I don't lose something is to back it up. And this works extremely well with our products with eLicense because you can install the same download anywhere you want, as often as you want, and activate with any number of keys. So you really only ever need to download one time. Theoretically, you should never ever need to re-download anything.

Martin

[Patrocles]

Sorry, your analogy is poor. Computer data is not analogous(sp.) to foodstuff, DVDs, etc. that are in a BAM store.

Delivering the product may have some comparisons, but your original comparison is weak.

If you like the analogy then good for you!

Have a nice day!

[Clavicula_Nox]

So if you buy food off a shelf, get home and lose that food, would the grocery store replace it free of charge?

[MarkEzra]

Jack Benny used to take a small hammer to the store. He'd put a dent in the cans and demand a discount. But he was finally caught...tried to dent a milk bottle!

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request