Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mario F.
In order to control the level of privacy on my computer once PB is installed, I'll need special knowledge not related to gaming which is the target of PB.
To keep your computer safe for online banking also requires more knowledge than normal banking does. Doing stuff with computers requires knowledge about computers. If you want to play games only, a gaming console would be more suited, it requires virtually no knowledge at all.
Quote:
There's however a problem with the fact that each game is one entity unrelated to any other game; Refusing to buy a game because it has PB is not the same as refusing to buy a certain refrigerator brand and going with another brand. So, if I'm concerned about my privacy, I'll actually be barring my access to a whole individual product that is unlike any other.
Compare it to a club with house rules. For nudist clubs, all members are required to be nude on the compound. We probably agree that nudity if not voluntary is a huge breach of privacy. But people go there. Voluntarily. You don't like the house rules, you don't join the club. Nothing will hinder you to open your own club and set your own house rules if you don't like the existing ones. Same with games. You don't like it? Buy one you like, if there is none, publish your own. You cannot force private companies or even clubs (in my time, punkbuster was an additional feature installed by the server admins) to not set rules.
Quote:
Exactly what's the connection between privacy and gaming? And why should there be a connection?
The connection is that privacy has been misused by so many people, that misuse became the norm rather than the exception. Privacy is protection for every one and we accept that under this protection some crimes will go unnoticed. However, if every single citizen started dealing drugs, we would probably think different about "privacy". When programs like PB started, you could not join a server of 10 with at least 3 people openly cheating. Why? Because they could.
Quote:
Why is that these mechanisms are not implemented on the console market by the exact same games? Why are console users privacy protected, but PC users not?
Because cheating in multiplayer console games is so difficult that most people don't. You have to modify your console to cheat. With your PC, all you have to do is run an installer from the internet. There simply is no reason to scan console players.
Quote:
Being the most probably answer to this "because of piracy", why I am being treated as a criminal? Why do I have to surrender my privacy in order to legitimate my person when no other industry in the world does this, when not even law enforcement organizations can do this without a court issued warrant?
No, piracy has nothing to do with punkbuster. The game itself checks if everybody is a legit user, then punkbuster checks if all legit users are playing fair.
I do not support DRM. I support PB and their likes. Because they do fundamentally different things. If I play a game, I want it to be free of cheaters. For this, I am willing to sacrifice my privacy concerning the gaming machine. Like I would do a drug test before a race or be checked for cheat sheets before an exam.
Maybe you have to experience what playing without punkbuster was like. This is the internet, with anonymous scum and villainy just around the corner and with people who think it's fun to ruin other peoples playing experience. Without punkbuster, you could not play a single game without a cheater or two. And it's not fun to lose 10 rounds 0-5 just because the other team has a guy who can teleport, look through walls and is uanable to miss a shot. Most rounds were decided by the team that had the better cheater. And with privacy you couldn't even get hold of those people. You had no ID. Kick him? Sure. He'll be back in 2 minutes under a different name when he's resetted his router to get a new IP. No thanks, I'll gladly give up the privacy of my gaming machine to play a fair game.