That's not a rhetorical question. I'm actually wondering if there was, and what it was. This might be rendered null and void due to ownership transferral (as in, Activision owns Vivendi, and now has full, autonomous say over their IPs)
But in those cases, did the offender in the former case still have to register? That's the crux of this argument. In my local area's database, we have a lot of people who got busted at 20 for bonking a 15 year old. That makes them retarded, but that doesn't make them criminals for life. Of course, all that comes up as is Rape 4, or "Impairing the morals of children".
Most fan reaction - real, hardcore fans of CC - were anywhere from ambivalent to negative for Chrono Cross. The gaming media fell over it - as they should have, it's an outstanding game - but Square's "hardcore" base picked the game apart, and the game does not enjoy anywhere close to the reputation that CC does.
Doing something can often be more harmful than doing nothing. If they release something that doesn't meet the (sometimes ridiculous) expectations of their fanbase - a fanbase that rivals Star Wars fans in being batshit insane - it does cheapen the brand. They have to be very careful with what they do.
That said, releasing a C+D at 98% is a dick move. They knew the progress of the game well before it got to this point; they didn't just want to break the game, they wanted to break spirits, too.
Oh, I agree our filter, the way it's implimented (Websense), sucks; I've been hacking around it for years, and the only reason I don't now is because we're looking at a major audit.
I just know that a site that was linked from here, I couldn't get to it without going through the Digg bar (it was the EFF). I found that as laughable as you.
I'm going public with my support, and I don't even use the Pirate Bay.
My feeling is that Sweden only went after them because they faced international isolation at the hands of the United States. Therefore, international policy is being designed by LOBBYISTS FOR AN ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. An industry that already makes obscene profits.
I don't support piracy... but this is a sad, sad day, because I can see the next steps for this forming in my head, and I don't like them. This just emboldened an industry that's already shown it will do whatever it will restrict and attack the rights of it's customers to maintain their profits, and that has way too much influence in Washington, especially considering it's function.
I work behind a content filter, so the Digg bar was handy for reading sites that are filtered, so I didn't have to RDP onto a separate server to read blocked URLs. So this is kinda sad news for me, but c'est la vie, big picture and all that.
So far, everything I'm reading in that court - from the non-trolls - says that these girls are young, foolish, and will learn from this the hard way the same way we did back when we were in that age. So that's fine in this particular case.
Are you kidding? This is the main reason I actually thought John Bolton's nomination as the ambassador to the UN was a good idea, despite the fact that he's a despicable person.
Re:Sorry, but I have to consider the source
on
UN Attacks Free Speech
·
· Score: 4, Funny
There we go. NOW I can take it seriously in joining the chorus of asking what the FUCK these people were thinking.
Sorry, but I have to consider the source
on
UN Attacks Free Speech
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Forgive my scepticism, but I have to wait until I see a second, less biased source before I take this at face value. The rule of reporting is to get two verifications, and I think I'm going to do just that.
Secondhand market? No, no, piracy killed the secondhand market for PC games long, long ago. Even in 2004, I couldn't return PC games after I'd bought and opened them, and trade-in costs didn't even offset the gas I spent.
You're never going to see someone buying back a used PC game - not a major retailer, at least - because if they did, they would lose money hand-over-fist, as people copied their games and returned them.
It's funny because there's a game called Elven Legacy that's coming out soon; I previewed the Russian build of it, and it's nothing more than Battle of Wesnoth with better graphics, a shitty story, less options, and worse gameplay. It aped the hexagonal gameplay almost exactly, but made it less intuitive.
It's going to likely cost $30. I have Wesnoth on both Linux and Windows.
I think you're letting a historical view - propagated since the game's popularity has taken off - get in the way of perspective. The first Halo, for a console shooter, was very good. Furthermore, it wasn't presented to the fratboy crowd, it caught on with them. It was only after Halo's popularity jumped that the stupid shit started happening.
I'm not saying Halo is the bee's knees; it's above average when all is said and done, but not amazing. But I don't think it's the standard of mediocrity that everyone says it is, either.
The "scene", as people like to call it, will always live. The people that have been pirating since swap parties and VHS recording will still be pirating.
It's the 98%ers that companies want to make afraid.
A real solution, of course, would be the content holders to get off their collective asses and make way for a global and non DRM:d way to access content at a reasonable fee.
Everyone that has tried this has been abused. No ifs, ands or buts; everyone that has tried going the open route has been anally raped with no lubricant, and no kiss afterwards. It's worked like this:
Company 1: *drm* Consumer: "u fagget i pirate u" Company 2: "That's not right... here, just pay a reasonable fee, and I won't limit you" Consumer: "lol ur easy 2 pirate fag" Company 2: ":(" Company 1: *MASSIVE LITIGATION PUSH*
Your idea makes sense on paper, but human nature is a painful reminder that it just doesn't work in reality. Check out the piracy numbers on the completely open (and Linux enabled!) World of Goo.
Slashdot Mirror
But was there an actual contract?
That's not a rhetorical question. I'm actually wondering if there was, and what it was. This might be rendered null and void due to ownership transferral (as in, Activision owns Vivendi, and now has full, autonomous say over their IPs)
But in those cases, did the offender in the former case still have to register? That's the crux of this argument. In my local area's database, we have a lot of people who got busted at 20 for bonking a 15 year old. That makes them retarded, but that doesn't make them criminals for life. Of course, all that comes up as is Rape 4, or "Impairing the morals of children".
Morally doesn't matter. Legally is all that matters to a group of people that might as well have pitchforks and torches.
It depends. I've reviewed a few iPhone games, and as long as you're not expecting the wheel to be reinvented, there ARE some good games.
The games that have been problematic are the ones that went and tried to do too much.
Most fan reaction - real, hardcore fans of CC - were anywhere from ambivalent to negative for Chrono Cross. The gaming media fell over it - as they should have, it's an outstanding game - but Square's "hardcore" base picked the game apart, and the game does not enjoy anywhere close to the reputation that CC does.
Doing something can often be more harmful than doing nothing. If they release something that doesn't meet the (sometimes ridiculous) expectations of their fanbase - a fanbase that rivals Star Wars fans in being batshit insane - it does cheapen the brand. They have to be very careful with what they do.
That said, releasing a C+D at 98% is a dick move. They knew the progress of the game well before it got to this point; they didn't just want to break the game, they wanted to break spirits, too.
It's funny... I was going to type up a long response for this, the way spiralpath did.
But the latest article on the site actually defends my view perfectly! http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/17/1710205&art_pos=1
Oh, I agree our filter, the way it's implimented (Websense), sucks; I've been hacking around it for years, and the only reason I don't now is because we're looking at a major audit.
I just know that a site that was linked from here, I couldn't get to it without going through the Digg bar (it was the EFF). I found that as laughable as you.
I'm going public with my support, and I don't even use the Pirate Bay.
My feeling is that Sweden only went after them because they faced international isolation at the hands of the United States. Therefore, international policy is being designed by LOBBYISTS FOR AN ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. An industry that already makes obscene profits.
I don't support piracy... but this is a sad, sad day, because I can see the next steps for this forming in my head, and I don't like them. This just emboldened an industry that's already shown it will do whatever it will restrict and attack the rights of it's customers to maintain their profits, and that has way too much influence in Washington, especially considering it's function.
I work behind a content filter, so the Digg bar was handy for reading sites that are filtered, so I didn't have to RDP onto a separate server to read blocked URLs. So this is kinda sad news for me, but c'est la vie, big picture and all that.
If it means KDawson gets locked up, then I welcome our new Governmental overlords.
He's already been punished. He's out of the Senate.
Everyone has the same bias: whatever brings in the most money.
So far, everything I'm reading in that court - from the non-trolls - says that these girls are young, foolish, and will learn from this the hard way the same way we did back when we were in that age. So that's fine in this particular case.
Are you kidding? This is the main reason I actually thought John Bolton's nomination as the ambassador to the UN was a good idea, despite the fact that he's a despicable person.
There we go. NOW I can take it seriously in joining the chorus of asking what the FUCK these people were thinking.
Forgive my scepticism, but I have to wait until I see a second, less biased source before I take this at face value. The rule of reporting is to get two verifications, and I think I'm going to do just that.
Only if that finally gives us my dream scenario of President CowboyNeal.
Does that take VAT into account?
I'm not questioning you, I'm legitimately curious.
Secondhand market? No, no, piracy killed the secondhand market for PC games long, long ago. Even in 2004, I couldn't return PC games after I'd bought and opened them, and trade-in costs didn't even offset the gas I spent.
You're never going to see someone buying back a used PC game - not a major retailer, at least - because if they did, they would lose money hand-over-fist, as people copied their games and returned them.
Steam isn't even a fucking company. Valve is the company. Get your facts straight.
It's funny because there's a game called Elven Legacy that's coming out soon; I previewed the Russian build of it, and it's nothing more than Battle of Wesnoth with better graphics, a shitty story, less options, and worse gameplay. It aped the hexagonal gameplay almost exactly, but made it less intuitive.
It's going to likely cost $30. I have Wesnoth on both Linux and Windows.
I think you're letting a historical view - propagated since the game's popularity has taken off - get in the way of perspective. The first Halo, for a console shooter, was very good. Furthermore, it wasn't presented to the fratboy crowd, it caught on with them. It was only after Halo's popularity jumped that the stupid shit started happening.
I'm not saying Halo is the bee's knees; it's above average when all is said and done, but not amazing. But I don't think it's the standard of mediocrity that everyone says it is, either.
kdawson's the editor. He fucks up everything he touches.
C'mon mods, fire away on me!
The "scene", as people like to call it, will always live. The people that have been pirating since swap parties and VHS recording will still be pirating.
It's the 98%ers that companies want to make afraid.
A real solution, of course, would be the content holders to get off their collective asses and make way for a global and non DRM:d way to access content at a reasonable fee.
Everyone that has tried this has been abused. No ifs, ands or buts; everyone that has tried going the open route has been anally raped with no lubricant, and no kiss afterwards. It's worked like this:
Company 1: *drm*
Consumer: "u fagget i pirate u"
Company 2: "That's not right... here, just pay a reasonable fee, and I won't limit you"
Consumer: "lol ur easy 2 pirate fag"
Company 2: ":("
Company 1: *MASSIVE LITIGATION PUSH*
Your idea makes sense on paper, but human nature is a painful reminder that it just doesn't work in reality. Check out the piracy numbers on the completely open (and Linux enabled!) World of Goo.