jamesh had it right. Car companies don't consider used car sales as theft because it isn't. They know the person bought the car from the dealership. You can't magically create a car. So it is a separate issue.
Software is easy to pirate and thus not pay for. Game companies want to find a way to make a profit in the used market. Honestly, rather than doing it this way, it would be nice if they made their own used game stores to compete...but that would just be the ideal. But this does help them get revenue from people who pirate.
In any case, it is annoying. And cars already have subscription models but it is for alternative services like On-Star.
Partially, I guess. A lot of cheating is a technical problem due to bugs or poor game design. These can have technical solutions. Cheaters themselves are just a certain class of people who either want to get ahead by any means possible, or who enjoy other people suffering. They also are a class of people who suffer from the Internet asshole effect. Their negative actions don't have any severe consequences. Just like on Internet forums, if they did the stuff they did in public, they would get the living crap beaten out of them and learn not to do it.
eBay and Amazon are completely different. There are real world consequences (eventually) when your screw around there. Reputation systems work there since there is money involved. It works less well in games because there is no penalty for people to rate you down if they don't like you or if they are better than them. Back in the day, I played a lot of CS. I was banned from so many servers for "cheating". I didn't cheat, I just played FPS competitively in college so I had a bit more skill than most. I imagine I would have a horrible reputation despite being someone who would never cheat.
And I don't really get where you are talking about people blaming cheaters on poor sales. Valve sells games just fine. They know their customers want to play a game as free of cheats as possible. Nothing is wrong with that...in fact, it is great for the consumer that they are concerned with cheating.
Wrong. I can't believe you are being modded up. You are basically making the argument that closed platforms are more secure than open platforms. In other words, you are saying Windows is more secure than Linux.
Just because the platform is closed, doesn't mean it is hack proof. On the contrary, when a hack is discovered the community can't really know how because it isn't an open platform.
On top of that, there are plenty of different kinds of hacks. For example, you can hack the controller so that you can do rapid fire rather than having to pull the trigger each time.
The only want to have a true competition is to put people in front of crowds on standard hardware. If you think consoles are hack proof, you are beyond naive.
Ahh, you make so much sense. This is the message we should be sending to companies. DRM is ok as long as it isn't overly obtrusive. If it is, we will not by your game.
I am in the exact same boat as you. Too many great games, not enough time. The companies that don't do extreme things like this will get my money.
I think it worked. Didn't they lessen the DRM? And I think much less people bought it than would have if it wasn't for the DRM. I am included in that. Well, that and I heard the game wasn't very good.
Of course, if no one pirated there would be no DRM. So it's like the dumb girl who keeps stealing from her boyfriends and wondering why they break up with her.
Then don't play the game. You guys get so outraged. AC is not the only game you can purchase. People who don't have broadband...yeah, it sucks. I don't think every game needs to cater to people in the digital stone age. It might be to their financial benefit if they did, but they don't need to. Besides, just get it on a console. You guys get all crazy over these things.
I'd say the moral thing to do is not buy or pirate the game. That way they get the message. By more people pirating, it just increases their justification for adding new forms of DRM.
Uhh, no. It is really hard to know who would buy a game with DRM and who would have bought it withuot DRM. There really is no way to figure this out with accuracy, so you are lying when you say there is overwhelming evidence that proves your point. Obviously there isn't, or companies wouldn't use DRM.
If you read Slashdot enough, you might believe it to be true because everyone cries foul with DRM. But anecdotes from this community is not evidence for anything other than the vocal majority on Slashdot hates DRM and have the technical ability to pirate.
WoW has tons of story...what the hell are you talking about? Cut scenes != story. Sheesh.
If Activision had any effect on Blizzard, SC II would be out 2 years ago. Blizzard can do what they want. This is quite obvious to anyone with a double digit IQ.
I think you are stupid because your logic is horrible. If you already decided you won't buy it because of LAN play, then why are you even bothering to comment? Why does it matter how they break up the campaign...YOU ALREADY KNOW YOU AREN'T GOING TO BUY IT. I am beginning to agree more with the people who are modding you troll. You either are a troll, or the type of person who can't admit when they are wrong.
You have to be kidding. You don't think Blizzard is going to be putting quality in to their games. Really.
You also use horrible logic. What if it was the writers that had so much story, that it could not be put in one game. Then wouldn't it reduce quality to shorten all of it to fit in to one game? The answer is yes...that would reduce the quality of the story. If the Lord of the Rings was each 90 minutes long, wouldn't that reduce the quality of the story? In any case, IT ISN'T OUT YET. So making claims that it is going to suck because it split up is just flat out stupid. If they implement it right, it will be great. Given Blizzard's track record, I believe they will pull it off.
No, they aren't. They are up front about it. If they weren't up front about it, how could you know to complain about it? Do you see how your logic fails?
It is like you have convinced yourself to not buy the game...and even when the things you believe fly in the face of reality, you refuse to change your position and continue repeating the same dribble.
Fine, then state it like that. Don't exaggerate how the core feature of Starcraft's popularity was LAN. Don't speculate on how the add-ons are going to be because you don't know. For me, your reasons to boycott are superficial. But don't try to win others to your side by making stuff up.
No matter how many times you say it...no, Starcraft wasn't great because of LAN play support and spawns. It was great because it was and is still a great game with an excellent campaign and incredibly balanced multiplayer. That might be what is important to you, and why you won't buy it. But don't make a claim that having LAN support makes or breaks a game, that is just stupid.
Not even close. Actually, I fully support people's decision to not purchase products that don't deliver what they want.
I just completely disagree with the logic you use to come to your conclusions. I also felt your post was a bit preachy...like you were the only one that had values and that other people must not since we would purchase the game.
Ultimately, I think it is good to boycott games with overly restrictive DRM. I just don't see anything that heinous in what Blizzard is doing. The fact that you have to exaggerate your points is a form of intellectual dishonesty to me.
I'm not trying to get you to buy the game. I am sure my opinion doesn't really matter to you. I am just trying to articulate that you aren't being logical on a lot of your points.
I'd like to think it makes me someone with enough balls to speak logic in the face of an overwhelming horde of people who circle-jerk their ideology at me. But I am giving myself a little too much credit, I think.
You are comparing EA to Blizzard. That would work on someone who lacks the ability to go back and look at this history of the companies and understand their track records. Unfortunately for you, I can so your point is...pointless.
Yeah, like I said, it wasn't really him. I am just tired of the ideology. And he might not be Libertarian (I didn't actually click your link, sorry), but he still espouses some of their ideology. I think sometimes you get tired of reading all the negativity modded up. I want more optimism. Kind of why I think reddit appeals a bit more to me these days.
I'd rather get a cracked version, risking virus' and trojans
I give you credit for at least acknowledging that it is a risk to do that. I'd still say if you don't like something a company does, just ignore it. They don't get your money and you still stay on the moral high ground.
But I'd say what I say to others. Maybe you should relax a bit and see how things are implemented. Nothing is final until it is released, and even then they might change things up. And battle.net is actually pretty sweet. I created an account, entered in cd keys, and now I can download all of my Blizzard games on any computer anywhere. That is enough of a reason for me to register right there.
I do understand your feeling though. You just want to play a single player game and not deal with the other stuff. I still feel the attitude is a bit extreme. Times change. I change with the times. I don't want to be like many old people today that can't figure out how to operate a computer because I have some dumb out dated principle. Like people who refuse to use credit cards and use checks instead. I can understand it, but it seems a bit silly to me.
Your assumption, which is wrong, that it isn't a full game. If you damn them now, you should have damned them when they released Brood Wars. It has roughly the same number of missions as the first full game. If they feel they can give each race a full Starcraft length story, then good on them for doing it.
People told Queen not to make Bohemian Rhapsody because it was too long for radio and no one wanted a ballad. It turned out to be epic. This could be the same. Or, it could be crap. But I am not retarded and damning a company before I really know what is going on.
Slashdot Mirror
jamesh had it right. Car companies don't consider used car sales as theft because it isn't. They know the person bought the car from the dealership. You can't magically create a car. So it is a separate issue.
Software is easy to pirate and thus not pay for. Game companies want to find a way to make a profit in the used market. Honestly, rather than doing it this way, it would be nice if they made their own used game stores to compete...but that would just be the ideal. But this does help them get revenue from people who pirate.
In any case, it is annoying. And cars already have subscription models but it is for alternative services like On-Star.
Partially, I guess. A lot of cheating is a technical problem due to bugs or poor game design. These can have technical solutions. Cheaters themselves are just a certain class of people who either want to get ahead by any means possible, or who enjoy other people suffering. They also are a class of people who suffer from the Internet asshole effect. Their negative actions don't have any severe consequences. Just like on Internet forums, if they did the stuff they did in public, they would get the living crap beaten out of them and learn not to do it.
eBay and Amazon are completely different. There are real world consequences (eventually) when your screw around there. Reputation systems work there since there is money involved. It works less well in games because there is no penalty for people to rate you down if they don't like you or if they are better than them. Back in the day, I played a lot of CS. I was banned from so many servers for "cheating". I didn't cheat, I just played FPS competitively in college so I had a bit more skill than most. I imagine I would have a horrible reputation despite being someone who would never cheat.
And I don't really get where you are talking about people blaming cheaters on poor sales. Valve sells games just fine. They know their customers want to play a game as free of cheats as possible. Nothing is wrong with that...in fact, it is great for the consumer that they are concerned with cheating.
Wrong. I can't believe you are being modded up. You are basically making the argument that closed platforms are more secure than open platforms. In other words, you are saying Windows is more secure than Linux.
Just because the platform is closed, doesn't mean it is hack proof. On the contrary, when a hack is discovered the community can't really know how because it isn't an open platform.
On top of that, there are plenty of different kinds of hacks. For example, you can hack the controller so that you can do rapid fire rather than having to pull the trigger each time.
The only want to have a true competition is to put people in front of crowds on standard hardware. If you think consoles are hack proof, you are beyond naive.
Ahh, you make so much sense. This is the message we should be sending to companies. DRM is ok as long as it isn't overly obtrusive. If it is, we will not by your game.
I am in the exact same boat as you. Too many great games, not enough time. The companies that don't do extreme things like this will get my money.
I think it worked. Didn't they lessen the DRM? And I think much less people bought it than would have if it wasn't for the DRM. I am included in that. Well, that and I heard the game wasn't very good.
Of course, if no one pirated there would be no DRM. So it's like the dumb girl who keeps stealing from her boyfriends and wondering why they break up with her.
This. Thank you for saying it and thank you moderators for actually modding up the only sensible action.
Then don't play the game. You guys get so outraged. AC is not the only game you can purchase. People who don't have broadband...yeah, it sucks. I don't think every game needs to cater to people in the digital stone age. It might be to their financial benefit if they did, but they don't need to. Besides, just get it on a console. You guys get all crazy over these things.
I'd say the moral thing to do is not buy or pirate the game. That way they get the message. By more people pirating, it just increases their justification for adding new forms of DRM.
Uhh, no. It is really hard to know who would buy a game with DRM and who would have bought it withuot DRM. There really is no way to figure this out with accuracy, so you are lying when you say there is overwhelming evidence that proves your point. Obviously there isn't, or companies wouldn't use DRM.
If you read Slashdot enough, you might believe it to be true because everyone cries foul with DRM. But anecdotes from this community is not evidence for anything other than the vocal majority on Slashdot hates DRM and have the technical ability to pirate.
That says nothing about how they will price it. i.e., your i.e. is full of crap.
Right. At least make it plausible if you are going to make crap up.
WoW has tons of story...what the hell are you talking about? Cut scenes != story. Sheesh.
If Activision had any effect on Blizzard, SC II would be out 2 years ago. Blizzard can do what they want. This is quite obvious to anyone with a double digit IQ.
I think you are stupid because your logic is horrible. If you already decided you won't buy it because of LAN play, then why are you even bothering to comment? Why does it matter how they break up the campaign...YOU ALREADY KNOW YOU AREN'T GOING TO BUY IT. I am beginning to agree more with the people who are modding you troll. You either are a troll, or the type of person who can't admit when they are wrong.
You have to be kidding. You don't think Blizzard is going to be putting quality in to their games. Really.
You also use horrible logic. What if it was the writers that had so much story, that it could not be put in one game. Then wouldn't it reduce quality to shorten all of it to fit in to one game? The answer is yes...that would reduce the quality of the story. If the Lord of the Rings was each 90 minutes long, wouldn't that reduce the quality of the story? In any case, IT ISN'T OUT YET. So making claims that it is going to suck because it split up is just flat out stupid. If they implement it right, it will be great. Given Blizzard's track record, I believe they will pull it off.
No, they aren't. They are up front about it. If they weren't up front about it, how could you know to complain about it? Do you see how your logic fails?
It is like you have convinced yourself to not buy the game...and even when the things you believe fly in the face of reality, you refuse to change your position and continue repeating the same dribble.
Fine, then state it like that. Don't exaggerate how the core feature of Starcraft's popularity was LAN. Don't speculate on how the add-ons are going to be because you don't know. For me, your reasons to boycott are superficial. But don't try to win others to your side by making stuff up.
Then he has no character since he is bragging about his awesome values on Slashdot. /sarcasm
Listen, I support boycotts too. I just think his reasons behind his boycott are either based on speculation or falsehoods.
No matter how many times you say it...no, Starcraft wasn't great because of LAN play support and spawns. It was great because it was and is still a great game with an excellent campaign and incredibly balanced multiplayer. That might be what is important to you, and why you won't buy it. But don't make a claim that having LAN support makes or breaks a game, that is just stupid.
Not even close. Actually, I fully support people's decision to not purchase products that don't deliver what they want.
I just completely disagree with the logic you use to come to your conclusions. I also felt your post was a bit preachy...like you were the only one that had values and that other people must not since we would purchase the game.
Ultimately, I think it is good to boycott games with overly restrictive DRM. I just don't see anything that heinous in what Blizzard is doing. The fact that you have to exaggerate your points is a form of intellectual dishonesty to me.
I'm not trying to get you to buy the game. I am sure my opinion doesn't really matter to you. I am just trying to articulate that you aren't being logical on a lot of your points.
I'd like to think it makes me someone with enough balls to speak logic in the face of an overwhelming horde of people who circle-jerk their ideology at me. But I am giving myself a little too much credit, I think.
You are comparing EA to Blizzard. That would work on someone who lacks the ability to go back and look at this history of the companies and understand their track records. Unfortunately for you, I can so your point is...pointless.
Yeah, like I said, it wasn't really him. I am just tired of the ideology. And he might not be Libertarian (I didn't actually click your link, sorry), but he still espouses some of their ideology. I think sometimes you get tired of reading all the negativity modded up. I want more optimism. Kind of why I think reddit appeals a bit more to me these days.
I'd rather get a cracked version, risking virus' and trojans
I give you credit for at least acknowledging that it is a risk to do that. I'd still say if you don't like something a company does, just ignore it. They don't get your money and you still stay on the moral high ground.
But I'd say what I say to others. Maybe you should relax a bit and see how things are implemented. Nothing is final until it is released, and even then they might change things up. And battle.net is actually pretty sweet. I created an account, entered in cd keys, and now I can download all of my Blizzard games on any computer anywhere. That is enough of a reason for me to register right there.
I do understand your feeling though. You just want to play a single player game and not deal with the other stuff. I still feel the attitude is a bit extreme. Times change. I change with the times. I don't want to be like many old people today that can't figure out how to operate a computer because I have some dumb out dated principle. Like people who refuse to use credit cards and use checks instead. I can understand it, but it seems a bit silly to me.
Your assumption, which is wrong, that it isn't a full game. If you damn them now, you should have damned them when they released Brood Wars. It has roughly the same number of missions as the first full game. If they feel they can give each race a full Starcraft length story, then good on them for doing it.
People told Queen not to make Bohemian Rhapsody because it was too long for radio and no one wanted a ballad. It turned out to be epic. This could be the same. Or, it could be crap. But I am not retarded and damning a company before I really know what is going on.