I think a lot of people out there, including me, are somewhat jaded by the lack of quality in many products being released. Some games you pay $50 for only to learn the other 1/2 of the content is DLC you must pay for. The games I am talking about are EA games that are very well known. I have been burned one too many times by companies trying to cheat players out money. Even some online games are running subs as well as item shops to increase their revenue.
So here are my options.
Quit playing games that do this, or pirate the game to see if it's actually worth buying. With the extras you end up purchasing, IF the game was not a fraud, then there is no harm done. If the company is selling CRAP to the buyer again, then their scheme will not work.
I am becoming more and more turned off by these policies. They inconvenience the people who actually pay for the game. Hackers/Crackers will get around any copyright protection they come up with. Also, if you think everyone plays while on an internet connection, you are naive. Many people play single player games because they DON'T have an internet connection, or can't use one at that moment.
If anything, more people will look to pirate games with measures like this because of the inconvenience factor. Someone mentioned Spore earlier, and it is a perfect example.
The companies will lose more customers, the game will get cracked, and they will blame it on crackers, as they always have.
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
Yes, entitlement to actually get a product worth $50. Shame on him.
I remember back when games took for ever to beat, you paid your $50 and got your monies worth. Now its just about the graphics but you can only dress up a pile of crap so many ways before I realize its the same pile of crap with a different color of bow...
but now you want to add DRM to it so I can only touch this pile of crap 3 times and then it disappears....
Yeah that's pretty much my problem too. Lately I have considered giving up gaming all together because it just doesn't seem worth it anymore. The fun is not = to the time and money paid.
Sad days.
... Not to mention. Talked to my husband about this a minute ago, and there are already known ways to hack this system... So they are paying people to create a protection system that people already know how to beat. Go team! LOL
Amazing Ubisoft think they can get away with this.
Maybe even more amazing, and scary, is the fact people don't even care, or are on Ubisoft's side. Will you care once there is a camera in every room of your house watching what you do? All in an effort to keep us safe?
Laugh at it now, but I bet 15 years ago people were laughing at the concept of a game publisher keeping tabs on you by watching what you do in the net. This should be illegal. Unfortunately, Americans are giving away their right to privacy at ab alarming pace.
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
Well the perfect customer is the one who buys everything regardless of quality or if he likes it.
But wants to be this customer?
Maybe in your world....that's certainly not what I'm suggesting though.
In my world, the perfect customer is the one who exercises good judgement in his purchases, buying only those things that s/he is interested in and acknowledging that, regardless of how much s/he liked it, still got value out of it for however long it was used. Now, "quality" (i.e., it's not working as intended) is a different matter entirely and that needs to be taken up with the company directly; furthermore, it certainly doesn't offer any more of an excuse to pirate software. If you're concerned about quality, you wait or don't buy it at all.
I very much have a history of advocating consumer rights but that goes hand in hand with seller and service provider rights too, so please don't cute with attempting to twist my words into suggesting consumers should blindly accept all shovelware and like it.
I suppose this is the natural evolution in copyright protection for PC games. Too bad I feel it's too invasive, looks like I won't be purchasing Assassin's Creed 2.
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
So from your standpoint, if we have doubts we shouldn't play the game in any form. Don't buy it and don't pirate it. Explain to me how either are different. Both result in NO sales for the company.
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
Yes, entitlement to actually get a product worth $50. Shame on him.
It's worth $50 dollars to the person who made and published it. if you disagree, wait until it comes down in price, or just don't buy it. Society doesn't condone just taking things from someone if you don't like how much they're offering it for, otherwise you would see a lot more people walking around with diamonds.
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
well yes I will own this title you are giving me. I do think I am entitled to be as informed as I can be about a product I am going to spend my money on. Be it a game, a car, or a home... what ever I will do what ever I feel is necessary to put my money in the proper place.
Lets say you go to a friends house who bought a new game you have been wanting to try out. You are worried that you'll be burned again, so you ask them if it's ok to borrow the game to see if you want to buy it. Your friend agrees, and you try out the game.
Have you stolen from the gaming company because you have played their game without paying for the hours you played?
Just as long as they put on the package that you must have a continuous internet connection to operate it isn't a big deal. I will not buy it of course, but at least if it's on the box people can make informed decisions.
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
I never said a company was entitled to a customer's money because they made a product. You won't find that in any of my posts that you opted to quote or...not quote.
See the problem is that I rarely will go out and buy a single player game anymore. All of the ones I do buy are ones I have downloaded and liked. So for me in this instance, right or wrong, I would not buy any games other than MMORPG's if it were not for pirating.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
well yes I will own this title you are giving me. I do think I am entitled to be as informed as I can be about a product I am going to spend my money on. Be it a game, a car, or a home... what ever I will do what ever I feel is necessary to put my money in the proper place.
Okay, as long as we're clear on that -- Companies like ubisoft can point to people like you to justify these demented DRM strategies that frustrate consumers in general.
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
I never said a company was entitled to a customer's money because they made a product. You won't find that in any of my posts that you opted to quote or...not quote.
Ok the company is not entitled to my money... and I am not entitled to try before I buy... I shouldn't buy the game if I am unsure it is a good investment, but I am not allowed to actually touch the game until I pay for it. Then I can not return it if it was a pile of crap. I am out of $50 the company makes Millions on a pile of crap... yep its a Win-Win situation here...
If you apply your logic to pretty much anthing else on the planet you can buy it would not make sense at all, but yet for digital media its the only place where it does not make sense, but is accepted anyway....
I never said a company was entitled to a customer's money because they made a product. You won't find that in any of my posts that you opted to quote or...not quote.
Why can we talk about one extreme and not the other? Your quote spoke to the customer entitlement and the logical flip side of that is producer entitlement. Whether or not you can be quoted as saying a producer is entitled to something is really irrelevant. However, your quote serves as a spring board for another view point. Simple as that.
The problem really down to the fact game producers really do seem to feel entitled regardless of whether they put out a decent product or not. As a result, they dream up these DRM schemes, that are effectively useless in their advertised intent, in order to protect those sales they feel so entitled to.
With that in mind (and unrelated to the quoted), I think some people in this thread, and perhaps more relevant to the OP, have made some excellent posts about the intent to stop piracy versus the attempt to mitigate second-hand sales. While I think it has been pretty well established that this form of DRM will do little/nothing to stop piracy (regardless of anyone's view of piracy), but how this affects second hand sales and how it passes the First Sale Doctrine in U.S. markets is a much more interesting conversation. This announcement coupled with the increased attention to resales from the larger producers certainly gives one pause to think.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Hilarious. Seems that everyone I know who owns a game is a pirate then :P Good times.
Ever play guitar hero on someone else's machine? YOU'RE A PIRATE. That's right, put down the guitar, and back away slowly....
Just wait... coming soon... you are walking down the street and just look into an arcade, you must pay a fee to every game producer just for looking. You walk by your neighbors house and hear music, you are billed by the music label for listening to music you do not own the rights to... you drive down the road past a Drive-in movie theater (yes they still exist) and all of the sudden you are arrested for viewing a film you did not pay for....
You walk by your neighbors house and hear music, you are billed by the music label for listening to music you do not own the rights to...
I know it's total off-topic, but couldn't help but comment:
The quoted might be closer to the truth then you might think. To be a bit closer to the truth though, it would be your neighbor facing charges from ASCAP for a public performance of a copyrighted work. Next up, ring tones.....
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Don't laugh zasd it is coming. Also you won't have a choice to pay or not, it will auto deduct from your chip that will be forcibly implanted into everyone soon. Laugh now, pay later.
You know, congrats Ubisoft. Way to screw yourself. You're making a single-player game require online connectivity to even play. Half of it's user's won't know that, and as sad as it is to admit, hackers will have that fixed in a jiffy. Meaning, people will rely on hackers in order to even be able to play their game, if anyone even buys it. I think everyone needs to know the 'new method' Ubisoft has launched. It needs a huge label on the box saying 'Warning! Internet is Required!' Really I'd say about 40% of the people that would play AC2 on PC don't have internet connection, and not to mention losing your game saves if their server's fall or your router restarts. Absolutely the wrong move on their part, major fail. You can't stop hackers, you can only give them new obstacles to overcome, from my experience in computer's, let's just say this is an easy fix.
** There's only one way to fix the problem here ubisoft, make those games that require internet connection, downloadable only. Steam, D2D, there's lots of sites that have the capability to do this. It cuts down the cost of plastic and packaging, and won't rip off the people who still buy the disc's at walmart because they don't have internet. If you don't think people will pay for downloadable games, maybe lower the price by 5$, that's enough incentive to buy it online.**
I think someone mentioned this earlier that there is a huge double standard from what some find acceptable for game/application copyright and that is acceptable for everything else. In my opinion they should be the same, but hey, it's a huge gray area for some.
I could mention a few other disturbing things like patents on seeds (real ones that grow plants) that have been allowed because they are specially bio-engineered. Patents on living things are wrong too, but yet they are there.
Only the naive think the ideas of "right & wrong" come into play with business. It is always about profits.
This isn't about whether theft is right or wrong. This is about them thinking they can make more money by putting this protection on their games. As we have seen recently, a lot of companies are trying a variety of things to combat piracy, some working better than others.
Do not confuse a companies greed with the intent to do what is right.
Comments
Here's a thought.
I think a lot of people out there, including me, are somewhat jaded by the lack of quality in many products being released. Some games you pay $50 for only to learn the other 1/2 of the content is DLC you must pay for. The games I am talking about are EA games that are very well known. I have been burned one too many times by companies trying to cheat players out money. Even some online games are running subs as well as item shops to increase their revenue.
So here are my options.
Quit playing games that do this, or pirate the game to see if it's actually worth buying. With the extras you end up purchasing, IF the game was not a fraud, then there is no harm done. If the company is selling CRAP to the buyer again, then their scheme will not work.
I am becoming more and more turned off by these policies. They inconvenience the people who actually pay for the game. Hackers/Crackers will get around any copyright protection they come up with. Also, if you think everyone plays while on an internet connection, you are naive. Many people play single player games because they DON'T have an internet connection, or can't use one at that moment.
If anything, more people will look to pirate games with measures like this because of the inconvenience factor. Someone mentioned Spore earlier, and it is a perfect example.
The companies will lose more customers, the game will get cracked, and they will blame it on crackers, as they always have.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
Yes, entitlement to actually get a product worth $50. Shame on him.
I remember back when games took for ever to beat, you paid your $50 and got your monies worth. Now its just about the graphics but you can only dress up a pile of crap so many ways before I realize its the same pile of crap with a different color of bow...
but now you want to add DRM to it so I can only touch this pile of crap 3 times and then it disappears....
Yeah that's pretty much my problem too. Lately I have considered giving up gaming all together because it just doesn't seem worth it anymore. The fun is not = to the time and money paid.
Sad days.
... Not to mention. Talked to my husband about this a minute ago, and there are already known ways to hack this system... So they are paying people to create a protection system that people already know how to beat. Go team! LOL
Amazing Ubisoft think they can get away with this.
Maybe even more amazing, and scary, is the fact people don't even care, or are on Ubisoft's side. Will you care once there is a camera in every room of your house watching what you do? All in an effort to keep us safe?
Laugh at it now, but I bet 15 years ago people were laughing at the concept of a game publisher keeping tabs on you by watching what you do in the net. This should be illegal. Unfortunately, Americans are giving away their right to privacy at ab alarming pace.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
Well the perfect customer is the one who buys everything regardless of quality or if he likes it.
But wants to be this customer?
Maybe in your world....that's certainly not what I'm suggesting though.
In my world, the perfect customer is the one who exercises good judgement in his purchases, buying only those things that s/he is interested in and acknowledging that, regardless of how much s/he liked it, still got value out of it for however long it was used. Now, "quality" (i.e., it's not working as intended) is a different matter entirely and that needs to be taken up with the company directly; furthermore, it certainly doesn't offer any more of an excuse to pirate software. If you're concerned about quality, you wait or don't buy it at all.
I very much have a history of advocating consumer rights but that goes hand in hand with seller and service provider rights too, so please don't cute with attempting to twist my words into suggesting consumers should blindly accept all shovelware and like it.
a
I suppose this is the natural evolution in copyright protection for PC games. Too bad I feel it's too invasive, looks like I won't be purchasing Assassin's Creed 2.
I'm not here to complete my forum PVP dailies.
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
So from your standpoint, if we have doubts we shouldn't play the game in any form. Don't buy it and don't pirate it. Explain to me how either are different. Both result in NO sales for the company.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
Yes, entitlement to actually get a product worth $50. Shame on him.
It's worth $50 dollars to the person who made and published it. if you disagree, wait until it comes down in price, or just don't buy it. Society doesn't condone just taking things from someone if you don't like how much they're offering it for, otherwise you would see a lot more people walking around with diamonds.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
well yes I will own this title you are giving me. I do think I am entitled to be as informed as I can be about a product I am going to spend my money on. Be it a game, a car, or a home... what ever I will do what ever I feel is necessary to put my money in the proper place.
I have another hypothetical situation...
Lets say you go to a friends house who bought a new game you have been wanting to try out. You are worried that you'll be burned again, so you ask them if it's ok to borrow the game to see if you want to buy it. Your friend agrees, and you try out the game.
Have you stolen from the gaming company because you have played their game without paying for the hours you played?
Just as long as they put on the package that you must have a continuous internet connection to operate it isn't a big deal. I will not buy it of course, but at least if it's on the box people can make informed decisions.
Archlinux ftw
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
I never said a company was entitled to a customer's money because they made a product. You won't find that in any of my posts that you opted to quote or...not quote.
That illustrates my point though -- what about single-players games people such as yourself download but don't like? You're trying to make it sound like you're being a good consumer going out of your way to buy this game after trying your pirate-demo but glossing over the fact that you're not buying games you did play too (but just didn't happen to like).
I am not trying to make myself look like a good consumer, I am just tired of forking out $50 for a crappy game. I am not some huge game down loader, so why you pick me to go at with is beyond me, the last game I downloaded was spore... I spend almost all of my time playing MMO's I rarely play single player games any more.
You make it sound like I go get every game that is released to "demo" it, but I could careless about 90% of the garbage that they release and dare to put the title of "Game" on it. like Crysis, what 3 hours of play time for $50 just for pretty graphics....
And there it is, that entitlement.
well yes I will own this title you are giving me. I do think I am entitled to be as informed as I can be about a product I am going to spend my money on. Be it a game, a car, or a home... what ever I will do what ever I feel is necessary to put my money in the proper place.
Okay, as long as we're clear on that -- Companies like ubisoft can point to people like you to justify these demented DRM strategies that frustrate consumers in general.
Xavya, sharing non freedom lisenced software with your friends makes you a pirate. Just informing you, not flaming.
Archlinux ftw
On the other hand, why is the company entitled to a customer's money just because they made a product? I mean, the fact they made a product does not take into account quality or value of said product. With many other physical items you have the opportunity to hold them in your hand and gauge the quality and perceived value before making a purchase. Digital content does not allow this manner of pre-purchase inspection by default so I can certainly understand people looking for a trial mechanism (legit or pirated).
I think I understand your overall point in that people will try to justify an activity so as not to feel they are doing something unethical/inappropriate/etc. I just don't agree with your approach as it is a very one-sided view.
I never said a company was entitled to a customer's money because they made a product. You won't find that in any of my posts that you opted to quote or...not quote.
Ok the company is not entitled to my money... and I am not entitled to try before I buy... I shouldn't buy the game if I am unsure it is a good investment, but I am not allowed to actually touch the game until I pay for it. Then I can not return it if it was a pile of crap. I am out of $50 the company makes Millions on a pile of crap... yep its a Win-Win situation here...
If you apply your logic to pretty much anthing else on the planet you can buy it would not make sense at all, but yet for digital media its the only place where it does not make sense, but is accepted anyway....
Why can we talk about one extreme and not the other? Your quote spoke to the customer entitlement and the logical flip side of that is producer entitlement. Whether or not you can be quoted as saying a producer is entitled to something is really irrelevant. However, your quote serves as a spring board for another view point. Simple as that.
The problem really down to the fact game producers really do seem to feel entitled regardless of whether they put out a decent product or not. As a result, they dream up these DRM schemes, that are effectively useless in their advertised intent, in order to protect those sales they feel so entitled to.
With that in mind (and unrelated to the quoted), I think some people in this thread, and perhaps more relevant to the OP, have made some excellent posts about the intent to stop piracy versus the attempt to mitigate second-hand sales. While I think it has been pretty well established that this form of DRM will do little/nothing to stop piracy (regardless of anyone's view of piracy), but how this affects second hand sales and how it passes the First Sale Doctrine in U.S. markets is a much more interesting conversation. This announcement coupled with the increased attention to resales from the larger producers certainly gives one pause to think.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Hilarious. Seems that everyone I know who owns a game is a pirate then :P
Good times.
Ever play guitar hero on someone else's machine? YOU'RE A PIRATE. That's right, put down the guitar, and back away slowly....
Just wait... coming soon... you are walking down the street and just look into an arcade, you must pay a fee to every game producer just for looking. You walk by your neighbors house and hear music, you are billed by the music label for listening to music you do not own the rights to... you drive down the road past a Drive-in movie theater (yes they still exist) and all of the sudden you are arrested for viewing a film you did not pay for....
I know it's total off-topic, but couldn't help but comment:
The quoted might be closer to the truth then you might think. To be a bit closer to the truth though, it would be your neighbor facing charges from ASCAP for a public performance of a copyrighted work. Next up, ring tones.....
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Don't laugh zasd it is coming. Also you won't have a choice to pay or not, it will auto deduct from your chip that will be forcibly implanted into everyone soon. Laugh now, pay later.
Archlinux ftw
You know, congrats Ubisoft. Way to screw yourself. You're making a single-player game require online connectivity to even play. Half of it's user's won't know that, and as sad as it is to admit, hackers will have that fixed in a jiffy. Meaning, people will rely on hackers in order to even be able to play their game, if anyone even buys it. I think everyone needs to know the 'new method' Ubisoft has launched. It needs a huge label on the box saying 'Warning! Internet is Required!' Really I'd say about 40% of the people that would play AC2 on PC don't have internet connection, and not to mention losing your game saves if their server's fall or your router restarts. Absolutely the wrong move on their part, major fail. You can't stop hackers, you can only give them new obstacles to overcome, from my experience in computer's, let's just say this is an easy fix.
** There's only one way to fix the problem here ubisoft, make those games that require internet connection, downloadable only. Steam, D2D, there's lots of sites that have the capability to do this. It cuts down the cost of plastic and packaging, and won't rip off the people who still buy the disc's at walmart because they don't have internet. If you don't think people will pay for downloadable games, maybe lower the price by 5$, that's enough incentive to buy it online.**
Played - M59, EQOA, EQ, EQ2, PS, SWG[Favorite], DAoC, UO, RS, MXO, CoH/CoV, TR, FFXI, FoM, WoW, Eve, Rift, SWTOR, TSW.
Playing - PS2, AoW, GW2
I think someone mentioned this earlier that there is a huge double standard from what some find acceptable for game/application copyright and that is acceptable for everything else. In my opinion they should be the same, but hey, it's a huge gray area for some.
I could mention a few other disturbing things like patents on seeds (real ones that grow plants) that have been allowed because they are specially bio-engineered. Patents on living things are wrong too, but yet they are there.
Only the naive think the ideas of "right & wrong" come into play with business. It is always about profits.
This isn't about whether theft is right or wrong. This is about them thinking they can make more money by putting this protection on their games. As we have seen recently, a lot of companies are trying a variety of things to combat piracy, some working better than others.
Do not confuse a companies greed with the intent to do what is right.