Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Star Citizen and Squadron 42 split - now you suddenly have to buy second one.

17810121324

Comments

  • joejccva71joejccva71 Member UncommonPosts: 848
    Thourne said:

    Ahh calling me out for being honest as a defense of your dishonesty.
    I can't claim suprise.
    What a mature adult would do is concede they were in error.

    Like it or not you are part of society and by joining this forum also part of a community.
    Both have rules. 
    One has laws.
    You broke the basic rule of honesty which I would like to think we would all appreciate from each other, but worse you went further and wish to condone and support criminal behavior that damages your very hobby.

    Your behavior is poor.

    What dishonesty?  I haven't been dishonest with anyone.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Talonsin said:
    Murph, while I enjoy many of your posts, you really are splitting hairs on this one.  Torrenting a game you did not pay for can easily be considered theft.

    In a moral sense sure, it's taking something that you don't have a right to - I don't disagree with that but under legal terminology torrenting isn't actually classed as theft. I'm a bit of a pedant for absolute statements.
    Well, I am sure some people now in jail also thought it is not theft.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/18/arts/international/swedens-notorious-distinction-as-a-haven-for-online-pirates.html?_r=0

    Torrenting Squadron 42, Star Citizen or any copyright protected game can get you in trouble.


    Have fun

  • ThourneThourne Member RarePosts: 757
    Thourne said:

    Ahh calling me out for being honest as a defense of your dishonesty.
    I can't claim suprise.
    What a mature adult would do is concede they were in error.

    Like it or not you are part of society and by joining this forum also part of a community.
    Both have rules. 
    One has laws.
    You broke the basic rule of honesty which I would like to think we would all appreciate from each other, but worse you went further and wish to condone and support criminal behavior that damages your very hobby.

    Your behavior is poor.

    What dishonesty?  I haven't been dishonest with anyone.
    Thievery is dishonest. You condone and support it by your own words.
  • BrenicsBrenics Member RarePosts: 1,939
    edited February 2016
    LOL this is getting really weird. I love this > http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/star-citizen/artikel/star_citizen_squadron_42,48820,3239947.html (from the article) the writers never saw ANYTHING new of SQ42. Only what was shown at CitizenCon. Wonder if CR named CitizenCon, that would be a whole joke on it's own. :-D

    SQ42 looks to be years away. Hope CR has saved a lot of that cash, because he is going to need it to finish SQ42. 

    Just can't this shit up. :-D
    I'm not perfect but I'm always myself!

    Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event


    4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.

    http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/

    Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!

  • ThourneThourne Member RarePosts: 757
    edited February 2016
    Brenics said:
    LOL this is getting really weird. I love this > http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/star-citizen/artikel/star_citizen_squadron_42,48820,3239947.html (from the article) the writers never saw ANYTHING new of SQ42. Only what was shown at CitizenCon. Wonder if CR named CitizenCon, that would be a whole joke on it's own. :-D

    SQ42 looks to be years away. Hope CR has saved a lot of that cash, because he is going to need it to finish SQ42. 

    Just can't this shit up. :-D
    So the article written roughly 5 weeks after the con had seen nothing new.
    How is this news or surprising?
    That article was written in Nov  2015 and Citizencon was what OCT 2015? (I can't remember)

    *Edit:spelling
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    Not to mention that the article ends with a pro-SC summary with the caveat that a lot still needs to be done. 


    Have fun
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Brenics said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    Brenics said:
    Yes we all knew SQ42 was separate. The real argument and the people that signed up all because of SM seems to be forgotten here. Those people are all being denied refunds for false advertising from what they expected and bought in to couple of years back. 

    It is hilarious how you guys are arguing over a game that was a package and now being split apart. Yet SM which was a separate game from SC is now in SC yet when you play SC you never see SM. 

    your first paragraph says that its not mystery that SQ42 was separate and then you say the package was split.

    why post if you arent going to make any sense?
    I should of made it more clear. Way back it was all a complete package. The games them self was always separate. Yet they are now saying SM and SC was always going to be together or some such thing that CR has said. :-D
    Why would it make any difference to those people? They get both anyway don't they?

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited February 2016
    Erillion said:
    Well, I am sure some people now in jail also thought it is not theft.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/18/arts/international/swedens-notorious-distinction-as-a-haven-for-online-pirates.html?_r=0

    Torrenting Squadron 42, Star Citizen or any copyright protected game can get you in trouble.

    Have fun


    But if you open said article and Ctrl+F for the word theft, it doesn't appear once.

    I'm not trying to make any excuses for obtaining content that you don't have a right to, I'm just saying that if we're stating things are illegal then we need to be clear about what those terms actually refer to.

    Your example of "Torrenting Squadron 42, Star Citizen or any copyright protected game can get you in trouble." isn't wholely true because lots of games allow you to torrent their contents. Many, including CIG's, even have built in torrent clients.
    Downloading the assets for the new X-COM for example is not actually illegal providing you don't circumvent the DRM. Quite often games are put on torrent sites and not DMCA'd by the publisher to avoid server stress on release day.

    As always, all that legal stuff is a minefield.
  • ThourneThourne Member RarePosts: 757
    Erillion said:


    As always, all that legal stuff is a minefield.
    Indeed it is.

    Again though, the spark that ignited this debate was an obvious appeal to theft of software that in itself damages our very hobby.

    Let us not forget that that was exactly the point of the posters.

    I have no issues with the points you bring up @rpmcmurphy; I simply wish to keep the reason we got here clear.
  • joejccva71joejccva71 Member UncommonPosts: 848
    Thourne said:
    Thourne said:

    Ahh calling me out for being honest as a defense of your dishonesty.
    I can't claim suprise.
    What a mature adult would do is concede they were in error.

    Like it or not you are part of society and by joining this forum also part of a community.
    Both have rules. 
    One has laws.
    You broke the basic rule of honesty which I would like to think we would all appreciate from each other, but worse you went further and wish to condone and support criminal behavior that damages your very hobby.

    Your behavior is poor.

    What dishonesty?  I haven't been dishonest with anyone.
    Thievery is dishonest. You condone and support it by your own words.

    You should talk to Chris Roberts and RSI about dishonesty.   They're the ones that initially said what they were going to do, and then change it after they started running out of cash.  Why should those that did not pledge or back them get bent over the kitchen sink?

    It's a total dick move to the consumer that didn't pledge.
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,904
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
  • ThourneThourne Member RarePosts: 757
    Thourne said:
    Thourne said:



    What dishonesty?  I haven't been dishonest with anyone.
    Thievery is dishonest. You condone and support it by your own words.

    You should talk to Chris Roberts and RSI about dishonesty.   They're the ones that initially said what they were going to do, and then change it after they started running out of cash.  Why should those that did not pledge or back them get bent over the kitchen sink?

    It's a total dick move to the consumer that didn't pledge.
    All you are doing is attempting to justify your encouragement of the immoral act of theft. 
    Please stop.

    Even if you believe what you say, you are inferring that "Two wrongs would make a right" and that is not true.
    Lastly your points about their financial state are supposition. You are basing your argument, at least in part, on unsubstantiated claims.

    What troubles me the most is that you have yet to admit that encouraging thievery is wrong, immoral and illegal. 
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Thourne said:
    Thourne said:

    Ahh calling me out for being honest as a defense of your dishonesty.
    I can't claim suprise.
    What a mature adult would do is concede they were in error.

    Like it or not you are part of society and by joining this forum also part of a community.
    Both have rules. 
    One has laws.
    You broke the basic rule of honesty which I would like to think we would all appreciate from each other, but worse you went further and wish to condone and support criminal behavior that damages your very hobby.

    Your behavior is poor.

    What dishonesty?  I haven't been dishonest with anyone.
    Thievery is dishonest. You condone and support it by your own words.

    You should talk to Chris Roberts and RSI about dishonesty.   They're the ones that initially said what they were going to do, and then change it after they started running out of cash.  Why should those that did not pledge or back them get bent over the kitchen sink?

    It's a total dick move to the consumer that didn't pledge.

    People who back early generally get a much better deal. I got in for $20, actually, but I don't feel like it's dishonest that you now have to pay more. There's 2 weeks before this happens, so why not just back it? If you don't then you made that choice. 

    Do you get upset that you have to buy additional episodes for these Tell Tale games? 

    So you're getting upset that you'll have a free game, but then you need to actually buy the single-player game. DAMN THOSE MONEY GRUBBERS!!! I don't know why this is a big deal, to be honest. If it's that big a deal to you then I'd just get in now. If you don't then you can at least wait for a review. If it's bad, at least you didn't put money in.

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Just here to remind everyone that SQ42 has ALWAYS been billed as a separate stand alone game

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    SEANMCAD said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game mode
    FTFY

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    SEANMCAD said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game mode
    FTFY
    1. I dont think that is correct
    2. I dont see how it remotely matters

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • goobsnewsgoobsnews Member UncommonPosts: 220
    Torval said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    I'm not seeing that.
    Really? Been to reddit or the CIG forums lately? The amount of backer anger is higher than it's ever been.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol

    Naw, it only goes down every time Chris opens his mouth......which I suppose is a problem since he likes to open it a lot.
  • goobsnewsgoobsnews Member UncommonPosts: 220
    SEANMCAD said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game
    Wrong.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    goobsnews said:
    Torval said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    I'm not seeing that.
    Really? Been to reddit or the CIG forums lately? The amount of backer anger is higher than it's ever been.
    why would people be getting upset about something that was stated when SQ42 was first announced

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • goobsnewsgoobsnews Member UncommonPosts: 220
    edited February 2016
    SEANMCAD said:
    goobsnews said:
    Torval said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    I'm not seeing that.
    Really? Been to reddit or the CIG forums lately? The amount of backer anger is higher than it's ever been.
    why would people be getting upset about something that was stated when SQ42 was first announced
    Can you link where they said that they would be two separate games and you had to buy both separately when SQ42 was first announced please, thanks.
  • joejccva71joejccva71 Member UncommonPosts: 848
    SEANMCAD said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game mode
    FTFY
    1. I dont think that is correct
    2. I dont see how it remotely matters

    It actually IS correct and we can show you the exact wording the Chris Roberts stated, if you like.  God knows it's already been posted 10 times in just this one thread.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    SEANMCAD said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    Ever since SQ42 was first spoken about it has been described as a separate game mode
    FTFY
    1. I dont think that is correct
    2. I dont see how it remotely matters

    It actually IS correct and we can show you the exact wording the Chris Roberts stated, if you like.  God knows it's already been posted 10 times in just this one thread.

    number 2 is FAR more important than number 1.

    Lets focus on what matters rather than wasting our live on drivil
    so with that....why does it matter if its a game 'mode' vs 'stand alone game'

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited February 2016

    goobsnews said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    goobsnews said:
    Torval said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    This move does not help their trust factor. Their trust factor seems to go down with every move they make lol
    I'm not seeing that.
    Really? Been to reddit or the CIG forums lately? The amount of backer anger is higher than it's ever been.
    why would people be getting upset about something that was stated when SQ42 was first announced
    Can you link where they said that they would be two separate games and you had to buy both separately when SQ42 was first announced please, thanks.
    I am not doing your home work for you. i do recall him saying it on stage on a video more than a year ago.
    mr. doesnt even bother to post discussion threads with what he claims is happening currently....seriously?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

Sign In or Register to comment.