I couldn't agree more and that is why I created a discussion thread about it here.

Not buying is correct but to get people to stop buying(boycott) is like trying to win Lotto.

This doesn't matter, players will continue to buy that garbage and you will even see people defending, we live in a world where the publishers already brainwashed gamers into defending them, they don't need pr anymore.
How many times have you seen something like this "Hey guys, the game is now working and it's great, buy it, the devs deserve it" when the game was broken at launch, it was broken for 2~3 months (or even more) and the compensation is really something small that used to be free (dlc's).

Boycott seems like such a heavy and overused term. Personally, I'm just not willing to spend good money on bullshit -- that's all there is to it.

But yeah, people have varying thresholds of what they are willing to put up with, regarding DRM, game quality or ridiculous pricing. Hence why I mentioned that perhaps things will have to get even worse, before the majority of gamers will no longer put up with it. On the other hand, most of the major publishers aren't stupid -- they know quite well what they can get away with, and how far they can push their consumers. They gradually keep adding more bullshit to their products and business strategies, slow enough so people get used to it.

Part of that is probably gamers trying to defend their own ( expensive ) purchases. If a game is junk, that would mean they made a bad purchase and wasted their money. So by defending the game, they're also defending themselves, rather than being objective about it.

Minority goes nowhere,just gets labeled whingers.

I can understand that (although i don't agree) but i just don't understand the need of making others buy it, it's not defending their bad purchase, it's basically doing free pr.

Yesterday i was reading a thread on neogaf about Driveclub and people were actually offending those who were still waiting for the promised psn edition (let me remind or inform that it was the version that was anounced to divert the attention that multiplayer was going to be a paid feature), i mean, how does this work:

- Yeah, buy it, give them money, they deserve it.
- FUCK YOU, YOU DESERVE NOTHING, BUY THE GAME.

That's not defending their purchase, i could just say "play the demo, the game is great" but no, they really WANTED people to pay for it. It blows my mind, especially considering that the game was a broken mess for months.

I guess there's always the chance that they do actually like a game, even if it is objectively crap. Maybe they just have different tastes, or lower quality standards, I don't know. :P