Posted April 18, 2013
catwhowalks: From what the devs said, I don't believe this was their fault at all, so folks can stop blaming them. The way I understand it, they did intend in good faith to sell the game DRM free but when the final negotiations went through (they probably needed the kickstarter funds to fully acquire the license and just had an preliminary agreement there) they were told to either accept the must have DRM requirement or lose the license. They were able to get a one time exception only because they had already promised DRM free copies to backers and it sounds like they only just managed to get that through.
You can certainly blame the property owner here, but don't blame the developer unless more details come out that contradicts what I just said.
Trilarion: Are these statements backed by something or is it assumptions. Could it also be that they knew right from the beginning of the KS campaign that they would only get some restricted DRM free rights but they wanted to have the money so badly they ignored the inconsistency with what they published during the campaign. You can certainly blame the property owner here, but don't blame the developer unless more details come out that contradicts what I just said.
At the least they could have stated that the rights are still not negotiated and that in case that DRM free isn't going through they will offer simple refunds to every backer with DRM free. I guess it's all about displaying the situation like it is, not like they would like it to be. This is honest behavior.
But since it seems they offer refunds, everything is fine. And I also believe them that the rights holder is the one to blame most for this crappy "DLC must have DRM" move. It's really bad that such things still exist.
In any case, I won't be asking for a refund, as I prefer Steam anyway.