That was what I got out of the letter they send us. (I'm a backer) Logically, they can't complete right negotiations if they don't have the funds to actually make the game. They would need a preliminary agreement that they could secure the right if they had the funding. If they weren't careful about how they worded things, they very well may have made promises they couldn't really keep. I suppose you could lay some blame on them, but this is also a new way of doing things, and I doubt they were aware of every little thing that could come up in a licensed kickstarter funded game. They were one of the first ones, after all.

In any case, I won't be asking for a refund, as I prefer Steam anyway.

Part of the "community going downhill" bit can probably be attributed to people getting fed up with always being questioned and being asked to explain why they want DRM-free content. I know I am sick of it, but I've still tried to be civil. In SimonG's case, I think he has used well-reasoned arguments for why he's for DRM. I disagree with him though as do many others here, obviously because this is a DRM-free game store. Then he started name-calling when people still disagreed with him which is where it went downhill I think.

An example, a user posts that he/she got a refund and the first response is "The monsters!" trying to make him/her look like an idiot for doing so. I personally am not going to ask for a refund for reasons I've already stated, plus there isn't an easy way to get refunded from what I've seen and other users experiences, like hedwards.

Really my problem is not that it's only for sale at the Steam store (I could care less where people get the game from), it's that it will require Steam to be installed to play (except for backers, but their version won't be officially supported). Now I worry that if they've been planning this for some time, how much effort and backer money has actually gone into making the game? Is the DRM-free single-player base game going to suck? Will it just be a stepping stone for the DLC that people have to pay for? I don't think it is going to suck, but I don't know that for sure until I get the game either. Also, if people should just skip this game if they don't want Steam on their system, then these developers should just skip Kickstarter/crowd-funding business model altogether too so they don't put all of their risk on backers just so the developers can restrict it afterward anyway. If that's what they're going to do, I really do think that backers should get a share of the profits.

I sent them a request on Friday through the contact form on their web site and never received a reply. I sent another message via email to info@hbs-studios.com and received a reply about 9 hours later stating that they could take care of the refund for me via PayPal.

It's hard for them to understand why anyone should care. That's why they're rude sometimes and obviously frustrated other times... they just fundamentally do not understand at all why anyone would care.

The reasons for this are varied, from not caring about old games to knowing everything is cracked anyway to whatever else. You have plenty of reasons to counter these things, that doesn't matter though, they still don't "get it." I love debating with people like SimonG and Orcish and consider them internet-friends or whatever but they have issues seeing both sides of issues, they cannot see your viewpoint because it just makes no sense to them. It's irrational and illogical to them.

I don't want to start a whole "you did it first" debate, but if you read carefully the first few pages you'll notice that the name calling and insulting began on the "DRM-free" side because some people (me included) didn't share the same opinion.

Respect clearly didn't work both ways in this thread.

That makes sense to me. SimonG's viewpoint is illogical to me too :P I'm really not that upset about this game though either. The important thing to me is that an isometric Shadowrun RPG has been made. It's just disappointing that it will require Steam to run on my computer if I want to be official with any future updates. Maybe the base game and unofficial content will be so good that this will be a non-issue anyway. Shit, Morrowind had official add-ons from Bethesda (not counting the two expansions) and I thought nearly all of them sucked. Some people still play that game modded without either of the expansions, although with limited mod choice

Well, when one replies specifically to someone's post with "SURPRISE" in all caps, "let's be realistic here", or "for fuck's sake" in their responses, it can be taken as being very abrasive and people aren't going to respond very well even if that person make good points. Some people replied to in that way may even feel insulted even if you are right.

What is a person saying when posting "let's be realistic here"? Anybody else who disagrees is being unrealistic? It's the same as "let's be logical", implying that other opinions that are not the same as the one stated are stupid, which is something I got into spat about not that long ago (it was about downloading from one computer and then transferring a game to another computer; apparently, that's not logical and is not a reason for anyone to want DRM-free games). That was an example of an argument that made me fed up with some people, like I have to explain myself to them, pffft. For me, I see it as trying to declare oneself winner before anyone else even attempts to debate further because that person has already declared an argument invalid. Maybe that's not the intention, but that's how I view it.

I personally try to stay away from the reply button most of the time now and just state my opinion. A hasty reply can be taken as an attack too easily I think. I don't know how this reply will be taken. Maybe I didn't do a good enough job to not be taken as an attack.

As for my opinion of the first page, I agree with Stiler's post on the first page so much that I gave it another + :P Rating posts is something I usually never bother doing though.. He did use the "isn't it logical" argument too though. Hmmm, I could be just a little biased.

Disappointed is a good word. I am disappointed too, I would much prefer a GOG or Amazon release with no DRM. The features Steam offers are not that important to me and I would prefer to not have to worry about cracks and Valve's status when I want to replay these games in 20 years.

That said I can only say disappointed because I accept Steam. I can crack it in 20 years if I have to. Whatever.

The thing we ALL have to do is understand others' views. A lot of people on one side are belittling others for caring about DRM because it makes no sense to them. A lot of people on the other side are belittling others for not thinking this is the massive betrayal they think it is. The simple fact is no one is wrong, it's about your own personal line in the sand. Less personal, more objective.

Most people are angered at their doublespeak rather than the fact that Steam is there. It really baffles me that they didnt foresee this and just told people upfront that the Steam version was guaranteed, but DRM Free versions would be pursued with the license holders while negotiations settled. This would have averted this PR nightmare.

No one likes being lied to. I'm glad I didn't back this, and I sure as hell won't back any projects in the future where devs are not the license holders of the IP. KS was supposed to remove the shady backdealings from game making, not make it more pronounced.

From Harebrained Schemes LLC in the Kickstarter comments:

I don't think that Steam was guaranteed, IIRC, they ran it through the Greenlight process which isn't guaranteed. But, it was likely they would be able to get it through when they saw how many people backed it.

And yes, I don't see many people complaining about it being available on Steam, most of the complaining is about the fragmented community and having to use Steam if they release any more DLC after Berlin, and to use any mods that make use of DLC assets.

Personally, I wouldn't have backed it had I known that it would be Steam only, I backed it because I wanted more DRM free RPGs available.
OK, that's good to know. I'll be sure to send them one. I'm not really upset about it taking them so long, I realize that it could easily have slipped through the cracks. And really, 2-3 days is relatively common for a response anyways.

So, if I'm understanding this story correctly: the developers claim that they didn't know that DRM would be required until after they negotiated for the Shadowrun license, and they chose not to disclose this fact to anyone else until now, after development is near completion. Wow.

I think it's an open question as to whether they were lying or were so incompetent as to not realize that MS might require DRM in order to get the license.

Either way, I think the whole situation is rather mind blowing. And I can't imagine them working on the project for nearly a year without knowing the final licensing terms. Especially the information relevant to what shops they would be negotiating with for the game to be carried by.

I'm also somewhat surprised that if MS could force them to use DRM that they couldn't force them to use GFWL instead of Steam. Because I would have expected that.

For all we know the steam version could include GFWL, unless they have specifically stated otherwise.