It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Siannah: .... hating this community? Nope. But it's a far cry of what it once was.
Just counting the personal insults in this thread because someone has a different point of view should give dozens of examples (sometimes on 1 page alone) - but keep patting your shoulders on how much better it is here.....
Agreed. This is far from being the awesome community i found when i first joined the forum (i was a lurker before i finally joined). Too much aggressivity and hate now. Freedom of speech? Forget it. The freedom of speech is limited to those who think the same way. If you dare to voice a different opinion you either get downrepped to hell, called a troll (like SimonG) or get insulted. People just can't respect different opinions. This forum is becoming as nasty as RPGCodex with this amount of elitism and aggressivity.

SimonG already took the hit just for expressing his opinion. So did i and Jackal. "Oh wait, your opinion is different than mine, therefore you're a troll". No, i'm not leaving and i'm not saying that the community is horrible. It's just not as good to post here as it was some time ago.
I really don't have a problem with this.
avatar
Neobr10: SimonG already took the hit just for expressing his opinion. So did i and Jackal. "Oh wait, your opinion is different than mine, therefore you're a troll". No, i'm not leaving and i'm not saying that the community is horrible. It's just not as good to post here as it was some time ago.
I called Jackal a troll because he was blatantly lying about what was going on in that other thread. If he wasn't trolling, I don't know what he was doing. I suppose it would have been more polite to just ignore it, though.

(Steam obviously didn't bribe the Shadowrun people into doing this, and I think the people who downvoted Amok for pointing that out were clearly wrong to do so. But there were faults on both sides.)

(clarifying edit: the "sides" here being the people who are OK with what Shadowrun is doing and the people who aren't, not Amok and whoever downvoted him)
Post edited April 17, 2013 by BadDecissions
avatar
Neobr10: SimonG already took the hit just for expressing his opinion. So did i and Jackal. "Oh wait, your opinion is different than mine, therefore you're a troll". No, i'm not leaving and i'm not saying that the community is horrible. It's just not as good to post here as it was some time ago.
avatar
BadDecissions: I called Jackal a troll because he was blatantly lying about what was going on in that other thread. If he wasn't trolling, I don't know what he was doing. I suppose it would have been more polite to just ignore it, though.

(Steam obviously didn't bribe the Shadowrun people into doing this, and I think the people who downvoted Amok for pointing that out were clearly wrong to do so. But there were faults on both sides.)

(clarifying edit: the "sides" here being the people who are OK with what Shadowrun is doing and the people who aren't, not Amok and whoever downvoted him)
Look in the latest Omerta DLC thread. The "DLC is evil" stuff started again (although, some of us also made counter-arguments that things like Bethesda DLC was very similar to expansion packs). Also, the thread where people say Planetary Annihilation shouldn't be allowed because it's multiplayer-focused and "might" open the door to DRM because it has an account system. (What successful multiplayer game doesn't have an account system? Battle.net has utilized accounts since the late 90s!)
avatar
BadDecissions: I called Jackal a troll because he was blatantly lying about what was going on in that other thread. If he wasn't trolling, I don't know what he was doing. I suppose it would have been more polite to just ignore it, though.

(Steam obviously didn't bribe the Shadowrun people into doing this, and I think the people who downvoted Amok for pointing that out were clearly wrong to do so. But there were faults on both sides.)

(clarifying edit: the "sides" here being the people who are OK with what Shadowrun is doing and the people who aren't, not Amok and whoever downvoted him)
avatar
jackalKnight: Look in the latest Omerta DLC thread. The "DLC is evil" stuff started again (although, some of us also made counter-arguments that things like Bethesda DLC was very similar to expansion packs). Also, the thread where people say Planetary Annihilation shouldn't be allowed because it's multiplayer-focused and "might" open the door to DRM because it has an account system. (What successful multiplayer game doesn't have an account system? Battle.net has utilized accounts since the late 90s!)
Account systems don't really seem like the same thing as the traditional definition of DRM. These days for multiplayer there aren't too many people that play without an internet connection of some sort anyway (for the multiplayer portion). Having an account for multiplayer isn't that big a deal.

The account system would seem similar to CD keys, CD Keys were technically DRM but they never prevented you from playing offline on any computer. It only prevented more than 1 computer at a time playing online multiplayer with that CD Key. So you could install the game on as many computers as you wanted with that copy of the game, using the same CD Key for all of them (perhaps if you had multiple computers, a labtop, or brought it to a friends house). You just couldn't use one copy of the game to play multiplayer with a friend if you were able to play the game without the disc in the disc drive.
Post edited April 17, 2013 by thelovebat
avatar
BadDecissions: (Steam obviously didn't bribe the Shadowrun people into doing this, and I think the people who downvoted Amok for pointing that out were clearly wrong to do so. But there were faults on both sides.)

(clarifying edit: the "sides" here being the people who are OK with what Shadowrun is doing and the people who aren't, not Amok and whoever downvoted him)
Oh yeah, i had forgotten about that. Amok, me, Jackal, SimonG, and to a lesser extent, orcish, got bashed, downrepped, called trolls, insulted, for what? For expressing our opinion. This is the kind of immaturity that i didn't expect here.
high rated
avatar
Neobr10: SimonG already took the hit just for expressing his opinion. So did i and Jackal. "Oh wait, your opinion is different than mine, therefore you're a troll". No, i'm not leaving and i'm not saying that the community is horrible. It's just not as good to post here as it was some time ago.
Except you have been more or less civil about it.

Let me refresh your memory about SimonG's 'opinions':

"Well, this thread has lost any sanity long before I joined it. And with the current state (or rather Dec 2012, but it doesn't look like it changed) of the forums, there really isn't a reason to take most of the people here serious any more."

"Well, the GOG DRM free hypocrite club certainly isn't small, considering the amount of Steam/Desura keys from HIBs are being traded here. "

"If that really is your reasoning, I have some bad news about Santa for you ..."

"Wow, this is the saddest thread I've ever seen on this forum since I joined."

"Making this whole tantrum even more silly."

"Anyway, as with the whole DRM ideology itself, this discussion is ultimately pointless and insignificant."

"The vitriol spewed in this thread is showing why people no longer want to be associated with the term "DRM free". People who care so little about small time devs shouldn't humoured by them. Luckily (and ironically) thanks to DRM the devs and publishers are finally starting to realize how little "DRM free" means in actual sale numbers."

Simon's tactic is basically to call anyone who dares challenge his 'reasoning' an intellectually inferior moron and impose his high-horse morals onto others to make himself look good. I've tried being civil to him, to no avail, so basically I've chosen to make it perfectly clear what I think of him and his behaviour now. That's not to say I downrated any of his posts - I didn't see fit to waste my time doing so - but I have decided to stop being civil to people with this kind of attitude in general, because it's just driving me fucking crazy.

And while I don't have any problems in principle with what jackal wrote, it did superficially come off as a bit of a 'master race' attitude.

What I am finding sad is that a minority of Steam users seems fit to label an entire community - on a site that specifically focuses on DRM-free and traditional gaming values no less - as "going downhill", because they are finding themselves in the minority opinion. I mean, GOG markets itself as DRM-free, as espousing these kinds of traditional values. What sort of people did you think would come for the most part to GOG? Steam fanatics? If I didn't care about DRM-free, I probably wouldn't have bothered with GOG, and if its principles didn't appeal to people, it wouldn't have made second or third place in terms of market share.

Edit: Formatting.
Post edited April 17, 2013 by jamyskis
avatar
jackalKnight: Look in the latest Omerta DLC thread. The "DLC is evil" stuff started again (although, some of us also made counter-arguments that things like Bethesda DLC was very similar to expansion packs). Also, the thread where people say Planetary Annihilation shouldn't be allowed because it's multiplayer-focused and "might" open the door to DRM because it has an account system. (What successful multiplayer game doesn't have an account system? Battle.net has utilized accounts since the late 90s!)
avatar
thelovebat: Account systems don't really seem like the same thing as the traditional definition of DRM. These days for multiplayer there aren't too many people that play without an internet connection of some sort anyway (for the multiplayer portion). Having an account for multiplayer isn't that big a deal.

The account system would seem similar to CD keys, CD Keys were technically DRM but they never prevented you from playing offline on any computer. It only prevented more than 1 computer at a time playing online multiplayer with that CD Key. So you could install the game on as many computers as you wanted with that copy of the game, using the same CD Key for all of them (perhaps if you had multiple computers, a labtop, or brought it to a friends house). You just couldn't use one copy of the game to play multiplayer with a friend if you were able to play the game without the disc in the disc drive.
Technically, GOG does provide CD keys for the multiplayer portions of some of its games on request (usually the former Gamespy ones). The argument was over whether having a game that was mostly dependent on account based multiplayer was "a slippery slope" to other DRM forms or not. Planetary Annihilation is designed primarily as a multiplayer game, although single player with bots is also possible.
avatar
jamyskis: What I am finding sad is that a minority of Steam users seems fit to label an entire community - on a site that specifically focuses on DRM-free and traditional gaming values no less - as "going downhill", because they are finding themselves in the minority opinion. I mean, GOG markets itself as DRM-free, as espousing these kinds of traditional values. What sort of people did you think would come for the most part to GOG? Steam fanatics? If I didn't care about DRM-free, I probably wouldn't have bothered with GOG, and if its principles didn't appeal to people, it wouldn't have made second or third place in terms of market share.

Edit: Formatting.
You missed my point. I'm not trying to turn my opinion into the majority (no one is), i just expressed my view on the matter. For me it's not a big deal, but i do understand why people got frustrated, even though i don't agree with it. But that's not the point. The point is that all of those who dared voice their opinion against the majority got either downrepped or insulted. The fact that you can't have a different opinion anymore is what saddens me. What's the whole point of a forum anyway if you're not allowed to post your opinion without gettting bashed?
high rated
avatar
Neobr10: You missed my point. I'm not trying to turn my opinion into the majority (no one is), i just expressed my view on the matter. For me it's not a big deal, but i do understand why people got frustrated, even though i don't agree with it. But that's not the point. The point is that all of those who dared voice their opinion against the majority got either downrepped or insulted. The fact that you can't have a different opinion anymore is what saddens me. What's the whole point of a forum anyway if you're not allowed to post your opinion without gettting bashed?
But as I say, there has been a lot of whining of late about how this community has been "going downhill" simply because they have been unable to establish their opinion as the majority. It's nothing about differing opinions, but rather about how people deal with their opinion being questioned. Looking back through this thread, the only low-rated posts I've seen are ones that have resorted to insulting other parties collectively in lieu of a proper argument, which sadly in this case are mostly from the Steam/KS defenders.

I don't see any problems with having different opinions, but storming into a forum on a site whose main focus is DRM-free games and then insulting anti-DRM campaigners is akin to walking into a lung cancer ward and screaming complaints at the top of your voice about how oppressed you feel by anti-smoking laws (I did actually see this happen during my 'mandatory' volunteer service period a few years ago, by the way, to my absolute amazement - "Zivildienst" to the German speakers out there, I'm too lazy to find a translation).

Most people here are here because they are opposed to DRM and recent developments in business models. It shouldn't come as any surprise that the reaction will be rather vitriolic when someone stampedes in like a bull in a china shop and starts labelling DRM activists childish, hypocritical, unrealistic and selfish.

The discussion on the "New Gaming Options" is a recent example of how directly opposing opinions can be discussed in a civil fashion.
Post edited April 17, 2013 by jamyskis
avatar
apocolypse600: ....Their reason for the DRM is actually explained in the post aswell : "The reason is that our license to develop Shadowrun Returns actually requires that the game and its DLC be distributed under DRM"
Well this is actually the culprit. They should have offered this piece of information right from the beginning of the KS campaign. So customers who order a DRM free version would have known that DLCs are out of question, somewhat diminishing the value of the final game. It might have made a difference for some and any bad feelings now will be the result of not being completely honest.

Something like: "we promise a DRM free game but only without any future additions (DLCs) because we simply do not have a license for that".

And anyway license agreements requiring DRM to be added under all circumstances should be shoot.
Anyone demanded and got a refund?
avatar
grinninglich: Anyone demanded and got a refund?
Someone linked to a thread a while ago, where people had demanded and got refunds; don't know if anyone at GOG has.
avatar
grinninglich: Anyone demanded and got a refund?
Here is the post on NeoGaf where the owner requested a refund.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=53806143&postcount=214

He said they got back to him with an e-mail address to send the info to and would get a refund after doing so.
I think the root of the problem is that had they been forthcoming, their attempt to raise funding would not have been so successful... and they were not as upfront as they should have been. During the Kickstarter they were highlighting the whole DRM Free bullet point a lot. Now granted the Game and its First DLC will be available to backers. I imagine I am not the only one disappointed because I expected the game to be sold DRM Free to others as well.

I don't like to treat Kickstarter as a pre-ordering store, I like to look at it concerning its original intention. That being a place where one can help fund the development of products and services one would like to see. This is where in my opinion a lot of the anger comes from. People were told DRM Free, they were told about add-ons. And now we have Steam exclusivity for those who did not back, and the Berlin campaign now counting as DLC instead of originally being included.

I was there when they sent out the surveys, I voted for Berlin, In and around their forums (nice place, though minefield right now), their was never any indication up until recently that Berlin was not going be included in the base game. Or that the DRM Free game we funded wasn't going to be DRM Free for all.