Posted April 19, 2013
KyleKatarn: 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.
amok: Then it came out wrong, and it was not my intention at all. I meant - first complaining how bad this situation is, and how much vitriol and discussion coming out of this, very much blaming the developers and there are post here on how terrible they are, when all is needed it just asking for your money back. All I was trying to say is, maybe this is not such a big issue after all and if you do not like the way it turned, it is easily remedied. That do not mean "you are idiots and you are idiots for asking a refund". I tried humor, and I know I am very bad with it and should stop doing so, sorry. edit - but all that said. I am genuinely interested in how many people in the end will actually claim a refund. It would be interesting for later to see the % for whom the DRM issue is actually so big, that they can not get over it when it comes to a game they really want enough to back on KS. Also to see which tiers they have pledged on. (This is just my curiosity, and there are no value judgments attached to this). I doubt these figures will ever be released, though.
SimonG: More and more companies have discovered that besides all the screaming and shouting, DRM free is not worth the effort. When even a big player like paradox is moving away from DRM free, why should a small time dev take the risk?
What the fuck are you going on about? The risk is all on the backers. They didn't even think of doing this until they saw a couple of other big, popular projects on Kickstarter. They asked for $400,000 and got +$1,800,000. How's that for "breathing room" and whatever they can do to make a buck? Their salaries are already paid and then some. Gonchi: So I can download it, get rid of Steam, back-up the game to an external HD and burn it to a DVD to install and play it whenever I want...?
There are some games on Steam that you can do that with although I wouldn't call it many games. It's not advertised either because it's not a feature of Steam that they would want people to advertise so you would have to use trial and error to figure it out. Some people have shared their trial and error experience with others. But if you buy a game hoping that it will be able to run without Steam and then it doesn't run without it, you'd feel a bit silly, yes? For Shadowrun Returns though, they have stated in their answers to questions that the Steam game will require Steam to be installed to run the game. They have stated that you will have to use offline mode with Steam still installed if you want to play offline.
KyleKatarn: 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.
Neobr10: How is that offensive? So SURPRISE is now an offense? Or "for fuck's sake"? I mean, really? Maybe i should have been a bit more polite, but i don't really see it as offensive in any way. It wasn't even directly targeted at anyone. Who did i insult? Whats so harmful about my post? You see, this is exactly what i'm talking about. Posts like mine are offensive for expressing a different opinion. Posts explicitly offensive with name-calling targeted at one user aren't. Can you see the double standards that i'm pointing out? Calling someone a fanboy for pointing out that Steam doesn't bribe every single developer in the world is ok, but expressing a valid opinion about the issue isn't.
KyleKatarn: 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.
Neobr10: No, no and no. You're completely distorting a simple expression and blowing it out of proportion to try to prove your point. Just no. That's just a commonly used expression, it doesn't mean everyone is being unrealistic. If i said "Guys, let's think for a second", am i implying that everyone is being irrational on the matter? How in the fucking world is that offensive, abrasive or whatever? I'm just trying to raise awareness to one specific issue. I was going to do something similar, but Timpuu beat me to it :) SURPRISE, PC gaming has been getting along just fine modding for over 20 years now without centralized servers. No one asked the developer to try to restrict modding so that they would be the one's in control of modding. This is actually a pet peeve of mine that I don't bring up very often but people complain about piracy and then praise PC gaming for it's openness because they can crack a game or mod it if they want to. How many of those people actually made mods or wrote their own cracks? .01%? It's the same thing as piracy. In fact, I find it offensive that HBS wants to make Steam a requirement to use community content so they can profit off of other people's work. Don't they plan on doing some "best of" community content releases for the tablet versions because they will not have an editor for them? YARRRR!!! I don't find it offensive that they would do that, but that they would restrict the game so that ONLY they can do that.
I've been expressing a different opinion without getting downrated and yelled at.
Post edited April 19, 2013 by KyleKatarn