3659 réponses à ce sujet

[Savber100]

Jsxdf wrote...

meanwhile the pirates get a hassle free experience while we, the paying customers, get a boot on the neck

Oh I'm going to be a paying customer as final "thank you" directed to Casey Hudson and his team. 

[inappropriate comments removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:05 .

[Eurypterid]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They do require proof, when something goes wrong and has to go back to them for repair or replacement why do you think they always ask for that reciept. This is not much different in that they continue to offer services for products/titles and support providing you have that electronic version of a receipt (activation or DRM) in the case of games.

A receipt is obtained from the retailer if an item is bought from a retail outlet. If it's an electronic purchase, a receipt is e-mailed to the buyer. There's no need for DRM or activation to act as a receipt.

[MingWolf]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

MingWolf wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
That Moo group is only 150ish members and I think around 120-130 will still buy ME3 in the group itself, have about a dozen people constantly moaning on about it in here who may stick to their guns.

I don't know what this group has done to you are why you are so valiantly defending Origin.  Also, the group has nothing to do with any perceived large-scale revolution, nor is it about moaning and crying.  I can't speak for anyone, but most of the members find having Origin mandatory to be less than acceptable.  I place a Moo banner on my sig because I believe that having it optional is better than otherwise having to submit and agree to everything a corporation wants me to have if I should purchase a software from them.  Other people do so for their own reasons.  Show a little respect and respect the view of others.  The world does not evolve because everyone agrees to everything all the time.

I have nothing against the Moo group, some of my friends are in the Moo group. I'm not even bothering to defend Origin much but I am fine answering with regard to my experience with it, what I am doing is getting slightly annoyed at the fact if compiled every actual legitimate question that can be answered posed in this thread and last thread relating to Origin plus their answers it would only occupy about a dozen pages. We then have a few dozen people holding the entire rest of the thread (and last one) to ransom which sums up about 330+ pages from those few dozen people. 

When Dmex, Chris or Stanley offers any advice or answers they are falling on deaf ears so no matter what is said, what is answered it will never be good enough unless EA drops Origin (NOT going to happen) especially to people using such dubious tactics of "convince me this and that", pose question X or Y with zero chance any answer will change their mind in both cases. Like I said it's nothing more than carrot and stick but with no carrot actually on the end regardless of anything anyone says unless Origin is dropped from ME3.

It is not a productive discussion when nothing said will ever change their opinion unless what is said is ME3 will not come with Origin. Asking a question when you know before hand any reply will be met with "Nope not buying, nope not interested, nope still don't care, nope still don't trust" is not productive in any way, shape or from. It's more inline with child stamping his or her feet because they aren't getting their way, while an adult would try to find a compromise. Thats why I support Opt In/Opt Out in the client which is a compromise and not this temper tantrum of "no, no, no, no, no, no, no, trololo; not interested".

I apologize.  Fair enough.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

dmex wrote...

Secondly, how should we verify your rights to play the game, even offline?

Just like every other product people buy, it's called a receipt. Other than the fact I've receieved a receipt for handing over money to buy a product, I personally don't feel companies have any call to keep asking me to prove I bought it. This is why for me, Origin (and Steam) vastly decreases my perceived value of any game. So I'll put up with having to repeatedly prove I own a game, but not for more than $5 for said game.

How far do you think the oft-exampled appliance companies would get, if they tried to claim the "right" to require you prove that you had actually purchased a toaster before the coils would heat up, every single morning as you made toast?  Or that they could show up and confiscate any toaster you didn't have a receipt for at any time? 

In the real world, there needs to be reasonable suspicion or other solidly actionable grounds before someone can be accused of theft and have the items taken away from them, and the burden of proof is on the accuser. 

Only in the fantasy world of software company HQs do they think it's reasonable to force people to prove that they didn't steal something over and over again. 

They do require proof, when something goes wrong and has to go back to them for repair or replacement why do you think they always ask for that reciept. This is not much different in that they continue to offer services for products/titles and support providing you have that electronic version of a receipt (activation or DRM) in the case of games.

At least in the industry I was in, many companies will provide warranty service based on the date of manufacture if you didn't have a receipt or registration.  Others wouldn't even talk to you at all if you hadn't registered the product.

Putting out patches for software should be considered no more of an optional service for the manufacturer to provide than the free recall service done to car models that are found to have shipped with a defect.  

(Edited, by me)  There's no service and support that a single-player PC game should ever need that should require proof of ownership. 

Many DRM schemes are now going beyond even requiring proof for service -- they require proof just to play the game, every time you play the game.  As I said, it's as if your toaster wouldn't heat up until you'd logged it in to the manufacturer's servers every morning (and allowed them to record what sort of bread you were toasting, what time, etc).

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:09 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They do require proof, when something goes wrong and has to go back to them for repair or replacement why do you think they always ask for that reciept. This is not much different in that they continue to offer services for products/titles and support providing you have that electronic version of a receipt (activation or DRM) in the case of games.

A receipt is obtained from the retailer if an item is bought from a retail outlet. If it's an electronic purchase, a receipt is e-mailed to the buyer. There's no need for DRM or activation to act as a receipt.

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:03 .

[MingWolf]

Zargon VII wrote...

dmex wrote...

Secondly, how should we verify your rights to play the game, even offline?

That is the crux of the DRM question and the simple answer is:  You can't.  Every DRM scheme so far has been cracked and will continue to be so, in fact Origin and Steam already have.  I think the answer is that EA needs to find a way to reward an official purchaser.  In the old days games came with ornate instruction books and cloth maps and Infocom games came with all sorts of cool collectible trinkets that would be incorporated into the game itself.   Yet you can't help but notice that companies at the forefront of DRM like EA and Ubi are now too cheap to even include manuals anymore.   I think companies need to realize that DRM schemes are an exercise in futility and should maybe try the carrot instead of the stick approach.  The stick doesn't work, it only gets used on paying customers who you should try to befriend and reward, not punish!

Some good points there.  I find this recent article quite interesting.  Isn't about EA, but does talk about the way DRM is handled nowadays and how it affects the customer. 

[Eurypterid]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Dragoon, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this. Suffice to say I have no issue with registering on a website (a la GOG) if I need support for my games. I DO, however, have an issue with being repeatedly required to prove I've paid for something once I've already given my money for it.

[Forbidden]

dmex wrote...

Secondly, how should we verify your rights to play the game, even offline?

And there's the money shot.  Origin is designed around EA treating its paying customers as potential criminals.  And Origin goes one step further, giving EA the ability to revoke those "rights" at their whim. 

Even more laughably, this isn't about piracy.  The pirates will crack origin if they haven't already.  In fact, by making all games go through Origin, they've made it easier for them to break open future games.  So what is the DRM for?  It gives them control over paying customers, those who don't pirate games.  The goal is to make paying customers pay more.

[Dragoonlordz]

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Dragoon, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this. Suffice to say I have no issue with registering on a website (a la GOG) if I need support for my games. I DO, however, have an issue with being repeatedly required to prove I've paid for something once I've already given my money for it.

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

[MingWolf]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They do require proof, when something goes wrong and has to go back to them for repair or replacement why do you think they always ask for that reciept. This is not much different in that they continue to offer services for products/titles and support providing you have that electronic version of a receipt (activation or DRM) in the case of games.

A receipt is obtained from the retailer if an item is bought from a retail outlet. If it's an electronic purchase, a receipt is e-mailed to the buyer. There's no need for DRM or activation to act as a receipt.

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

It's a matter of perspective.  I would agree with you in the realms of support.  The perks is that it can be beneficial when you actually have a database on this stuff.  (My only reservation is that, I suspect, one doesn't have to go through stringent DRM procedures to accomplish this).  If you sign up for a forum, or a site like the BSN, and enter your order information, you already have a database there to keep everything in line.  Offer support to those who have valid info and ignore the rest.  It doesn't need to get much further than that. 

If DRM is used for whatever reason, it should be value-added.  It does no good when legitimate customers have to suffer through so many different forms of control in order to verify that they are the legitimate customers.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Dragoon, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this. Suffice to say I have no issue with registering on a website (a la GOG) if I need support for my games. I DO, however, have an issue with being repeatedly required to prove I've paid for something once I've already given my money for it.

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

I worked in purchasing/inventory/returns for a computer repair and retail company for 5 years, and not once did any of the manufacturers or distributors give even a hint of needing to be assured that I hadn't stolen something before they would provide service -- and I can't think of any company that wouldn't allow you to download drivers or related software without registering the part.  No company NEEDS to prove it.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:19 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

MingWolf wrote...

If DRM is used for whatever reason, it should be value-added.  It does no good when legitimate customers have to suffer through so many different forms of control in order to verify that they are the legitimate customers.

It's never the people doing things they should not, who suffer the most from the efforts to keep them from doing those things. 

[Dragoonlordz]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Dragoon, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this. Suffice to say I have no issue with registering on a website (a la GOG) if I need support for my games. I DO, however, have an issue with being repeatedly required to prove I've paid for something once I've already given my money for it.

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

I worked in purchasing/inventory/returns for a computer repair and retail company for 5 years, and not once did any of the manufacturers or distributors give even a hint of needing to be assured that I hadn't stolen something before they would provide service -- and I can't think of any company that wouldn't allow you to download drivers or related software without registering the part.  No company NEEDS to prove it.

Every single peice of business software I have ever bought when asking for support, or especially with updates to that software (from the developer/manufacturer) they have always asked for an account id or proof of purchase. In the retail world it is rare to buy some product and when ask for help with it from the manufacturer (like EA would be in this case) or replacement (like how Origin allows the digital version of games if register/activate retail version) hasn't asked for proof of purchase.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:26 .

[OperativeX]

Wittand25 wrote...

You change your hardware more than 5 times a day ?
The number of activations on Origin resets every 24 hours.

Untrue. You use up ur activations then u have to contact EA Support via email (which takes days for a reply) or by phone (which costs at international rates) to get another activation.

You clearly don't change your hardware much.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

Dragoon, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about this. Suffice to say I have no issue with registering on a website (a la GOG) if I need support for my games. I DO, however, have an issue with being repeatedly required to prove I've paid for something once I've already given my money for it.

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

I worked in purchasing/inventory/returns for a computer repair and retail company for 5 years, and not once did any of the manufacturers or distributors give even a hint of needing to be assured that I hadn't stolen something before they would provide service -- and I can't think of any company that wouldn't allow you to download drivers or related software without registering the part.  No company NEEDS to prove it.

Every single peice of business software I have ever bought when asking for support, or especially with updates to that software (from the developer/manufacturer) they have always asked for an account id or proof of purchase. In the retail world it is rare to buy some product and when ask for help with it from the manufacturer (like EA would be in this case) or replacement (like how Origin allows the digital version of games if register/activate retail version) hasn't asked for proof of purchase.

See previous statement about the fantasy land that exists inside the HQs of software companies.

[Eurypterid]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

Look at it this way: I bought The Witcher 2 from GOG. I can install and play on any computer I own without ever having to access the internet. If I want patches, I need to grab them on-line from the Witcher 2 site, but I still don't need to register. GOG also provides the fully patched game later on once the patch cycle is near its end. In order to access that, I must be logged into my account on GOG's website to DL the game files. After that though, I'm free to install the game wherever I want, as many times as I want, with no restrictions. I don't have to phone home, don't have to activate, don't have any DRM to deal with. I don't need a separate client to prove I bought the game. That's the reason I paid full price for the game when it was released. Tthat's the reason I won't pay full price for a game that has restrictions.

Am I opposed to this type of thing (Origin, Steam)? Yes. However, I also realize this is the way things are going in our glorious digital future and it's not likely to change. I'll register my complaints when I can. I'll do what I can to oppose this type of thing. But in the end, I'll still accept it for a much reduced price. The bottom line is, money talks. And I'm letting mine talk with respect to what I'll pay for something that comes with restrictions and limitations.

*edit* Bolding.

Modifié par Eurypterid, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:35 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Every single peice of business software I have ever bought when asking for support, or especially with updates to that software (from the developer/manufacturer) they have always asked for an account id or proof of purchase. In the retail world it is rare to buy some product and when ask for help with it from the manufacturer (like EA would be in this case) or replacement (like how Origin allows the digital version of games if register/activate retail version) hasn't asked for proof of purchase.

See previous statement about the fantasy land that exists inside the HQs of software companies.

The same applies to retail products. Say my Sky TV box goes down or stops working, or just need support for it, if contact the supplier of the service I am required to proof via being account holder (and by proxy of such have bought their service and product) only then will they help me. If my stereo breaks or even if doesnt but if I contact the (manufacturer) to get replacement part they tend to ask for serial number and/or proof of purchase.

Some might not as per example above for Eurys answer, but most do.

Your example applies if I went to an alternative customer or 3rd party to get help or parts. But in this case that is not relevant because it is not a 3rd party providing support and updates. It is the manufacturer who provide  that support not a 3rd party.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:41 .

[Mitchumas]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Mitchumas wrote...

Tony_Knightcrawler wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Yes, sure, a changeable contract means that the risk of something bad happening is not zero. But remember that possibility and probability (or likelihood) are two very different things. It is possible for any person of a given nation to become that nation's rules, but how probable (or likely) is that to happen. And should you live your life banking on that possibility?

But... it *is* probable.

So I guess the question remains, why is *BioWare* so adamant on using Origin. Specifically. Not this "Steam limits us" vagueness (ignoring the fact that physical copies are unrelated to Steam). It's not a spoiler to tell us how you're going to use a program. How *could* it be a spoiler, if it doesn't even apply to the PS3 and 360 versions? What is so imperitive that you'd require PC gamers to undergo these requirements for the same experience as console gamers?

And it is BioWare, right? You're the ones programming the game, so the people making the actual Origin requirement are you.


BTW Fun fact: After sending in my ME3 Origin requirement complaint to EA, in the E-mail I got... a coupon for Origin. LOL

All I got back in the E-mail I sent off to EA was getting told to get over it, company choices are no concern to the customer... and all wanted to know is that if Origin was going to be requierd for all future EA games and why Origin wasn't made optional to games that were not requierd it for single player games...

Wait, you actually received a reply email telling you that "company choices are no concern to the customer"? 

Yeah that is what the e-mail said:

Company choices are no concern to the customer but we do take on feed back in making those decisions. 

We hope that there will be options in the future of Origin or EA Games that are more to your liking.

We appreciate the time you have taken providing your feedback and welcome any further thoughts.

Regards,
EA Team

That's the reply I go to the two questions I asked them...

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Every single peice of business software I have ever bought when asking for support, or especially with updates to that software (from the developer/manufacturer) they have always asked for an account id or proof of purchase. In the retail world it is rare to buy some product and when ask for help with it from the manufacturer (like EA would be in this case) or replacement (like how Origin allows the digital version of games if register/activate retail version) hasn't asked for proof of purchase.

See previous statement about the fantasy land that exists inside the HQs of software companies.

The same applies to retail products. Say my Sky TV box goes down or stops working, or just need support for it, if contact the supplier of the service I am required to proof via being account holder (and by proxy of such have bought their service and product) onyl then will they help me. If my stereo breaks or even if doesnt but if I contact the (manufacturer) to get replacement part they tend to ask for serial number and/or proof of purchase. Some might not as per example above for Eurys answer but most do.

Your example doesn't apply if I went to an alternative customer or 3rd party to get help or parts. But in this case that is not relevant because it is not a 3rd party providing support and updates.

As I stated, some manufacturers will provide service without any registration or proof of purchase, they just base the warranty period on the date of manufacture instead of the date of purchase -- based on the serial number.  There's nothinig in providing the serial number that proves you purchased the item. 

If your SkyTV box is what I'm thinking it is, it's part of your service, not a product you paid for, that's entirely different. 

Software isn't a service, it's a product.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:42 .

[Forbidden]

Dragoonlordz wrote..

Activation or registration online on their database is a far more reliable way to continue to offer support for a product than a e-reciept from some random retailer which is easily faked. Would you prefer evey time rang customer support or change an account detail or recieve patches or updates that you had to email this e-receipt which then the developer (who supplies support for the product) has to go to the retailer and verify with them your reciept. Or this alternative method of verification, just an activation code stored on the developers end where do not have to forward/email or post a reciept every single time have a problem or need help.

It's possible to create an anti-piracy scheme that isn't based on control, but instead on accountability. 

You encrypt chunks of the game with an encryption scheme that isn't mickey mouse, then e-mail a keyfile with the electronic reciept.  The electronic reciept becomes an electronic signature that ties back to the name and credit card of the person who bought it in the vendor's database.  The client's computer never connects to the internet, never contacts back to the publisher.  However, any copy of the game that appears on pirate sites can be tracked back to the purchser.  You then sue them into oblivion.  Do this a few times and people will be more careful with their copies.  Lawful paying customers are not hindered by nonsense. 

[MingWolf]

Eurypterid wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

So you say your ok with activation/registering which is fine. I see it as if you wish to have any support or patches, updates or help with a product I do not think it is unfair for those who provide that support to make sure they are supporting someone who actually bought it and not stole it.

Look at it this way: I bought The Witcher 2 from GOG. I can install and play on any computer I own without ever having to access the internet. If I want patches, I need to grab them on-line from the Witcher 2 site, but I still don't need to register. GOG also provides the fully patched game later on once the patch cycle is near its end. In order to access that, I must be logged into my account on GOG's website to DL the game files. After that though, I'm free to install the game wherever I want, as many times as I want, with no restrictions. I don't have to phone home, don't have to activate, don't have any DRM to deal with. I don't need a separate client to prove I bought the game. That's the reason I paid full price for the game when it was released. Tthat's the reason I won't pay full price for a game that has restrictions.

Am I opposed to this type of thing (Origin, Steam)? Yes. However, I also realize this is the way things are going in our glorious digital future and it's not likely to change. I'll register my complaints when I can. I'll do what I can to oppose this type of thing. But in the end, I'll still accept it for a much reduced price. The bottom line is, money talks. And I'm letting mine talk with respect to what I'll pay for something that comes with restrictions and limitations.

*edit* Bolding.

Me too!  They made things pretty darn simple with TW2 without any needed hassles.  No strings attached.  I cringe a little bit when I have to pay $60 bucks for a video game.  I'm not rich, though I am willing to do it, but I do hold my own perceived values as well.  Without being held back, I feel more like I'm getting the full money's worth when a game doesn't have restrictions

[Dragoonlordz]

Mitchumas wrote...

Yeah that is what the e-mail said:

Company choices are no concern to the customer but we do take on feed back in making those decisions. 

We hope that there will be options in the future of Origin or EA Games that are more to your liking.

We appreciate the time you have taken providing your feedback and welcome any further thoughts.

Regards,
EA Team

That's the reply I go to the two questions I asked them...

They are not wrong in doing so, though could of worded it more polite.

A customer or section of customers does not dictate the business decisions, they are not the ones footing the bill for the development or publishing/distribution. The business can take feedback but the decisions is still the businesses choice to make.

I will agree the first half of the first sentence (bolded) could of been improved though. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:46 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Actually, the customers ARE the ones footing the bill. For everything.

[Dragoonlordz]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Actually, the customers ARE the ones footing the bill. For everything.

You got what you paid for you did not pay for development of future products.

E.g. You bought ME2 you got ME2, the money spent in buying ME2 does not give you right to decide/dictate the future of ME3. You can leave feedback and state and opinion on what you would like but you did not pay for ME3 until it is released of which then you either buy then or don't and if do buy then; and only then did you pay for ME3.

Edit: I got work to do so I'm off for now. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:51 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Actually, the customers ARE the ones footing the bill. For everything.

You got what you paid for you did not pay for development of future products.

E.g. You bought ME2 you got ME2, the money spent in buying ME2 does not give you right to decide/dictate the future of ME3. You can leave feedback and state and opinion on what you would like but you did not pay for ME3 until it is released of which then you either buy then or don't and if do buy then; and only then did you pay for ME3.

And if we don't like the direction of ME3, we don't purchase it, and THEN the company is left paying for its development.  Ooops.

And actually, it's largely the profit from game A that feeds the development of game B, either directly, or through being used to garner loans or investment.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:53 .