5 ms·

>A glib remark of "Just don't buy it", simply won't cut it. This attitude is harmful, both to consumers and to developers/producers, and to a lesser degree, peo

>A glib remark of "Just don't buy it", simply won't cut it. This attitude is harmful, both to consumers and to developers/producers, and to a lesser degree, peoples health. There are many mediocre games out there. I bought a few over the years. Sometimes you get a bad game, it goes with the territory. I agree it's ok to voice your opinions and stick it to a bad developer on forums, but does the SimCity fiasco really needs to be talked about weeks after release? It's just a bad game, at the end of the day, what more is there to be said? // EA didn't get my money. I was never going to buy SimCity because it isn't my type of game, but even I knew ahead of time of its always-online component.

belorn 14y ago
The reaction is good. I don't know for how long is suitable, but I would lean towards a similar time as if a physical object share its characteristics, for how long should the iphone map mess still be mentioned in polite discussion? What if the whole phone was also complete unusable (disabled) for a week after the release, and then had its features cut down for people who had already bought it. What if apple refused refunds? What if the issues was all brought because of a more intrusive DRM, intentionally put there to prevent people from copying content out of the phone. What would a suitable time frame be when such a thing should no longer be discussed? I don't know, but I suspect it would still be mentioned years later. I also suspect that no other phone manufacturer would dare to put similar DRM in a phone because of it. We are not there yet with software, but I personally would encourage such outcry when ever it happen.
Pxtl 14y ago
In other industries, when you get a defective product you return it. Why do we allow videogames some special immunity from this?
- pyre 14y ago
  It's a defence against "buy it, install it, return it, keep playing installed version." For games with heavy DRM this doesn't make sense, though.
  - belorn 14y ago
    While I understand the fear of that, I can go to the store and see hundred of food products that has a "if not completely satisfied, send the package back with a recite and get 100% of the money back". People could buy it, eat the food, and then return the package to get the money back. Have anyone heard of a food producer that gone bankrupt because of their 100% satisfaction guarantee? To my understanding, the amount of people who would go through such policy and send back the package is so extreme few that the numbers get lost in the sale statistic.

belorn 14y ago

The reaction is good. I don't know for how long is suitable, but I would lean towards a similar time as if a physical object share its characteristics, for how long should the iphone map mess still be mentioned in polite discussion? What if the whole phone was also complete unusable (disabled) for a week after the release, and then had its features cut down for people who had already bought it. What if apple refused refunds? What if the issues was all brought because of a more intrusive DRM, intentionally put there to prevent people from copying content out of the phone. What would a suitable time frame be when such a thing should no longer be discussed? I don't know, but I suspect it would still be mentioned years later. I also suspect that no other phone manufacturer would dare to put similar DRM in a phone because of it. We are not there yet with software, but I personally would encourage such outcry when ever it happen.

Pxtl 14y ago

In other industries, when you get a defective product you return it. Why do we allow videogames some special immunity from this?

pyre 14y ago
It's a defence against "buy it, install it, return it, keep playing installed version." For games with heavy DRM this doesn't make sense, though.
- belorn 14y ago
  While I understand the fear of that, I can go to the store and see hundred of food products that has a "if not completely satisfied, send the package back with a recite and get 100% of the money back". People could buy it, eat the food, and then return the package to get the money back. Have anyone heard of a food producer that gone bankrupt because of their 100% satisfaction guarantee? To my understanding, the amount of people who would go through such policy and send back the package is so extreme few that the numbers get lost in the sale statistic.