duh, an unhappy customer you have the utmost control over the most important: not buying the product. best way to show your displeasure to a for-profit entity is to not buy their stuff and make a heap a noise about it.

and no matter how many people have this long load time issue, its still the game programming teams fault, not the distribution system's fault. if you bought red dead redemption from walmart and the game took forever to load, would you blame walmart? no!

at pain of sounding pedantic: you can't own a license. you are granted one. you either own the IP or are granted a license to utilize the IP with specifically stated restrictions.

yes, it is a sad fact that no one "owns" what they buy. but can you blame the content creators for trying to protect their IP? how many games are hacked daily? how many 0days? how much revenue is lost from it? that is the state of the economy as we see it and it is not about to change.

besides, lets consider the benefits of centralized e-distribution? steady, frequent game updates and patches. unified marketing architectures. player bases that are completely solidified--no one is playing with old out of date versions. you're so caught up on the negative (and lets be honest, bandwagon hatred of digital distribution) that you are ignoring the positive.

Updates and patches are already easily available. Centralizing an -already active- internet distribution system does not hold any promise of steady or frequent game updates and patches. An example being the company Valve itself: The Orange Box. If you've ever owned an Xbox 360 or a PS3, you should understand my distaste for such a 'centralized' system.

Look up the case tried in California for a program called Second Life. You're playing with words when you say "granted" or "owning" a license, that's it.

"best way to show your displeasure to a for-profit entity is to not buy their stuff and make a heap a noise about it."

Firstly, how does one know not to buy it? Premonitions of the future? You just simply 'know' you'll hate it? Secondly, when you say make 'make a heap of noise about it' translates roughly to 'whining' in my eyes. It rarely does anything but make you feel better and others opinion of you decline. This is extremely comparable to how a child doesn't want to eat their vegetables. "I don't want it. I just know I don't like it."

"and no matter how many people have this long load time issue, its still the game programming teams fault, not the distribution system's fault. if you bought red dead redemption from walmart and the game took forever to load, would you blame walmart?"

Steam and Wal-Mart are two extremely different entities, and they should not be compared as such. The only common factor is that they sell products. Wal-Mart doesn't have an effect on your computer, as where Steam does.

i own both and i am pretty happy with my experiences with that system.

of course. eulas and t&c are all words. words that say "you dont own what you buy." what are you trying to say here?



industry peer review (a la zine reviews) of products is a great way of getting a first look at something you're buying, video games or not. if enough people are activists against a product or service, the people who create or provide that product or service will make amendments (providing there is profit in doing so). again, what are you trying to argue here?

steam runs as a background process and puts an overlay on your desktop. hardly an all-encompassing impact on your system. the fact of the matter is: game performances issues are caused by games. i hate to be cliche, but correlation does not equal causation. because a specific game runs bad on steam doesn't mean its not steam. i guess here your argument is "its all steams fault," which is unsurprising.

and fyi point-by-point dissection is for hardcore forensic ballers.

"i own both and i am pretty happy with my experiences with that system."

Then you should understand that what you said about constant updates and patches is false.

"what are you trying to say here"

You didn´t look at what I´d requested. Second Life legal suit.
That´s what I´m trying to say.

"industry peer review (a la zine reviews) of products is a great way of getting a first look at something you're buying, video games or not. if enough people are activists against a product or service, the people who create or provide that product or service will make amendments (providing there is profit in doing so). again, what are you trying to argue here?"

That you have little say in the matter unless you´ve actually used the product. Your great service is relying on someone elses opinion to form your own. That people can´t seem to appreciate something unless it´s tailored to their every whim and need.

"steam runs as a background process and puts an overlay on your desktop. hardly an all-encompassing impact on your system. the fact of the matter is: game performances issues are caused by games. i hate to be cliche, but correlation does not equal causation. because a specific game runs bad on steam doesn't mean its not steam. i guess here your argument is "its all steams fault," which is unsurprising.
and fyi point-by-point dissection is for hardcore forensic ballers."

I´ve bolded my point in what you said.

And damn right. You can call me Abby.

omg i mades a typo holy balls. my whole arguments validity--SHATTERED.

Blah Blah Blah nasty stuff. - Seraph

Don't you think that's more than enough?

in all seriousness, I thought we were just having a nice discussion about the in's and out's of technology's impacts.

i don't know why you're so bothered by things--you haven't participated at all except to come in and be mean and rude for some reason i cannot ascertain except for perhaps trolling.

and i dont think cc is the worst game ever. its fun for what it is, but to me its just a novelty. its a fun novelty, but only just that.

and wow, elitist much with the capitalization. if you want to talk grammar, look at the giant run-on your complaint is.

and frankly i dont care what anyone thinks about me on this forum. i was just trying to have some lively friendly discussion. there was no need for personal attacks.

duh, if you thought i was ever attacking you personally, i apologize. that is not the case. we both just seem ot be people of--bullishly stubborn opinion.

Oh yes, yes indeed, that would be an accurate description XD

I'll admit I did feel personally attacked, but perhaps that is because I become very attached to my views.

my above replies are also directed at Zylos. there was no malicious intent in my words just fun debate and discussion