@danusty @SpearM64 Hahaha. I'm most definitely NOT a "1%er", and I don't even own a console (wait... I think I have an Atari 2600 and a PS1 around here somewhere.) My entire income last year was just barely above poverty level.
"by the way, SFxT requires no installation whatsoever to play it so where does the de facto acceptance fall on that? instruct me on that"
OK. Since you asked: You bought the game, you put it in your console, you played the game, therefore you agreed to the EULA. Doesn't matter if you had to install anything or not. That is where the courts fall on the de facto acceptance.
Because it's a lot easier to remake a game that's only 8 years old and still works on Windows operating systems than it is to remake games that are so old, they were originally written for DOS. (Actually, it's a little more than just that, since you're converting from a "simulated 3D" engine to a fully 3D graphics engine.)
Who says they're NOT making Rage 2 and Doom 4? However... even though it was announced in 2007, there still is no release date for Doom 4. (If I were a betting man, I'd lay a wager on sometime next year.) While they've already announced that there will be a Rage 2, they've also already said it will not come out until sometime after Doom 4... whenever the hell THAT happens.
Apparently you didn't notice that the BFG edition includes Doom 1 and Doom 2. I don't know whether or not it includes Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, or Master Levels for D2 (probably not, but you can't prove a negative. They didn't say it includes those three, but they didn't say that it didn't, either.)
I guess they listened to the gamers. One of the most popular mods for Doom 3 was the Duct Tape mod, which duct taped the flashlight to your gun. Let's face it, if a Hell Knight attacks you in the dark, it is not going to be impressed by whacking it over the head with a flashlight.
Um, wait. Saying a game "is what it is, it's an FPS game made to be fun", is bashing it now? Maybe you should actually learn what "bashing a game" is before you post.
Yeah, and here's what really gets me. If you pay attention to what it tells Shepard, the entire reason the Reapers were created amounts to: "Yo, I heard you didn't like getting killed by synthetics, so I made some synthetics to wipe you out every 50,000 years so you wouldn't get killed by synthetics."
Actually... while I don't necessarily agree with the tone Maxwell's taken in some of his comments, he is absolutely right about one thing. Owning the disc does not mean you own all the content on the disc. In fact, most of the time, you don't own ANY of the content on the disc; all you own is permission to USE it. It's all right there in the EULA.
The whole reason behind the content being locked on disc is because of an agreement with Sony; the short version is, those characters will be unlocked (automatically) only on the version of the game for the Sony Vita, and later you can unlock them for $20 by buying the "DLC".
The best thing for Capcom to do is to finish their contract with Sony, and then never make such a contract again. And stop making us pay twice for the game.
Capcom: If you're going to treat your customers like cash cows, don't expect them to always be complacent every time you bend them over to milk them.
Like I told Danusty above, read the EULA. Despite what you may think, you do NOT own the content on the disc; the company that made the game does. Your money is simply paying for permission to USE it.
Also, when you are reading the EULA, you may see something like this: "You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble {product name}, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation."
This means that if you unlock said content yourself, you ARE, in fact, in breach of contract, and ignorance is no excuse; if you didn't read the EULA but play the game anyway, the courts will say that by playing the game, you have agreed to the EULA, whether you read it or not.
I find Capcom's behavior to be just as reprehensible as you do, but it is what it is, and I've seen this kind of language in EULAs since 1982, when $400 would buy you permission to use one copy of Lotus 1-2-3, so this is nothing new. It is what it is.
SpearM64's comments