No one has the right to say what people should do/not-do and they should be entitled to do or not. You don't live their lives and you don't have the right.
Saying that person that barely puts some food on the table should not use something virtual for free that has unlimited quantities just because it's not fair from your point of view (because you bought it) is evil and selfish.
The car in your example is a physical product that if stollen will actually hurt the Manufacturer, but a person who downloads a software he can't afford to buy either way does not. Also, in my country for example the internet is fast and cheap (thank god), and I pay 10$ a month. And the internet is considered something mandatory like electricity. But a new game is ~100$. And while I can afford to buy my games (because I'm probaby a little bit more "lucky" than most in my country), many of my friends for example can't, because their monthly income is ~$300. When you take out $150 for bills (including $10 for the internet), you have $150 left to live with this month. You do understand that you simply can't give $100 for something unimportant as a game and be left with $50 for the rest of the month. You can't just tell people in this situation that they're thieves and greedy sons of bitches (or "Tough luck"), because well... that's just evil and mean. Try to see things from the other side before you judge.
This is something that publishers like EA will never understand. People don't shit money. If a 1000 poeple pirate their stuff and don't have the money to buy it, doesn't mean they will pay for it when the said publishers put some super DRM. Money don't come up from nowhere. That's why piracy should be looked as a potential sales, not loss.
No one has the right to say what people should do/not-do and they should be entitled to do or not. You don't live their lives and you don't have the right.
Saying that person that barely puts some food on the table should not use something virtual for free that has unlimited quantities just because it's not fair from your point of view (because you bought it) is evil and selfish.
The car in your example is a physical product that if stollen will actually hurt the Manufacturer, but a person who downloads a software he can't afford to buy either way does not. Also, in my country for example the internet is fast and cheap (thank god), and I pay 10$ a month. And the internet is considered something mandatory like electricity. But a new game is ~100$. And while I can afford to buy my games (because I'm probaby a little bit more "lucky" than most in my country), many of my friends for example can't, because their monthly income is ~$300. When you take out $150 for bills (including $10 for the internet), you have $150 left to live with this month. You do understand that you simply can't give $100 for something unimportant as a game and be left with $50 for the rest of the month. You can't just tell people in this situation that they're thieves and greedy sons of bitches (or "Tough luck"), because well... that's just evil and mean. Try to see things from the other side before you judge.
This is something that publishers like EA will never understand. People don't shit money. If a 1000 poeple pirate their stuff and don't have the money to buy it, doesn't mean they will pay for it when the said publishers put some super DRM. Money don't come up from nowhere. That's why piracy should be looked as a potential sales, not loss.
@Lhomity Don't be stupid. The majority of the pirates pirate the games because they can't afford them (not because of greed, because their monthly income/budget doesn't allow them to spend money on such things). Gaming is a luxory. And others don't want to support BS extortion practises that some publishers/developers do (for example: EA).
Aquiring competive talanted studios that have a promissing franchise/s, dumbing down their games to lower development cost and appeal to casual people for more profit, while using the studio's good reputation, and when people stop buying the studio's games because of mediocrity and greedy tactics, EA kills the studio becasue it's no longer profitable. Which causes many people to lose their jobs. (And leads to destruction of great franchises) That's how EA is doing things. They will never change. But I think we all know this. What a shame. BW was great studio.
LOL. That's real talent. Eaware, you've successfully pissed me off again in your desperate attempt get Hudson on people's good side, because he is in charge of the next title. This is so ridiculous... an attempt to make Hudson the good guy by saying he was against CHARGING FOR A FIX for this uncomplete game and it's atrocious ending that ruined the franchise (because of his ego)? Words just can't describe the arrogance and... GOD! Seriously... Does BW have the dumbest PR EVER?! I don't even... WTF? I will never buy your products again bioware. U just can't leave the dead horse alone.. You keep pissing on it's corpse.
There is no such thing as "accessible to both old fans and newcomers". Fans want deep RPG mechanics, good story, less action and more dialogue and meaningful character interactions. Less autodialogue and more meaningful choices. More exploration and freedom, less linearity and coridor shooting. Casual newcomers want the oposite. So this "accessible to both old fans and newcomers" statement is as nonsensical as the ME3 ending.
@texasgoldrush Every mediocre FPS game these days has weapon customization. **** your painted guns. Where are the dialogue choices? That's what was important in MEU. /// "more variation of powers" Doesn't matter, because you rarely use them in ME3 because of the "awesome pew-pew" gunplay. /// "ME3 had a superior paragon/renegade system" and "more consquences to your actions" - Are you serious? Indoctrinated? Stupid? Drone? Which one is it?
Astralify's comments