Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

A hilarious lesson about DRM in PC games (RE: Ubisuck)


SmootsDaddy89

Recommended Posts

Yeah this is stupid. The thing that kills PC games more than anything is not making them down-scale in the requirements. So many people go buy a hot pc game just to realize it won't play on their computer. Then they can't return or exchange it.

So that's the last pc game they will ever buy.

Blame the industry for not making their products more user friendly in an attempt to sell moar Nvidia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I buy anything and everything that I enjoy after I torrent something honestly.

Also Scrum speaks the gospel. And don't use public sites either. Demonoid, for all intents and purposes, is a public site at this point with all the traffic they get now by the way.

Even though it would be considered a public site, it is still far better than thepiratebay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who made most of their money from writing software I can say with all honesty Ive never stolen software.

Hell I even pay for all of the shareware I download.

Like I said, I've only ever done it for a good cause.......my entertainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah this is stupid. The thing that kills PC games more than anything is not making them down-scale in the requirements. So many people go buy a hot pc game just to realize it won't play on their computer. Then they can't return or exchange it.

So that's the last pc game they will ever buy.

Blame the industry for not making their products more user friendly in an attempt to sell moar Nvidia.

There is an absurdly huge market for casual games on the PC. Look at WoW, and also microtransaction supported games on Facebook and stuff.

The AAA supergraphizxZOMG title is dead on PC, and that's just the way it is. Consoles streamlined everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an absurdly huge market for casual games on the PC. Look at WoW, and also microtransaction supported games on Facebook and stuff.

The AAA supergraphizxZOMG title is dead on PC, and that's just the way it is. Consoles streamlined everything.

Crysis 2 begs to differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...