This issue gets debated constantly. The twist this time is some of the
NON-Pirates are pissed.
Besides, who's PC is it anyhow, yours or Ubisofts?
If a game wants to install this form of CP, then WARN people
clearly on the box that a) It's Starforce and b) there's a potential risk to
their PCs.
Not like you can return the game after opening now adays any how.
Because a) and b) aren't happening, people have to resort to plan c).
Which is let everyone else try the game, and/or find out if in fact its SF
protected.
Then if they really want it, wait for a crack before buying, or don't bother
and pass.
Everyone is intitiled to buy whatever games they want.
If you want to call that a boycott so be it. The decision to buy or not to
buy
is the ONLY way to voice our opinion in this market.
I don't buy software to float share holders boats, I buy it if I like it and
I trust
it. I buy a lot of software every year (I think I'm in the $700 bracket
now).
Where's your source for that?
The SF devs must be worried to some degree because of their contest/fud
event.
2005 saw a drop in game sales, but I don't think the SF "boycotters" caused
that.
Sound practice to me, or they could invest in companies that don't cause
"waves" with their CP software.
So people who refuse to buy SF protected games, are idiots! Idiots who also
want to see the end of simulations? Yeah ... right, come on.
They are/were idiots in regards to that stunt. Caught with their pants down
big time.
It's not as easy as that. It's too easy to paint everyone with broad
brushes.
I suspect as many neoCons voted NO to SF as there have been neoLibs.
If you don't like Liberals, are you now a whiner? If you don't like Pepsi,
also a whiner?
I'm not sure what the solution is to piracy, maybe they should go after the
large piraters.
You don't hear that on the news do you.