By pirating, I'm trying to do my part in bringing down large companies who make these mistakes, I don't want them to continue poluting the industry and getting away with it.
Romanticised ideal, but it doesn't work like that. By pirating, you also enforce their fears, you no longer become a voice in their market but a whiner who doesn't contribute TO the industry. It's like voting, you can't really complain about the government if you've done nothing to try change it.
Why should I pay and than go out of my way to fix thier mistakes? In my mind the publisher and devolper are one entity. If the publisher agrees to releace a game that is full of bugs than they are at just as much fault as the developer, if the deveopler agrees to hand over the rights of the game knowing the publisher as going add that restrictive DRM, they are at just as much fault. "But I didn't rape the little girl, my friend did it, I just recorded it and sold the videos."
The publisher owns the rights to the game, it's actually pretty rare that a developer owns rights to their own games. Developers need funding and investment, this comes from publishers, with stock-holders and board members who are usually entirely detached from the industry as a whole (why, I believe, it's so easy for DRM companies to sell their snake oil to them). It's also why independent developers like CDProjekt and, as czc said, Paradox should be supported, why games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect should be supported.
It's a kind of living proof that DRM doesn't work and truly great games sell like hotcakes. If, after that, you still insist on pirating then there is nothing that you are contributing to the industry. You become a faceless pirate, not a scorned or upset customer.
Publishers also regularly force deadlines on developers, sometimes unfairly. I remember Troika had many issues with their publishers, especially Activision
Developers are rarely your enemy.
Did you try re-installing it recently? WinLive won't register it because of some expired key bug and now the multiplayer is useless and you have to crack it to play the singleplayer. If these problems aren't adressed by the makers of the game, they don't deserve anything.
Think I first played it about three weeks ago, actually. I bought a second-hand copy with an unused key, my other half bought his new off ebay. We installed
the 6.4MB patch after installing and that was that. Patches aren't that unusual in games, are they?
I never had any problems with SecuRom and D-tools, but had to download about a million cracks to get around that WinLive and Rockstar Social bullshit that has only one purpose, multiplayer and social networking, neither of which I wanted anything to do with, I just want to play the damned game! Rockstar and any WinLive games have since than been removed from potential buying lists and onto the torrent list. Your securom issue highlights my point even further, you shouldn't have had to send any e-mails in the 1st place. The game is supposed to just install and play.
I agree. Well, partially. LIVE games have one advantage in multiplayer--ease of hooking up. Granted, at first you had to create a LIVE account pretending you lived in the US or the UK to get past the territorial discrimination, however, switching over the SA last November bagged me 800 points I spent on a cute avatar and a silly little costume. I don't own a 360, so it doesn't really faze me too much, but South Africans are still given the short end of the stick there, I believe--You have more features with a UK/US account than a ZA one.
Resident Evil 5 and Gears were both incredible fun in co-op, courtesy of LIVE. While I don't really care too much for achievements, they're nice to show off (mostly to myself

).
Regardless, LIVE was mostly for the multiplayer component of GTA, RE5 and Gears, if you wanted to play without it, you didn't need to use LIVE. However, I agree, you're a customer, you paid full price for the game, you are entitled to ALL of its features, not just the basics.
We'll have to see what Rockstar do with the next GTA; see if they make the same mistakes. Thing is, as far as the Rockstar Social Club thing went, many liked it. I didn't, I have XFire for uploading screenshots and videos, but the fact is that many wanted it, which is why it was there in the first place.
I'm not talking about buying games off steam, I mean buying the game in a retail shop and than you need to activate it on steam. Another torrent list item. The new AVP and Saints Row 2 are the two mistakes I made.
So you'd torrent it (read: download), but you won't install it on something that would occasionally patch it and keep it up to date and bug-free? Look, I can't stand Steam, it likes to get somewhat confused more often than a chicken with its head cut off. Sometimes it takes AGES to connect, other times it doesn't start up my games, sometimes, even after telling it that I'll manually update a game, it insists on trying to update it regardless. Things have gotten better but if I can avoid Steam, I will.
Here's a funny little factoid for you,
I own 55 games on Steam. New Vegas, Dawn of War 2 and Last Remnant are the only games, I think, which were retail-bought using Steam. I can't say I've ever had a problem with them. Again, insert disc, put in serial, install like normal then play. The only difference is that your serial is locked to your Steam account.
It's also possible to play offline, but who'd want that if you get achievements?
I for one liked it better when gaming was the domain of shut-in outcasts, it meant that games were made with passion, not money. Shit like C&C4, IWnet and the Ubi DRM would never have been though of. Starcraft 2, MW2, BFBC2 and BlOps would all have had LAN support and the latter two would have been bug free. The entire concept of porting would never have had the chance to exist. And much, MUCh more. "Vote with your wallet" is the popular term, I do that, and I take it one step further by retaliating the only way I can.
I disagree, if gaming remained the domain of the shut-in outcast, we'd never have the AAA titles we see today. Casual gaming makes money, it's a huge earner, much bigger than the die-hard gamers. If it weren't for casual gamers' money filling the industry, most of us would be stuck playing Commander Keen. It's easy to hate casual gamers, you could even say that they're the biggest pirates and blame them for why certain publishers enforce DRM, but that would also mean looking in the mirror and seeing the similarities and risk being placed on the same page as them.
Why should teh paying customer go out of thier way to get the thing to work because of the fault of the ones who wrote the software? As I've said, it's supposed to just work.
Then don't be a paying customer, but don't support the argument of DRM by pirating it either, otherwise your overblown sense of entitlement feeds the beast. If you enjoy a game enough to play it, buy it. Pirate it after, sure, spam their forums with the fact that you bought it, it sucks ballz0rz and you've pirated it to make it playable, "How's that you stupid fox? I bought your game, I think it's fantastic, just this tiny little issue... I had to pirate it to be able to play it, it's a broken game because of the DRM and idiocy you enforce."
You then become a legitimate customer, with a legitimate concern and not a buzzing annoyance that contributes nothing under the misguided romanticised ideal of fighting the victimisation of clients by being a back-seat revolutionary. If you do nothing, you have nothing: no voice, no integrity, no game and no legitimacy.
As I said, pirates aren't lost revenue, a person that had no intention to buy a game is not lost revenue. If you had intended to buy it, then DRM pops up or some other legitimate concern as a customer, then yes, you are well-within your rights to change your mind about the game and sure, you are then considered lost revenue. If you still went on to play the game, it's difficult for me to think of it as lost revenue because that shows that you had no intention to buy it, you just wanted your cake and to eat it too.
It's difficult for me to think of you as a customer any longer when you're at their heels for not doing what you want but don't support them and air your legitimate concerns as a customer. There's a way to go about making a difference, being spiteful doesn't make a difference, it's apathy. Apathy has never been exactly... revolutionary.
Ever consider I might just be a comercial user?
If that were true, that would mean that you're making an income off of someone else's work without compensating them for it. That would be disgusting, actually.
Yes, I am spitefull, I'm elitist and entitled. And you know what? I'm proud of it! It means I won't take shit and I demand quality. People would not get away with peddling half-assed crap and screwing people over because they're cheap, greedy assholes if things were run with morrals instead of profit in mind.
My dear Raven, have you considered getting yourself a console? Your spiteful, elitist and self-entitled pride would likely be better-suited there, where DRM can't upset you. PC gaming is evidently not suited to you.
I hear that the 360, especially, is quite fun. Apparently you can take it to friends and LAN with them, you have the social aspect, the achievements, the avatar, no DRM, no real bugs (uniformity FTW).
I'm serious, get a console and get back to supporting the industry. All your concerns are legitimately addressed in one compact device.