DRM problem with used copy » Forum Post by epiclulz

I didn't ask you meaningless questions like how many times you pleasure yourself - I asked pertitnent questions (which you have not answered) like Are there any other items missing from the box you bought second hand - like Keyboard fold out ref or music CD? Are there? Or is missing items from the box not that important?

These questions are meaningless and arbitrary.

So, you are saying that asking about missing items (like a manual or a license) from a second hand box which you bought is meaningless and arbitrary? Newbies may need the manual to refer and to read up on, so a missing manual is not trivial to some. Maybe to experienced games such as yourself, the manual is optional, but to a new gamer, it could be a big deal. So if you want to make points about greed and the moral aspect of things, you need to also consider others viewpoints, who might feel that updates are less important than a manual. If (and I hope you don't) think that only your viewpoint is valid and all others are irrelevant when you try to take the moral high ground about things like greed - then it would make you rather obtuse.

The fact that this thread has been allowed to go this far without being locked is already a credit to SD. So I think if any company were to listen - try asking EA to change their policies - SD would be the ones to do so. The truth is, you only want to complain on this forum, but when you have to do something real about it - write an email to sales@stardock.com with your real email addy - you fall short.

In what way does any of this disprove the fact that Stardock is guilt of greed by intentionally preventing second hand sales?

Stop changing the topic. Your opening post is about keys of second hand copies of Sins (which has already been answered "Yes") and not about the greed or lack thereof of SD.

I 110% agree with you! That's right - no publisher or manufacturer can be held responsible for people leaving out items from games they sell second hand. In your case, the person left out one important item - the licensing - from the box you bought second hand. Then, as you yourself said, how can SD/IC be responsible?

It was their choice to intentionally and arbitrarily make second hand sales problematic. It is easily within their power to fix this. It was also their choice to not alert consumers about the issue. Again, easily fixed. There's also the default assumption that second hand games work the same as new ones. A missing instruction manual etc. in a second hand game is not something that a publisher can reasonably be held accountable for. SoaSE's license key was in the game's box, and the account that the key is linked to did not come with the game.

Whether SD can fix it "easily" or not is not the topic - you are changing the topic again.

For example, if the serial no was faded, and you could only read half the numbers there, that would be just as bad correct? So, if the serial no is half of the license, then the account to which the serial no was tied to forms the other half and it was missing, that's like a faded CD key..

Thererore, as you yourself said, "the account that the key is linked to did not come with the game" hence you should complain to the shop you bought it from that the box they sold you is missing the account. You can tell the shop that while the account is not needed to install or play the game, it is needed to update it, and so it is important. If they refuse to assist you with that, then yes, you should (and you did) get a refund.

Conclusion: Your situation sucks, I agree. You should complain loudly to the store that screwed sold you the second hand box. For other stuff about SD policy concerning second hand sales and Impulse accounts, please go ahead and petition SD directly.

Successfully updated karma reason!

don't assume it makes you look stupied

I wasn't assuming, I was stating a fact. There's a difference.

The fundamental disagreement here is over who owes what to second-hand customers in the case of software.

No, the fundamental disagreement is actually whether or not corporations should be allowed to do anything they want in the name of greed (and the answer is no).

He did not buy it from a licensed reseller. He bought it from a second hand shop

Uh, no I didn't. The store just sells second hand games in addition to new ones.

No longer are you attempting to prove your point but simply disprove everyone elses points (failing at it by the way).

That's kind of how it works.

You fail to see and realize that this is not a factual discussion but merely stating opinions and that everyone here is right in their own way because it is what they believe.

Believing that something is right or correct doesn't make it so.

Should second-hand software sales be actively supported by game developers? We may wish that to be the case but from their perspective, it would be like actively supporting a bootlegging enterprise. Why on earth would they want to do that?

For the millionth time, just because a corporation wants something doesn't mean they should have it. Do you seriously think society should be structured according to what maximizes corporate profits?

So, you are saying that asking about missing items (like a manual or a license) from a second hand box which you bought is meaningless and arbitrary?

Haha, what? I was obviously referring to your questions to me.

Stop changing the topic. Your opening post is about keys of second hand copies of Sins (which has already been answered "Yes") and not about the greed or lack thereof of SD.

Since when has this thread been exclusively confined to what I said in the original post? I have repeatedly talked about the fact that Stardock & co are being greedy (and I actually did so in the original post!). It is very much on-topic.

Whether SD can fix it "easily" or not is not the topic - you are changing the topic again.

Missing manuals etc. are not something that a publisher can do anything about, or should be expected to. But Stardock & co are actively preventing second hand sales and actively misleading consumers, and both of these things are well within their powers to fix.

For example, if the serial no was faded, and you could only read half the numbers there, that would be just as bad correct?

It's not something that a publisher can be held accountable for.

Thererore, as you yourself said, "the account that the key is linked to did not come with the game" hence you should complain to the shop you bought it from that the box they sold you is missing the account.

The account is not part of the game, and once again: how is the shop supposed to be aware of every DRM-crippled game out there? They didn't know SoaSE has this kind of DRM. Maybe you live in a magic land where game stores have omniscient employees, but I don't.

Conclusion: Your situation sucks, I agree. You should complain loudly to the store that screwed sold you the second hand box.

The shop is completely innocent, and since I've already returned the game and they've pulled the remaining used copies from their shelves, I don't understand what more there is to do. You're shifting blame.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Believing that something is right or correct doesn't make it so.

@epiclulz could not have said it better

You amaze me every time I read your responses (and dont bother with the "you didnt argue any of my points" answer. Heard it already, still boring.) I do love the way your answers change the contex of every line without proof or direction.

Are you a failed polititian by any chance

Successfully updated karma reason!

Bottom line: the shop you bought it from violated the law. It's as simple as that. You keep dancing around the issues, screaming corporate murder and greed, but that's what it comes down to. They practically sold you a DVD with Sins burned on to it, and charged you "half price".

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting The_Regicide,

reply 4

Bottom line: the shop you bought it from violated the law. It's as simple as that. You keep dancing around the issues, screaming corporate murder and greed, but that's what it comes down to. They practically sold you a DVD with Sins burned on to it, and charged you "half price".

Add to that "why is it the shops fault" because they are a buisness, they want to make money, they should have done their homework. Otherwise they just tried to make a quick buck -greed- on your behalf. You might not need to know about an included EULA but they get paid to know these things. The shop is the greedy corporate in this tale

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Kruppe,

reply 24

To clarify, if I buy a game at a store (whether if it is new or unused is irrelevant), and this game contains some critical bugs making the game crash, not run, run poorly, etc, regardless if I am with an internet connection I should be able to get a patch for that. After all that is what patches are, they're patching it up because it's flawed/broken/whatever.

Version 1.00 works fine and does not crash, your point is moot.

I am not a big fan of a second hand games (not buying or selling them) but since it is not illegal it should be supported or very CLEARLY flagged on the box of the retail version that it is not possible to utilize the games full extent(features/updates/patches without a license, and that the license that is included is only usable once. Now I know this, many know this, but some don't, and that does not make them stupid.

it IS illigal, your point is moot.

because we're all idiots

you may be

So I ask you, kind sir, if it is illegal, then how come I don't see many cases of lawsuits in the country where I live? Smartass

Successfully updated karma reason!

ZubaZ

Join Date 11/2001

+917

epiclulz: I think you need to better define what makes an opinion or assumption and what is a fact. You seem to believe that anything you believe is a fact. That may not always be the case.

Successfully updated karma reason!

why is this guy still here. he says that he has had it with sins and doesnt even own it anymore.

Successfully updated karma reason!

You amaze me every time I read your responses (and dont bother with the "you didnt argue any of my points" answer. Heard it already, still boring.) I do love the way your answers change the contex of every line without proof or direction.

So in other words you were unable to find a single flaw in of my arguments.

Bottom line: the shop you bought it from violated the law. It's as simple as that.

What would you know about my country's legislation? I haven't even said where I'm from.

You keep dancing around the issues, screaming corporate murder and greed, but that's what it comes down to. They practically sold you a DVD with Sins burned on to it, and charged you "half price".

They sold me a completely legitimate copy of SoaSE.

Add to that "why is it the shops fault" because they are a buisness, they want to make money, they should have done their homework. Otherwise they just tried to make a quick buck -greed- on your behalf.

For the billionth millionth time, they have no way of being aware of every DRM-crippled game in existence, and they don't stand to gain anything from taking used games that can't be re-sold. That's why they don't take MMORPGs or Valve's games, and that's why they won't take SoaSE in the future.

You might not need to know about an included EULA but they get paid to know these things.

Yes, surely it's perfectly reasonable for shops to read through every single EULA just in case they run into shit like SoaSE (which, again, is still very uncommon).

The shop is the greedy corporate in this tale

You're shifting blame.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Whatever country is unlucky enough to have you has laws that the shop may or may not have broken. But since I know SD and IC are in the USA, I'm thinking they're free of all blame here...

And any company that sells second hand games should take two point six seconds to actually open the box that was just returned and see if there is a serial number on a game card anywhere inside.

Successfully updated karma reason!

For the billionth millionth time, they have no way of being aware of every DRM-crippled game in existence

If they don't understand the products that they're selling, then they really have no business selling them in the first place.

And it sounds like they agree and have since remedied the problem so all is right with the world again.

Successfully updated karma reason!

And any company that sells second hand games should take two point six seconds to actually open the box that was just returned and see if there is a serial number on a game card anywhere inside.

Most games have serials but they aren't connected to anything, they're just a method of copy protection. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

If they don't understand the products that they're selling, then they really have no business selling them in the first place.

It is preposterous to expect them to fully understand the precise mechanics of every game's DRM system. SoaSE is not a MMORPG or primarily a multiplayer game, nor is it a Valve game, so there's no reason to suspect that it can't be resold. Furthermore, everyone keeps saying that it has no DRM whatsoever.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This post of yours made me lol. Hard. Rofl even. Seriously, learn the meaning of the terms you use before you use them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Secondhand sales are as bad, if not worse than piracy. In an abstract sense they are the same thing, although one is much faster, and the other stands to profit more.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

It is preposterous to expect them to fully understand the precise mechanics of every game's DRM system.

I'd argue that it's preposterous for them to simply assume that every game is going to 'work' as a second-hand product. Citing common practice as their guide is just as much a fallacy as anything else you've pointed out here. As was noted before, this is precisely the reason that most reputable PC game retailers don't dabble in used products. It's just not cost-effective to have to research every title (and more games than you let on will have issues with resale. This isn't isolated to Valve and MMO's) and it's just poor form to pass that risk on to the customer.

And again - according to you, they pulled the product from the shelf. They know they made a mistake putting it out there in the first place without understanding the products' limitations, and they fixed it. It's a shame that you, as an unwitting customer, had to deal with it but they seem to agree that it was their responsibility (otherwise, you probably wouldn't have gotten your money back).

Like Craig said, for developers to actively support second-hand products would be tantamount to supporting a company that's bootlegging their products. Once again, in this case, the original owner still has complete access to the game and related support and by selling the disc, they've essentially made a copy of the game for resale which is of no benefit to Stardock. We can argue until the end of time what constitutes 'greed' but I think it's daft to expect SD/IC to be working against their own best interests for the sake of people who aren't even their customers.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This post of yours made me lol. Hard. Rofl even. Seriously, learn the meaning of the terms you use before you use them.

What a devastating rebuttal.

Secondhand sales are as bad, if not worse than piracy. In an abstract sense they are the same thing, although one is much faster, and the other stands to profit more.

Yes, and buying a used car is even worse than stealing one. Anything that doesn't result in more profit for corporations, such as the ability to purchase used goods, is morally wrong and should be removed from existence.

I'd argue that it's preposterous for them to simply assume that every game is going to 'work' as a second-hand product.

Who is making that assumption? Did I not say that they will not take MMORPGs, Valve games and anything else known not to work?

Citing common practice as their guide is just as much a fallacy as anything else you've pointed out here.

No, I believe that's called common sense. The vast majority of games work just fine as used.

And again - according to you, they pulled the product from the shelf. They know they made a mistake putting it out there in the first place without understanding the products' limitations, and they fixed it.

They had no reason to think that SoaSE has such restrictive DRM.

It is highly amusing how the fanboys here keep trying to shift blame against all reason.

Like Craig said, for them to actively support second-hand products would be tantamount to supporting a company that's bootlegging your product.

Meanwhile, outside the magic fantasy bubble of the games industry, second hand products are completely normal.

Once again, in this case, the original owner still has complete access to the game and related support and by selling the disc, they've essentially made a copy of the game for resale which is of no benefit to Stardock.

Then maybe they should implement copy protection like the rest of the fucking industry does. How many times have I explained this by now?

We can argue until the end of time what constitutes 'greed'

No we can't. It's already been clearly established that they're being greedy.

It's daft to expect SD/IC to be working against their own best interests for the sake of people who aren't even their customers.

And once again we arrive at the same old conclusion: corporations are God.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Troll. Now I'm sure of it, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Who is making that assumption? Did I not say that they will not take MMORPGs, Valve games and anything else known not to work?

They assumed it would work and they were wrong. And now, SD/IC products are on the list and you have your money back. Why is this still an issue?

Incidentally, are you posting this rant on the Valve and various MMO forums as well?

No, I believe that's called common sense. The vast majority of games work just fine as used.

So, because your fallacy is more common, it still counts as a credible argument? I'm guessing you missed a day or two in the Intro. to Logic course.

Past behavior of other developers isn't a guarantee of future behavior by everyone in the industry. Times change and processes with them.

They had no reason to think that SoaSE has such restrictive DRM.

And they were wrong. Oops. At least they owned up to it and fixed the problem.

It is highly amusing how the fanboys here keep trying to shift blame against all reason.

The reasons are clear as day. I'm not sure who you're trying to convince with the feigned ignorance. Oh well... at least we got the baseless accusation of fanboyism out of the way.

Then maybe they should implement copy protection like the rest of the fucking industry does. How many times have I explained this by now?

Copy protection doesn't have an industry standard. No developer wants to encourage second-hand sales and new methods are going to continue being floated to stop it (preferrably, without punishing first-hand customers). It's a constantly changing world. Deal. Or continue fighting for supposed 'rights' that you've done nothing to deserve. I suspect that'll be chosen course.

Meanwhile, outside the magic fantasy bubble of the games industry, second hand products are completely normal.

Outside of the software industry, second-hand products generally aren't available for continued use by the first customer. If you sell a car, you don't have access to a copy of the car afterwards. In the case of most software, the original user generally doesn't lose access to the content of the game unless they go the extra mile to delete it from their systems.

And once again we arrive at the same old conclusion: corporations are God.

If repeating that mantra makes you feel better about your entitlement-based whining, then go for it. I fail to see what makes your greed any more attractive than theirs.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Stop changing the topic. Your opening post is about keys of second hand copies of Sins (which has already been answered "Yes") and not about the greed or lack thereof of SD.

Since when has this thread been exclusively confined to what I said in the original post? I have repeatedly talked about the fact that Stardock & co are being greedy (and I actually did so in the original post!). It is very much on-topic.

You have often accused others of changing the topic and ask them to stop changing the topic, but you are allowed to do so? The original post is:

Is it really true that when you buy SoaSE and link your CD-key to an account, they stay together forever and thus screw over anyone unfortunate enough to buy a used copy containing that CD-key?

and has no mention about greed, or even SD. In fact, your original question is a valid fact-finding question. So, clearly, you are changing the topic - at least in your replies to me.

Thererore, as you yourself said, "the account that the key is linked to did not come with the game" hence you should complain to the shop you bought it from that the box they sold you is missing the account.

The account is not part of the game, and once again: how is the shop supposed to be aware of every DRM-crippled game out there? They didn't know SoaSE has this kind of DRM. Maybe you live in a magic land where game stores have omniscient employees, but I don't.

The account IS part of the game. It says so in the manual. See the word Impulse? Oh wait, did your second hand copy have the manual? You didn't say because you said that was a meaningless and arbitrary question..

Earlier, I asked several times, what is the name of your shop, you refused to say. How is SD/IC supposed to educate the shop employees then if they don't even know who the shop is? Wait, are you living in a magic land where SD/IC is omniscient and knows the name every game store out there?

Conclusion: Your situation sucks, I agree. You should complain loudly to the store that screwed sold you the second hand box.

The shop is completely innocent, and since I've already returned the game and they've pulled the remaining used copies from their shelves, I don't understand what more there is to do. You're shifting blame.

You can remember that the store has pulled the remaining second hand copies of the game but not the price of the second hand copy? Funny how your memory works. It seems to be very selective.

I'm not shifting blame - never have. You need to go re-read my posts again.

What else is there for you to do? I've also said this several times - Email SD with a real email addy and say "Please allow second hand sales!". But in all the time you've spent posting on this thread, you have not done so.

You're just here to pick a fight. Go ahead. Fight on. The truth is as long as you continue with this unproductive behaviour, what you want to change - SD's policy on second hand sales - will not change. And with you not providing any details or take any concrete steps like what I asked/suggested to you, I think your behaviour ought to strengthen their resolve to not change.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Took you blazing long enough.

Sadly, people have the strange impulse to respond to them. Insecure topic-starts + insecure posters = this

Successfully updated karma reason!

Another long shouting match that could have been easily prevented by a note on the outside of the box explaining the registration system. I really don't understand why Stardock (whose licensing system is, IMO, very customer friendly and low stress) doesn't simply spell out that the license key is non-transferrable on the outside of the box so that no one in these situations can cry ignorance anymore.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Troll. Now I'm sure of it, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The only thing I'm sure about is that you have no counter-arguments whatsoever.

They assumed it would work and they were wrong.

It's a valid assumption since most games do work (at least over here in the real world, where I live).

Incidentally, are you posting this rant on the Valve and various MMO forums as well?

No and no (and what do MMOs have to do with this anyway? I have already explained multiple times that they are different).

So, because your fallacy is more common, it still counts as a credible argument? I'm guessing you missed a day or two in the Intro. to Logic course.

We are not talking about logic, we are talking about everyday reality. It is completely sensible to assume that most games work (because they do).

And they were wrong. Oops.

If they had Googled the issue they would have only found legions of paid shills (or complete fucking idiots) claiming that the game has no form of DRM whtasoever. They had no reasonable way of knowing about the DRM.

The reasons are clear as day.

No they are not. I have explained over and over again why the store cannot be at fault.

I'm not sure who you're trying to convince with the feigned ignorance. Oh well... at least we got the baseless accusation of fanboyism out of the way.

It is not baseless, since people here are acting like fanboys.

Copy protection doesn't have an industry standard. No developer wants to encourage second-hand sales and new methods are going to continue being floated to stop it (preferrably, without punishing first-hand customers). It's a constantly changing world. Deal.

It's their choice to allow people to keep playing the game without the original disc.

Or continue fighting for supposed 'rights' that you've done nothing to deserve. I suspect that'll be chosen course.

Consumers have no rights? This is news to me, but I guess anything is possible in the corporate fantasy world that you inhabit.

Outside of the software industry, second-hand products generally aren't available for continued use by the first customer.

If Stardock doesn't want to take steps to prevent this, that's their problem.

If repeating that mantra makes you feel better about your entitlement-based whining, then go for it.

Yes, surely anyone standing up for consumer rights is just whining. Corporations are God, after all.

I fail to see what makes your greed any more attractive than theirs.

What greed?

You have often accused others of changing the topic and ask them to stop changing the topic, but you are allowed to do so? The original post is: and has no mention about greed, or even SD. In fact, your original question is a valid fact-finding question. So, clearly, you are changing the topic - at least in your replies to me.

The first post is completely irrelevant at this point (I was obviously referring to the second post), and you are just arbitrarily trying to limit the discussion because... well shit, I have no idea why.

The account IS part of the game.

Nope. It doesn't come with the game.

Earlier, I asked several times, what is the name of your shop, you refused to say. How is SD/IC supposed to educate the shop employees then if they don't even know who the shop is?

You think they're going to contact some tiny shop on the other side of the world over this, especially when that shop has already pulled the game from their shelves? You are completely out to lunch.

You can remember that the store has pulled the remaining second hand copies of the game but not the price of the second hand copy? Funny how your memory works. It seems to be very selective.

Remembering a number is entirely different from remembering an event or conversation. And I still don't understand what fucking difference it makes how much it cost.

Successfully updated karma reason!

You have often accused others of changing the topic and ask them to stop changing the topic, but you are allowed to do so? The original post is: and has no mention about greed, or even SD. In fact, your original question is a valid fact-finding question. So, clearly, you are changing the topic - at least in your replies to me.

The first post is completely irrelevant at this point (I was obviously referring to the second post), and you are just arbitrarily trying to limit the discussion because... well shit, I have no idea why.

Excuse me, you said, and I quote (post #202):

Since when has this thread been exclusively confined to what I said in the original post? I have repeatedly talked about the fact that Stardock & co are being greedy (and I actually did so in the original post!). It is very much on-topic.

You even italicised the words "so in the original post". Are you trying to change your own words? In post #202 you say you talk about SD being greedy in the original post, but now in your reply to me in post #222, now you say "I was obviously referring to the second post". Geez, make up your mind already. I think your poor memory (unable to remember prices, shop name, manual included or not, etc) is beginning to affect your ability to reply coherently.

You ask about keys being locked in second hand copies in the original post, and now, as of post #222, you say the original post is now irrellevant - by your own admission, you changed the topic. The kicker is that you've often accused others of trying to change the topic, so I am merely taking a point from you. So it is OK for you to change the topic but not others? I see your sense of fair play must be like the AI on unfair..

The account IS part of the game.

Nope. It doesn't come with the game.

Yes it is. You must have forgotted to read the manual. Again, Impulse - manual - RTFM. Did you even read the manual? Oh wait, I just remembered, smart chap like you with excellent memory doesn't think that asking about the manual is a pertinent question.

Earlier, I asked several times, what is the name of your shop, you refused to say. How is SD/IC supposed to educate the shop employees then if they don't even know who the shop is?

You think they're going to contact some tiny shop on the other side of the world over this, especially when that shop has already pulled the game from their shelves? You are completely out to lunch.

First, you say a shop is innocent because how can a shop staff possibly know about such policies, then you say that it is ridiculous to think that a game company is responsible for teaching shop employees their software's registration/update/etc procedures. So, if it is not the shop employees, and it is not the software developer, then it is what, the customer's fault? Which is it? You are arguing both/multiple sides of the coin here.

And incidentally, yeah, maybe SD might talk to the small shop on the other side of the world who have already pulled their second hand copies of Sins off the shelf - who knows. Do you work for SD and so you know for sure what they can/will/cannot/won't do? Or are you too chicken to find out the truth? Come on, crunch time. Go ahead - challenge SD to really talk to the small shop - tell us the name/contact of the shop. Let us see if you are just full of hot air, or is your implication that SD "couldn't be bothered" true. I don't work for SD, so I don't know. Maybe Frogboy/Frasers/etc will fail to talk to the small shop, and you will have concrete proof of SD's "greed". Or maybe they really will. Who knows. Question is - do you dare to find out?

As for remembering how much it cost - why do I keep asking that question? I want to know if you really bought it second hand or if you downloaded it off a torrent site. I don't know who you are, it is only right that I be circumspect. Maybe you can say that you don't have to prove anything to me (or anyone), but that's just the way of the coward. You level accusations at others, but don't dare to bring out your own proofs when challenged.

I think you are really a troll. A pretty good one, I will admit, but a troll nonetheless. Proof:

1. You will not take concrete action to resolve an issue even when the action has been suggested to you (numerous times). It's like saying the game doesn't work, and then being told to update your video drivers, but instead of doing so (updating the video drivers), continuing to complain that the game doesn't work.

2. You keep changing your points - example 1: first you accuse others of changing the topic, then you say it is unfair for others to limit the topic, example 2: you say how can the shop employee possibly know the policies of SD, then when asked the name of the shop so SD can educate them, you say that it is daft to consider the idea that SD might educate them - either way, no one can win an argument with you eh? It's your way, or the highway is it?

3. You accuse others (SD/IC) of various things (greed) but when asked for your proof, you do not deliver. You ask others to prove it when they accuse you of trolling, but when others ask your for proof that you really bought a copy second hand (like price), you decline to answer.

OK, let's say you win, SD/IC is a greedy bunch of immoral corporate b***s that just screw everyone over their truly dictatorial policies. And it doesn't look like they are going to change their policies based on your forum posts in this thread. OK. So epiclulz, what now? Ball's in your court. Are you just talk, or what?

Successfully updated karma reason!

You even italicised the words "so in the original post". Are you trying to change your own words?

If you had taken the time to compare the two, you might have noticed that I did say it in the second post, which I consider to be the original post since the first one is meaningless at this stage. It's not that hard to figure out.

(unable to remember prices, shop name, manual included or not, etc)

Uh... where did I say I can't remember the store's name and whether or not a manual was included? I simply refused to waste time answering your arbitrary questions.

Furthermore, you've often accused others of trying to change the topic, so I am merely taking a point from you. So it is OK for you to change the topic but not others? I see your sense of fair play must be like the AI on unfair..

Where was I changing the topic?

Yes it is. You must have forgotted to read the manual. Again, Impulse - manual - RTFM. Did you even read the manual? Oh wait, I just remembered, smart chap like you with excellent memory doesn't think that asking about the manual is a pertinent question.

The account does not come with the game. You have to download Impulse and create the account.

First, you say a shop is innocent because how can a shop staff possibly know about such policies, then you say that it is ridiculous to think that a game company is responsible for teaching shop employees their software's registration/update/etc procedures. So, if it is not the shop employees, and it is not the software developer, then it is what, the customer's fault? Which is it? You are arguing both/multiple sides of the coin here.

I don't understand how you could possibly think that the publisher should contact every individual shop in the entire world that's selling SoaSE and tell them about the game's DRM. I have never said they should do this and the whole idea is batshit fucking insane. What I did say was that at the very least there should be a clear warning in the game's packaging.

And incidentally, yeah, maybe SD might talk to the small shop on the other side of the world who have already pulled their second hand copies of Sins off the shelf - who knows. Do you work for SD and so you know for sure what they can/will/cannot/won't do? Or are you too chicken to find out the truth?

Maybe I just used my powers of common sense to determine that maybe Stardock isn't going to contact a tiny game store on the other side of the planet to provide them with information they already have about a product they are no longer selling second hand.

Question is - do you dare to find out?

I really have to wonder if you have some kind of mental disorder. To say that you're blowing things out of proportion in a melodramatic fashion would be an understatement of the highest order.

As for remembering how much it cost - why do I keep asking that question? I want to know if you really bought it second hand or if you downloaded it off a torrent site.

If I had torrented it, what would it prove if I lied about the price and told you that I paid X euros? But of course I didn't torrent it, because if I had then I wouldn't be making this thread (use some of that common sense, please).

You level accusations at others, but don't dare to bring out your own proofs when challenged.

I don't see how I could possibly prove how much I paid for it, even if I could remember the price.

I think you are really a troll. A pretty good one, I will admit, but a troll nonetheless. Proof:

1. You will not take concrete action to resolve an issue even when the action has been suggested to you (numerous times). It's like saying the game doesn't work, and then being told to update your video drivers, but instead of doing so (updating the video drivers), continuing to complain that the game doesn't work.

There are no actions to be taken since I already returned the game, got a refund and have no plans of buying a new copy or having anything else to do with the game. I have explained this numerous times.

2. You keep changing your points - example 1: first you accuse others of changing the topic, then you say it is unfair for others to limit the topic

Suddenly changing the subject is not the same thing as attempting to impose arbitrary restrictions on the entire discussion, like limiting it strictly to what was said in the original post.

3. You accuse others (SD/IC) of various things (greed) but when asked for your proof, you do not deliver

What? I've clearly explained many, many times why they're guilty of greed.

You ask others to prove it when they accuse you of trolling, but when others ask your for proof that you really bought a copy second hand (like price), you decline to answer.

It is impossible for me to provide proof that I bought a second hand copy of the game. It is equally impossible for someone to prove that I'm trolling, since I'm not trolling (not that you even appear to understand what trolling means). By the way, the reason why you're trying to argue or prove that I torrented the game is because you have no real counter-arguments against my position or the facts that I've presented here. You're getting desperate.

OK, let's say you win, SD/IC is a greedy bunch of immoral corporate b***s that just screw everyone over their truly dictatorial policies. OK. So epiclulz, what now? Ball's in your court. Are you just talk, or what?

Have I at some point asserted that I'm going to do something about this?

Successfully updated karma reason!

trolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltrolltroll

wtb ignore function on this forum

Successfully updated karma reason!