🚀 go-pugleaf

"SpammersDie" <xx@xx.xx> wrote in message 
news:NNJxk.210305$102.14161@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

>> I mean, I understand giving a bad review because of DRM, but they are 
>> giving the lowest possible review scores for the DRM issue ONLY,
> The score is a separate thing from the review. Scores are inherently 
> subjective and can't really be "disputed." I'm talking about the factual 
> assertions in the text of the reviews, which I haven't seen anyone 
> disputing.
>> without having played a single solitary second of the game.  So it could 
>> have incredible, awesome, radically fun game play...
> But if it comes packaged in a DRM that these reviewers find unacceptable, 
> then the product is worthless and it's the product that's being reviewed. 
> It just doesn't matter how wonderful the gameplay is if people won't buy 
> it because of the DRM - hence, a "1 star" in the DRM category *should* 
> limit the total score to 1. It also works the other way: if the gameplay 
> is a "1", it doesn't matter if the game has no DRM at all - the total 
> score can still be no better than 1.

I totally agree that DRM should be included in the score - it's ever bit as 
important as the gameplay if you can't even GET to the gameplay due to the 
DRM.

These fucking publishers go on and on about "piracy destroying the PC games 
industry" and yet keep putting in more and more DRM that pisses off more and 
more people. If a gamer can just download a pirate copy of a game for free 
without any DRM, or pay $50-$60 for a game with draconian DRM, which do you 
think they are going to do? Why would anybody buy these games?

How exactly do I buy a game without DRM, supporting the developer while 
bypassing the publisher?