Dear Santa

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

Worgen:
I was wondering where all the uproar was about sc2s drm, it seemed pretty damn restrictive but everyone was too busy wetting them selfs over a mediocre game to notice I guess

In what bizarre world is SC2 mediocre?

On-topic: I think the reason gamers were more okay with SC2 than, say Ubisoft's scheme is that Battle.net makes it seem more like an integrated service for multiplayer than DRM. You expect to log on a game to play multiplayer, and there are some nice additions you get from being logged on for singleplayer, too. It's very much like the early days of Steam with better integration but less flexibility. I can only imagine it'll improve, too.

Pugiron:

Spot1990:

Pugiron:
Having done the DC Universe Online Beta, I can't wait for Lil Shamus to get his lump of coal when he discoveres what a turd in his stocking this game is. I hope he does a Shamus plays for DCUO. The game is the worst MMO since the orriginal design for Star Wars Galaxies and its going to be hilarious.

I actually thought it was brilliant. Just need to replace my damn PS3. I must be the only person in the world who's had no problem with my 360 but got the YLOD on my PS3.

Considering you think a game is brilliant when Batman would have to go punch a bunch of guys before he could use stealth, you're probably using your PS3 wrong, or else you are an Escapist staff member in your "I'm in disguise to praise a game that has paid for good press" account.

It's really cute how you think we get paid to shill for games. :P

JerrytheBullfrog:

Worgen:
I was wondering where all the uproar was about sc2s drm, it seemed pretty damn restrictive but everyone was too busy wetting them selfs over a mediocre game to notice I guess

In what bizarre world is SC2 mediocre?

On-topic: I think the reason gamers were more okay with SC2 than, say Ubisoft's scheme is that Battle.net makes it seem more like an integrated service for multiplayer than DRM. You expect to log on a game to play multiplayer, and there are some nice additions you get from being logged on for singleplayer, too. It's very much like the early days of Steam with better integration but less flexibility. I can only imagine it'll improve, too.

I played a little of it on my friends comp, it wasnt good, just pretty.

on topic: I still think its because for some reason people will give blizz a huge pass on things, from what I could tell it was almost exactly like the ubisoft plan, altho with achievements... so I suppose more like a working version of games for windows live that is a bit more intrusive

Worgen:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Worgen:
I was wondering where all the uproar was about sc2s drm, it seemed pretty damn restrictive but everyone was too busy wetting them selfs over a mediocre game to notice I guess

In what bizarre world is SC2 mediocre?

On-topic: I think the reason gamers were more okay with SC2 than, say Ubisoft's scheme is that Battle.net makes it seem more like an integrated service for multiplayer than DRM. You expect to log on a game to play multiplayer, and there are some nice additions you get from being logged on for singleplayer, too. It's very much like the early days of Steam with better integration but less flexibility. I can only imagine it'll improve, too.

I played a little of it on my friends comp, it wasnt good, just pretty.

on topic: I still think its because for some reason people will give blizz a huge pass on things, from what I could tell it was almost exactly like the ubisoft plan, altho with achievements... so I suppose more like a working version of games for windows live that is a bit more intrusive

well sorry, but you're wrong. It's easily the best RTS I've played in... a very long time, and I play a lot of RTSes.

On topic: It's more like a PC-ified Xbox Live more than anything. Yes, you need to log on, but you get value and services for doing so. That's why people give it a pass; it isn't "you need to log on to play the game," it's "you log on to play the game and you get the social features/achievements/portrait rewards."

They're still making improvements and it certainly has a ways to go, but the seeds ARE there for a good value-added service, rather than just plain boring DRM.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Worgen:

JerrytheBullfrog:

In what bizarre world is SC2 mediocre?

On-topic: I think the reason gamers were more okay with SC2 than, say Ubisoft's scheme is that Battle.net makes it seem more like an integrated service for multiplayer than DRM. You expect to log on a game to play multiplayer, and there are some nice additions you get from being logged on for singleplayer, too. It's very much like the early days of Steam with better integration but less flexibility. I can only imagine it'll improve, too.

I played a little of it on my friends comp, it wasnt good, just pretty.

on topic: I still think its because for some reason people will give blizz a huge pass on things, from what I could tell it was almost exactly like the ubisoft plan, altho with achievements... so I suppose more like a working version of games for windows live that is a bit more intrusive

well sorry, but you're wrong. It's easily the best RTS I've played in... a very long time, and I play a lot of RTSes.

On topic: It's more like a PC-ified Xbox Live more than anything. Yes, you need to log on, but you get value and services for doing so. That's why people give it a pass; it isn't "you need to log on to play the game," it's "you log on to play the game and you get the social features/achievements/portrait rewards."

They're still making improvements and it certainly has a ways to go, but the seeds ARE there for a good value-added service, rather than just plain boring DRM.

your more wrong, sc2 plays just like the original and the original played like a bad mod for warcraft 2 which didnt play good either

does it have any kind of install limit?

Worgen:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Worgen:

I played a little of it on my friends comp, it wasnt good, just pretty.

on topic: I still think its because for some reason people will give blizz a huge pass on things, from what I could tell it was almost exactly like the ubisoft plan, altho with achievements... so I suppose more like a working version of games for windows live that is a bit more intrusive

well sorry, but you're wrong. It's easily the best RTS I've played in... a very long time, and I play a lot of RTSes.

On topic: It's more like a PC-ified Xbox Live more than anything. Yes, you need to log on, but you get value and services for doing so. That's why people give it a pass; it isn't "you need to log on to play the game," it's "you log on to play the game and you get the social features/achievements/portrait rewards."

They're still making improvements and it certainly has a ways to go, but the seeds ARE there for a good value-added service, rather than just plain boring DRM.

your more wrong, sc2 plays just like the original and the original played like a bad mod for warcraft 2 which didnt play good either

does it have any kind of install limit?

Haha you're joking, right? Do you actually play RTSes?

No, it does not. You can download it and install on as many computers as you like.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Worgen:

JerrytheBullfrog:

well sorry, but you're wrong. It's easily the best RTS I've played in... a very long time, and I play a lot of RTSes.

On topic: It's more like a PC-ified Xbox Live more than anything. Yes, you need to log on, but you get value and services for doing so. That's why people give it a pass; it isn't "you need to log on to play the game," it's "you log on to play the game and you get the social features/achievements/portrait rewards."

They're still making improvements and it certainly has a ways to go, but the seeds ARE there for a good value-added service, rather than just plain boring DRM.

your more wrong, sc2 plays just like the original and the original played like a bad mod for warcraft 2 which didnt play good either

does it have any kind of install limit?

Haha you're joking, right? Do you actually play RTSes?

No, it does not. You can download it and install on as many computers as you like.

rts games are my favorite genre but starcraft is one of those massively overrated games that people wet them selfs over since blizzard likes to polish turds to a mirror shine

ok in that case its not quite as bad as some other drm stuff but its still annoying and Im still surprised more people didnt at least bitch about it

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here