This is not anecdotal comment. It happened to at least one guy because he used a trainer and, supposedly, that's against the EULA. Because by using a trainer you can get some achievements in an unfair way and this doesn't sit well with other players. While there may be some legitimate concern behind this, I don't care about these practices at all. I want to be able to give myself 1.000.000 minerals and vespene gas while playing by myself, if I so choose.
Originally Posted by yogi_berra
its simple: no money from me for blizzard.
I agree. But their choice is to sell Serious Sam only through Steam and their choice not to release it without DRM (they obviously doesn't wany their game being illegally copied with ease - that is reasonable because Croteam is from Croatia, and legal software in Croatia is very rare - it is almost certain that if they release non-DRM version it will be at same day available for free on all East-European torrent sites).
Originally Posted by leif81
Humble bundles has proved that Linux gamers will pay for non-DRM games, but obviously this proof is not enough for some people.
What? It's ALREADY free on every torrent site.
Originally Posted by DoDoENT
Whether or not a game has DRM it will still nearly always be available for free on torrent sites the same day it's released. This has been proven time and again.
the first 2 or 3 bundles were nice so i got them, the rest of the bundles weren't interesting enough imo. so not all games pleases every one. arcade games aren't my cup of tea. the only thing that i get when checking the sales of humble bundle is that linux gamers very well present the numbers doesn't count much if linux gamers represent about 1/3 of potential buyers.
Originally Posted by KameZero
DRM sucks and will always suck, though a 60 USD game isn't really tempting price to get a game. at least not for me. i do recall that limited collector editions games back in the end of the 90s were about 60USD as highest price. the cost/fun ratio is truly poor nowaday. Lack-Of-Vision has been a very stupid publisher for ages and now since it merged(?)/acquired blizzard well it went for the worst.
Blizzard is loosing almost nothing by not supporting linux, why would they bother.
Limited resources my ass, WoWcrack has how many users that pay how much per year these days? Last time I checked a few years ago it was pulling in a over a Billion(1000 millions) a year on WoWcrack alone...
Originally Posted by phoronix
Every Blizzard game sells damn well and they know theres a Linux demand due to all the people playing their games via Wine, which is what they're betting on, that anyone wanting to play Diablo 3 will just make it run on Wine and make a profile of WineTricks or PlayOnlinux. This is why I really don't like the idea of Wine...
Exactly, I was a Mac user when they where "less then 1%" of the market, yet there seemed to be plenty of big name titles being ported to it, mostly by MacPlay, but my WarCraft2 Battle.Net Edition V. 2.01A CD works on Mac OS 7.6 and has been patched to even run on OS X on Intel Macs, not to mention Windows 95 and NT4 support all on the retail disc available everywhere ported first party BY Blizzard...
Originally Posted by oliver
Because porting from Mac OS X to Linux isn't really that much of a stretch seeing as they've supported Macs since their user base was smaller then Linux is now...
Originally Posted by soupbowl