Go Back   the Magicball Network > Forums > MBN Main Forums > Off topic

Welcome to the Magicball Network.

You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Off topic General off-topic chat goes in here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 2010-05-13, 15:21
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 22,496
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Portal for free

Just in case you didn't have enough generous game offers to get though, Portal is free till the 24th.

http://store.steampowered.com/freeportal/

Now no one has any excuse not to play this masterpiece
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 2010-05-13, 15:29
Kobold's Avatar
Kobold Kobold is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,235
Does this mean the free game will still be playable after the 24th or not if you get it now?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 2010-05-13, 15:42
Kitarii's Avatar
Kitarii Kitarii is offline
You what?!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6,537
Yeah it's fine you can download it for free then it's yours forever.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 2010-05-13, 18:19
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitarii View Post
Yeah it's fine you can download it for free then it's yours forever.
Really? I know when L4D2 was free, and with TF2 weekends in the past, it is free only for a short time, then if you want to keep playing you have to buy it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 2010-05-13, 19:56
wacko's Avatar
wacko wacko is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,426
I'm pretty sure this one is permanent. "Buy" it for $0 and have it activated in your Steam account forever. You don't even have to download/install the game right away if you're out of disk space or bandwidth.

I already have the game, but if you don't, there's no reason not to get it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 2010-05-13, 20:13
Kitarii's Avatar
Kitarii Kitarii is offline
You what?!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex_Hollywood View Post
So if I get it, it sits in my Steam account?
I mean there's no downloadable install file?
What do you mean? You can only get it for free through Steam so yeah it'll be attached to your account.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 2010-05-14, 13:00
Kitarii's Avatar
Kitarii Kitarii is offline
You what?!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex_Hollywood View Post
Because I said before I don't like the whole Steam thing.
I wondered if it's like the Humble Bundle that you actually have the option to get a file you can burn on a disc, and not rely on Steam for all eternity.
No you will need Steam, but how can you complain when it's free?!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 2010-05-14, 14:39
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitarii View Post
No you will need Steam, but how can you complain when it's free?!
Because it's virtually ubiquitous at this point if you want to PC game these days.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 2010-05-14, 15:18
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 22,496
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Given that *all* their games require steam they arnt going to do a special exception to one game which they are giving away are they?

Besides, while its true steam is DRM, its one of the nicest because its run by a bunch of developers, not a publisher.
They have, for example, promised that at the slightest sign of going bankrupt or losing control of their company, they would release a global patch to remove steam requirements from all their games.
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 2010-05-14, 19:11
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkflame View Post
They have, for example, promised that at the slightest sign of going bankrupt or losing control of their company, they would release a global patch to remove steam requirements from all their games.
Not for nothing, but that's like trusting a fox that he wouldn't go into the chicken coop. Considering how Valve has been more than willing to cash in with EA for shoddy console ports of their signature games, I don't think Valve is any better (or worse) than a publisher having such control, and I also don't put much faith in their "promises."
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 2010-05-14, 19:23
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 22,496
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
They have showen zero reason why not to trust them.

Also, FYI, they personally didnt want to develop for consoles; what's wrong with licensing other company's to port their products? Thats all they did

If you got a problem with the bad port, blame the developers who ported it, or EA who picked them, not Valve.

I guess you could blame Valve for picking EA rather then a smaller publisher, but in the console world their isnt that many options for expensive multiplatform releases.

Quote:
I don't think Valve is any better (or worse) than a publisher having such control,
Valve has yet to do anything dodgy, imho.
Whereas EA and Ubisoft seem to do something a big iffy every though months.

Also, perhaps critically for me, Valve is still run by gamers. EA and Ubisoft most certainly arnt.

Portal a good example of this. They saw brilliance, hired the students into their company, and paid them to develop it.
I cant picture EA doing this in a million years. They would only hire people after they made a success of themselves, and buy up the company. (or just hire someone else to make a clone)
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 2010-05-14, 22:15
LBAWinOwns's Avatar
LBAWinOwns LBAWinOwns is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,420
Send a message via MSN to LBAWinOwns
I want to play this game during the summer. Not now, can I somehow "secure" the game even though I won't have access to the computer which I'll be playing on until some week(s) after the free offer is over.
__________________

LBA Image Creator project
(image by leoboe! )

Get the Jump-Save-Bug graphically explained here
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 2010-05-14, 23:06
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkflame View Post
They have showen zero reason why not to trust them.

Also, FYI, they personally didnt want to develop for consoles; what's wrong with licensing other company's to port their products? Thats all they did
Last time I checked, those ports have Valves logo on it. You make it sound like they had to bite a bullet and publish on consoles. I'm sure they didn't weep when the profits started rolling it. This isn't some altruistic organization...a cut-and-burn set of ports is a great way to make money, but a lousy way to earn respect and "trust."

Quote:
If you got a problem with the bad port, blame the developers who ported it, or EA who picked them, not Valve.
Oh, EA gets plenty of blame. But Valve has control over their content, and again, their name is on the product. They should stand behind their products.

Quote:
I guess you could blame Valve for picking EA rather then a smaller publisher, but in the console world their isnt that many options for expensive multiplatform releases.
I highly doubt the Source engine was an "expensive" proposition to convert. EA was probably willing to port it for the cheapest; Valve didn't want to bother spending time on coding it. It worked out well for Valve.

Quote:
Valve has yet to do anything dodgy, imho.
Whereas EA and Ubisoft seem to do something a big iffy every though months.
Valve is in charge of the most ubiquitous DRM to date, and you blindly trust them? I guess for me, it is more of a personal belief that no entity with that much control could possibly be so altruistic. If that were the case, there would be universal love for the U.S.

Quote:
Also, perhaps critically for me, Valve is still run by gamers. EA and Ubisoft most certainly arnt.
All of the companies - Valve included - are interested in making money. Each have their own pros and cons, but don't pretend that Valve is somehow more pure than others.

Quote:
Portal a good example of this. They saw brilliance, hired the students into their company, and paid them to develop it.
I cant picture EA doing this in a million years. They would only hire people after they made a success of themselves, and buy up the company. (or just hire someone else to make a clone)
So because they made an admittedly brilliant market decision, this somehow is indicative that they are inherently good?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 2010-05-15, 01:17
Polaris's Avatar
Polaris Polaris is offline
Polly parrot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tippett Island
Posts: 5,671
Waow, just downloaded it, it's a really cool game ! Thanks a lot for noticing us Darkflame !
__________________
<((((((((((((([[[========================]]])))))))))))))>
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 2010-05-15, 02:33
Axx's Avatar
Axx Axx is offline
The return of
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Jerusalem, Palestine
Posts: 4,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Last time I checked, those ports have Valves logo on it. You make it sound like they had to bite a bullet and publish on consoles. I'm sure they didn't weep when the profits started rolling it. This isn't some altruistic organization...a cut-and-burn set of ports is a great way to make money, but a lousy way to earn respect and "trust."



Oh, EA gets plenty of blame. But Valve has control over their content, and again, their name is on the product. They should stand behind their products.



I highly doubt the Source engine was an "expensive" proposition to convert. EA was probably willing to port it for the cheapest; Valve didn't want to bother spending time on coding it. It worked out well for Valve.



Valve is in charge of the most ubiquitous DRM to date, and you blindly trust them? I guess for me, it is more of a personal belief that no entity with that much control could possibly be so altruistic. If that were the case, there would be universal love for the U.S.



All of the companies - Valve included - are interested in making money. Each have their own pros and cons, but don't pretend that Valve is somehow more pure than others.



So because they made an admittedly brilliant market decision, this somehow is indicative that they are inherently good?
Thats some heavy stuff, well said, couldn't agree more (Sorry Mr. Flame)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 2010-05-15, 03:08
Kitarii's Avatar
Kitarii Kitarii is offline
You what?!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBAWinOwns View Post
I want to play this game during the summer. Not now, can I somehow "secure" the game even though I won't have access to the computer which I'll be playing on until some week(s) after the free offer is over.
Sign up for a Steam account and get the free download. Then, as with all games on Steam, you can download the client again on any other computer, and sign in as your account with Portal attached to it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 2010-05-15, 09:45
LBAWinOwns's Avatar
LBAWinOwns LBAWinOwns is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,420
Send a message via MSN to LBAWinOwns
Now I got:
Quote:
Success!

Portal is now registered to your account on Steam.

To access your new content, simply launch this game from your games list on Steam.
So I don't need to install Steam just yet, I can safely install it on my other computer after the 24th and play Portal then, right?
__________________

LBA Image Creator project
(image by leoboe! )

Get the Jump-Save-Bug graphically explained here
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 2010-05-15, 18:25
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 22,496
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Last time I checked, those ports have Valves logo on it. You make it sound like they had to bite a bullet and publish on consoles. I'm sure they didn't weep when the profits started rolling it. This isn't some altruistic organization...a cut-and-burn set of ports is a great way to make money, but a lousy way to earn respect and "trust."
People wanted their games on other systems.
Do you think that;

a) They are somehow obligied to develop for them personaly? They didnt want too. This is their choice.
Besides, what makes you think Valve would even be that good? They have little console experience themselves.

b) They shouldn't have let anyone else port their games to consoles? That they should have ignored those that wanted it and not let anything be developed whatsoever?

Of course they arnt altruistic, they want to make money. Thats their god-dam right for making games that lots of people love.
That doesn't mean they are single handedly responsible for pleaseing every gamer out there.

They didnt want to develop for consoles.
They sold the rights so someone else could.

Now, unless they had veto powers over the game ports in the contracts they wrote with EA, I really dont see how they could have garrentied better ports.
Whoever they sold the rights too might have done bad ports.

Why Valve gets the blame here when theirs plenty of other logos slapped on the products I have no clue.
They didnt code the ports. They didnt pick the people that coded them.
The degree's of separation between them and the ports faults is a few degree's.

Bad ports are like bad games, you should just look at the reviews and not buy them. Hell, even make sure to avoid the developer again if they are that bad.
But demonising the company that created the IP for daring to license their work is just silly, imho.


Quote:
Oh, EA gets plenty of blame. But Valve has control over their content
That would depend on the contract.
Valve is big for a developer, but is still small-fry compared to most console publishers. Veto-rights would be fairly rare I think. (I confess this is a guess).

I think it would be like a book author saling they book for film-rights.
They have little control over the outcome, and certainly no rights to reject what's created.
About all they could have done I think is remove their logo from the cover.

Quote:
I highly doubt the Source engine was an "expensive" proposition to convert. EA was probably willing to port it for the cheapest; Valve didn't want to bother spending time on coding it. It worked out well for Valve.
Apparently not, seeing as they cant even give away one of the best-reviewed games ever without people moaning.

Also, Valve didn't pay EA to convert it, Valve licensed their games for EA to develop on other systems. I dought Valve will be making any use of any code developed by the EA-hired team.

Quote:
Valve is in charge of the most ubiquitous DRM to date,and you blindly trust them? I guess for me, it is more of a personal belief that no entity with that much control could possibly be so altruistic.
Why the two extreams?
They dont have to be altrustic to not be the evil enity your painting them as.

They want their DRM to reduce piracy, to reduce online cheaters and to build an online community.

You may dissagree with all of that but it doesnt make them evil.
Valve's done nothing to earn a lack of trust from what I see.

Valve makes money from making games that people like.
They dont need any other agenda then that.

Quote:
All of the companies - Valve included - are interested in making money. Each have their own pros and cons, but don't pretend that Valve is somehow more pure than others.
They all have pro's and con's true.
But that doesn't mean they are all the same.

Valve hasn't released DRMs that damage computers and is hard to remove (Sony-Rootkit/SecurRom), or DRM's that allow limited installs (EA).
They arnt proposing DRM's that make sure your game will never function offline (Ubisoft).
I assume you are boycotting games from all those publishers too?

It is a very easy, lazy, view to see all company's as equally evil. But its a false one. Some are far worse then others, and it normally directly correlates to the separation between the creators in the company and the management.
Valve is still mostly creators thats exactly why they are better, or ""pure"" if you want.
They are still run by the people actually making the games. And there is nothing whatsoever wrong with them wanting to make money from that.

Quote:
Quote:
Portal a good example of this. They saw brilliance, hired the students into their company, and paid them to develop it.
I cant picture EA doing this in a million years. They would only hire people after they made a success of themselves, and buy up the company. (or just hire someone else to make a clone)
So because they made an admittedly brilliant market decision, this somehow is indicative that they are inherently good?
The reply is completely irrelivent to the statement of mine you quoted.
They are inherently better because they spotted talent and invested in it, rather then ripping it off, or copy-catting already successful stuff.
Your acting like anything resulting in making money must be wrong here, its just weird.
It was a brilliant decision that proved profitable AND it was a inherently good way to behave. They arnt multily exclusive.
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff

Last edited by Darkflame; 2010-05-15 at 18:37.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 2010-05-16, 00:05
Kobold's Avatar
Kobold Kobold is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBAWinOwns View Post
Now I got:


So I don't need to install Steam just yet, I can safely install it on my other computer after the 24th and play Portal then, right?
Yes indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 2010-05-16, 01:08
Polaris's Avatar
Polaris Polaris is offline
Polly parrot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tippett Island
Posts: 5,671
I have a question about the game.


Spoiler:
All along, the computer only wanted us to kill him/her/it ?
__________________
<((((((((((((([[[========================]]])))))))))))))>
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 2010-05-16, 09:04
Kitarii's Avatar
Kitarii Kitarii is offline
You what?!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
I have a question about the game.


Spoiler:
All along, the computer only wanted us to kill him/her/it ?
That is a serious spoiler, do NOT be tempted if you haven't played!

Spoiler:
GLADoS was doing the tests on you to see how the portal gun functioned which is what she was programmed to do, and then dispose of you afterwards, probably because it was supposed to be a secret research. But she'd gone a bit crazy and power-mad which is why she killed all the humans that worked there.


Someone else could probably put it in a better way but that's the gist of it.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 2010-05-16, 14:21
Polaris's Avatar
Polaris Polaris is offline
Polly parrot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tippett Island
Posts: 5,671
Yeah, but

Spoiler:
Quote:
This was a triumph
I'm making a note here
HUGE SUCCESS
It's hard to overstate my satisfaction
Aperture Science
But it got killed, isn't it means that it's what it wanted ?
__________________
<((((((((((((([[[========================]]])))))))))))))>
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 2010-05-17, 03:04
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 14,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkflame View Post
People wanted their games on other systems.
Do you think that;

a) They are somehow obligied to develop for them personaly? They didnt want too. This is their choice.
Besides, what makes you think Valve would even be that good? They have little console experience themselves.
I agree, it is totally their choice whether or not they port to consoles. However, I disagree with this attitude that Valve is somehow blameless because, aww shucks, they knew they weren't any good and didn't want to develop for consoles, but they did it anyways.

Quote:
b) They shouldn't have let anyone else port their games to consoles? That they should have ignored those that wanted it and not let anything be developed whatsoever?p
If you're concerned about how your company is perceived, then they should have cared. Because now people on both Microsoft and Sony consoles dislike Valve for their shoddy practices towards the console market.

Quote:
Of course they arnt altruistic, they want to make money. Thats their god-dam right for making games that lots of people love.
That doesn't mean they are single handedly responsible for pleaseing every gamer out there.
Thankfully, it's also not our right to give them our money, either. However, if they're going to slap their name on shoddy ports, it should also be our right to criticize them.

Quote:
They didnt want to develop for consoles.
They sold the rights so someone else could.
They wanted the money from console development, and as such, when their name was slapped on a product box, their company's reputation was behind it, for better or worse.

Quote:
Now, unless they had veto powers over the game ports in the contracts they wrote with EA, I really dont see how they could have garrentied better ports.
Whoever they sold the rights too might have done bad ports.
Again, if you put your logo on a product, and you're the one who is giving them the OK, you are - directly or not - on the hook for how that product works. How could they have guaranteed better ports? By not abandoning the console market and providing updates. By not contracting out to the cheapest bidder, EA. By, perhaps, spending some time on their ports, or alternatively, putting out a disclaimer that they were cheap cash-ins that they weren't bothering to put any effort into them.

Quote:
Why Valve gets the blame here when theirs plenty of other logos slapped on the products I have no clue.
They didnt code the ports. They didnt pick the people that coded them.
The degree's of separation between them and the ports faults is a few degree's.
Not really. Valve gave the code to EA. EA ported it to the consoles. Valve was responsible for providing the updates and oversaw the general development of the ports. They actually abandoned EA once they saw how bad the ports were, refused to give updates, and then claimed that it was simply too hard to try and program for console games. Only once they realized how big of a backlash they got in PR from console gamers did they retract and come back and claim (real or not) that they'd be having a dedicated team working on console ports in the future.

Let me put it to you this way. If I am a farmer, and I sell rotten fruit to a market, and you buy the rotten fruit...is the farmer not at fault as much as the market? Certainly the market knew it was rotten, but the farmer sold it to the market rotten as well.

Quote:
Bad ports are like bad games, you should just look at the reviews and not buy them. Hell, even make sure to avoid the developer again if they are that bad.
But demonising the company that created the IP for daring to license their work is just silly, imho.
I have no desire to purchase any more Valve titles, certainly. They have. But you're putting the onus on the consumer, as if somehow it is their fault that they were gypped on a port that was originally slated to receive updates? That they expect customer support, as per warranty and consumer laws?


Quote:
That would depend on the contract.
Valve is big for a developer, but is still small-fry compared to most console publishers. Veto-rights would be fairly rare I think. (I confess this is a guess).

I think it would be like a book author saling they book for film-rights.
They have little control over the outcome, and certainly no rights to reject what's created.
About all they could have done I think is remove their logo from the cover.
Again, their logo means their reputation. And in the eyes of the console market - a market they desired to tap into - they have been considerably soiled.

Quote:
Apparently not, seeing as they cant even give away one of the best-reviewed games ever without people moaning.
What is it with pro-Valve people? Even on GameFAQs, it is impossible to criticize Steam. There is always a pro-Valve defense force that seems to been willing to offer themselves up for the cause of defending Valve. It's eerily similar to Apple users.

Quote:
Also, Valve didn't pay EA to convert it, Valve licensed their games for EA to develop on other systems. I dought Valve will be making any use of any code developed by the EA-hired team.
Fine. But their licensing - and the use of their name - is where I'm taking exception.

Quote:
Why the two extreams?
They dont have to be altrustic to not be the evil enity your painting them as.
Because power inherently corrupts. Why to people slavishly accept the fact that Steam is slowly gaining a monopoly on PC gaming, even if they do not produce the games? We console users have seen the less-than-altruistic side of Valve. It worries me, and for all the vitriol spewed at Microsoft and it's ubiquity, I find it ironic that pro-Valve folks are willing to trust these developers with this massive set of controls.

Quote:
They want their DRM to reduce piracy, to reduce online cheaters and to build an online community.

You may dissagree with all of that but it doesnt make them evil.
Valve's done nothing to earn a lack of trust from what I see.
By that logic, U.S. foreign policy is designed to foment democracy, end terrorism, and create peace. I don't buy either of those perspectives.

Quote:
Valve hasn't released DRMs that damage computers and is hard to remove (Sony-Rootkit/SecurRom), or DRM's that allow limited installs (EA).
They arnt proposing DRM's that make sure your game will never function offline (Ubisoft).
I assume you are boycotting games from all those publishers too?
I don't have issue with DRMs because I don't game on my PC. Steam is a large reason for that. But Steam certainly limits installs; you cannot install a Steam game across the PC's in your home and be online with them simultaneously, or have multiple accounts. It's extremely limiting in that regard.

Quote:
It is a very easy, lazy, view to see all company's as equally evil. But its a false one. Some are far worse then others, and it normally directly correlates to the separation between the creators in the company and the management.
Valve is still mostly creators thats exactly why they are better, or ""pure"" if you want.
They are still run by the people actually making the games. And there is nothing whatsoever wrong with them wanting to make money from that.
Of course it isn't wrong for them to want to make money, but by portraying them as somehow "pure" is ridiculous. Their episode with console ports has demonstrated this.

Quote:
Your acting like anything resulting in making money must be wrong here, its just weird.
It was a brilliant decision that proved profitable AND it was a inherently good way to behave. They arnt multily exclusive.
No, I just find it hilarious that in spite of the fact that Valve is out for profit, much like EA and Sony, by some subjective ideal, they are somehow more "pure" or better than those other companies. Yet neither EA or Sony have initiated the most ubiquitous DRM-to-date in Steam.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Portal 2 ChaosFish Off topic 9 2010-03-22 19:00
Portal: Chell's Legend ChaosFish Off topic 17 2009-10-25 03:50
Portal Screenshots Thread (spoilers) ChaosFish Off topic 48 2008-07-19 22:58
Portal problem... Battler The site and forum 3 2005-12-18 16:39
Do we have free will? CS2x Off topic 35 2005-01-30 12:14


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:55.


News Feed
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, the Magicball Network