Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalver
Yeah, yeah.
"Spit in poor peoples eye" is an exaggerrated-phrase used by me to spark a reaction, which I got. So don't do as I do and get hung up on that one thing, there are more points in there, to be considered than that.
|
Haha ok you exaggerated a bit and I don't like exaggeration, but it looks like we actually agree about activation sucking
Works for me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by grumpy
Its all about choices I guess and your choice is to obviously use Linux? So what are you actually saying? You wont use windows or you cant afford to use windows? You seem to be whining more than 'dalver'!
|
Yawn. If I can afford hardware good enough to run Half Life, I think I could afford Windows. In fact, I had both 98 and XP on here before I deleted them. I just choose not to use them. This means I can't play Half Life 2, but I'm not screaming about it. Life goes on. I only mentioned it to make the point that I wasn't whining about it, even though I am prevented from playing just like someone who has no net access. THe point, in simple terms is this: I am moving on, people without net access can too.
But this just in: Transgaming's Cedega will support Half life 2 on Linux, so looks like I can play after all. Probably still won't, 'cause activation sucks
(why do you think I don't use windows anymore?)
Bottom line: activation is dumb. But it is not discriminating against poor people, and since dalver said he was just exaggerating to get a response anyway, I don't think I disagree with anyone here. I just think it's possible to point out the drawbacks to activation without breathless hyperbole.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sole_fish
That is called DISCUSSION. Not one sided drivel from a Nazi-conspirator. This is a FORUM for DISCUSSION about topics of interest. IF YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED, THEN GO AWAY. We are interested here. Find a place where your input is a topic of discussion.
|
Apparently people are only allowed to discuss things if they agree with you? After you rant about how this is a place for discussion you tell me not to discuss? You probably don't even realize how hypocritical that is. But please, stick by the weak claim that Valve is paying me off. And try to draw politics into it as well. Violate Godwin's Law while you're at it.. And do it while all the while you try to shut someone up, cause this is a place for DISCUSSION don't you know!
How clear can I make it that I am not buying Half Life 2 because of the activation, which I find ridiculous and unnecessary? As far as I can tell, you are pissed at me because I am not denouncing it with the same frothy mouthed rabidness that you are. I hate it, but not because it discriminates against poor people. Oh fark, I don't hate it as much as you do, I must be silenced! Fark, even dalver said he was just exaggerating about the discrimination.
"'Spit in poor peoples eye' is an exaggerrated-phrase used by me to spark a reaction, which I got." Going to try to shut him up too now?
Since you appear to be dense: my point was not that activation is good, it was that it is not discrimination. If you're going to say activation sucks, use real reasons. Here are some of them:
1) it annoys the tard out of people who pay for it legally
2) it doesn't inconvenience people who download it illegally at all.
3) it is therefore a waste of money, moeny which could be spent on other parts of development
4) pissing off people who buy it legally will likely cause more of them to get it illegally, thereby defeating the purpose
So .. wow. One guy accuses me of not being able to afford Windows, the next accuses me of being a republican elitist. And for what? I didn't disagree with dalver's point (activation=bad) I disagreed with how he made it. For that I am accused of being poor, or rich, or
something bad. Good grief.