I don't know. The people in the UK seem to have adapted well, if you read this idiot's http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/18/edward-snowden-leaks-grave-threat article.
I love the line "Snowden has given Beijing something it couldn't achieve on its own: moral equivalence."
Of course I jest about those in the UK, but when articles like this try to dispel why the surveillance isn't an issue of a police state, it's obviously written by someone who lives in one.
I've learned long ago Cliff B. has been out of touch with gaming reality, and anything out of his mouth is utter stupidity and ignorance.
Despite this, however, I'm still disappointed the mentality he speaks of us widespread, as though these idiots can't see the facts before them.
Angry Birds is, by no means, a "AAA" title and yet it's managed to make more money than any "AAA" title out there. Why? Because it's got a price base of 99 cents, which attracts billions, yes with a "b", downloads. It's been using the same game engine as well.
Bethesda, makers of the Fallout and TES franchises, has been using their (broken) game engine for 4 games, and if Skyrim sales are any indication, it's proof companies can make stellar games and keep costs low.
EA and Ubisoft are two of the most asinine game companies out there. According to NPD, consumers spend nearly $2 billion on gaming last year, and if the most costly "AAA" title is $250 million to make, someone's either lying about profits or they're including their shovelware failures in the mix, which no respectable gamer's going to shell out $60 for.
I don't begrudge the opportunity, and massive risk, Microsoft is doing to allow gamers, for the first time ever to sell used digital games. I welcome the opportunity because it gives me flexibility.
But what I can't stand are articles like this which constantly omit this feature of the changes Microsoft is risking. Cliff B. obviously failed to take into account selling back a digital file is no different than gamers selling back a plastic disk.
Furthermore, it's this opportunity, when consumers knowingly sell off their games at a significant loss of what they paid, that allows them to try other games, usually at at the current MSRP.
The fact the gaming industry has three constant tiers of pricing based on their "production" of the games proves it's their model that's failing, not the consumer who is taking a loss at every turn and has been since the introduction of the NES (remember those old game stores which sold second hand NES cartridges we had to blow on to get to work?).
Gaming is a risky business by its very nature to do the consistent over-saturation of the market. Trying to sell the "next big thing" isn't going to be done unless thousand upon thousands of us review the game and offer our opinions.
With the 49k+ reviews on XBox 360, Bethesda owes each of them a massive "Thank you" as it was their near-5 star ratings which got me to buy Oblivion, and thus Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, Skyrim, and the latest Dishonored (which was full price because I trust Bethesda's quality.
The world is moving to digital, and it's disgusting those who are finally, and slowly, migrating toward it aren't looking to open the doors to make it better for everyone, but are looking to ensure the same prices of physical goods are carried with it, despite their costs being lowered.
Hell, even their marketing budget shrinks thanks to the customer base reviewing their products, and those ratings absolutely influence sales.
All our problems are solved.
The DoJ will make quick work of...
... damn.
Film? 11?
You sound like a politician, being out of touch like this.
/joke
I do agree, this King is an idiot.
You see, this is where I fail to understand the hate.
When XBox Live goes down, people are upset. This tells me the internet isn't the problem.
I get people are upset there's an always-on connection required, but the benefit outweighs the non-benefit, in that we can finally sell digital games, an option we don't have now.
And my ISP doesn't have outages that extend 24 hours. It never has, and I'll be damned if people are going to convince me this is a significant problem.
If it was, I'd say they're fighting the wrong battle.
Indeed. The worst part about all this is that people don't understand why the XBox One requires a 24 hour check in while giving customers the ability to sell digital games.
I mean, common sense dictates why this is a necessity. I'm excited I can finally sell my digital games rather than delete them from my console, losing everything I paid into it when I'm done with it.
Physical and digital can't live together without restrictions. Otherwise, everyone will be selling both, and you can bet that won't go over well with publishers.
"Authorized" retailer means they need access to the gamer's XBox Live account to ensure they don't have a digital copy of the game (and if they do, it gets locked out) while trying to sell their physical copy.
Common sense, yet most of the internet's all "But I can't play my games without an internet connection??!! Lame!!!"
Derp. It's how we gamers, the whole customer-friendly aspect, can have the best of both worlds.
Yes, but you're misreading the statements of the last two presidents.
Replace "American people" with "American corporations".
Then you'll see what the statements really mean.
Sony has a reputation of saying one thing, then doing something else which is completely anti-consumer.
They sure set themselves up well to get millions to buy their console, and then months after doing so, customers get a rude surprise their "featureless" console is now full of those very features the XBox One has.
Developers are not going to "change their ways". There are billions out there to tap into, if we're to trust Gamestop's business model.
Do you really think they'll not try every possible attempt to get those billions as they trample over customers to get it?
You must be new to America. Welcome.
It's a good thing we can safely rely on the FBI. Not only do they not need FISA, they can actually stop terrorist attacks!
Of course, after setting them up, it sure helps, but want to best this surveillance not only failed to prevent any terrorist attack but will have netted other parties in crimes unrelated to the order?
Yeah, I wouldn't take this sucker's bet either.
Cohen's just pissed off EA took the title of "Worst Company in America" this year and can't stand the second and third place placements the company has received.
Perhaps next year, Comcast can (and should) take the #1 spot.
I'm a bit terrified many people didn't see the obvious: Since when has a cartoon been deemed child pornography.
This is why Psy should have never signed a label deal. This is going to come back on him, even if he's not involved.
Yep. Google certainly opened a can of worms with their announcement.
If they had just kept their mouth shut and lowered results, I doubt this would have been an issue.
Next up for the MPAA: having the DoJ block the site from US ISPs.
It's coming. You know it is.
The UK has been a police state for well over a decade. This news isn't as shocking as much as it is expected.
You should see what they do to people who illegally import blank disks. Their bodies are never found.
It wouldn't be surprising if these FACT "officers" carry black badges with red cross-like emblems on them. Would be most fitting.
/joke
Good Answer: To ensure those violating the law are in position to cover up their actions and step above it.
Yes, but the lawsuit's enough to drive this business, which admits it doesn't have profits, on its way out the door.
Just as these lawsuits are intended to do.
Veoh, you may find yourself with company soon.
I'd like to offer a counter to the article's summary.
If Acetrax didn't have any DRM to begin with, it's more than likely they wouldn't be shutting down at all.
Well, as unpleasant as the demand looks, it's a sad state of affairs that those who are in this world have to use threats like this all the time.
Personally, I see this as no different than Google's buyouts of patents. "Don't sue us or else!"
I mean, by now everyone should know these laws aren't about protection of "rights".
Re: Crypto
You're correct, but I must caution about private keys: they're stored [i]in the same location on every computer[/i] by design, which means if someone's machine is broken into, possible with the back door options Microsoft gives "law" enforcement, those keys are pointless.
Ironically, the only way to protect a PgP key is to encrypt it, but the sheer hassle of so many levels of encryption/decryption makes the tools useless to most people who simply want to send their mothers a "Happy Mother's Day" message (and for them to read it).
I'm on the side with Snowden here. Our companies, who tell us via their ToS our privacy is important, should have blown the whistle on these requests years ago.
The fact they didn't is more a statement than politicians who stated they knew this was going on for 7 years.
Ironic, again, that Google helped stop SOPA, but didn't lift a finger to stop this blatant abuse of the 4th.