Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1247622)

With 6 billion people in the world we are truly an insignificant spec in the internet.

Originally Posted by Méo (Post 1247640)

6 billion ...like it would matters. :nope:

You think everyone in the world possess a computer and everyone who possess a computer use it to play naval simulations...:doh:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1247645)

Hence you proved my point, and Platapus point.

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1247622)

With 6 billion people in the world we are truly an insignificant spec in the internet.

Originally Posted by goldorak (Post 1247705)

Wrong sample. We don't care about the 6 billion people out there, we care about those that play subsims and specifically those that play the SH franchise.
And you can bet your *** that the people on subsim represent a non negligeable fraction of the Silent Hunter player base.

Originally Posted by Letum (Post 1247712)

And SubSim it's self represents a significant part of the genre's journalism.

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1247399)

Hmmm... cheap shots now, Golderak?

Originally Posted by mookiemookie (Post 1247728)

So we've moved on from just plain bitching to boycott threats. Checking my "New Subsim Stages of Grief" pocket reference, I'd say the next step is the class action lawsuit threats. Eagerly awaiting that. :ping:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1247378)

Wow, you wanna job? :up:

Simply this, guys: boycotts are the nuclear weapon of community activism. People as individuals can determine for themselves if they want to buy a game or not.



You are right, but the core mission statement for Subsim has always been, to support sub game developers and the people who play subsims. Politics and sub games are apples and oranges.

Originally Posted by urfisch (Post 1247254)

...why? why are threads, which call for action are shut down?

anyone can decide on his own, wether he follows or not. this is like a democratic proclamation, which must not be censored. as carotio rightfully stated, which signal should we send, instead of not buying the game in the first days?? uhh...hard to answer.

:arrgh!:

please give people, who also ask themselves this question, an answer. i simply do not understand. fear of advocats and lawyers from ubi?...

Originally Posted by goldorak (Post 1247723)

You're right, I apologise.
The fact is that your "fatalism" in relation to this DRM issue sounds a lot like a copt-out.
People bitched and moaned during the SH 3 days because of Starforce. with your fatalism nothing would have changed. On the other hand the backslash made Ubisoft forget out Starforce and start experimenting with alternative ways. Some games such as HAWX and Prince of Persia came with no copy protection. Some games had their copy protection eliminated after 2 years (Chessmaster !0th edition, and SH3 just to stay in Ubisoft land).
So you see, expressing our displeasure for draconian DRM measures some times carries weight. And things change, maybe for the better maybe for the worse but they change. Instead of keeping us in a status quo were everybody loses out.
Even EA who is known for implementing draconian DRM backpedalled with Mass Effect 2 after the horribile problems of the first chapter on the pc.
So yes, if customers make their voices heard change can happen, hopefully for the better.
Remember if gamers and by association the press and influential game forums etc... give a free pass to whatever publishers come up with, things will go from bad to worse. The publishers gamer relation is not a one way relation, its a two way relationship. They make a product, and we decide wether or not its valuable enough to warrent spending our hard earned dollars/euros on it.

Originally Posted by urfisch (Post 1247879)

Supporting developers of sub games? Or developers of subsims? Nice rhetoric, Neal. ;) I understand your point of view and in the core you are right. But wheres the objective differentation in this topic? You cant say, we are just supporting all of them.

Cause

in this whole discussion i miss one important point: What about the facts in progress and information with this game? And the rating of this behavior? Maybe from this point of view a support for such manner is no longer appropriate...

Look

Most of us follow the development of sub games since more than 10 or 20 years. Me too (my first subsim was silent service and wolfpack). And we are a very passioned and skilled community, which made SH3 to one of the most worthful subsims ever. We all are not dumb and have our opinion about, how the 5th part of this series should be - analysing the former versions. So UBI noticed that...and we where all made very hopeful, with a lot of big words (UBI in summer 2009: Now, we are doing all different, New ways in creation, We will have a special community developer, the community really counts for us. Be sure, to get a really nice game, to your long term needs, etc.) and now we all see, not to get most of anything from that, what has beeing promised and proclaimed...adding a really unfair kind of information policy (e.g. why didnt got neal the preview version first, before any press got it???)...and all this beside the facts of semi dynamic game content, only one boat, a limited time line, an console optimized gameplay and interface...and things like non-local savegames, permanent net connection...etc.

So, is there still the need of politeness in supporting the studio, which just follows the orders from UBI HQ?