You are right, we don't know all the facts. If a company elects to publish the fact they are using a new DRM, then they damn well better be explicit about EXACTLY what it will and will not do, or they will face situations like this. I'm not giving them a pass on terribly marketing, sorry. I will assume the worst until proved otherwise.
Look at the Il-2 "copyright" fiasco—even SH4/5 pay the price for this, the video I saw recently has Brewsters on the deck of a carrier in the Med. All this because they used other company names on the box of a game without attribution/rigts/etc (Grumman, etc). Had they had ANY lawyer check the box art—heck, even a decent copy editor—they'd not have had the problem. If you can't touch-type ™ or © you don't deserve to be working prepress on product art.
Assume the worst is entirely reasonable.
As I said, I'm actually fine with DRM, but not this requirement to constantly be online, that's invasive, IMO, and I won't pay money to be treated that way, sorry. It's not more complicated than that. Since I don't want to play u-boats anyway, not buying is an easy choice for me. Given the same scheme, it would be a slightly more difficult choice were this SH6 in the PTO—but my decision would be identical.
|