NWN2 - Mysteries of Westgate Official Release Date!

[Dhruin]

The NWN2 Adventure Pack Mysteries of Westgate will be released on April 29th by digital download for $9.95.
The official announcement is below but Avantenor writes in with the following additional but unconfirmed details (http://www.rpguides.de/fullnews.php?c14a2a57ead18f3532a5a8949382c536) (German link) from Atari France Product Manager Arnaud Staebler:
- Copy Protection: Online Activation, one-time per installation
- Installation limit: Allowed to install on three different PCs
- Installation Limit Reset: not possible
- Available at: AtariSHOP, Metaboli, IGN, Steam, most likely others will follow
Ossian's Tiberius is unaware of the DRM restrictions and posted on the official forums that he would check further (http://nwn2forums.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=675255&forum=122&sp=45) - we'll follow up if he posts again on the topic.
Also, Borutnik had previously let us know Poland will get a disc-based release through CD Projekt.
Here's the official PR:
‘NEVERWINTER NIGHTS™ 2: MYSTERIES OF WESTGATE™’ Adventure Pack confirmed for WORLDWIDE RELEASE ON 29 APRIL 2009
- First Neverwinter Nights™ 2 Adventure Pack Available Exclusively via Digital Download -
Atari today announced that the first Neverwinter Nights™ 2 Adventure Pack entitled Neverwinter Nights 2: Mysteries of Westgate will be available exclusively via digital download for the Windows platform on 29 April 2009 at a suggested retail price of €9.99 / £9.99 /$9.99. Neverwinter Nights 2: Mysteries of Westgate will be available for digital download at the Atari store by visiting www.atari-store.eu (http://www.atari-store.eu) in Europe or www.atari.com/us (http://www.atari.com/us) in the US.
Neverwinter Nights 2: Mysteries of Westgate provides over 15 hours of additional entertainment with all-new engrossing storylines, professional voice acting, enchanting musical scores, new in-game content, and much more. Neverwinter Nights 2 is set in the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS® Forgotten Realms® universe created by Wizards of the Coast, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. (NYSE: HAS). DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is under license from Hasbro.
More information about Neverwinter Nights 2 can be found at www.nwn2.com (http://www.nwn2.com), which includes user forums, project news, development updates and more.
More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=11831)

[Avantenor]

Small correction: Tiberius is unaware of that, not Alan.

[txa1265]

The DRM restrictions - particularly 'no reset' really concerned me ...

[guenthar]

If the restrictions are true Atari just killed off "Mysteries of Westgate" since for something like this only people that really want to support the company or are really in to Neverwinter Nights 2 will buy it. (except people that don't know what the restrictions mean) They are also competing with mods and even though this is better then most mods the drm hurts them.

[Cabel Blacke]

Wow...... <shakes head>........... just wow.

[Dhruin]

Thanks for the correction, Avantenor. I don't really doubt your source but would rather play it safe with this sort of topic.

[Prime Junta]

Argh, I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, I want to support small studios like Ossian. OTOH, I do not want to support limited-install-with-no-reset DRM, which is IMO the most obnoxious thing since StarForce. Buy or not to buy?

[Roi Danton]

I'll buy it, even with those annoying drm restriction 'cause I'll complete the game once, maybe twice if it's really good and then just don't care anymore.

[Phonix]

Screw the DRM, how many time will one install it anyway, one time is anough fore me.

[Avantenor]

I don't really doubt your source but would rather play it safe with this sort of topic.
That's ok, I have no problem with this. In the official forum they got a little bit upset by that info.

[CutLunch]

Sounds like it's the Tages DRM that's with The Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena.
MoW is a niche product so it hardly needs this DRM. It seems that Atari are trying to kill sales of this product for some reason.

[kalniel]

Personally (and without any hats on at all please), I think there might be a translation issue here, which is why I'm always wary of posting official comments in one language as news in another (and note the release I posted doesn't say anything about it.) What if the 'no reset' is actually 'no revocation tool at the moment'? That doesn't mean the activations can't be reset over the phone, like with other products, and in the past they've been very happy to grant additional activations for genuine reasons.

Without clarification, I think it's wrong to be saying for certain those activations are fixed forever. If you look at Riddick for example, you can easily get more activations.

[Avantenor]

I asked that quite clearly and the response was very clear. Also the communique was in English, not in German or French. As I'm under NDA I can't say more than has been said.

[kalniel]

I asked that quite clearly and the response was very clear. Also the communique was in English, not in German or French. As I'm under NDA I can't say more than has been said.I know it was in English, but neither of you were speaking in your native language (not that you aren't both absolutely excellent speakers of English).

Regardless, 3 machines for 10 credits seems very reasonable to me, depending on what constitutes a new machine, which we're hoping to find out later.

[booboo]

Screw the DRM, how many time will one install it anyway, one time is anough fore me.

I often come back years later and replay games - as do many others if you look through these forums. So limiting installs or using authentication servers which may not be there years down the line etc are serious issues for many. I certainly won't buy this module as it stands now - see - one sale lost already.

[SveNitoR]

Same here. I have probably installed most of my games 5+ times and on several different computers. I won't buy it unless they change it since I don't want to support this kind of DRM. Sad, but that's how it is.

[Acleacius]

Say what, leave it to atari to kill my enthusiasm of buying and playing this game with a stupid drm scheme, now I will never play this.

[Moriendor]

I'll buy it, even with those annoying drm restriction 'cause I'll complete the game once, maybe twice if it's really good and then just don't care anymore.

+ 1

I don't really care about the restrictions either. Besides if we assume that "over 15 hours" of new content is the usual marketing blurb then it should be rather safe to assume that we are in reality looking at 10 hours max with this mini add-on, probably even less. I'll play through it once, then maybe a second time in a couple years and that's it. The vast majority of people will never even use up their three installs.
And I'm pretty sure that they will either release a revoke tool or a patch to loosen the restrictions at some point in the hopefully (hopefully = for you guys who upgrade your systems all the time and replay the game over and over) not too distant future.

[wolfing]

let's see how long it takes for pirates to publish this, and without any DRM. Once again, real customers get the shaft while pirates play it without problems

[Avantenor]

@Moriendor: Alan Miranda assumed 8h four main quest and additional 7h if you go and look after every side quest. From my own perspective, I think 10-15h is very likely for most people.

[Cabel Blacke]

Ossian tends to undersell time-to-play (i.e., for much of its development, DoD was estimated at 15 hours...), so I would say that the 15 hours is on the low side (and is probably timed by someone playing through the game at a fast pace, like a tester). My guess is if you complete all side-quests--at a typical, leisurely CRPG pace--you'll get something along the lines of 20 hours, perhaps even more. 20 hours for 9.99 is a great deal. Now, the DRM stuff... that's a different story and very disappointing to hear, if true.

[txa1265]

Screw the DRM, how many time will one install it anyway, one time is anough fore me.

I have installed the NWN Premium Modules at least 5 times, so this is a real issue for me.

[kalniel]

I have installed the NWN Premium Modules at least 5 times, so this is a real issue for me.

All on separate computers? There are unlimited installs on the same computer.

[Guhndahb]

Over the course of many years of course it will be on more than 3 computers. No, sorry, the DRM is absolutely unacceptable. Generally I'd just say "screw it" and not buy it but now it's hurting a studio about which I care. Just had do this this a week ago when I found out about Dark Athena. I own two copies of Butcher Bay and generally loved the game, but Dark Athena is also a no-sale now for me.

If a revocation tool is released, I'll about face, but for now it's an absolute no buy.

[Elwro]

By the way, the disc-based Polish version will be sold for an equivalent of $15.

[kalniel]

Over the course of many years of course it will be on more than 3 computers.

I guess if I'm still playing a game over many years then I'll consider it a bargain even if I have to buy additional copies. But remember, this is only an adventure pack - 15 hours is the estimated play time, not 15 years.

[darklord]

I'm looking forward to the expansion by why are we being ripped off in the UK? I want to pay in Euro's/Dollars!

Daniel.

[guenthar]

With how I am with games I would definetly hit the install limit since I play games and don't finish them then uninstall them sometime down the line then come back in a few years and install again.

[kalniel]

I'm looking forward to the expansion by why are we being ripped off in the UK? I want to pay in Euro's/Dollars!

Daniel.

Well pound and euro are virtually at parity, and I don't think the dollar rate includes sales tax (which is included in the euro/pound cost), so they're essentially all the same to the nearest .99

[marko2te]

I bought every expansion for NWN2 and i wanted to buy this, but there is no way Iam buying something that i have limited number of times i can use it.

[Phonix]

My main problem whit replaying old games, is that so many new good games are comming out, I have problems finding time to do it. I only have between 30 min to 2 hours to play each day, many day no time at all, as work and family take up the rest of the time.

So even that i love many of my old games, new experince is almost always more fun, so I rather spend my limit game time on new games that old ones! Even if I replay a game, I tend to it right after my 1st walk through, this only happen whit really good games white difrend options along the story line, like Mass Effect and The Witcher.

[screeg]

The way Atari has handled this whole mess, from constantly delaying the release to this final DRM BS, is a complete slap in the face to Ossian. I think they deserve to succeed. It's really a shame to see a promising indy company saddled with a dinosaur of a publisher like Atari.

[txa1265]

All on separate computers? There are unlimited installs on the same computer.

Yep - only once per computer ... and I think it is actually 6 or 7. Maybe 8 for the first couple.

[Zygo]

All on separate computers? There are unlimited installs on the same computer.

Something as simple as plugging in an external HD can count as being a "new" computer to an activation system.

[Cabel Blacke]

Once upon a time when you purchased software it was yours to do with as you wished... i.e., put it on a shelf to collect dust, then pull it down one day to reinstall... I know the pirates have made this a thing of the past, but I can still pine for better days.
It really is hard to believe that I can spend money on a piece of software and have a company tell me it will self-destruct after a certain number installs. Just doesn't seem right.

[Dhruin]

Personally, the limit won't affect me at all. That said, it's a crying shame Ossian has been saddled with this whole drama and a pity Atari has wasted community good-will stuffing around for a DRM system that won't help them.

[Dusk]

At least, in theory, I understand end-users don't buy the copy-righted content but that they are simply buy the right for the limited access to it. CDs and DVDs are just medium which makes it possible for end-users to access the content. We are, however, accustomed to think that we "bought" something "solid" in our hands while we bought something abstract. As for music, mostly through Apple, music industry established a new distribution system and end-users began to be accustomed to it, especially it has trade-offs such as convenience and the cheaper price. However, the game industry is still struggling. Casual games can be "bought" through the same route as the music are but there should be some other ways for "serious" games.

Are 10 dollars for 3 installation rights expensive? Does it allow end-users to play a game even after years?

[SveNitoR]

Are 10 dollars for 3 installation rights expensive? Does it allow end-users to play a game even after years?

For me the problem is not the price. For me the problem is I feel like I rent the game. That would be all fine except they constantly talk about "sales". Lost "sales", bad "sales" etc. If they "sell" me something I expect to own it and be able to do with it as I please, otherwise they should change it to "rent" (which I think is what "buying limited access" actually is). For me this just feels like a way to slowly change the public perception of ownership to owning = renting.

[kalniel]

For me the problem is not the price. For me the problem is I feel like I rent the game. That would be all fine except they constantly talk about "sales". Lost "sales", bad "sales" etc. If they "sell" me something I expect to own it and be able to do with it as I please, otherwise they should change it to "rent" (which I think is what "buying limited access" actually is). For me this just feels like a way to slowly change the public perception of ownership to owning = renting.

I'm not sure why public perception should suddenly change. We've been agreeing to contracts that clearly state we aren't buying the game, only licensing it, for years and years.

These license conditions are actually an increase in our rights - before we were only licensed on a single computer, now it's three.

[txa1265]

To me this just puts this into the realm of console-centric DLC, where you basically get the rights to play it forever on your console, but if you buy a new console for another room you are SOL.

[Cabel Blacke]

These license conditions are actually an increase in our rights - before we were only licensed on a single computer, now it's three.

I'm glad you see it this way. I don't. To me, it is akin to leasing a car vs. buying and I don't lease cars. For example, I have a copy of Shadows Over Riva, that I purchased when the game came out (12 years ago?) that I recently popped in my CD-ROM and reinstalled, because I felt like replaying it. I also have hard copy versions of Planescape Torment, BG1 and 2, Deus Ex, Thief 1,2, and 3, Arx Fatalis, Gothic, and the list goes on and on. When I hit a slow period in new games, I pull one of these down off the shelf and reinstall. I'll play it for a while until the next game du jour comes out that interests me.

With the scenario Atari is offering, this "ownership" concept (even, if it is just a concept and not legal actuality) will be gone. I will now be leasing my games, instead of buying.

How is this a good thing?

[screeg]

I don't think this business model will last. Just because Atari puts something forth doesn't mean it will succeed. After the various catastrophes from the Troika days, you'd think Atari would have given up on trying to micromanage their developers into an early grave be completely unsurprised this kind of thing still goes on.

[Guhndahb]

I guess if I'm still playing a game over many years then I'll consider it a bargain even if I have to buy additional copies. But remember, this is only an adventure pack - 15 hours is the estimated play time, not 15 years.Perhaps. But this isn't just about one game. I'm opposed to what is being done here. If all games were to suddenly go this route, it would be a tragedy to me.

I'm a consumer. I only have one power. Complaining on forums is ultimately meaningless. The one power I have is my dollar vote. The only way I can tell publishers that I oppose their tactics is by not buying the product. There are games over the years that I wanted very much and didn't buy for this reason. There are even a few games I bought but didn't play because I wanted to support the developers but was not particularly interested in the game.

I'm not asking for that much. I'm willing to meet halfway. I simply want a deactivation tool and a promise to patch out the activation requirement after X years.

[txa1265]

I'm a consumer. I only have one power. Complaining on forums is ultimately meaningless. The one power I have is my dollar vote.

And the problem there is the vague meaning - are you voting against the publisher (DreamCatcher), against the genre, against the game, against the DRM, against the platform (console vs. PC), against something else ...

[Konjad]

I wonder if polish box version has that DRM crap.

BTW there is funny thing about the price. Storm of Zehir will be released in Poland in the same day as Mysteries of Westgate (yes, late :\ ) and the prices are:
- Storm of Zehir - 69,90 zł
- Mysteries of Westgate - 49,90 zł
- Storm of Zehir + Mysteries of Westgate - 84,90 zł

So... when you are buying SoZ you have MoW for 15 zł which is around 4.5$ or 3.5 Euros.

1 Polish złoty = 0.233679281 Euros = 0.304414 U.S. dollars.

[Elwro]

I'm a consumer. I only have one power. Complaining on forums is ultimately meaningless. The one power I have is my dollar vote. The only way I can tell publishers that I oppose their tactics is by not buying the product. One problem with this line of thought is that when people stop buying, the publishers say it's the pirates' fault and move to consoles instead of focusing on making better games.

[DArtagnan]

I'm a consumer. I only have one power. Complaining on forums is ultimately meaningless. The one power I have is my dollar vote.

Never underestimate words - spoken or written.

People do that, because they don't see any immediate effect. But you'd be surprised how efficient speaking your mind can be - especially if it's well thought out and supported by reason. It might take years or even decades - but even these tiny and subtle hints can result - or at least have an effect - in an overall perspective change. Both in general and for the industry.

Key players of our beloved hobby are reading this - and they're paying attention. They might deny ever being influenced, but that's irrelevant. If you have anything approaching truth to speak - believe me - it will be heard and it WILL have an effect.

It's vital to speak your mind.

[Benedict]

I'm a consumer. I only have one power. Complaining on forums is ultimately meaningless. The one power I have is my dollar vote. The only way I can tell publishers that I oppose their tactics is by not buying the product.

Call me a cynic, but I suspect that Atari's reaction to lost sales will not be "OMG, people really didn't like the DRM, let's not do that again" but "OMG, people just aren't interested in premium modules, let's not bother in future", so really withholding your dollar vote does fuck all for your stated aim and screws over a hard working developer by all accounts releasing quality work.

I will be buying it, if it's good and if the drm in some way bites and can't be overcome then in future I'll buy it again.

Maybe Ossian should set up an anonymous donation function so that people who have pirated DRM free copies can give them the money anyway, although (call me a cynic again) I suspect that it won't get a whole lot of use in spite of the noise over drm.

[stefan9]

Not going to buy this if there's not even a chance of having the activations reset.

[crpgnut]

Hmm, I never buy a game unless I think I'll get my full money's worth in my first playthrough. If the game interests me enough for a 2nd playthrough, that's just icing on the cake. DRM means almost nothing to me, personally. I certainly don't have energy enough to waste getting my hackles raised over this. I never played any of the premium mods in NWN1, so this will probably be my first. I would have no problems with re-purchasing any of the games that I enjoy replaying. They're generally much cheaper the 2nd time around, but they can be hard to find. I also would have no qualms about "pirating" a game that I had paid for if my activations ran out. I see no moral issues with this.

[kalniel]

I'm glad you see it this way. I don't. To me, it is akin to leasing a car vs. buying and I don't lease cars. For example, I have a copy of Shadows Over Riva, that I purchased when the game came out (12 years ago?) that I recently popped in my CD-ROM and reinstalled, because I felt like replaying it. I also have hard copy versions of Planescape Torment, BG1 and 2, Deus Ex, Thief 1,2, and 3, Arx Fatalis, Gothic, and the list goes on and on. When I hit a slow period in new games, I pull one of these down off the shelf and reinstall. I'll play it for a while until the next game du jour comes out that interests me.

With the scenario Atari is offering, this "ownership" concept (even, if it is just a concept and not legal actuality) will be gone. I will now be leasing my games, instead of buying.

How is this a good thing?Are you just moaning because you can't breach your license conditions as easily with this game as you can with your older games?

I believe most, if not all, of those games you list are only licensed for use on a single computer, but you seem to be fine with ignoring your agreement and installing them on another.

Or are you installing them on the same computer? If so then it's no different - there are unlimited installs on the same computer.

[bkrueger]

Are you just moaning because you can't breach your license conditions as easily with this game as you can with your older games?

I believe most, if not all, of those games you list are only licensed for use on a single computer, but you seem to be fine with ignoring your agreement and installing them on another.

Or are you installing them on the same computer? If so then it's no different - there are unlimited installs on the same computer.

No, those old licenses said something like:

Only on one computer at the same time. The idea (which was even stated explicitly in some of the licenses) was to make it comparable to a book, which you can read, give it somebody else for reading, even sell, but are not allowed to copy. So there was no breach of licence conditions in the situation you refer to. Modern DRM systems should try to reach the same goal, then most people will gladly accept them.

[stefan9]

Are you just moaning because you can't breach your license conditions as easily with this game as you can with your older games?

I believe most, if not all, of those games you list are only licensed for use on a single computer, but you seem to be fine with ignoring your agreement and installing them on another.

Or are you installing them on the same computer? If so then it's no different - there are unlimited installs on the same computer.

Those licenses said one computer at a time. Similar to how the licensing for the retail editions of most windows operating systems are written.

Also same computer is down to interpretation. According the drm scheme formatting and reinstalling windows means its not the same system while to any normal person it would still be the same system.

[Guhndahb]

And the problem there is the vague meaning - are you voting against the publisher (DreamCatcher), against the genre, against the game, against the DRM, against the platform (console vs. PC), against something else ...I never said it was a good power. :) As I said in my previous post to that one, I regret that my actions will harm a studio for which I care due to the decision of the publisher. And yet, I have to stand my ground somewhere. Don't think for a second I don't hold regrets. It hurts me, it hurts the developer, and it hurts the publisher when I make the decision to skip a game. But the same could be said of the decision to include such malefic DRM.
One problem with this line of thought is that when people stop buying, the publishers say it's the pirates' fault and move to consoles instead of focusing on making better games.I know. :(
Never underestimate words - spoken or written....It's vital to speak your mind.Different parts of me feel differently about this. I agree that in can be effective, on occasion. And I strongly agree that one must never give up. (I'd not be bothering posting here on this subject if I'd given up.) But I do feel that in most cases it's futile. Obviously I was feeling the futility when I wrote that because I'm fairly discouraged by this situation. I certainly didn't mean to imply that we shouldn't be bothering with this discussion, if anyone took it that way.
Call me a cynic, but I suspect that Atari's reaction to lost sales will not be "OMG, people really didn't like the DRM, let's not do that again" but "OMG, people just aren't interested in premium modules, let's not bother in future", so really withholding your dollar vote does fuck all for your stated aim and screws over a hard working developer by all accounts releasing quality work.You, too, are likely quite right.

Maybe I'm being a stubborn ass. But, again, I feel like I've met the publishers halfway. I tolerate, although I certainly do not embrace, many of the DRM measures. I can put up with activation. I just insist on the two things I mentioned earlier, the most critical being the ability to deactivate and at least some promise of patching out the activation after several years or if the activation servers are going to go down.

[blatantninja]

If there is actually a CD release anywhere, then it will be on bittorrent and it will be cracked. I'll buy the download, but I'll immediately be finding a cracked copy online.

I have a desktop and a laptop that I game on. I routinely install on both and then keep my save games on a flash drive so I can jump from one to another. My desktop is about 1 year old, which means I'll probably do another upgrade in a year. That would be my three installs right there. Ohh and I'm building an HTPC that I might want to play it on just it on to see what it looks like on a 42inch Plasma with surround sound. Oh wait, that's too many installs. Piracy here I come.

[blatantninja]

Call me a cynic, but I suspect that Atari's reaction to lost sales will not be "OMG, people really didn't like the DRM, let's not do that again" but "OMG, people just aren't interested in premium modules, let's not bother in future", so really withholding your dollar vote does fuck all for your stated aim and screws over a hard working developer by all accounts releasing quality work.

The only way around this is to stop bitching on forums (or at least not just bitch here) and write letters, emails, etc. to Atari, so they KNOW that people are interested in premium modules, but that the DRM is keeping them away. Heck, it's not that hard to find the mailing address or email address of the CEO of a company.

Since Atari is a wholly owned subsidiary of infogrames, I'd go to their CEO:

David P Gardner
Phone: +33-4-37-64-30-00
Fax: +33-4-37-64-30-01
1 Place Verrazzano
France

[Kostaz]

Outrageous!There's no way I'm buying this.
I'd sooner pirate it than having to go through that DRM crap.
I've made this mistake with Spore I'm not doing it again.

[Cabel Blacke]

No, those old licenses said something like:

Only on one computer at the same time. The idea (which was even stated explicitly in some of the licenses) was to make it comparable to a book, which you can read, give it somebody else for reading, even sell, but are not allowed to copy. So there was no breach of licence conditions in the situation you refer to. Modern DRM systems should try to reach the same goal, then most people will gladly accept them.

Exactly. So, long as I don't copy the game and redistribute or install on multiple different computers at once (which would also involve copying), I don't see how I'm in breach of anything.

[skavenhorde]

Are you just moaning because you can't breach your license conditions as easily with this game as you can with your older games?

I believe most, if not all, of those games you list are only licensed for use on a single computer, but you seem to be fine with ignoring your agreement and installing them on another.

Or are you installing them on the same computer? If so then it's no different - there are unlimited installs on the same computer.

WTF are you talking about? He only talked about installing them on A computer, just in different time periods. For example I still play Star Trail every now and then, but do I have the same computer as I did 10 years ago, fuck no. Does that mean I shouldn't play Star Trail? Once again NO. I bought it. I'm playing it. Hell, I don't even lend it to anyone.

So what you are saying is that the licensing agreement of today state that you can only install the software on ONE computer EVER? So if you buy a new computer and format the other one, you still couln't install the software you paid for on the new computer? Monkey's will fly out of my butt if that ever held up in court.

That's sorta like saying the DVD movie you bought can only be played on your current DVD player. If you ever buy a new DVD player you will have to buy the movie again.

[Benedict]

I also would have no qualms about "pirating" a game that I had paid for if my activations ran out. I see no moral issues with this.

Likewise, that would seem to me to be a better solution than just denying hard working developers their day one profits (especially when their day one profits come quite so long after they'd completely finished everything)

[DArtagnan]

I find that circumstances tend to be unique in almost every single instance of what's legally considered piracy - and as such, I find trying to pigeonhole the entire concept excessively shortsighted.

[Benedict]

The only way around this is to stop bitching on forums (or at least not just bitch here) and write letters, emails, etc. to Atari, so they KNOW that people are interested in premium modules, but that the DRM is keeping them away.

You lot crack on with that if you want, personally i couldn't give a crap about this kind of drm and don't understand why people are getting their knickers in such a twist about it.

And I especially don't understand why they'd pick this game of all games to take a stand on. It's a small, independent studio, the reviews suggest it's an extremely deep and well crafted module of exactly the sort that we're all crying out for more of, they've had nothing but shit from their publisher all the way along and could really do with some support from the few people still interested in the game.

Plus they have NO influence whatsoever on Atari, if sales are low for this Atari won't even look at the reasons for it, the way they've treated the whole horrifically bungled release makes it absolutely clear that they simply don't give a crap about Ossian on any level. Atari has a lot of high budget releases it really cares about, take a stand on some of those if you need to.

Plus, and apologies if money really is that tight for some of you but . . . 10 dollars. TEN FREAKING DOLLARS. Sure, three activations only for people who play on a few different individual platforms might mean that if one wants to replay in a year or so then one might not be able to put it on the latest piece of hardware but still - TEN DOLLARS. It is not a high budget release that one only wants to purchase once, if a (15 hour +) game's good enough to want to play more than once then frankly a game's good enough to be worth paying 20 dollars for.

Or, as crpnut says, buy it now so Ossian get what they deserve and download a cracked copy if and when the drm ever becomes an issue.

[Benedict]

I find that circumstances tend to be unique in almost every single instance of what's legally considered piracy - and as such, I find trying to pigeonhole the entire concept excessively shortsighted.

I think there's a lot of grey areas. Buying the game legally then downloading a cracked & drm free version - legally piracy, but morally fine. Buying the game legally then if the drm ever restricts, downloading a cracked & drm free version - again fine.

Any situation that involves playing the game without Ossian being paid for it though is, unequivocally, acting like a complete arsehole and any amount of huffing and puffing and pretending it's the publishers fault for making people act like arseholes is just complete, self serving bullshit denial.

[txa1265]

I think there's a lot of grey areas. Buying the game legally then downloading a cracked & drm free version - legally piracy, but morally fine. Buying the game legally then if the drm ever restricts, downloading a cracked & drm free version - again fine.

Any situation that involves playing the game without Ossian being paid for it though is, unequivocally, acting like a complete arsehole and any amount of huffing and puffing and pretending it's the publishers fault for making people act like arseholes is just complete, self serving bullshit denial.

Thanks for that clear explanation ... that is pretty well how I feel. If you have never paid for it, you should never have played it - otherwise you have no moral standing.

And I find that people who 'play the piracy card' (say they'd sooner pirate than deal with DRM) are already predisposed to do so ... not always, but quite often. They are the ones who are to blame for 18,000 out of 120,000 Demigod connections beign from paid customers ...

[Prime Junta]

You guys talked me into it, I'm buying. You're right -- it would be stupid and wrong to punish Ossian for Atari's idiocy. But I would like to mail Atari's CEO a big steaming turd to express how I feel about these shenanigans.

[DArtagnan]

Any situation that involves playing the game without Ossian being paid for it though is, unequivocally, acting like a complete arsehole and any amount of huffing and puffing and pretending it's the publishers fault for making people act like arseholes is just complete, self serving bullshit denial.

You don't sound like a very "grey area" aware person when you speak with words so emotionally laden.

Anyway, it's not my responsibility as a consumer to ensure that whoever has done the work, gets paid. That's out of my hand completely.

Often enough, the money (the REAL money) ends up with people who did little or no work - and that's hardly my fault.

What we can agree on, is that good work deserves compensation. I would gladly pay twice or thrice the standard price for any game worthy of being called good.

But there are so many factors involved in each incident - that I find it impossible to make a broad statement regarding the "ethical" nature of piracy.

[Benedict]

You don't sound like a very "grey area" aware person when you speak with words so emotionally laden.


Why? Surely it's possible to recognise that some things fall into confusing grey areas, while other things just aren't ambiguous at all.


Anyway, it's not my responsibility as a consumer to ensure that whoever has done the work, gets paid. That's out of my hand completely.

Often enough, the money (the REAL money) ends up with people who did little or no work - and that's hardly my fault.


It's not your responsiblity to ensure that the money that you've been honest enough to pay is split fairly between the potential recipients but it is IMO your responsibility to be honest enough to pay for things that you use. That's the implied contract - producers try to make things worth consuming and consumers pay for what they consume.


What we can agree on, is that good work deserves compensation. I would gladly pay twice or thrice the standard price for any game worthy of being called good.


Indeed, which is what makes this whole furore so odd - if it's so good that one wants to play it so many times that the drm might potentially bite then $9.95 is cheap even if one pays it several times.


But there are so many factors involved in each incident - that I find it impossible to make a broad statement regarding the "ethical" nature of piracy.


I disagree. I would make the following broad statement - "It is unethical to play (beyond an initial trial) any game one has not paid for if there is a relatively easy way to pay for it"

That is the basic principle IMO. If beyond that the drm is intrusive, buy the game & then play a pirated copy. If the drm might lock you out at some point, buy it, play it until locked out then pirate a copy and play that. If you've bought it in the past and lost the disks but still paid at the time, pirate it. If it's an old game and you can't find any way of paying for it (or if the only ways are hugely overpriced ebay games that could take ages to find and wouldn't get anywhere near the developer's bottom line), pirate. If it's illegally available now but can't be bought yet, pirate it and pay later once it is. If it's never legally available then pirate away.

The underlying ethical principle is very, very simple. Try to pay for what you play, even if around that you do a bit of pirating for your own convenience.

[Benedict]

You guys talked me into it, I'm buying. You're right -- it would be stupid and wrong to punish Ossian for Atari's idiocy. But I would like to mail Atari's CEO a big steaming turd to express how I feel about these shenanigans.

If you're going to the post office then curl one out for me while you're at it.

Not for the drm business, just for having sat on it for so long when there really was no need.

[Gorath]

Atari's future will be interesting. They've sold their physical distribution branch to, I think, Namco Bandai.

[blatantninja]

You lot crack on with that if you want, personally i couldn't give a crap about this kind of drm and don't understand why people are getting their knickers in such a twist about it.

I think I illustrated quite well how I might run out of 'licenses' very quickly with my current set up.

And I especially don't understand why they'd pick this game of all games to take a stand on.

For me, it's because it is the first time I have encountered it. Granted I am not as heavy a player as I used to be, but I've installed all the infinity games on more than 5 different machines over the years as well as most of the Ultima games, Wing Commander games, etc. I'm already on machine #2/3 (desktop and now laptop) on my NWN2/MotB. I'd be REALLY pissed if I couldn't install it again when I upgrade my machine in a year or so.

It's a small, independent studio,

No one is pissed at them. They're more a victim than anyone.

[blatantninja]

Often enough, the money (the REAL money) ends up with people who did little or no work - and that's hardly my fault.

That's irrelevent. Whether or not it is going to the people that developed it doesn't matter. If you haven't paid for it, you shouldn't be playing it. The ONLY situation I can see otherwise is if a legel copy simply is not attainable.

[skavenhorde]

Oh hell, I feel another piracy thread in the making.

[Avantenor]

Atari's future will be interesting. They've sold their physical distribution branch to, I think, Namco Bandai.

That's correct. I'm still thinking that they are gonna merge some day.

[Benedict]

I think I illustrated quite well how I might run out of 'licenses' very quickly with my current set up.


Then buy it & pirate it later if the drm is causing an issue. Or buy it twice, I get the impression from your financial knowledge that $9.95 isn't going to be a major issue for you.


For me, it's because it is the first time I have encountered it.

They're more a victim than anyone


Things are bound to change with more digital only releases of this kind, it may be the first but I'm sure it won't be the last. And of all the games and development studios I have the most sympathy for Ossian because of all the shit they've been through for ages, drm or no drm the release delays have screwed them completely.

You say that they're more a victim than anyone as if it's some abstract thing happening to them that you're playing no part in, it's not. You could buy the game and take a stand with one of Atari's AAA releases that it'd actually care about. You could buy it and send them a letter registering your distaste (even telling them you've refused to buy it).

[DArtagnan]

That's irrelevent. Whether or not it is going to the people that developed it doesn't matter. If you haven't paid for it, you shouldn't be playing it. The ONLY situation I can see otherwise is if a legel copy simply is not attainable.

That might not be relevant to you - but it's a pretty vital factor to me.

If my money ends up in the right hands, then all is good.

If not, then I would have no ethical boundary preventing me from not paying.

That said, I very rarely have the opportunity to detect where the money ends up, because greedy people are exceptionally good at justifying their greed. Often, developers are compensated by all kinds of sources - and I have no idea whether their funding partners have already made a deal and paid them. That's why I'm a strong supporter of paying for the games you enjoy.

That doesn't make broad statements any more correct or fair, though.

In effect, I pay for games without really knowing if I should.

[DArtagnan]

Why? Surely it's possible to recognise that some things fall into confusing grey areas, while other things just aren't ambiguous at all.

That is possible in theory. In practice? Not too often, I would say.

It's not your responsiblity to ensure that the money that you've been honest enough to pay is split fairly between the potential recipients but it is IMO your responsibility to be honest enough to pay for things that you use. That's the implied contract - producers try to make things worth consuming and consumers pay for what they consume.

Honesty isn't a factor here.

Whatever contract people imagine isn't implicitly interesting to me.

As I said, good work should be compensated and if I can do that - I will.

I pay for games that I probably shouldn't pay for - but that's because I'd rather not risk having people not be compensated when they deserve it.

Indeed, which is what makes this whole furore so odd - if it's so good that one wants to play it so many times that the drm might potentially bite then $9.95 is cheap even if one pays it several times.

My point had no direct tie to this case.

I disagree. I would make the following broad statement - "It is unethical to play (beyond an initial trial) any game one has not paid for if there is a relatively easy way to pay for it"

Well, to be honest, I don't have ethics as a firm concept in my head. I try to look at every decision I make with as many factors as I can. I don't like restricting myself to principles, because they tend to confuse truth with perception of truth.

The underlying ethical principle is very, very simple. Try to pay for what you play, even if around that you do a bit of pirating for your own convenience.

Yeah, that's the trouble with principles. They're simple. The truth isn't always that simple.

[blatantninja]

Then buy it & pirate it later if the drm is causing an issue. Or buy it twice, I get the impression from your financial knowledge that $9.95 isn't going to be a major issue for you.

Which is exactly what I said I would do. Regardless, I shouldn't have to.

You say that they're more a victim than anyone as if it's some abstract thing happening to them that you're playing no part in, it's not. You could buy the game and take a stand with one of Atari's AAA releases that it'd actually care about. You could buy it and send them a letter registering your distaste (even telling them you've refused to buy it).

That would require me being interested in buying one of their other releases.

[blatantninja]

That might not be relevant to you - but it's a pretty vital factor to me.

If my money ends up in the right hands, then all is good.

It's not your decision to make. If you don't want to play or buy fine, but you don't have the right to decide if you should pay for something that you acquire just because you don't like where the money is going.

If not, then I would have no ethical boundary preventing me from not paying.

Which means you have very loose ethics.

[Prime Junta]

In effect, I pay for games without really knowing if I should.

I regularly pay for movie tickets without really knowing ahead of time that I'll enjoy the film. Am I weird?

[Benedict]

That might not be relevant to you - but it's a pretty vital factor to me.

If my money ends up in the right hands, then all is good.

If not, then I would have no ethical boundary preventing me from not paying.

Sounds like flimsy bullshit to go around pretending you're morally acceptable to me ;)

Whether the deal the developer got with the publisher is good or fair or not they've still entered into it willingly themselves and that is the method that they've chosen for payment for their labours to be made, a choice you can't ignore and still (sensibly) pretend you've not crossed an ethical boundary.

Even if the developer has been paid everything already and receives absolutely nothing at all from any sales they will still want to be able to point to high sales figures when they're negotiating their next deal, unless the publisher has raped their daughter and run over their cat there are no situations where the developer would not prefer high sales figures.

[Benedict]

That is possible in theory. In practice? Not too often, I would say.


Really? In practice I'd say it's the norm and absolute black to white with nothing in between is pretty rare. Take abortion, possibly the most polarising political issue there is. All but the most die hard pro choicers will have a grey area around maximum time limits or people using it as a form of contraception. All but the most die hard pro lifers will have grey areas around rape babies.

Almost everyone on almost every issue will have some specific circumstances in which they have no unequivocal moral absolutes while having other aspects on which they feel very strongly that something is clearly right or wrong.


Honesty isn't a factor here.


Maybe not entirely the right word, but honesty is still a factor IMO because (if the internet is anything to go by) most pirates justify their piracy by lying to themselves about how it's okay.


Well, to be honest, I don't have ethics as a firm concept in my head. I try to look at every decision I make with as many factors as I can. I don't like restricting myself to principles, because they tend to confuse truth with perception of truth.


I think we have different concepts of principles as opposed to laws. Principles are general moral compasses that one uses as a frame of reference when analysing individual circumstances, they're not absolute "if you obey them you're right regardless of the manner in which you obey and if you don't then you're bad whatever your reasons"


Yeah, that's the trouble with principles. They're simple. The truth isn't always that simple.


I think piracy is more simple than most. There's no "But what if they had to steal that video game to feed their starving family" type dilemmas.

[DArtagnan]

I regularly pay for movie tickets without really knowing ahead of time that I'll enjoy the film. Am I weird?

I don't know if you're weird.

I do know that I find the system horrible and illogical. I've had a few debates in which I've detailed alternative ways of compensating movie makers - but I don't think it'll catch on in Hollywood.

[DArtagnan]

It's not your decision to make. If you don't want to play or buy fine, but you don't have the right to decide if you should pay for something that you acquire just because you don't like where the money is going.

I'm not too concerned with what rights you think I have.

Which means you have very loose ethics.

I might not even have ethics - it's hard to say.

[DArtagnan]

Really? In practice I'd say it's the norm and absolute black to white with nothing in between is pretty rare. Take abortion, possibly the most polarising political issue there is. All but the most die hard pro choicers will have a grey area around maximum time limits or people using it as a form of contraception. All but the most die hard pro lifers will have grey areas around rape babies.

Yes, I agree.

That's why I think it's rare to be able to find black and white issues. So, what are we arguing about again?

Almost everyone on almost every issue will have some specific circumstances in which they have no unequivocal moral absolutes while having other aspects on which they feel very strongly that something is clearly right or wrong.

I'm the exception in terms of the latter point. Meaning, I have very VERY few things that I can say are clearly right or wrong. Maybe I don't have a single one.

Maybe not entirely the right word, but honesty is still a factor IMO because (if the internet is anything to go by) most pirates justify their piracy by lying to themselves about how it's okay.

That's an interesting statement that's entirely irrelevant to my point. Whether you pay for something or you don't - has nothing to do with honesty in itself.

I think we have different concepts of principles as opposed to laws. Principles are general moral compasses that one uses as a frame of reference when analysing individual circumstances, they're not absolute "if you obey them you're right regardless of the manner in which you obey and if you don't then you're bad whatever your reasons"

No, I don't agree that's what a principle is.

A principle is actually a kind of law that you make for yourself - and being a principle, it's fundamental. People have sets of these and some use them to guide their own conduct.

My problem with principles is that they don't evolve along with your understanding of humanity.

Incidentally, I have much the same problem with the laws of society - but I can accept them more easily - because they serve a pragmatic purpose that I can appreciate is necessary. Well, something like them is necessary, anyway.

I think piracy is more simple than most. There's no "But what if they had to steal that video game to feed their starving family" type dilemmas.

I think it's a very complex issue with so many factors that I couldn't begin to comprehend them all.

[skavenhorde]

Yep, A full blown Piracy debat is now up and running. Hide the children, lock the doors, get the shotguns because a flaming twister is on its way :)

Good luck guys, I'm all raged out from discussing nutjobs in the P&R section. Can we have a winner this time though?

[DArtagnan]

Yep, A full blown Piracy debat is now up and running. Hide the children, lock the doors, get the shotguns because a flaming twister is on its way :)

Good luck guys, I'm all raged out from discussing nutjobs in the P&R section. Can we have a winner this time though?

Hehe, you're right.

Wrong place and most likely as pointless as ever.

I'll gladly concede that we're all right and super sexy to boot :biggrin:

[skavenhorde]

Hehe, you're right.

Wrong place and most likely as pointless as ever.

I'll gladly concede that we're all right and super sexy to boot :biggrin:

First sensible thing I've read since the "Flaming Twister" sirens went off. :) Good on you DArtagnan.

[Benedict]

Yes, I agree.

That's why I think it's rare to be able to find black and white issues. So, what are we arguing about again?


Sorry, didn't really read your post like that . . . I was saying that on any particular issue some forms of behaviour will fall into grey areas and others will be clearly in the black or white camps, and you said that was rare. I agree it's rare to find entirely black or white issues, but it's the norm for people to divide each issue up into black, white and grey.


I'm the exception in terms of the latter point. Meaning, I have very VERY few things that I can say are clearly right or wrong. Maybe I don't have a single one.


I agree that saying that things are clearly right or wrong is difficult given moral relativism, but presumably in most cases there'll be things that you feel are right or wrong?


That's an interesting statement that's entirely irrelevant to my point. Whether you pay for something or you don't - has nothing to do with honesty in itself.


Actually, take some definitions of honest from the net, google dictionary search here (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+honest&meta=&aq=f&oq=) throws up: "gained or earned without cheating or stealing;" and "not disposed to cheat or defraud;" both of which I would say could perfectly reasonably justify my use of the word honesty in this context.


No, I don't agree that's what a principle is.

A principle is actually a kind of law that you make for yourself - and being a principle, it's fundamental. People have sets of these and some use them to guide their own conduct.


I think you're contradicting yourself there. You use principles to guide your conduct, not as laws to unequivocally mandate your conduct. Different things.


My problem with principles is that they don't evolve along with your understanding of humanity.


Why can't they? Right here and now I would say that the principle I expressed earlier with regard to piracy is entirely appropriate and I can see no circumstances under which it would be readily invalidated in the immediate future. Doesn't mean I can't or won't change my mind if and when the circumstances do change.


I think it's a very complex issue with so many factors that I couldn't begin to comprehend them all.

Really? Very occasionally maybe, say in russia or china where local economic situations make legal imports prohibitively expensive and developers haven't responded by differential pricing structures. The vast majority of the time? It's not complex. People like free shit and in these circumstances they can just help themselves without needing to worry about the indirect damage they're doing. Everything else is just bullshit that people make up to pretend that they're not stealing.

[booboo]

hm, why did Ossian choose to have Atari distribute their mod? Were they truly blind to Atari's drm 'obsession'? Can't see how that' s possible - unless they've been living under a rock for trhe last few years. So, if they willingly jumped into bed with them, then they surely bought into Atari's DRM model - and should not be overly surprised when people get annoyed with them. Yes, I know Atari is a big distributor (And obviously attractive to a newbie) but if you hop into bed with the devil.... I have bought other DRM-free Indie games directly from their creators and I was happy to pay for those - and a lot more than $10 too. Surely that direct (private - not d2d etc) digital online distribution would have been sensible for a small startup? Or are people not allowed to make money off mods for the NWN engine? As for the low cost - that's irrelevant: whether it's $10 or $100 it's the constraints imposed by Atari's (And other) DRM model that I object to. I have many old games and expansions which I haul out now and then - no DRM, no problems (as long as you have appropriate hardware - something *I* control).

[Prime Junta]

Because Atari owns the rights to NWN2, and I'm fairly certain the terms of service of the toolkit include clauses that forbid you from selling your mods independently.

Now, if NWN2 was an OSS game engine...

[DArtagnan]

I agree that saying that things are clearly right or wrong is difficult given moral relativism, but presumably in most cases there'll be things that you feel are right or wrong?

Sure, I have feelings like anyone else. But I'm quite used to separating my feelings from my opinions, so it's not as often the case as you'd think.

Actually, take some definitions of honest from the net, google dictionary search here (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+honest&meta=&aq=f&oq=) throws up: "gained or earned without cheating or stealing;" and "not disposed to cheat or defraud;" both of which I would say could perfectly reasonably justify my use of the word honesty in this context.

You're right and I'm wrong.

I think you're contradicting yourself there. You use principles to guide your conduct, not as laws to unequivocally mandate your conduct. Different things.

No, I don't think I'm contradicting myself.

I could link a definition of the word, but you've proven you already know how to find this stuff ;)

You said that principles are different from laws, in that they serve as a frame of reference. I'm saying they ARE personal laws that serve as (potentially) strict rules, and those rules tend to guide people in their overall conduct. Just like the laws of society tend to guide our conduct as members of society.

Not that I would presume to speak for everyone, and I don't really know what you do with your principles. That's just my experience, and I find that having too many principles can cloud an otherwise open mind and leave too many decisions to past conclusions which might not be consistent with reality or your current (updated) perception of reality.

Why can't they? Right here and now I would say that the principle I expressed earlier with regard to piracy is entirely appropriate and I can see no circumstances under which it would be readily invalidated in the immediate future. Doesn't mean I can't or won't change my mind if and when the circumstances do change.

Good on you. Unfortunately, I've had many experiences where people refuse to change their principles according to new and fresh information. In effect, they hinder themselves because they've become too invested or attached to their principles.

Do you know what I'm talking about here, or it is a completely foreign concept to you?

Really? Very occasionally maybe, say in russia or china where local economic situations make legal imports prohibitively expensive and developers haven't responded by differential pricing structures. The vast majority of the time? It's not complex. People like free shit and in these circumstances they can just help themselves without needing to worry about the indirect damage they're doing. Everything else is just bullshit that people make up to pretend that they're not stealing.

Again, you speak with so many curse words that I can't really accept you are being entirely neutral or objective. Clearly, you have a very negative perception of piracy, and you don't seem open to it being a grey area.

As such, I think we can conclude that we simply don't agree on the matter and move on?

[kalniel]

Did you guys spot this?

Hi Everybody,

I wanted to clarify for you what Atari is intending with regard to the 3 activations for MoW. So I’ve consulted with them to get some specific details and prepared a list of clarifications.

Firstly, please note that entering your serial key when installing MoW is NOT the same thing as MoW automatically authenticating with the Atari server in order to activate.

- With 3 activations you can install MoW on 3 different PCs.
- If you reinstall MoW on the same PC with unchanged hardware (see below for details), you can do this an unlimited number of times. You can do this on 3 different PCs.
- If you uninstall MoW and reinstall it, the westgate.key file (generated from the authentication) in your NWN2 folder won't have been removed, so your new MoW installation will not count as an activation.
- If you uninstall MoW and NWN2 (on the same PC), and then reinstall them, you can either have backed up your westgate.key file (to copy back into your NWN2 folder so MoW doesn't have to authenticate again) or not backed up the key at all and let MoW authenticate again (in this case, it will detect that this machine has activated before). In either case, this will not count as an activation.
- If you change your RAM or video card (and likely sound card too) and play or install MoW, this will not count as an activation. I don’t have 100% confirmation from Atari on this next part, but I would expect that changing your CPU, motherboard, or hard drive where MoW is installed would count as an activation.
- If you reformat your hard drive and reinstall your OS, NWN2, and MoW, but without changing your hardware configuration, then this “normally” shouldn’t be another activation. I say “normally” because that is the wording that Atari told me.
- Apparently, for some retail games, a user can revoke their usage of it in order to resell it, so that the slate is wiped clean for a new user to install and activate (I think this is termed an “installation reset”). Atari has said that can’t be the case for a digitally-distributed title like MoW.
- If you surpass 3 activations, then you can contact Atari tech support in order to get another activation.

I hope this has helped answer your questions about activations.
- Alan

[txa1265]

Oh hell, I feel another piracy thread in the making.

I had something to say ... but it is too late - it has already run rampany!

[Benedict]

Sure, I have feelings like anyone else. But I'm quite used to separating my feelings from my opinions, so it's not as often the case as you'd think.


Indeed, I was talking about people feeling that certain aspects are right or wrong though rather than people knowing that they are.


No, I don't think I'm contradicting myself.

You said that principles are different from laws, in that they serve as a frame of reference. I'm saying they ARE personal laws that serve as (potentially) strict rules, and those rules tend to guide people in their overall conduct. Just like the laws of society tend to guide our conduct as members of society.


I think we disagree on the semantics here then, I don't think of laws and rules as things that guide my conduct, I think of them as things that stipulate the scope of my conduct if I am to obey the laws.

Probably a rubbish & obscure example here but the one that springs to mind for me is the key difference between US and UK financial regulation - the US has a rules based system with fairly explicit laws on what is and isn't allowed (and an army of lawyers working to shoehorn all manner of dodgy stuff into the letter of the law) and the UK has a principles based system with comparatively few underlying principles of good behaviour with any case able to be judged against those principles (and an army of lawyers arguing if it ever comes to such a case).

Similarly for my (actuarial) profession, there's about 4 key principles (that I really should know off by heart, but they escape me at present) supplemented by a load of guidance notes that suggest a general consensus on an acceptable way of meeting those principles.


Not that I would presume to speak for everyone, and I don't really know what you do with your principles. That's just my experience, and I find that having too many principles can cloud an otherwise open mind and leave too many decisions to past conclusions which might not be consistent with reality or your current (updated) perception of reality.

Good on you. Unfortunately, I've had many experiences where people refuse to change their principles according to new and fresh information. In effect, they hinder themselves because they've become too invested or attached to their principles.


I think that's less an issue with having a set of principles and more an issue with people believing that their principles are a set of moral absolutes handed down by a power greater than themselves. A more frequent issue when people adopt principles from others rather than developing them themselves.


Do you know what I'm talking about here, or it is a completely foreign concept to you?


I do, I just find it odd that your reaction to some people being dogmatic in adherence to inflexible principles is to view having principles at all as a negative.


Again, you speak with so many curse words that I can't really accept you are being entirely neutral or objective. Clearly, you have a very negative perception of piracy, and you don't seem open to it being a grey area.

As such, I think we can conclude that we simply don't agree on the matter and move on?

Where did I say I was neutral about piracy? And why does a lack of neutrality mean a lack of objectivity, presumably you're not neutral about e.g. rape but could still be perfectly objective in that non-neutral stance?

It probably is going nowhere and we should move on, but before we do - please can you make some arguments as to why I shouldn't be very negative about the vast majority of piracy? I promise to really try and be objective, even if that doesn't mean I agree with your arguments.

[DArtagnan]

Indeed, I was talking about people feeling that certain aspects are right or wrong though rather than people knowing that they are.

Yes, I got that.

But the way I see it, emotional responses can often be very unfortunate when trying to determine the objective truth - assuming there is one. We can have very strong emotions based on very wrong information, for instance.

The emotional power can be extremely hard to overcome, and it's been my experience that human beings are very hard to reason with if they let their emotions guide them.

This is often the case for myself when dealing with people I love, for instance, and I find myself behaving in a way that I'm not proud of - which is why I always try my best to separate my emotions when discussing whatever topic.

I think we disagree on the semantics here then, I don't think of laws and rules as things that guide my conduct, I think of them as things that stipulate the scope of my conduct if I am to obey the laws.

Well, the difference between principles and laws in this case would be that the upholding of principles isn't enforced by any external power. But other than that, yes, I think we disagree on what they mean to people. Whether that's a semantic issue or not, I can't say.

I think that's less an issue with having a set of principles and more an issue with people believing that their principles are a set of moral absolutes handed down by a power greater than themselves. A more frequent issue when people adopt principles from others rather than developing them themselves.

Now I'm starting to see how we might disagree on semantics. For something to be a principle in the first place, it IS an absolute. I don't think people necessarily see them as being handed down by a power greater than themselves, and in fact I'm sceptical that's even the norm.

But it's for sure that many adopt their principles from others - and if you view, say, parents as a "power greater than oneself" then I guess we can agree there. It's just a term I would apply in a religious context more than anything else.

I do, I just find it odd that your reaction to some people being dogmatic in adherence to inflexible principles is to view having principles at all as a negative.

I've never stated having principles is negative. I've just said that I try to avoid having them, or too many of them. It's because I find it a very human tendency to adhere strictly to what I consider fundamental self-induced laws. That's what principles are to me - and I think it's pretty close to the official definition as well.

So, I've been guilty of this myself.

People who can have these laws for themselves, and ignore them at will, probably shouldn't worry about it. But in that case, I think it's a semantic issue and in reality it's not the kind of principles I'm talking about.

Where did I say I was neutral about piracy? And why does a lack of neutrality mean a lack of objectivity, presumably you're not neutral about e.g. rape but could still be perfectly objective in that non-neutral stance?

I'm not talking about intellectual objectivity or neutrality. I'm talking about emotional objectivity. Now, you haven't said that you're emotionally neutral - nor would I ever expect that of you.

I'm simply sensing that your emotional investment is too strong for us to have a fruitful debate. Maybe that's unfair of me, but when people constantly add "shit" and "bullshit" when referring to the opinions of others - then my interest in pursuing a serious debate wanes. Sorry about that.

It probably is going nowhere and we should move on, but before we do - please can you make some arguments as to why I shouldn't be very negative about the vast majority of piracy? I promise to really try and be objective, even if that doesn't mean I agree with your arguments.

I would never impose on your opinions like that. It's none of my business how you feel about it.

I'm simply saying that if you want to have this debate with me, you're going to have to appear reasonably emotionally neutral. Not necessarily a fair request, but there it is.

[Benedict]

Now I'm starting to see how we might disagree on semantics. For something to be a principle in the first place, it IS an absolute.


Then we definitely disagree, I view at least my principles as the end result of asking myself "what do I (currently) feel is the right thing to do on this issue" rather than absolutes. Changeable by new information & persuasive debate from others, and always subject to compromise where they conflict with other principles.


But it's for sure that many adopt their principles from others - and if you view, say, parents as a "power greater than oneself" then I guess we can agree there. It's just a term I would apply in a religious context more than anything else.


Parents, general social consensus, peer group acceptance etc I agree "greater power" has religious overtones but I think it all ties into the same bit of the brain.


I'm simply sensing that your emotional investment is too strong for us to have a fruitful debate. Maybe that's unfair of me, but when people constantly add "shit" and "bullshit" when referring to the opinions of others - then my interest in pursuing a serious debate wanes.


:lol: I think you're probably more sensitive to magic words than I am, I greatly dislike pirates but don't really view the s word as being remotely emotionally charged.

[DArtagnan]

Then we definitely disagree, I view at least my principles as the end result of asking myself "what do I (currently) feel is the right thing to do on this issue" rather than absolutes. Changeable by new information & persuasive debate from others, and always subject to compromise where they conflict with other principles.

Yup - I agree to disagree ;)

Parents, general social consensus, peer group acceptance etc I agree "greater power" has religious overtones but I think it all ties into the same bit of the brain.

It's hard for me to say, because I'm lacking that particular bit of brain. As in, I've never encountered a person or being I recognised as being a greater power.

:lol: I think you're probably more sensitive to magic words than I am, I greatly dislike pirates but don't really view the s word as being remotely emotionally charged.

That's possible.

But it's interesting that you've - so far - only used these words in direct connection with pirates or the act of piracy. I think the reason for my reaction is that you seem very neutral and calm everywhere else.

If these words are in no way emotionally charged, one might have expected them to be used in other instances.

Just a thought.

[Benedict]

But it's interesting that you've - so far - only used these words in direct connection with pirates or the act of piracy. I think the reason for my reaction is that you seem very neutral and calm everywhere else.

If these words are in no way emotionally charged, one might have expected them to be used in other instances.

Just a thought.


Not quite sure where else I'd be using them here (and I do most certainly use them elsewhere), that's pretty well all we're talking about! Short of calling you or your arguments shit of course, but firstly that wouldn't reflect what I think and secondly whatever the emotional charge words hold for me when using them in the abstract, using them about someone else directly has to be more sensitive to the emotional charges they could potentially attach to those words.

[DArtagnan]

Not quite sure where else I'd be using them here (and I do most certainly use them elsewhere), that's pretty well all we're talking about! Short of calling you or your arguments shit of course, but firstly that wouldn't reflect what I think and secondly whatever the emotional charge words hold for me when using them in the abstract, using them about someone else directly has to be more sensitive to the emotional charges they could potentially attach to those words.

I gotta ask, though.

You say you dislike pirates.

Does this mean you actually dislike everyone who pirates?

[Benedict]

I gotta ask, though.

You say you dislike pirates.

Does this mean you actually dislike everyone who pirates?

:lol:

It means that I think less of those my friends who do pirate as a result of their piracy.

[zakhal]

I regularly pay for movie tickets without really knowing ahead of time that I'll enjoy the film. Am I weird?

I usually read multiple game reviews and user reviews on multiplace places before buying any game. Its too hard for many people though so they must resort to pirating.

[booboo]

Because Atari owns the rights to NWN2, and I'm fairly certain the terms of service of the toolkit include clauses that forbid you from selling your mods independently.

Now, if NWN2 was an OSS game engine...

Ah well, bad luck for them. Hopefully they will put this behind them and develop a fully fledged game using an engine/framework which does not make them beholden to the devil ;) Atari really needs a boot up the behind - I resent the fact they publish so many of the games I want to buy - damn them!

[blatantninja]

I'm not too concerned with what rights you think I have.

From a legal perspective you should be concerned with what rights others think you have.

[DArtagnan]

From a legal perspective you should be concerned with what rights others think you have.

You might be right, but it still doesn't really concern me.