interview: advertisements coming to cs

[ghsty9fdsa]

Cs hasnt been the same, good ole fun game it was for awhile this will just add to the downward spiral. i dont wanna play cs:s noooooo

[mousiehamster]

Zips wrote..

Consider your "I AGREE" click to be a digital signature... Something that is, by law, a legally bound agreement between yourself and the other party. In this case, the other party is Valve. :) But hey, enjoy trying to fight a losing battle against an EULA.

That's not the point. Read my post! It is by no means a losing battle. The main barrier is litigation expenses, but that's an inherent flaw of the judicial system that applies to all cases anyway.



BTW zips... I see no reason for celebration regarding the ads. Valve is gaining a benefit @ our detriment. CS 1.6 is only a testing ground. Doug actually failed to include the other reason as to why ads were implemented to 1.6: because it is safe. If the response isn't favourable and we are talking about a drastic reduction of online players that they could keep that in mind and exclude ads from future products. There's no loss from pissing off the 1.6 people coz they've already bought the game. Future sales won't be affected by excluding ads, taking into account the response from the community. But if the situation is the contrary, which it conceivably will be (that is, a neither positive or negative response), then i am quite certain ads will be used in future products without any sort of benefit conferred to the consumer. Games will be equally as expensive as before; ads will become more intrusive as companies try to squeeze as much capital from ads and things will suck.



It was already bad enough when they started monopolizing the popular game mods, and i have suggested at the time that it was a sign of things to come. It is the reflection of a corporate philosophy concerned with short term, bottom line profits. It's just like the way an accountant runs a business - they're only concerned with short term annual growth and figures falling within projections. But this is an unintelligent and unsustainable approach that definitely needs evaluation.



Until the gaming demographic shifts to a more mature audience, this consumer eroding behavior will continue. But past that point, gamers will have less tolerance for bullshit. It is perhaps in their interest, for now, to gain a lead start in terms of consumer relations. The direction that companies like Stardocks, and to an extent, bioware, are taking is probably the way forward.



Unless, of course, the companies do not predict a demographic shift at all and gamers along the time line are just gullible, introverted, trashy teens.

[mouth]

Zips wrote..

Consider your "I AGREE" click to be a digital signature... Something that is, by law, a legally bound agreement between yourself and the other party. In this case, the other party is Valve. :) But hey, enjoy trying to fight a losing battle against an EULA.

How about i consider it to be a stupid dialogue box that has no way of actually verifying exactly who clicked on it? Because that's what it is. Stuff like PGP has digital signatures. EULAs have buttons that are as legally binding as the delete confirmation for my Windows recycle bin.



Although, there was that cute little fad a long time ago where a dialogue would pop up saying "You're a dick", and the "No" box would switch sides whenever you tried to click on it. We all thought it was cute, but your keen legal acumen has made me realize just what a close call that was for the rest of the world; thank god it didn't say "give me all your stuff", because a judge would've looked at that and said "Well, fuck. Did you click on the button? Because our legal system is not equipped to deal with the concept of buttons, so anything goes".



On top of that, let's consider the additional issue of unconscionable contracts too much for you to handle without someone explaining it to you via a press release.

[bearded clam]

Valve seam to forget that it is the guys who provide servers for us to play on and their passion for the game that is now providing steam with a large enough demographic to start making big bucks from advertising!



I don't mind Valve advertising thier games on Steam, which they already do, but I don't want to see a great big advert for a soft drink when I am trying to shoot someone in the ****!



If they do go down this route then shouldn't they give a percentage of this profit t the server provider? After all... it does cost money to keep a 20 man server runnning!