So the crux of your explanation is that simply ceasing to publish PC games creates bad press. - Edit 1
Before modification by lord-of-shadow at 20/02/2010 09:48:20 PM
Which simply is not true. There are tons of games that are released for consoles only. That does not generate bad press, especially not as much bad press as DRM does. It might generate a tad bit of bad press if a company simply stopped publishing any PC games, but it really wouldn't be that much. Especially if the company just stopped doing it, rather than making any sort of press announcement about the fact.
If a company's goal was to stop losing money on the PC market and simply publish console games, they can do that now. They don't need to destroy the PC market to do it. And it's certainly not the of causing bad press that's keeping them in the PC market.
Also, your logic is a little flawed. You claim that the fear of bad press is keeping them in the PC market. In other words, they are making decisions to avoid bad press. Second, you claim that in order to escape the PC market without causing bad press, they have decided to instead destroy the PC market in an insidious long-term conspiracy. Their chosen tool for doing this? DRM, which causes worse bad press than outright ceasing PC publication ever would.
In other words: in order to avoid causing a bit of bad press, they are going to take actions that cause a lot of bad press. Does not compute.
Unless, of course, you believe that stopping PC publishing would cause more bad press than DRM does. At which point your logic makes a bit more sense, although I'd argue that your information is incorrect and the logic fails to take into account a number of other factors.
If a company's goal was to stop losing money on the PC market and simply publish console games, they can do that now. They don't need to destroy the PC market to do it. And it's certainly not the of causing bad press that's keeping them in the PC market.
Also, your logic is a little flawed. You claim that the fear of bad press is keeping them in the PC market. In other words, they are making decisions to avoid bad press. Second, you claim that in order to escape the PC market without causing bad press, they have decided to instead destroy the PC market in an insidious long-term conspiracy. Their chosen tool for doing this? DRM, which causes worse bad press than outright ceasing PC publication ever would.
In other words: in order to avoid causing a bit of bad press, they are going to take actions that cause a lot of bad press. Does not compute.
Unless, of course, you believe that stopping PC publishing would cause more bad press than DRM does. At which point your logic makes a bit more sense, although I'd argue that your information is incorrect and the logic fails to take into account a number of other factors.