Relshak

This user has not updated recently.

40 0 18 0
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Relshak's forum posts

#1 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 3 months, 5 days ago

I'm sorry if this isn't really a bug. I looked all over, and couldn't find a full list of forums, so I wasn't sure if there was a separate feature request board.

Anyway, the issue is that, on the old player, I could set a video to fullscreen on my second monitor and continue working on a primary monitor. Youtube has always allowed this, but the current player set to "Progressive" loses fullscreen when it loses focus.

Thanks, keep up the good work.

#2 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 4 months, 10 days ago

Get Well

Get Well Soon

We wish you to get well

#3 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 4 months, 11 days ago

@Vexxan said:

I feel sorry for the people who bought a WiiU for this game.

Those people should have waited until the game released to buy a WiiU

#4 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 5 months, 10 days ago

if it's yellow, let it mellow

if it's brown, let it mellow

#5 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 6 months, 23 days ago

I just bought a Wii (not WiiU)

See ya in 5 years, Nintendo!

#6 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 8 months, 27 days ago

i love boobieeeeeeees

#7 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 9 months, 13 days ago

I'm a poor prospective developer, and this seems fine to me. If you can't scrape together $100, you don't believe in your game and it shouldn't be on the internet.

#8 Edited by Relshak (40 posts) - 9 months, 13 days ago

@CosmicQueso said:

@Relshak said:

Even if the 93%-95% piracy rate is accurate to the number of players versus those who bought it, that absolutely does not equate 93%-95% loss of sales.

Blah. Blah. Blah. The fact is some percentage of those pirated copies are lost sales. And all of the pirated copies represent some opportunity cost of either pennies or $60.

And it doesn't matter if 95% is the rate or 50% or even 5%. Companies have a right to try to protect their shareholders. And when one way of trying to prevent loss doesn't work (like this DRM), then they have to try something else. They can't just throw their hands up and say "it's impossible to stop! We give up."

Nothing in my post implied that they shouldn't do DRM. The whole point of my post was 93-95% piracy is not the same as 93%-95% lost sales. You completely ignored most of my post.

DRM should stop casual piracy such as burning a copy for your weed buddy, or some guy just slapping the ISO on the web. When you try to stop hackers, you hurt your customers more than the pirates. A one-time activation is perfectly fine and I support it fully.

#9 Posted by Relshak (40 posts) - 9 months, 13 days ago

Even if the 93%-95% piracy rate is accurate to the number of players versus those who bought it, that absolutely does not equate 93%-95% loss of sales.

The fact is, there is no way of knowing how many sales are lost to piracy, because it's an impossible number to get. There are a few kinds of people who pirate.

A) Someone who wants to play everything, but doesn't want to pay for any of it. If this person HAD to buy the games, they'd play a small fraction of the games they do now. For them, it's easy to play something then drop it, whereas someone who paid money dollars will want to get more for their buck, and put more hours into each game.

B) The poor guy. Sometimes this person would be inclined to earn more money if they had to buy their games, but sometimes they simply can't. The people who can't or won't make enough money to consume their game requirement is not a lost customer.

C) The vigilante. This guy just hates DRM! GRRRRRRRR!!! I'm so mad, I'm gonna steal your game! (He's usually A or B, pretending to be C)

Anyway, my point is the number of people pirating versus the number of lost sales are extremely different numbers.

A lousy businessman sees all the potential dollars he's losing. A good businessman sees only the real dollars he's losing.