Out of the Blue

It is with fascination that I read the extensive thread that's popped up as a result of the posting of the single-player Medal of Honor demo yesterday. Frans has already made a lengthy post explaining what we did and why we did it, so I won't go further into that, but I will say that I am sort of pleased to see the debate that centered around whether we were doing the right thing or not in this case, since we actually do exert a lot of effort here to try and avoid coloring outside the lines (which some feel posting this demo qualifies as), and it's reassuring to see so many of you feel this is an important effort to make (though we certainly are a bit surprised at some of the motives that have been attributed to us here considering the efforts we take in this regard). Anyway, regardless of your opinions on this subject, your feedback is appreciated.

Link of the Day: Worthless word for the day. Thanks Zdim.
Bonus Link: The Massachusetts State Lottery Winning # for 12/31/01. Thanks MDG.
Wild Science: NASA satellite pair to tackle weighty task. Thanks Jamie Fullerton.

View : : :
17.
 
The question is...
Jan 2, 2002, 16:56
anon@207.217
17.
The question is... Jan 2, 2002, 16:56
Jan 2, 2002, 16:56
anon@207.217
 
Which one of the "effected" companies does 216.26 work for? I say this given that he's posted nothing but negative spin in regards to this issue in -every- thread that makes mention of it. All I'll say is that demos allow me to try a game before buying it. Those companies that choose not to release a demo (or charge for it, defeating the purpose of said "demo") get rewarded by me downloading it for free then loosing motivation to actually pay for the title. The ONLY reason I "warez" a game is to try before I buy. 31 flavors offers free samples, imagine if they wanted you to buy a magazine in order to try Jamocha Fudge (may or may not be a real flavor, you'll have to excuse me...I'm not an ice cream fan).
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@199.221
2.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.78
3.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
4.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@195.92
14.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
5.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
11.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
18.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
19.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
21.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
29.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
6.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
9.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
12.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
15.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
16.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
38.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@213.1
7.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
8.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@151.201
10.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
13.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
20.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@213.51
28.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
 17.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
The question is...
anon@207.217
22.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@213.105
23.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
24.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@128.205
25.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@64.218
27.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@64.218
26.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@165.121
30.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
31.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
32.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
33.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
34.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
35.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
36.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@198.182
37.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@204.201
39.
Jan 4, 2002Jan 4 2002
40.
Jan 4, 2002Jan 4 2002
41.
Jan 8, 2002Jan 8 2002