If a game's copy protection has the effect of making my ownership temporary, ie limited installs/activations and the like, then it is effectively a rental, not a purchase. In that case, I will pay exactly what I would pay to rent a game, and nothing more.
I have to, reluctantly, somewhat agree to that remark.
psychoak, you can, and encouraged to, call or Email the tech support under these circumstances. This will set you back a bit, true, but I believe it's worth it for the company that wants to limit you from installing on million computers.
Frogboy, psychoak's comment repeats the same exact iteration people are constantly posting on threads like this in general, and in this thread, specifically (with an added bonus of swears
). Yes, it sucks, but I still believe it's the company's right to protect their IP any way they can, especially if the outcome doesn't require you to use a CD in drive to play. Not every company shares your model of business, man. You have to respect that as well. And no, I'm just a gamer, not a developer.
I fail to understand how the mini expansion packs have any relevance to this thread, though.
MegaVolt, who's me to tell you? I'm nobody, but then again, I'm not the one that tells you anything, since it's not my call, it's the company's. You know, the guys who made the thing, and want to be paid for it without you abusing their IP? They're telling you. All I'm saying is to try to understand them as well. I regard Stardock as the future and the solution to piracy, but like I said, sometimes this business model just doesn't work, and in that case, I sure as hell prefer an alternative that allows me to play without having the CD in drive, and if they limit the amount of times I can install their game for it, so be it, it's their call and I can live with that.