Dota doesn't have that problem because DoTA is protected by the tools that the parent has mentioned. Try opening a DoTA map and see if you can edit it, you can't. And I also disagree, the tools for compiling open source applications tend to also be open source (gcc). A script kiddie with basic knowledge of the programming language use can easily modify the game to include hacked weapons, distribute the game via a torrent, rapidshare, megaupload or other file sharing program. It will be a nightmare.

There's also the fact that most linux users that are likely to play games on their linux PCs are open-source fanboys that want everything for free and will not touch proprietary software.

i'm happy to play that too, thats wii sports. It came free with my purchase of Wii... the newer tennis ones also provide a new great accessory the motionplus thus making it worth the price. And it is also taken for granted that some games do not need a great story to work: Sports games, fighting games, simulation games (car, plane etc), even some FPS's (that break new grounds in graphics such as Crysis), most multiplayer focused games. However they all still need proper sound effects. I'd like to see someone release a AAA game with only midi music and see how it fares. There is also game play. If the players had to control the characters in tennis with their digital/analog buttons/controllers it would take a lot of the fun out of the game. Gameplay is important as well.

So because they are public servants, their children and wives are public servants as well?

Put it this way. Suppose you run a company and its networth is $200 million. Now lets suppose that out of that you have $100million to spend (the other $100 million is from non-cash assets like buildings). Now you can take that $100 million and deposit it to a bank that provides you 10% interest per annum. You can earn $1million a year simply from doing that. That method is virtually risk free (there is still risk but it is very small compared to the next scenario. Now lets say your company is a game developer. You can use that $100 million to pay employees, expenses (like electricity, advertising, etc) used to create and publish a game. Your plans are that the game will be finished within a year. But there are risks, the game could take longer to finish, the game may not sell as much as you hoped, etc. The projections are that you will also earn $1m for developing the game (Assuming all goes as planned). Now given that scenario, which path would you choose? Deposit it to the bank and earn $1m or take the risk and also earn $1m. It is rational in that scenario to choose to go the less risky way and deposit it in the bank. For it to be rational to choose to develop the game, it needs to return much more than $1million to take into account the risk. Now if you include complexities such as having to answer to investors the issue only gets more complicated. Why would an investor provide you funding to start a project that can return $1m when another can return $5m?

Go play them then but don't assume every one wants the same thing as you and don't live in the illusion that simplistic game play can cut it for the mass market today. When I was younger, tetris, pacman, mario, sonic etc. were all fun, very fun for me to play in fact. However, simplistic games can only go so far. Now for my serious money ($50+AUD) I expect a great story, excellent voice acting (this is actually very important, voice acting can ruin a game), sound effects and then also great game play and top notch graphics. Great gameplay alone doesn't cut it for me anymore. A game without a story isn't worth the time for me, a great story needs great dialog and a game with bad voice acting no matter how much it excels in other areas can be terrible. It's not like before where good gameplay alone is enough. Back then game developers only needed programmers and maybe a background musician. Now games need everything else and that means they need to hire not just programmers but also writers, actors, musicians (midi music doesn't cut it anymore). That increases the cost of the game, but it also provides jobs. Now it would be great if all game developers can make great games. However that's unrealistic. Just like everything that involves creativity, for every good work it is preceded by many bad works. It is experimentation and learning (take for example Too Human, they tried an innovative way to control the character - many found the controls bad, now many developers would know to steer clear of that control method or to improve it). Sure I will still play simplistic games, and will enjoy them. But those games better damn well be free (ie-Flash games) or cheap (iphone games -- less than $2AUD). But if the two types of games were mutually exclusive, I would prefer to have the big blockbuster games that breaks new ground (albeit expensive) rather than the cheap simplistic games (that are mostly a rehash of games already released). As for tie-ins and those kind of games, I personally don't enjoy them. But do I get pissed off that I think they are priced much more expensive than I think they should be? No, why? because I wouldn't buy them even if they were $5. But other people do enjoy them and do think they are worth the price they are being asked for (hence they buy them). Do I have the right to say that they should get rid of those games simply because I don't enjoy them? No I don't. And as for DRMs, if pirates didn't pirate there wouldn't be a need for them. Developers develop DRM because they have mouths to feed so more power to them.

Yes I do (like I said earlier I use Google as my primary search) you click the link it opens a page in another frame (or what seems like one) and embeds the video on that frame,and it doesn't always work with all types of videos; much more heavy weight than the thumbnail previews.

To each his own I guess. To me i'd rather get a short preview of the movie before I click on the actual thing rather than actually go to another page, stream the movie and find out its the wrong one. In any case even when using my Eeeepc the pages load right away and the previews start the moment i hover my mouse over the thumbnails. If those kind of things lag your computer so much maybe you should think about an upgrade.

I use bing to search for movie clips. When you put your mouse over the icons it gives you a preview of the clip along with the sound. Really useful as the previews load fast, it means you don't have to click on the thumbnails to see if it is what you are looking for. With text searches, I find its the same with google, sometimes google results aren't that good for me and I use bing, sometimes bing results arent good for me and I use google. But generally if im searching for text I'll use google as I am more familiar with it, but if im looking up videos I use bing.

To try and stop pirates.

The goal is to stop piracy look at the topic: "Ubisoft Working On a New Anti-Piracy Tool" key word: New Anti-Piracy Tool

People still pirate Star Craft even with the spawn installation option (they still pirate it now even though Star Craft can be bought very very cheaply). So no spawn features does not stop piracy. Which just proves my point that pirates will pirate no matter what.

I'd have to disagree with that, you only really need to type the key once during installation. When you buy a recharge card for a mobile phone, you also need to enter a series of long numbers, are the telcos treating you like a thief? Think of it like your bank account, when you access an ATM you need to use a pin, is the bank treating you like a thief? My son recently bought an economics book for his degree. At the back of the book there is a 25 digit key that he can use to access an 'online teaching aid' that he can use. Is the publisher treating him like a thief? Entering numbers(and/or characters) for verification is a given these days. As I said in my other post the anti piracy measures would not exist if there were no pirates in the first place. You can hardly blame them for trying to preserve their livelihood.

I don't think you get the gist of what I said. What I was trying to explain was that while there are legitimate buyers, most pirates are the ones who choose not to buy in the first place.Most of the people who pirate choose to pirate and thus would not be considered 'customers' (at the same time legitimate customers who need to make copy for their purposes are not 'pirates'). Thus investing in anti-piracy technology is still worth it, even though it will be cracked it becomes increasingly harder for the cracks to be implemented (for example while before pirating was a straight out burning of the cd, now they need to use specialized burning software, etc. To legitimate users these measures are annoyances, however they should blame the pirates for forcing the developers to implement this technology in the first place. If there were no pirates there would be no need for anti-piracy measures (pirates in this case are the non legit customers not the customers who legitimately purchased the products but need to make a copy). These technology will affect legitimate customers, but they are few and far between compared to the amount of pirates preferring to be handed freebies. Reducing the cost is not an option, it will lead to a price war that pirates will eventually end up winning because pirates will always be able to sell cheaper (they don't have to pay for the development cost, only the cost to copy: which is the price of a blank media). While we all would like to live in a world where all software is free, many people who work in the software industry paid lots of money to go to college/university to learn the skills they have. Most certainly did not do so, so that at the end of it they can make software to give out free. They have mouth(s) to feed and are in need of a roof over their heads. Pirating will ALWAYS be cheaper than buying legitimately, and pirates will always exist as a result. However it is in their best interest to minimize this pirates while maintaining the ability to make money.

Anti piracy technology does not treat customers like thieves. The people who pirate the games aren't buying from them so are not technically their customers. Albeit it might treat some customers like theives, those who like to create their own backups and run games from their hard-drives but those compose of a very small minority. Most of the people who create their own 'backups' and want to run from their hard-drives most probably got their copies from a warez site or a friend of theirs own a copy and they want one too. I highly doubt reducing the price would help. Say its 60, the 'customers' (although not really since they wouldn't be buying the game from them) will say its too expensive, why should I buy when a pirated one costs $2. They bring it to $40, $40 is still greater than $2, and they will still choose to pay the $2 still. Pretty much the only way to satisfy their customers is if they sell the game for the cost of a blank disk (ie give it away for free).