That is completely not at all a reasonable assumption. There is no evidence to show that people complain, then buy the game. Looking at the basic figures doesn't even tell you if the same people complain are also the ones who buy.
Do we have evidence of this?
Neither do I. The worth of the game is irrelevant to my point. My point is a lot of people seem to be complaining bitterly about issues and then buying the game anyway.
As I said before, the evidence is largely anecdotal. But given the vocal complaints that are kinda hard to miss on the web coupled with the huge sales figures, I think it's a reasonable assumption.
Not that there is anything wrong if this is the case. As I say, the criticism of the game's DRM is separate to liking a game. People might buy a game because they want to play, but still rightly criticise the system put in place.
It's only a flawed argument if people say "I'm not going to buy this game" because of this, and then they go and buy it.
Which is, like your post, a straw man argument
Er, that was exactly my point with my first post in this thread. Mostly I just wanted to post this penny arcade comic.
Yes, there is a reasonable argument that one action is to call for a boycott.
My point is pretty simple. On one hand, people are angry. Whether that anger is justified or not is irrelevant. On the other hand Blizzard are seeing obscene amounts of money being thrown at them.
Companies are ultimately pretty simple entities. If an action is perceived to increase profits, they will continue to take that action regardless of whether that action is actually responsible for their profits or not. Until you stop giving them money, they will keep doing whatever they want.
But then you seem to be suggesting the very thing you then criticise people for - criticising that an alleged boycott ends up to fail, because people end up buying the game anyway. And in order to spread the word about the boycott, and the reasons for not buying, you have to spread the word - what you above criticised as "noise".
You're going to have lots of people who aren't aware of the system. You're going to have people who already bought it. You're going to have people who just disagree with the idea. Plus all the people who just don't care.
I think a boycott is a reasonable idea. I think it's difficult to succeed. And I think it's odd to criticise people criticising the game, because there hasn't been a boycott, when the only one arguing for it is you, and not them, and you even seem to think it's wrong to spread the word about why people shouldn't play. Should no one ever criticise Windows, because it's immensely successful?
Edited by mdwh, 01 June 2012 - 07:22 AM.