Calm down. No one is trying to offend you. This is a discussion about an unfeeling network of machines.
no you didn't. you made some stupid comment about being in a contract with a third party against your wishes. it ultimately makes no difference whatsoever, but the irrational steam hate will continue im sure.
Yes, he bought the game prior to Steam, thus with the understanding that it was unnecessary. Later they made it necessary. He did not agree to this when the monetary transaction transpired. That is a logical argument.
how is steam meant to be used for the MP infrastructure (plus patches etc) without having steam installed exactly?
Like Gamespy, I think he meant that MP accessibility should be optional based on one's agreement with the new EULA. Since the conditions of loading the game changed, he should at least be allowed to sacrifice MP access in order to install only the software he originally agreed to.
typical of what exactly, somebody that stopped wishing it was 1990 again? move with the times kids.
Many Steam users, at least the most verbal of them, respond as if they were personally insulted when Steam is criticized as a program. This has given said users a negative reputation.
it was either that, or lose MP and updating delivery.
Yes, that is what he is willing to trade.
i suggest GPG did the right thing by still providing those to its customers (not to mention you even got the 3603 update GPGnet users never got).
Some of us have all the patches we need archived and I have found patches from Steam independently available. It is nice that they offer an easy means of access, but some of us are willing to sacrifice that for various reasons.
you say you buy some stuff through steam, so you've already got it installed. so, using FAF for the MP service, what exactly is the problem?
I believe the cheap purchases were made expressly to make being forced to use Steam worth it to him. I do not think he would bother with said purchases otherwise.