A:CM: I can't believe that any amount of chopping and changing or lack of communication could cause anyone to think the AI, plot and many other features were good. No matter what each person's vision was, they did not aim to make a terrible game. As suggested I think it was a case of things weren't getting done so they pushed it out the door so at least some people would buy it. The resulting bait-and-switch is unfortunate for those who saw the game demo.
Used games and etc.: Any reduction in functionality, use, rights, anything to do with a game that eventuates from changing from a single purchase, unlimited use model needs to be compensated for in price. If games that were previously bought once suddenly adopt subscription models, if games that used to be resellable become user-locked, if content that was previously included becomes segregated, the price needs to reflect that. And I'm not sure how much other people value being able to play a game whenever you want, or being able to recoup some of the costs once it is used, but the reduction would have to be dramatic for me to consider buying in.
And Chubby Checker has done more damage to his brand by suing H-P than they did themselves, because now people actually know who he is and the connection is being made obvious. That's Somebody's Law, whoever said they didn't want pictures taken of their house or something. I had no idea beforehand and even if I had heard about the app, which is also getting publicity, I wouldn't have made the connection because I didn't know who the bastard was.
EDIT: Oh look, 1234 posts.
