The trend of not checking the facts when you hear a rumour (DRM related)
Under today's Ubisoft DRM article some folks say they're not buying various games due to UbiDRM, including Driver: San Francisco.
I left a comment saying Driver has no stupid DRM. Someone replied with a link to an August article. That article quotes Ubisoft's PR, who says you only need to sign in at launch.
That left me a bit puzzled. I played the game just fine when uPlay was down two weeks ago.
So I unplugged my Internet cable... and I started the game. It works. I even started to play, just to make sure it won't get stuck in the menu.
Now, I admit that Ubisoft's DRM policy is confusing. Searching for some articles related to Driver I found some that interpreted the above statement as having to sign in only once, not every time you start the game. A bit more googling revealed forum posts which confirm that Driver and many other Ubisoft games work offline.
This got me thinking.
How come people are so anchored to the first thing they hear about something? In the case of UbiDRM, we see folks filling the comments section with angry messages about having to be online constantly (for unreleased games too). Ruse was released in September 2010, is a Steamworks game yet I've seen people that ignore it because of UbiDRM! In the case of Origin, some dumbass on the Escapist forums started unfounded rumours that people still believe now, 6 months later.
Or the SOPA thing. I've seen many people yesterday that criticised Wikipedia for shutting down because SOPA was shelved. But SOPA will be discussed again next month, it's just a delay. Why do I know this and others don't? Yeah, the first link when I search "SOPA shelved" thinks SOPA is dead, but the ones below know what's up.
I don't get it. I usually search for a bit more info before I post something. It's not like it takes more than 10-20 seconds to see if there are any updates on a certain matter.
What do you think?