Icyedge said:
No, however you see it, this is not a concrete proof of anything. And I surely wouldnt trust you on this matter. But why are we arguing here? Im just waiting for concrete evidence before making a point of view, im all for it if you can give it to me. Im actually of the opinion that if they did remove the ability to play new game, the plaintiffs should appeal the case and Sony should pay some kind of damage to those affected. But like I said, it seems that either the judge missed the point, the plaintiff didnt build the case correctly, or you dont have to remove "other OS" in order to play the offline component of a non move game. Im open to real proof, just not different claims by different websites or persons. That being said, If a reputable poster known by me do try it, why not. Until then, the judge is more reputable. |
Don't be distracted by my post count... I'm dsister... over 11K posts on this site. You used to be on my friendlist iirc
