I've been playing Warhammer Online since it launched about two weeks ago and I'm thoroughly enjoying life as a squig herder. Might jump over to The Order on another server though. That Dwarf engineer looks like fun, too.

Right now my greenskin is a bit short on in-game cash to buy gear, but it looks like I'll have to make do. That's because WO developer Mythic is aggressively targeting gold sellers. In fact, Mythic co-founder Mark Jacobs recently wrote, “I HATE GOLD SELLERS WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY BEING.”

Decaf, Mark...

Over at Gigaom, Wagner James Au argues that Mythic's approach doesn't make much sense:

When launching a big-budget online game, it doesn’t strike me as a very good idea to risk alienating nearly a quarter of your user base right out the gate. That, however, is likely to be the consequence of an extreme anti-gold selling policy at Mythic Entertainment...

 

In a study by Nick Yee, a PARC research scientist... 22 percent of players surveyed reported purchasing game gold, with those ages 35 and over most likely to do so... let’s face it: If you have kids and a mortgage, you only have so many hours a week left over to play games.

 

So if Mythic succeeds in driving away gold sellers, it seems inevitable that it will succeed in hurting Warhammer Online’s retention, too. For surely players who like to buy their way out of difficult quests but no longer can are likely to get frustrated and leave for another game.

GP: I've fessed up in the past to buying WoW gold, which led to the most hate mail I've ever gotten. In my case, though, it's pretty much what Nick Yee found in his research. Kids + mortgage + job = less time to play.

Larry Probst, Chairman of the Board of Electronic Arts, has been named the new Chairman of the United States Olympic Committe, according to the Colorado Springs Gazette.

Probst succeeds former Major League Baseball commissioner Peter Ueberroth in the post and will likely lead efforts to bring the 2016 games to Chicago.

A press release on the USOC website offers reaction from the 58-year-old Probst:

I am honored to have the opportunity to serve an organization and a movement that makes such a significant difference in our world today. This is a movement built upon the spirit and dedication of athletes, and the selfless commitment of volunteers. By working closely with my fellow Board members, the USOC staff and the greater Olympic family in our country, my goal as Chairman is to preserve and strengthen opportunities for all those who wish to participate in this important endeavor.

With EA out of the picture, Take-Two has apparently decided to go it alone.

That word comes by way of a press release issued today by the Grand Theft Auto publisher. Citing "detailed discussions with various interested parties over the last five months," T2 has concluded that stockholders will be best served by the company staying its course.

Chairman Strauss Zelnick is quoted in the press release:

Take-Two’s Board of Directors and management have a clear mandate from stockholders to maximize value. We are strongly positioned creatively, financially and competitively to benefit from the opportunities we see in the fastest growing segment of the entertainment industry.

CEO Ben Feder invoked the success of GTA franchise and cited the rest of T2's catalogue:

Take-Two’s recent performance demonstrates our potential to create value for the long term. We have delivered solid financial results and expanded our portfolio of leading titles, which includes the powerful Grand Theft Auto franchise, as well as 15 other wholly owned brands with sales of more than one million units each.

Yesterday GamePolitics reported on troubling e-mails between representatives of the NFL players' union (NFLPA) and EA Sports which seemed to indicate that retired NFL players depicted in Madden's classic teams were not well represented by the NFLPA and its licensing arm, Players, Inc (PI).

The e-mails are contained in court documents from Parrish, Adderley, Roberts, et al vs NFLPA, a class action suit scheduled to begin on October 20 in federal court in San Francisco. A reading of the e-mails appears to indicate:

• some retired players received far less than their market value to appear in Madden
• some retired players had details such as name and number "scrambled" so they would not be compensated
• Take-Two's competing football game prospects were damaged by the NFLPA's deal with EA

Before going further, it is important to note a couple of points:

1. Electronic Arts is not a defendant in the lawsuit, nor is any wrongdoing alleged by EA. The company paid its licensing money to the NFLPA. The plaintiffs, retired NFL players, take issue with the distribution of those funds by the NFLPA.
2. Madden is not the only licensed product at issue, although it is by far the most lucrative. Others mentioned include such items as Topps football cards. Much of the case, however, revolves around Madden.

To recap the smoking gun e-mails, we'll start with former PI exec LaShun Lawson's e-mail to Madden producer Jeremy Strauser:

For all retired players that are not listed... their identity must be altered so that it cannot be recognized... Hence, any and all players not listed... cannot be represented in Madden 2002 with the number that player actually wore, and must be scrambled.

An e-mail from PI exec Clay Walker touches on how Take-Two lost out in the deal. This would appear to refer to 2K Sports' failed All-Pro Football 2K8:

Take Two... went after retired players to create an “NFL” style video game after we gave the exclusive to EA. I was able to forge this deal with [the Pro Football Hall of Fame] that provides them with $400K per year (which is significantly below market rate) in exchange for the HOF player rights. EA owes me a huge favor because that threat was enough to persuade Take Two to back off its plans, leaving EA as the only professional football videogame manufacturer out there.

GP: We promised the document. Get it here.

Although Electronic Arts isn't a defendant in Parrish, Adderley et al vs NFL Players, Inc., the megabucks generated by its Madden NFL series are at the center of the legal dispute.

The case, which will go to trial next month in San Francisco, alleges that the National Football League Players Association and its marketing wing, Players, Inc., prevented retired players from earning their fair share of licensing revenue. Money generated by EA's enormously popular Madden NFL series is the primary bone of contention.

According to former Buffalo Bills safety Jeff Nixon, newly-uncovered documents in the suit reveal that EA Sports obscured identifying information of retired players to skirt licensing payments. Nixon writes:

The documents... make it is crystal clear that the NFLPA conspired with EA to “scramble” the images of retired players in their Madden NFL Video Games...

 

The Class Action lawyers have more than a smoking gun to prove this; they have the person shooting the gun in the form of a letter fired off by former Players Inc. Vice President of Multimedia LaShun Lawson, to Madden NFL Game producer Jeremy Strauser that was cc’d to Doug Allen, then President of Players Inc. In the letter LaShun says:

 

“For all retired players that are not listed... their identity must be altered so that it cannot be recognized. Regarding paragraph 2 of the License Agreement between Electronic Arts and Players Inc, a player’s identity is defined as his name, likeness (including without limitation, number), picture, photograph, voice, facsimile signature and/or biographical information. Hence, any and all players not listed... cannot be represented in Madden 2002 with the number that player actually wore, and must be scrambled."

 

In the 2007 version of Madden NFL alone, more than 600 retired players... had their images scrambled. They are not identified in the game by their names and numbers, but the game lists their exact weight, height, years in the league, and position they played...

 

When a substantial competitor to EA [Take-Two] began to emerge for use of retired players, EA and Defendants rushed to enter into a contract locking up the most valuable retired players’ rights in exchange for payments that were admittedly below market. PI’s Senior Vice-President, Clay Walker, admitted as much in the following email:

 

“Take Two [the EA competitor] went after retired players to create an “NFL” style video game after we gave the exclusive to EA. I was able to forge this deal with [the Pro Football Hall of Fame] that provides them with $400K per year (which is significantly below market rate) in exchange for the HOF player rights. EA owes me a huge favor because that threat was enough to persuade Take Two to back off its plans, leaving EA as the only professional football videogame manufacturer out there.”

NFL retirees who are seeking a bigger slice of the pie from licensing deals such as the one involving the Madden NFL video game series have appealed to the man himself.

In Parrish, Adderley et al vs NFL Players, Inc., a class action lawsuit scheduled for trial in U.S. District Court in California in October, the former players claim that they have not gotten their fare share of revenues despite being depicted as members of some classic teams in Madden. The retired players are suing NFL Players, Inc., the licensing arm of the players union, the NFLPA.

Jeff Nixon, 51, who played free safety for the Buffalo Bills from 1979-1984 is tracking the lawsuit on his blog. Nixon has penned an open letter to John Madden, calling for the football announcer and former NFL coach to support the retired players:

You are... the face and name behind the wildly popular EA Sports Video Game - Madden NFL... will you sit back and let the NFLPA and EA Sports continue to take advantage of our Hall of Fame players?

 

...Evidence in the Retired Players Class Action suit demonstrates that the NFLPA and Players Inc. were working against the interests of the retired players and in favor of your boss EA Sports. For example, this internal email from NFLPA Executive Clay Walker, confirms that Players Inc. negotiated a deal with EA on behalf of retired Hall of Fame players which was significantly below market rate:

 

“I was able to forge this deal with the HOF that provides them with 400K per year (which is significantly below market rate) in exchange for the HOF player rights. EA owes me a huge favor because of that threat was enough to persuade Take Two to back off its plans, leaving EA as the only professional football videogame manufacturer out there.”

 

...Instead of negotiating the best possible deal for the retired players which it purported to represent, the NFLPA and Players Inc. were doing favors for EA by reducing compensation to retired players, and driving a competitive licensee [Take-Two's NFL2K series] out of the market...

 

And in this February 22, 2007 email from NFLPA Executive Clay Walker to Players Inc. in-house attorney Joe Nahra, the naked truth is exposed to the world:

 

“...The per player price for most of these guys was tens of thousands of dollars less than what they were guaranteed by Take Two Interactive so it’s a real coup that we were able to pull this off so cheaply. You have to remember that EA’s total cost is only $200,000 per year. We know that Take Two offered six figure deals to several former NFL players so the total cost is millions below market prices..."

 

John, these are your fellow Hall of Fame Players they are talking about! Are you going to let them get away with this? I know that EA is your employer, but come on...

 

GP: We're working on obtaining additional documents in the suit. The information concerning the elimination of Take-Two Interactive's NFL2K series is fascinating, to say the least. That's a topic about which GP has railed for some time.

While some game consumers are outraged over Spore's controversial DRM scheme, others - many others - are snapping the game up at retail.

As reported by gamesindustry.biz, variants of Will Wright's evolve-and-conquer game occupy three of the top four spots among PC titles for the week ended September 13th.

1. Spore
2. Spore Galactic Edition
3. The Sims 2 Apartment Life
4. Spore Creature Creator
5. World Of Warcraft: Battle Chest
6. The Sims 2 Double Deluxe
7. World Of Warcraft
8. World Of Warcraft: Burning Crusade
9. Warcraft III Battle Chest
10. Crysis
 

Despite making a recent concession to consumers, the Spore DRM saga doesn't seem likely to stop vexing publisher Electronic Arts any time soon.

In the latest development, Courthouse News Service reports that a class action lawsuit has been filed in U.S. District Court. From the CNS story:

Electronic Arts, a leading maker of computer games, defrauds consumers through its "Spore" game, which "completely wipes their hard drive" and replaces it with an undisclosed program that prevents the computer from operating under some circumstances and disrupts hardware operations, a class action claims in Federal Court. 

 

The class claims that "Spore," a virtual reality simulation game, contains "a second, undisclosed program" called SecuROM, a "form of Digital Rights Management (DRM) for computer games."

 

Consumers are not warned about the program, which is installed without notice and cannot be uninstalled, even if the uninstall Spore, the complaint states. The secret SecuROM program is "secretly installed to the command and control center of the computer (Ring 0, or the Kernel), and surreptitiously operated, overseeing function and operation on the computer, preventing the computer from operating under certain circumstances and/or disrupting hardware operations," the complaint states.

Copy of the lawsuit here.

GP: Thanks to GP reader nighstalker160 for tipping us to this one via Shoutbox.

Electronic Arts has issued an apology to customers over the controversial DRM in Will Wright's long-awaited Spore.

As reported by the Los Angeles Times, EA is also relaxing Spore's extra-tight copy controls. EA exec Frank Gibeau said:

We've received complaints from a lot of customers who we recognize and respect. We need to adapt our policy to accommodate our legitimate consumers...

 

We assumed that consumers understand piracy is a huge problem. We have found that 75% of our consumers install and play any particular game on only one machine, and less than 1% ever try to play on more than three different machines.

As part of its reversal of course on Spore DRM, EA is boosting the install limit to five computers. Commenting on EA's decision, IDC analyst Billy Pidgeon told the Times:

The key to making copyright restrictions work is to offer value. In the end, this will blow over because Spore is a fun game, and people will want to try it.

CBS News correspondent Daniel Sieberg interviews Will Wright about Spore. It's a DRM-free conversation and the second installment of this week's three-parter, The Games Our Children Play.

Catch part one, detailing the landmark Teens, Video Games & Civics report issued by the Pew Internet & American Life Project here.

With the controversy surrounding Spore's DRM reaching a fever pitch, Edge Online Editor Colin Campbell argues for calm and disputes some of the current theories about the relationship between DRM and piracy:

The anti-DRM crowd. They have a point, but then it gets lost by mob-insanity... They get mad about EA only offering three installs for Spore. I don't know many people who install games on three computers, but I dare say it's a few. EA says 1%. OK. That's a significant number of people, all in all. They ought to be offered some more options...

 

I agree that the DRM solutions currently in use are often frustrating and damage publishers. They need to be improved. Customers need to be heard. Action needs to be taken. EA needs to address these issues one by one.

But there's also a nasty sort of relativism going on here, that is weakening the position of those protestors who have a genuine grievance... And this mob-pandering argument that DRM encourages piracy? Please. What encourages piracy is dishonesty. Either you're the sort of cheap f**k who wants something for nothing, or you're not.
 

GP: For my money, Edge Online is among the top tier of video game news sites, but I can't get behind Colin on this one. In regard to the issue regarding the number of installs, here's a snippet of something I wrote this week for the Philadelphia Inquirer about my own gaming experience:

If you change PC’s or you are the type who keeps games for a long time and re-installs them periodically, you could be in for trouble. For example, I’m still playing EA’s Battlefield 1942 five years after release. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve deleted and reinstalled the game.

In his GameDaily column, Entertainment Consumers Association president Hal Halpin labels the Spore DRM situation a "travesty" and blames the mess for prompting otherwise upstanding gamers to learn piracy work-arounds.

After all, legit owners get just three installs of Spore. Pirates? Unlimited.

Legit users can only have one account per copy. Pirates? Just make more copies, as many as they need.

Hal writes:

One of the year's most highly-anticipated titles, Spore... may prove to be more notable for the fact that it marks the first time a major publisher defied the wishes of its own customers... The damage is done and the delay in responding has been significant.

 

The debate here isn't, assuredly, about piracy. This DRM did nothing to combat the cracking of the game. In fact, it essentially helped in training legions of customers how to become pirates and legitimized their rationalization in the process. With each additional negative story – which seem to be released hourly – you can almost hear the collective cringing of anti-piracy executives who know that they have all been forced to take a giant leap backwards due to this fiasco...

 

Here's hoping that EA does the right thing and makes amends with their customers before it gets much worse.

FULL DISCLOSURE DEPT: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics.

Following the collapse of a proposed merger between Electronic Arts and Take-Two Interactive, GamePolitics wondered aloud yesterday whether Take-Two might be the second coming of Yahoo. That is, a company which should have accepted a reasonable acquisition offer and saw stockholder equity plummet following its rejection.

Analyst Doug Creutz (left) of Cowen and Co. thinks not. Here's what he told GP when asked if T2 was following in Yahoo's ill-considered footsteps:

I’d say no. YHOO [Yahoo] is clearly a company in decline, with an entrenched management. TTWO [Take-Two] is a company with arguably improving business fundamentals and a management team that I believe was willing to deal at the right price. I also think that MSFT [Microsoft] shareholders were not excited by the prospect of a YHOO acquisition whereas most ERTS [Electronic Arts] shareholders wanted the TTWO deal to happen at a reasonable price.

Nor did Creutz believe that T2 Chairman Strauss Zelnick was in jeopardy in the wake of EA's withdrawal from negotiations:

I don’t think so. Any shareholders who wanted to get out of the stock at $26 (EA’s best offer) had ample opportunity. Anyone who was holding out for a higher price feels the same way as Zelnick – no deal at $26. As long as the business turnaround continues then I think Zelnick is safe.

In failing to accept EA's buyout offer, has Take-Two become the new Yahoo?

Is Strauss Zelnick's position as chairman in jeopardy?

Readers may recall that Yahoo spurned a series of acquisition offers by Microsoft over a five month period earlier this year. If that sounds familiar, Take-Two spurned several EA tender offers over roughly the same time frame.

Microsoft's' interest in Yahoo drove the search firm's stock higher, to the 30 range; Yahoo ultimately stunned Wall Street by refusing MS' 33 per share bid. EA's interest in T2 did the same, pushing TTWO at times into the 26+ range. EA's 25.74 offer remained on the table for months, ridiculed by T2 as undervaluing the GTA publisher.

When MS became frustrated and pulled out, Yahoo stock tanked. Today it wil open at 18.27. On Sunday's news that EA was bailing, T2 plunged 5 points yesterday. Admittedly, some of that might have been helped along by the most brutal day on Wall Street since the 9/11 aftermath.

So why would Zelnick's job be on the line?

It probably isn't - yet. But T2 investors who saw the value of  their shares jump nearly ten points on EA's offer have now given all of those paper profits back with EA's withdrawal. The stock is back where it started. Moreover, a sweetheart deal that would have enriched Zelnick and his management team in the event of an acquisition never sat well with EA. It actually caused EA to lower its tender offer by about 1/4 point and caused bad blood between EA and T2 execs from the get-go.

Now that EA is gone, Zelnick faces some challenges. GTA IV profits are slowing. The Houser brothers will become free agents in February. If they walk, T2 becomes less of a company than it is now. If they stay, T2 will have to pay them a bigger slice of the profits.

We asked Wedbush-Morgan analyst Michael Pachter whether Zelnick might be in jeopardy. His thoughts:

Jeopardy is a strong word. I think that shareholders may be upset that he didn't accept the $26 offer when he had it in hand.  He has some time to demonstrate that there are other interested parties; if he can produce them, I don't think he is in trouble at all.  If he can't, I think that the number of unhappy shareholders will increase.

Financial website The Motley Fool does not see T2 as the new Yahoo, however:

This isn't Microhoo revisited. Take-Two's fundamentals have actually improved since EA went public with its unsolicited offer for Take-Two at $25.74 a share. Grand Theft Auto IV broke records. The BioShock franchise has a sequel on the way, as well as Pirates of the Caribbean director Gore Verbinski on board to give the property the Hollywood theatrical treatment.

 

This is why I believe that Take-Two will bounce back from this a lot quicker than Yahoo! did after its prolonged courtship with Microsoft came up empty... Take-Two shareholders can't blame executives, because those investors perpetually turned down EA's tender offers. The company can also point to its improving fundamentals.

Frustrated by Spore's egregious DRM scheme? 

Evolve a protest creature.

GameCulture reports that Spore owners are using the game's extensive content creation tools to speak out against the DRM and offers a half-dozen screenshots to prove it.

gamesindustry.biz reports that the uncertain status of GTA masterminds Sam and Dan Houser (left) may have played a key role in sinking an EA-T2 merger. The brothers' current contract with Take-Two expires in February.

Moreover, as GP has alluded to in the past, chemistry was lacking between EA and T2 execs. Along that line, gamesindustry.biz reports comments by analyst Doug Creutz of Cowen and Co.:

We think EA's decision to walk was motivated by some combination of the following: a desire to appear fiscally responsible after several years of capital misallocation, concern about EA’s ability to retain the development talent at Rockstar, personality conflicts between the management teams of the two companies, and scepticism about Take-Two's multi-year release lineup.

 

The main question mark is the status of Rockstar’s key talent [i.e., Dan and Sam Houser], with their contract due to expire in February 2009.
 

Meanwhile, in a note issued this morning, Wedbush-Morgan analyst Michael Pachter foresees a bidding war for the Housers:

While neither [Houser brother] writes game code, we believe that they are analogous to the director of a Hollywood film, instrumental in determining the final shape of the ultimate games released. We expect a bidding war for the Housers’ services in February 2009, and remain convinced that Take-Two faces two equally unpalatable options: either lose the Housers to another bidder, or pay more to retain them...

 

Should the Housers depart to Activision, Ubisoft, or even to EA, we think that Take-Two will suffer lower future sales of its GTA games. We draw an analogy to EA’s Medal of Honor brand, which saw sales decline by over 40% following the departure of key members of its development teams in 2003. Those teams produced Activision’s Call of Duty franchise, which has consistently outsold Medal of Honor since the departure...

 

On the other hand, should the Housers remain at Take-Two, the price of making future Grand Theft Auto games will go up...

Nor does Pachter anticipate any other publishers stepping up to acquire T2 - again, it's the Houser factor:

We do not think that any offers will come in from third parties. The risk of losing key talent is too great, and the Housers’ contract is up for renewal in February. Should a third party (including EA) be interested in an acquisition, we think that the first step is to secure the services of the Housers. Thus, we do not expect competing offers to materialize until after February 2009, when the status of the Housers’ contract is better understood.

Reaction has been swift to yesterday's report that EA was giving up on its quest to acquire Grand Theft Auto publisher Take-Two Interactive.

As GP predicted yesterday, Reuters is now reporting Take-Two's stock price has plunged. Indeed, from Friday's close just under 22, as I write this the stock [TTWO] has dropped to 16.44. On the other hand, the market as a whole is experiencing a broad sell-off today as shockwaves from the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the purchase of Merrill-Lynch ripple through Wall Street. At the same time, EA [ERTS] stock is also down from Friday's closing price of 44.99.

Reuters quotes UBS analyst Benjamin Schacter on the EA-T2 situation:

While (Electronic Arts) will not reveal details about its exact reasons for walking, the fact that it did not make any offer after further due diligence will certainly raise some eyebrows.

 

In our view, Ubisoft could be a logical buyer, but a deal would not be easy. Traditional media companies as well as Asian video game publishers-operators might also be interested, but we don't believe that these players are likely to even match EA's prior offer given that none would have synergies in the sports genre.

Game publisher Electronic Arts, Xbox maker Microsoft and leading retailer GameStop are among 259 corporations that have been awarded perfect scores for their treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees, consumers and investors.

The announcement comes by way of advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign Foundation and is contained in its 2009 Corporate Equity Index. HRC Foundation President Joe Solmonese commented:

The 2009 Corporate Equality Index shows that corporate America understands that a diverse workforce is critical to remaining successful and competitive. In the absence of a federal law that prohibits workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, it is up to employers to take the lead and implement policies that ensure all their employees are protected.

Game-related companies which also received perfect scores include retailers Best Buy and Target; PC manufacturers Dell and HP; chip maker Intel; online auction site Ebay; and search companies Google and Yahoo. Also on the list, Apple, increasingly seeming like an up-and-coming game biz player.

GP: We've been beating on EA and Microsoft of late over a couple of (well-deserved) issues, but must give credit where it is due. Well done!

It's official - Grand Theft Auto V will not be released under the Electronic Arts brand.

EA has just issued a press release announcing that it has decided not to continue its lengthy pursuit of Take-Two Interactive.

The two sides have been talking, but those negotiations appear to have broken down. At this point it's unclear what made EA decide to give up its nearly seven-month long bid to acquire T2. From the EA release:

Electronic Arts... today announced that while EA continues to have a high regard for Take-Two's creative teams and products, after careful consideration, including a management presentation and review of other due diligence materials provided by Take-Two... EA has decided not to make a proposal to acquire Take-Two and has terminated discussions with Take-Two.

EA CEO John Riccitiello (right) commented:

EA is tracking toward a record breaking year. We're launching 15 new games including award-winners like SPORE, Dead Space and Mirror's Edge, great new titles from the Sims, new family titles with Hasbro, and the highest quality slate of EA SPORTS titles on this generation of consoles. We're also expanding beyond our core business with a series of direct-to-consumer launches including Warhammer Online.
 

UPDATE: Take-Two has issued a press release of its own, with chairman Strauss Zelnick (left) saying:

We remain focused on creating value for our stockholders and our consumers. This has been our goal since EA launched its conditional and unsolicited bid six months ago, a bid which was repeatedly rejected by our stockholders. As part of that commitment, we remain actively engaged in discussions with other parties in the context of our formal process to consider strategic alternatives. We're especially proud of the success we've enjoyed over the past eighteen months and we remain confident in our ability to generate value for stockholders.

GP: Expect T2 stock to take a big hit when the markets open in the morning. TTWO closed at 21.65 on Friday amid expectations that an EA-T2 deal would get done somewhere north of the 25.74 tender price that EA offered earlier. Prior to EA's expression of interest, T2 had been trading in the 17 range. With EA now out of the picture, T2 shares will likely be heading south.

Conspiracy theorists and grassy knoll types had a field day this afternoon as a couple of thousand customer reviews of Spore, mostly of the negative variety, suddenly disappeared from Amazon.com.

Some were quick to see EA's heavy hand in the missing reviews, but that was apparently not the case.

Earlier this week it was widely reported that angry gamers were slamming Spore with 1-star reviews due to the game's draconian copy protection scheme. Ironically, the game was cracked and posted online several days before its official release, meaning that legit buyers were the ones who suffered from the game's frustrating DRM.

Ars Technica, however, reports Amazon's explanation that the reviews were lost to a glitch of some sort and would be coming back online. Indeed, as this is being written, they appear to be back in place.