> > the difference is whether i would be at the mercy of a third party with no accountability everytime i want to play a C&C game. the difference would also be that if XWIS were able to force down updates which could contain malicious code which could harm my computer or be used for identity theft.
> As far I know both cases are technically possible in either situation.
> > the difference could also be whether we have some guy running a server out of his basement who has to suddenly shut down because his mom found his nude pictures of seven of nine
> > thanks, do you accept donations from people who like your service?
> Sure. See the PayPal button at http://xwis.net/xcl/.
> > > > i don't know XWIS so please don't take the following as an insult...
> > > > if XWIS team members attempt anything malicious or simply turn into jerks, what recourse will the players have?(not that we have any against the non-support of EA now)
> > > EA could switch back to WOL again I assume.
> > since when does EA take a proactive or even a reactive action against anyone?
> > if XWIS decided to be jerks, it's not likely EA will do anything about it for a very long time.
> What kind of solution would you like to see instead?
this is actually the best solution i've seen yet for the RTS games. i'd prefer to see BHS in charge of renegade though. i actually like the idea of a company giving some of this to fans. but there are of course still concerns since i, like many gamers, have seen a lot of jerks who just like to ruin a game for kicks. i'm sure many of us have even seen people who seem like upstanding citizens turn into cheaters/script kiddies/jerks/etc.
i've heard your name mentioned in the past when i was more active with ra2, but i don't know that much about you and nothing about XWIS.