There Is Always a Reason Why Something is "Free"...

It was only last year that I was forced to abandon my trusted WinXP and upgrade to Win7. And I say forced because Microsoft made sure that key features of my OS was not working anymore, including security. So, Win7 was a brief yet not a bad altogether experience - if one disregards numerous lack of customization options and the palpable effort of Microsoft to make us abandon them as well, that is. Such as stopping our desktop widgets from working in order to promote the "brilliant" Win8 tiles! Nevertheless, I want to make clear that I am comparing Win10 to an extensive background on WinXP and an adequate experience with Win7.

ALL YOUR BASES ARE BELONG TO US
Two words: forced updates. I was lucky enough to have opted for the Professional edition of the Win7, so when I got to switch to Win10, I received the Professional edition as well - which comes with the option to defer (yet still not pick between or even cancel) the installation of the latest updates. The Home edition, however, does not give the user any such option and all updates are forced onto him. Remember how after numerous "essential" updates in the past, our PCs encountered a myriad or mysterious problems? Yeah, there is no more avoiding them anymore.

A PRIVACY NIGHTMARE

From the initial Logging in only with a Microsoft-confirmed eMail account to the Groove Music and the Movies & TV Players amassing info on your files and personal habits, Win10 are a private person's worst nightmare. In a sense, Win10 are the basis of the most intrusive and abusive DRM ever to be slipped in with a piece of software. There had been an uproar even since the pre-release builds and some deactivation options are available but they are far from thorough. And the question is this: how much can one trust a company that silently downloaded Win10 to every WinVISTA, Win7 and Win8 PC without the consent of their owners?

NO, IT IS NOT FASTER BY ANY MEANS!

Microsoft did not allow us to perform a clean install when upgrading from a previous Microsoft OS; however, using one's product Serial Number, it was possible to download the official image and burn it onto a disk (or transfer it to an empty USB). In preparation for the upgrade, I increased my system's RAM to 12GM and a few days after the initial update, I formated and did a clean install. Then I went on installing only software that was Win10 compatible. Keep this information in mind when I tell you that Win10 are SLOW. Slower than Win7 and definitely slower than WinXP! It takes forever to transfer files to and from a USB flash drive (a problem that started with Win7) and what is more aggravating, it takes forever to explore folders, especially those on my second HDD. Even if they were opened a few moments ago.

So, why is it not faster? Is it because of an increase in cosmetic additions and aesthetic customizations? No. Absolutely no.

ESSENTIAL CUSTOMIZATION OPTIONS ARE MISSING

The Windows interface and Menu options look worse than Win7. Aero Glass, for some unfathomable reason, is not available. The Windows borders are not customizable (for the first time since Win95!). Quick Launch can be made to appear with some Registry editing (I would advise Googling it - carefully) yet the icons now cannot be centered in the Toolbar and stay misaligned to the Task View button; the option of which icons and how to appear in the Taskbar is missing; whereas, this latest shinny OS refuses to learn that I do not like every shortcut to have a "Shortcut to" prefix to every shortcut I create - something Win98 had no problem learning after the third time I removed it on a new one.

There is a semi-official piece of software (no, I am not calling them Apps!) called Windows Ultimate Tweaker 4: it does offer a number of options, some of which very useful. However, one of the most important ones (specifically, which new templates and options to appear when right-clicking on the desktop) -you guessed it!- is missing. And do not get me started on the Start Menu!

WHY MESS WITH SOMETHING THAT WORKED FINE?

Win8 were a complete failure mainly because of their Start menu. We all loved the WinXP Start Menu, easy to use, a breeze to customize and backup when needed. Win7 improved on it, even if, quite counter-intuitively, one had to use libraries in order to add personal folders in the Start Menu. Yet, everything was at the right place. Well, not so much with Win10.

Power is now a button like any other, found between(!) All-Apps and Settings - and when pressed (remember that this will also be needed to be done at 2:00AM after 12 hours of working on a screen) one has to read and carefully select between the Shut Down or Restart options that appear. Every single time. With no confirmation dialog.

The installed software (All-Apps) are alphabetized easy to navigate - yet its folders do not respond to Right-clicking them. They are just dead.

The Tiles Panel, however, this is where they screwed up again: none of the tiles are customizable in other aspects than total size (resulting in beautiful icons looking ridiculous in all that empty background). Why can we not readjust the sizes of the contained icons? And yet they even failed to adjust the tile sizes correctly!

The Tiles Panel allows resizing but only in huge pre-set steps. We can also move and group the tiles. Some (but not all) tiles come in 4 sizes, others in 3 yet most in only 2 sizes. The step-wise increments of the Tile Panel create space for 6 small tiles in each group. Have less than 6 tiles in a group and the empty space is an ugly waste. Moreover, no tile under them can grow to fill the space of 6 small tiles, so, once again, more ugly wasted space.

Oh, and for some another mysterious reason, not all installed software can be pinned to the Tile Panel, even if they do appear in the All-Apps list! You have to hunt for them in your Program Files and find the executable.

COMPATIBILITY MODE IS STILL A JOKE

Drakensang: The Dark Eye is not an old game, barely 5-6 years old and it is supposed to be Win10 compatible. At least its expansion is, and that run fine. The original game, however, refused to run under any "compatibility mode". Does this thing finally do anything besides reducing the resolution, Microsoft? You know, running them under DirectX 9.0c or something?

ALL KNOWN BUGS ARE STILL THERE

The Recycle Bin still refuses to use its customized icons, just like with Win7. The Explorer folders are still unable to retain my Viewing preferences. And the Desktop still looses files (especially saved web-pages) one then has to hunt down with the Explorer (even if they are still in the Desktop folder).

Overall, not a failure of WinVISTA or Win8 proportions but nowhere near as good as WinXP or even Win7.

I am willing to accept this as a work in progress and give them 6 months to get their act together and patch things up.

Yet they should not think that they will get a free ride just because they claim to be giving it away for "free". Because it was not.

We had to exchange our perfectly working OS for it.

This goes to prove that, once more, there is no free lunch in this Universe.

The Devil In The Corporation

Even if I was a great fan of the original Diablo and D2, I was late in deciding to take on Diablo 3. It was a combination of factors, from the bad reviews the game kept getting, to the constant servers errors I kept hearing about and to me being too busy to take up such a time-eater. However, I came across it at a great discount and, on an impulse, decided to give it a try. Three weeks of (casual) gameplay later this is what I think.

DIABOLICALLY GORGEOUS

The game is beautiful to look at and a visual pleasure to play in. The environments are meticulously rendered and yet they loose none of their details when zoomed in or acted upon. Blowing up tree trunks or exploding bodies of enemies is both fun and physically accurate. Sure, some heads or pieces of wood can be seen to spin for too long, but that is part of the game's appeal, right? You are become Death, the destroyer of Worlds!

YOUR CHORD SOUNDS FAMILIAR

The sounds are better than the music but they are both quite well made. What I found strange was that, at least once, throughout Act I, the background music clearly reminded me of the main theme from Baldur's Gate. Let's chalk this one off as ...tribute.

GRINDING BUILDS CHARACTER

The bad news is that it builds exactly the same kind of character for everyone. There are no choices when leveling up. Everything eventually gets unlocked for you and you only get to choose what 4 skills to use and which runes to combine with each one. Your strength, dexterity, intelligence and vitality get automatically increased, depending on your class. No more making a tank out of a ranger I am afraid. And this is where the game looses a good chunk of its rating.

The fact that you get to have a sidekick that does practically little more than keep the mobs occupied until you dispense of them, does not help either.

CULTURAL PHOBIAS DO NOT A GOOD STORY MAKE

Yes, the story plot is infantile, disrespectful to the original games (I will refrain from spoiling it) and it offers very little help in immersing into the game world. It is unfortunate because, Blizzard has proved in the past that they can produce games with a very good back-story, such as Starcraft II.

However, this a game franchise that is heavily invested on the Judeo-Christian culture of the Devil. Just read the name on the box! So, taking away demonic pentagrams and most religious symbols (some crosses can still be found) fools no one. Because once you go down that road and then decide to backup, you should make sure not to step on yourself and trip. As in: if a golden-eyed Fallen Angel (Hello!) is helping you fight Diablo, are you sure who is the Devil and who is not?

LOOT. LOOT NEVER CHANGES

Well designed and clearly labeled items make all the difference in the world. I would love for Borderlands 2 items to have such a clear Damager-Per-Second (DPS) number to make comparisons easier. Pair this with an inventory that is big enough and free of the need to play item-Tetris in (all items take up either one or two vertical squares) and you have yourself almost loot haven. Almost because you still get too many unusable items, mostly because of class restrictions.

You can stash such items in your common stash to share with your other heroes (on the same BattleNet account) but make sure to find the necessary...700,000 gold to pay for all the extra stash space. Hint: use the Auction House while you still can.

The only thing I found missing is the ability to add sockets to magical items and enchant regular ones.

THE AUCTION HOUSE: BRILLIANT! (WHEN IT WORKS)

I am going to go against the current here but here it is: I found the Auction House a brilliant idea. Well designed and decently executed. I am going to be sad to see it go on March, as announced. I can only hope they change their mind before then.

In all honesty, I am currently a Demon Hunter at Nightmare difficulty. And I have heard the complaints that it is impossible to finish Inferno without Real-Money Auction House (which is clearly not how it is supposed to work) but up to Nightmare, using the Auction House is the only way to get enough money to be able to do the enhancements you want, craft or buy the items you covet and unlock the precious extra stash space you need.

CHAINS IN NEED OF BREAKING

I had to rate the game even lower because of the always-online requirement. Because it is indeed a hassle and a hindrance (just try pausing in town for longer than half and hour and see what happens). Yes, the game does offer some gameplay features (namely, the Auction-House) to compensate for the inconvenience but they all give way to anger and frustration whenever Blizzard's servers go down  and you are unable to play a Single-player game for days at a time(!). Take away the Auction-House, however, and the always-online requirement becomes a severe and now unjustified hindrance!

THE ORIGINAL SIN

No, D3 dips to an even lower rating for managing to be both short and boring at times. There, I said it. Yes, it is a well balanced eye-candie, with tons of loot, problematic character development yet the gameplay feels like at chore at times and it is over before you know it. I even found Act I (the one offered for free as a demo) to be better designed and longer than the rest.

It is like that old Woody Allen joke: two old ladies are complaining about their retirement home catering. "The food was awful, barely edible", "I know", her friend replied, "and such small portions!".

Sure, Rimms, Flash & Bling-Bling. But What Is Really At Work Under The Hood?

Need for Speed: Undercover is yet another EA release which, gameplay and graphics problems aside, suffers from the bundled DRM scheme: SecuROM with Limited Installations.

This is a well known scheme based on a custom-made augmented version of SecuROM 7+, used for over a year now (from BioShock to Mass Effect, Dead Space and Red Alert 3) and it has been proven to offer overall...zero protection from piracy. But, of course, fighting piracy was never amongst its aims.

SecuROM is not a Digital Rights Management system but rather a spyware subroutine that unavoidably comes bundled with most major game releases. It borrows into the Root of our systems, masking itself from the System Manager and refuses to be removed - even after one completely uninstalls the game it came with. SecuROM is indeed used as a cloaked dataminer, gathering information on the system and its user's activities and sending them to its mothership. It is the metho

d the industry's behemoths chose to pave the way for their coveted Pay-per-Play future.

Turning our own PCs into their...insatiable coiners is what the gaming executives are having wet dreams about. Games that we will have to keep paying for again and again.

And that is where the idea of Limited Activations comes ins: not only it nullifies the value of a game once bought, killing the second-hand market overnight, but it also familiarizes gamers to the idea of having to buy the same game over and over in order to keep playing it.

Need for Speed was a series I loved in the past and would love to keep playing in the future once the DRM idiocies get resolved. But not at this price.

Some people are indifferent to these issues - and I respect that. In a free market voting with one's wallet is the most effective expression of opinion - and everyone is free to cast his vote in whichever direction he seems fit. My experience though taught me that most gamers would like, at least, to make well informed decisions.

And who would not want its customers well informed?

Nothing Is Sacred Anymore...

The original Sacred was a great game that, although not exactly groundbreaking, it offered many hours of action-cRPG fun. What is more, its publisher had the good sense to price it reasonably from the start and thus fight piracy in the most effective way.

Sacred II, although enjoys more demanding environmental graphics and spell effects, is just another victim of clueless gaming industry executives. Instead of learning from the history of their own game, they'd rather idiotically jump on the "SecuROM/Limited Activations" bandwagon. After all, if they can hide behind the "everyone is doing it" excuse, who can blame them when the game does poorly?

They are obviously under the illusion that selling at full price a game that is actually rented will fail to be...noticed! Respect is a two way street - and underestimating gamers' intelligence is not a good start.

It is a shame that Sacred II got shot in the foot by its own publisher. Now, instead of being another success, it will simply be another game sacrificed on the alter of corporate Greed and marketing incompetency.

Avoid.

Gaming Is Still Crossing The Dark Mines of Moira

"One ring to rule them all, 

one ring to find them, 

one ring to bring them all 

and in the darkness bind them."

Well, it sure is more honest than the vapid..."Challenge Everything!"

Darkness still spreads on the land of gaming. The number of games that get ruined by the bundled DRM schemes keeps growing. Lord of the Rings:Conquest is just another edition. Burdened with SecuROM 7++, OnLine Activation requirement and Limited Installations it is bound to follow in the steps of Red Alert 3 and Spore: yet another expensive EA flop.

In the spirit of the Tolkien epic, EA is the Dark Lord Sauron that tries to watch everything from its tower of power. Greed in the heart, contempt in the nostrils, arrogance in the eye. Unfortunately for such entities (and contrary to board-meeting projections) not every gamer is either an Orc or a Troll. Some of us decided to take a stand. And fight back. And our numbers are growing.

No matter how many Nazguls EA releases this time around, in the end, the Ring of DRM rule will be cast in the burning heart of Mount Doom.

And the land of Gaming shall be free to dream again.

The Day Gaming Cried

Some time ago UbisSoft had to settle a huge class-action suit brought against the company for bundling (the notoriously harmful) StarFORCE DRM with its released games. So what the geniuses at the helm do next? They decide to make the same mistake yet again - by choosing the same DRM scheme that made BioShock, Mass Effect and Spore infamous: SecuROM 7.xx with Limited Activations!

Mass Effect (a great game in all other aspects) can be fouSpore not only undersold miserably but also made history as the boiling point of gamers lashing back, fed up with idiotic DRM schemes. And the clueless MBAs that run an art-form as any other commodity business decided that, "hey, why not jump into that mud-pond ourselves?"

nd in clearance bins only months after its release;

The original Far Cry was such a monumental game that any sequel of it would have to fight an uphill battle to surpass it (especially without its original developing team). Now imagine shooting this sequel on the foot with a well known, much hated and totally useless DRM scheme that turns it into another Rent-A-Game no one wants. Were I a UbiSoft stock-holder I would be ordering my broker to "Sell-Sell!-SELL!!" instead of posting this...

Ever since its 7.xx version, SecuROM has nothing to do with..."fighting piracy". All it does in this direction (blocking certain optical and virtual drives) is a very old, lame and already bypassed attempt that serves as a thin smoke-screen. SecuROM is, in fact, an intruding and silent Data-Miner and Root-Hijacker that is delivered by means of popular games.

That is why even the STEAM versions as well as the (free) Demos of such games are infected with it. SecuROM will borrow deep into our PC systems and will refuse to be removed completely even after uninstalling the game it came with. It will retain backdoor access and will keep reporting to its mothership.

Lately, these security concerns have been accentuated as known Trojans seem to be exploiting SecuROM's backdoor access for their own purposes. In effect, installing a SecuROM-infected game in our computer will be placing your hardware and data at risk long after having uninstalled the game.

And the latest vehicle to deliver this hazardous snoopware is Far Cry 2 - a game crippled by Limited Installations! No, thanks. I think I 'll pass this one too.

The only people who do not care about SecuROM are, in fact,...pirates! Because cracking games "protected" by this contraption apparently is very easy. Every single game that was supposedly "protected" by SecuROM was cracked hours withing its release!

To everyone else though, SecuROM (or StarFORCE or any other hazardous DRM scheme) is a core issue that needs to be resolved before PC gaming can evolve any further. And the best way to resolve such issues is market correction.

That is why it is important for gamers to keep voting with their wallets. And as with any vote, well informed decisions are paramount in making the right choice. 

The Latest OnLine DRM Fiasco

Einstein defined idiocy as doing the same thing over and over and yet expecting a different outcome. A definition I was reminded of after the latest Must-be-OnLine-to-play disaster. If there ever were an attempt to prove that there is, indeed, bad publicity,  the release of SimCity 2013 sure was it.

Mega-publishers are repeatedly trying to turn the beautiful artform of gaming into a utility, where "gaming content" will be streaming to your TV or PC or phone - and you will be charged by the second for it. Monopolistic issues aside for the moment, are they even remotely ready for such a model? It matter because their every attempt is (involuntarily!) financed by the customers they manage to scam in paying for games that do not deliver the gaming experience advertised. Paying for a product or a service that you do not receive because the seller planed it this way is the definition of a scam. So calling it an idiocy is in fact generous. 

Let's count the number of times the same idiocy was repeated, shall we? BioShock, Spore, Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell (or any UbiSoft game at this point), Command & Conquer IV (was that a stinker!), Diablo III, SimCity 2013 (and every single EA game requiring Origin). The list is long and it could go on.

The problem with gaming today is not the hard-working and creative people working in game studios but the executives at the top of game publishing houses, the likes of EA, ActiVision/Blizzard and 2K.

They do not love, comprehend or even care about the product they are marketing. They might as well be peddling sacks of potatoes. And they clearly do not care about the game developers who provide them with games to market. They only care about one thing: their annual bonuses. And their bonuses depend solely on last trimester's profits.

That is why they operate on a very short-sighted basis.

Sell the most popular games for over $150 by portioning them in thin DLC slices? Sure!

Release games before they are completed to catch the Summer or Christmas market? Why not?

Exploit and truncate a beloved franchise in order to promote the new Digital Distribution DRM? Go ahead!

Ruin the experience of most paying customers by forcing them to log on to servers that do not exist? Who is to stop us?

They do not care about the company they are running (and the bigger it is, the easier to dissociate) because this time next year they may be running a company selling hardware or health care insurance or weed control. So, they do not care whether they insult, make angry and chase away customers the company they are now running enjoyed for years. It takes almost a decade for a game studio to acquire a loyal fan base. Yet it only takes a couple of months to chase them away never to come back.

But the bozos at the top do not care. They will have grabbed their fat bonuses and run.Who is there to stop them?

Well, we all are. I, for one, have stopped buying EA and UbiSoft games for some time now.

We are the Gandalfs standing in the bridge they want to cross. And THEY. SHALL NOT. PASS.

The Moment They Cemented It In DRM, It Is Not Business. It Is Personal

Puzo's & Coppola's The Godfather may be the I-Ching of western men but this installment, like Sollozzo the Turk's proposal, is an infamita.

With The Godfather II, EA's pezzonovante, they come not in respect. They come not asking to be our friends. Not once. Even though we keep financing their very existence. They only ask greedily for more.

In a sneaky Hyman Roth fashion, EA tries once more to infect our domains with SecuROM RootKits and make us pay again and again for the same game by Limiting its installations. By claiming to fight piracy (ironic from day one...) EA wants to keeps squeezing its own customers. And they are ready to badmouth and brand as "pirates" anyone who might stand up to their rule.

But, just like Don Fanucci, behind the white suit of an ever-menacing EULA hides nothing. Forced to accept an agreement under pain of suffering the financial loss of a worthless non-refundable product nullifies any stipulation in said agreement before any court of law. They only rule on our fear.

But we shall fear no more. Because this is cosa nostra. We have been in PC gaming long before these accountants ruined this beautiful artform.

Make them an offer they can't refuse: let this horses' head soil the silk sheets as EA is slumbering. Eventually they will wake up. And they will do so screaming.

Gamers, I salut!

Little To Command And Nothing To Conquer

It is always sad when a great historic game franchise comes to the end of its road. But it is depressingly sad to watch it do so in this condition.

KANE IN DISNEYLAND?

The graphics of Command & Conquer 4 are laughable. True, EA has been steering the C&C franchise towards the ...cartoon direction ever since the Red Alert 3 installment. But the Red Alert Series had always been more playful. Even so, what was barely palatable for a Red Alert game is outright insulting for a Tiberium one.

If his tanks could still run-over infantry units, have no doubt, he would hunt down whoever did this to him.

Because, you cannot mock Kane and avoid having your lungs infused with Tiberium fumes!

MORE UNITS? PLEASE WAIT BEHIND THE YELLOW LINE. FOREVER.

One of the most annoying features of the new C&C4 is the units cap. You cannot produce more units above a (very low) number. Upgrading your tech-tree with such a unit cap in place means you have to kill and replace most of your units - and make painful decisions as some units are more equal than others. It feels like having to deal with a (small) Diablo-like inventory: whatever does not fit within the grid must be left behind to rot.

And to add insult to injury, extra units are bestowed with a dropper. A tiny one.

This cap reeks of one thing: an attempt to turn this series into a Massively Multiplayer Online Game (fewer units means less lag). And no one seems to care that this took away one of the most fun tactics in a C&C game: tank rushing.

SORRY, ALL OF OUR TIBERIUM-HARVESTERS HAVE BEEN RECALLED. WOULD YOU CARE FOR A SENSIBLE COMPACT?

A Command & Conquer game without harvesting? It could be an RTS game of any name (and there have been baseless RTS games before), why did it have to be a C&C game? Because, once again, EA proves to have no respect for this beautiful art-form. If it means exploiting a classic title in its swan song to sell a few more units, so be it.

Moreover, game publishers seem to have an ever declining expectation of their targeted customer IQ. Hence the ever simplified games released. So, yes, this feels like C&C-for-Dummies.

BATTLEFIELD CONTROLS OFFLINE? YOU'RE ROYALLY SCREWED COMMANDER!

Yes, this must be the most inconvenient DRM scheme ever.

If you hate STEAM for requiring endless updates, this is worse.

If you hate games that require online activation because they never actually become yours, yes, this is worse.

And if you hate games that come with Limited Activations and become worthless the moment you pop the box, well yes, this is worse.

This inconceivable scheme demands for the owner of this game to always be online to verify that the copy he payed for is legitimate. That's right, not just activation, always OnLine. Yes, even for a single player game.

Will it deter piracy? No, pirates will be playing the game without all those DRM hassles. Legitimate gamers are left complaining - and, once more, EA will turn a deaf ear.

All in all, C&C4 will not appeal neither to old friends of the series nor younger gamers. And (for as long as it will keep working), it will have you jumping through hoops for the privilege of having ...bought it. And I thought it was the other way around.

This Tiberium field has been depleted long ago.

Move along Commanders.

Unconsecrated

The original Sacred was a great game that, although not exactly groundbreaking, it offered many hours of hack'n'slash-action/RPG fun. What is more, its publisher had the good sense to price it reasonably from the start and thus fight piracy in the most effective way possible. Apparently its common sense run out.

SACRED II: Fallen Angel, although enjoys more demanding environmental graphics and spell effects, is just another victim of clueless gaming industry executives. Instead of learning from the history of their own game, they'd rather idiotically jump on the "SecuROM/Limited Activations" bandwagon. After all, if they can hide behind the "everyone is doing it" excuse, who can blame them when the game does poorly? 

They are obviously under the illusion that selling at full price a game that is actually rented will fail to be...noticed! Respect is a two way street - and underestimating gamers' intelligence is not a good start.

There were no reviews for this edition (obviously most gamers have been ignoring this game) yet I was informed by the only discussion thread that it still sported the same DRM scheme. Nevertheless, the price had dropped so much it was irresistible. Unfortunately, it was not even worth the bargain-bin price.

The graphics have improved since the first Sacred of course, but they look dated and limited (especially for a game that takes up...12GB of HDD space!); and yet the animations still seem amateurish and stiff.

There are no new ideas, it is hack'n'slash by numbers. Inventory, LogBook, potions, loot...There are all there and yet there is no flavor. And what is with not being able to change the gender and the race of the classes? Who says that a Seraphim cannot be male, a Shadow Warrior female or an inquisitor African?

Now, the game also comes in a (supposedly) "Gold" edition. And I say supposedly because when a commercially flopped, 2-years old game is released in a "Gold" edition, one would expect to include not only its expansion but also all of its its patches. It does come with an auto-patching utility that informed me I have "the latest version" - which disappointingly did not include the Elite Graphics Pack.

Since it is a (extra!) 9GB archive and most PCs are now more than able to handle them, I see no reason why the improved graphics should only be available with the (obsolete) Collector's edition and not the "Gold" edition released years later!

DEEP SILVER could learn a thing or two on how to support and market one's games by the people who published The Witcher.

It is a shame that SACRED II got shot in the foot by its own publisher. Now, instead of being another success, it will simply be another game sacrificed on the alter of corporate Greed and marketing incompetency.