TR Member Perks!

Update: James Romine got back to us with some details on the situation and a few thoughts in general. There are a couple elements here, and the rest can be found below:

It is important thing to note – Digital Homicide didn’t file a dismissal or a case. The company had pretty much nothing to do with the case other than some evidence.  Which was why we were surprised by the result. It’s like a manager at a large mall shop filing suit against some harassers who’ve been attacking him inside and outside of his shop, and the entire shops removed. It’s confusing.
In another bit he says:
We may have been painted in a negative customer light by gaming media, truthfully we’ve been fighting for lower prices and a more open market – which to me is the most important thing for consumers.
Original story:

It wasn’t that long ago that developer Digital Homicide sued 100 Steam Users for harassment and getting a subpoena on Valve for further user information. That was followed by Steam pulling Digital Homicide’s games off the storefront, which Digital Homicide responded to by saying that they were looking to sue Valve. On September 26th, Digital Homicide filed to have the court case against the Steam users dismissed without prejudice and a refund for their court fees, or if that is not possible they request a 90-day extension in continuing matters.

First spotted by the Steam group Digital Homicides, the filing cites the reason for the dismissal is that the developer lacks the funds to continue the case due to the fact that their business was destroyed after filing the case, financially disabling them. We have independently confirmed that the filing does exist and a copy of it can be found at the bottom of this article. In the filing, we learn that they initiated the case on the advice of their local sheriff, who was not able to help them on what Digital Homicide calls a Criminal Harassment matter under Arizona State Law 13-2921, which covers all harassment including anonymous electronic harassment. Per the statute, which does not include consideration of case law which shapes the practical use of the law, harassment is defined as:

Conduct that is directed at a specific person and that would cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed and the conduct in fact seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the person.

The request to dismiss without prejudice means that, if granted, Digital Homicide would be able to bring the case again in the future if they wished and not run into issues around double jeopardy.

We have reached out to Digital Homicide and Valve for comment. We will update if they respond or if we learn more about the situation.

Below, is the court filing we have uploaded, albeit with Romine’s address and phone number redacted.

Update 2: Jame’s Romine got back to us with a pretty extensive response.

On the Case

At least two were competitors.The case dismissal was only due to financial reasons caused by the removal of our games. I believe the case was very solid. There were in excess of 140 false statements by the 11 steam users, tens of thousands of posts harassing myself and my customers, three direct interference with written contracts with third parties by steam users (some of which were competitors), and much more. A combined in excess of 25 reports were filed against the worst users of the 11 with no resolutions being found.
Then I get labeled as hostile for defending my few customers that speak English. We’ve received a lot of bad emails but there’s been in excess of fifty positive emails over the past year more than a few from non-english speakers. Supporters would like to talk publicly but they don’t want to be harassed, which I understand.
On Harassment
Insufficient harassment control mechanism’s is definitely the other problem. A review should be enough of a open area to discuss displeasure of actual customers. When I ban someone who isn’t even a customer that’s been harassing me for 18+ months after reporting them 3-12 times, for a false statement or harassing me or a customer – I don’t expect to have to listen to them insult me for 2-3 days afterwards in a direct communication line. If I do – it’s a problem with moderation controls and why is 30% of my sales a proper cut without supplying security that would be expected in any business environment. It’s like a mall charging you rent for a shop and mall security staying at the donut shop all day while you get mobbed and looted. Then I get competitors leaving bad reviews on my launches, putting false statements in my reviews and running the game on unsupported platforms to make it look broken, and when I complain I am ignored. This would be like the next shop over in the mall coming next door and posting signs on my business with false information on them. How is that logically allowable?
On the case against Jim Sterling
Sterling case waits for dismissal decision. No other comment on this.
On Digital Homicide:
As far as digital homicide? It’s destroyed. It’s been stomped into the ground from a thousand directions and use is discontinued. I’m going back into the work force and watching what’s really going on. Not gaming media gossip – the real stories are in the legal documents. Not talking about mine.
We weren’t some evil censoring dudes. If someone didn’t like the game they could leave a bad review and refund – no hard feelings here at all. I was even rebuilding forsaken and the single player was about 1/3 finished. Construction, inventory was all wrapped up and I was working on a strategy aspect. Those customers will now never see it. I expect random trolls showing up – no big deal. I’d even leave their stuff there if it wasn’t too vile. The problem real problem was reoccurring returning attackers for in some cases 20 months. I’m a stationary target as a store front. I can’t just log out and not come back. When that started getting aimed at customers is what triggered the case. But… I’m hostile.
The 7 or so lawsuits in the link below (it might look like 70 or so but a bunch of those are combined into one now). Five of them were in the past 2-3 months.
On Greenlight:
Greenlight itself, to me, is a barrier to entry to market. The question you have to ask yourself is, why are there non triple A publishers with publisher access (one published 18 games in the past 2 months) while others are forced to try and market through a broken system while being harassed.
They released over 24 games released since may with most being in the last two months or so. 60+ percent of their games are mostly negative or worse and they don’t have the Youtube train running over them. None of those had to go through Greenlight.
See the X1.png a game that got through Monday last week. Hundreds of examples of these and our stuff has at least and in some cases significantly more work into them.
 x1
Why is it some have to wait while others publish freely. Obviously by the shown reviews of those games above – it’s not a customer satisfaction thing.

 

Update 1: The Filing was removed from Scribd. We have a screenshot version of it here below.

digital-homicide-dismiss-case


Don Parsons

News Editor

I've been a gamer for years of various types starting with the Sega Genesis and Shining Force when I was young. If I'm not playing video games, I'm often roleplaying, reading, writing, or pondering things brought up by speculative fiction.



  • webkilla

    they want to drop the cases because they don’t have any money?

    I guess nobody wanted to quickly settle with them for any amount of cash

  • WhiteNut

    Whats funny is Romine is representing themself it isn’t an issue about not having money because they don’t have anyone they have to pay.

    Also, the Scrbd link is broken.

  • Severs

    The business was destroyed when people saw that they were willing to sue customers if they didn’t like the game they just bought? You don’t say!!

  • DrearierSpider

    Probably for a number of reasons:

    -No money after Steam nuked their catalog
    -No sane lawyer would get anywhere near this trainwreck of a case
    -They cited Arizona State Law in a federal court, where it has no bearing whatsoever

  • coboney

    They’d have to pay court costs and fees for various subpoenas and court orders.

    Also, we’ve replaced it with a screenshot of the files (which is what made up the Scribbed anyways.)

  • Nope Naw

    Ahahaha! Hahahahah *wheeze*ahahahahahhhaaaaa!

    These people are such clowns.

  • It almost seems like…and hear me out on this, cause I know it sounds crazy…but it’s almost as if this was just a transparently desperate cash grab by a company of scammers.

  • SoloDragonRider

    they really don’t have a leg to stand on. i doubt any judge, let alone a paralegal, could take their lawsuit seriously. they just seem to be attempting a “get rich quick” scheme. I’ve read their court paperwork, i’m no lawyer or judge, but the case seems frivolous and unsubstantiated. obviously a complete and utter misuse of the legal system to further their own agenda of squeezing money out of people. i’m not surprised they dropped their case against the steam users since they probably read all the articles about them, even from legal professionals, that their case was doomed to failure. they might as well just cut their losses and move on with life.

  • ParasiteX

    Witness and behold! The sight of what Digital Suicide(retardation) looks like… You have to be a special level of retarded to bite the hand that feeds you.

  • Volrath

    I have nothing of value to add. Much like Digital Homicide.

  • Severs

    Don’t insult yourself like that, comparing yourself to DigiHom. No one deserves that comparison.

  • Great foresight on their part.

  • Jason Miller

    “Greenlight itself, to me, is a barrier to entry to market.” I don’t think he understands what a barrier to entry is. Greenlight may have its issues, but in no way is it a barrier to entry.

    No, wait, now I understand what he says saying. It’s a barrier to entry “to me” because no one wanted to Greenlight his games.

  • WhiteNut

    >”See this here : http://store.steampowered.com/search/?sort_by=Released_DESC&publisher=United%20Independent%20Entertainment%20GmbH
    >They released over 24 games released since may with most being in
    the last two months or so.
    >60+ percent of their games are mostly
    negative or worse and they don’t have the Youtube train running over
    them.”

    Probably because they’re a publisher, not a developer. Additionally they have 60%+ negative reviews. But they at least have SOME games with a neutral or positive score unlike Mr. EveryGameIsOverwhelminglyNegative. And Romine is the VERY last person to talk about releasing over 24 games since may. Fuck, he released those 20-25ish clones OF THE SAME GAME in the same month. So yeah, they don’t have the youtube train of hate running them flat for a myriad of reasons.

  • Michele

    I cannot trust all those claim on words but to me there were fair points.
    Steam moderation has always been a joke and barely existent, and when it was there it was often the one abused to harass users. It never worked and that’s a fact. So it’s true that Valve is not providing both customers and developers means to defend themself.
    Valve is changing how review score is calculated but it hasn’t fixed the problem. When there are issues with a game you have to hope someone on the community would help you, but official support is not guaranteed (from either devs and Valve).
    Greenlight is a barrier in the sense it is required for some developers to publish their games. It would have been fair if that was the the rule for all developers, but it’s true that some of them doesn’t have to go through that flawed system. So that’s not something that is in the best interest of customers.
    I’m also not sure if is it correct for Valve to remove games from developers if they are suing users directly. If users cannot be held responsible for their action, than Valve should be responsible, but someone has to take responsibility. It’s strange for Valve to be on the side of consumers, they never were. I believe the reason is that they fear they are losing customers if there’s the chance that someone could sue their users.
    I’m wondering, can Valve really remove a developer for using the means of law against another person? Is that something that is in the agreement like the clause that make users give up their right to join in a class action lawsuit against them (that should be illegal, at least in Europe it is not valid). To me it seems they have a very differend definition regarding their interest.

  • Daniel Jensen

    There’s almost certainly a “we can terminate our agreements any time for whatever reason” clause in the agreement. And you’re also almost certainly right that Valve’s concern is purely self-centered… but can you blame them? Valve doesn’t want people worrying about getting legal threats for using forums and other features the way they’re meant to used.

    Seriously, those subpoenas? DH wanted information on EVERYONE WHO VOTED “NO” ON THEIR GREENLIGHT GAMES. That’s fucked up no matter how you look at it.

    As for Greenlight, well. Keep in mind that Greenlight came AFTER private arrangements between Valve and publishers. I have my own grievances with the system, but I don’t think it was ever designed to create parity between massive AAA publishers and tiny indie stuidios.

  • WhiteNut

    >So it’s true that Valve is not providing both customers and developers means to defend themself.
    Except Romine literally said that he reported 25 people and of those, 11 people had actions taken against them. Considering most moderation is done by humans and considering Romine has paper mache for skin it isn’t unreasonable to believe that his reports filed may not have been about rule breakers.

    >Valve is changing how review score is calculated but it hasn’t fixed the problem.
    Its a start, there are other issues in play like being able to hawk games for next to free and allow users to sell cards to generate a profit, this incentives users to upvote garbage in the hopes of being able to sell the cards.

    >Greenlight is a barrier in the sense it is required for some developers
    to publish their games. It would have been fair if that was the the rule
    for all developers
    Except greenlight is a barrier for literally people like Romine. Who want to flood greenlight was a deluge of garbage. Its because of greenlight we can be thankful we don’t have suzy to the rescue 1-5 or another 20+ space invade clones (and that’s just from Digihom alone). It’s thanks to greenlight we’re able to monitor terrible games and try and stem the tide of terrible and broken messes of games. Think about it, why should games like Dishonored, Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, or any other super huge triple A dev team need to go through greenlight when the greenlighting process is only there to stop or discourage people from uploading trash.

    >I’m also not sure if is it correct for Valve to remove games from
    developers if they are suing users directly.
    Digital Homicide has a known history with valve and this wasn’t their first strike, this however was just the straw that broke the camel’s back. Digihom was accused (and later they admitted) to using alt accounts to try and deceive users so to get through greenlight, they attempted vote rigging for a few of their older titles by giving away keys for votes (again, something they freely admit to doing in their lawsuit).

    >If users cannot be held responsible for their action, than Valve should be responsible, but someone has to take responsibility.
    Users are held accountable for their actions, but when their actions are negatively reviewing shit behavior and terrible games there really isn’t much to account for, this is doubly so when the Romine(s) took it upon themselves on numerous occasions to draw unneeded attention upon themselves and to kick the proverbial hornets’ nest

    >I’m wondering, can Valve really remove a developer for using the means of law against another person?
    Ultimately it is Valve’s platform and they can do as they wish, assuming Valve’s ToS is the same as pretty much everyone elses there is most likely a clause saying they reserve the right to drop anyone for any reason if they need to.

  • WhiteNut

    And don’t forget, He wants 18mil for “lost sales” and other damages. Or the deletion of the named users’ steam accounts.

  • Daniel Jensen

    I’m not 100% sure that’s what he meant… but it sounds like it, and knowing them I wouldn’t be surprised. Trust the Romine brothers to take a system that’s notorious for flooding the marketplace with utter trash, and criticize it for making it too difficult to peddle said trash (with the typical “those guys are worse than us look at them” excuses, no less).

  • Azure

    I hope they get forced to go to trial and forced to financially ruin themselves, they have asked for it and they most certainly deserve it.

  • AntoxaGray

    Have they tried to make good games?

  • Daniel Jensen

    Once. They put a decent amount of effort into Dungeon’s of Kragmor, taking on the criticisms by Jim Sterling. Jim even praised them for it.

    However, DH later dropped the project, making a blog post saying that it didn’t make them enough money, and that therefore it was wrong to tell them not to make shovelware.

    I mean… make money how you gotta if you need to make ends meet, but don’t go around telling people that they’re stupid for wanting quality products because churning out trash is more profitable.

  • Daniel Jensen

    Yeah, about that. In the same emails/comments he sent to people to say that they were being sued, he casually mentioned that they could contact them to “reach a settlement”.
    I don’t know about you, but if someone said there was a lawsuit coming my way and then INSTANTLY mention that they’d let it go if I sent them a check and shut up, I’d seriously suspect that they were bluffing.

  • Daniel Jensen

    You should mention subpoenas for personal information aren’t given to people who don’t have lawyers to handle said information, so those ‘fees’ are going to be pretty damn high.

    Why do they need a lawyer? Now, don’t take this as an accusation of the Romine’s character, but the last thing the courts want is for someone to visit everyone he’s ‘suing’ with a shotgun once he’s told where they live.

  • Through the market, the course changes.

  • ImaLemming

    So DigiHom says they were fighting to make the Steam market more open, then complains that hundreds of garbage games get through Greenlight.

  • Michele

    >Its a start, there are other issues in play like being able to hawk games for next to free and allow users to sell cards to generate a profit, this incentives users to upvote garbage in the hopes of being able to sell the cards.

    I don’t see how that is gonna gives incentives for users to upvote a game.
    I also don’t see cards change in the near future, both devs and Valve earns money from that.

    >Except greenlight is a barrier for literally people like Romine. Who want to flood greenlight was a deluge of garbage. Its because of greenlight we can be thankful we don’t have suzy to the rescue 1-5 or another 20+ space invade clones (and that’s just from Digihom alone). It’s thanks to greenlight we’re able to monitor terrible games and try and stem the tide of terrible and broken messes of games. Think about it, why should games like Dishonored, Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, or any other super huge triple A dev team need to go through greenlight when the greenlighting process is only there to stop or discourage people from uploading trash.

    Triple A games could be trash too. We have a lot of case of games that shouldn’t have been able to release on Steam. With refunds we have equal chance of getting money back when that happens. Valve should improve the refund process by providing third party stores with a way to ask refund too for their customers as the keys are provided by steam.

    >Digital Homicide has a known history with valve and this wasn’t their first strike, this however was just the straw that broke the camel’s back. Digihom was accused (and later they admitted) to using alt accounts to try and deceive users so to get through greenlight, they attempted vote rigging for a few of their older titles by giving away keys for votes (again, something they freely admit to doing in their lawsuit).

    Sure, but the reason they removed them is related to the lawsuit, or so they claim, I don’t see how the other behavior should matter.

    >Users are held accountable for their actions, but when their actions are negatively reviewing shit behavior and terrible games there really isn’t much to account for, this is doubly so when the Romine(s) took it upon themselves on numerous occasions to draw unneeded attention upon themselves and to kick the proverbial hornets’ nest

    From what I read in the article the issue is not negative reviews, but the harassing of user and devs and rude behavior.
    Could you point me to one of the case that is purely based on negative review (really, I want to understand the situation better)?

    >Ultimately it is Valve’s platform and they can do as they wish, assuming Valve’s ToS is the same as pretty much everyone elses there is most likely a clause saying they reserve the right to drop anyone for any reason if they need to.

    You are correct. I should rephrase it. Is it morally acceptable and honest for Valve to remove a developer (or a user) for using the means of law against another person?

    Let say, for instance, that Valve is right (rarely) and someone is actually buying reviews. But they are buying negative reviews and posts to defame devs. Shouldn’t those devs defend themself? How are they able to do that without being blackmailed in not doing it if that could cost them they place in the store?

    Now I’m not saying that’s the case here, I don’t know the full situation (like probably most of us), but I’m trying to be a devil advocate here. I don’t like going from one extreme to another. I’m just saying that could happen and I don’t see this precedent as something good.

  • Michele

    >There’s almost certainly a “we can terminate our agreements any time for whatever reason” clause in the agreement. And you’re also almost certainly right that Valve’s concern is purely self-centered… but can you blame them? Valve doesn’t want people worrying about getting legal threats for using forums and other features the way they’re meant to used.

    Wouldn’t that be the same as saying “we don’t like law being applied when it is not convenient for us?”

    I don’t say the reasoning is completly flawed. I wouldn’t like being sued for something I said on a forum too and I’d like someone to take my side if something like that happened. But is really ok for a company to pressure another one into not take action, because that action could be inconvenient for them? Where should we draw the line?

    >Seriously, those subpoenas? DH wanted information on EVERYONE WHO VOTED “NO” ON THEIR GREENLIGHT GAMES. That’s fucked up no matter how you look at it.

    Sure, that look dumb, without much of a doubt. I want to be sure: is that really what happened?

    >As for Greenlight, well. Keep in mind that Greenlight came AFTER private arrangements between Valve and publishers. I have my own grievances with the system, but I don’t think it was ever designed to create parity between massive AAA publishers and tiny indie stuidios.

    That’s for sure. Even though I would like to seem a little more control on AAA titles.

  • Daniel Jensen

    >Wouldn’t that be the same as saying “we don’t like law being applied when it is not convenient for us?… Is it really ok for a company to pressure another one into not take action, because that action could be inconvenient for them?

    That’s a very, very boiled down assessment of what’s going on. Not that I’m saying the sentiment doesn’t apply to Valve: the fact that they tried to dodge AU consumer protection laws and ignored third parties making GS:GO skin gambling sites for as long as they could strongly suggests they only like the law when it suits them. However the Romine brothers are not using the LAW, they’re using the LEGAL SYSTEM. This would certainly not be the first time someone tried to threaten people with lawsuits to intimidate them, even though said lawsuits had no legal merit at all. And I think Valve knew this when they told DH to piss off.

    And, um. Businesses pressuring each other’s decisions happen all the time, ESPECIALLY when they’re working together (an interesting case would be when Valve told EA Games they needed to display DLC for their games on the Steam store instead of ONLY having it available/visible on third-party sites… and EA Games took their ball and went home). Valve didn’t owe the Romines their business, and I’m not convinced that it was unethical to boot them, especially considering Valve were already pissed at the Romines for all the other shady shit they’ve been pulling.

    >I want to be sure: is that really what happened?

    Can’t find the information for the life of me right now. I will update when I get the chance.

  • RocKM001 .

    They probably might..The request to drop the case comes w/ a request for a refund…. last time i checked the court doesn’t do refunds for civil court costs.

    In which case they get a 90 day continuance to…. troll more ppl for cash maybe?

  • In EA Dungeons of Kragmore was 11.99 and digihome swore that the price wouldn’t lower unless for sales. Upon release however Digihom made the price of Dungeons of Kragmore 1.99. Then Digihom did two updates then abandoned it pissing off not only the EA buyers but anyone actually interested in buying it.

  • LordCancer Kain

    is this real? what kind of losers harasses a guy who reskins his own games. if pc gaming is so great why would a single person harass this loser even once? nothing worth playing i guess.

  • Jason Mounce

    “I’m going back into the work force and watching what’s really going on”

    Please, don’t. Just attempt to get hired, stop trying to make ‘games’.

  • Tanya von Degurechaff

    More like Digital Suicide

  • RocKM001 .

    “Wouldn’t that be the same as saying “we don’t like law being applied when it is not convenient for us?”

    I don’t say the reasoning is completly flawed. I wouldn’t like being sued
    for something I said on a forum too and I’d like someone to take my
    side if something like that happened. But is really ok for a company to
    pressure another one into not take action, because that action could be
    inconvenient for them? Where should we draw the line?”

    Except that clause is standard in ALL provider style businesses. The same way your ISP can terminate your contract, the same way any chain store can choose not to stock a product.. heck it’s even in YT’s policy of choosing to deny monetisation if a video is deemed unfit.

    It’s a standard protection/control clause for any provider. Sure Valve may not be directly harmed at DH’s actions but it’s the effect on it’s consumers and the trickle down effect on the company’s standing w/ said consumers that would be hurting Valve here… would you ever purchase or do anything w/ a company that let’s the developer/publisher get away w/ anything abusive to the consumer?

    Sure you can take the devils advocate approach that it gives provider services a free pass/control on everything that goes through on their service and you will be correct on that but at the same time these clauses are there to make sure everyone using the service plays nice… VALVE using the same clause can also delete/suspend and account should they be deemed to disruptive or breaking the rules as well.

    “Sure, that look dumb, without much of a doubt. I want to be sure: is that really what happened?”

    The court filing for the subpeona was linked by TechRaptor on their earlier story here – https://techraptor.net/content/digital-homicide-suing-100-steam-users-18-million

    So they were targeting specifically negative accounts w/ the first batch which I assume is just to set up a precedent to dig up the other users from 21 till 100. It’s your standard speculative fine fishing expedition lots of movie studios loved doing years ago.

    Now don’t get me wrong Valve isn’t blameless here and they have been rather terrible in keeping the more toxic and dodgier users checked most of the time. But if a company *really* was not happy w/ the services Valve offered DH could have always packed up their bags and move to alternative like say GOG or Itchi.o If their games were actually good then their “fanbase” would just migrate with them and create their own community on the new place.

    You don’t go on a fishing expedition for consumer information just to get back at them =/

  • Daniel Jensen
  • Michele

    Thanks, that’s made it more clear.
    I would have at least find it fair if this was limited to the interference with business, harassment and stalking part. But the part about wanting to know who voted no is clearly over the line.

    Correct me if I am wrong. What they are saying is that there are developers that are trying to sabotage them but mass voting no on their games using both developer and user accounts linked to them. That’s why they are asking for their ip to be able to cross reference them. If that the case I can see what trouble them, and they could even be right in the claim. But still, demanding such information with few proofs, is a bit of a stretch.

  • Daniel Jensen

    It certainly seems like DH is claiming that the Steam Group is some sort of combined effort of malicious rival developers to steal DH’s slice of the game industry. Hell, why stop with developers? In the papers he presented, his definition of “competitor” is pretty much ANYONE with any sort of financial interest in the gaming industry, so even Youtubers are apparently trying to grab a piece of DH’s market!

    The conspiracy theory of theirs could be a genuine concern of theirs (considering the retarded statements they’ve made in the past it’s hardly improbable), or it could just be their attempt to make their claims of malicious intent more substantial. At the very least, they’re correct about some of the people on the list being game developers (one has his game on Steam already, while another is still working on theirs), but I would be VERY disappointed if any judge bought his bullshit argument that ANYONE stands to financially gain from DH leaving the market (well, perhaps aside from fellow shovelware peddlers), never mind whether anyone would try to put such events into motion.

  • Daniel Jensen

    “If their games were actually good then their “fanbase” would just
    migrate with them and create their own community on the new place.”
    Hence why their sales were COMPLETELY destroyed the moment they left Steam: the only people interested in their crap were the kind of people who will eat any shit up as long as it’s free and/or they get Steam Cards.

    Don’t quote me on this, but I’ve heard there are stat sites that show people are idling games for the minimum time it takes for cards to drop and then just ditching the titles. Figures, eh?

  • Daniel Jensen

    Yeah, but who needs to pay any sort of attention to any sort of context that doesn’t suit your narrative? Certainly not the Romines. And this wouldn’t be the first time they’ve used bullshit false comparison arguments to justify their nonsense, either.

  • Nik Kris

    “We weren’t some evil censoring dudes. If someone didn’t like the game they could leave a bad review and refund – no hard feelings here at all.” – James Romine Jr

    Yes but when gamers posted the bad reviews, you DigiHomos would delete them and take no responsibilities with your filth of a game library. I have experience making games and I can safely say that DigiHomos know nothing about game development, the games industry, the market, the way you handle criticism and the list goes on and on.

    Their games are not littered with bugs – they’re incomplete. Period. They’re the kinds that you’d make in game jams or school projects, not selling them as consumer products. It’s so obvious it’s a scam job and after being in denial for so long, DigiHomos finally paid the price. Rust In Pieces!

  • ThEjOkErIsWiLd

    Hey digihom, c’mere…. When you make a giant pile of excrement, don’t be surprised if you attract more than a few flies.

  • ThEjOkErIsWiLd

    Haha, holy fucking shit, that guy actually used “gang bang” in a legal document!

    I think Chris Walken in Ripper said it best about James Romine, this guy is un-fucking-believable.

  • Daniel Jensen

    Stealing that one. Thanks.