1. It absolutely is. We're talking about companies and trust. I'm trying to understand that, and so far nobody's given me any reason why they trust Valve, but magically not 2K or these folks at Red Shell. "I know and accept Google can be bad" isn't a defense, right? It's an admission that you're okay with what they're doing regardless of what it is they're doing. That doesn't actually explain why it's okay for party A, but not for party B. 2. Sure. You're still comparing Civilisation VI to F2P games in a negative context. F2P games usually existing on Steam, a mobile OS, or some similar distribution platform. You're relying on the assumption that F2P games are inherently more anti-consumer as a negative parallel for your opinions of Civilisation VI. Not only does this have to be proven (and you're still not giving concrete examples), it's literary guilt by association. You're tying Civilisation VI to the murky waters of F2P business practises for the sake of an analogy. "even" F2P games can do better. The insinuation is that's a low bar to clear, and it's a bad insinuation because it relies on a chain of assumptions, as I just described. 3. Are you arguing that the baseline for my logic doesn't hold? It's my logic. It pertains to me. Your argument, though you try and use words that make it seem you're not talking about bugs in the UI and ingame Civilopedia, is that because there is a lack of polish in the UI and / or ingame Civilopedia, that this means they are obviously intent on not being transparent with regards to the legal practise of data privacy. That's somewhat ridiculous, to me. Not only have you once again melded 2K and Firaxis, you've melded all the various teams and their separate skillsets working on the game with a business decision with regards to data collection. I don't want to patronise you, I have enjoyed (even though we seem to often end up like this) the old UI and UX debates of old. But it seems like you don't have much experience with how software of this kind of scale is put together. I mean, I can't convince you otherwise. I don't think I can. I just find it incredible someone would equate UI polish with anonymous data collection for marketing and / or technical reasons. I can guarantee you nobody working on the UI would even be remotely aware of such a thing if they weren't explicitly told about it. For any developer, working on any game (outside of an indie effort, or something similarly small-scale where people often perform multiple roles). I've worked at a startup, and I now work at an international software company whose headquarters are three hours away from me by timezone difference alone. Six years ago, I knew what everyone was working on pretty much all the time, even as a junior developer. Now? Even though I still know at least half of my colleagues? I have no idea what they're working on, nevermind what the other offices and development teams are implementing. I said I - personally - could not trust any company with such logic. I could not. If I could find such an easy way to not trust the very software built into Civ VI to the level that I wouldn't want to play it, or other products by 2K again, I could find similar reason for the vast majority of games I own. It's very easy to find reasons. Which is why I was talking about bias and introspection. It's why I gave a personal example of bias I have for another developer. I'm not doing this to make anything personal with regards to you, or anyone else here. The only way I'm making it personal is to give convincing examples for why I feel the way I feel. That's all. 4. Why does anything throw stuff like this into a EULA? Because it's required by law. That's the only reason. They don't do it because they think you won't like it. We have enough of that from the way the map is rendered, the art direction, the units they choose to include, the UI bugs they include, the way they conduct their social media, the hair colour of their employees as gleaned from livestreams by reddit (don't ask). People find any reason they want to not like something. The compliance as required by law was delivered here, and it's going to take a bit more than packet sniffing by reddit to prove otherwise. You can dislike it as much as you want. I don't want to stop you on that score. That's your opinion, and you're free to it. But again, you disliking something does not make that something wrong. You not understanding, or not being told every single technical detail relating to the inclusion of telemetry in a video game, is not evidence that that inclusion is nefarious in some way. It simply isn't.