Why Not Digitial Distribution?

[AstralWanderer]

Originally Posted by Endoperez

While the companies produced great games, I don't know if any of them were financially successful before their bankruptcy. At least Looking Glass wasn't, according to this article.

An interesting read - thanks for posting it! However I do think it reinforces the point made above in that none of Looking Glass's problems were known to their customers - and the initial commentary after their closure almost universally pointed the finger at Ion Storm.

Originally Posted by S.R. Krol

Which is where Stardock differs from most other indie game publishers/developers. Their business software is their backbone, allowing them to venture into the game side.

Their desktop enhancement software (I really wouldn't call it business) is critically dependent upon them maintaining a good relationship with Microsoft and it has been whittled away due to features incorporated in recent Windows versions (e.g. XP's ZipFolders obsoleting ObjectZip, XP's Themes cutting into WindowBlinds sales, Vista's Sidebar displacing Control Center).

Stardock's increased emphasis on gaming may be a desire to diversify - but it could also be an increasingly urgent attempt to exit a vulnerable and shrinking market, under threat by the world's biggest convicted monopolist.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by AstralWanderer

Their desktop enhancement software (I really wouldn't call it business) is critically dependent upon them maintaining a good relationship with Microsoft and it has been whittled away due to features incorporated in recent Windows versions (e.g. XP's ZipFolders obsoleting ObjectZip, XP's Themes cutting into WindowBlinds sales, Vista's Sidebar displacing Control Center).

Stardock's increased emphasis on gaming may be a desire to diversify - but it could also be an increasingly urgent attempt to exit a vulnerable and shrinking market, under threat by the world's biggest convicted monopolist.

Errr, except that Stardock's first product happened to be a game? So they are diversifying back into the market that they got their start in, and doing so with top selling titles, and high profile partnerships? They may be de-emphasizing their OS optimization software, but at the same time they are refocusing on what got them where they are today, and they're doing so with effective and clear plans.

But this is tangential to my original point - that if I take Brad at face value, as the person he portrays himself as, then I am confident that he will make his software public domain, if his company completely fails. You can argue that if things get really rough, they will enact the draconian user fees and whatnot that you seem so scared of, but I simply don't think that Stardock in particular, is a company that would stoop to such levels, as long as Brad is at the wheel.

[AstralWanderer]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

...then I am confident that he will make his software public domain, if his company completely fails.

As this Authorization Servers article notes, if a company fails, it is the creditors that dispose of its assets. It is unlikely that anyone, even the CEO, would be able to release them free to the public without facing legal action.

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

...I simply don't think that Stardock in particular, is a company that would stoop to such levels, as long as Brad is at the wheel.

My view is that companies should be judged by their actions, not their PR. Stardock's PR has been great - especially compared to the train-wrecks of some other publishers (EA, 2K, etc) - but their actions (switch-and-bait DRM, imposing extra charges) differ little from the tactics used by others and the backpedaling on their "Gamer's Bill of Rights" seems to have confirmed that as PR over principle (not least since Stardock themselves don't comply - points 8-10 notably though 4 is open to debate too).

[Gandalf Parker]

As always, facts are facts. But agreement often depends on the choice of words used to define the facts.

Backpedaling could also be called "learning" or "flexibility". Brad's "Gamer's Bill of Rights" initially had points in it which were wonderful but just didnt hold up in the real world. We all wish they had, but I cant hold it against him for figuring out that it needed some changes.

As to the other persons comment on Brad's reliance on MicroSoft that might be true but Id find it surprising. Brad's entry into the MS arena is actually fairly new for him. I knew him well before that and he was already well known in the areas of AI, gaming AI, and alternative marketing. For as long as he was a very vocal anti-MS person, until MS finally became capable of what he wanted (with WinXP irrc), Id be surprised that he has become such a staunch convert that he isnt keeping his eye on other directions to jump to. IMHO

[AstralWanderer]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

Backpedaling could also be called "learning" or "flexibility".

True. People should review the details and decide for themselves. The "no harmful software" removal seems hard to justify though.

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

Brad's entry into the MS arena is actually fairly new for him...until MS finally became capable of what he wanted (with WinXP irrc)

New? The first release of Windowblinds was over 10 years ago. What sort of timescales are we looking at here?

[MaxWilson]

IIRC Brad was well-known on Usenet for game AI in 1992 or so.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by AstralWanderer

True. People should review the details and decide for themselves. The "no harmful software" removal seems hard to justify though.

Honestly I'm pretty sure this was only removed in wording, for "political" purposes. He wants to shake things up a bit in the market, but he doesn't want everyone pissed at him for implying that they are deliberately installing malware with their products

[Gandalf Parker]

Brads entry into the Win territory was announced with his thrill that Windows had finally achieved at least a workable simulation of threaded
Its not hard to find many posts in groups.google.com for Brad Wardell. I couldnt find the thread where he announce his Windows version of GalCiv and why he had decided to do it. Something to do with multi-threading.

But here are a couple of fairly telling articles which tend to give BWs positions the way I remember it.

Brad Wardell Apr 27, 1995
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...66a583e2?hl=en

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[AstralWanderer]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

But here are a couple of fairly telling articles which tend to give BWs positions the way I remember it...

Interesting piece of nostalgia - but come on, 13 years can hardly be described as "fairly new"!

[Gandalf Parker]

Hey! Im old!
No actually his announcement of shifting to windows was in the 2000's someplace Im sure. And if it is WinXP he is talking about that has achieved what he considered to be minimal support for his games then it wasnt all that long ago.