Why Not Digitial Distribution?

[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

[MaxWilson]

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

[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.

[Gandalf Parker]

Have you tried that downloaded game? And did it come with a couple PDF files or the full 300 page manual as a pdf file?
I check the available files on a regular basis. They tend to be older versions, which develop menu problems quickly, and wont patch forward successfully. Thats part of the protection scheme for this game. Appearing to be a good download, but it only plays enough to make you want to buy a fully working version.

Occassionally I find a working latest version, but the next patch tends to wipe it out. (and we just had a patch)

Gandalf Parker
--
Planning Committees for Internet, SysAdmin for ISPs, Administrator for servers, Channel Ops for IRC, paid Moderator for web forums and newsgroups. Honeypots, Forensics, Enforcer. Whatever you think NetCop is, Ive been.
Ive even got the shirt! http://www.cafepress.com/oddthotz/740452?pid=2837642

[Keratin]

...
I admit that in retrospect I felt sorry for the title for being so difficult to acquire legally and so easy to acquire illegally. I like the game. I want to support the game (now that I know how good it is.) But I'm disinclined to pay money to buy myself a hassle. And sitting around with my thumb up my *** for a week, so that I can receive some more annoying physical possessions I get to lug around with me till I die, all for the low low price of $60, seems like quite a lot of hassle. I'll buy the game, but I honestly feel like I'm being punished for wanting to do the right thing. I'd rather be punished with annoying DRM crap than this. And I'm quite certain I'm not a beautiful and unique snowflake and nobody feels this way but me.

[Gandalf Parker]

Well Ive paid that for much prettier games that lasted a month on my machine. Paying it for a game that lasts years seems like a good deal.

From what you say it looks like I need to go searching again. Expect your downloaded key to not work in the next patch.

[Ballbarian]

I'll buy the game, but...

I hope you do regardless of the ill fated first posts. Feel free to contact the administrators to see about having your banning reversed if you do purchase the game, but promoting piracy on these forums will not be tolerated.

[lch]

Pirating is easy? Amazing! Who woulda thunk! Thanks for opening my eyes.