Good thread on GalCiv AI over at GallCiv's site...
Heh?
A lot of thought seems to have gone into this game... looks like a
rewarding SP experience to me.
Reece Hasson
Bowen
Definately looks like it's worth the money. If only more developers would do what
the GalCiv ones did. :)
The only question I have, that I couldn't seem to find out from the webpage is; are
LAN games supported. And if so, does one need to buy a seperate CD for each player?
Maybe Brad can answer. :)
--Bowen--
"Heh?" <hungf...@snork.net> wrote in message news:3E66823E...@snork.net...
Bowen
> LAN games supported. And if so, does one need to buy a seperate CD for each
player?
> Maybe Brad can answer. :)
Blast, no multiplayer. :) Ignore my post.
--Bowen--
Lucian Wischik
>The only question I have, that I couldn't seem to find out from the webpage is; are
>LAN games supported. And if so, does one need to buy a seperate CD for each player?
>Maybe Brad can answer. :)
Yes, you need a separate CD for each player. Each LAN game supports a
maximum of 1 human-controller player...
--
Lucian
Heh?
> Based on this newsgroup alone I'm willing to spend some money on getting GalCiv.
> Definately looks like it's worth the money. If only more developers would do what
> the GalCiv ones did. :)
>
> The only question I have, that I couldn't seem to find out from the webpage is; are
> LAN games supported. And if so, does one need to buy a seperate CD for each player?
> Maybe Brad can answer. :)
>
> --Bowen--
No MP at all for the game- but there is an online AI-improving component
that sounds simply amazing, if it works as planned. The designers
really focused on the SP experience. I don't mean just in coding time,
but it seems like the *bottom line* to design decisions for the game was
how would it play out in SP. I think they really freed themselves up to
succeed by this single decision alone.
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> No MP at all for the game- but there is an online AI-improving component
> that sounds simply amazing, if it works as planned. The designers
> really focused on the SP experience. I don't mean just in coding time,
> but it seems like the *bottom line* to design decisions for the game was
> how would it play out in SP. I think they really freed themselves up to
> succeed by this single decision alone.
Indeed. I have to admit that ever since Quake 2 or so, I cringe whenever
I read how some company or other is going to focus on the "multiplayer
experience." That never strikes me as appealing.
--
E. D. Brooks | kalima...@attbi.com | US2002021724
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
AeonAdventure | "Why, in my day, we used to fight the Lord of
Terror with nothing but a sharp stick!" -- www.reallifecomics.com
Joe M.
news:3E6698CE...@attbi.com...
> Heh? wrote:
> >
> > No MP at all for the game- but there is an online AI-improving component
> > that sounds simply amazing, if it works as planned. The designers
> > really focused on the SP experience. I don't mean just in coding time,
> > but it seems like the *bottom line* to design decisions for the game was
> > how would it play out in SP. I think they really freed themselves up to
> > succeed by this single decision alone.
>
> Indeed. I have to admit that ever since Quake 2 or so, I cringe whenever
> I read how some company or other is going to focus on the "multiplayer
> experience." That never strikes me as appealing.
>
Focus on MP means leaving the "I" out of "AI".
I'm sure I missed the MP boat because I just don't see the appeal. I'm also
pretty confident there is an iceberg ahead and the MP boat is on course to
collide.
The ONLY MP I enjoy is Ghost Recon co-op with a very close friend. We have
a blast playing a realistic/tactical shooter over cable modems while talking
on headsets. It works because we are serious, we are friends and our
connection is flawless.
I have no interest in "fragging" in a teenie bopper FPS. I have no interest
in RTS (as if there's a "strategy" in a build quick and rush the opponent
game). I enjoy racing simulations but it's too difficult to find 10-20
people for a good session (and harder to find a game with good net code).
A realistic flight-sim takes too much time to get to the action for MP and
when you do you lose your buddy all to quickly. I also have no interest in
creating a stream of income for a game developer by paying a monthly
mortgage to play an MMORPG.
On the console front there's Xbox Live which, technologically speaking, is
brilliant. I bought Xbox live mainly for the roster updates and
downloadable content since the MP experience shares the single biggest flaw
with PC gaming: finding enough mature people that you'd care to play with in
the first place. I don't need a guy to quit when I'm winning 5-2 in the
3rd period of a hockey game or some yahoo to blast around a turn recklessly
in MotoGP because he hasn't a clue about driving physics.
Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
--
Joe M.
Bowen
> Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
> want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
If done well it is. I look for multiplayer games for the LAN parties my friends and
I have, that's where the majority of my money will go. I'm not so sure about buying
GalCiv now; but it'll come before buying something like the Warcraft3 patch. :)
--Bowen--
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> "E. Deirdre Brooks" <kalima...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:3E6698CE...@attbi.com...
> > Heh? wrote:
> > >
> > > No MP at all for the game- but there is an online AI-improving component
> > > that sounds simply amazing, if it works as planned. The designers
> > > really focused on the SP experience. I don't mean just in coding time,
> > > but it seems like the *bottom line* to design decisions for the game was
> > > how would it play out in SP. I think they really freed themselves up to
> > > succeed by this single decision alone.
> >
> > Indeed. I have to admit that ever since Quake 2 or so, I cringe whenever
> > I read how some company or other is going to focus on the "multiplayer
> > experience." That never strikes me as appealing.
> >
>
> Focus on MP means leaving the "I" out of "AI".
It sometimes feels that way. :(
Actually, to be honest, it bothered me long before Quake 2.
> I'm sure I missed the MP boat because I just don't see the appeal. I'm also
> pretty confident there is an iceberg ahead and the MP boat is on course to
> collide.
I don't mind MP - I like playing multiplayer Warcraft & Starcraft on the
lan here, but I hate seeing games that I would've liked being gutted for
the sake of mp functionality.
> I have no interest in "fragging" in a teenie bopper FPS. I have no interest
> in RTS (as if there's a "strategy" in a build quick and rush the opponent
> game).
I don't like the typical battle.net style rush-game, but it tends to go
a bit differently when gaming with people you know. :_
> Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
> want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
It's certainly overrated. I suspect the majority of PC gamers aren't
into it for the multi.
E. Deirdre Brooks
You buy your Warcraft patches? No wonder you're bitter.
Bowen
> Bowen wrote:
> >
> > > Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
> > > want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
> >
> > If done well it is. I look for multiplayer games for the LAN parties my friends
and
> > I have, that's where the majority of my money will go. I'm not so sure about
buying
> > GalCiv now; but it'll come before buying something like the Warcraft3 patch. :)
>
> You buy your Warcraft patches? No wonder you're bitter.
The expansion is always a glorified patch when you're dealing with Blizzard. :)
--Bown--
Rachel Butt
> "E. Deirdre Brooks" <kalima...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:3E6698CE...@attbi.com...
> > I read how some company or other is going to focus on the "multiplayer
> > experience." That never strikes me as appealing.
> Focus on MP means leaving the "I" out of "AI".
>
> I'm sure I missed the MP boat because I just don't see the appeal. I'm also
> pretty confident there is an iceberg ahead and the MP boat is on course to
> collide.
> Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
> want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
Sounds like an over-generalization to me. Everyone wants different things
in life, and in games, and I think there's a group that really prefer
multiplayer games.
My partner is mildly addicted to Return to Castle Wolfenstein -
multiplayer. It's a very different game to the singleplayer, apparently.
It involves teams, usually four to eight per side, and cooperation between
players is vital to the team's success. If you are a Medic, you give out
health packs to your fellow players - no sense keeping them all to
yourself, not when that injured soldier could (if healed) hold off more
people than you can. Of course, if he's to keep holding them off, the
Lieutenant had better hand over some ammo as well. The solider may be
best at killing people - so he'd better clear the path for the Engineer to
get through and plant dynamite ...
Not a *terribly* strategic game, which will be why it doesn't get all that
much discussion here. But cooperative (which probably does a fair bit to
get rid of the Kidd135; the other half is the Punkbuster software required
by most servers) and - well, it holds my partner's attention. I think
Multiplayer does have its place, and there will be an on-going market for
good multiplayer games.
Me, though, like you, I prefer single-player - further, I prefer
turn-based games. And I do agree that trying to pack both single and
multi-player into one game is currently very difficult - until we have AI
which is practically human and can be plugged into an interface just like
the human!
DragonSister
--
Rachel Butt rb...@pcug.org.au, rac...@heroes.mycomport.com
Administrator of MapHaven (http://heroes.mycomport.com/)
All pigs fueled and ready for takeoff.
full name
>>Heh? <hungf...@snork.net> wrote:
>>>No MP at all for the game- but there is an online AI-improving component
>>>that sounds simply amazing, if it works as planned.
If you mean perpetual input from designers and players, I can see that.
Fully developed, I think that would greatly enhance a serene single player
strategy game.
>I have no interest in RTS (as if there's a "strategy" in a build quick and
>rush the opponent game).
The reason real time strategy was like an arcade game is because there was
no preset cost for unit movement.
If you were not so incredibly closed minded, maybe you could see how preset
cost for movement resembles taking turns.
--
orphans of invention
http://home.att.net/~lshaping
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> The expansion is always a glorified patch when you're dealing with Blizzard. :)
Why, except for the simultaneous release of free patches with many of
the improvements (but not content) and all the added content in
Blizzard's expansions, you'd almost be right.
Brad Wardell
Thanks for the kind words.
Actually as someone who has lurked through a decade plus of piracy debates,
I'd be interested in people's take on what we're doing with Stardock
Central:
http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
In a nutshell, the game has no copy protection whatsoever. Instead, we've
taken the route of providing long term feature support (i.e. updating the
game with new stuff). But to get to these new features you go through
"Stardock Central" which uses the serial # that comes with the game. The
serial # is authenticated on the server so even if someone cranked out a
serial # generator or passed out serial numbers on the net, the server would
be able to detect serial #'s that aren't in the retail list or serial #'s
getting a lot of differnet IP's downloading the entire game.
But my favorite feature, as a TA player who had to buy multiple copies
because my kids...did things with the CD, you can download the whole
latest/greatest version as long as you have that serial #. And that applies
no matter whether you bought the game at CompUSA or EB or direct.
Combine that with a demo that lets people get a feel for the game and we're
hoping piracy will be pretty minimal.
Anyway, sorry to gush on it, I didn't have anything to do with the coding on
SDCentral, I just like the idea of being able to download my full game years
after buying it even if I've lost my original CD and be able to chat with
other people and such.
Some of these ideas were stolen er INSPIRED by the piracy debates here on
.strategic. How do you decrease piracy? Don't punish customers, give people
a reason to buy the game.
Brad
>
GungHo
news:SYOdnTkeWq9...@comcast.com:
> I'm sure I missed the MP boat because I just don't see the appeal.
Depedns on the MP for me.
With me and a few friends on a LAN, it's fine.
With me and some guys over the net named @$$m0n|<33 and Killfuck
Soulshitter, then no thanks.
Bowen
Pure genius. There'll be pirates, of course, but that system looks pretty decent. :)
--Bowen--
full name
>Bowen wrote:
>>
>> The expansion is always a glorified patch when you're dealing with Blizzard. :)
>
>Why, except for the simultaneous release of free patches with many of
>the improvements (but not content) and all the added content in
>Blizzard's expansions, you'd almost be right.
Building queuing should have been in the original version. It is being
released in an expansion.
full name
>Bowen wrote:
>>
>> > Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
>> > want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
>>
>> If done well it is. I look for multiplayer games for the LAN parties my friends and
>> I have, that's where the majority of my money will go. I'm not so sure about buying
>> GalCiv now; but it'll come before buying something like the Warcraft3 patch. :)
>
>You buy your Warcraft patches? No wonder you're bitter.
Why are you acting like an idiot?
Heh?
Brad, the one concern I have over the above idea is what stops the
unethical pirate from getting all the good stuff he can and then just
sharing that. Seems like it only takes on bad apple in the entire
orchard to spoil it all...
As for me, I can't answer personally if your ideas would have had any
affect on me or not. I just don't pirate. I *bought* winME and I admit
it, as shameful as that may be, I buy my CD's, DVD's, et. al. I just
don't pirate. But I've had arguments with tenured ECONOMICS profs
(peers of mine, not as a student, but a friend) at respectable private
schools about why THEY shouldn't f'ing steal stuff that ain't theirs-
one prof. in particular d/l'ed lots of music... grr. I think I
embarrased my wife when I was the only one(!) in the room who told him I
thought his choice was unethical unless he stole ALL the stuff he had in
a similar fashion simply because "someone" got "too rich" from the
product already... like his car manufacturer.
Bottom line: I think you've taken the highroad, and I deeply respect
that. You have me on your side; if I see someone with a pirated version
of GalCiv in my circle of friends, they'll get heaps of irate hotshit
from me, even be they econ. professors... So on that front, you've
recruited one stormtrooper. :)
Ceowulf
news:1LqcnYv-ffc...@comcast.com...
> http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
<snipity>
Fantastic choice and plan... if you stick to the future promise of many
added downloads {I've no doubt you will}, you will indeed have hit upon a
golden idea. :)
Ceo-
full name
>Actually as someone who has lurked through a decade plus of piracy
>debates,
I think it is about the most fascinating subject, maybe because it has much
to do with science fiction (high technology versus society, that sort of
thing).
>I'd be interested in people's take on what we're doing with Stardock
>Central:
>http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
>In a nutshell, the game has no copy protection whatsoever. Instead, we've
>taken the route of providing long term feature support (i.e. updating the
>game with new stuff). But to get to these new features you go through
>"Stardock Central" which uses the serial # that comes with the game.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=loj8ruk5kpjhj1jm5bi8l6o0715qfi9grc%404ax.com
"Perhaps a CD key can be required for updates/patches/expansions and
discounts on future purchases."
Maybe especially if an "online AI-improving component" which incorporates
perpetual input from designers and players into the game is part of that
system.
Good luck.
<snip>
>Some of these ideas were stolen er INSPIRED by the piracy debates
>here on .strategic. How do you decrease piracy? <snip>
If the world's big leaders are not seriously focusing themselves on
equitably solving high technology issues like the (social) problem of
piracy we confront today, I think they are making a grave mistake. Those
problems are not just visible to techies, you can see them all around
Microsoft.
Now back to the game.
jacko
Where can I purchase this in the UK. I've had a look at galciv.com and the
normal UK etailers but no luck.
Any help appreciated.
mcv
:>
:> Anyway, sorry to gush on it, I didn't have anything to do with the coding on
:> SDCentral, I just like the idea of being able to download my full game years
:> after buying it even if I've lost my original CD and be able to chat with
:> other people and such.
: Pure genius. There'll be pirates, of course, but that system looks pretty decent. :)
It's a bit like what stars! uses. There you buy the code and you download
the game. I think if you don't have the code, you can still play a demo
version. They don't register anything there, but you still simply need
that code at least to play in a multiplayer game (which is the only good
way to play stars!).
And the store that currently sells those codes even remembers who you
are and what code they gave you, so if you lose it, you can just ask
them. Great people.
mcv.
Brad Wardell
"full name" <em...@address.com> wrote in message
news:rt4e6v00gc5uhmn9o...@4ax.com...
Indeed, the problem with piracy is that there are three types of pirates:
1) The pirate who gets it out of convenience.
2) The pirate who simply doesn't want to pay for the product or service.
3) The pirate who doesn't understand the concept of intellectual property.
In my view the best way to combat piracy is to reward customers and make it
as convenient for people to obtain your product or service as possible.
I think music piracy, for intance, would be heavily curbed if users could
simply go to a website, find any single song they want quickly and easily
and pay a modest fee (a couple dollars) for that song.
> Now back to the game.
>
Only 20 days left! ;)
Brad
Brad Wardell
"jacko" <Jason.J...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:b47cer$1t1ab3$1...@ID-109748.news.dfncis.de...
>
> Where can I purchase this in the UK. I've had a look at galciv.com and the
> normal UK etailers but no luck.
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
Not sure what UK availability is. Hopefully soon after release. You will
also be able to get it direct from www.galciv.com and download the full game
while awaiting the CD (though the download is big, a full CDs worth).
Brad
>
Brad Wardell
> Brad Wardell wrote:
> > "Heh?" <hungf...@snork.net> wrote in message
> > news:3E6690E9...@snork.net...
> <snip>
Sure, that is very possible. But that happens with most games except that
the paying customers are stuck having to sift through their CDs to put into
the drive to play while the pirates have a crack to disable the CD
protection.
But in our case, the pirates wouldn't be able to get new versions of the
game.
> As for me, I can't answer personally if your ideas would have had any
> affect on me or not. I just don't pirate. I *bought* winME and I admit
> it, as shameful as that may be, I buy my CD's, DVD's, et. al. I just
> don't pirate. But I've had arguments with tenured ECONOMICS profs
> (peers of mine, not as a student, but a friend) at respectable private
> schools about why THEY shouldn't f'ing steal stuff that ain't theirs-
> one prof. in particular d/l'ed lots of music... grr. I think I
> embarrased my wife when I was the only one(!) in the room who told him I
> thought his choice was unethical unless he stole ALL the stuff he had in
> a similar fashion simply because "someone" got "too rich" from the
> product already... like his car manufacturer.
>
> Bottom line: I think you've taken the highroad, and I deeply respect
> that. You have me on your side; if I see someone with a pirated version
> of GalCiv in my circle of friends, they'll get heaps of irate hotshit
> from me, even be they econ. professors... So on that front, you've
> recruited one stormtrooper. :)
Thanks. :)
Brad
>
lame...@windmill.com
But what if it is a used galciv purchased at, for example, EB, how
will this serial scheme work in this case ?
Lamerlot
Matt McLeod
> Actually as someone who has lurked through a decade plus of piracy debates,
> I'd be interested in people's take on what we're doing with Stardock
> Central:
>
> http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
It looks like a very good idea, and if that "years later" bit you
mentioned actually works out then that'd be *great*. There are a
heap of games I've bought and at some point lost the media for that
I'd love to be able to play again, but there's no way I'm going to
pay US$40+ for a copy of _Rebellion_...
(Seriously, that's the sort of price it's going for on Ebay.
I was stunned: most things are easy enough to pick up for
a pretty reasonable price, but not _Rebellion_.)
I just hope it doesn't turn out like the Maxis setup: if you
bought a second-hand copy of The Sims (for example) and the
previous owner already registered it, it's a bloody nightmare
trying to get patches.
Matt
--
SUSPICION BREEDS CONFIDENCE
Heh?
> Brad,
>
> But what if it is a used galciv purchased at, for example, EB, how
> will this serial scheme work in this case ?
>
> Lamerlot
You get it in the box, then.
Knight37
consulted the bones and whispered:
This scheme will not work to prevent piracy of the game but it might help
convince a casual pirate that it's less effort to pay for it to get to the
new goodies than it is to wait on a new warez release that contains them.
The thing is, cdkey type stuff only works to deter pirating if you NEED the
key to play the game. In this case, you don't, you just need it to download
new features from OFFICIAL sources. The warez scene will probably offer
substantial new features just like they would any expansion pack, but many
people may find it more convenient to use the official site with an
official code. Also I think piracy is an overrated problem. I think people
that truely like and play the game are going to buy it, even if they did
get a warez copy of it first to try it out. Tons of people will warez it
but only a few of them would have ctually been customers. You just need to
make sure you're not footing the bill for the distribution of the warez,
and your serial number idea I think will prevent this.
--
Knight37
Don't be so down on humanity. I estimate 1 in 3 to be good, decent people.
2 in 3 are a**holes who will get to expand the size of Hell.
-- morgul12 on csipg.rpg
Terry McKelvey
news:1LqcnYv-ffc...@comcast.com...
>
>
> .strategic. How do you decrease piracy? Don't punish customers, give
people
> a reason to buy the game.
You have provided several compelling reasons to buy GalCiv here and at your
website, including the one you described in your post. I have just
preordered the game, so as to help boost the number of game copies ordered
by my local EB as per a suggestion I saw in this newsgroup. Hopefully,
playing GalCiv will wash away my memory of all of the time I wasted on MOO3
before finding out that it is completely broke in the aspect of computer
strategy games I most care about, computer player AI.
Terry McKelvey
Brad Wardell
<lame...@windmill.com> wrote in message
news:av6f6vkktnba4djg0...@4ax.com...
> Brad,
>
> But what if it is a used galciv purchased at, for example, EB, how
> will this serial scheme work in this case ?
As long as the other person isn't using that account you would take it over.
This is how we do it with Object Desktop.
Brad
Brad Wardell
"Knight37" <knig...@email.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93369BDF0...@130.133.1.4...
Well said. Piracy can't be eliminated. But you can make it more convenient
to be honest.
This system has been in place for some years with Object Desktop. Once in
awhile someone will post their ODNT serial number and hours later the system
suspends the account (i.e. you get 3 different IPs downloading the program
at once, you know something's not right).
I personally just think that one reason piracy is "high" is because
legitimate buyers don't get much of a reward for paying their hard money on
a game. I mean, I pay 50 bucks for some game and I am typically treated to a
buggy release, a patch, and then asked to pay $20 for the "expansion pack"
that should have been part of the game in the first place.
That doesn't exactly motivate people who are on the fence to purchase the
product. But if game companies start actually making is apparent that you
get real support after purchase, then there's a greater reason to buy it.
But only if that support is pretty seamless.
Brad
Brad Wardell
"Ceowulf" <c...@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
news:3e670da5$0$11...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
Thanks. What's nice about this system from a developer point of view is that
I can be reading the news groups or the message boards or get an email and
hear a suggestion or something and compile up an updated version and copy it
over to the source directory and voila, a new alpha build appears.
If anyone here is familiar with CVS, it's a bit like that. You just get the
files you need. I just copy the file to the folder and it's there for others
to get as an alpha. If all goes well it gets promoted to beta and eventually
to GA. It steamlines the update process. Since SDCentral's already
available in beta, you can check it out on how it works on our other stuff
(check out ObjectDock for instance since it's free).
Brad
>
> Ceo-
>
>
Rachel Butt
> "Ceowulf" <c...@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
> news:3e670da5$0$11...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
> > "Brad Wardell" <bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> wrote in message
> > news:1LqcnYv-ffc...@comcast.com...
> >
> > > http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
> >
> > <snipity>
> >
> > Fantastic choice and plan... if you stick to the future promise of many
> > added downloads {I've no doubt you will}, you will indeed have hit upon a
> > golden idea. :)
>
> Thanks. What's nice about this system from a developer point of view is that
> I can be reading the news groups or the message boards or get an email and
> hear a suggestion or something and compile up an updated version and copy it
> over to the source directory and voila, a new alpha build appears.
And watch the fans be thrilled to bits :-)
Open source has some of these advantages too. I remember one freeciv
LAN-party where people complained that they couldn't tell which flag was
which country[1], and wouldn't it be good if the flags appeared in this
particular dialog? My partner was following the freeciv developers list
at the time; he posted the suggestion to them, and I saw screenshots of it
around ten days later. I still grin over it, and I don't even know if it
has made it into the standard release yet. (My fault for running old
versions of the game.)
Of course, the relative ease of implementation of a feature varies widely.
On my website, some suggestions and bug fixes don't even require a trip
to the source code; most require about a paragraph of code; and some
things require fundamental revisions in the software design.
DragonSister
[1] Reasonable when there are more than 40 countries to choose from,
including several fictional ones. I always like to play Dunedain.
ka...@ecn.ab.ca
Just say "no thanks" right now and get it over with.
full name
Would you please stop stalking me.
>Path: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmaster11!wn12feed!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!208.49.253.98!newsfeed.news2me.com!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!news.uunet.ca!localhost!not-for-mail
>From: ka...@ecn.ab.ca
>Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>Subject: Re: Good thread on GalCiv AI over at GallCiv's site...
>Message-ID: <havd6vks94se2s2fs...@4ax.com>
>References: <3E66823E...@snork.net> <b4620p$1se7pi$1...@ID-159243.news.dfncis.de> <3E6690E9...@snork.net> <3E6698CE...@attbi.com> <SYOdnTkeWq9...@comcast.com> <b4670r$1st36p$1...@ID-159243.news.dfncis.de> <3E66A37C...@attbi.com> <nsfd6v8bhdgrstra5...@4ax.com>
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.92/32.572
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Lines: 9
>Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 01:24:07 -0700
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.161.206.164
>X-Trace: localhost 1047026095 198.161.206.164 (Fri, 07 Mar 2003 01:34:55 MST)
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 01:34:55 MST
>Xref: wnmaster11 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:670214
>X-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 08:33:55 GMT (bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)
Knight37
the bones and whispered:
> if game companies start actually making is apparent that you
> get real support after purchase, then there's a greater reason to buy it.
> But only if that support is pretty seamless.
I agree, and I think the market shows this. The developers that have a
reputation of supporting their games post-release seem to be developers
that people buy games from even without looking at a demo. Blizzard is
known to patch their games (they even did one for WC2BNE not too long ago,
and they still do them for SC), and provide support in the way of online
matching service long after a product has been released. Bioware has been
good at supporting NWN with patches and additional content. Bethesda seems
to be doing pretty good with MW also (although their track history hasn't
been that good prior to MW).
Developers or publishers that are known to release a game then drop support
for it don't get a lot of customer loyalty. How many times do you hear
people praising EA for their great support? LOL. Or Activision, with their
CTP2 fiasco (dump it, then hope the fans fix it). Is it any wonder that EA
and Activision games wind up in the bargain bins in a few months while
Blizzard games still sell at decent prices years after release? Customers
reward developer/publisher integrity with loyalty, and that means being
able to command a higher price longer, and bigger sales at pre-order time
or launch.
Well, anyway, I am glad that Stardock is doing Gal Civ the way they are
doing it, and look forward to it.
--
Knight37
So lie to me
But do it with sincerity
Make me listen
Just for a minute
Make me think
There's some truth in it
-- Depeche Mode, "Lie to Me"
Bowen
>
> "Ceowulf" <c...@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet> wrote in message
> news:3e670da5$0$11...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
> > "Brad Wardell" <bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> wrote in message
> > news:1LqcnYv-ffc...@comcast.com...
> >
> > > http://www.galciv.com/sdcentral.html
> >
> > <snipity>
> >
> > Fantastic choice and plan... if you stick to the future promise of many
> > added downloads {I've no doubt you will}, you will indeed have hit upon a
> > golden idea. :)
>
> Thanks. What's nice about this system from a developer point of view is that
> I can be reading the news groups or the message boards or get an email and
> hear a suggestion or something and compile up an updated version and copy it
> over to the source directory and voila, a new alpha build appears.
OOP, how much I loathe thee; for now :).
--Bowen--
mcv
:
: <lame...@windmill.com> wrote in message
: news:av6f6vkktnba4djg0...@4ax.com...
:> Brad,
:>
:> But what if it is a used galciv purchased at, for example, EB, how
:> will this serial scheme work in this case ?
:
: As long as the other person isn't using that account you would take it over.
: This is how we do it with Object Desktop.
And what if he is still using it? As you only need the serial number
and many shops allow you to return the game, you can get a number for
free and screw the next purchaser.
mcv.
B.H. Chan
>news:1LqcnYv-ffc...@comcast.com...
> Some of these ideas were stolen er INSPIRED by the piracy debates here on
> .strategic. How do you decrease piracy? Don't punish customers, give
>people
> a reason to buy the game.
I believe CompUSA and Best Buy and a couple others are selling GalCiv for #39.99
but was wondering approximately how much of that will go to Stardock?
I also see it available for $44.95 on the stardock site, but does that only get me download access? (one page says i get both beta and final download, but doesn't mention getting the CD) Also, what about tax, tip, shipping, & handling?
Just wondering how we can show stardock the most of our spending money when we go buy the game.
Paul Angstrom
Chan) wrote in message <b4ahdn$3rj$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>:
>I believe CompUSA and Best Buy and a couple others are selling GalCiv for #39.99
>but was wondering approximately how much of that will go to Stardock?
>
>I also see it available for $44.95 on the stardock site, but does that only get me download access? (one page says i get both beta and final download, but doesn't mention getting the CD) Also, what about tax, tip, shipping, & handling?
>
>Just wondering how we can show stardock the most of our spending money when we go buy the game.
I'm pretty sure a direct purchase from Stardock will give them the
largest percentage. From Brad's message below, that direct purchase
includes both a download and a physical CD.
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 21:40:48 -0500, "Brad Wardell"
<bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> wrote in message
<x8icnYy9bPo...@comcast.com>:
>Actually we have something I think you'll like a lot better.
>
>http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=18753
>
>Regardless of how you purchase the game (direct, retail, etc.) you'll be
>able to put in your serial number and download updates or the full game.
>
>For instance, on the 26th if it isn't available locally, you can buy it
>direct from www.galciv.com and download it while waiting for the CD to
>arrive.
>
>You can try out Stardock Central now if you'd like (it's in that link) to
>get a feel for how things get updated.
Brad Wardell
"mcv" <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:3e68bcf6$0$49106$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
Wouldn't work that way. Worst case scenario is that the account could get
suspended and the person(people) using it would email and one would have the
actual CD, the other would not. Out of the hundreds of thousands of copies
of Object Desktop we've sold over the years, this sort of thing has only
happened a few times and it's almost always resolved within hours.
We've been using this system for several years with Object Desktop, the
thing about piracy is that game companies WAYYY over state it. It's easier
to blame piracy than to blame lack of sales on other factors.
We've found that there are different types of pirates and different levels
of piracy. In fact in this very news group we've seen that in the lengthy
flame wars on the subject. Most pirates try to find a way to justify their
actions. But buying a game, taking it home, and then returning it, while
possible just doesn't happen that often as a percent. I suspect that this is
because that kind of behavior crosses a threshold. At that point, there's no
weazel-word way to justify it. At that point the pirate is basically
shoplifting.
Even the most copy protected game out there is going to get a crack hence
that scenraio you mention can/does happen for every game but I suspect it's
pretty rare for the reasons I outlined.
Brad
>
>
> mcv.
E. Deirdre Brooks
It's sad that "full name" must lash out at anything he doesn't
understand. That entails a lot of lashing.
--
E. D. Brooks | kalima...@attbi.com | US2002021724
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
AeonAdventure | "Why, in my day, we used to fight the Lord of
Terror with nothing but a sharp stick!" -- www.reallifecomics.com
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> I agree, and I think the market shows this. The developers that have a
> reputation of supporting their games post-release seem to be developers
> that people buy games from even without looking at a demo. Blizzard is
> known to patch their games (they even did one for WC2BNE not too long ago,
> and they still do them for SC), and provide support in the way of online
> matching service long after a product has been released. Bioware has been
> good at supporting NWN with patches and additional content. Bethesda seems
> to be doing pretty good with MW also (although their track history hasn't
> been that good prior to MW).
Yes, it's good to continue to receive support for relatively ancient
games from Blizzard. One of the (many) reasons I still play their games.
> Developers or publishers that are known to release a game then drop support
> for it don't get a lot of customer loyalty. How many times do you hear
> people praising EA for their great support? LOL. Or Activision, with their
> CTP2 fiasco (dump it, then hope the fans fix it). Is it any wonder that EA
> and Activision games wind up in the bargain bins in a few months while
> Blizzard games still sell at decent prices years after release? Customers
> reward developer/publisher integrity with loyalty, and that means being
> able to command a higher price longer, and bigger sales at pre-order time
> or launch.
The Activision game I remember most fondly is actually Vampire:
Redemption. Not a particularly great game, but Nihilistic did a great
job with putting patches out in response to customer feedback.
I am on the fence regarding Starfleet Command III, though. I have the
previous three titles, but the whole "patch" fiasco that Activision put
Taldren through puts a bad taste in my mouth. Admittedly, I like
Taldren's products (and the fact that they continued to patch their
games long after it was economically necessary), so that'll probably
decide. I do hope they go through someone else for their next game,
though.
> Well, anyway, I am glad that Stardock is doing Gal Civ the way they are
> doing it, and look forward to it.
AOL.
full name
>>full name <em...@address.com> wrote:
>> >"E. Deirdre Brooks" <kalima...@attbi.com> wrote:
>> >>You buy your Warcraft patches? No wonder you're bitter.
>> >
>> >Why are you acting like an idiot?
>>
>> Just say "no thanks" right now and get it over with.
>
>It's sad that "full name" must lash out at anything he doesn't
>understand. That entails a lot of lashing.
I realize you were trying to be clever but I doubt anyone thought it
amusing. To me, it looks more like an utterance from a sad person. Your
current comment is slightly above that IMO.
Terry McKelvey
"Paul Angstrom" <angs...@go.away.spammers.invalid> wrote in message
news:girh6v4ovaunavaov59vfi7icgd2eq074h@news12...
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:29:43 +0000 (UTC), bhc...@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (B.H.
> Chan) wrote in message <b4ahdn$3rj$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>:
>
> >I believe CompUSA and Best Buy and a couple others are selling GalCiv for
#39.99
> >but was wondering approximately how much of that will go to Stardock?
> >
> >I also see it available for $44.95 on the stardock site, but does that
only get me download access? (one page says i get both beta and final
download, but doesn't mention getting the CD) Also, what about tax, tip,
shipping, & handling?
> >
> >Just wondering how we can show stardock the most of our spending money
when we go buy the game.
>
> I'm pretty sure a direct purchase from Stardock will give them the
> largest percentage. From Brad's message below, that direct purchase
> includes both a download and a physical CD.
I would guess that ordering direct results in Stardock making the most money
per unit sold. But, preorders apparently increase the numbers of copies
ordered initially at retail. There is certainly value in having stores
order more initial copies to sell, which can then generate new orders if
those initial copies sell out. So, I couldn't guess what is ultimately best
for Stardock. Maybe someone else has a better feel for this?
Terry
Brad Wardell
"Kevin B. O'Brien" <zwi...@zwilnik.com> wrote in message
news:mjci6vkq5hgosts4k...@4ax.com...
> "Brad Wardell" <bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> said (on
> Wed, 5 Mar 2003 21:51:04 -0500):
>
> >In a nutshell, the game has no copy protection whatsoever. Instead, we've
> >taken the route of providing long term feature support (i.e. updating the
> >game with new stuff). But to get to these new features you go through
> >"Stardock Central" which uses the serial # that comes with the game. The
> >serial # is authenticated on the server so even if someone cranked out a
> >serial # generator or passed out serial numbers on the net, the server
would
> >be able to detect serial #'s that aren't in the retail list or serial #'s
> >getting a lot of differnet IP's downloading the entire game.
> >
> >But my favorite feature, as a TA player who had to buy multiple copies
> >because my kids...did things with the CD, you can download the whole
> >latest/greatest version as long as you have that serial #. And that
applies
> >no matter whether you bought the game at CompUSA or EB or direct.
> >
> >Combine that with a demo that lets people get a feel for the game and
we're
> >hoping piracy will be pretty minimal.
> >
> >Anyway, sorry to gush on it, I didn't have anything to do with the coding
on
> >SDCentral, I just like the idea of being able to download my full game
years
> >after buying it even if I've lost my original CD and be able to chat with
> >other people and such.
> >
> >.strategic. How do you decrease piracy? Don't punish customers, give
people
> >a reason to buy the game.
>
> Drengin.net and ObjectDesktop.net a couple of years ago (I think
> pretty much as soon as you announced them). And I have renewed ever
> since and intend to keep renewing.
>
> I think copy protection can lead to more piracy rather than less,
> though I have no hard data at all. But I find it so annoying that I
> have to find the CD before I can play a game that I go looking for
> cracks on the Internet. And while I am looking, I start seeing other
> cracks that let me play games I don't own. As you get more pissed at
> the game companies, it is easier to rationalize grabbing those other
> cracks.
I totally agree. Did you ever play the game Power Monger? It had a really
painful copy protection scheme. Bad enough to the point that I cracked it
myself with good ole turbo debugger. Just for my own use. But what do many
gamers do? When faced with obnoxious copy protection they end up going out
and finding a way around it and as a result they find places (binary NGs,
warez sites, etc.) that they otherwise wouldn't have known about. Then
suddenly next time they're going to buy a new game, there's that temptation
that maybe the game is already available "for free". That's the sort of
thing game companies should be trying to avoid.
Object Desktop is rarely pirated. I think that's because it's so convenient
to just pay for it and get the regular updates.
Since you have Object Desktop (ODNT is already supported on SDCentral) you
know how reguarly we update that. But with SDCentral it gets even easier.
With the older system a new version of WindowBlinds had to go through the
"build team" because of all the WISE installer stuff and you had to
redownload the whole thing. But with SDCentral, we can put things right
onto the network directly as an alpha making it much easier to do regular
updates.
>
> BTW, when will Drengin.net folks get GalCiv?
March 26th at the latest, possibly March 25. Make sure you switch from the
old Drengin CM to Stardock Central. It's all been migrated over to that.
We'll be sending emails out to Drengin users soon.
Brad
--
Brad Wardell
Stardock - http://www.stardock.com
Project Manager: Galactic Civilizations (www.galciv.com)
>
>
> --
> Kevin B. O'Brien
> zwi...@zwilnik.com
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> Even the most copy protected game out there is going to get a crack hence
> that scenraio you mention can/does happen for every game but I suspect it's
> pretty rare for the reasons I outlined.
Okay,
so tell me what disease you caught that made you look at this issue
sensibly? :)
Regnor
"Joe M." <NoEma...@spamfree.com> wrote in message
news:SYOdnTkeWq9...@comcast.com...
> Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
> want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
I am constantly amazed at this reaction. It is definitely true that
multiplayer is not for everyone, and I appreciate and respect your reasons
for feeling that way, they make complete sense. But I hope that you can also
appreciate that not everyone has the same experiences that you've had, and
in fact many players (myself in particular) find multiplayer gaming richly
rewarding. It's the difference between playing solitaire and poker, a good
multiplayer game is a great social experience and in my experience, the best
things in life are the things that we share with others.
Successful multiplayer gaming seems to be something that certain people have
more luck with than others. I don't know what the criteria is for success,
maybe it's a certain personality type, maybe it's a certain level of
tolerance and thick skinnedness, dunno. I've been playing seriously online
since around 1995 or 1996 and while I've had my share of the experiences you
describe, these moments have been so far overshadowed by the good moments
that I couldn't imagine reverting to primarily single player again. I enjoy
a good single player game and I've played *extensively* most of the very
same ones that people in this ng know and love. But there has never been,
and there never will be, a better opponent than a competent human, and there
never will be as rewarding an experience as sharing great moments of success
with a cooperative opponent in cooperative multiplayer.
I hear your disappointment and disdain for multiplayer gaming, and I regret
that it's been that way for you. I do, however, respectfully disagree that
it's overrated, I believe the rewards are immense and it's because of this
reality (an alternate reality from your own) that I do believe it is indeed
the future of gaming. Not the exclusive future (single player gaming will
always have a place), but an exciting future that will, hopefully, make it
better even for gamers like yourself. When that day comes for you, I look
forward to having a good game with you. ;-)
full name
>"Joe M." <NoEma...@spamfree.com> wrote
>> Give me good AI and I can play when I want, how I want and as long as I
>> want. MP is grossly overrated and is NOT the future of gaming.
>
>I am constantly amazed at this reaction. It is definitely true that
>multiplayer is not for everyone, and I appreciate and respect your reasons
>for feeling that way, they make complete sense. But I hope that you can also
>appreciate that not everyone has the same experiences that you've had, and
>in fact many players (myself in particular) find multiplayer gaming richly
>rewarding. It's the difference between playing solitaire and poker, a good
>multiplayer game is a great social experience and in my experience, the best
>things in life are the things that we share with others.
>
>Successful multiplayer gaming seems to be something that certain people have
>more luck with than others. I don't know what the criteria is for success,
>maybe it's a certain personality type, maybe it's a certain level of
>tolerance and thick skinnedness, dunno.
Hosting helps :)
>I've been playing seriously online
>since around 1995 or 1996 and while I've had my share of the experiences you
>describe, these moments have been so far overshadowed by the good moments
You betcha. Good moments that will last (me) a lifetime. I will never
forget my great team games of Warcraft II on the map (Nowhere to run,
Nowhere to hide). Some of those games ended in draws, real draws, and both
sides had a wonderful time. I could go on for quite a while about them :)
Gol'fleme.
>I agree, and I think the market shows this. The developers that have a
>reputation of supporting their games post-release seem to be developers
>that people buy games from even without looking at a demo. Blizzard is
>known to patch their games (they even did one for WC2BNE not too long ago,
>and they still do them for SC), and provide support in the way of online
>matching service long after a product has been released. Bioware has been
>good at supporting NWN with patches and additional content. Bethesda seems
>to be doing pretty good with MW also (although their track history hasn't
>been that good prior to MW).
3DO/NWC was one of these BEFORE HM&M4. I've been so disappointed...
Missing multi-player parts, brain-dead AI, unbalanced design...
The result of this shame is : I will never buy any 3DO game without demo, a
4-6 months delay... AND IF the game is good
At this time, I'm telling each of my pals How 3DO/NWC is careless/idiot
with its customers
>Developers or publishers that are known to release a game then drop support
>for it don't get a lot of customer loyalty. How many times do you hear
>people praising EA for their great support? LOL. Or Activision, with their
>CTP2 fiasco (dump it, then hope the fans fix it). Is it any wonder that EA
>and Activision games wind up in the bargain bins in a few months while
>Blizzard games still sell at decent prices years after release? Customers
>reward developer/publisher integrity with loyalty, and that means being
>able to command a higher price longer, and bigger sales at pre-order time
>or launch.
>
>Well, anyway, I am glad that Stardock is doing Gal Civ the way they are
>doing it, and look forward to it.
me too! I'm waiting for an release in the UK AND a demo, but, all I've
seen/read about this make me, at least, confidant/impatient! :-)
Bill Bouma
> > And what if he is still using it? As you only need the serial number
> > and many shops allow you to return the game, you can get a number for
> > free and screw the next purchaser.
>
> Wouldn't work that way. Worst case scenario is that the account could get
> suspended and the person(people) using it would email and one would have the
> actual CD, the other would not. Out of the hundreds of thousands of copies
> of Object Desktop we've sold over the years, this sort of thing has only
> happened a few times and it's almost always resolved within hours.
Ok, now you got me curious. How do you know which one
actually has the CD? If 3 people are downloading at the
same time with one number (eg.) and all 3 write in claiming
to have the CD, what will you do? The only thing I can think
of it is to let them all just have it. Else the legitimate
one is going to get angry. I guess you are counting on the
ones that don't have the CD not to lie about having it?
Bill
full name
>Brad Wardell <bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> wrote:
>:
>: <lame...@windmill.com> wrote in message
>: news:av6f6vkktnba4djg0...@4ax.com...
>:> Brad,
>:>
>:> But what if it is a used galciv purchased at, for example, EB, how
>:> will this serial scheme work in this case ?
>:
>: As long as the other person isn't using that account you would take it over.
>: This is how we do it with Object Desktop.
>
>And what if he is still using it? As you only need the serial number
>and many shops allow you to return the game,
That is not the case where I live.
Matt McLeod
> Ok, now you got me curious. How do you know which one
> actually has the CD?
Ask 'em to fax a photocopy of the front of the CD?
--
"I love the way Microsoft follows standards.
In much the same manner that fish follow migrating caribou."
-- Paul Tomblin, ASR
full name
>Bill Bouma wrote:
>> Ok, now you got me curious. How do you know which one
>> actually has the CD?
>
>Ask 'em to fax a photocopy of the front of the CD?
Maybe you still end up with a problem there, however obscure. The prior
owner could make a copy ahead of time. Then if he (or she) waits until the
key is in use, he has the photocopy when asked. Strange but, well, we are
talking possibilities.
Here is another possibility (I have no idea whether this is novel, but it
seems to fit the objective).
...On the box, offer money back or exchange if the CD (with key) is
returned to the publisher. If returned, kill the key.
...If the key being used is a duplicate, advise the new owner that the key
is in use and offer money back or exchange if the CD (with key) is returned
to the publisher. If returned, kill the key.
Matt McLeod
> Matt McLeod <ma...@boggle.org> wrote:
>>Bill Bouma wrote:
>>> Ok, now you got me curious. How do you know which one
>>> actually has the CD?
>>
>>Ask 'em to fax a photocopy of the front of the CD?
>
> Maybe you still end up with a problem there, however obscure. The prior
> owner could make a copy ahead of time. Then if he (or she) waits until the
> key is in use, he has the photocopy when asked. Strange but, well, we are
> talking possibilities.
True, that's possible. But then again, according to Brad the whole
situation is pretty rare to start with. Provided they aren't widely
publicizing how they resolve a conflict where two or more people claim
to have the CD, the number of cases where two or more people are actually
able to satisfy the "I have a CD" test is going to be even smaller.
So small that it may not be worth Stardock's time or money to dispute
it, or for them to find some more perfect system. Get too elaborate
and you'll quickly go beyond the point of diminishing returns.
--
+++ Out of Cheese Error +++ MELON MELON MELON +++
Thomas Palm
One way would be to have a program on the CD that would allow the
company to send each of them a (random) number that would be
translated by a program that could only be run with the CD in
place and which translated the number into a new number that
is then returned. Only the owner of the CD can do this, and
since they don't know what number they are supposed to translate
they can't do it in advance.
Probably overkill, but it would work as long as none of the
people involved are able to crack the program. A far simpler
would be to just ask each of them what the CD looks like.
It's almost certain that the people who no longer have the
CD will have forgotten.
Brad Wardell
"Bill Bouma" <bronc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3e6b2b8f_3@newsfeed...
At that point they're dealing with tech support directly and there are ways
of telling who has the actual legitimate copy.
In instances like that that have happened with Object Desktop is that we
first find out who has the legitiamte copy, then we reassign them a new
serial #.
Brad
>
> Bill
Ray Kerby
> I totally agree. Did you ever play the game Power Monger? It had a really
> painful copy protection scheme. Bad enough to the point that I cracked it
> myself with good ole turbo debugger. Just for my own use. But what do many
> gamers do? When faced with obnoxious copy protection they end up going out
> and finding a way around it and as a result they find places (binary NGs,
> warez sites, etc.) that they otherwise wouldn't have known about. Then
> suddenly next time they're going to buy a new game, there's that temptation
> that maybe the game is already available "for free". That's the sort of
> thing game companies should be trying to avoid.
This was exactly my experience! I've never visited a Warez site until
BioWare added additional copy protection IN A PATCH that suddenly
prevented NeverWinter Nights from running on my machine. After banging
my head against developers in denial for about a week, I hunted down a
no-CD crack on a Warez site simply so that I could play the game that
I LEGALLY PURCHASED. And yes, I was in a pretty indignant frame of
mind at that time. It took a while to find the site, but I was amazed
at the vast number of games available for free...
Fortunately, I am not in a financial situation where I would pirate a
game instead of buying it, but I can see the temptation.
What I've learned from this is that copy protection does not prevent
piracy; it simply hurts the legitimate, paying customers who have to
worry about not losing their CDs, making sure they don't get damaged,
and dealing with unnecessary waits while their CDs are validated.
E. Deirdre Brooks
>
> This was exactly my experience! I've never visited a Warez site until
> BioWare added additional copy protection IN A PATCH that suddenly
> prevented NeverWinter Nights from running on my machine. After banging
> my head against developers in denial for about a week, I hunted down a
> no-CD crack on a Warez site simply so that I could play the game that
> I LEGALLY PURCHASED. And yes, I was in a pretty indignant frame of
> mind at that time. It took a while to find the site, but I was amazed
> at the vast number of games available for free...
Seriously? They disabled the copy protection with the first patch, did
they re-enable it?
> Fortunately, I am not in a financial situation where I would pirate a
> game instead of buying it, but I can see the temptation.
>
> What I've learned from this is that copy protection does not prevent
> piracy; it simply hurts the legitimate, paying customers who have to
> worry about not losing their CDs, making sure they don't get damaged,
> and dealing with unnecessary waits while their CDs are validated.
Copy protection is the soul of evil, pretty much. At least the computer
entertainment kind.
Bent C Dalager
Ray Kerby <rayk...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>What I've learned from this is that copy protection does not prevent
>piracy; it simply hurts the legitimate, paying customers who have to
>worry about not losing their CDs, making sure they don't get damaged,
>and dealing with unnecessary waits while their CDs are validated.
But that's only because you choose to be law-abiding. If you had
chosen to be a pirate, you might have learned that copy protection was
an impediment. It is dangerous to base your views only on what has
happened to you personally since there are lots of other people with
other use-cases than yourself and you really don't want to be tossing
them out of the equation.
Not if what you are looking for is a "truth" (or as close as you can
get) rather than just a "biased opinion" anyway.
Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - b...@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
wargamernews
Are you sure you are not fired from the game industry? I mean there is no
way to find it out if a copy is made with the latest cd-copying technology.
When there is a new cd-copy protection scheme, you have about, I say, 2
months or so until it is broken. If it is broken, there is no way to tell
remotely whether one has a legitimate CD or a pirated copy.
But for these kids, bluffing as you do will work.
Lucian Wischik
>Brad wrote:
>> In instances like that that have happened with Object Desktop is that we
>> first find out who has the legitiamte copy, then we reassign them a new
>> serial #.
> Are you sure you are not fired from the game industry? I mean there is no
>way to find it out if a copy is made with the latest cd-copying technology.
Hey wargamernews, I have an idea. Why not read Brad's posts before
responding to them in such a condescending tone?
--
Lucian
mcv
: "Brad Wardell" <bwar...@getridofthispart.stardock.com> wrote in message
But it is possible who was the last one to install the game. At
installation time, you could use the time and the serial # to generate
a code which Stardock then uses to check who installed the game most
recently and is therefore probably the legitimate owner. You could
leave that code there when it's uninstalled or re-installed, so the
pirate would have to reformat his system to update that code. And if
you take a WinXP kind of approach where information is exchanged with
stardock at installation time, you can even prevent that from working.
Ofcourse it's still possible to screw the system, but it's going to
be a lot harder for the pirates and probably not worth their while.
mcv.
Paul Schneider
I think M003 was very good for Galciv. If MOO3 hadn't been released
(wetting the appetite for space based 4X games), Galciv might have
gotten lost in the crowd. I know that I probably wouldn't have bought
it or even read much about it or cared.
But after all the hype for MOO3 (MOO2 it ain't), I'm ready for a
really good space based 4x game. MOO3 was interesting but doesn't
satisfy that hunger (perhaps addition patches will "fix" it but I
doubt it). So I am definately buying Galciv now where I probably
wouldn't have earlier.
Paul
mcv
: "Regnor" <reg...@DELETETHISplanetperez.com> wrote:
:
:>I've been playing seriously online
:>since around 1995 or 1996 and while I've had my share of the experiences you
:>describe, these moments have been so far overshadowed by the good moments
:
: You betcha. Good moments that will last (me) a lifetime. I will never
: forget my great team games of Warcraft II on the map (Nowhere to run,
: Nowhere to hide). Some of those games ended in draws, real draws, and both
: sides had a wonderful time. I could go on for quite a while about them :)
I agree. Every one of my multiplayer games of stars! has been an epic,
and I'm sure my current one won't be an exception[0].
But I also think that single player games actually have much more room
for growth. Multiplayer games are roughly at their peak. They're not
leaving, but there's not a lot to go to from here. All you really need
is other players, and there are plenty of those. For a single player
game you need good AI, and that's virtually nonexistent at the moment
(but that may change at 26 March).
mcv.
[0] At war with all three of my neighbours, and my allies are on the
other side of the galaxy. And I intend to win.