OT: Stardock going DRM
eddys...@hotmail.com
Previously their games didn't require a server activation for the base
game, only for the patches.
This is about to end.
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewstory&threadid=96882
"When a player runs the game for the first time, the Goo’d program
lets the user enter in their email address and serial number which
associates their game to that person as opposed to a piece of hardware
like most activation systems do. Once validated (red : by connecting
to a server), the game never needs to connect to the Internet again."
<scratches Brad Wardell of the Good Guys list>
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Bloodstar
<scratches Brad Wardell of the Good Guys list>
LOL and you should scratch yourself from the Good Guys list. I remember how
I have been first to discover that sleazy bastard who used all sorts of lies
and cheap marketing tricks and many believed him. But I was crucified on
this ng and flamed and they said that I was wrong. Now eat your own words
:)))
In my book Brad Wardell is worst of the whole bunch because he was not
sincere at all.
Mario
Giftzwerg
c7f232...@j39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
I loved the bit about how this is a better "solution" because gamers
won't have to worry about the developer going out of business since
Stardock will be handling the activation. Oh, snap, how much better
that is! Now gamers only have to worry about *Stardock* going out of
business!
Now when the chain-server goes tits up, *all* your games will disappear,
instead of just one!
Oh, but these people are all assholes.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"After a week in which President Obama thanked himself for inviting him
to the White House, compared AIG executives to suicide bombers, and did
the first Presidential retard joke on national TV, I was impressed to
find that Slate is bravely keeping up its 'Bushism Of The Day' feature."
- Mark Steyn
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
Yep. You were right all along. Advantage: Mario.
Bloodstar
Thank you.
eddys...@hotmail.com
> I loved the bit about how this is a better "solution" because gamers
> won't have to worry about the developer going out of business since
> Stardock will be handling the activation. Oh, snap, how much better
> that is! Now gamers only have to worry about *Stardock* going out of
> business!
Recently Brad Wardell gave us an insight into production costs and
sales. Going by the comments on Bluesnews this move is going to affect
his bottom line. Will he be smart enough to figure out what caused
it ? Or will the net gains of this delivery platform selling other
people's games outweigh the negative impact of this on his own games ?
Wait and see.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
eddys...@hotmail.com
> In article <gqfcoc$nk...@sunce.iskon.hr>,
> george.washing...@microsoft.com says...
>
> > <scratches Brad Wardell of the Good Guys list>
>
> > LOL and you should scratch yourself from the Good Guys list. I remember how
> > I have been first to discover that sleazy bastard who used all sorts of lies
> > and cheap marketing tricks and many believed him. But I was crucified on
> > this ng and flamed and they said that I was wrong. Now eat your own words
> > :)))
>
> > In my book Brad Wardell is worst of the whole bunch because he was not
> > sincere at all.
>
> Yep. You were right all along. Advantage: Mario.
Takes one to recognize one early on ?
Actions speak louder than words.
Up to now the out-of-the-box version of his games did not contain any
DRM, despite the double-talk we sometimes got from him. And the 1.0
releases were pretty solid too so there was no reason to shun his
products.
Now there is.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> > Yep. You were right all along. Advantage: Mario.
>
> Takes one to recognize one early on ?
>
> Actions speak louder than words.
>
> Up to now the out-of-the-box version of his games did not contain any
> DRM, despite the double-talk we sometimes got from him. And the 1.0
> releases were pretty solid too so there was no reason to shun his
> products.
>
> Now there is.
Wardell comes in for an extra measure of disliking, IMO, because he was
tooting his horn so much over issues like SPORE's DRM. I guess he was
just fulla shit, eh? I mean, this fucking "Gamers Bill of Rights" he
keeps spouting about? How about being able to *buy* the fucking thing
you're paying for?
This GOO system is "better" than other activation systems in one
respect; if Stardock does disappear and their chain-servers die,
presumably the original game designer would still be around and could
patch the software. So it gives on extra shot not-to-lose.
But it's meaningless. For the millionth time, I'm going to start buying
these products with Nazi eLicensing only when I can pay for them with
"eMoney" which I can reclaim from the publisher's coffers if they do
anything that makes me unhappy.
Juarez
news:MPG.24350d2a...@news-east.giganews.com...
> Yep. You were right all along. Advantage: Mario.
Don't forget me too! I also had to put up incessant flames from you dilberts
and it is now time for you all to admit the wrongness of your ways and take
me out of your killfiles. I am a forgiving man so no hard feelings. ;)
mcv
> In article <d55e8cd9-fd13-4443-a13e-
> c7f232...@j39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
> says...
>
>> lets the user enter in their email address and serial number which
>> associates their game to that person as opposed to a piece of hardware
>> like most activation systems do. Once validated (red : by connecting
>> to a server), the game never needs to connect to the Internet again."
>>
>> <scratches Brad Wardell of the Good Guys list>
>
> I loved the bit about how this is a better "solution" because gamers
> won't have to worry about the developer going out of business since
> Stardock will be handling the activation. Oh, snap, how much better
> that is! Now gamers only have to worry about *Stardock* going out of
> business!
>
> Now when the chain-server goes tits up, *all* your games will disappear,
> instead of just one!
The activation is only once, so your games won't disappear. They'll
survive for as long as the last machine you installed it on.
Still not good enough, ofcourse. Shame, Brad sounded like one of the
few big publishers who knew what he was talking about.
mcv.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel
Giftzwerg
says...
> > I loved the bit about how this is a better "solution" because gamers
> > won't have to worry about the developer going out of business since
> > Stardock will be handling the activation. Oh, snap, how much better
> > that is! Now gamers only have to worry about *Stardock* going out of
> > business!
> >
> > Now when the chain-server goes tits up, *all* your games will disappear,
> > instead of just one!
>
> The activation is only once, so your games won't disappear. They'll
> survive for as long as the last machine you installed it on.
Yep, and in my case, that's about three months.
> Still not good enough, ofcourse. Shame, Brad sounded like one of the
> few big publishers who knew what he was talking about.
Depressing. Yes. And his new gizmo will still end up on torrents with
the usual dizzying speed.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"All of Europe, which has nationalized health care already, is also
experiencing the current economic crisis. Why does Obama believe that
bringing national health care here will in any way save us a similar
economic crisis in the future?"
- Jonah Goldberg
Bloodstar
Takes one to recognize one early on ?
LOL Really... In fact people think that I am too just, too naive, and maybe
even too good.
So I lost too many money on not honest people in The Balkans. So watch your
tonque.
But of course you know me from Usenet. Buarghahaha.
Briarroot
This move is hard to figure out considering Wardell's past comments on
DRM issues. The inference is that Stardock was pressured to take this
step by the other development houses whose games they're now publishing.
Is it a bad move? Well, *I* sure don't like it, but the only important
question is will the majority of Stardock's customers even notice it?
I'm guessing the answer is no, they probably won't.
Onward... into the future! <sigh>
--
"Man will always be Man. We tried so hard to create a society that was
equal, where there'd be nothing to envy your neighbor. But there's
always something to envy: a smile; a friendship; something you don't
have and want to appropriate. In this world, even a Soviet one, there
will always be rich and poor; rich in gifts - poor in gifts, rich in
love - poor in love." - Comrade Commissar Danilov in "Enemy at the Gates"
Briarroot
> <scratches Brad Wardell of the Good Guys list>
>
>
> LOL and you should scratch yourself from the Good Guys list. I remember how
> I have been first to discover that sleazy bastard who used all sorts of lies
> and cheap marketing tricks and many believed him. But I was crucified on
> this ng and flamed and they said that I was wrong. Now eat your own words
> :)))
>
Nope. I'm not buying that. If Wardell were the evil sleaze bag you
keep claiming he is, he wouldn't have *announced* Stardock's new DRM
scheme, it would have simply been silently slip-streamed into future
releases.
> In my book Brad Wardell is worst of the whole bunch because he was not
> sincere at all.
>
Sincerity is over-rated. *Hitler* was sincere!
In any case, think Wardell *was* being sincere and *would* have
preferred to eliminate all forms of DRM, but he's running a business and
that business has recently contracted to publish games from several
other developers. It's likely that *they* are the one's pushing for
this new scheme, not Wardell himself. Of course, I'm giving the man
credit for being honest - you aren't.
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > LOL and you should scratch yourself from the Good Guys list. I remember how
> > I have been first to discover that sleazy bastard who used all sorts of lies
> > and cheap marketing tricks and many believed him. But I was crucified on
> > this ng and flamed and they said that I was wrong. Now eat your own words
> > :)))
> >
>
> Nope. I'm not buying that. If Wardell were the evil sleaze bag you
> keep claiming he is, he wouldn't have *announced* Stardock's new DRM
> scheme, it would have simply been silently slip-streamed into future
> releases.
I'd still argue that this is yet another attempt for publishers to sell
us shit and convince us that it's really chocolate ice cream. Wardell
appears to believe (or at least is a good actor) that there's something
fundamentally different about the Nazi DRM he's preparing to inflict on
gamers. There isn't. It might be slightly less objectionable that what
SES is doing, but it's still Nazi DRM.
So sure, he "announced" it ... but he's trying to tell us there's some
meaningful difference between his Nazi DRM and somebody else's.
eddys...@hotmail.com
I'm this <shows a gap of half an inch> close to chucking pc gaming. 2
days ago "tevans" posted this at The Wargamer in a DRM thread and I
couldn't have put it any better :
"Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
still play. Same with books. Buy a book now it's just as good in a few
years. There's no publisher trying to tell me how many times I can
play the boardgame or read the book. I hope any company pushing DRM
goes out business. They deserve to. Instead of worrying about "lost
sales" they need to worry about taking care of paying customers. Good
customer service means repeat business. Take a look at E:TW as an
example. Before it was released CA/Sega was all over the internet
telling everybody how great it was. Now that it's been released
there's barely a peep from them on patching that will actually fix the
game. In other words bad customer service. That's usually the way it
is with all gaming publishers/developers and it's tiresome. Add DRM to
that equation and for me it's just not worth it anymore. This is
supposed to be entertainment not aggravation. When your hobby starts
to become aggravating it's time to find a new hobby or go back to an
old one. That's exactly what I plan on doing. "
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Erik
> In any case, think Wardell *was* being sincere and *would* have
> preferred to eliminate all forms of DRM, but he's running a business and
> that business has recently contracted to publish games from several
> other developers. It's likely that *they* are the one's pushing for
> this new scheme, not Wardell himself. Of course, I'm giving the man
> credit for being honest - you aren't.
Frankly, this sounds quite plausible to me, but I'm just guessing like
everyone else.
Regards,
- Erik
paul...@yahoo.com
> DRM issues.
They have morphed from Stardock to Impulse which is just a version of
Steam. It looks that unlike Steam, you only have to activate once
(Steam re-authentacates every few weeks). Under Impulse they are
selling other peoples games not just those developed by Stardock.
In the past, if you bought a Stardock game electronically, you always
had to register and activate it once (just like Impulse works).
Only the boxed CD version didn't need activation. They have just
expanded it to other game publishers.
They could still use the model of release a boxed version without DRM
as they have in the past. I haven't read if they are abandoning brick
and mortar shops yet. Goo, is a download only game I think.
Tom Brown
the sky. Now THAT is something I don't think anyone can take away from me.
But hey, you never know.
<paul...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0e1edd32-09c1-401f...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Erik
<eddyster...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm this <shows a gap of half an inch> close to chucking pc gaming. 2
> days ago "tevans" posted this at The Wargamer in a DRM thread and I
> couldn't have put it any better :
>
> "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
> computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
> fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
> still play. Same with books. Buy a book now it's just as good in a few
I hate to read this, but I can't blame gamers. I was just thinking
that, all things considered, the mainstream publishers are doing more
IMHO to kill PC gaming than to save it. Now overall, I exempt
Stardock from this, but many other publishers treat the PC as an
afterthought and implement bizarre schemes for PC activation and
protection. Frankly, I'd rather those folks move entirely to the
console, which is where they do much of their primary development and
not turn off all gamers to the PC as a gaming platform, which is
currently the main refuge for real strategy games that simply can't be
found elsewhere.
I certainly hope that wargamers don't abandon the PC and with it niche
companies like Matrix simply because of the problems they've had with
the mainstream publishers. That would be throwing the baby out with
the bathwater, IMHO. If wargaming is your hobby, then there's nothing
that says you have to ditch all computer wargames while you're
ditching other kinds of computer games.
Regards,
- Erik
Bloodstar
> claiming he is, he wouldn't have *announced* Stardock's new DRM scheme, it
> would have simply been silently slip-streamed into future releases.
Well, it didn't take long for him to surrender his NO DRM motto LOL!
Really a stand up guy! Full of consistency!
>> In my book Brad Wardell is worst of the whole bunch because he was not
>> sincere at all.
>>
>
> Sincerity is over-rated. *Hitler* was sincere!
Hmmmmmmmm... Don't agree here. He shouldn't have trumpeted all over known
Universe that his games are without DRM just to make 180 degree turn a few
years later. That's just plain so obvious.
> In any case, think Wardell *was* being sincere and *would* have preferred
> to eliminate all forms of DRM, but he's running a business and that
> business has recently contracted to publish games from several other
> developers. It's likely that *they* are the one's pushing for this new
> scheme, not Wardell himself. Of course, I'm giving the man credit for
> being honest - you aren't.
That only excuses, nothing else really.
Bloodstar
Now thinking of good mottos I can recommend one for no DRM schemes.
Matrix could issue his new company logo - Matrix Games - We didn't screwed
you up like Stardock did! Hint: NO DRM! (TM)
;o))))
Mario
Briarroot
A-yup. :-(
Thankfully, I still have a very interesting collection of old PC games
to play, most of which are without any form of DRM more obnoxious than a
disk-check.
Briarroot
> In article <5a6dnePLobOHDlbU...@posted.toastnet>,
> bria...@gmail.com says...
>
>>> LOL and you should scratch yourself from the Good Guys list. I remember how
>>> I have been first to discover that sleazy bastard who used all sorts of lies
>>> and cheap marketing tricks and many believed him. But I was crucified on
>>> this ng and flamed and they said that I was wrong. Now eat your own words
>>> :)))
>>>
>> Nope. I'm not buying that. If Wardell were the evil sleaze bag you
>> keep claiming he is, he wouldn't have *announced* Stardock's new DRM
>> scheme, it would have simply been silently slip-streamed into future
>> releases.
>
> I'd still argue that this is yet another attempt for publishers to sell
> us shit and convince us that it's really chocolate ice cream. Wardell
> appears to believe (or at least is a good actor) that there's something
> fundamentally different about the Nazi DRM he's preparing to inflict on
> gamers. There isn't. It might be slightly less objectionable that what
> SES is doing, but it's still Nazi DRM.
>
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your assessment, it's just that I don't
see Brad Wardell as being the Devil Incarnate who's been slyly trying to
fool us all.
> So sure, he "announced" it ... but he's trying to tell us there's some
> meaningful difference between his Nazi DRM and somebody else's.
>
My question is: was he given a choice?
Briarroot
>> Nope. I'm not buying that. If Wardell were the evil sleaze bag you keep
>> claiming he is, he wouldn't have *announced* Stardock's new DRM scheme, it
>> would have simply been silently slip-streamed into future releases.
>
> Well, it didn't take long for him to surrender his NO DRM motto LOL!
> Really a stand up guy! Full of consistency!
>
It's been several *years* since Stardock announced their "no DRM"
policy. But business models change and Stardock has recently embarked
on an ambitious venture far removed from their being an tiny independent
developer who produced one PC game every 10 years or so. It strikes me
that Wardell has been forthright with us in the past about his
objections to DRM schemes like the one Stardock has just adopted, but
that's not necessarily a sign of perfidy; it might just be a sign of the
times. Stardock may have overextended themselves financially and, their
sources of credit becoming much stingier as a result of the
international recession, they now find *need* those 3rd party developers
to survive. In other words, Wardell's bargaining position may be
substantially weaker than it was a year or so ago, and he now finds
himself forced to accede to their wishes regarding DRM.
>>> In my book Brad Wardell is worst of the whole bunch because he was not
>>> sincere at all.
>>>
>> Sincerity is over-rated. *Hitler* was sincere!
>
> Hmmmmmmmm... Don't agree here.
>
Which part? ;-)
> He shouldn't have trumpeted all over known
> Universe that his games are without DRM just to make 180 degree turn a few
> years later. That's just plain so obvious.
>
The salient point is "a few years later." I'm saying (just guessing,
really) that this was a business decision that Wardell would rather
*not* have made, if only for the fact that he surely knew that legions
of online critics such as yourself would instantly pounce on him for it.
>> In any case, think Wardell *was* being sincere and *would* have preferred
>> to eliminate all forms of DRM, but he's running a business and that
>> business has recently contracted to publish games from several other
>> developers. It's likely that *they* are the one's pushing for this new
>> scheme, not Wardell himself. Of course, I'm giving the man credit for
>> being honest - you aren't.
>
> That only excuses, nothing else really.
>
Excuses can be meaningful and may result from substantial and
unavoidable changes in situations beyond anyone's control. Shit happens.
Juarez
news:67d6cf70-c8b3-43c6...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>When your hobby starts
to become aggravating it's time to find a new hobby or go back to an
old one. That's exactly what I plan on doing. "
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Good, so we can expect to see no more 100 posts per day here from you then.
Juarez
No it doesn't. You authenticate once and that's it.
Juarez
news:49cb61c0$0$185$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
>Shame, Brad sounded like one of the
> few big publishers who knew what he was talking about.
Sounded like BS propaganda to me to garner more sales, which is all it was.
And to think I had to endure flames from the likes of Giftfart and Briarrot
because they were too dumb to read between the lines.
Mike Kreuzer
news:15ac3944-3a19-4626...@o36g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 26, 12:09 pm, "eddyster...@hotmail.com"
> <eddyster...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm this <shows a gap of half an inch> close to chucking pc gaming. 2
>> days ago "tevans" posted this at The Wargamer in a DRM thread and I
>> couldn't have put it any better :
>>
>> "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
>> computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
>> fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
>> still play. Same with books. Buy a book now it's just as good in a few
>
> I hate to read this,
[snip]
Reactions to this news do seem a little baby-with-the-bathwater to me. A
game publisher -- who's not especially noted for his wargames -- is going
the DRM route. And? So? He's been vocal in his criticism of DRM in the
past. OK, that makes the apparent hypocrisy of his move more interesting,
but not really all that troubling.
So what if his "Gamers' Bill of Rights" was a crock? Which wargames are
going to be DRMed as a result of this? Any? I'm this <shows a gap of half an
inch> close to not even noticing.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
> He's been vocal in his criticism of DRM in the
> past. OK, that makes the apparent hypocrisy of his move more interesting,
> but not really all that troubling.
Actions <> words. I have a deep personal dislike for anyone who
preaches something and does the exact opposite and I hold those guys
to a higher degree of morality than I would demand from someone else.
At work there's this manager who demands everything to be done
*exactly* to procedure, except when it inconveniences him personally,
then the rules suddenly become flexible. He's widely detested, unlike
another manager who's also a "rules are rules" guy, but doesn't act as
if they don't apply to him.
When the local Cardinal came on tv to plead for homing measures for
illegal aliens I wrote an email to his office stating that there was
plenty of room in his palace so he could start by homing a couple of
them himself. Funnily enough I never got a reply.
These are just a couple of examples and I'm not buying the "he got no
choice", "he got pressured into doing so" or "the market forced it on
him" excuses with regard to Brad Wardell. He's the #1 guy in his
company, he *always* has a choice.
I never really trusted him as he seemed too glib, but I was prepared
to give him the benefit of the doubt because his games really didn't
have DRM out of the box but now it seems that Mario got it right from
the start. That's adding injury to insult.
> So what if his "Gamers' Bill of Rights" was a crock? Which wargames are
> going to be DRMed as a result of this? Any? I'm this <shows a gap of half an
> inch> close to not even noticing.
You've got a point, but I don't just play wargames.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Holdit
a7f8e9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
rules you can "patch" it any time you like. Pity playing them is so
labour intensive, though. All the same, most of my Napoleonics gaming is
done with a set of miniatures rules, and tevans is spot on about the
advantages.
In the meantime, apart from purchasing only from publishers who don't
inflict this nonsense on their customers, we'll just have to wait until
a lot of mainstream gamers get very publicly burned by an activation
system. I think server-slaved-DRM will be with us for a while yet and at
an increasing level, but I don't think it will be here forever.
<Crosses fingers>
Holdit
--
"As one particularly fatuous female columnist here in Ireland bleated
during the Danish cartoon disgrace, "freedom of speech doesn't mean the
freedom to offend". Actually, sweetheart, that's exactly what it means."
(Ian O'Doherty)
burna...@gmail.com
wargamer since the 80s, though it's not such a big deal for me to do
this as it has been petering out, down to just a handful of titles per
year.
Simple reasons:
1) Wardell going DRM just shows the trend. No need to repeat the
arguments but it's nice to own things with my hard earned money,
rather than just rent for an undisclosed period. I know I am just
going to get annoyed when I see games I want to play being kept from
me by DRM. This is my few precious hours of leisure time, to hell
with that.
2) Testing software to the extent that is now normally required really
pisses me off. Again, this is my few precious hours of leisure time,
to hell with that.
All the best!
eddys...@hotmail.com
>
> 2) Testing software to the extent that is now normally required really
> pisses me off. Again, this is my few precious hours of leisure time,
> to hell with that.
Where a lot of wargame developers have lost their way is that unlike
the boardgame and miniature world where simple to play games are still
a serious proportion of games published, this is not the case for pc
wargames. Apart from War Plan Pacific there wasn't a single other new
game last year I could just pick up, play and finish in an evening.
Shallow learning curve, 90% of brain power devoted to thinking about
strategy, not how to perform actions in the UI.
So, we get loads and loads of complicated wargames, so complicated
that even with lots of testing loads and loads of bugs remain, which
annoys me too.
To repeat a post of me from over a year ago :
"AH Wargame Sales Numbers Top 3 : Panzerblitz, Panzer Leader and
Tactics II - all entry
level wargames"
I'm reasonably convinced there's a serious market out there for entry-
level pc wargames and it's getting neglected.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
a7f8e9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
> "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
> computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
> fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
> still play.
I think he misspelled, "Twenty years from now, I can pull it off the
shelf and still won't be able to find someone to play against. On
Saturday morning. At 2:34 AM."
eddys...@hotmail.com
> In article <67d6cf70-c8b3-43c6-b143-
> a7f8e9804...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddyster...@hotmail.com
> says...
>
> > "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
> > computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
> > fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
> > still play.
>
> I think he misspelled, "Twenty years from now, I can pull it off the
> shelf and still won't be able to find someone to play against. On
> Saturday morning. At 2:34 AM."
It's what ? - 07:00 AM on the US East Coast right now and there are
currently 49 people in the ASL forum where there's a substantial
number of VASL players.
http://forums.gamesquad.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30
I'd say your chances of finding an ASL opponent at 2:34 AM far
outnumber the chances of finding an online player for a game of
<insert any pc wargame>
Ok, so you can play the AI at 2:34 AM and while some are adequate,
they're no match for a human opponent. I've got a pbem opponent for
WPP lined up for when the patch comes out and am really looking
forward to that.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> > Sincerity is over-rated. *Hitler* was sincere!
>
> Hmmmmmmmm... Don't agree here. He shouldn't have trumpeted all over known
> Universe that his games are without DRM just to make 180 degree turn a few
> years later. That's just plain so obvious.
Years!? It was more like "minutes." Weeks, at least. Wardell was
spouting off about the DRM in SPORE when that came out.
Briarroot
> In article <67d6cf70-c8b3-43c6-b143-
> a7f8e9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
> says...
>
>> "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
>> computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
>> fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
>> still play.
>
> I think he misspelled, "Twenty years from now, I can pull it off the
> shelf and still won't be able to find someone to play against. On
> Saturday morning. At 2:34 AM."
>
Neatly summarizing the reason I bought my first PC and why my boardgames
have remained buried in a closet for close to 25 years.
--
"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the
distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every
time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists
conclude that we object to its being done at all." - Frederic Bastiat
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > Well, it didn't take long for him to surrender his NO DRM motto LOL!
> > Really a stand up guy! Full of consistency!
> >
>
> It's been several *years* since Stardock announced their "no DRM"
> policy. But business models change and Stardock has recently embarked
> on an ambitious venture far removed from their being an tiny independent
> developer who produced one PC game every 10 years or so. It strikes me
> that Wardell has been forthright with us in the past about his
> objections to DRM schemes like the one Stardock has just adopted, but
> that's not necessarily a sign of perfidy; it might just be a sign of the
> times. Stardock may have overextended themselves financially and, their
> sources of credit becoming much stingier as a result of the
> international recession, they now find *need* those 3rd party developers
> to survive. In other words, Wardell's bargaining position may be
> substantially weaker than it was a year or so ago, and he now finds
> himself forced to accede to their wishes regarding DRM.
Or, maybe he's just an hypocritical asshole. William of Ockham likes my
theory better.
> The salient point is "a few years later." I'm saying (just guessing,
> really) that this was a business decision that Wardell would rather
> *not* have made, if only for the fact that he surely knew that legions
> of online critics such as yourself would instantly pounce on him for it.
No. Sorry. I call bullshit on the notion that poor, helpless Brad was
forced into accepting DRM by The Black Legions of Evil. DRM appears
when paranoid scumbags start focusing on people who *might* be stealing
from them instead of their paying customers.
So, dear Brad; you just lost the chance to ever get any of my money. I
hope the billions now pouring in from Chinese hackers is worth it.
> Excuses can be meaningful and may result from substantial and
> unavoidable changes in situations beyond anyone's control. Shit happens.
Uh, what - exactly - changed?
Giftzwerg
60b4ed...@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
> > > "Not gonna work for me. I've decided to get almost completely out of
> > > computer gaming. Back to boardgames, minatures and ASL for me. No
> > > fuss. No hassle. Twenty years from now I can pull it off the shelf and
> > > still play.
> >
> > I think he misspelled, "Twenty years from now, I can pull it off the
> > shelf and still won't be able to find someone to play against. On
> > Saturday morning. At 2:34 AM."
>
> It's what ? - 07:00 AM on the US East Coast right now and there are
> currently 49 people in the ASL forum where there's a substantial
> number of VASL players.
>
> http://forums.gamesquad.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30
>
> I'd say your chances of finding an ASL opponent at 2:34 AM far
> outnumber the chances of finding an online player for a game of
> <insert any pc wargame>
>
> Ok, so you can play the AI at 2:34 AM and while some are adequate,
> they're no match for a human opponent. I've got a pbem opponent for
> WPP lined up for when the patch comes out and am really looking
> forward to that.
But our correspondent above is "getting completely out of *computer*
gaming."
How do you use VASL without a computer?
Briarroot
> In article <gqgnvp$d5t$1...@sunce.iskon.hr>,
> george.w...@microsoft.com says...
>
>>> Sincerity is over-rated. *Hitler* was sincere!
>> Hmmmmmmmm... Don't agree here. He shouldn't have trumpeted all over known
>> Universe that his games are without DRM just to make 180 degree turn a few
>> years later. That's just plain so obvious.
>
> Years!? It was more like "minutes." Weeks, at least. Wardell was
> spouting off about the DRM in SPORE when that came out.
>
Wardell comes out of this looking bad, that's undeniable; so how can we
explain his abrupt about-face? Was he *always* just a lying SOB out to
hoodwink PC gamers? That's what Mario thinks, but I'm not so sure.
In the end I don't suppose it matters much. The trend in PC gaming
seems to be toward more server activation schemes whether we like it or
not. :-/
eddys...@hotmail.com
>
> In the end I don't suppose it matters much. The trend in PC gaming
> seems to be toward more server activation schemes whether we like it or
> not. :-/
Verelendung ...
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Bartow W. Riggs
<snip>
briaarroot wrote:
>>
>> I think he misspelled, "Twenty years from now, I can pull it off the
>> shelf and still won't be able to find someone to play against. On
>> Saturday morning. At 2:34 AM."
>>
>
> Neatly summarizing the reason I bought my first PC and why my boardgames
> have remained buried in a closet for close to 25 years.
>
>
>
> --
><snip irrelevant quote>
Just the opposite for me. My boardgame collection is expanding and being
played all the time and my purchase of PC games has dwindled to only a few.
There have been many sales lost because of DRM.
With the advent of Vassal and cyberboard it is pretty easy to find opponents
for boardgames and they are usually playable solitaire as well. I've had as
many as five games going (some have more) on ACTS/Vassal (Paths of Glory,
Wilderness War, Twilight Struggle x2 and Hannibal rome vs. Carthage) at once
so there is usually something to do. I prefer playing Twilight Struggle via
ACTS actually.
There is no doubt that having AI to play against is a major PC gaming
advantage though just for sheer convenience. It should be noted that there
are some great "dedicated" solitaire board wargames (Silent War and Dan
Verssen's Field Commander game(s) comes to mind immediately.)
So for me, I see the trend likely to continue. There are a couple of ftf
boardgame and wargame groups here in my town (near Sacramento, CA) that
meet at local gamestores/libraries and predict my participation in those
groups will only increase.
So while I rail at DRM the single biggest effect the publishers have had
upon me with their DRM is that they have lost sales and moved me back to
playing more board and wargames. I don't mind.
Mike Kreuzer
news:80673313-6d38-45c7...@f19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
> On 27 mrt, 07:59, "Mike Kreuzer" <m...@FIRSTNAMEkreuzer.com> wrote:
>> He's been vocal in his criticism of DRM in the
>> past. OK, that makes the apparent hypocrisy of his move more
>> interesting,
>> but not really all that troubling.
>
> Actions <> words. I have a deep personal dislike for anyone who
> preaches something and does the exact opposite
Fair enough.
> I never really trusted him as he seemed too glib, but I was prepared
> to give him the benefit of the doubt because his games really didn't
> have DRM out of the box but now it seems that Mario got it right from
> the start. That's adding injury to insult.
[snip]
LOL, also fair enough.
>> So what if his "Gamers' Bill of Rights" was a crock? Which wargames are
>> going to be DRMed as a result of this? Any? I'm this <shows a gap of half
>> an
>> inch> close to not even noticing.
>
> You've got a point, but I don't just play wargames.
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
Don't get me wrong, I certainly agree with you about how on the face of it
Wardell looks like the world's biggest hypocrite, and sure, I play other
games than wargames too. Well, occasionally. But this news has me nowhere
near giving up on PC games. That's not even a consideration. Not even close.
I just do not understand that level of ... reaction (I was going to say
hysteria. <g>).
<shrug> Of course I've been teetering on the brink of giving up on PC games
that aren't wargames for ages now, they're a perpetual disappointment to me.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Mike Kreuzer
news:70f39f4c-3e40-4431...@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
Good entry level PC wargames.
Bad ones keep appearing. Think hundred mile wide Napoleonic artillery units
with two hundred mile ranges ...
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Juarez
news:80673313-6d38-45c7...@f19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
Actions <> words. I have a deep personal dislike for anyone who
preaches something and does the exact opposite and I hold those guys
to a higher degree of morality than I would demand from someone else.
Eddy holds a game developer up to the same moral standards as his local
Priest. Fool!
Briarroot
> In article <tI-dnXTbXbRauVHU...@posted.toastnet>,
> bria...@gmail.com says...
>
>>> Well, it didn't take long for him to surrender his NO DRM motto LOL!
>>> Really a stand up guy! Full of consistency!
>>>
>> It's been several *years* since Stardock announced their "no DRM"
>> policy. But business models change and Stardock has recently embarked
>> on an ambitious venture far removed from their being an tiny independent
>> developer who produced one PC game every 10 years or so. It strikes me
>> that Wardell has been forthright with us in the past about his
>> objections to DRM schemes like the one Stardock has just adopted, but
>> that's not necessarily a sign of perfidy; it might just be a sign of the
>> times. Stardock may have overextended themselves financially and, their
>> sources of credit becoming much stingier as a result of the
>> international recession, they now find *need* those 3rd party developers
>> to survive. In other words, Wardell's bargaining position may be
>> substantially weaker than it was a year or so ago, and he now finds
>> himself forced to accede to their wishes regarding DRM.
>
> Or, maybe he's just an hypocritical asshole. William of Ockham likes my
> theory better.
>
You mean you think the simplest explanation for this move is that
Wardell was lying all along and now he's decided to admit it? I don't
find that very simple at all!
>> The salient point is "a few years later." I'm saying (just guessing,
>> really) that this was a business decision that Wardell would rather
>> *not* have made, if only for the fact that he surely knew that legions
>> of online critics such as yourself would instantly pounce on him for it.
>
> No. Sorry. I call bullshit on the notion that poor, helpless Brad was
> forced into accepting DRM by The Black Legions of Evil. DRM appears
> when paranoid scumbags start focusing on people who *might* be stealing
> from them instead of their paying customers.
>
So what's your explanation then? That Brad Wardell was always a
"paranoid scumbag" who cleverly diverted attention from his abnormality
by releasing Stardock's own games without DRM? Whew!
As I said, I'm just guessing, but *my* Mark I Occam's Razor suggests to
me that the simplest explanation is a *financial* one. I can't see any
other reason for Wardell to reverse course like this and open himself to
such criticism.
>> Excuses can be meaningful and may result from substantial and
>> unavoidable changes in situations beyond anyone's control. Shit happens.
>
> Uh, what - exactly - changed?
>
Oh, I dunno. Maybe it's got something to do with the world's economic
situation, the sales of PC games, the availability of easy credit, the
eagerness of venture capitalists to pour money into internet businesses?
Wall Street crashed six months ago, taking down the rest of the
world's financial systems like a row of dominoes. Trillions of dollars
have disappeared into thin air and investors have grown exceedingly
wary. Isn't that a substantial, unavoidable change beyond anyone's control?
--
"Any attempt to replace a personal conscience by a collective conscience
does violence to the individual and is the first step toward
totalitarianism." - Herman Hesse
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > Or, maybe he's just an hypocritical asshole. William of Ockham likes my
> > theory better.
> You mean you think the simplest explanation for this move is that
> Wardell was lying all along and now he's decided to admit it? I don't
> find that very simple at all!
All I know is that the minute anyone scratched Mr. Brad No-DRM, we found
that he was actually building really rather an elaborate Nazi DRM
scheme. I find it easy to believe that this is yet another example of
someone who *talks* one way and *behaves* the opposite.
Cripes, Briar, it'd be as if we found out you just went on welfare, sued
to get food stamps, registered as "disabled," and took out 15 insurance
polices.
> > No. Sorry. I call bullshit on the notion that poor, helpless Brad was
> > forced into accepting DRM by The Black Legions of Evil. DRM appears
> > when paranoid scumbags start focusing on people who *might* be stealing
> > from them instead of their paying customers.
> So what's your explanation then? That Brad Wardell was always a
> "paranoid scumbag" who cleverly diverted attention from his abnormality
> by releasing Stardock's own games without DRM? Whew!
Again, dude; he's *stuffing his products with DRM*, after previously
ranting about how bad DRM was. And it's not like this "Goo" system
suddenly sprang into being last Tuesday; he must have been working on
developing it all the while he was spouting lying batshit about the
evils of DRM.
Factor that into our calculations; we can revisit every one of his
former statements with the knowledge that he was beavering away to
inflict a Nazi eLicensing scheme on consumers all the while he was
babbling about the evil's of DRM.
> As I said, I'm just guessing, but *my* Mark I Occam's Razor suggests to
> me that the simplest explanation is a *financial* one. I can't see any
> other reason for Wardell to reverse course like this and open himself to
> such criticism.
I don't give a shit what his *reasoning* is, I'm just pointing out that
we can just chuck out all that happy-dappy lying shit he was dishing out
so very recently; now we know what he's really about, and it's as
Gestapo a DRM system as anything from SES.
> >> Excuses can be meaningful and may result from substantial and
> >> unavoidable changes in situations beyond anyone's control. Shit happens.
> >
> > Uh, what - exactly - changed?
> Oh, I dunno. Maybe it's got something to do with the world's economic
> situation, the sales of PC games, the availability of easy credit, the
> eagerness of venture capitalists to pour money into internet businesses?
<laughter>
Ah. I see. It's all AIG's fault?
Bloodstar
is going DRM way and that he will not change it.
Contrary to Jim Rose, Brad Wardell was preaching in a church called Anti DRM
Baptist Church while he was preparing (as you said) DRM Goo system. Birds
goo? :))
Anyway, many customers on Internet said that they will support Stardock due
to it's copy protection scheme which was I admit very low compared with some
others. I can assume that they feel betrayed right now. Or maybe even
tricked, decieved etc...
And to answer Briarrot. Why I was calling Brad Wardell an sleazy bastard? Of
course I couldn't predict the future but I had some third eye or insight...
First of all I didn't liked this trumpeting with fanfaras about his No DRM
schemes while some other publishers at the same time had lesser copy
protection even from Stardock but they didn't published three zillion times
about this on 6 zillion web sites.
I have admitted that I have used harsh words and later I did apologised
about that but now I see that I was right.
Hunger for dollars is maybe not bad things for some but here we have
obsessive hunger for money that is using all available tricks, agendas and
methods just to succeed. OK, his games were good, OK, but nothing so
spectacular.
And lastly I didn't liked his No DRM trumpeting when DRM is implanted in
taking patches off his website! I have Empire: Total War and it is taking
patches automatically from Steam. Who wants patches? I certanly do so that
argument how 1.0 game is so good that you don't need patches doesn't hold
water to me. Patches are nececary. And lasty there are companies that don't
put any sort of copy protection into their products (not even serial key) so
they in fact have the RIGHT to trumpet about NO DRM in their products. Brad
Wardell was just seizing business opportunities. Briarroot is known
knowledgable person about CAPITALISM, BUSINESS etc... What I don't approve
if you walking over dead bodies just to succeed. Hmmmm.
(even at that twenty years from now you could play GalCiv II even if
Stardock is no more but if you want patches then you will in it for
suprise). So basically if they talking about NO Drm then take it from 1.0
game and FROM patches too!!!
Other case is a known bullshit.
I wouldn't give a drawed sheep to Brad Wardell to guard it for me... And in
fact I think that his birtday is LIARS DAY as well. ;)))
Hmmmmm.... I wonder what his customers will say about this when they
suddenly realise that he was making donkeys out of them?
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> Anyway, many customers on Internet said that they will support Stardock due
> to it's copy protection scheme which was I admit very low compared with some
> others. I can assume that they feel betrayed right now. Or maybe even
> tricked, decieved etc...
I believe the famous quip from the film ANIMAL HOUSE is appropriate
here:
"You fucked up! You trusted us!"
Indeed, people can be forgiven for believing Wardell's anti-DRM focus,
for the simple reason that I (we) take people at their word. At least,
when I denounce something, you may rest assured that I won't suddenly
embrace it when some advantage presents itself.
When Wardell was decrying DRM and keeping it out of his products, I (we)
had no reason to imagine that he was then currently chugging away at
developing his own egregious version of it. Again, when some of us tell
you something, it's a lead-pipe cinch that *this is what we really
mean*.
So sure, Wardell comes across as a hypocritical asshole. My read of the
situation is that his next move will be to patiently explain that he's
really *not* a hypocrite ... because his massively-intrusive Nazi DRM is
really not that at all ... but, uhm, some sort of *feature*! Yes,
that's it, his annoying activation scheme is really something else
entirely.
Chocolate-chip ice cream, most likely; that usually how these idiots
explain the shit they're peddling.
> Hmmmmm.... I wonder what his customers will say about this when they
> suddenly realise that he was making donkeys out of them?
Well, I'm not one of his customers, but my position is firm and
consistent; I think Nazi eLicensing is a horror that costs publishers
money. I feel that way when the Brad Wardells of the world seem to
agree with me, and I feel that way when they repudiate their former
positions.
In fact, if Jim Rose appeared tomorrow and explained how he'd had a
change of heart and was removing the Nazi DRM from his products, and
asked me to re-evaluate, he'd get a shiny $100 bill from me. And some
belated applause.
eddys...@hotmail.com
> When Wardell was decrying DRM and keeping it out of his products, I (we)
> had no reason to imagine that he was then currently chugging away at
> developing his own egregious version of it. Again, when some of us tell
> you something, it's a lead-pipe cinch that *this is what we really
> mean*.
Duh.
Why even bother posting something you don't mean ? Well, unless you
treat this ng as an RPG game, which I suspect a fair number of posters
do - fine by me - it's all enterainment - but rest assured that when I
type something, I mean it.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Vincenzo Beretta
> Guys list>
The last days were a whirlwind of activities, so I hadn't the time to put
the head into this. However, I have the feeling that something is missing
from the picture.
The point is that Wardell was *right* in his refusal to embrace the
"Nazi-DRM" path. Not only right in a moral sense, but, more importantly, in
an economic sense too. Why someone who both grasped and defended the right
path - even investing his personal reputation on it - should all of sudden
do a 180° turn?
It is just a question, but, as I said, I feel that things, as are presented,
are not adding up. Let's see what the next days will bring.
eddys...@hotmail.com
>
> It is just a question, but, as I said, I feel that things, as are presented,
> are not adding up. Let's see what the next days will bring.
Yup, in the meantime we can play some Jutland. Oops, no we can't - the
servers are down, locking everyone out.
http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?t=83926
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Vincenzo Beretta
> servers are down, locking everyone out.
>
> http://forums.gamesquad.com/showthread.php?t=83926
You know? Given the time (and a good paycheck - sorry, I have to eat) I
could write a "Network"-like script around this ^_^
'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'
eddys...@hotmail.com
Funnily enough the upcoming The Sims 3 will *not* have online
activation, just a serial number on install. After the Spore fiasco EA
had to do something I guess but to ditch DRM for their main
bread&butter series is a bold move.
As to Brad Wardell, my Ockham Razor Mk I tells me he had this choice :
carry other publisher's games on his platform *with* DRM or not carry
them at all. Money makes people swallow their principles all the time,
but what grates me is that he was still babbling about no-DRM while he
was already busy making a DRM platform.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Vincenzo Beretta
> was already busy making a DRM platform.
Yes, but why you would want to behave like that?
I mean, in this field at the end of the day what counts is what you do. It
is not like in politics, where people need to make "promises" to be elected.
Wardell wasn't running for anything, so doing a turnaround like that only
means that he actively worked towards a loss of face and nothing else. One
could even point to how JR, at least, is faithful to his principles.
I checked Stardock's forums, and there are some rumbles by people noticing
the "DRM-on-the-sly" meat of the matter, but nothing definitive. I would
really like to see someone openly challenging BW about how this new scheme
relates to his "no DRM" views.
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
The obvious question about the forum, though, is whether they've already
moderated any discouraging anti-DRM words out of existence, a la Don
Maddox et al. You know, the kind of "free and open forum" where you can
freely and openly applaud the courage of Wardell in taking on the
software pirates and tobacco companies.
Briarroot
> In article <McidnQBaSq9HpVPU...@posted.toastnet>,
> bria...@gmail.com says...
>
>>> Or, maybe he's just an hypocritical asshole. William of Ockham likes my
>>> theory better.
>
>> You mean you think the simplest explanation for this move is that
>> Wardell was lying all along and now he's decided to admit it? I don't
>> find that very simple at all!
>
> All I know is that the minute anyone scratched Mr. Brad No-DRM, we found
> that he was actually building really rather an elaborate Nazi DRM
> scheme. I find it easy to believe that this is yet another example of
> someone who *talks* one way and *behaves* the opposite.
>
Stardock has ventured into unknown territory trying to compete with
services like Steam etc, offering downloaded games from other
independent developers who quite likely have their own ideas about DRM.
That's a lot different than what they used to do: offer a single game
developed in-house with user-friendly copy protection.
> Cripes, Briar, it'd be as if we found out you just went on welfare, sued
> to get food stamps, registered as "disabled," and took out 15 insurance
> polices.
>
GAAHHHH! I'd sooner set my hair on fire and run up the steps of the
Capital building shouting: "Power to the proletariat!" ;-)
>>> No. Sorry. I call bullshit on the notion that poor, helpless Brad was
>>> forced into accepting DRM by The Black Legions of Evil. DRM appears
>>> when paranoid scumbags start focusing on people who *might* be stealing
>>> from them instead of their paying customers.
>
>> So what's your explanation then? That Brad Wardell was always a
>> "paranoid scumbag" who cleverly diverted attention from his abnormality
>> by releasing Stardock's own games without DRM? Whew!
>
> Again, dude; he's *stuffing his products with DRM*, after previously
> ranting about how bad DRM was. And it's not like this "Goo" system
> suddenly sprang into being last Tuesday; he must have been working on
> developing it all the while he was spouting lying batshit about the
> evils of DRM.
>
> Factor that into our calculations; we can revisit every one of his
> former statements with the knowledge that he was beavering away to
> inflict a Nazi eLicensing scheme on consumers all the while he was
> babbling about the evil's of DRM.
>
>> As I said, I'm just guessing, but *my* Mark I Occam's Razor suggests to
>> me that the simplest explanation is a *financial* one. I can't see any
>> other reason for Wardell to reverse course like this and open himself to
>> such criticism.
>
> I don't give a shit what his *reasoning* is, I'm just pointing out that
> we can just chuck out all that happy-dappy lying shit he was dishing out
> so very recently; now we know what he's really about, and it's as
> Gestapo a DRM system as anything from SES.
>
The only real question here is: *has* Stardock been secretly planning
this for some time even while Brad Wardell was gadding about, extolling
the virtues of DRM-free software, or was this a recent development,
adopted with the greatest reluctance due to circumstances beyond his
control? Without further information, we're all just speculating
according to our own personal tendencies; mine is to See No Evil unless
clear evidence is available and I see no reason to suspect dirty tricks
here. While I understand that Wardell's reasons ultimately don't make
any difference to us, his potential customers, that does not mean that
he was lying all along.
>>>> Excuses can be meaningful and may result from substantial and
>>>> unavoidable changes in situations beyond anyone's control. Shit happens.
>>> Uh, what - exactly - changed?
>
>> Oh, I dunno. Maybe it's got something to do with the world's economic
>> situation, the sales of PC games, the availability of easy credit, the
>> eagerness of venture capitalists to pour money into internet businesses?
>
> <laughter>
>
> Ah. I see. It's all AIG's fault?
>
Just as not every problem can be solved, so too can it be said that not
every problem is someone's fault - but you knew that.
Consider this scenario: Stardock enters into contractual arrangements
with several independent development houses to offer their games through
its new download service. One of the sticking points during
negotiations is the presence or absence of DRM. Wardell can proudly
point to the success of Stardock's games sold without DRM. The
developers he's wooing are wary though, having heard many horror stories
about torrents, pirates and 'lost sales,' but in the end they agree to
accept Stardock's system provided Wardell meets their price - a price
which may only be marginally profitable for Stardock (we're speculating
here). Now comes the Crash, and suddenly Stardock's sources of credit
are drying up while the backers are demanding expedited repayment
schedules. Now Wardell finds himself in a bind because that marginal
profit per-game-sold won't float the company, but if he accepts the DRM
that the developers want, they will allow him a larger slice from each
sale - and Stardock can survive.
I think that, or something along similar lines, is a plausible
explanation; but if you want to join Mario in believing that for the
past several years Brad Wardell was engaged in a propaganda campaign,
staking his reputation on positions in which he did not believe, all the
while planning to publicly contradict himself, then go ahead. I don't
think that idea makes any sense at all, but whatever floats your boat...
--
"The 20th century experimented with every possible variant of socialism.
We had democratic socialism in Western Europe, totalitarian socialism in
Eastern Europe, and fascist socialism in South America. We had atheistic
socialism and we had 'liberation theology.' We had the 'scientific
socialism' of the Soviet central planners and the chaotic jungle
socialism of the Khmer Rouge, who executed anyone with an education. We
had 'socialism with Chinese characteristics' and socialism with African
characteristics and socialism with Hindu characteristics. We tried it
all, and every time it led to poverty and oppression. Those results have
been proven with scientific thoroughness. There is no excuse for trying
it all again." - Robert Tracinski
Briarroot
> And, in fact this is more bad than Jim Rose stance on DRM. He said that he
> is going DRM way and that he will not change it.
>
> Contrary to Jim Rose, Brad Wardell was preaching in a church called Anti DRM
> Baptist Church while he was preparing (as you said) DRM Goo system. Birds
> goo? :))
>
> Anyway, many customers on Internet said that they will support Stardock due
> to it's copy protection scheme which was I admit very low compared with some
> others. I can assume that they feel betrayed right now. Or maybe even
> tricked, decieved etc...
>
> And to answer Briarrot. Why I was calling Brad Wardell an sleazy bastard? Of
> course I couldn't predict the future but I had some third eye or insight...
>
That's R-O-O-T buster!
You may or may not have a third eye - or two heads - I can't tell from
this distance, but I think you were *way* beyond the pale in your
original condemnation of Brad Wardell and Stardock, and nothing in this
latest news has changed my mind.
Briarroot
Wow. First Gifty embraces Mario and now I find myself heartily agreeing
with Vincenzo! <grabs desk in panic>
What just happened here? ;-)
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > I don't give a shit what his *reasoning* is, I'm just pointing out that
> > we can just chuck out all that happy-dappy lying shit he was dishing out
> > so very recently; now we know what he's really about, and it's as
> > Gestapo a DRM system as anything from SES.
> >
>
> The only real question here is: *has* Stardock been secretly planning
> this for some time even while Brad Wardell was gadding about, extolling
> the virtues of DRM-free software, or was this a recent development,
> adopted with the greatest reluctance due to circumstances beyond his
> control?
You mean, like, they whipped up this entire system from scratch over the
weekend? Come now; this has clearly been in development for some time.
> Without further information, we're all just speculating
> according to our own personal tendencies; mine is to See No Evil unless
> clear evidence is available and I see no reason to suspect dirty tricks
> here. While I understand that Wardell's reasons ultimately don't make
> any difference to us, his potential customers, that does not mean that
> he was lying all along.
Actually, I've been re-reading some of Mr. Wardell's musings on the
topic, and he was full of shit all along.
"Stardock's products use activation, and I wouldn't say that it's DRM.
We're just verifying if you're real customer."
http://www.edge-online.com/features/stardocks-copyright-security-
solution
Asshole. Activation is the *purest* kind of DRM. It is, in fact, the
exact kind of DRM that makes customers most angry. To claim activation
isn't DRM means that Wardell is either (a) a dishonest shitbag, or (b)
completely delusional.
For fuck's sake, what kind of DRM can Wardell be bleating about that's
worse than activation? Jeepers, thanks Brad, for saving us from The Bad
Stuff That *Is* DRM!
Bloodstar
> explanation; but if you want to join Mario in believing that for the past
> several years Brad Wardell was engaged in a propaganda campaign, staking
> his reputation on positions in which he did not believe, all the while
> planning to publicly contradict himself, then go ahead. I don't think
> that idea makes any sense at all, but whatever floats your boat...
Well don't try to portray here ME as a bad guy! :)
I have Chris Taylor as my friend on a Facebook and I can ask him straight
question because Demigod is supposed to be released on Impulse in April.
It is not that simple. Read press releases when Chris Taylor signed with
Stardock. He was praising Brad's model all along. So it is hardly to believe
that some developer made him accept DRM or take less cut in profit share.
It is more likely that Brad Wardell was preaching NO DRM while they were
smaller and he took substantial cream out of it and now they are doing the
opposite.
Also it is of not significant difference WHAT was the reason for Brad
Wardell to do this. He already traded his reputation for money doing this.
This is summa summarum.
He was quite lecturing all other publishers how his way is the right one and
he got enormous publicity all along. Now suddenly you want us to believe
that what he have preached was actually worthless?
So he have eaten his own words. But in doing so he didn't actually
apologised to the public for his lies. Nothing! Screw the public and take
the money, that's it! No responsibility!
Have you got some shares in Stardock? ;)
So I am not here the bad guy but Brad Wardell and right now it was proved. I
was flamed here all along but now can chuckle a bit :)
Mario
Bloodstar
>
> You may or may not have a third eye - or two heads - I can't tell from
> this distance, but I think you were *way* beyond the pale in your original
> condemnation of Brad Wardell and Stardock, and nothing in this latest news
> has changed my mind.
Say whatever you want but you have been proved wrong. I don't want to argue
or flame with you on this subject because I want peace with you. Apology
would be nice if you are gentlemen but it is not nececary!
So don't look at me as some enemy or anything else - I am just on the side
of gamer and I just want straight informations from publishers not lies!
So again don't paint ME here as a bad guy!
I didn't eat my words here.
I said three zelion times what I didn't liked in Brad Wardell talkings! (and
he have the face of an rat so he definetly looks like some crook :).
What I didn't liked? I didn't liked his lecturing to other developers, his
using of every possible means to earn extra cash, his lies (which in fact
turned out to be!).
It was really low preaching how DRM is bad, how only quality of game matters
etc... etc... and then implementing a DRM!!!
It doesn't matter fact that his DRM is in fact quite well received here and
apparently is not so nasty like some other. That is not important right now!
It is important to note that he was lecturing others what they should not do
(while he was getting FREE MARKETING IN DOING SO!) and later he done exactly
the same more or less!
Some developers who used to be ridiculed by Brad Wardell could get their
revenge now. LOL
No matter how you try to paint this situation he acted very low!
Mario
Bloodstar
>scheme relates to his "no DRM" views.
I can do that but don't have time for it :)
And maybe it is of no use. He have zillion of fans and they will defend him
all along. Not all but substantial numbers.
And it's their forums and I can bet that they could use fake adresses and
defend themselves :) (I am certain that some companies do that!)
People are like sheeps. Already I see that Brad Wardell is portrayed as
angel on their forums because hey his DRM is not so nasty! It could be
worse! LOL
Nobody has openly said to him that he is a low liar which proved to be.
He got enormous support from gamers with his NO DRM stance, he got also
enormous support in fighting against Starforce and now when he feels that
Stardock is big enough he think that he can do whatever he wants. He got
free publicity and big fan base and now he thinks even if some of them shake
off and become angry, he have substanitial fan base and also he is maybe now
tapping on DRM market as well.
LOL
So take money from all of them :)
Mario
Bloodstar
week despite only being launched nine months ago.
(chuckles)
So it was clear screw the public move LOL
Mike Kreuzer
news:n8udnZinpMKRGFLU...@posted.toastnet...
> Vincenzo Beretta wrote:
>>> <scratches Brad Wardell of the Good
>>> Guys list>
>>
>> The last days were a whirlwind of activities, so I hadn't the time to put
>> the head into this. However, I have the feeling that something is missing
>> from the picture.
>>
>> The point is that Wardell was *right* in his refusal to embrace the
>> "Nazi-DRM" path. Not only right in a moral sense, but, more importantly,
>> in an economic sense too. Why someone who both grasped and defended the
>> right path - even investing his personal reputation on it - should all of
>> sudden do a 180° turn?
>>
>> It is just a question, but, as I said, I feel that things, as are
>> presented, are not adding up. Let's see what the next days will bring.
>
> Wow. First Gifty embraces Mario and now I find myself heartily agreeing
> with Vincenzo! <grabs desk in panic>
>
> What just happened here? ;-)
>
It's the summer of love. <g> How can I fix things ...
In case anyone hasn't seen it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lW6Y4tBXs
"You cannot carry on forever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in
order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit. You
cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt."
Daniel Hannan UK Conservative MEP
Though apparently it's too late, the revolution starts Wednesday ...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/29/g20-protests-london
<?>
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Mike Kreuzer
news:ed4b7b24-2901-4fe7...@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Hahahhahahhahahahhaha: p0wned.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
> <eddyster...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Here's some additional funny stuff - they're desperately trying to
"explain" it
"Therefore, I suspect the internet is having a bad day. A couple weeks
ago, there was a big blizzard on the US east coast that hosed up trans-
Atlantic internet connections for most of a morning. When that
happened, most folks in Europe and on the US east coast couldn't get
the game to work, and had other internet problems. I suspect something
similar is happening today. Right now, the US east coast is being
shelled by torrential rains (they came by here a couple days ago and I
got 9.5" from the storm)."
Bullethead
http://forums.gamesquad.com/showpost.php?p=1140644&postcount=22
.. and JR adding
"The log shows no servers down today, or yesterday.
Could be 1 or 2 items.
1. (Most Likely) German installs had a problem with 1.029 because a of
a missing German resource file. This was fixed with 1.030. Make sure
you have updated to 1.030. You can switch to German id the display
menu form the main desktop.
2. (Least Likely) There is a massive virus spreading around the world
causing havoc everywhere. The main thrust is supposed to go off on
April 1st. THis could be causing Name Server issues with service
providers.
Ours servers have never gone down in the 3 years since we brought them
up."
http://forums.gamesquad.com/showpost.php?p=1140658&postcount=24
-
You just got to admire those "logs" don't you - they can prove
*everything*. The SES version of "my dog ate my homework"
Well, at least now their customers have been given a taste of what it
will be like when they shut that server down for good : no more game
for them.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Mike Kreuzer
news:e5cf1e48-49aa-451e...@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
"Hope you'll be able to find the reason as this situation is the kind of
ammo that the anti-DRM'rs will sieze upon."
Hahahahaha ... massive virus ... hahahahaha ... the internet is having a bad
day ... hahahahaha ... torrential rains ... hahahahaha ...
Sorry, I can't seize the ammo, I'm too busy laughing. <g>
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
HermanH
> "Hope you'll be able to find the reason as this situation is the kind of
> ammo that the anti-DRM'rs will sieze upon."
I'm not anti-DRM. I'm anti-Stupid.
Vincenzo Beretta
> ammo that the anti-DRM'rs will sieze upon."
It never ceases to amaze me how people can perfectly grasp the point without
realizing it.
Bloodstar
Steam servers were not down :) lol and you can play offline as well.
I played Empire: Total War as Turkish... Hmmmm, good game but must be
polished there are many things that were left out and were useful in MTW2
(cannot remember all right now). At least you can reinforce your trooops
anywhere so you don't need to go back in the town.
Well, as Turkish I conquered Georgia and some turns later people started
rebellion and as I split forces and sent some to Persia I decided to
withdraw my forces to Yerevan (from Georgia). But using forces from Baghdad
and those from Georgia I managed to defeat Persia which perfidly declared
war to me. I am sitting in their capitol right now. They have only two
provinces left (Pakistan and Afghanistan I think).
Naval battles are nice and fun.... with right ships ;-))
Overall game needs much polishing. Maybe this game was developed by UK team
of CA (MTW 2 was developed in Australia). Graphics in a battle is strange to
me or maybe my PC is bad.
Overall, very good game but needs 3, 4, 5 patches.
Mario
Vincenzo Beretta
> team of CA
It was. I interviewed them in Horsham (West Sussex) back in 2008. One of the
nicest town I ever visited, BTW.
Giftzwerg
@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> You just got to admire those "logs" don't you - they can prove
> *everything*. The SES version of "my dog ate my homework"
What I want to know is how come I never get to use that "according to
the logs, there were no problems" excuse when I've got 300 users
screaming that they can't log in.
"LIKE I GIVE A FUCK WHAT YOUR LOGS SAY, YOU FUCKING MOMO! I CAN'T LOG
IN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Giftzwerg
says...
> Hahahahaha ... massive virus ... hahahahaha ... the internet is having a bad
> day ... hahahahaha ... torrential rains ... hahahahaha ...
>
> Sorry, I can't seize the ammo, I'm too busy laughing. <g>
You know what's even funnier?
No. One. Noticed.
Microsoft's activation server goes down, and it's huge news by 8:00AM.
Google screws up, and the blogs are buzzing. SPORE manifests a DRM
problem, and 100,000 people neg them at Amazon. Every other DRM fuckup
is major news 15 minutes later, but ...
SES goes down?
No. One. Noticed.
Bloodstar
Well, thanks, I have suspected that. Maybe I will make a list of what needs
to be done (some things are small and some are not so small). Game is of
course a little bit rushed out the door.
Australian team is maybe a little bit more talented. Eh. Maybe.
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> > "Hope you'll be able to find the reason as this situation is the kind of
> > ammo that the anti-DRM'rs will sieze upon."
"If there were some physical, quantum-level penalty for abject
hypocrisy, you would just have vanished in a blinding flash of irony."
- Giftzwerg
> It never ceases to amaze me how people can perfectly grasp the point without
> realizing it.
Terrible, isn't it, how we anti-DRM zealots seize on exactly the thing
we warned them about ... uh, when it happens ... just like we said.
eddys...@hotmail.com
> In article <e5cf1e48-49aa-451e-90e9-dcf49a358922
>
> > You just got to admire those "logs" don't you - they can prove
> > *everything*. The SES version of "my dog ate my homework"
>
> What I want to know is how come I never get to use that "according to
> the logs, there were no problems" excuse when I've got 300 users
> screaming that they can't log in.
In the Real World when something goes fubar you *hope* that the logs
will give you a clue as to what exactly went wrong. Nothing in the
logs means you're in deeper shit than if you did find something. Plus,
you never ever even mention the existence of logs to users - another
trick you learn early on.
But I've got to admit something : "It rained too hard yesterday" is an
excuse that tops *everything* on the official BOFH Excuse List
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~ballard/bofh/excuses
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
@g19g2000yql.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> > > You just got to admire those "logs" don't you - they can prove
> > > *everything*. The SES version of "my dog ate my homework"
> >
> > What I want to know is how come I never get to use that "according to
> > the logs, there were no problems" excuse when I've got 300 users
> > screaming that they can't log in.
>
> In the Real World when something goes fubar you *hope* that the logs
> will give you a clue as to what exactly went wrong. Nothing in the
> logs means you're in deeper shit than if you did find something. Plus,
> you never ever even mention the existence of logs to users - another
> trick you learn early on.
Too true. "Logs" are something you pull out as a last resort.
But I'm not sure we're focused on the right issue here. Isn't SES's DRM
schema supposed to give you seven days or something? My understanding
was that it was *not* supposed to just go clang if an internet
connection back to the slaver-server wasn't present?
> But I've got to admit something : "It rained too hard yesterday" is an
> excuse that tops *everything* on the official BOFH Excuse List
Yeaaaaah, the decision to build fiber-optic cable out of sugar is
starting to look like a bad one.
And ... what rain? Friday and Saturday were simply glorious. Stunning
examples of those first truly warm, sunny days that spell the end of old
man winter.
Briarroot
> In article <pdednUxmPZD1HlLU...@posted.toastnet>,
> bria...@gmail.com says...
>
>>> I don't give a shit what his *reasoning* is, I'm just pointing out that
>>> we can just chuck out all that happy-dappy lying shit he was dishing out
>>> so very recently; now we know what he's really about, and it's as
>>> Gestapo a DRM system as anything from SES.
>>>
>> The only real question here is: *has* Stardock been secretly planning
>> this for some time even while Brad Wardell was gadding about, extolling
>> the virtues of DRM-free software, or was this a recent development,
>> adopted with the greatest reluctance due to circumstances beyond his
>> control?
>
> You mean, like, they whipped up this entire system from scratch over the
> weekend? Come now; this has clearly been in development for some time.
>
Or maybe they just purchased a made-to-order system.
>> Without further information, we're all just speculating
>> according to our own personal tendencies; mine is to See No Evil unless
>> clear evidence is available and I see no reason to suspect dirty tricks
>> here. While I understand that Wardell's reasons ultimately don't make
>> any difference to us, his potential customers, that does not mean that
>> he was lying all along.
>
> Actually, I've been re-reading some of Mr. Wardell's musings on the
> topic, and he was full of shit all along.
>
> "Stardock's products use activation, and I wouldn't say that it's DRM.
> We're just verifying if you're real customer."
>
> http://www.edge-online.com/features/stardocks-copyright-security-
> solution
>
> Asshole. Activation is the *purest* kind of DRM. It is, in fact, the
> exact kind of DRM that makes customers most angry. To claim activation
> isn't DRM means that Wardell is either (a) a dishonest shitbag, or (b)
> completely delusional.
>
> For fuck's sake, what kind of DRM can Wardell be bleating about that's
> worse than activation? Jeepers, thanks Brad, for saving us from The Bad
> Stuff That *Is* DRM!
>
I can't defend Wardell anymore, so I'm gonna bow out right here. My
impression is that he isn't as bad as you're making him seem - but maybe
that's just me.
--
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker
that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."
- Adam Smith
Vincenzo Beretta
> schema supposed to give you seven days or something?
Yup. Like Samara, interestingly enough.
Briarroot
>> I think that, or something along similar lines, is a plausible
>> explanation; but if you want to join Mario in believing that for the past
>> several years Brad Wardell was engaged in a propaganda campaign, staking
>> his reputation on positions in which he did not believe, all the while
>> planning to publicly contradict himself, then go ahead. I don't think
>> that idea makes any sense at all, but whatever floats your boat...
>
> Well don't try to portray here ME as a bad guy! :)
>
Not "bad" just crazy - not that there's anything particularly wrong with
being crazy! ;-)
> I have Chris Taylor as my friend on a Facebook and I can ask him straight
> question because Demigod is supposed to be released on Impulse in April.
>
> It is not that simple. Read press releases when Chris Taylor signed with
> Stardock. He was praising Brad's model all along. So it is hardly to believe
> that some developer made him accept DRM or take less cut in profit share.
>
I was just constructing a plausible scenario, not pretending to know the
truth. My objective was to illustrate that there may be quite ordinary
business reasons at the bottom of all this rather than nefarious plots
featuring "Goebbels-like propaganda."
> It is more likely that Brad Wardell was preaching NO DRM while they were
> smaller and he took substantial cream out of it and now they are doing the
> opposite.
>
But *why* are they doing it?
> Also it is of not significant difference WHAT was the reason for Brad
> Wardell to do this. He already traded his reputation for money doing this.
> This is summa summarum.
>
I disagree. Survival often requires compromise. Think your boss is
stupid and a drag on the company's bottom line? Why don't you tell him,
or tell *his* boss? Think a co-worker is falsifying expense reports but
don't have enough evidence to prove it? Why don't you report him even
though by doing so you may be opening yourself up to charges of slander?
Most of us are forced to bow to the powers-that-be in order to put food
on our tables and keep a roof over our heads. That doesn't makes us
evil nor does it mean we're complacent. It means we're realists.
> He was quite lecturing all other publishers how his way is the right one and
> he got enormous publicity all along. Now suddenly you want us to believe
> that what he have preached was actually worthless?
>
I don't know what Wardell wants us to believe, but he certainly has egg
on his face at the moment. What I'm saying is this: do you think he
planned to embarrass himself this way, or is it more likely that this is
a bitter pill he was forced to swallow?
> So he have eaten his own words. But in doing so he didn't actually
> apologised to the public for his lies. Nothing! Screw the public and take
> the money, that's it! No responsibility!
>
That's an overheated misrepresentation of the facts!
> Have you got some shares in Stardock? ;)
>
Uh... nope.
> So I am not here the bad guy but Brad Wardell and right now it was proved. I
> was flamed here all along but now can chuckle a bit :)
>
Maybe you were flamed for good reason and maybe now Wardell is being
flamed for good reason. I see no reason to take back anything I've said
about either of you! ;-)
eddys...@hotmail.com
>
> But I'm not sure we're focused on the right issue here. Isn't SES's DRM
> schema supposed to give you seven days or something? My understanding
> was that it was *not* supposed to just go clang if an internet
> connection back to the slaver-server wasn't present?
supposed to <-> reality
I can pretty much imagine a piece of code that checks if there's an
internet connection first. If no, update 7-day timer. If yes, and
can't get acknowledgement from the server -> PIRATE -> stop working.
Also, one could argue that your rented game not working right away or
7 days after SES pulls the plug on the server is pretty irrelevant in
the whole DRM discussion.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > You mean, like, they whipped up this entire system from scratch over the
> > weekend? Come now; this has clearly been in development for some time.
> >
>
> Or maybe they just purchased a made-to-order system.
Doubtful. All the articles I've read about Stardock's system is that it
was developed in-house as a response to Steam.
> > Asshole. Activation is the *purest* kind of DRM. It is, in fact, the
> > exact kind of DRM that makes customers most angry. To claim activation
> > isn't DRM means that Wardell is either (a) a dishonest shitbag, or (b)
> > completely delusional.
> >
> > For fuck's sake, what kind of DRM can Wardell be bleating about that's
> > worse than activation? Jeepers, thanks Brad, for saving us from The Bad
> > Stuff That *Is* DRM!
> I can't defend Wardell anymore, so I'm gonna bow out right here. My
> impression is that he isn't as bad as you're making him seem - but maybe
> that's just me.
<shrug>
He's building an activation-based Nazi DRM that's predicated on locking
players out of products they've paid good money for unless they manage
to get the "Mommy May I" from Stardock's servers. This is not different
in any meaningful sense from Microsoft's activation schemes or SES's ...
except that Microsoft is more lenient and penalizes failed activation
far less, and SES is considerably more Draconian.
In other words, how much credit is anyone willing to give this
douchebag, who just joined Jim Rose in the "phone home or your money is
gone" school of Gestapo eLicensing. He's *calling* it Not-DRM, but that
simply means that he's managed - in his own little pointy head - to have
tortured out a definition of "DRM" that includes what other people are
doing ... and lets him off the hook.
It's bad enough that these clowns are trying to tap their DRM up my ass,
but trying to make me believe it's not an ass-reaming is just
incredible.
Briarroot
>> That's R-O-O-T buster!
>>
>> You may or may not have a third eye - or two heads - I can't tell from
>> this distance, but I think you were *way* beyond the pale in your original
>> condemnation of Brad Wardell and Stardock, and nothing in this latest news
>> has changed my mind.
>
> Say whatever you want but you have been proved wrong.
>
About what?
> I don't want to argue
> or flame with you on this subject because I want peace with you. Apology
> would be nice if you are gentlemen but it is not nececary!
>
I haven't done anything requiring an apology. I'm not Brad Wardell! ;-)
> So don't look at me as some enemy or anything else - I am just on the side
> of gamer and I just want straight informations from publishers not lies!
> So again don't paint ME here as a bad guy!
> I didn't eat my words here.
>
I never think of you as "bad" (as in evil) just a bit wacky (as in just
a little crazy).
> I said three zelion times what I didn't liked in Brad Wardell talkings! (and
> he have the face of an rat so he definetly looks like some crook :).
>
You said his anti-DRM campaign was really all about touting his own
software, which you saw as an evil trick while I merely saw it as
Business as Usual. We've had this discussion before: you apparently
think all businesses should be run as if they were charities while I
think that it is incumbent upon each customer to decide if a business
can fulfill his needs. Individual liberty entails individual
responsibility. I won't give that up for some ridiculous fantasy world
where 'daddy' is supposed to watch out for me.
> What I didn't liked? I didn't liked his lecturing to other developers, his
> using of every possible means to earn extra cash, his lies (which in fact
> turned out to be!).
>
> It was really low preaching how DRM is bad, how only quality of game matters
> etc... etc... and then implementing a DRM!!!
>
> It doesn't matter fact that his DRM is in fact quite well received here and
> apparently is not so nasty like some other. That is not important right now!
>
> It is important to note that he was lecturing others what they should not do
> (while he was getting FREE MARKETING IN DOING SO!) and later he done exactly
> the same more or less!
>
Golly gee, "free marketing!" Horrors! <chuckle>
> Some developers who used to be ridiculed by Brad Wardell could get their
> revenge now. LOL
>
Yep. He's left himself wide open to get sucker punched by his
competitors. Why do you suppose he did that?
> No matter how you try to paint this situation he acted very low!
>
Maybe so - or maybe not. The facts have not been entered into evidence yet.
Briarroot
How exactly is anyone screwed by Impulse? *I* may not like it, but I
don't have to become a customer, do I?
Giftzwerg
fe76d1...@v37g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
> > But I'm not sure we're focused on the right issue here. Isn't SES's DRM
> > schema supposed to give you seven days or something? My understanding
> > was that it was *not* supposed to just go clang if an internet
> > connection back to the slaver-server wasn't present?
>
> supposed to <-> reality
Ultimately, sure. But it's interesting that even within the bill-of-
goods SES customers were sold, they got a bill-of-goods.
>
> I can pretty much imagine a piece of code that checks if there's an
> internet connection first. If no, update 7-day timer. If yes, and
> can't get acknowledgement from the server -> PIRATE -> stop working.
>
> Also, one could argue that your rented game not working right away or
> 7 days after SES pulls the plug on the server is pretty irrelevant in
> the whole DRM discussion.
Agreed. The details are so much digital noise. Activation is
activation, and unless you're going Microsoft's route and making
activation so toothless that the user can hardly tell the difference
between an activated product and a unactivated one, then bandying
questions of degree back and forth is fruitless.
Briarroot
Heh! ;-)
"The revolution will not be televised." - Gil Scott-Heron
"Man, were *you* ever wrong!" - Briarroot
Giftzwerg
bria...@gmail.com says...
> > He was quite lecturing all other publishers how his way is the right one and
> > he got enormous publicity all along. Now suddenly you want us to believe
> > that what he have preached was actually worthless?
> I don't know what Wardell wants us to believe, but he certainly has egg
> on his face at the moment. What I'm saying is this: do you think he
> planned to embarrass himself this way, or is it more likely that this is
> a bitter pill he was forced to swallow?
There are two more choices, though:
(3) He actually believes that "activation isn't DRM," and couldn't
imagine how that theory / behavior could end up being embarrassing in
any way.
(4) He knows damn well that "activation is DRM," but figures that there
are enough dumbheads out there in the world that he can snooker
sufficient numbers of the idiots into agreeing with him.
Again, what alarms me is that he seems to be actively promoting the idea
that "activation isn't DRM" when anyone burned when <online music
service here> turned off their DRM servers knows that activation is the
*worst* kind of DRM; your purchased products stop working when they fail
to get a "Simon sez" from home.
Wardell's idea here appears to be that he can "hocus-pocus, mumbo-jumbo,
third-party, tied-to-user-not-machine" his way out of what everyone
knows: If the fucking thing is phoning home and getting permission from
a server or it fails to work, it's Nazi DRM *and it's a bad thing*.
eddys...@hotmail.com
> Yep. He's left himself wide open to get sucker punched by his
> competitors. Why do you suppose he did that?
Because #drones buying DRM'ed games served through a platform
outnumber #informed people who are upset by this ?
Something important needs to fail massively for the drones to notice,
and even then I'm not entirely sure what the reaction will be - have a
look at the SES forum : not a single one drawing the obvious
conclusion that when the SES server goes down permanently, so will
their game.
Send a memo to Einstein : stupidity *is* infinite.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Frank E
wrote:
>Bloodstar wrote:
>> Impulse is poised to exceed one million customers in the next
>> week despite only being launched nine months ago.
>>
>> (chuckles)
>>
>> So it was clear screw the public move LOL
>>
>
>How exactly is anyone screwed by Impulse? *I* may not like it, but I
>don't have to become a customer, do I?
It remains to be seen what they do with the games already out on
Impulse. If they patch it retroactive into GalCiv2 and Sins, then I'll
certainly consider myself screwed by Stardock.
Rgds, Frank
Bloodstar
We have found your pal Brad with his fingers in a honey :))
> I haven't done anything requiring an apology. I'm not Brad Wardell! ;-)
OK...
> I never think of you as "bad" (as in evil) just a bit wacky (as in just a
> little crazy).
Mario Le Foui :))
> You said his anti-DRM campaign was really all about touting his own
> software, which you saw as an evil trick while I merely saw it as Business
> as Usual. We've had this discussion before: you apparently think all
> businesses should be run as if they were charities while I think that it
> is incumbent upon each customer to decide if a business can fulfill his
> needs. Individual liberty entails individual responsibility. I won't
> give that up for some ridiculous fantasy world where 'daddy' is supposed
> to watch out for me.
No... no... no... Again you are making same mistake as Eddy. Connecting me
with region I live. First and foremost I was always opposed to communistic
regime, party etc... Tito was partly OK - hedonist, enjoyed life, done some
good things and some bad things. Balkan is a melting pot, just like USA sort
of - so actually genetically it is more strong than it seems. Of course
there are a lot morons, but when someone is a quality person from The
Balkans, he is good everywhere in The World. We succed everywhere. So it's
not just bad things.
So actually I don't think anywhere near what you said above. Maybe I am even
bigger capitalist at heart than you. Of course I am not but I am not against
good traditions of capitalism at all.
Again, what I didn't liked here... What Brad Wardell actually have done is
taking this prima dona image to himself, and really trumpeting all around
how everything is good what he have done. First, I see here a big pompuse
ego shit character, who really likes to be patted on a shoulder all the
time. Secondly I see a really low character and his action proves that.
DRM is ye pain in the ass but what Brad Wardell actually have done was
tutoring all publishers who used DRM, he call them stupid (in EDGE article)
etc... Basically he was criticizing DRM and voila right now he is using it
and probably even more in the future. It is gray area and you can said that
he actually didn't done anything wrong but his morals are questionable.
If his company is not a charity company then SES, Battlefront.com, Paradox,
Steam, EA are not charity companies either. So basically what I want that
people stick with principles, and their words.
SES in that regard was straight open, they said that they will use DRM
whatever if some didn't liked that but they stick with their word. They
didn't acted Brad's way!
I don't care if some third party company have made him do this! Even at that
what he sells? Now on Impulse there are a lot older games that are also
available on million other places so I don't think that those publishers
have made pressure on them.
And he had arguments, do you forget, that supposedly his copy protection
scheme works? He boasted on Usenet and other places how GalCiv II and SOSE
sold exeptionally well without using intruisive copy protection scheme.
As you see you are alone defending Brad's position here. Other people also
don't approve his action. So it's not just crazy Mario. :)
Why I would have to like man without principles, untrustworthy people etc?
Sorry it is not business as ussual. You can twist "truth" around but
something here is fishy.
I don't like this and that's all.
Mario
Bloodstar
> Golly gee, "free marketing!" Horrors! <chuckle>
Yes, free marketing on his empty words... He was not talking as a game
designer, artist, he was talking like a dirty salesman trying to sell us his
NO DRM shit.
This shitty character is not stupid though.
He had noticed people's anger toward DRM and used that sentiments to boast
his sales. Even that in my book is a dirty rotten scoundrel tactic and I
always say to Erik Rutins - don't do that. Don't be a Brad Wardell. I hope
that he'll listen.
Talk about the game, features, what is good in game, what is thrilling about
the game. But I fuckinly don't care is your game DRM FREE or DRM INFECTED.
I am not interested in publishers talking about DRM, I want that they talk
about games. Because if they talk like dirty salesman trying to sell me
something I love then they can sell shoes as well, or bricks, or pillows or
anything else. So passion about the games they make is a plus.
But I don't care for their dirty games over competition. And their using of
DRM just to get ahead of competition. To hell with all those people, Devil
eat their soul.
That's BAD, and don't do that! Selling your soul for a few dollars more. :)
Disgusting.
> Yep. He's left himself wide open to get sucker punched by his
> competitors. Why do you suppose he did that?
See above. And I will tell you.
You see there are two kind of people: smart and intelligent.
When Alexander Macedonian said to Leonidas (?) to talk what is good about
Macedonians he started to praise them and he have done so well that all
around was jubillation, tables were overturned with joy, wine was spilled,
there was laughter... And then A. M. said to Leonidas, tell me what is bad
about Macedonians and Leonidas talked all bad things about (true)
Macedonians... After he had finished after some half hour there was silence
in a room. All people drop their heads and sadly watched in the floor...
They never forgave him this and someone killed him few months later. A. M.
then said for Leonida : "Leonida was intelligent man but he was not smart".
Smart man think only about himself and intelligent man think about other
people as well (even more).
So Brad Wardell is smart but he is not intelligent.
Falsely people think how he is good guy. OK, some people think this. When in
the end now we see that he think ONLY about his ass, ONLY. And that is his
curse.
And maybe he is even stupid at that. So smartness is not completely proved.
He just proved that people can be big sheep herd. So I am not like others
who praised him on Stardock forums on this DRM scheme. Because he have
crushed his own principles. Supposed principles because I think that he is a
big liar and manipulator.
Other game publishers are polite but I am not in this case. Such vermins
should be squashed on sight!
Stick with your principles or shut your mouth Brad. Simple as that.
> Maybe so - or maybe not. The facts have not been entered into evidence
> yet.
We have time...
Mario
Bloodstar
> being crazy! ;-)
Being "crazy" is good because it is creative. Even God likes those
characters. LOL
That's why I like people from UK, they are also crazy and eccentric.
> I was just constructing a plausible scenario, not pretending to know the
> truth. My objective was to illustrate that there may be quite ordinary
> business reasons at the bottom of all this rather than nefarious plots
> featuring "Goebbels-like propaganda."
It all started when Stardock started to grow and when they wanted to be a
new Steam. That's all. They had somthing like ten times return of
investments on their games so I don't think that they had a money problems.
They just grew in size and have seen that money have started to pour in and
they THEN employed this activation DRM. Before they had DRM as well but just
taken it off line in comparation with steam. DRM was in fact implemented in
their patching policy.
His calculation can misfire this time if enough of his customers goes
Giftzwerg way and refuse to buy his game due to his loss of face in the
public.
He is just playing again that people = sheep thing and he just think that
many people will just accept his DRM as better than other solution and even
be thankfull to him.
That is his plan.
> But *why* are they doing it?
Money. Nothing else. He didn't wanted to stick with his supposed principles,
he traded it for hard cash.
He competes against Steam. But basically now we have two DRM's. LOL
> I disagree. Survival often requires compromise. Think your boss is
> stupid and a drag on the company's bottom line? Why don't you tell him,
> or tell *his* boss? Think a co-worker is falsifying expense reports but
> don't have enough evidence to prove it? Why don't you report him even
> though by doing so you may be opening yourself up to charges of slander?
>
> Most of us are forced to bow to the powers-that-be in order to put food on
> our tables and keep a roof over our heads. That doesn't makes us evil nor
> does it mean we're complacent. It means we're realists.
Yes, he wants more and more and more. He is taking positions in the age of
digital distribution.
But we will remember how he in fact lost his face. All money that he make on
this is not enough to clear this picture. Gone.
> I don't know what Wardell wants us to believe, but he certainly has egg on
> his face at the moment. What I'm saying is this: do you think he planned
> to embarrass himself this way, or is it more likely that this is a bitter
> pill he was forced to swallow?
I like this term eggy in the face :)
OK, I will be merciful. Brad Wardell is not and angel but he is not an devil
too. He is mortal like all of us. Some people try to become something like
Gods or little Gods (hard to explain) but that is very hard so just a few
try this.
Brad Wardell is unfortunately one of those really low characters, people
without a spine in fact. I don't say that that is nececary so bad - he
couldn't choose what he will become. Or maybe he didn't tried to be a better
person. Certanly I don't like traits like this in people. Maybe some think
that this is normal but for me it isn't.
So I really don't pity this guy too much. Let's consider. If that was a
bitter pill he was forced to swallow then his public, his customers should
know whole truth. Other way he is laughing in their face and think it is
cool to make them jackasses.
Suddenly he cannot be open and say what is this all about. I don't buy that.
And he is very stupid if he think that people are so stupid to not see
trough this.
> That's an overheated misrepresentation of the facts!
Urm, yes? Then we want the whole truth. Which he is not giving us. Or maybe
he is giving us twisted truth.
Until proven other way, he is a jackass of the Year 2009.
> Maybe you were flamed for good reason and maybe now Wardell is being
> flamed for good reason. I see no reason to take back anything I've said
> about either of you! ;-)
Hmmmm... At least I am glad that now I am not alone.
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> > About what?
>
> We have found your pal Brad with his fingers in a honey :))
Actually, *you* haven't found anything. You've been *defending* the
purveyors of the worst sort of DRM for as long as I can remember. So
"finding" something about Mr. Wardell simply places him in the same
Nasty-Nazi zone as, oh, Battlefront, SES, lots of folks you appear to
like.
Bloodstar
>
> Actually, *you* haven't found anything. You've been *defending* the
> purveyors of the worst sort of DRM for as long as I can remember. So
> "finding" something about Mr. Wardell simply places him in the same
> Nasty-Nazi zone as, oh, Battlefront, SES, lots of folks you appear to
> like.
Nope. There is a difference. I was never defending DRM per se. And I never
said that I like DRM. I said that it is mostly nececary evil. More or less.
Call me oportunist but if Steam is cost that I can play Empire: Total War so
be it.
And there is big difference between Brad Wardell and Steve or Moon from
Battlefront. Both of these gentlemens didn't preached how DRM is bad all
around Internet and then implemented the one. That is a big difference!
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> And there is big difference between Brad Wardell and Steve or Moon from
> Battlefront. Both of these gentlemens didn't preached how DRM is bad all
> around Internet and then implemented the one. That is a big difference!
It's no difference at all. DRM is DRM, and from a consumer standpoint,
it's equally objectionable when it comes from a formerly-anti-DRM
asshole publisher or a DRM-all-along asshole publisher.[1]
I mean, come now; a woman who is raped takes only cold comfort in the
fact that her rapist has been a rapist his whole life, rather than
someone who previously voiced anti-rape rhetoric but failed to live up
to those standards.
Fucked is fucked, m'man.
[1] The main practical difference appears to be that Wardell makes
games which are hugely popular, and Battlefront / SES makes crap that
almost no one buys. In that light, we understand that Stardock can make
a fantastically better case for "needing" DRM, since it's probably
selling 1,000 times as many copies.
Mike Kreuzer
news:Y03Al.6332$VA5....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
>> Isn't SES's DRM
>> schema supposed to give you seven days or something?
>
> Yup. Like Samara, interestingly enough.
>
Samara?
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
> "Vincenzo Beretta" <reck...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Y03Al.6332$VA5....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
>
> >> Isn't SES's DRM
> >> schema supposed to give you seven days or something?
>
> > Yup. Like Samara, interestingly enough.
>
> Samara?
The girl from "The Ring" - she survived for 7 days in the well before
dying. Unlike Schrödinger's cat she was dead all along, just like DRM
systems :)
That movie really creeped me out - we're both fans of schlock horror
movies, but that one ... yikes.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Mike Kreuzer
news:d253d9c9-354c-4882...@y13g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Ahhh, ta. Probably the only famous (or otherwise) horror film I've yet to
see, and that's either in its Japanese or US version. I knew it has
something to do with water & video tapes, but that's all.
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
eddys...@hotmail.com
> In article <gqrn3b$hm...@sunce.iskon.hr>,
> george.washing...@microsoft.com says...
>
> > And there is big difference between Brad Wardell and Steve or Moon from
> > Battlefront. Both of these gentlemens didn't preached how DRM is bad all
> > around Internet and then implemented the one. That is a big difference!
>
> It's no difference at all. DRM is DRM, and from a consumer standpoint,
> it's equally objectionable when it comes from a formerly-anti-DRM
> asshole publisher or a DRM-all-along asshole publisher.
It makes a huge difference if the publisher is a direct rival of
Matrix - then he immediatly becomes a pal of Mario irrespective of his
actual objectionable actions.
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx