If Stardock Fails

If Stardock fails, I'll be sad, but PC gaming will go on. 

Obstructive copy protection will be the flavor of the day and we'll all put up with incredibly intrusive DRM in order to play our games.  We're gamers.  It's what we do. 

I'll support Stardock with my money and by recommending them to everyone who cares to listen.  Some, who might not be so willing will get to hear it anyway.  GalCiv2 is destined for many a stocking come Christmas. 

In the end though, I'm a gamer.  Not gonna stop anytime soon.

I'll say this though.  If Stardock fails, buy stock in rye whiskey.  I'll be consuming much more.

Errr, rest assured: Stardock and failure are mutual exclusive.

As for whiskey: Braes of Glenlivet Single Malt for me.

Well, strictly speaking DRM is already the norm. Stardock is the odd-ball. If for some reason their game side business flops (though the way it's going, especially them looking to hire more game devs recently, it's highly unlikely), the rest of the gaming world will remain mostly unchanged, save for us no longer having access to DRM free games on Impulse, and probably being unable to look forward to more DRM-free games.

I think its going to reach a point when something breaks. Either companies realize that DRM is bad, or the pc gaming industry falls apart. Take the amazon ratings for example, thousands of 1-star reviews because of drm. That definitly hurts sales. If the big publishers continue to strain developers, nobody's going to want to make games, shutting down the industry, save for a few indies.

I'll take The Balvenie Doublewood please.

Actually, not really. Spore sold over 1 million in just a couple weeks after release, despite all the Amazon reviews. Not that I'm defending the DRM, but Amazon is just one of very many ways to buy games. No one "store" can really hurt it that much.

....and he mentions the scotch to rule them all! 

Stardock is not the only one. Bethesda, for example, will have only a simple disc check on Fallout 3. This is viewed negatively by some in the gaming industry, but those are just people who still do not realize that the only ones benefitting from DRM are companies which produce and sell DRM security "solutions". To this day no DRM scheme has lasted more than a week or two at the outmost. If it's a program, it can be hacked. If I were a publisher, I wouldn't waste my money on something that does not work and only aggravates my paying customers.

In any case, the backlash from DRM issues recently seen with Spore and Mass Effect does take its toll. I think we are going to see fewer invasive DRM schemes in the future once neolithic companies like EA get their act together (and they will when they realize they are only losing money with their DRM solutions - this just takes time because, like all such mega corporations, they tend to be kinda slow).

That's probably not the best thing to say when talking about hard liquor.

let me clarify my point with DRMs. currently the lighter DRMs are the norm however the more frustrating DRMs will become the norm if Stardock has a falling out. A smart company would use a stardock failure as a reason to create stricter DRMs, which in turn would make gamers much more frustrated posibly turning them to pirating games because without the DRMs the games are much easier to use.

If this hypothetical situation would occur the PC gameing industry could be destroyed

but thats just my opinion

Ahh....Scotch. My first was Cutty Sark, when I was 17. It burned and I thought I would puke, so I had another shot. Now I'm so much older and have moved up the ladder to the Glens (Livet & Fiddech) and I've had the Balvenie Doublewood also, fine stuff. There is nothin finer than a smooth single malt. As a matter of fact this thread has brought out my present bottle of Glenlivet. But even the worst scotch is better than that urine colored stuff they call beer these days. If it hasn't sat in a keg for at a minimum of 12 years, it should'nt be served to man or beast. So I raise my glass to Stardock in toast, "Here's to the first 15, and may they just keep coming!" MMMMM.......scotch.

Very nice! I'm patrial to Lagavulin, but I'm rather pissed off that it's jumped to 125 bucks a bottle up here (Canada) now. Recently tried Laphroaig and quite like it as well and today I picked up a bottle of Bruichladdich (never had that one before. Quite nice). That Balvenie Doublewood is damned good stuff though.

Personally I bought Sins of a Solar Empire as soon as I heard they were going to trust people with the lack of DRM on the game, and I plan on continuing to buy their products/use impulse to support it (and honestly having Impulse around to download/install things whenever I want is awesome)

Just bought Dreamscape for the cool backgrounds!

I doubt it will ever become a standard by the majority of the market, but I'll be damned if I don't support the developers that do take the plunge and trust their customers

I'll drink everythign that's been listed if you force me to. 

I've been drinking the Laphraig of late.  No complaints and a good fit for my budget at the moment. 

Can you go wrong with an Islay single malt? I somehow can't picture it.

*edit* Oh, and this talk of scotch has prompted me to pour myself a Laphroaig. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm...

What you have to remember is that games are only one side of Stardock's business.  They also sell a range of applications which include but aren't limited to the enhancement of the desktop.  Unless someone designs The One Desktop To Rule Them All, you can pretty safely assume that the business won't fail.

Also, just because Stardock doesn't slap copy-protection on its games, doesn't mean they are doomed to be duplicated to death.  Because you need to buy one of their games to get free updates for that game, there's quite an incentive to.... *drum roll* actually buy the game.  If someone did play an arrr'd game and liked it enough to buy it, then there's one arrr less, matey.

Gotta remember that part of the reason Stardock's games division is profitable is that they choose to design games that are for people who are more likely to pay for instead of pirate games.

There's a reason Stardock isn't making FPS's and instead is making games like Galciv and notMoM.

notMoM, I like that name.

Also keep in mind that the companies do not enfore restrictive DRM because they are evil and like to cackle in the evening reading reports from tech support about frustrated gamers not being able to play their legit copies. Restrictive DRM *will* fail, for several reasons:

1. It's totally inneffective

2. It hurts sales

3. It aggravates existing paying customers

4. It generates negative PR

Once companies realize they are losing more money because of their restrictive DRM schemes than because of piracy, you will see a change in direction. Also, PC game market will not fail. If every company on the planet decided to pull the plug on PC production today, tomorrow you would have a new company happily coding away because it suddenly has a huge market all to itself. And it wouldn't be the only one. Money is honey, and despite what panicky CEO's have to say about pircy hurting their sales, fact is PC games tend to net alot of honey. And past experiences tell us that as long as the market bears profit, it stays alive.

Bookers Single barrel.

Stardock FTW!!

The only way to make the bean counters at companies like EA stop and take notice is to stop buying their DRM riddled games. If you bought Spore YOU are part of the problem and have no place to complain. I see quite a few saying how they're anti-DRM, yet in the same post say they bought Spore knowing about the issues. You have only yourself to blame.

I love how there's 2 separate threads going on....

I didn't buy Spore, and we all know why. I did ask for SoaSE for my birthday. No guarantees, I guess, but if I don't get it I'll probably buy it.

well, sins (and a lot of other games) have the advantage that the multiplayer is in integral of the whole game - and you can´t pirate working cd-keys (i.e. those that work online).

so, at leat for multiplayer games the world doesnt look that bad at all

I still don't understand why companies waste money on copy protection. I think part of the problem with piracy is because of copy protection.

Why should I, a legitimate buy feel like a criminal? I bought the game legally. They are installing hidden software without my knowladge, how is that legal?

Also because I had some problems with copy protection, witch I bought legally and now can't play. So what did I have to do? I had to get a crack so I can play my game witch I paid $80 for. Now that I see how easy it is to get a crack why should I buy games now?

I havn't downloaded any games yet since I don't bother much with them any more, since most games that come out I find are garbage. All these new games that come out don't even play on my computer even though I exceede the minimum requirements. I get console games now, at least I know it will run without any problems on the 360. Why should I have to upgrade my computer to just play a game? *cough cough Civ

Also after spending my money lots of the games are not even playable because of game breaking bugs. Why do they think they can release an incomplete game and patch later? *cough cough Call to Power

So if I had more time in my life, I think I would be downloading free games now, because A) I know they will run, and if they don't I havn't wasted my money since I can't get a refund.

I have bought a game, and funny enough they are from Start Dock. I would have gotten Anor but I only get games in a box, so havn't gotten it yet. The only other games I get are for the 360 so it looks like my PC buying days are gone now, unless it's from Bethseda or Star Dock.