Shadowcat on 30/8/2008 at 03:14

---

The point is that gamers should not have the right to expect (which kinda equates to 'demand') any kind of update for a game that is released in a complete and stable state. That implies that all games must receive 'meaningful updates', which is stupid.

If the developer says there will be updates, that's different. And if they supply updates regardless of expectations, that's awesome. But if the game was already complete on release, updates are unnecessary.

No one is saying that "new official map packs" or anything else is "unwanted". Just that stating that such things should be mandatory for all games is ludicrous.


Agreed. They've basically made a list of things that they do themselves, and offered that up as the list of things that gamers should be looking for. And I mostly agree with them, so that's cool, but I still think it's a marketing stunt :)

The_Raven on 30/8/2008 at 04:18

---

Merely updating the version number. :p

EDIT: Yes, some of the items are rather silly in the context of a "bill of rights."

doctorfrog on 30/8/2008 at 07:25

---

I noticed this little slip in the article as well. Brad's more or less on record stating that you don't own a copy of his software, just the license to use it. That he includes this wording in his 'bill of rights' shows that even in his mind, when you pay for something, it makes sense that you own it, not merely permission to use it at the publisher's discretion. Yeah I'm picking nits, but software activation sticks in my craw.

All the same, though, Stardock has been a remarkably stand-up publisher in my limited experience so far. And, to their credit, they've stated that if there was another way to control access to their software updates, they'd elect to use it. Finally, unlike Steam, (and included in the 'bill') neither Impulse nor the older Stardock Central need to run, or even be installed, on the machine you're running their software on-- it just needs to be present for updates. They're also (unofficially) considering a 'portable' build of Impulse for those who don't even want to install the software at all, but still want to be able to update their software.

From game launch to game play, TF2 takes a couple unnecessary minutes to get going. Galactic Civilizations doesn't need to call home or load up an authentication framework, and starts more or less immediately.

RavynousHunter on 30/8/2008 at 08:58

---

Ok, I simply can't resist adding my 2 cents; so I'll refute some of Koki's points.


To put it simply, you can't. Though something like a 2-week money-back thingy might alleviate this somewhat.


Technically, yes; however, many games have a very large bug list after initial release. What's being implied here is that game companies need to do more testing to root out these bugs and design flaws before the game even hits the shelves; look at Ultima VIII and IX, the hideous amount of bugs and design flaws tarnished their reputation, and even though OSI put out patched versions, the damage was already done. Initially releasing a buggy product grants you a bad reputation, which can hurt sales significantly.


Again, technically, yes. Game updates are "meaningful" in that they add something or fix a problem, however, it's the relative importance of these additions/problems that's in question here. Adding a new NPC that makes you special new arms/armor? That's usually meaningful, as it will have a direct impact on the game. Shifting the effectiveness of a single skill by a few percentage points (relatively speaking), is unimportant, as it really changes very little.


Might work for some, however, there are others, the names of which I can't recall at the moment, that require active network communication between you and the server in order to allow usage. This is what they're talking about, anything as blatantly obvious as what you said doesn't even deserve mentioning because it is, as I have said, obvious unless you are completely computer-illiterate.


True for the most part, however, I think what they meant was minimum requirements that worked for a large enough population and allowed them to run the game at about medium detail levels with average to good performance.


Take a look at World of Warcraft, it places blatant spyware on your computer that you have no choice but to have installed if you actually want to play the game. Of course, this kind of sneaky DRM bullshit isn't limited to gaming, just look at the lil Sony rootkit debacle a while back.


I believe torrents may be what they're referring to here, for example, say you bought a copy of Thief in say... 2000. Well, yesterday, your Thief CD pushed up daisies and you're S.O.L because you can't find someone who sells Thief any more. However, you discover that someone put an iso up on a torrent site. What's being said here is that once you pay for a game, if it should break down or cease to function for any reason, you should therefore have the right to acquire it for free, as you have already paid for the game once.

As for having to put the CD/DVD in the drive to play, I do agree that is inefficient at worst, but it also increases the rate of degradation of the media. If you only used it when you installed it, then it wouldn't break down nearly as fast as a game that required the disc to run.

ZylonBane on 30/8/2008 at 13:39

---

Just FYI, it's statements like this that lead people to maintain the general impression that you're a drooling halfwit.