I myself am not using pirated software, and I have not yet sold any of my legally purchased software packages, nor do I intend to (unless my software is having the value of the Blue Mauritius ). I may consider to give it away for free, to a friend or a relative, though. That's what I'm doing with books, music records or CDs, etc. But I can't do this with GC2.

I appreciate that there are people out there who would crack everything or buy cracked stuff as long as they think they get away with it, and that software (and other) vendors care about protecting their value. Problem is that building protection into the product and/or its support is affecting legal customers, too (possibly inevitably?), and is sometimes in conflict with other laws. Very often measures against piracy remind me of medicine killing the patient with the illness.

You could take a simplistic view: If you think Stardock is violating any laws, take them to court and see what happens. Or conversely, if you think you can ignore Stardock's legal claims, do what you like, and let them take YOU to court.
In reality, this is rubbish, at least in the international context. Take Stardock to a German court (I'm German)? Even if the German court accepted my request (which is not certain), Stardock would simply ignore the court. If I were the European Community, it would be different, of course (as Microsoft found out recently). But I'm not.
This means, as a German individual, I am not in a position to use any legal levers against whatever Stardock does, like it or not. Thus the whole legal discussion is pointless, sad but true.

I don't have a practical solution to prevent software piracy without hurting customers, too. You could blame society and its growing lack of generally accepted ethics, but that's pointless, too - love it or leave it (or change it).

But I would like to simply question the paradigm - that software piracy is killing the software (or music) industry. I'm not saying it's not true, but I haven't seen any conclusive evidence supporting the statement. There ARE people using software without paying for it, no doubt, but I'm not convinced it's THE reason for shrinking revenues (by the way, software sales have been higher than music sales in Germany, recently).
For one, piracy helps selling (it's cynical, I know, but it helps to make a product known to a higher number of people, which is exactly the purpose of marketing campaigns). Secondly, at least some users of pirated software buy it legally later. And finally, who is saying which percentage of illegal users would have purchased the product if the pirated version wasn't available? Many of them wouldn't have known about the software, others wouldn't have bothered to buy it.
Like I said, I'm not trying to say software piracy is harmless or a benefit for the software industry, but I would like to see realistic and independant numbers supporting the statement that software piracy is about to kill the software industry (or, more precisely, that the damage outweighs the benefits greatly on the industry level).

I'm not buying any music CDs or DVDs anymore (with the exception of some old stuff), and I'm spending less money on computer games than I used to. The reason is it's not giving me any value for my money. The same old stuff in the 10,001st variation and the 12,345th disguise, yawn! In addition, I'm not buying a new PC every year, and many new games tend to be unplayable on older hardware. Let me add that I don't like games focussing on graphics instead of content, that I don't like being a beta tester for games released deliberately prematurely, and that I don't like to pay for the the extremely expensive marketing campaigns and for the offensive copy protection schemes of many vendors, etc. You can't imagine how much fun older games can be to play (not all of them, admitted).
Sometimes I do buy a game one or two years later at a discount price, when the bugs have been ironed out and I can be fairly sure that I'm going to like it.
I did purchase GC2 when it became available in German stores, though, and I don't regret it. And I would have purchased Dark Avatar had it become available in German stores (I don't buy over the internet).

My own example, representative or not, gives me lots of good reasons for the decline of the software and the music industries, without considering the impact of piracy. And maybe the industry should focus more on providing value for money, on making their customers happy to come back and purchase again.

Just to intercept you here - the only reason the EC is able to take action against Microsoft is because Microsoft has a legal presence in the EU as well (Microsoft UK, Microsoft Germany, etc). Even the EC could do nothing to Stardock, as it's a US based company with no presence in any of the EU.

Which makes it all the more funny that people in this thread prattle on about how the EULA is worth nothing in Germany, and that they'll take Stardock to a German court. No, actually, you wont - as Stardock has no presence within German jurisdiction! As the spammer that sued Spamhaus found out.

I agree - in the legal context. Politically, the EC does have more power than I, and can influence things I can't (unlikely they would go against Stardock, though ).

I have a question relating to this topic. Let's say I buy the Ultimate bundle when it comes out, and I give my brother or a friend my copy of the Gold Edition. how do I do this without giving up my account info? Please Respond.

PS: I read this entire topic some time ago, but I do not have time to re-read it right now, so I apologize if my question has been answered. If it has, simply quote the answer. Thank you in advance.

If you order direct, it'd get automatically registered to your account, and once done, serials can't be transferred to another account. But if you only have GC2/DA on your existing account, you could change the email and password on it (via My Account at the top of the forum->Stardock Account) before giving it away, then create a new account for yourself with that email again to buy Ultimate on.

It'd be nice if they could disable the previous serial number and enable a new one for a transferred license. That said, for a mature, updated product like GalCiv2, it's hard to ensure that all copies have been removed withour resorting to online verification, which SD has (thankfully) avoided. If the cost of no copy-protection--and the convenience that comes with it--means I can't transfer a license, then so be it. It's better than having Sony put root-kits on my machine.

Not that I like the new registration at BattleFront. But with their registration / activation you can transfer your serial etc with not input from BattleFront so StarDocks model is way out of date.

Also Matrix Games serial protection is also very good. I believe they monitor any serials found on the net and exclude them in all future patches, as all their patches need the serial to be entered to apply the patches. To me this is the best system around and seems to work very well.

I will always support Matrix Games because of this, and unlike StarDock you will always be able to install your game and apply the patches. Even when the game is no longer supported.

If StarDock made some sort of garantee that they would release a standalone full patch in "X" years after the games release that did not require activation I would purchase more of their titles.

Cheers MarkL

I've been buying stardock games for a long time, I really like their method. I lost my original galciv disks long ago, for instance. I've had a billion computers since back then, and moved several times as well. No big deal though, I can just reinstall through SDC any time, no hassle. No weird stuff installed on my machine disabling nero (like STEAM does) regardless of how legitimate my use of NERO might be.

Yes you can re-sell your copies, but the new user doesn't get the license w/it so all you're really selling is the physical tangible cd/dvd, useless. Well, I guess it works as a sort of demo, so not completely useless. If he can show you did so knowingly, you might even be technically be guilty of fraud for making such a sale, depending on if you actually represented it as more than it was. Find a consumer law lawyer and sue gamestop for fraud if they don't let you return it after you find you can't use it and I'm sure they'll stop reselling such games before long. And of course,even if you aren't bound by the EULA, stardock is under no obligation to provide support to 3rd parties they've never gotten any money from. How would they continue to pay for their support staff. It would be nice though if it said on the box for stardock games that it'll work for the original owner or something like "this game can't be re-sold", or what have you (and maybe they do say such a thing, I don't know). In the very least it'd keep retailers from getting mad at stardock for getting them sued for fraud by their used game customers. hehe

I am going to quote myself from another thread:

DRM as a whole is not meant to stop piracy (it never did do that successfully, nor was it designed in a way that COULD do so), it is a trick to force customers to purchase the same product again and again. (which several big DRM advocates HAVE publicly declared as their ultimate goal)

Software companies like to pretend that their product is both intellectual property which they license, as well as a physical product which they sell you. And somehow combined so that the consumer gets the negatives of both and the benefit of neither. and vice versa for the seller.

When you sell a DVD you are transferring a physical product, one that was manufactured, transported, purchased, and has to be disposed of (at taxpayer expense) when trashed. And has to be repurchased if damaged. Just like a car.

Digital distribution does NOT do that. Digital distribution treats it as 100% IP that is licensed to you. You have one lifetime license to use a game, a license that does not need to be repurchased if your CD is scratched. Therefore you are getting the benefits and drawbacks of the IP licensing method. Which is, overall, fair and reasonable. And you have NO right to resell the product at that system.

If you wanted the model in which you could sell the DVD than you have to agree to a model where DVDs can NOT be duplicated under any circumstances, that the DVD has to be in the drive to run the game. And that if the DVD breaks then you are obligated to buy a new one, even if you already purchased the game/software. This is a ridiculous notion since a DVD is worth under 10 cents, but the software on it is worth at least 50$. It isn't a CAR, it is a method of transferring the software, which is pure information.

Many forms of piracy exist to reclaim the benfits of either the IP license or the physical property method, but some users forget that if you reclaim both at once than you are going from protecting your rights as a customer and into the realm of thievery.

I am very VERY happy with digital distribution. Now in a system that no longer tries to exploit me and STEAL from me (which is exactly what software companies do when they pretend that their product is two different things at once) I am quite satisfied with purchasing software again. Which is why impulse is so much BETTER than buying a DVD at the store.

So I'm thinking about buying your game, however anymore, I'm particularly wary about buying anything from this industry. The licensing business model and other practices such as treating me like a criminal, installing malicious and unnecessary software on my private machine without my knowledge, and making it harder for me to play the game then those who obtained it by less then desirable means, are making it hard to complete the purchase.

However, my biggest gripe is the software industry's unwillingness to adapt to changing technology, which is incredibly ironic seeing as how they develop the systems that drive the technology. I'm not even sure how software developers can be so technophobic (I almost used xenophobic) and still turn a profit. Oh yeah, people are sheep and there are way too many of us.

You guys seem pretty responsive to your community which is rare and you get points for that. However I was a little troubled by the actual substance of those responses. After reading my entire post I thought it might be necessary to add a little context. It might seem I'm being too harsh on these guys. While I'll admit the problems with the industry I once loved are not entirely these guy's fault, I think their efforts to regain trust with the once enormous PC market ring slightly hallow. They're asking us to spend millions of dollars, essentially making them very wealthy people, and I think we as a consumer base need to start questioning these business practices and then let them know how we feel with our dollars. That's all I'm doing here. Here we have a rare occurrence, a company willing to try something new, and talk about it openly.

So yeah, I'm going to take advantage of that to find out as much as I can about the company and their practices. Not only because I'm about to plop down $60 bucks for their game, but also because they're asking me to trust them. You can't really put a price on trust but I can tell you at its minimum it's at least worth the lost sales if you lose that trust. So yeah, the post is long and some of the offenses I claim this company have made are rather light, but these are all things that are consistent throughout the industry, things you notice happening time and time again. That combined represent a pattern of behavior that no one should have to put up with. These are things I look for before making any purchase.

Surprisingly, however my problem isn't with your copy protection per se. I think it's a bold move to try something so unproven in the PC game market, although this method has been used for a long time in other areas of the software industry with pretty much no effect. As has been said in this post multiple times, it's not perfect but it is the preferred method. My only real obstacle to buying your game are the responses by Stardock representatives, which include a lack of basic logic, proper research on industry trends and consistency in your responses regarding this issue (copy protection and distribution).

My first problem with the responses in this thread is the inconsistency from one Stardock representative to the next when dealing with policy. Even the largest companies do this, EA and Blizzard being the most notable.This is another practice I've added to my list of stuff I can't believe companies are getting away with (yet I keep buying their games). In most cases this is just a simple miscommunication due to the lack of body language, eye contact, and voice inflection we're cursed with using text. But it's those miscommunications that cause much of the strife within these small online communities that represent the most active of your player base. Someone accidentally thinks something negative was directed at them and 11 pages later they still haven't realized they were actually on the same side of the original argument. When these miscommunications are coming from the company and you start seeing a pattern of disturbing behavior, you have to start questioning whether or not they're just mistakes or if the company is being deceptive.

This inconsistency is present throughout this board, however Ill keep my examples confined to this thread. These are fairly benign but the point still stands, inconsistency fosters fear of corruption.

Yarlen says - "It is against Stardock's license terms to sell used copies of the game, and as such, they will not be supported."

Further along Yarlen posts - "Stardock cannot stop you from reselling your game, it's just not possible to put chip implants in people to control your actions."

A couple pages later Frogboy writes - But we have to have some way to know that the person downloading the update has the actual game.

The multiple uses of the word 'game' in these responses cause confusion as to the true intent of your overall policy. The confusion in the first two examples is pretty clear, Yarlen is saying that you can't sell your game (serial/license) but Stardock can't stop you from selling your game (theCD's). The second sentence as it stands just doesn't make sense. Why would I be downloading a patch for a game I don't have? Oh, you mean "have some way of knowing the person downloading the update has actually purchased and registered the game."

With so many people arguing the point of license vs Cd's vs software vs serial and where true ownership lies, I would think it important to make it absolutely clear when you're addressing each. Your games attract a much larger group of higher intelligence gamers, but it doesn't mean they're mind readers. More intelligent base also means more scrutiny, which means more diligence is needed on your part. Poor community management can kill a game faster then poor sales, and certainly faster then piracy. This plagued WoW boards forever. Their boards are still essentially useless but it's a lot better then it was.

These examples are essentially innocent but this kind of word interchanging can get you into real trouble fast. It's fine to kid around with you're community but keep it out of official policy statements. Also get someone else to do this. Why is the lead dev spending hours reading message boards and then spending countless more hours formulating and typing responses? If you're going to tout a robust post purchase experience I want you working on that and not trying to quill an uprising. I don't mean you should completely cut yourself off, but give us someone else to demonize besides the CEO.

Considering how important corporate image is in any industry, you want to be perfectly clear with your policy statements. Use specific language, don't worry about using multiple words of the same meaning to add variety. Use the same word over and over and make sure everyone is on the same page, everyone should be using the same word. The fewer words that have more then three syllables the better. I'm not saying people are dumb, this is just a basic concept of communication. As the information you're trying to convey becomes more complicated, the simpler everything else should get. I'm turned off as a consumer when companies overlook these very basic rules. It makes you look sloppy and amateurish. Remember, be as transparent as possible and keep your community well informed and they will buy games from you forever.

Onto my second criticism, proper research on industry trends. I'm going to try and make this short. There are multiple instances of this but I'll just pick on this one.

Frogboy said - "Some of the responses here explain why the PC games market is in decline.

That is, some people will be unsatisfied no matter what policy is created."

So basically in these first two sentences Brad is claiming to have knowledge of a single source for the decline in PC sales. If his little bit of wisdom sounds familiar that's because it's essentially an adage that's older than him, his grandfather and his great grandfather which goes:

You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time. - JohnLydgate

I say it's older than his great grandfather to illustrate a point, this adage, this little bit of knowledge, which has been around longer then the PC games market, has been a constant piece of the equation since Computer Space. It was there when the market boomed and it will be there when the the market is no more, until there are exactly two humans left on earth will this adage be true. My point being it has no effect on the PC game market decline. If it's responsible for the decline then it was responsible for the rise, resulting in a net zero effect.

I'd have to say the PC games market is in decline for a number of reasons, just like everything else in economics. I think the largest contributor to the decline would have to be the influence of publishers over developers to migrate their major franchises to console. Also included in this is a developers willingness to switch to consoles simply because they're more lucrative.

EA over Dice is a perfect example. Certainly the Battlefield series is going to rank high in a lot of people's list for best games. This game has a pretty decent PC player base worldwide, however EA, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to have Dice develop their next major release for console only! All we get on PC from them is a cartoon shooter. Personally, I'm not really into games like that. I'm sure it will be fun but it's not really something you can play hardcore, competitively. Well, I'm sure you can but you won't see me in any of their leagues. I think a lot of people feel this way. We want the games on PC! Also,TF2, hello?! If you can't beat em join em I guess...

I'll bullet point my last two reasons

1. Developers pushing the limits of hardware faster than their player base can, or is willing to upgrade.

2. World of Warcraft... They essentially took 10 million people (or some fraction thereof) off the PC gamer market. I played off and on for two years, and it was the only game I played during that time. I bought no other games.

Number three, lack of basic logic. I'm just going to use a single example here. Constantly Brad and others as well, but mostly Brad bring up the point that their game doesn't have any CD copy protection. Usually this is in response to any claims that a better system is out there.

ManOWar2 - "I gave my Battlefield 2 to me brother, he registered new account on a different pc without any problem."
Frogboy - "Battlefield 2 requires a CD to be in the drive."

Now, I don't think Battlefield has a better system. My brother had to repurchase the game after losing it, however this time online. When purchased online Battlefield requires no CD in the tray, and you can download the game from them more than once, sound familiar? Although I will admit it's not as desirable as Stardock's method. EA will only allow you to download it for 6 months, longer for a fee, something like $5 dollars.

While your response may certainly be true it doesn't address his issue at all. It simply states an irrelevant fact. This is called Ignoratio elenchi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi), similar to a red herring but that involves intention to lead us astray by changing the subject. I don't think you're intentionally being deceptive here, it's a pretty common fallacy in all forms of debate.

The CD copy protection argument is irrelevant because CD copy protection is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that Battlefield requires it and it certainly doesn't matter that your game doesn't. This protection scheme is one of the first to be bypassed and the method to bypass for any given game is usually available withing hours of a games release. Also, almost every game you can download has CD copy protection removed by whoever compiled the download. Even if your argument were valid what it comes down to is you're removing the least effective method of protection and in return not including one of the most effective. Battlefield, Half-life and WoW are some of the hardest games to pirate.

This is really simple, so simple I don't know how I'm not rich and you poor. If a copy protection method doesn't work remove it. If removing it makes your business model unprofitable change it. You're half way there, you saw that CD protection was a declining and unpopular method so you decided not to include it. So when are you going to take the next step? Dump the serial registration, it doesn't work, all of your updates and expansions are available online. The only thing someone is not getting by taking that route is the Metaverse, and from the last I saw, they're not missing much.

If this makes you uncomfortable about what effect it has on your profit margin, change your business model until you are comfortable with your profits. If you think this is impossible, which I've seen you state multiple times, then I'm sorry but this is just plain ignorance and goes to show how out of touch you are with how your industry has developed recently. At the end of this post (if it ever comes...) I'll include a business model that would be highly effective for your PC game sales.

I'm just going to make one point on the topic at hand. Whether or not your copy protection method is legal or not is pretty much a moot point. The fact of the matter is you're undermining the consumerist culture in this country. People can become patriotic rather quickly and if you ask me this is borderline un-American. With the exception of airline tickets (and do you really want to be in the airline's current position?), pretty much everything with mass can be resold, yes even eaten food, although we won't talk about that.

More specifically you're undermining a key driver of first hand sales, and that's second hand sales. If you think I'm making this up check out this NYT article about the economics of the second hand book industry. This article clearly shows that used media has a value. The used book industry is far more mature then the shrinking second hand PC game market. It's likely a more accurate indicator of what a used PC game industry could look like if managed properly, considering all data on second hand PC sales is going to be skewed by the withdrawal of retailers who no longer want to hassle with a product with such fluidity.

The point is here in the US we're taught that every purchase of a durable good is an investment. Every thing we buy has two values. The value we initially assign the use we get out of the thing. And its liquid value, the ability to reclaim some/all/more of your investment after the first value reaches zero. By removing this second value completely you're effectively lowering the amount gamers are willing to pay for the game. The gamer is left with little choice because he just can't reconcile the loss of that value. Result? He doesn't buy your game. Also his stance on theft has suddenly gained a new exception.

My biggest argument on this topic, that claiming you make no money off the sell of a used copy is a poor excuse for sticking with an aging method of copy protection and distribution. Your claim is not only false but a perfect example of the narrow minded thinking that is hurting the sales of other types of digital media right now.

So how about that business model I mentioned earlier? Now you may ask why I would help someone who it would appear I don't like. First, I do like them, they seem nice and helpful, and they made some great games. I just think they're stagnated a little and need a kick in the butt. Second, I'm helping because I think this company has potential to make a difference and help other companies avoid the practices that are going to lead the PC game market to the same fate as music and movie sales. They started off on the right foot, however after that they just kinda stopped advancement in that direction. I'm hoping to show that there are alternatives than what the majority does. You may not like my ideas but as long as they get you thinking I don't care what your opinion of me is.

First thing you need to do is go completely digital. If you're worried about losing sales of people who want the game CD's or don't have Internet then provide a materials cost only service to deliver game CD's directly to them. This would be more or less OEM packaging. The disk, with no art in a simple media mail (http://www.usps.com/send/waystosendmail/senditwithintheus/mediamail.htm) CD sleeve that it's mailed in. The important thing to keep in mind here is that the CD's should never cost more then it does to burn, print and mail them. If it was ever discovered you were trying to make a profit from this I personally would dump you in a heart beat as this is an incredibly abusive practice.

Second, give away the game! That's right give it away. People eat up free. Even if they don't need it, if it's free, they'll at least take it home. This is all about market saturation. Get the game on as many PCs worldwide as possible. If you're worried about the cost of distributing digitally then don't do it yourself. This is something that can be almost completely offset to the customer who, as it turns out incur no extra cost. It's called distributed delivery, aka BitTorrent, the bane of your industry. Wouldn't it be nice to never have to worry about old, tainted copies of your game floating around on trackers because the best, most recent release is always available on them. You would also never have to worry about counterfeit copies.

Third, come up with a method to make money. You've already stated multiple times that one of your key selling points is post purchase experience. I have yet to see it for myself but if the experience is what you claim then it might be enough to support a subscription based system or maybe even a micropayment system or hell, even an ad based system (being against ads is un-American btw). However, I doubt, that on its own what you have would suffice these systems to deliver the profits you see now. And the point is to increase profits right?

From the outside it would appear you pretty much offer two things in the post purchase experience. The ability to get patches and the ability to upload games to have them scored and posted on the Metaverse. This just doesn't pass muster, almost all games offer these things for free, there's just no way you're going to convince people to pay for this even if they are getting the game for free. Adding a system for players to send and receive two or more player games to each other might help. Of course you would need to allow more then one human player per game. And that little trick you mentioned somewhere to play hot-seat games just isn't going to cut it.

So you're going to need something people are going to want to pay for. What I suggest is coming up with a real multiplayer element to your game and either charge a subscription or rent preconfigured servers where players could set up their own universes which others players can join in. The latter is my favored method, the possibilities are endless. You have no idea how much I want to set up an empire where I'm the evil ruler and the players who join are trying to overthrow me. Also this is a way you can have hardcore players offset the cost for average more casual players.

Hardcore players rent the servers from you for a premium and the casual players join their servers for free. You could even manage the size of their universe by price of server. That way empires (guilds/clans) can divide the cost among members so they can afford a server that will fit them.
-
If you so choose you can make these servers available exclusively from you, but only if after I rent it I get full control to add mods and configure the game how I want. If you're worried about unauthorized servers, don't. These servers are going to have an IP address which can be traced to an ISP who are more then happy to honor cease and desist orders against their customers. Offer a bounty to players who find these servers and you don't even have to have anyone you employ look for them. And seriously, this bounty could be nothing more then their name listed with how many servers they've found, and they'll eat it up. The only problem I see with this is countries who don't honor foreign cease and desist orders, (even China will honor a cease and desist if your game has a legitimate presence there). One way to combat this would be to only allow your server version to run on servers with IP address that matches their region. This wouldn't stop them from running the server with say an American proxy. But the proxy would probably slow the connection down so much that the game would unplayable to all but their next door neighbor.

I highly doubt this is something that you would do with GalCiv2 as it's on its final expansion and you're probably already developing your next major release. Also, turn based, multi-player isn't something that's very practical and not something I would play. You could probably use Sins of a Solar Empire as a base, however I was disappointed with how basic certain aspects of the game are, such as planet development. However, I was incredibly impressed by the galaxy viewer, GalCiv should look like that.

Your best bet is to combine Sins and GalCiv. A real-time living universe that has the depth to satisfy even the most anal micro-manager but with governors who can ease that burden from players who just want to mix it up or players who want to have the game running 24/7 for a month and come back and not have it completely trashed by poor management.

The idea's in this post regarding policy, copy protection, and distribution really aren't that new and they're certainly being used by successful companies.

So that's basically it, I wrote this post over the course of two days off and on for a total of about 10 hours. I believe its well constructed and well researched. I had a lot of fun writing it and hope it gets the reception I'm hoping for, that is simply that those who read it keep an open mind. Yeah, I'm crazy for writing this much about something that is likely going to be ignored but this is a subject, for some odd reason I feel very passionate about. Ugh now I have to read the whole thing one last time...

taltamir, I like your post and couldn't agree more. I'd really like to get your sources, unless of course you are the source. You mind getting cited?

I hope my post doesn't steal your thunder. I think Stardock would greatly benefit if it took your post to heart. I really hope they take into consideration both our posts, as well as the all of the other posts on this board which stress the same ideas.

I think this policy is fair and I applaud you for such practices.

Software should NOT be sold used anymore, in any way.

I don't like copy protection and commend SD very highly for not incorporating those practices in their design.

All games should have demos developed on the other hand, so they can be tried out before purchased, however I don't commend people for obtaining illegal copies of the game for ANY reason. This goes for, even downloading to try for eventual purchase. Personally, don't buy a game if you aren't sure you like it. Also, read a lot of reviews, both published and from users. If you can't decide based on that information then you probably aren't meant for that kind of game.

If you buy used software, be prepared for some heartache. The wonderful thing about downloads is that you can download it from anywhere in the world...that actually has broadband.

I just got into GCII after playing Sins of a Solar Empire...both great games. I read plenty of reviews of the game so that I got a rounded view of them.

I will continue to buy Stardock games because their games are great...and as a bonus I don't have to have that stupid CD in the tray everytime I want to play it!!!

Keep up the great work!

feel free to quote me. I am my own source for that.

The only thing that might require documentation is:
"DRM as a whole is not meant to stop piracy (it never did do that successfully, nor was it designed in a way that COULD do so), it is a trick to force customers to purchase the same product again and again. (which several big DRM advocates HAVE publicly declared as their ultimate goal)"

Which I have seen on several occasions, but did not bother to keep a link to.
A good starting point would be to google sony BGM ceo interview.
Or read arstechnica.com and wait for the next time one of them makes such a statement.

Never seen this thread before, but a short reply: Not allowing games to be sold on the second hand market (sold as in, the original owner no longer plays the game and sells the media and license and does not keep a "backup" copy) is both silly, anti-consumer and in some parts of the world, illegal.

I never sell software and such second-hand, nor do I buy it that way. But some people and the law allows them that. While I can imagine that software-publishers may seem to thinks this is a "loss", it isn't of course. Most people who buy games on the second-hand market are not likely to buy them first hand, unless we're talking about serious cheap-skates here. But, if they like their second-hand game, they may buy a game from the same series first hand after a while. Tendency that people have, if they really like something, they want the newer version.

Stardock excels at consumer-friendliness, which gives them free and good publicity. Which turn in sales. It is a much better way to sell than draconian EULA's.

Hi,
This question may be already asked , but I did not read the 10 pages of this topic.
I'm interested in the last version of GalCiv II Twilight of the Arnor, and I don't care about previous expansions and any campaigns. One friend of mine bought the original GalCiv II, before any expansion. I understand that normally, Stardock do not support reselled version of GalCiv II, but if I buy this used original GalCiv II and I buy directly on Stardock website the TA expansion alone, may I have a new serial that will be supported?
I checked on the "purchase" section and there is no just a GalCiv II TA alone. You have to buy GalCiv II DL + TA or the full bundle, but as said, I do not want previous expansion and campaigns, I know I will not play them.
Thank you.

Sorry, TA requires both DL and DA, with valid serials. Without both of the prerequisistes you won't even be able to download it, since it wouldn't run.

Thanks kryo, so if I understand well, I must order the full bundle to have TA. Ordering the GacCiv II DL + TA expansion will not work (missing DA), right?

Correct, if you have only a used copy of DL, you would need the full ultimate bundle in order to most inexpensively get TA.

I'm not sure if it was mentioned earlier or not, I tried to skim through all the pages, but the external link in the original post doesn't work, at least for me. Here is what I believe is the working link: WWW Link

I am sure that situations like this is why there is so much piracy.

You think games companies care about you? Well, let me tell you, I am a PC games collector and have collected over 600 games since 1992. Recently, due to lack of quality PC titles being released I have been playing my older games - and you know what I have found?

That starting around 2002 games companies started using cheaper CD's/DVD's compared with the past, because almost half the games I own from 2002 to 2006 that I load up, I have read problems! This includes GTA III and GTA San Andreas, Morrowind and Oblivion, Half Life 2 and Metal Gear Solid 2, to name a few. Meanwhile, games from the 90's, like X-Com 1 and 2, Daggerfall and Thief: The Dark Project all install first time!

If we're going to get 15 hour games like Bioshock and Dead Space for our $60 AND they're going to have onerous DRM AND they're going to use cheap CD's/DVD's that only last 2-3 years, then why are we surprised PC gaming is declining?!

Quite simply, if I have a faulty CD where I have only played the game 3-4 times and the disk is less than 5 years old, I will never have any moral problem downloading a replacement for that faulty disk and just that faulty disk. I feel that I am allowed one or two legal backups of legally bought software (In the 90's many games specifically told you to not use the original floppies, but copy them first!), and although this is after the fact, I am still downloading a backup.

Or do games companies expect us just keep re-buying their games every 3-4 years because they use inferior disks - just to make a couple more pennies per sale!?

Game companies, by their actions, are the cause of much 'piracy'. Unless they change, piracy is always going to be a problem!

Also note that with the exception of Ubisoft an their 'online all the time' DRM, most European companies have a very different attitude to this than their North American cousins.

For example, could you see, for a second, a Bioware or Bethesda producing an 'Enhanced Edition' of one of their games, and then selling it at retail, but also allowing original owners of the game to update their game to the Enhanced Edition for free? No, neither can I! But CD Projekt did it with The Witcher!

So wake up games publishers, you are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs in your chase for a few more pennies! Change, and change now, or see PC gaming going indie only and out of retail altogether.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

speaking of fauly CDs... a huge portion of my legit disks don't work anymore due to read errors. I have to resort to downloading a copy (often the game is no longer for sale) and then I install using my legit key.

However, where CD emulation doesn't work or simply the DRM is incompatible with newer versions of windows, I have to use a non legit key and crack... There are tons of games whose DRM simply doesn't work with windows 7 64bit.

Do keep in mind that this issue an issue with impulse where you don't have to worry about a faulty CD... you just download a brand new copy (and its already the latest version too)

I usually don't like necro threads (almost 2 years!  really?), but for fun, I'll add that with Impulse, you can download an archive of your game, so you can keep a backup copy on a hard drive, rather than optical media.  Not only do you have to worry less about disc degradation, but you won't have to download it all again if you ever reinstall Windows.

But only today I had to do just that after a OS problem meaning I had to install the game for just the second time and while I am glad I could download the game from Impulse (took an hour) I would much rather have spent 10 minutes installing the game from the Gal Civ II Ultimate DVD I have from my copy of my new game. Except I got it in December 2009 and it already doesn't load on my drive!

This is telling me that as companies offer this 'benefit' they will use even more inferior CD's/DVD's and I will be left hoping the companies servers stay up and they continue to allow downloads of the game, which is easy to see for a year after release, but what about 5+ years?

 

hypothetically, couldn't one go to a friend's house, get on their PC, download impulse, log into their account and download all of their purchased games onto that friends PC?