If you win said lottery, please give the Freespace license to Mike Kulas and the former Volition folks, not to Derek Smart.
No offense Derek, but I like those guys’ space sim cred much better.
You said:
That is actually the gist of it. Despite @Brad_Wardell aggressive defense of his actions and which has obviously served to cast them in a poor light, the long and short of it is that he paid good money - in good faith - for something. Only to find out YEARS down the road when he tried to exploit the benefits of what he BOUGHT, that it was “tainted” by claims which weren’t previously known
All I was I pointing out is they knew P&F had the copyrights to SC1/2 at the time of purchase, and would need a license if they wanted to use that material, quoting Brad himself. Among all the other stuff they have been claiming they have the rights to that material now. This is what has been causing the issues around the Arilou dlc, yes?
As to whether Stardock has the right to make a SC game. I think it is pretty clear they do, or at least it was in good faith, which might be what you were talking about. P&F really should have cleared things up before with Accolade/Atari/whomever. I don’t think Brad can be faulted for that. Maybe more due diligence could have been done to figure out the state of the agreement. I don’t know.
I sincerely wish they would have worked things out, but yeah that settlement offer would have put me on tilt as well. Along with the claims that they are not the creators of Star Control 1 & 2? It isn’t a good look for Stardock. One would hope they ALL will finally come to their senses and reach an agreement which lets them both focus on their games.
I had to do a double take on that one, I thought you wanted Brian to give the license to Mila Kunis. That would be interesting.
I thoroughly share your take on this, mate. Yet there is something in the very public behaviour of key players that tells me it is not going to happen.
It might be hard to just state the facts though and inform people about the legal dispute? You might even gin up a negative review with some reasonable sounding complaints and criticisms about the game mechanics and then give the whole show away with something like this:
“Frankly, the lawsuit alone is reason enough not to buy this game. But it’s also a rather poor entry in the Star Control franchise. Avoid.”
That sound familiar?
Your whole disingenuous “I’m an impartial game reviewer” shtick is just silly and insulting. Your “moral outrage” about the lawsuit and which side you support is splattered all over this thread.
Must…not…make…joke about…wanting to give something…to Mila Kunis…
Maybe a link at the end to an article about the legal issues they feel like they need to talk about it? I’d rather have someone review the game on its merits. I received the game due to the Servo fiasco, and have been enjoying what I’ve played so far, more than any other game where Stardock has been the lead for the design. Usually their games come across to me as technically competent, but feeling a little bland. It is kind of hard to really articulate. For example, Offworld Trading Company, which Soren was the designer for, to me has the special sauce that just makes a game great. It is obvious to me that they’ve worked really hard to try and make something special with SC:O.
As someone who wrote a lot of reviews professionally, I would mention in the review that this game is not from the original creators of Star Control and whether that impacts enjoyment of the game these other people have created.
Do you think the deliberate hiring of someone involved in creating the gamergate harassment campaign is worth noting in a review?
Genuine question I dont have an answer.
A small voice acting role from a “sci-fi celebrity”? Doesn’t really move the needle for me. If the game was created by or funded by a gamergate person, it would make a difference to me.
I mean…
(in fairness, my recollection is that Brad’s involvement there was more akin to, say, TB’s, being more adjacent than a direct member. But I didn’t follow it super closely to be fair)
Talking about Steam reviews I have found a bunch (5 or 6) reviews
- From users with exactly one game in their accounts
- Who haven’t setup their Steam profiles
- All have playing times of about 1 hour
- Username handles have a vague Spanish/Latin America vibe “buddyquito”, “scguerra02”
- The review is one paragraph long doesn’t enter into specifics
- Don’t accept comments
- All positive
I have reported several of these to Steam.
@Vic_Davis, do you really need to drag a Steam review into this thread? I’ll respond as briefly as possible so as to not detract from this thread too much. Feel free to continue this via direct messages if you feel the need to continue to debate this – I’m game.
I’m really not sure why you’re so angry with me. But let me make this abundantly clear then: a game like Star Control: Origins is made by loads of people. Nearly all of them have nothing to do with the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by Stardock – they have their reasons, whoever “they” are precisely, with Brad clearly as the figurehead. I’m able to see the two separately – you have the game on the one hand (which I already owned before the suit was filed, by the way) and the lawsuit on the other, which is a dispute between Stardock/Brad and P&F.
I have written a review about the game on Steam that is indeed negative. I’m not a Stardock fanboy. I like some of their games, love a few of them, and dislike others. Star Control: Origins goes into my “dislike” pile, at least for now (I have been known to change my mind!). My review states that I don’t care about the art style or the writing, the lander missions, and so on. I like the in-game help, the way star systems are modelled, the voice acting, and a bunch of other stuff. There’s real potential here, especially once the adventure editor and world editor actually get added to the game: it was a surprise to see the “Coming soon!” text when I hovered over the links for those.
You’re right that I don’t like that Stardock are suing P&F – and I state so explicitly in my review, towards the very end of my original text. I’ve added further remarks based on comments received, which cover stuff like the very long loading times and the fact that I like the help system. I’m sorry that I didn’t love the game or that you don’t like the fact that I brought up the lawsuit. Maybe I shouldn’t have mentioned the lawsuit at all. But for reasons expounded in this thread, I think it’s important to note the context in which a game is released.
I think I’ve been fair. You may disagree: that’s your perogative. I’m more than willing to have a civil discussion about this, but I reject being described as disingenuous. Neither did I ever claim to be an “impartial” reviewer – there’s a reason I state whatever bias I might have in any review that I write. It’s called disclosure.
Well Adam Baldwin aside then. Brad has also written at length in his defence of gamergate. I wont rehash his words they are out there, he seems to stand by them. So yeah.
Well, in Brad’s defence, he has stated repeatedly that he tries to keep politics out of his games, most recently on the Steam forums, writing:
Our games won’t ever try to inject anyone who works here [sic] politics. Even our political game, The Political Machine, is hopefully considered very neutral.
Of course, whether it’s actually possible to avoid inserting your politics into your creative endeavours is an entirely different (philosophical) debate, but I’ve never played a Stardock game where I went, “Gosh, this is all rather right wing, isn’t it?!”
I make no comment on the work. I do think creators views (within reason) are part of the purchasing process however. I mean like a lot of SF readers I would never buy an Orson Scott card book for example.
In the case of gamergate it hits home because many of us personally know women who were and still are harassed by the gamergate abuse campaign.
So whats a person of good will to do when a game developer defends that harassment or denies its existence?
Yeah, that’s the conundrum that most of us are wrestling with here, no doubt. Can you divorce a work from the people that make it? Whether it’s Brad Wardell, Orson Scott Card, or whoever. It’s even more difficult when it comes to (larger) games, since a lot of the people work on them and they are all likely to be a varied bunch, with different opinions, biases, and prejudices.
“Frankly, the lawsuit alone is reason enough not to buy this game.” Perfectly valid opinion
“But it’s also a rather poor entry in the Star Control franchise” Perfectly valid opinion
"Avoid.” Perfectly valid recommendation.
Here is what you said 2 days ago:
“I think it might be worth mentioning to potential customers that the publisher is involved in an ongoing legal dispute with the original creators, and that money you give to Stardock will be used in part to pay their legal bills. I assume that’s relevant, even though I know a lot of people won’t care about it at all”
So you went and played the game for 1.4 hours and then stuck your dagger in. You act like you gave the game a fair shake but it just disappointed you. Maybe you did. It’s impossible to know. It’s clear though that you went into it with substantial bias. Maybe this belongs in the SC 2 Origins thread but I’d hate to pollute that thread with this and you posted your strongly felt opinions about the lawsuit here and talked about reviewing it here.
I think what you did was awful. I think it was a deliberate attempt to hurt stick it to stardock because you disagree with the actions they have taken vis a vis the legal dispute over SC. That’s just my opinion but yeah I think it was petty and it makes me angry.
Agree. Full disclosure I like Brad Wardell as a game maker. I like a lot of folks at Stardock. I just feel… queasy about giving money to a game which may indirectly support or normalise gamergate . I have to look in the eyes my friends and colleagues whose lives have been impacted by it.
My “solution” is a message board post apparently :) But its the best I got.
It’s not impossible to know: I wrote a whole bunch of words. Assume that I’m being genuine and honest – I don’t think I have given anyone cause to think differently. Furthermore, I didn’t play the game for just 1.4 hours – I’ve dipped into it on and off during the beta and played the prelude (or whatever it was called before release), but Steam was offline (due to my VPN) and/or glitched out, so the count isn’t anywhere accurate.
Well, don’t be angry. Honestly, I see no reason why you should be. It’s a 1,400+ word review where I explain, in detail, what I don’t like about the game and why. And hey, after some comments, I even went back and explained what I do like about the game. I strive to be fair: I have myself been at the receiving end of an unfair review, so I know what that feels like.