Timmaigh

[quote who="Sir_On_The_Edge" reply="680" id="3713366"] Quoting Starkillr, reply 679 Quoting Frogboy, reply 677 It's been

[quote who="RomeoReject" reply="1" id="3712612"] Full disclosure, I'm one of those folk firmly in the "I [e digicons] . As for the why, I enjoy the variety it forces you to try. If every race in a game can play the same way, although there's the potential for variety, the inspiration for it is diminished - after all, we're naturally going to default

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="551" id="3711814"] You are correct. What would prevent a third party from having the Ur-Quan in their game would be the Star Control trademark. You’d need the trademark holder to cooperate. If a new space game showed up with the Drengin Empire, Arceans, Yor and Torians Could people be misled into thinking that game is related to Galactic Civilizations? If so, the GalCiv trademark holder could choose to act to stop

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="538" id="3711774"] Quoting Elestan, reply 517 That's interesting; so are you saying that most game developers only yield the trademark to their publisher, while retaining the copyright? If so, that's quite different from what I've seen in other parts of the software industry

[quote who="fantstc1" reply="12" id="3711456"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 11 On another note, Ashes is never gonna become e-sport like StarCraft, because its boring to watch, as the result of its big scope and zoomed out camera. Oh, I don't know... B

[quote who="MrPhalanx" reply="10" id="3711355"] I agree all with , but you guys DON'T FORGET one FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE from Starcraft. Ashes was built for to follow the path, what Total Anninhilation laid back, and later SupCom followed, and much later the path divided for that abomination what we call Planetary Annihilation now (Sorry, im still angry with UBER, even the Titans can't soothe my anger..), and Ashes. And that difference is the speed up everything until your reso

If you can keep it under sustained load under say 80C, even at 5 GHz, then by all means, OC it to that value. I would not go higher, maybe its just psychological, but not a fan of coming way to close to edge (in this particular case, thermal limit, Tj max or whatever its called). It is up to you, if those additional 6 percent of performance is worth possibly degrading your CPU due to way too high temps way too often. I would not do it, personally i am keeping my CPU at nic

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="443" id="3710710"] Do you spend this much time arguing whether it's worth paying for a Superbowl ad, Timmaigh? [/quote] Why? Are you gonna have one for StarControl next year? [e digicons]:)[/e]

[quote who="Jafo" reply="435" id="3710575"] Quoting JerkClock, reply 435 so my guess is it's probably company data and sales figures that aren't publicly posted much of the time. Just a hunch. Not a bad hunch. Even Ford stopped publicizing how long it took to make a Model 'T'

[quote who="Arch Zero" reply="430" id="3710430"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 426 Where did i say i know more about the subject than him? Am i not allowed to discuss things and have different opinion? Nowhere did i say brands have no value, or that StarControl mark specifically has no

[quote who="eride" reply="427" id="3710397"] I wasn't making the argument that you actually think you know more about the subject than Brad but that is what your posts implicitly suggest. It looked to me you were claiming, through multiple posts, that you don't believe that the mark itself was worth what Stardock paid if it was solely for the "brand" name. Brad gave multiple explanations and analogies, none of which persuaded you from your "gut" feeling. I don't know how

[quote who="Starkillr" reply="425" id="3710384"] Quoting eride, reply 424 Timmaigh, just out of curiosity... between yourself and Brad, the CEO of a software company, who do you think knows more about this subject? It feels surreal sitting here reading posts where you argue with Brad over whether or not a trade

[quote who="eride" reply="424" id="3710381"] Timmaigh, just out of curiosity... between yourself and Brad, the CEO of a software company, who do you think knows more about this subject? It feels surreal sitting here reading posts where you argue with Brad over whether or not a trademark has value from identifying the software product to the public. I don't even think your opinion reflects commonsense, that of course a "brand" name has value. If the Star Control

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="422" id="3710350"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 421 Quoting Frogboy, reply 420 I'm really not goi

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="420" id="3710337"] I'm really not going to get into a debate with someone who isn't clear on how important brands are to sales or suggests there isn't vast empirical data on it. Two sodas. They're identical. One is called Coca Cola. The other is called "Fizz One". We can debate on the value of these brands. But that's subjective and unless you have a background in marketing and product sales, it's not a very interesting discus

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="418" id="3710302"] Actually, that’s a very good analogy. Wargaming bought the Total Annihilation trademark for something near $1.6M. Why? Because that has a lot of name recognition. If Ashes f the Singularity had been called Supreme Commander 3 (would have required design changes to make it a SupCom game) we’d probably have sold multiples of what it has sold so far. Brand awareness is v

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="410" id="3710243"] @Starkillr: Agreed. My opinion on these things is well known. For instance, we bid on the Master of Orion IP too. If we had got it, you can bet that we would have developed a Master of Orion game that was a natural evolution of Master of Orion II. When we released Ashes of the Singularity, we spent around $600,000 in marketing. Acquiring Star Control for $300,000 allowed us to instantly c

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="313" id="3709358"] No, it's a real thing. Star Trek, Star Wars, and Babylon 5 have a "formula" that runs through them. They share a set of qualities that other sci-fi stories don't have. It's not "semantics", it is a tangible thing. One of those qualities, to give just one example, is "scope and scale". Those stories aren't about "a fictional world" or "the humans". They are about "a fictional galaxy". That

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="310" id="3709270"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 308 You see, i love Star Trek to bits, DS9 and then Babylon 5 are my favourite shows ever, but you are so wrong here, its mind-boggling. But whatever, feel free to ignore all the quality new stuff there is, without checki

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="303" id="3709181"] It is not already here. There is now a big, huge, gaping opening in sci-fi that has not existed since Star Trek became dominant in the mid-1970's. Shows like Firefly and The Expanse are virtually unknown, and not in the same category as Star Wars and Star Trek. And they never can be, because they don't follow the formula that made Star Wars and Star Trek so unique and so dominant in the genre. It does matte

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="301" id="3709163"] None of those shows ever competed with Star Wars or Star Trek, they were not even remotely in their league. Babylon 5 came close, in England, but never in America. By comparison, very few people have ever even heard of Firefly or The Expanse. Battlestar Galaxtica never became a big thing, not even as bit as the original BSG had been in it's day. Just being a sci-fi story doesn't put you in the same class with Star

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="299" id="3709159"] What "creative works"? If you are just demanding to write your own Star Trek or Star Wars stories, for example, that is not really "creative", is it? It's actually kind of admitting that you are not "creative", can't come up with something of your own, so you just want to tell your own story in someone elses universe because you aren't capable of creating your own. If that is the case, you are just a pretender anyway.&nb

[quote who="DeepSpaceNine" reply="273" id="3709020"] Talonius, I'm no lawyer either.. but in the broadest terms: they have since announced a game that claims to be a sequel to our trademarked IP, gone on a public offensive against us and our motives for months, and interfered with our ability to market the new game and creating confusion. After that, there's no real way to go back in time and pretend that no harm has been done. All tha

[quote who="JerkClock" reply="280" id="3709032"] It sounds as if Reich may be the 3rd person in his family with that name...................just saying............... [/quote] Saying what? Something involving Third Reich?[e digicons]:D[/e] On more serious note, i am with Talonius here, if there is any chance to drop all the lawsuits and find common ground, it should be taken, instead of dragging this to bitter end.

You have the best job ever, obviously. I am massively envious [e digicons]:D[/e] So what is it that designer vision of yours for Ashes, which may never come to existence due to various limitations? Is there any similar game you have in mind you want it to come close to, or several games, i mean, do you have some kind of ideal in mind? In my humble opinion, i tried to voice it before, the one aspect, where Ashes comes short and why i pretty much rarely play it, are