http://www.intelligentgamer.com/ en-gb Stock photos courtesy of stock.xchngAll other content is copyright © 2010 intelligentgamer.com Sleepy - sleepy@nospam.com sleepy@nospam.com Tue, 07 Sep 2010 05:44:34 -0700 Tue, 07 Sep 2010 05:44:34 -0700 http://backend.userland.com/rss e107 (http://e107.org) 60 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_images/square_icon.png http://www.intelligentgamer.com/ 88 31 Search Intelligent Gamer query http://www.intelligentgamer.com/search.php http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?637
My second thought, and the one I hold now, is that this is Google's CEO trying to wash his and Google's hands of the problem. To a large extent Google, and companies like them, created this problem because they encourage people to post too much information without implementing adequate safeguards.]]> Alastair<alastair.shewan@nospam.com> Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:25:49 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?637 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?637
Curious to hear some other thoughts.

Article on ReadWriteWeb]]> Sleepy<sleepy@nospam.com> Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:28:38 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?637 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 RedConversation wrote ...

I've been a long time supporter of the Free Software Foundation, and in examining the issue I seem to confront the question of "is it all publisher's greed? Or is it some of it artist's paranoia?"

I suspect that it due to publishers' greed and paranoia rather than that of the artists.

To test this idea you could compare the releases of games companies from the very large to the very small. On the assumption that the larger the company the more distant management will be from the creation of a title, we may conclude that the artists have a greater say in a small company than they do in a large company. So, is the inclusion of DRM distributed evenly amongst the companies, or is there an evident bias? If the latter is the case, and the bias is towards the larger companies being more inclined to use DRM, then we may be more confident that it is the publishers rather than the artists who want DRM.
]]> Alastair<alastair.shewan@nospam.com> Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:17:18 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622
Microsoft has always been at the forefront of pro-DRM argument, and I've noticed they seem to have a disdain for modders. Curiously Gabe Newell has been one of the most quoted person when it comes to "anti-DRM arguments," which is odd sense Valve utilizes its own forms of DRM (albiet certainly less intrusive). There's a lot of subtle hints at the mentality of these corporate entities as whole. For example, Left4Dead2's add-on campaign The Passing which sold for 560 Microsoft points on XboxLive and absolutely nothing on Steam. As far as I can tell, Kerberos Studios "Sword Of The Stars" strategy game shipped without requiring the CD in the drive.

I still remember the original Fallout's license containing a bit about how you could install the game on the largest setting and run it without the disc so you could pass the disc to a friend. Understandably, internet piracy as an issue was an infant when it came to video games, but god-forbid we allow anyone to show other people products today. It seems as if there is a desire for everything to have an owner and for that owner to be the other source of that particular product which, for me, I don't understand. It's like only one company being allowed to make chairs and they could charge whatever they please for them. At the end of the day, we'd make our own chairs. In this imaginary world, there might be "chair-busts" where people go to jail for building chairs, or using off-brand chairs because it uses a patented design of having three to four legs, a backboard, and a seat The trouble with chairs could fill prisons, and I seriously doubt that would stop people from building chairs at cost.

I think these policies and practices go against a lot of what is capable in the digital age. As an independent, creative person I have enjoyed a vast amount of resources in the digital age. I have sent short stories to editors in emails, and automated submission forms, and as an artist the money I get if they take it is nice... but everyone seeing the byline is more important. I know Bethesda Softworks doesn't think the same way, but thatgamecompany and Kerberos might.

Grant, when I read your examples, the first thing I thought of was the Yippies with less drugs. Abbie Hoffman and his band of Groucho Marxists had it in their mind the best to decentralize and destabilize what they perceived as a "broken system" (I will not bring up that argument today) was to organize alternatives, food co-ops, free clinics, independent newspapers, etcetera.]]> RedConversation<luc.reeves@nospam.com> Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:18:06 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622
What I think is interesting are the movements out there that offer alternatives to the centralized copyright laws. There's a website called the Free Music Archive http://freemusicarchive.org/ which was created specifically as an alternative to traditional methods of copyright and distribution. The radio station WFMU was a big part of making this happen because of how legislation could affect their ability to broadcast via internet. It could easily come about that they could no longer afford or be allowed to broadcast music on their internet stream because of new copyright law, so they decided to start building an archive of free music. Its a collaborative effort between artists, labels, radio stations, and other distributors to actually curate a collection of free music. Of course Open Source software is another great example of alternatives to the current system. Its model is even influencing artists in thinking of new ways to collaborate and share their work. I feel its only a matter of time before the monolithic world of corporate copyright becomes mostly a moot point, there will be free and open alternatives if people keep moving in that direction.]]> Grant Centauri<gcentauri@nospam.com> Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:56:19 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?633 post I made last year about The Game Crafter.

Well, they have joined up with another print-on-demand service that will be providing them with a lot of new production options for your game designs. This is definitely going to make me go back and revisit some of my previous designs that I was messing with on their original site.

Unfortunately it looks like the new features haven't rolled out yet, but it will be worth keeping an eye out.]]> Sleepy<sleepy@nospam.com> Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:18:46 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?633 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 RedConversation wrote ...

Furthermore, the whole of the issue can be seen as an additional corruption of the United States copyright laws. There was a time when a copyright only lasted 14 years. The logic behind that is pretty simple, to encourage the creation of new material. The current policies place the timespan as nearly indefinite if held by a corporate entity, and well over a standard human lifespan if held by a person. I don't know, but these changes are disturbing.

I've thought about this a lot, particularly in regards to the so-called Mickey Mouse Protection Act that extended copyright durations after much lobbying by Disney. I'm not sure how many people realize that under previous copyright law, the character of Mickey Mouse would have entered the public domain in 2003. It's crazy to think of something so recognizable and iconic to Disney being in the public domain, but the law is the law, right? Apparently not if you're a big enough corporation. So now the copyright has been extended an additional 20 years. Anybody want to place bets on if Disney will seek another extension in 2023?

Another piece of crazy copyright trivia: Did you know the "Happy Birthday To You" song is copyrighted by Time-Warner? You can't sing the song in TV, film, radio, or any public performance without paying them royalties. Ever wonder why restaurants sing "Happy Happy Birthday" or some alternate birthday song instead of "Happy Birthday to You"? There's your answer. Wikipedia notes that they collect on the order of $5000 per day in royalties from use of the song.]]> Sleepy<sleepy@nospam.com> Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:10:48 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622
In either case, I find it increasingly more difficult to understand why it exists. DRM has never been particularly effective. Pirates seem to be an unstoppable force, and some legitimate customers resort to piracy because of the extraneous software. DRM simply doesn't make sense to me when one runs the numbers - and I'm sure the publishers pay people to do that exact task.

Furthermore, the whole of the issue can be seen as an additional corruption of the United States copyright laws. There was a time when a copyright only lasted 14 years. The logic behind that is pretty simple, to encourage the creation of new material. The current policies place the timespan as nearly indefinite if held by a corporate entity, and well over a standard human lifespan if held by a person. I don't know, but these changes are disturbing.

It feels as if the government is catering to people who would "milk" an idea/concept/franchise to death rather than those who create. The whole of the system seems a suicidal effort to prevent liberty of the many for the crimes of the few.

And those crimes are arguable.]]> RedConversation<luc.reeves@nospam.com> Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:06:30 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?622 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?165
I picked this up again in the last couple of weeks. As expected, I still mostly suck at it. It's so much fun, though. I've owned the game and its expansions for many years, and still haven't learned how to properly balance my military and economy. I'm trying to improve, though!]]> MaxKnight<MaxKnight1010101@nospam.com> Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:20:38 -0700 http://www.intelligentgamer.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?165