The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

That DosBox pretty much has Starcon 2 emulated perfectly? It would bug the hell out of me that all this work could be for nothing. Actually it annoys me just watching.
-Jim

it doesnt work perfectly for every system on line the sound does not work and the colors get messed.

also i like some of the voice acting. exept for the orz

Also, I don't think you can technically get the DOS version for free... although I really don't know exactly what TFB released as open source, I may be wrong about this...

The screwy colours can be fixed by running starcon2.exe with the "/g:bios" switch.  I should know, without it I get screwy colours.

But as for the original question, how on earth do you figure that this would be "for nothing"?  UQM has gameplay improvements over SC2 (e.g., AutoScan, lander navigation), improved visuals (3-D orbit view, smooth-scrolling melee) and higher-fidelity music (that isn't prone to skipping like it is on my DosBox installation)  And it has full speech.  Say whatever you want about the quality of acting in said speech, but the fact that it's there makes a ton of difference.

We're not just bringing the game back to life, we're breathing new life into it as well.  If that doesn't interest some people, that's fine, they can play their old copy via DosBox; but it interests ME quite a bit.  And I'm having quite a bit of fun helping, too.

I'm pretty sure you're correct.  A year ago I bought SC2 off the Accolade site.  I don't know if it's still up but I think I would've gotten gyped out of $15...  If only SC2 weren't worth it.

For me, the speech is a terrible addition. The first time through the game my imagination concocted wonderful voices for the characters. The voice overs tend to disrupt the imteractive process that a player enjoys when filling in missing pieces.

I also consider the free scrolling battles to detract. They give a better idea of where a cloaked opponent is, and also do not display the ship sprites in their original and flattering scales.

I understand your point though. I believe that Star Control 2 is the best game that has ever, and probably will ever be created. New life should be given to it. I just think DosBox may do a better job of it than altering the original.
-Jim

Say whatever you want about the quality of acting in said speech, but the fact that it's there makes a ton of difference.

Roger that, saying whatever I want: the voice acting only makes the game worse. I'd rather hear the nice music better instead of the talking. But it really doesn't matter since the voices can be turned off. Heck, the scaling and the interface can be reverted back to their original style. I'd take this any day over Dosbox, though.

The new hyperspace music alone makes it worth the while, as far as I'm concerned.  The other nifty little things the 3D0 version does better are just nicieties.

And there is one more big advantage UQM has over emulated SC2 - when UQM is done, there is a set of working souce code for which modifications and further improvements can be made.  Trying to add in new things, even very small new things, into the old SC2 would be no easy task, especially since the source code is lost to time.

If I compare the chances of getting something minor but nice, say a random team generator for hypermelee, for UQM vs. SC2, UQM wins by virtue of there being no hope for it in SC2.  And they're doing such a good job keeping everything true to the original, that you can't complain even if you don't like any change, since pretty much any differences can be set to 3d0 or pc.

Besides......think about it this way.  Dosbox emulation may be nice, but how many people are going to be grabbed by something like that?  Except for the die hards, no one's likely to care.  Something like this though, it can bring new fans into the fold, and that's a plus too.

Give these guys some credit, they're doing as much for the StarCon Community as anyone out there, and more the 99% of us.

I definitely like UQM, if I had spare time, I'd help in the development process - but I'm already stretched pretty thin with other little things I've been working on.

About the voice-acting - I think it's a cool addition - and if you don't like it, there is a command-line switch to turn it off.  Plus - as this is open-source, you can always work on making your own voice-acting for them, and maybe even submit something better to the community (if it uses a standard format, I haven't dug around in it myself).

I like mix-matching the 3do-version of things & the pc-version of things.  I prefer the pc-version menus & planet-scan info (all text), but like the 3do music & fonts.

And for the original poster - DOSBox will not emulate SC2 correctly on my system.  Even with the /g:bios switch (and much more foolin' around with things), I get garbled colors across the board (usually takes about 15-30 seconds before it kicks in though).  However, I've had no problem with UQM as of yet.

I'll go with the general consensus here, and add a few things... On my machine, UQM now looks almost exactly like the original SC2 for PC with menus and all. Tehere really isn't much difference,. the voices as stated, can be turned off if one doesn't enjoy them. And another critical point. UQM is likely to reach far more people, because it is simple to get from here. I seem to recalll though (and correct me if I'm wrong), that a Dosbox actually costs money.

So how many new players will go through the tedious chore of both hunting down a copy of this game and getting a Dosbox? As opposed to those who find this site and download it?

you can get a copy of sc2 pc version on *****. there are only two sources to download from but thats where i got mine. i once owned the single cd that had both sc1 and sc2 with a map in perfect condition, but sold for a rip off of $20. now i kick my self every time i think about it.. ouch!

anyways how did you get a good emulation setup to run sc2 on dosbox. ive read the ponaf guide on it but since the new version came out its screwed all up. for instance everytime i get to the starbase for the first time when the power is low the sound skips and jitters something horrible. yes i did set the keepsmall=true but nothing? ive tried posting over on there site but its like few in far between. i only posted here cause the topic was brought up. anyone with some constructive ideas?

and also uqm is what id rather be playing. with all its extras you cant go wrong~DEFIANT

First of all, dosbox does not run the game "near perfectly" at all. On my quick system I get immense slowdown in hyperspace and during melee battles. This may be because I play in windowed mode, but that's no excuse.

I generally agree with Nic's points here. But I'd like to add that one big thing is just the customizability you have in UQM that you will never have in running the original version on dosbox. PLUS, remember there are several original bugs (tm) which UQM has eliminated. And more are in the works (108, 109, 183)...Plus there's the fact that UQM is cross-platform, and will work on many more system configurations. IMHO, UQM is superior to running the original version through a dos emulator in every single way.

And yes, you can get sc2 on kazaa. But this is illegal.

illegal or not if there is way to screw accolade i will. its not like there going to release it as abandon ware or ill find it in the $10 dollar basket at a local fred myers. come to my house and try to sue me. you think there going to persue you and a small time download you did over the net. if they did what a sad country we live in. all hail the corparate usa. bah. they've got bigger fish to fry then some kid trying to relive past glory. im not making money off it so in my mind its ok. sorry goes out to the fred and starcontrol team of long ago, but when theres a will there is a way~DEFIANT

Hmm well first you need to know a bit about how cycles work in Dosbox. The emulator starts out at an incredibly low amount of clock cycles. You must increase this if you would like proper performance. Ctrl+F12 a few times and there will be no slowdown on a good system. The sound does occasionally skip still, but they never claimed the soundblaster emulation was perfect. Besides the occasional sound skip, I have no slowdown issues. The best way to max out Dosbox's performance is to bring up the task manager and increasing the cycles to a point where your system is using near 100 percent of its processing power.

I totally respect the work that is going on with making SC2 open source. I guess I just respect that Dos emulation will eventually enable gamers to play many of the best games ever made a bit more. This just seems like it has broader implications than saving a single one of these brilliant games.

There is exactly one legal and moral way to "screw" accolade: not buying their products.



No, they do not plan to release it as abandonware.  You might find it used somewhere, but this is not the point.  The point is that, like it or not, accolade own SC2 rights.



Software piracy is harming the entire gaming industry.  Even if they don't sue you, it is still wrong.



And here is the biggest fallacy of them all.  No, you are not making money off of the game.  But, neither is accolade.  If you did the exact same thing at a grocery store, and tried to apply the same justification, you would see how illogical that argument is.  If you steal food from a store and eat it, what has happened?  You have not made money off of the food, but that does not make it right.  You stole.  Period.

Although I just know there is going to be replys in the way of "Get off your high horses!" I still feel complelled to make a comment to these two latest posts.

I have to say that I feel it is strange that people, when it comes to computers, don't see these things as theft. Copying games and warez is the lifeblood of many gamers nowadays. Because these things exists only in the computer, people seem to believe you can't really steal them.

But if one thinks about this for a while, it is completely illogical. To use ErekLichs grocery store example... I often hear that it's okay to copy something to "try it out", or because "It's not so good that I want to pay for it", or even "It's too expensive".

Lets take tomatoes in our grocery store for an example, shall we? You don't get to bring tomatoes home and eat them, in order to find out if they are good. You pay for them. And if you get caught stealing tomatoes and explain "Well, I don't really like them that much, so I thought I'd just grab a few, the storeowner will call you a thief". The same goes for "Well, these tomatoes are just so expensive, I can't afford to buy them" Then don't eat tomatoes!

It's easy to say that you just made one copy for personal use, or that you're not making any money off it, but you're still stealing from the people who invested a lot of effort into these products....

A better example I just thought of, is books. Imagine that your favourite author has released a new book, and you want to read it but not pay for it. So you walk into the book store and open the book, and make a photography of each page. Technically, you haven't stolen anything, the book will still be there when you leave, you've just "copied" it. However, if the bookstore manager catches you in there photographing a book, he will throw you out....

I agree with Lukipela and Ereklich 100%. It's ridiculous how acceptable theft has become.  Another thing I'd like to add is that if you're pirating something "just to try it out," why not download the demo?

ok SMART guys, where do i send my hard earned cash?
oh thats right, fred and company dont own the rights to that game. now lets see, if i send money to accolade how much would that be, umm? oh whats that?, its not produced any more, what a shame, cause id pay for it, but theres no longer a price tag attached, well ill be damned. think before you judge, stealing it may be, but when its no longer sold i consider it picking thru some one elses garbage. its been thrown away never to be used again. and in that senario its free and not stealing. there is NO law that prohibits you to rumage thru some one elses garbage. look it up you'll be surprised. now if you dont mind ill continue with the way ive always got trash ill rumage, ive got no pride and nothing to hide~DEFIANT  

oh and another thing, in this great big corparate america we live in its sad to see that only the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, so if it came down to stealing to feed my my family, you'd be damn sure id do WHATEVER it took to do so. my veiws are my own and if you dont agree you have that right but youll learn soon enough how tough it is in the real world when you move out from underneath mommy and daddys protective wing.as you can already tell im a little pissed, im going to blow off some steam~DEFIANT

No, but stealing software does work in some situations. Some people steal software and then decide they like it enough to buy it. Piracy is a great way to determine which companies are worth giving money and which are not. The problem stems when the person stealing does not pay for either the good or the bad products they steal. Piracy is also the best way to acquire products that have a monopoly on the market such as Windows or Adobe Premiere, which are not by any means good products worth paying for, but are necessary for tasks because there are no adequate competitors. (PC) The same is true for accolade. They were a terrible company. Do not support them.

-Jim

heres some thing else for you guys to think about, if you havent noticed but i live in oregon. yhea so what you you say, well while everone else has enjoyed a decrease in gas prices, oregon is still ranked #1 highest in all of the usa. at $2.00 a gallon id call that stealing but whos standing up for me, huh? its the little people that take it in the ass on everything from food to gas to housing, and you sit here and defend a piss ass pc game and how some one acquried it. SAD. wake up, if you want to take a stand, do so without fear. i take my stand every day. may be you should take yours~DEFIANT

~and piss ass refers to (its just a game) not the quality of the game~

you know something, DEFIANT?  I am taking a stand.  Right here, right now.

Accolade owns the legal rights to the name Star Control 2.  Period.  This is a fact, indisputable.  They have not sold them to anyone.

It is up to Accolade what to do with what they own.  Just as it is up to, say, a  stamp collecter to do whatever he wishes with the stamps he buys, Accolade may do anything it wants with the games it buys.  The fact that our friend the stamp collecter does not put his stamps on the market does not give you the right to steal them from him.

Accolade has NOT thrown away the copyright to the game.  They still own it.  It is not in their trash can, it is in their attic.  If there is no way to acquire it from Accolade then there is NO legal way to acquire it.  Period.

I'm sorry you have to pay so much for gas, but the price is not stealing.  It may be monopolizing or some other sin, but it is NOT stealing.  Also, You cannot compare stealing to feed your family to stealing a game.  The game is not necessary for your survival.  You keep piling up the fallacies in your point of view.  The real world must not be very tough for you if you have the spare cash to buy a game, not to mention the computer to play it on and the internet access to scream about your "right" to steal.  There are people who have nothing.  Nothing.  Consider how blessed you are that you have anything at all.

LordJim - you are correct that some people will buy the game after they try it.  However, they still stole it.  Nothing can erase that.  It is wrong and an evil act.  

Every time I hear a speech like that, I'm inclined to go off on one of my own about how the granting of intellectual property rights is a distortion of capitalism, and how granting them to solve the chief problem of capitalism, it's stymieying effect on innovation, has cause a myriad of other problems to pop up, to the point where modern day american capitalism enjoys practically none of the actual benefits that capitalism was supposed to provide.

But that's just the anarchist in me talking, and the only economics I'd really like to discuss around these parts has to do with trading biodata for heavy weaponry, so I won't.

ErekLich- your argument seems to be based on the assertion that if something is illegal then it is automatically wrong.  But is that always or has that always been the case?   I can think of plenty of things that were legal in the past that were obviously wrong, and things that were illegal in the past (or the present) that are obviously perfectly okay.  I don't think you should rely on the law to make ethical choices -- the law is just an indication of the will of the majority.  The will of the majority isn't always right (in fact, is often wrong).

Not that I agree or disagree with you on illegal software copying, I just think your argument is flawed

I do not rely on illegal ALWAYS meaning wrong, however in the case of theft I think illegal does mean it is wrong.

Also, how do intellectual property grants "distort capitalism?"  If someone comes up with an idea then they should be able to reap the benefits of that idea.

ErekLich,
is your morality of stealing is wrong, based off your belief in GOD or just your parents instilled behavior also based on the belief in GOD. would i want some one to take something from me i worked hard on to make or acquried, i guess i would protect my stuff from anyone trying to take it. then why is it kazaa exsists? its like leaving the front door open saying here its free game have at. then im left with the question? should i or shouldnt i? ive made a choice to get something without paying for it yes, but like i said you show me where to send my cash and how much and ill be most happy to do so. it may be moraly wrong to steal and i may pay for it in the end but you have no right to point fingers. ease up, i see your view clearly, may be you should see mine~DEFIANT

Hmm... A world without intellectual property? I wouldn't like to live there, would you? Are you ready to say goodbye to books (no doubt some will be writen, though who would publish them?), movies (would you go investing millions of dollers in a movie which you can't charge people to see?), medicine (why would farmacudical companies R&D for new drugs if there's no gain in it?) etc'...

Your illogic astounds me, DEFIANT.  Yes, I too would wish to not have people steal things from me.  That has absolutely nothing to do with why Kazza exists.

Accolade did not create Kazza.

Accolade did not put the game on Kazza.  Pirates did.

Also, I have every right to "point fingers" and tell you that you are stealing.  Yes, it is your choice.  However, the consequences of your actions affect not only you, but also the gaming industry and therefore me, albiet indirectly.  I see your viewpoint;  I am just telling you that hey, you are stealing, and it is wrong.  I certainly can't stop you from doing it, but I can tell you it is wrong.  You're getting far too upset about this.

[/rant]

I'm sorry I am being so confrontational about this.  I prefer to try and discuss things rationally.  But when you come onto this board and say, "screw you accolade and if you disagree with me screw you" reasoned discussion is difficult.  I would like to ask, as respectfully as I can, that you calm down about the whole matter.

to answer your question, my belief that stealing is wrong is based on both my belief in God and my parents' teaching.  Why do you ask?

I'd like to back that up. I don't believe in God, and I believe stealing is wrong.

A few points I'd like to make... The first one really hasn't really got that much to do with the conversation, except I'd like to point out that people who complain about how expensive thing that they are "forced" to buy are should look around for a bit... 2 $ a gallon for fuel? wake up, noone is forcing you to buy fuel, and there are loads of people who can't afford to buy the stuff at all, much less a car. Over here, fuel is currently going at 1.07 €/litre, which translates into about 4.05 € a gallon, which is about 4.10 $ / gallon.That's twice what you pay. So really, you're being spoiled and shouldn't complain. Also, it isn't aright to drive a car, and it's really noones responsibility to sell you fuel dirt cheap. If you pay, you drive.

For AS: An example to bring this a bit clsoer to the real world for ya. Have a look at, for instance, http://www.sharewarepromotions.com/. most of the software advertised there is done by companys consisting of a few persons. They pout loads of work and effort into what they do, and the money is supposed to keep them going til the next product. How do you think they feel, when, a day after they release something, there are already twenty cracks out so that people wont have to pay them? How long do you think they can keep going really? Big coroporations can "afford" to lose a little every now and then, but small companies simply can't. Also, Erans post has some very good points. Why would anyone bother, if they don't get anything out ofit? since long before the greeks, artists have been sponsored in one way or another, because otherwise they'll starve to death...

For the Kazaa issue... So what you're saying is, if there's a riot in the town, you'd be among those who loot stores? Or, if someone forgets to lock their door when they leave their house, it's perfectly alright to walk in and steal stuff? Like it or not, theft is theft. And this is not a legal issue as much as it is a moral one. Laws can be wrong, yes. But we should try to act to the spirit of the law, and not the letter of the law.

Still, I will admit, it is a troublesome situation, seeing as the game can't be easily aquired yet. But there is UQM, and while hard, it's probably not impossible to get hold of a copy if one tries hard. Hell, if I can find people who own the game here in Finalnd, I'm sure you can find one or two in the US willing to part with their copy...

I adore conversations like this, because one side is always so clearly in the wrong, but still attempts to justify their actions.  Makes me smile.

Accolade owns the copyright to Star Control II.  Therefore, they have the absolute legal right to say who may and who may not copy their works.  (those of us who are fond of Locke's writings would also say that, being a property right, it is a moral right, but I'll not get into that) If they say noone but them can make copies, then making a copy, is in all forms, illegal (exception: backup copy for personal use).

They also have the absolute legal right to say "we will make no more copies of this, ever; and noone else is allowed to, until the copyright expires."   In that case, it is up to the person wishing to obtain a copy legally to find someone willing to sell a copy on the open market, e.g., eBay.  Can't find one?  Well, then that's really too bad for you.  Either learn to live without or break the law.

Arguments about the ease of copying bits, the wrong of "artificial scarcity" created by software copyrights, and the "stick it to the man" appeal of pirating software is only so much quacking:  what you are doing is illegal, and by all accounts, wrong.  That it's easy to do, or whom it impacts is absolutely irrelevant.  Own up to the fact that you're doing a bad thing, and stop dressing it up to be more than it is.

I don't think any disagrees with you that downloading an illegitimate copy of SC2 is illegal.  In my opinion, the issue here isn't legality, it's whether it's morally wrong to violate Accolade's copyright by illegally copying SC2.  I don't think you really addressed that in your post

Who gets harmed?  Accolade is never going to make any more money off of SC2 -- even if they were planning to, obviously they couldn't now that it's available for free here.  Yes they've got the legal right to take it off the market and sit on the copyright.  But is it morally wrong to violate Accolade's copyright, which they probably don't even really care about anymore?  All I see in your post is that "if it's illegal, it's wrong"

Okay, time for a little rant.  Sorry everyone

I tend to think of copyright as a necessary evil -- I can buy the argument that intellectual property is necessary for people to make money off of their work.  But the general public is better off if the work is eventually not covered under copyright.  Copyright is intended to encourge people share their work with the public -- but it's intended for a limited time (IIRC, originally it was seven years with an optional seven year extension).  Now it's forever through Congress's generous extension plan...

So anyway, back to the original point .... should Accolade have the right to a copyright after it's no longer useful to them?  I'm not talking about the trademark Star Control, that's obviously could potentionally be still useful and is a different issue -- but the original, IBM-PC DOS game.  Do you think that old games really need eternal copyright protection?  I'm interested in what you think, I've heard "illegal = wrong" lots of times, I just want to know why you think it's wrong.

Now, please understand.  I did not say illegal means wrong.  The two, while they do overlap quite a bit, are not identical.

That said, I have said that theft, under any name, IS wrong.  I say this for many reasons.  

1) Every major religion in the world, and a whole lot of the minor ones, say that theft is wrong.  To me, that says something about theft...

2) My parents taught me that it is wrong to steal.  That may sound silly to you, but such lessons are important.

3) It is taking something that belongs to someone else.  You are, by that action, harming the other entity.  That is an immoral thing to do.

Now, as to the "etenral copyright" bit:  When you have changed the copyright law get back to me.  Until then, no matter how much time has passed, software piracy is stealing.

At the very least illegal software copying is a different form of stealing because in traditional stealing when you take someone else's property they no longer have it. .stealing is wrong not because you benefitted but because you harmed someone else in order to benefit.  But anyway thanks for the patronizing response.

It is their property, and hence it is their call as to what is done with it; not yours.  That is, in as terse a form as I can make it, the moral argument.

Whether or not the holder of a copyright is "abusing" it is quite irrelevant.

Unless we restate copyright as a set of rights and responsibilities, that will remain the case. I foresee no such re-drafting. Can YOU devise a workable set of responsibilities that should accompany all copyrights?

But you do harm someone elseeven wehn you steal something insubstantial. That's what we're trying to get at. Read the book example further up, while the book remains, you've stolen/copied the content without the author getting anything for the time he spent writing the novel.

Just because it doesn't harm someone in the way of "Oh man, someone took my car!", it can still harm someone in the way of "Oh man, no roaylties this month either, I suppose I'll just stop writing/coding and start working at Macdonalds", or "Well, your game wasn't a very large success for some reason, so we are going to have to fire your dev team. Have fun at Macdonalds!"

People hang themselves up too much on this "It's not physical, so it can't be stealing" thing. If you invested even a couple of months of your life in creating a program of some sort, in the hopes of making it easier for other computer users and the hopes that it would pay, say maybe a quarter of your bills during those months if it sold well, wouldn't you be just as angry and feel just as violated when someone cracked your program on the release date, as if said person had actually stolen that money from you. You don't steal a physical object, no. But you steal someones potential. In a way, that's even worse.

Regarding the morality of this current case though, yes Accolade behaved very badly towards the Creators. But has any of you stopped to think, that if it wasn't for Accolade, maybe those games wouldn't have been released at all? Maybe some other company would have caught the idea, and MAYBE not. So before you complain too much about it, remeber that while the Creators without a doubt created this game, I'm assuming that their tools and resources during (most) of that period actually came from Accolade.

Yes I can see your point and I agree with you, illegally copying software robs artists of their royalities (but I don't think it's the moral equivilent of stealing).  But in this particular case, Accolade no longer sells the game, and I can't imagine a future in which Accolade will ever sell the game again.  In this situation, no royalities are lost if the software is illegally copied.

The public benefits substantially if copyrighted works that fall into this state are released into the public domain, Accolade loses hardly anything.  Copyright was originally intended to be for a limited amount of time but thanks to a cartoon rodent that's no longer the case and will never be the case again.

I know I'm never going to convince any of you but at least I hope you can at least see my side of this.

Also, if there hadn't been a porting effort, and the copyrighted DOS version had remained in Accolade's hands, Star Control 2 would have been lost forever..

I agree with you that the public benefits from Open-Source software.  (I mean, just look at the board we're discussing this on!)

HOWEVER, it is Accolade's decision whether or not to do so.  If you view them not realising it as "wrong" somehow, fine.  Just remember that two wrongs don't make a right.

To bring a more physical example to this: If you used to have a gas stove, but changed it for an electrical one, you'll have some stuff left over (maybe a half empty gas canister, a lighter, whatever), then you'll probably put these in the attic or something (after all, you payed good money for those things, you're not gonna just throw them away). Would it thenbe morally or legallly acceptable if someone was to come into your house and take these things off you, on the grounds that "you no longer need them"?

To give another non-physical example, how about this : A couple of years ago, you bought a bunch of movies on VCR tapes, to watch, because at the time you thought they were quite good. However, nowadays you don't watch them very often, if at all (after all, you've seen them already, and there are new videos). Does that mean that anyone can walk up to you on the street, or march into your house and demand that they be allowed to copy those videos? If they bring their own blank tapes with them, and maybe even their own VCR so that you have no expenses at all, nor is your machine used for this? Would you be quite alright with having tousands of strangers getting these movies from you, even though you, a year or two ago, payed good money for them? They are your movies, you decide what to do with them. If you want to give them away, fine. But you can't actually copy them, even if you wanted to let a thousand peopel see them for free. And would you really want to?

Now imagine that in your younger days, you played a role in one of those movies, and that for every copy that is sold, you get a small check 0.02 cent or something. Would you really want everyone to get them even though you wont get a thing, and you worked hard for those movies?

It's all aobut perspective.

Yeah, all about perspective

Dunno, in the first analogy, you're dealing with people physically stealing your property that still has value, even though you're not presently using it

in the second one, I think the reason that seems unsavory is because you're dealing with someone else's intellectual property which also still obviously has value to others.

I think the second analogy is a good one but it'd fit this situation better if

1) the movies were out of print, there was little or no chance they would ever be in print again, and they had otherwise had little value to the owner of the copyright
2) the people were copying my movies without hassling you at all (coming into my house, hooking up their VCRs, etc.)

with those two caveats I wouldn't have a problem with people copying my movies.

Hmmm... but even if the movies are out of print, you're still dealing with "someone else's intellectual property", no? And even if it only has the value of what you paid for it to you, and even if the people who originally made the movie don't intend to release any more copies of it, it still has a value to them. It represents a lot of hard work and ambition, and they may not want, fo their own reasons to see truckloads of copies of their movie being copied.

And I think that's what it all boils down to, doesn't it? Regardless of if the creator/copyright holder has no further use for their product anymore, even if they decide that noone but those who already own it should ever get to parttake it, it is their decision to make. It's their creation after all, their sweat and blood that's gone into it. So isn't it only fair that they should have a say in what happens to their creation? If they say that it's alright to copy it, make it "abandonware" so to speak, then obviously, copy as much as you want. But if they don't want that, it's really their decision. And their decision only.

And to get back to what started this, before anyone starts screaming about how accolade owns the name, and they never did a thing for SC, do rememebr that without Accolade, the game may never have been shipped at all. Like i said earlier, whilst they may not have had anything to do with the creative part of SC, they did finance it, which also demands quite a lot... That's why they have a partial copyright. They didn't just get given it.

EDIT: Oh, and we don't actually know what Accolade are planning to do with SC2, if anything, so we can't really make any assumptions to what it's worth to them... they might be planning a rerelease of all their old games soon, or maybe they'll include whith their next attempt at the SC saga.

that's why I said "little or no value".  Chances are if a movie's out of print not many people are interested in buying it -- not enough to make it cost effective.  Thus the movie's out of print and no one can see.  The copyright holder will hold on to it because it still has value, even if it's only very very little value.

There has to be a balance between the copyright holder's right to benefit from sales of his work and the public's right to not have it fall into oblivion.  Copyright is an artificial right intended to give people an incentive to share their work with the public.  It defeats the purpose to allow copyright holders (which often aren't the people who created the work itself) to let the work fall into oblivion on the outside chance that their copyright might be useful for something important, somewhere in the galaxy, at some point in the future.

One tricky point there... The publics right not to have it fall into oblivion? I think that is where we will have to agree to disagree...

For me there is no such right. If someone wants to share their work and creations, then that's great. But they can hardly be forced to do so because outher people want to see them, it's their creations to do as they please with.

I think that's a bit comparable to DEFIANT's complains about how gasoline is horribly expensive in Oregon. There is no law that states that it's a god-given (or otherwise aquired) right to drive a car. It's a privillege. If you can attain a drivers license and can afford a car, then fine. If not, take the bus or walk. If someone has designed a superb new car, but decides not to build it, you can't take his blueprints and build the thing yourself, because those blueprints are something he has worked with a long time. It's not a right to view art, movies, or listen to music, unless you created it yourself. It's a privilege you enjoy because there are nice people in the world who enjoy creating, and also enjoy sharing it with us. sometimes for a fee, sometimes for free. but ultimately, it's always their decision what they do with their creations.

Briefly adressing who holds the copyright: Yes, it is true that the artist seldom has full control. But rememebr, they wouldn't be able to get this art out to very many people, and certainly not be able to make a living off it, if they tried to do everything themselves. That's where the companys come in, for marketing and for the production budget. Why would they do it for free? The system is not perfect, and sometimes far from it, but until someone comes up with a better one, I'm inclined to keep this one instead of trashing it and watching as art as we know it disappears.

It's nice to have rights yes. But everything isn't a right. people always seem to forget that for every right they have, there is a dozen responsibilites to go with it. and this is something I'm inclined not to view as a right.

Still, if you want to think otherwise, well now that is a right.

I'd just like to add something to this discussion: As far as I understand the situation, Fred and Paul still DO get some money one way or another from the sales of the first two Star Control games. A quote from the IRC chat log from Pages of Now and Forever (Fwiffo = Fred & Paul):

"<_Stilgar> <Umgah> Q: Are you still making any money on SC1 or SC2?
<Fwiffo> We make a few hundred dollars every 3 months."

So that kinda undermines the "Accolade is an evil company and they give the great creators nothing if I by SC2." argument.

all I can say at this point is that I think Lukipela hit it on the head.

Basically, accolade may be the meanest company in the world for not releasing a game, but it IS theirs.  Period.

i think i opened a big can of worms when i stated where i got my COPY of sc2. if i kept my big mouth shut...oh well, at least you have opened my eyes on the whole situation. but:

in a world driven by greed, its these personal posesions that seperate the poor from the rich. if i am to believe that as a person i cant experiance any thing i want to on the basis that it cost too much money and i cant afford it because someone wants to charge alot of money, then wants the point on living? to strive to be richer? to out do your neighbors, your friends, god? if you cant take any thing with you, then why acquire it at all. because in this world its greed or nothing. it cost money to survive, and people no longer work for themselves(ie like in covered wagon days, but even then you still had to pay for things). of couse you cant any more, why, becasue some one says this land  is mine and now you will pay for it and anything else you dont really need. i hope some day that money no longer rings out as the driveng force behind are culture, that we as a people share ideas, items, food because we no longer try to out do everyone else. that whole sharing for free seems to be whats missing from our world. i would feed or house any one in need. and not charge them one red cent. your probley thinking what a fool but its that kind of kindness that is missing in our lives. we have all seen star trek right, well it is my hope that one day things will mirror that fictonal universe. that we strive to better our humanity as a whole and not crush the weak and poor under the capatilistic machine. did i steal to hurt accolade? no, i was angry at what some of you said and i lashed out, but your words ring true when youy say stealing is wrong. i would not take anything that belong to one of you or from your home but like you said i didnt see downloading bits of data as stealing. i may some day stand before GOD and he will ask "WHY DID YOU TAKE THAT GAME WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT?"
i did it because my greed for material items out wayed moral belief that stealing, in this case, was justified on the accounts that i just couldn't find it any where else. but that in itself doesnt nagate the fact that it is, bottom line, not mine and hence forth, stealing. so now what? do i erase it, send accolade a check with um...lets say $20 for sc2, or feel bad that ive may of hurt some feelings and lost some good friends in this forum. i hope that is not the case cause you guys are, for all accounts , the only people i talk to about games and the like. my wife isnt really into all this but thats ok. im willing to draw up a truce if you are and return this forum to a more orderly and friendly talk of sc2 and other related sci fi works. my appoliges to ANYONE i have offended, i get a little hot headed some times but try to stay within light of reason. i guess thats all i have to say bout this.
i hope this gives you all a better understanding into what drives me to hope for and may be it drives you too?
may be some where in this thing we call life, we can pause and ajust or course, even if we drifted a little the wrong way~DEFIANT

Um, copyright is not eternal.  Right now, the US copyright for software made for hire is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter.

So, assuming the law doesn't change again, is it wrong 95 years from now to copy Starcontrol 2?  It wouldn't be illegal.  Or is it 5 years from now it's wrong, but 95 years it isn't? Why?  Because the law says so?  Or is it because 95 years from now Starcontrol 2 will have no value and 5 years it still will?  Why 95 years?  Why not more, why not less?

Clearly law makers don't think copying software or books the same thing as stealing.  Otherwise it would be forever.  I mean, it doesn't matter how long my family has owned that diamond ring, when it was made, or anything.  If someone took it, it would be stealing.

Similiarly, if you ran into a store, grabbed a copy of some game, and ran out with it, you'd be prosecuted differently than if you copied it from the net.

If I made a machine that made duplicates of apples at practially no cost, nobody would accuse me of stealing from apple growers (except maybe the apple growers.)  In fact, I'd be hailed as the savior of mankind, I'd think, eliminating hunger!

Copyrights were intended as a way for artists to make money off of their creations.  After they've made their money, those works go into the public domain.   I think that copyrights have been extended way too far by corporate greed.  Disney has made their money on Mickey Mouse.  They need to let him go.  He belongs to all of us now.

Um, I knew that... however, for all intents and purposes it is indefinate, because in 95 years it will be impossible to play a game created today as it is today... it would have to undergo major porting.



Because, as you said, corporate greed has lengthened the copyright.



However, as you said, a physical object is not the same as an intellactual one.  Stick to one thing or the other.  As for the intellectual ones, look at Lukipela's example of photocopying a book -- EVEN an out of print one.  It is stealing, for the same reasons that software piracy -- EVEN of an out of print game, is stealing.



A couple corrections:  After they've made their money, those works SHOULD go into the public domain.

Mickey Mouse does NOT belong to all of us.  Disney is still very much making money off of Mickey Mouse, and to make Mickey Mouse public property would lose them money.

and now, a message to EVERYONE!

>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!>!

YES!  I think copyrights should be for a shorter time!

BUT!  They are not, and copying a copyrighted work without the owner's permission is illegal!  No matter what the circumstances, doing so is wrong!

[/soapbox]

Actually, I thought the copyright was extended to 90 some years from the creator's death...  Which would mean that if somebody wrote a book when they were 20 and lived to 100 (not impossible, certainly) then the copyright would have lasted for a total of 170 years.  An awfully long time...
The problem is that debating on the 'best' length of copyright isn't going to change anything, really.
:-/

I think we have exhausted all arguments here... I hereby second DEFIANT's call to return to a friendlier forum.  And btw DEFIANT, I accept your apology and offer one of my own to anyone I insulted (whether to their digital face or in my head).  You have certainly not lost me as a friend, and I hope that other forum-dwellers can say the same.

As for your questions about "the point of living" etc., I would answer that the point of living is to do good acts and to love God.  As for "what do I do now", well, it is possible to be forgiven.  All you have to do is ask. [/religious soapbox]

I third DEFIANT's suggestion, we have all stated our opinions, and even though they may differ, we have nothing to gain by bickering any further. (Except that I have to say that concerning Mickey Mouse, why should he belong to all of us now? We didn't make him. But that is beside the point, and again, only a difference of opinions, out of which many can have an equal degree of right and wrong to them I suppose).

I also agree completely with DEFIANT on the subject of greed. However, even though it sometimes sickens me to see the state fo the world today, and no matter how much I would liek to chaneg it, I tihnk that greed has unfortunately always been a, if not THE driving factor for us as a species... Something like that is hard to change, although that of course doesn't mean that we shouldn't do our utmost to do so.

As for the point of living, all I want to get out of it is that when I'm OLD (like preferably 90 or so) and preparing to leave this world, I'll be able to look back and say "I had a good life. I did more good than I did bad, and I always tried to do what was right.". I want to be able to be content with what I've had when I leave, to know that I did the best I could with what possibilities I was given. Nothing more.

And during arguments like these, everyone tends to get a little hotheaded. But still, among friends who mean no harm to eachother, harsh words don't really carry any weight. I doubt anyone here has been truly offended, but if they have, I will gladly add my apologies as well.

And as a final statement, I'm still impressed at how civilized this discussion (just as the war one), has been on this board. It is a rare thing nowadays to be ablet o discuss such touchy topics as these without someone starting a flamewar. That we have succeded is inherent proof of our own maturiyt (congratulations to us!). It is as always a pleasure to read these boatrds.

*absently wonders at the response to copying SC3 off the net instead*

umm...thats a bad, yes very bad, idea... ;)

i would also like to (just for the record) retract my statement about how to illegaly get sc2 of a certain pirate sharing place. dont do it, its bad, it hurts not only the software companies but you too. if you dont believe just read this thread. you will be a believer.

also ive deleated the name of that *pirate sharing* place in my earlier post. this has been done to protect the guilty, namely me~DEFIANT

Comparative morality aside, I'm more inclined to just tell people to do what they feel is right. Other people can tell you what to believe all they want, but in the end, it's you and not anyone else who lives your life, and controls what you do.

I just say this because I hate arguments regarding morality. When it comes down to it, I simply refuse to take stock in the belief system of right and wrong; just actions and consequences.

Slightly off topic, but : You have been busy Primat, haven't you? Two whole pages of new subject, and almost everyone has your name as the last :) Way to go!

letting peole do what they feel is right, would be fine, except it doesn't work that well. some people think nothing of murdering, raping, or looting. If you just tell them to go ahead and do it, because they think it's ok, then the world would be in a pretty sorry state at this time.

Whereas on smaller issues like this, the damage caused by ppl who do whatever they want isn't that aggravated (although still bad), in other circumstances it may well be fatal

As for the SC3 thing, the same reasoning applies to all games, and all intellectual property, not just a select few.

And as for actions and consequences. The problem is, most people aren't willing to take the consequences. and sometimes the consequences of your actions affect other people, which you should take into consideration.

Quite busy. Despite my earlier apology for bringing up old threads.

Why? The reasons are threefold.

1) The last three or four days saw all of maybe 4 new posts. (slight exaggeration, but you know what I mean). I don't care how 'convenient' it is for people to check this forum for only two messages; a forum is meant to be read, not to be gratefully opened and closed without reading anything.

2) The threads I'm bringing up are only two weeks old.

3) I'm incredibly hormonal right now. I have the constant and undeniable urge to just rip out a male's lungs through his chest. At this moment, telling me not to post just so you don't have to bother reading this forum is the equivalent of giving me a loaded shotgun, and then running up to me and kicking me in the shins.

It's a good thing I don't live close to you then :) Otherwise, I do agree with your points. The posts must flow.

Yeah, besides, how else is Death_999 going to reach his 'Enlightened' state, without another 12 posts to reply to? Even from the top to the bottom of the hierarchy, we Ur-Quan have to look out for one another.

But then I wont be the only enlightened one on the forum... i will no longer feel special.. oh well, that's life for you :)

Well if it makes any difference, none of us will ever catch up to your 619 posts.

Well, I'm going back home for easter today, and I wouldn't be too surprised, if by the time that I come back, every topic here is marked as new and you have 700+ posts  ;)

Bloody hell, I don't think I have that much creativity left in me. Besides, that would make a tenth of every post in this forum mine. And while I am ecstatic at surpassing Shiver's posts tally, I still have G.N. and Omni and Death_999 to try and catch up to, before I can even attempt to close with you.

This reminds me - what exactly is a Primat? #001, Top Banana-Quan?

In any case, given the number of posts it looks like you're determined that the way I'll become enlightened is entirely talking with you...
;)

Try saying hi to the Dnyarri without a mind shield.



See, my options were: Zoq, Talana, Queen Veep Neep, Utwig High Proctor, and Kohr Ah Primat. And I suppose, Sullen Plummet.

None of these had any appeal to me whatsoever except for either Zoq or Kohr-Ah. And Omni's already got a picture of a Fot, and there's someone who already has a picture of the Pik, so I didn't want to be another sheep in a flock.

I just had to pick that little Fot...  that eye of his is just so creepy when you think about it.  It's staring right at you... Not speaking, just staring.  Those Fots are creepy little buggers!  And I love 'em for it...  :D  I find it amusing that the only girl on the forums picked the most violent race in the galaxy for her identity.  Good pick, K.P.!  You've already frightened the majority of male members on these forums!  Hehe.  I congratulate you for this task.

The only primat I know of is Beldar Conehead's wife.

cactopus

that would requrie me to have thoes spare parts laying around, one and two the knowlage to put them together into something useful, wich i dont. im just a simple welder with limited computer knowlage, though i did install my voodoo5 and added some more ram to my super destructive and yet timid 600mhrz compaq crap machine that crashes more then a boeing 747. but thanks anyway. its a good thing they included a cd recovery program, otherwise id be up a creek without a mouse... ~DEFIANT

What can I say... I respect and worship evil. *evil smirk*

...and I wouldn't say I've frightened most of them. Maybe irritated... *laughs maniacally*

Yeah I tend to not think of those things.  I have about a metric ton of computer parts around, but I work in the field.  I'm on call 24/7 for a datacenter providing daycare for big HP 9000 equipment.  Most of my 20 or so computers at home are not Intel based (in fact I don't consider x86 machines "real" computers --  :) Most of my machines would crush a PC if they fell on them)  One of these days if I have spare time my friends and I will fix the sound loader code to be endian-safe so we can run it on the Mac and hear sounds as opposed to just hearing the music.  The 486 I built I swiped from my ex-employer's trash pile... swipe isn't quite true because I asked #1, and #2 I was the director of IT.

Well, I guess you're right!  You're not really frightening.  You're more kind and innocent than evil.  That is, if you consider maniacal laughing innocent...  well, I'm certainly not frightened!  Hehe, no siree!  ::)

...
... ...
...

*slowly backs away*   :'(

...
... ...
...

*runs*
Aieee!  Please don't hurt me with your blood-sucking tendrils!

Beyond the whole Dnyarri compassion thing, whatever could possibly give you the idea that I'm kind and innocent, Omni? Okay, so there is the whole banana thing, and the whole romance novel thing, and the...

Damnit.

I dunno, maybe I always thought deep down inside, the Kohr-Ah had at least some good inside of them...

Now that I think back, they really don't.  You must be pure evil, K-P...  no doubt in my mind!

Rar. You're going to end up Enlightened at this rate, Omni.
And yay, I'm *smell* controller now.

Personally, I'm not into the whole concept of good and evil. I just feel there's actions, and there are consequences.

And to address the topic of the post:
I think that reconstructing the code is the very first step in improving upon the game. Once you've gotten the remake of the original down, then you have something to work off of to improve the game. Plus, I personally believe in UQM being a rebirth of the series. I'd rather think of the series as the Ur-Quan Masters Series, starting with this game, and possible sequels coming along in the form of UQM2, and such and so forth. I don't particularly lend a lot of weight to SC3 as a sequel (obviously) and to be honest I'm not particularly big on the whole Timewarp project and where they're going with it. I guess you could call me a purist in that sense.

Personally, I just want to see what Fred and Paul can pull out of their collective noodles for this series.

Congrats on your new title as *Smell* Controller, K-P!  Now get to bed and stop posting!!!  You're going to hurt your hand if you post anymore.   ;D  Plus, we'll both be Englightened in no time if we keep this up...   ::)

I think it's great that the Star Control fan community has revived the classic, not only bringing back the code, but breathing life back into this great game and series.  It would be neat to consider side projects, like a UQM2, but for now those things are just dreams.  I think that UQM was a great step in returning interest in this classic title and hopefully earn some new fans.  (I've certainly advertised it to alot of my buds... now they're addicted to the game I used to play for hours on end!).  I don't think we'll ever see a "pure", Star Control 2 sequel in the form of Paul and Fred's work, but I'll keep the dream alive as long as possible...  *sighs*  ... ... ...

... that's basically until now.   :P

Yeah, I'm getting sleepies too. *answers your last couple posts*

Personally, I'm having trouble getting nerdy GUYS to play this game. *narrows eyes* Maybe they think this is one of those so-called "cutesy girly games" or something.

Any suggestions, you guys?
*snarls evilly at the lot of you that suggest I offer them something 'extra' to get them to play the game*

Damn, that was my suggestion!!   ;D

I'd suggest learning about some of their favourite PC or Console game classics and then compare the game to them.  A lot of geeks and nerds (like myself ;) ) need a comparison before we can get the point of how good a game really is.  I would also suggest a demonstration of how the melee works, since most guys like shooting and explosions.  That or offer them something 'extra' to play.

I hate sounding corny when I say this... but what games does SC2/UQM really compare with? And no, that's not me saying 'this game is so great that no game can possibly match it'. I just can't think of any games that it would be aptly comparable with.

At the risk of re-jacking this thread, wouldn't you say an action that intentionally causes negative consequences is evil?

No, because there are so many actions that people define as evil, that are only caused by people who aren't fully aware of the consequences of what they do.

Besides, I intentionally attempt to bring grief and negative consequences to others. And I still for some bizarre reason am seen as a very sweet and kind individual to some folk despite it all...

Not to mention there are many folk who commit "heinous acts" of evil from the assumption or notion that what they do is truly good.

I think intentions are quite important in judging character, but I also think that good and evil are overly simplistic concepts that just don't apply very well to define people accurately.

It depends on how you classify UQM. If you look at it as a sci-fi RPG, Starflight I've heard is pretty good. (However, I have a hard time getting over mining the first world. I run out of fuel too fast.)
If you're talking about a game with clever character design and somewhat interesting dialogs, then MOO kinda makes it (and was considerably commercially more successfull. However, it lacked a storyline.)
If you are considering the well concieved storyline with multple branching possibilities then perhaps you'd like to play FF7? (Not really sci-fi and let's face it, the battles were pretty lame.  Programming moves and waiting for your turnjust doesn't do it for me.)
However, if you're talking about a cleverly written game with fun characters, that successfully combines a story driven RPG style exploration with intense action fighting sequences, then, no game can compare with UQM.

I like the action-consequence idea, to a point. But I'd still have to go with "If you do an action that causes negative consequences to others it is a bad action" kinda thing myself. Sort of like, it should be the obligation of anyone considering to act to also consider consequences beforehand. Of course, some consequences can't be foreseen in any way, but I'd consider that more mitigating circumstances than anything else. but then again, that's just me.

On the UQM series idea, I thinkl that's an excellent point. astable 1.0 version would give anyone a great place to start an attempt of creating a new sequel. TW doesn't seem to be doing so good at the mo, but you never know I suppose. They might still surprise us.

Drop by Philadelphia on the way back to LA, we can blow each other up like there's no tomorrow. (a similar invitation was extended to Scott, since he lives in PA)

Betrayal at Krondor is very similar to Starcon 2 in that is is a giant hybrid of genres that succeeds in everything it attempts. Plus it is extremely intimidating when you first look at the map just like Starcon 2. Another great game of epic proportions is XCom 1. Neither of these games exhibit the kind of humor that Starcon exudes; so if humor is what kept you going, the Lucasarts adventure games are probably, dead on, what you want to play. Curse of Monkey Island is a good entry point if you aren't familiar with reverse logic adventure games. Full Throttle and Day of the Tentacle are both great lesser known adventures more for the veteran.
-Jim

My only real problem with Krondor was the fact that it doesn't seem to like my monitors too much. My monitors succumb to gamma radiation (or whatever you call it when the years make your monitor all dark even at its highest brightness setting). I can never play the bloody game because daytime looks like night, and nighttime is so dark you cannot even see the menu. (which is what you use to light a torch with...)

A reduction in gamma (i.e. brightness) could have to do with screen degradation, or it can have to do with the power supply... I don't think gamma rays (high energy photons typically emitted in nuclear processes) would do it, actually, unless it melted the whole screen.

*cheers as her geek level goes down another notch!*
Now I just need to say some really stupid things that would 'prove' how ungeeky I am.

Things a stereotypical blonde would say about nerdy things like...

...like...

...ick, I can't think of any right now.

Yeah, and it would probably also cause you to end up melting ;).

Inviting people sight-unseen over to your house that you met on an Internet forum, eh?  Well, some quick advice, then:

Be sure to use those "3-ply" trashbags to prevent leakage, and don't wimp out when digging the graves; deeper is better.  :P

After all, an axe is a mans best friend.... And it pays to be prepared.

Don't worry, I have a bastard sword, and I'm prepared to use it. Anyway, how can you meet anyone from a discussion board, sight seen? A bit of a bootstrap situation. Also note, I said to come to Philly, not my home -- neutral territory is good. I don't have a computer at home anyway (not since my old computer turned into a jumble of spare parts due to its video card advancing to another plane of existence).

Lastly, the invitation, though seriously offered, was not anticipated to be accepted.

Wow, she's so geeky she can't even think of anything a blonde would say!  Hehe.  Either that or you're so blonde that you can't think of what a blonde would say.... wow, that one really blew up in my face.  :P

Anyways, about the whole meeting people online thing... it's okay if you've known the person a while online.  I've met friends in real life that I've made online.  But there must be Star Control involved, or else it's just wrong.  I mean, unless you're honing up on your supermelee skills, it just gets a little too sketchy.   ;)   By the way, Philly sucks!  Booo Philly!  GO LEAFS GO!!! Wooooohooooo...!!!   ;D

Well what I was thinking of when I mentioned 'ungeekish blondish things to say' would be like per se...

If someone were to ask me how fast my processor was, and I would think they meant food processor...

Or if someone mentioned I should get a DOSBox, and I ask them if that's like an XBox...

I'd get one of those. A dosBox, for all my old games :) Everyone would walk in and be shocked by its sleek smoothness, and amazing menu system... til they noticed you could only put 5.25's into it!

The one I built had both a 5.25 and a 3.5" drive in it... of course the 5.25 is currently disconnected since I sacrificed its floppy cable and CD-ROM drive to repair one of my servers.  Yarr! but it does play a mean Mortal Kombat game.  ;D  Now I just have to figure out where I put my copies of MK1 and MK3... (it only has mk2 right now)... and of course my cheat sheets.