Show Posts
|
Pages: [1] 2 3
|
4
|
The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Making a video to help spread the word about the Frungy Fund and Stardocks greed
|
on: July 31, 2018, 02:44:15 am
|
I think it's also worth noting that for years the term "true sequel" to Star Control 2 was in reference to the fact that most of fandom wanted nothing to do with Star Control 3, and wanted to retcon it out of existence with a "true sequel" from P&F. I think taken in the current context, it could be misconstrued as meaning Star Control: Origins isn't "true" Star Control sequel (which, well... It's not exactly trying to be, more like a reboot), but I think for P&F fans it was always obvious that "true sequel" means a proper continuation of the storyline as was developed by P&F in UQM.
|
|
|
5
|
The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: Stardock Litigation Discussion
|
on: July 22, 2018, 06:19:16 am
|
I found the F&P are multi-millionaires bit kinda hilarious. Since Activision is a publicly traded company, you can easily look at the 10-K for that year and realize that the acquisition of TfB wasn't even a blip on their radar. I took a look at it a few years back and if memory serves I think it was low-mid seven figure deal, split to 3 owners, about 50-50 cash and stock. So, yeah, they probably made a cool million or two each (gross, with California taxes!), and I'm sure they're paid well as studio heads (though likely an order of magnitude or two less than the $12M a year the head of Blizzard makes), they're still as individuals probably nowhere near as well-off as Stardock, the company, or even Brad Wardell the person.
|
|
|
15
|
The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release / General UQM Discussion / Re: My take on Stardock
|
on: April 24, 2018, 05:30:11 am
|
I would assume it's an attempt inter alia to demonstrate that Stardock has the right to publish these games, by, in fact, publishing these games. Stardock's right to publish these games can only stem from the 1988 agreement which they acquired, and whose validity is what is subject to dispute between the parties. Therefore, I'm not sure P&F had a choice but to DMCA Steam and GoG when they became aware of the sales since a lack of action on their part might imply that they at least tacitly accept the continued applicability of the 1988 agreement.
|
|
|
|
|