The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 26, 2019, 07:07:00 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  My take on Stardock
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 ... 68 Print
Author Topic: My take on Stardock  (Read 62403 times)
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #465 on: April 12, 2018, 10:34:35 pm »

I can't argue how valuable the particular Ur-Quan Conflict lore is to you.   I can only tell you how valuable it is to us which is to say, it is not without value but even if we had it, we would still have ultimately gone with a different universe in any event for much the same reason why Star Trek rebooted its series (Kelvin timeline) in a different universe.

I agree that lore is very important in an RPG.  But if I had to choose between lore and the Baldur's Gate trademark, I know which I would pick. 

In the case of Star Control: Origins, we've had four years to think about it.  We have a published book that includes the beginning of the backstory for the Lexites (https://amzn.to/2qnI3Q3).   It is something that we have been thinking of and building on for a very long time that we are very passionate about.  We have no more desire to use Paul and Fred's lore than we have to make a Star Trek or Star Wars game.

This was why we wanted Paul and Fred to continue their story.  Because a new game set in the Ur-Quan universe would satisfy those that wanted to learn more about those amazing characters.  But for us, the value was in the trademark, the brand recognition.  The understanding by most of those who remember Star Control what type of game it is and what to expect.
Logged
Talonious
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #466 on: April 12, 2018, 11:26:30 pm »

I can't argue how valuable the particular Ur-Quan Conflict lore is to you.   I can only tell you how valuable it is to us which is to say, it is not without value but even if we had it, we would still have ultimately gone with a different universe in any event for much the same reason why Star Trek rebooted its series (Kelvin timeline) in a different universe.

I agree that lore is very important in an RPG.  But if I had to choose between lore and the Baldur's Gate trademark, I know which I would pick. 

In the case of Star Control: Origins, we've had four years to think about it.  We have a published book that includes the beginning of the backstory for the Lexites (https://amzn.to/2qnI3Q3).   It is something that we have been thinking of and building on for a very long time that we are very passionate about.  We have no more desire to use Paul and Fred's lore than we have to make a Star Trek or Star Wars game.

This was why we wanted Paul and Fred to continue their story.  Because a new game set in the Ur-Quan universe would satisfy those that wanted to learn more about those amazing characters.  But for us, the value was in the trademark, the brand recognition.  The understanding by most of those who remember Star Control what type of game it is and what to expect.

To your first paragraph: Fair enough! Admittedly "personal value" and "financial value" are certainly different enough things.

To your second paragraph: This is a bit dicey and a part of the core of my contention. I don't know if the you can really separate the value quite so cleanly between the lore and the trademark. The Baldur's Gate trademark has the value it has at least in part because of the experiences of the people who played those games doesn't it? If people didn't remember those games so fondly - largely because of the lore - then would the trademark still have any value?

Similarly, I wonder how much value the Star Control trademark would have without the fond memories of the prior experiences. Certainly less than it does. It would be a cool "name" even without the legacy of the experiences of those games, but would the trademark still have the value it currently has without it?

To your third paragraph: Please forgive me if I do not check your link. It isn't that I am not interested. Quite the opposite in fact. But for games that I have already decided to buy and play, I prefer to mostly keep myself in ignorance and go in with fresh eyes and no spoilers. It's a large reason why I am not active in more threads on your own forum. I like to learn just enough about an upcoming game to decide if I'm likely to enjoy it or not....and then stop learning anything more! I have high hopes that you and your team will come up with an entertaining and fun universe filled with interesting aliens and a gripping story. If I end up being disappointed, well, that's the price I pay for choosing to go into an experience with minimal knowledge.  Smiley

To your fourth paragraph: This I find the most interesting part of your post, most specifically the part I bolded but all of it in general too. This ties into my thoughts on your second paragraph, that it isn't so easy to separate the value of the trademark from the lore.

You're making the very reasonable argument that people associate the name "Star Control" with a specific kind of "gaming experience" and that's the core value of the trademark. I think this is a very good point and I don't dispute that I don't solely associate the trademark of Star Control just with the established lore. It is, in fact, largely your value pitch for Star Control Origins: "No, it won't have any of the races or history that you remember, but we're going to be creating a substantially similar gameplay experience with all the zaniness of exploration, new gaming races, an immersive story, etc." And believe me that's a great pitch!

But that also makes me wonder why you feel that future games need to have the specific gaming races you've registered trademarks for. Why bother having Spathi, Orz, Utwig, etc. in future games if they will need to be substantially dissimilar to pass legal muster? Why not just name them something else if they aren't going to be the same races people are familiar with?

I do apologize if I'm being obtuse on this point, but that's a genuinely confusing part to me.
Logged
svs
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #467 on: April 13, 2018, 12:05:56 am »

I can't argue how valuable the particular Ur-Quan Conflict lore is to you.   I can only tell you how valuable it is to us which is to say, it is not without value but even if we had it, we would still have ultimately gone with a different universe in any event for much the same reason why Star Trek rebooted its series (Kelvin timeline) in a different universe.

I agree that lore is very important in an RPG.  But if I had to choose between lore and the Baldur's Gate trademark, I know which I would pick. 

In the case of Star Control: Origins, we've had four years to think about it.  We have a published book that includes the beginning of the backstory for the Lexites (https://amzn.to/2qnI3Q3).   It is something that we have been thinking of and building on for a very long time that we are very passionate about.  We have no more desire to use Paul and Fred's lore than we have to make a Star Trek or Star Wars game.

This was why we wanted Paul and Fred to continue their story.  Because a new game set in the Ur-Quan universe would satisfy those that wanted to learn more about those amazing characters.  But for us, the value was in the trademark, the brand recognition.  The understanding by most of those who remember Star Control what type of game it is and what to expect.

To your first paragraph: Fair enough! Admittedly "personal value" and "financial value" are certainly different enough things.

To your second paragraph: This is a bit dicey and a part of the core of my contention. I don't know if the you can really separate the value quite so cleanly between the lore and the trademark. The Baldur's Gate trademark has the value it has at least in part because of the experiences of the people who played those games doesn't it? If people didn't remember those games so fondly - largely because of the lore - then would the trademark still have any value?

Similarly, I wonder how much value the Star Control trademark would have without the fond memories of the prior experiences. Certainly less than it does. It would be a cool "name" even without the legacy of the experiences of those games, but would the trademark still have the value it currently has without it?

To your third paragraph: Please forgive me if I do not check your link. It isn't that I am not interested. Quite the opposite in fact. But for games that I have already decided to buy and play, I prefer to mostly keep myself in ignorance and go in with fresh eyes and no spoilers. It's a large reason why I am not active in more threads on your own forum. I like to learn just enough about an upcoming game to decide if I'm likely to enjoy it or not....and then stop learning anything more! I have high hopes that you and your team will come up with an entertaining and fun universe filled with interesting aliens and a gripping story. If I end up being disappointed, well, that's the price I pay for choosing to go into an experience with minimal knowledge.  Smiley

To your fourth paragraph: This I find the most interesting part of your post, most specifically the part I bolded but all of it in general too. This ties into my thoughts on your second paragraph, that it isn't so easy to separate the value of the trademark from the lore.

You're making the very reasonable argument that people associate the name "Star Control" with a specific kind of "gaming experience" and that's the core value of the trademark. I think this is a very good point and I don't dispute that I don't solely associate the trademark of Star Control just with the established lore. It is, in fact, largely your value pitch for Star Control Origins: "No, it won't have any of the races or history that you remember, but we're going to be creating a substantially similar gameplay experience with all the zaniness of exploration, new gaming races, an immersive story, etc." And believe me that's a great pitch!

But that also makes me wonder why you feel that future games need to have the specific gaming races you've registered trademarks for. Why bother having Spathi, Orz, Utwig, etc. in future games if they will need to be substantially dissimilar to pass legal muster? Why not just name them something else if they aren't going to be the same races people are familiar with?

I do apologize if I'm being obtuse on this point, but that's a genuinely confusing part to me.

To play devil's advocate, why do the aliens need to match SC2? The vast majority of the people who buy SCO will either 1) have never played SC1 or SC2 or 2) played SC2 but don't remember much if anything about the game. In either of those two situations, I doubt very many SCO players will go back and play the quarter-century old DOS games to catch up on the lore and the story.

I truly believe that it is very important to you, I doubt it is important to the vast majority who will buy SCO. I think you are in a very small minority on that front. Stardock's Star Control universe will be the one that players of today know and associate with the brand Star Control.

Food for thought.
Logged
PRH
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 193



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #468 on: April 13, 2018, 12:23:15 am »

To play devil's advocate, why do the aliens need to match SC2? The vast majority of the people who buy SCO will either 1) have never played SC1 or SC2 or 2) played SC2 but don't remember much if anything about the game. In either of those two situations, I doubt very many SCO players will go back and play the quarter-century old DOS games to catch up on the lore and the story.

I truly believe that it is very important to you, I doubt it is important to the vast majority who will buy SCO. I think you are in a very small minority on that front. Stardock's Star Control universe will be the one that players of today know and associate with the brand Star Control.

Food for thought.

Don't think I or other fans didn't consider these arguments. We've already been discussing just that a few pages before. And I'll repeat what I said before: I won't accept any substitutes. And what purpose would it serve, except knowingly trampling what the hardcore fans hold dear? The newbies won't care what the new races will be called, so why, why alienate the old fanbase by messing with the classic races and characters?

So as long as Stardock sticks to this approach:

...We have no more desire to use Paul and Fred's lore than we have to make a Star Trek or Star Wars game.

This was why we wanted Paul and Fred to continue their story.  Because a new game set in the Ur-Quan universe would satisfy those that wanted to learn more about those amazing characters.  But for us, the value was in the trademark, the brand recognition.  The understanding by most of those who remember Star Control what type of game it is and what to expect.

...and as long as Fred and Paul have no legal restraints keeping them from developing their sequel, I will be satisfied.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #469 on: April 13, 2018, 12:24:26 am »

Man, Tolonious, aren't you the same guy I enjoyed talking to on the SC forums? It would make sense.  You have a keen mind.

Obviously, like many of you, I enjoy talking about this stuff.  So let's dive in here:

Trademarks are what encapsulate that feeling you tie to the original experience.  That's what people mean by "good will".  Good will. Reputation. Happy thoughts are legally tied to the trademark.

So why use them now? Because having those aliens (the names which are powerful) in Star Control put us at a disadvantage.  It's not a disadvantage we're willing to absorb now.

Of course I'd love to say they were the exact same expressions as they were in SC2.  I don't know who created, for example, the art and text for the species called Ur-Quan in SC2.   And it doesn't really matter as our Ur-Quan have a very different history.

Someone earlier said that it was retaliation.  That's pretty ugly and not remotely true.  Not doing someone a favor isn't retaliation.  On this very forum how many times has someone said "Why call it Star Control if you don't plan to have the Yehat and Orz and X in it?"  The reason was out of deference to Paul and Fred. Not because we couldn't.   Now, it makes more sense to make sure the Star Control multiverse is well understood.  And part of that will require Steinberg (Paul and Fred's attorney) educating them on what any potential copyrights they may think they have are limited to.  

We have $9 million into this project.  We're committed.  I don't want to fight with Paul and Fred. But we really have no choice.  They could have bought the IP. They declined. So we moved forward. We've spent years on this.  We care about Star Control.  We've probably spent more time working on Star Control than they have.   All the aliens associated with Star Control will remain as part of the Star Control universe.  I don't think most fans will have an issue with that.


Edit: Also, keep in mind, I'm posting here. I'm talking to you guys on this.  As any lawyer should tell you, it's madness that I discuss ongoing litigation publicly.  That should tell you just how passionate I am about Star Control and its future. 
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #470 on: April 13, 2018, 12:37:41 am »


...and as long as Fred and Paul have no legal restraints keeping them from developing their sequel, I will be satisfied.

Depends on how you define legal constraints (I mean that literally, our trademark is our trademark obviously). 

Paul and Fred and I could post bunches of emails making it pretty obvious how much I wanted them to make a new game in their universe with or without Stardock. 

Even if Paul and Fred handed me all their IP, we wouldn't use it in SCO or its sequels.  I'm not even sure we'd put the old games back up at this stage.  I'm so thoroughly disenchanted with them that I'm not inclined to do anything that would build on their IP.  That said, I wouldn't want to do anything that prevented them from being able to return to their universe and doing new games in it.  I just don't want to have anything to do with them now. 

I know Paul and Fred read this.  You (Paul and Fred) managed to turn someone who adored you and thought you walked on water and turn them into your adversary for no apparent reason.   Such a missed opportunity.  Consider this: I built a company around the Civilization V team (Oxide).  I hired Soren Johnson (Civilization IV, Spore, etc.) and built a company around him as well.  In both cases, gave them majority control of the companies so let them pursue their dreams.  I funded both companies completely and acted as their Presidents until they could become independent (and they're both now prospering and independent).  https://www.mohawkgames.com/ http://oxidegames.com/

Paul and Fred could have left Activision and I would have built a studio around them giving them majority control and let them make whatever they wanted.  Instead they choose to hire a PR firm and accuse me of being a thief and smear me in the media. 
Logged
Talonious
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #471 on: April 13, 2018, 12:49:06 am »


To play devil's advocate, why do the aliens need to match SC2? The vast majority of the people who buy SCO will either 1) have never played SC1 or SC2 or 2) played SC2 but don't remember much if anything about the game. In either of those two situations, I doubt very many SCO players will go back and play the quarter-century old DOS games to catch up on the lore and the story.

I truly believe that it is very important to you, I doubt it is important to the vast majority who will buy SCO. I think you are in a very small minority on that front. Stardock's Star Control universe will be the one that players of today know and associate with the brand Star Control.

Food for thought.

To be honest, I find this line of argument a little disingenuous. Prior to the very public legal squabbles, Stardock made mention of the old games and how great they were frequently. They talked up those old games and P&F constantly and were more than happy to have news articles reference them repeatedly. Now of course a part of this is probably an attempt to talk up the new Star Control game, but they wanted to associate the new game with the old games in the eyes of the market.

Since the legal squabbles, they're now 25 year old DOS games that only a tiny minority of people care about that have no real value...and yet at the same time future games WILL have all those alien races that were in those games included because the fans wanted them and were disappointed that Origins wouldn't have them.

I consider myself to be an open minded individual prepared to consider all sorts of viewpoints, but how those old games are described and talked about has changed a bit IMO. One example:

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/07/stardock-acquires-star-control-rights-in-fire-sale-plans-reboot/

This is right after Stardock bought the trademark and this is a direct quote.

I think what most Star Control fans are looking for is a new Star Control game where the inspiration comes from Star Control 2. They want a game with fun, adventure and top down ship battles like in Star Control 2 that all play within a fun sci fi universe. Preferably one with Ur-Quan and Spathi and lots of insults.

Worth noting as an aside this does seem to pretty directly imply that Stardock considered themselves to have the rights to include races like Ur-Quan and Spathi back then and that does support the contention of Brad's that they only did not include them out of respect to P&F at the time. Which makes them filing the recent trademarks look less like legal trolling andmore like a follow-up of sincerely held beliefs.

But that's another subject so, that aside...

I find it hard to reconcile this quote with my being a "tiny minority". Now, obviously, Brad could never have predicted how the situation would have changed between then and now (and also he himself is one of those tiny minority of folks like me who loved those original games so much!) but the thinking definitely does not appear at the time of the trademark purchase that the games were 25 year old DOS games that nobody remembered or cared about.

Quite the opposite, Stardock very much wanted people to make the connection to those games. (And for pretty obvious reasons...because they were so beloved. It's one of the reasons the trademark had/has so much value!)
« Last Edit: April 13, 2018, 01:02:21 am by Talonious » Logged
Talonious
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #472 on: April 13, 2018, 01:16:17 am »

Man, Tolonious, aren't you the same guy I enjoyed talking to on the SC forums? It would make sense.  You have a keen mind.

Obviously, like many of you, I enjoy talking about this stuff.  So let's dive in here:

Trademarks are what encapsulate that feeling you tie to the original experience.  That's what people mean by "good will".  Good will. Reputation. Happy thoughts are legally tied to the trademark.

So why use them now? Because having those aliens (the names which are powerful) in Star Control put us at a disadvantage.  It's not a disadvantage we're willing to absorb now.

Of course I'd love to say they were the exact same expressions as they were in SC2.  I don't know who created, for example, the art and text for the species called Ur-Quan in SC2.   And it doesn't really matter as our Ur-Quan have a very different history.

Someone earlier said that it was retaliation.  That's pretty ugly and not remotely true.  Not doing someone a favor isn't retaliation.  On this very forum how many times has someone said "Why call it Star Control if you don't plan to have the Yehat and Orz and X in it?"  The reason was out of deference to Paul and Fred. Not because we couldn't.   Now, it makes more sense to make sure the Star Control multiverse is well understood.  And part of that will require Steinberg (Paul and Fred's attorney) educating them on what any potential copyrights they may think they have are limited to.  

We have $9 million into this project.  We're committed.  I don't want to fight with Paul and Fred. But we really have no choice.  They could have bought the IP. They declined. So we moved forward. We've spent years on this.  We care about Star Control.  We've probably spent more time working on Star Control than they have.   All the aliens associated with Star Control will remain as part of the Star Control universe.  I don't think most fans will have an issue with that.


Edit: Also, keep in mind, I'm posting here. I'm talking to you guys on this.  As any lawyer should tell you, it's madness that I discuss ongoing litigation publicly.  That should tell you just how passionate I am about Star Control and its future. 


Yep. Same guy! Thank you for the compliment.

On your edit, I would agree completely. I'm certainly Not A Lawyer, but it's pretty common knowledge that talking about a case that is pending litigation publicly isn't the smartest legal strategy because the more you talk about something publicly, the more likely it is you'll inadvertently say something that could be used against you legally.

A few other thoughts on the rest of your post. I'm inclined to agree with the part "not doing someone a favor isn't retaliation". In particular, in light of the quote of yours I posted in my previous post from 2013 at the time of your acquisition of the trademark, it certainly does not look like you're acting out of anything other than sincerely held beliefs that you have the rights to all of those alien races since you clearly seemed to think you had those rights in 2013.

Not being a lawyer, I have no idea if that's true or not but clearly you strongly believe that you do and so I think folks assuming bad faith on your part is at the very least premature. (On the other hand, I admittedly take something of a similar stance on P&F in that they clearly seem to think they own more than you think they do but I don't have enough available evidence to assume bad faith vs. a more innocuous genuine difference of opinion on that point.)

Stepping back from the legal situation...a few posts back I hypothesized about an alternate universe where the Ur-Quan didn't meet the Dynarri when they did and never ended up enslaved, genetically tampered with and separated into two sub-species but instead remained in the Sentient Milieu and Brown. I speculated on how it might be fun if they discovered the Dynarri thousands of years later (presumably right around the timeline of the original SC2) and how that would be an interesting game to play with the Ur-Quan one of the good guys and the Dynarri the "big bad" of a new SC game.

So your hint that your Ur-Quan have "a very different history" is pretty interesting to me.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #473 on: April 13, 2018, 01:35:54 am »

Quote
I find it hard to reconcile this quote with my being a "tiny minority". Now, obviously, Brad could never have predicted how the situation would have changed between then and now (and also he himself is one of those tiny minority of folks like me who loved those original games so much!) but the thinking definitely does not appear at the time of the trademark purchase that the games were 25 year old DOS games that nobody remembered or cared about.

My view, naturally, is a bit different than either of yours.

I see the world through Venn diagrams.  This is not very helpful when driving.

Group 1: People who have no idea what Star Control means (majority).
Group 2: People who have heard of Star Control and heard it was good but didn't personally play it but are excited that a new one is coming. (smaller)
Group 3: People who have heard of Star Control and remember playing it and vaguely remember certain race names and the gameplay. (smaller)
Group 4: People who have heard of Star Control, blah balh, and finished the game and know who the Orz are (smaller)
Group 5: People who...blah balh...and care about the lore (smaller).

The question is the relative sizes of these 5 groups.   

IMO, only group 5 cares if the new Star Control has a Ur-Quan that was enslaved by the Dynarri for 20 centuries and broke free had two of the main castes (the green and black where the black were the worker's cast genetically engineered by the Dynarri prior to the departure of the Taalo to "pretty space") fight the Doctrinal conflict with one following the path of Now and Forever having named their sub-species in honor of Kzer-Za, the hero who discovered how to free themselves of Dynarri mind control.

I happen to be in group 5 (obviously).  But I'm also in the business of making and selling video games and feel pretty confident in saying that the vast majority of people fall into groups 1 through 4.    Thus, the brand matters a lot more than the lore. 
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #474 on: April 13, 2018, 01:40:06 am »

Quote
Stepping back from the legal situation...a few posts back I hypothesized about an alternate universe where the Ur-Quan didn't meet the Dynarri when they did and never ended up enslaved, genetically tampered with and separated into two sub-species but instead remained in the Sentient Milieu and Brown. I speculated on how it might be fun if they discovered the Dynarri thousands of years later (presumably right around the timeline of the original SC2) and how that would be an interesting game to play with the Ur-Quan one of the good guys and the Dynarri the "big bad" of a new SC game.

So your hint that your Ur-Quan have "a very different history" is pretty interesting to me.

Same here.   

In SC2, the Ur-Quan there met the Taalo and were the scouts of the SM where they ultimately encountered the Dynarri.

In SCO, the Ur-Quan meet the Taalo but are not enslaved by the Dynarri.   Instead, the Dynarri encounter a species known as the Xraki and the Dynarri Hegemony becomes a great menace until the Faction of 8 is formed to resist them and ultimately prevails thousands of years before the start of our game leaving our area of space in a bit of turmoil which sets the stage for the rise of the Scryve Empire which now dominates our sector.

But what is outside our sector remains to be seen.
Logged
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #475 on: April 13, 2018, 01:44:15 am »

Paul and Fred could have left Activision and I would have built a studio around them giving them majority control and let them make whatever they wanted.  Instead they choose to hire a PR firm and accuse me of being a thief and smear me in the media.

As I've said, I think the PR firm was a bad idea.  It said some stupid and juvenile things on their behalf, and I think they should have cut it loose.

And I don't doubt that you sincerely wanted to enable them to make a new game - your emails make it clear that you wanted their involvement, and your offer to sell them the trademark at cost really leaves no doubt that you wanted the game to happen even if it wasn't under your umbrella.

However, deciding that they wanted to stay independent was their prerogative.  And the trigger for them going hostile on you appears to have been your October 2017 email, where you claimed that the1988 agreement was still valid, meaning that you were saying that they had no right to develop their game without your permission.

I'd just ask you to take a minute, and realize how threatening that email must have seemed to them.  Regardless of your offering to be permissive about it, it still meant that you were asserting that you had final control over something that they believed they had owned for 16 years.  While that doesn't excuse any trademark infringement they might have then committed, from my read of the emails, that email was the first shot fired in this war, and it's what kicked off the cycle of subsequent escalations.
Logged
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #476 on: April 13, 2018, 01:55:10 am »

Group 1: People who have no idea what Star Control means (majority).
Group 2: People who have heard of Star Control and heard it was good but didn't personally play it but are excited that a new one is coming. (smaller)
Group 3: People who have heard of Star Control and remember playing it and vaguely remember certain race names and the gameplay. (smaller)
Group 4: People who have heard of Star Control, blah balh, and finished the game and know who the Orz are (smaller)
Group 5: People who...blah balh...and care about the lore (smaller).

The question is the relative sizes of these 5 groups.   

I happen to be in group 5 (obviously).  But I'm also in the business of making and selling video games and feel pretty confident in saying that the vast majority of people fall into groups 1 through 4.    Thus, the brand matters a lot more than the lore.

...but the question is not group 5's size relative to all the rest.  The brand name is irrelevant to group 1, the race names are irrelevant to groups 1&2, and the race names without the lore are hostile to 5, and maybe to 4 (if they care about the Orz). 

So the question for the race names without the lore is group 5's size relative to group 3, with group 4 maybe going either way.

I'd be willing to concede that group 1 is probably the largest, but I think I'd want to see some survey data from an uninterested source before reaching any conclusions about the relative sizes of the others.
Logged
PRH
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 193



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #477 on: April 13, 2018, 01:56:33 am »

Quote
In SCO, the Ur-Quan meet the Taalo but are not enslaved by the Dynarri.   Instead, the Dynarri encounter a species known as the Xraki and the Dynarri Hegemony becomes a great menace until the Faction of 8 is formed to resist them and ultimately prevails thousands of years before the start of our game leaving our area of space in a bit of turmoil which sets the stage for the rise of the Scryve Empire which now dominates our sector.

This kind of "alternate past" is actually interesting in its own way, the same way it would be interesting to read an "alternate past" Star Control fanfic. However, I'm curious - just how dissimilar your version of the races and the events has to be from those in UQM to avoid any conflict with Fred and Paul's copyright? Because you seem to be walking a fine line here - make them too obviously similar, and Fred and Paul sue you. Make them too different, and they will look like a cheap substitute.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2018, 01:58:32 am by PRH » Logged
Talonious
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #478 on: April 13, 2018, 02:02:57 am »

Quote
In SCO, the Ur-Quan meet the Taalo but are not enslaved by the Dynarri.   Instead, the Dynarri encounter a species known as the Xraki and the Dynarri Hegemony becomes a great menace until the Faction of 8 is formed to resist them and ultimately prevails thousands of years before the start of our game leaving our area of space in a bit of turmoil which sets the stage for the rise of the Scryve Empire which now dominates our sector.

This kind of "alternate past" is actually interesting in its own way, the same way it would be interesting to read an "alternate past" Star Control fanfic. However, I'm curious - just how dissimilar your version of the races and the events has to be from those in UQM to avoid any conflict with Fred and Paul's copyright? Because you seem to be walking a fine line here - make them too obviously similar, and Fred and Paul sue you. Make them too different, and they will look like a cheap substitute.

I had the exact same thought. You expressed it well.

Edit: It sounds like a ton of fun to explore, but I'm curious on just where the legal line would actually be.
Logged
Frogboy
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #479 on: April 13, 2018, 02:54:23 am »

I’ve already been briefed by legal counsel. But the answer to your questions are only a few Google searches away.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 ... 68 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!