Slashdot Log In
Stardock Evaluates DRM Complaints, Updates Gamer's Bill of Rights
Posted by
Soulskill
on Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:25 PM
from the they-sense-anger dept.
from the they-sense-anger dept.
Earlier this year, we discussed the Gamer's Bill of Rights, a document put forth by Stardock CEO Brad Wardell to address what he felt were the unacceptable characteristics of the gaming industry. ShackNews reports that Wardell has taken feedback from gamers, developers, and publishers, and updated the document accordingly. One particular area on which he focused was DRM. Stardock also published a customer report that examines the issue in greater detail (PDF). MTV's Multiplayer Blog fans the flames of the debate by asking if anyone is embarrassed about pirating video games.
Related Stories
[+]
The Gamer's Bill of Rights 272 comments
Edge Magazine is running a piece by Brad Wardell, CEO of game developer Stardock, in which he presents a "Gamer's Bill of Rights." Stardock teamed up with Gas Powered Games to develop a list of ideals they think all game publishers should follow. Some are rather basic operational guidelines (not requiring a disc to play, minimum requirements that make sense), and some are aimed at repairing the damaged relationship between game companies and customers ("Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers"). Wishful thinking or not, it will be interesting to see if they manage to get other publishers to sign on.
[+]
DRM-Free Classic Games Store Opens To Public 122 comments
arcticstoat writes "With all the controversy surrounding DRM in games at the moment, one games store has decided to buck the trend, proudly proclaiming that all its games are DRM-free. First announced back in July, Good Old Games is now in the public beta stage, which means that anyone can now access the site's archive of classic PC games, and you can do what you want with your game when you've bought it, too. 'You won't find any intrusive copy protection in our games; we hate draconian DRM schemes just as much as you do,' says the site. 'Once you download a game, you can install it on any PC and re-download it whenever you want, as many times as you need, and you can play it without an internet connection.'"
In related news, Stardock, the company responsible for the Gamer's Bill of Rights, is apparently working on a new copy-protection solution that will be friendlier to consumers than current schemes.
[+]
Stardock, Microsoft Unveil Their Own New Anti-Piracy Methods 232 comments
Island Dog sends news that shortly after Valve showed off their new anti-piracy methods in Steamworks, Microsoft and Stardock were quick to demonstrate their new, similar technologies as well. All three companies are bending over backwards to say that this is not traditional DRM. Stardock (the company behind the Gamer's Bill of Rights) calls their system Game Object Obfuscation (Goo), "a tool that allows developers to encapsulate their game executable into a container that includes the original executable plus Impulse Reactor, Stardock's virtual platform, into a single encrypted file. When a player runs the game for the first time, the Goo'd program lets the user enter in their email address and serial number which associates their game to that person as opposed to a piece of hardware like most activation systems do. Once validated, the game never needs to connect to the Internet again." Microsoft's update to Games for Windows Live has similar protections. "You can sign in and play your game on as many systems as possible, but you have to have a license attached to your account. Of course, this only works for online games."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
So... (Score:2, Insightful)
When are they going to add another important point to the bill of rights:
11. Gamers shall have the right to play the game on the platform of their choosing.
Obviously, this whole bill of rights deal is for PC's and not consoles.
Re:So... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:So... (Score:4, Funny)
>I'd like to see WoW on the commodore 64...
Done:
http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/moltencore/ [worldofwarcraft.com]
Enjoy it while it lasts!
Parent
I want my Halo 3-on-C64 port (Score:4, Informative)
Not a bad idea, but needs a rethink.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why not? They could use NAT, and free up some IPs for the rest of us to use. It would be a nice gesture of support for the Internet.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Nintendo should be forced to license their IPs out to their arch-nemeses? (I mean, aside from Sega ;) Companies should be forced to release ports even for systems that can't handle the load?
I think he already addressed that when he said PC and not console.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
12. If a gamer owns a copy of a game for 1 platform they shall be able to download versions for all other platforms at no extra cost. (I.e. I buy a game for windows and they release a linux version, I should not have to buy the game twice).
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Or have limited funds and resources, and want to put those funds and recources into games for your biggest market.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got no funds, and I'm targetting Mac OS X and Windows initially, and maybe XBLA/WiiWare later. The first step is choosing a multiplatform framework (I'm using Playfirst's Playground SDK [playfirst.com]) or even a cross-platform library to develop your own framework (like SDL [libsdl.org], OpenGL [opengl.org] and OpenAL [creativelabs.com] as appropriate).
Limiting yourself to one platform limits your potential customers. If you start with multiplatform at the beginning of development, it doesn't take much more time/effort (look how Blizzard works, they ship Mac
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Stardock started not as a game publisher but as a Windows Application publisher. They have some desktop productivity products or something... but have become more famous for their consumer-friendly approach to PC gaming. Brad Wardell is taking advantage of the anti-DRM hype going on post-spore to build up a lot of respect for himself in the hardcore gamer community.
I suspect that this heiritage of developing for Windows only, as well as their relatively small scale as a publisher, leads them to a.) keep t
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
No, Stardock started as an OS/2 game publisher in 1993, they didn't touch Windows until 1998. See: http://www.stardock.com/stardock/articles/article_sdos2.html [stardock.com]
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We'll they're pretty small, and shuts up the "will you develop for x" requests/complaints.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Majority of customers of a Windows-only publisher want them to do Windows software? Now that's a startling revelation.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I really want to drive a Murcielago but I only like railways, I don't use roads. However, Lamborghini don't make Murcielagos for railways. Those bastards!
Oh well, they better not complain when I steal one and mod it to work on a railway track. They don't support my platform, why should I pay a company that doesn't think I'm important enough?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Alright. But don't start complaining if I pirate the game. If there is no official support for my platform, why should I pay a company that doesn't think I'm important enough.
Why is this such a popular response? If [Game Company] doesn't do [whatever it is I want] then I'm going to pirate the game.
If you have issues with certain things these companies do be it lack of Linux support, or excessive DRM, you aren't granted some right to get it without paying for it. If you feel that strongly about it, please, don't pay for it. I refuse to buy music by the big labels for exactly this reason. But if you are going to boycott a product you don't get to have it anyway just because you
Embarrassed? (Score:3, Informative)
Embarrassed? No. I know that I will gladly purchase a game that I feel deserves my money, but I have a great appreciation of piracy for allowing me to preview a product freely in advance. Developers are not losing any money on Piracy from me. I truly wish that were the case for everyone, and we probably wouldn't be in this predicament.
But who can honestly say those who pirate rampantly are going to buy the damn games anyway? Most of them I assume are kids who don't even have an income in the first place.
Regardless, though I'm certainly not embarrassed by that, I am increasingly afraid of losing my job, or suffering some other form of corporate backlash. I WORK in the damn game industry. Pretty much everyone I know downloads games, and buys the ones they like. But in the last few years it's gone from something that "everyone does", to something "everyone does unofficially".
Something that still confuses me are the kids nowadays that come in chanting copyright slogans and poo-pooing on people who bit torrent stuff. That grade-school brainwashing really does work wonders...
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Insightful)
I still hassle my roommates for pirating games that I worked on. While I'd never see any of the revenue myself (it's not like we get royalties or anything), it still really bothers me.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't bother me more if I worked on it, I just think it provides me with a more compelling, more personal argument for why they shouldn't download them. My friends who have modded PS2s with probably hundreds of dollars of stolen games on them - that bothers me, but I know nothing I say to them will change their minds. But if they have to stand in front of me and tell me why they didn't value my work on their enjoyment, I think that at least makes them think, which makes it worth bringing up.
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Insightful)
When an game is sold $60, it is sold here in Europe for 60 Euro. You do the change back and tada: $100. :(
Now "Hundreds of dollard of games" start with only 1
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When an game is sold $60, it is sold here in Europe for 60 Euro.
Or in the UK for £60 = 70eur = $120 :(
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, what bothers me is that I intimately understand the direct connection between piracy of a PC title en masse and the ensuing lack of employment of people who worked on said title if it underperforms "as a result". I'm not saying I agree with that proposed causal relationship, and I certainly understand that not every stolen copy is a lost sale - actually, almost everyone I've talked to in the business agrees - but piracy does hurt real people who make games, and therefore also dampens the quality of PC titles and the enthusiasm for the platform across the board.
It's a real problem out there.
The counter-argument to that is that DRM hurts your customers in very real ways as well, while it has little to no impact on pirates. Hell, I can't even play my copy of UT2004 now because I lost my CD key last time I moved. What else do I own that I could permanently lose just because I can't find a little card with like 16 characters on it?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Piracy adversely affects the PC Game industry by providing a disincentive to publishers to publish on the PC platform, and indirectly affects the lives of game company employees whose companies receive lower revenues due to pirated copies
As you said yourself: no substantial data exists. If you believe that you're getting paid less because of piracy then it may just be because your employer wants you to believe that. An employer who doesn't pay you what your worth? That's unheard of. And, no disrepect, but to even guess that "30-40% of pirated copies are lost sales" is just that... a guess. My personal guess would be about 1%. So, who's right?
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have good news. I found someone who stole one of your games, and he has agreed to mail you back the bits you're missing. I just need a return address.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
3-40% of pirated copies is a silly number, where would that kind of money come from? All the pirates I know already spends alot of money on games/movies/music, they can't materialize money out of thin air to pay for the content they're currently pirating.
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to nitpick, but I was pirating WAY before I had internet access (actually, more then than now). As to your question: C) No demo=no purchase.
I won't pay for something unless I know I want it. If I buy meat from a butcher and it's not good, I'll get my money back. That option is not available to me as a consumer with software, so I try before I buy.
Parent
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Interesting)
My rule:
If it piques my interest (and most games dont), I'll go get a pirate friendly copy.
If reviews indicate that you infest DRM or other anti-user techniques in the software, I will NOT buy. I will instead spread the pirate copies that are fixed versions.
If I can ruin your business by reducing the money you will make, you MIGHT get the idea. If you dont, too bad. Not my problem.
If you respect the user in the regular copies, I'll make sure that others know about it and encourage them to buy. I'll most likely buy when I get the chance... if it's in reasonable grasp (box stores, your website with a CC) and a good game. Some times, what I think might be a god game, just isn't. They get deleted.
The key here: crackers and piraters here will not stop at anything to "do a challenge". You cannot defeat them. Instead, you can rally support by treating your paying customers honorably and respectfully. Many companies think that since they pay, they deserve crap treatment. Instead, the pirate copy users have less crashes due to drm and overall better user experience.
I've been burnt by crippleware that I couldnt return, nor could I play. I see no reason other than to download and try ON MY TERMS, as your industry has forced that upon us. And once I have the better quality pirate copy, why even buy?
Parent
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Thought exercise:
If the internet did not exist and you could not pirate any given game, would you
A.) Not buy a game you were fairly interested in but not positive about?
or
B.) Buy a game you were fairly interested in but not positive about?
If you're like most people, I'm guessing the answer is that sometimes you would do A, sometimes B.
If you're like me, you've been burned too many times in the past to ever trust most developers again. With only a couple of exceptions who I give the benefit of the doubt to, I have to try a game before I will decide whether to buy it or not. Even if I get home and it won't run at all, I can't return it.
Developers think that all they have to do is entice you with enough bullshit hype about how awesome their game is to get you to buy it, and then when you realize that they were bullshitting all along, they already have your money and you can't return it.
Even a demo can be made to seem awesome, and make you think that if you could just keep playing a bit further you'd get to experience the awesomeness that they've been telling you about for the last couple years. But you'll probably be wrong. Maybe I'm jaded now, but it's asshole developers (and really publishers more often than developers) that have made me that way.
Parent
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a significant lack of respect for my work inherent in the statement they make by stealing a game I've worked on. The way it comes across to me is, "I know you spent hours of your life working on the thing that's entertaining me right now, and I think those hours were worth a total of zero dollars."
That is not their statement, that's your assumption.
Most hardcore pirates that I know are very much into promoting cool stuff and sharing it with others because they think it is really cool. They don't waste energy on crap. In part it gives them status in their community when they are able to turn people on to something impressive. This behavior seems to be normal human nature - sharing cool stuff regardless of what it is - is an inherent part of the human social animal.
You can choose to feel insulted by it, but feeling that way won't change anything and it makes you unhappy in the process.
Parent
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:4, Interesting)
Without getting into the absolute nonsense of industry piracy figures (I mean I'd be counted in the figures for pirating Spore, except I bought it as well. I just wanted the crack to avoid the DRM.) Piracy currently offers a more attractive product. I've read LOADS of people having problems with Spore when used from the legit copy. Not ONE problem with the cracked version.
Sure, I can understand developers wanting to protect their titles, but it has to be transparent, and it seems with each passing phase of software protection, more and more people are being screwed out of playing the game they've bought due to the DRM. And of course the pathetic irony is you can't return the game, "because you may have pirated it".
I started using cracks regularly when Neverwinter Nights wouldn't load for after a certain patch. (1.27 I think. Maybe 1.29.) That was where I basically said "Enough" and have cracked every piece of software I've bought since. (Except in the case of Stardock and the like who don't use DRM.)
It really is at the point though where I'm about done with the PC gaming industry. And I have no interest in the consoles, so mainstream PC gaming is pretty much "game over" for me now. Endless lack of imagination, endless expansion packs, endless DRM... It's just not worth it anymore.
Parent
Re:Embarrassed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to admit I'd bought a copy of Spore considering the limitations of the DRM and the fact that it's installed malware like SecureRom. The people who have torrented DRM-free copies are already laughing at the people who have already hit their 5-install limit.
Just like I'd be embarrassed if I had bought music from Microsoft or Yahoo a few years ago, then found out that they're shutting down the license servers so that I have no way of listening to copies of songs I've purchased. People who listen to copies of those same songs downloaded from Kazaa are laughing at them.
Pay attention to the lesson here folks. If you buy something that comes with copy protection, you are being scammed just as surely as if you were to send your life savings to the nice man from Nigeria that sends you so many emails. If there is no legitimate method of buying it that doesn't include DRM, then don't buy it at all.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My PlayStation (original) games have DRM, have worked for over a decade and I have no reason to expect they won't continue to work for as long as my hardware holds out. Not all DRM is bad. For dedicated gaming platforms (where you're never going to have the need to use the media on a different device) DRM is a good thing as a locked-down platform makes cheating drastically harder. I wouldn't even want to play a game on-line without a platform with strong DRM. I gave up on PC gaming because of the cheaters.
pride shame (Score:5, Insightful)
But what's keeping all those gamers out there who don't pirate their games from standing up and saying they pay for what they play? From making not being a pirate a point of pride?
I paid for Spore. The DRM crashed my game. The seemingly incomplete game was enjoyable for as much as it accomplished. But I feel like a sucker for having paid money on it. I don't feel pride; I feel a small twinge of something akin to shame. I helped Electronic Arts dumb down a game (so they can piecemeal add-ons to eventually yield a complete game, sometime in the future) and distribute it with DRM (which interfered in my gameplay, which the pirated version would not have done). I helped them because I can't control my addiction to gaming.
That's why the cultural front would be a losing battle. To do the "legal" thing, I have to feel slightly embarrassed and used and out of control.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The game crashed, what makes you assume it was the DRM?
The game was stable up until the space stage, then it started crashing on me and caused me to lose many hours of progress. Buried in the crash logs was mention of a particular dll. I went searching for an explanation of what that file was for. Turns out, there was already an article written that explained that dll, SecureROM, and its relation to Spore. http://www.arsgeek.com/2008/09/09/how-to-remove-securom-spore-dasmx86dll-issues-and-some-great-drm-free-alternatives/ [arsgeek.com]
Their stuff sounds worse than DRM (Score:3, Interesting)
Their games require you to run "Impulse", and the "Impulse Dock", which is a browser-like client that only talks to Stardock. It has blogs, downloads, and such, and is required for updates to their games. It's like one of those background services required to run many games, only it's in your face.
This is progress?
Why marked as troll? (Score:4, Insightful)
The parent is correct. Their games do require you to run their Impulse client to download game updates.
A recent update to Impulse did actually install background services without asking the user's permission. This was their solution to slow app launch times, by invisibly launching the service at boot time, rather than actually fixing the problem.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, Impulse is nothing like that. I purchased the electronic download of Sins of a Solar Empire using Impulse, so I have actually used it.
1) Impulse doesn't run in the background.
2) I don't have to start Impulse to play Sins of a Solar Empire. Once it's installed, I can start it from an icon like any game installed from media.
3) Impulse only runs when I start Impulse. The only time I start Impulse is to download game updates.
4) Online multi-player accounts are created via Impulse, but you don't need to r
Hello, first sale doctrine? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I purchase a copy of the game, I *DO* own it. Otherwise, I have the right to get a replacement and or refund if my CD or DVD gets scratched. Does that really happen? I don't think so.
If we gave money and got a CD, it's not a license. It's a sale. Especially when you go to the website and see the words "purchase", "order" and "buy". See Vernor v. Autodesk [citizen.org]. A good review of the decision is available at http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080523-court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.html [arstechnica.com]
So what DRM is really about, is an attempt at circumventing the first sale doctrine. Therefore, it should be declared illegal.
Re:Hello, first sale doctrine? - it gets worse. (Score:4, Insightful)
Go read up on copyright, as part of the 'deal' that is copyright, the rights to the item are supposed to become public after copyright runs out (which is getting longer and longer, but that aint the point).
With DRM, how exactly is the public going to get their free access that has been bought and paid for by supplying (through the state..) the protection of the product during its copyright life?
Any copyright holder who uses DRM that does not time out at the end of copyright is reneging on their half of the contract that is copyright, so why should they get any protection through it?
State Copyright OR Private DRM, I say. No state protection for DRM!
Parent
How about a DRM Bill of Rights (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Right of Free Use: If you limit number of installations, the publisher MUST provide a "revoke" tool.
What it entails for the publisher:
The Publisher is allowed to limit the software's installation to one or more computers based on their hardware configuration and registered online ("Activation"). They must provide a free stand-alone tool, preferably on the same distribution medium, that the User can use to de-authorize previously activated computers. The total number of Activations and De-activations must be unlimited in number, but can be limited as to number of uses in a particular time period.
How It Would Work:
When you install a game, the software must be activated online as is the standard practice today. However, what this Right provides is a method for the User to de-activate an installation so the software can be transferred to another computer, either due to hardware failure, upgrade or resale. This tool needs to be provided free to the user, preferably on the CD/DVD with the game (or downloaded if the game is purchased through digital distribution) and must be stand-alone. De-activation would require proof of ownership (the CD in the drive and the CD-key should be enough), and would display a list of all computers authorized to run that software. The User could then select the computers to be de-activated. Note that this tool does NOT have to be run on the Authorized computer, or require the Authorized software to be installed. In order to prevent misuse of this tool, the Publisher can allow only a certain amount of Authorizations/DeAuthorizations per day/week/month, but cannot limit the TOTAL amount of de-Authorizations.
2) Right of Activation: If the publisher requires Activation, they must provide some assurance of method to bypass this should the method of Activation no longer be available.
What it entails for the Publisher:
The Publisher is allowed to require the User to Activate their software through the method of their choice. But if that method should no longer be available (be it due to technical or financial reasons), they must ensure that the user can continue to use the software they paid for even though the Activation service is no longer running. This assurance can take many forms; a legal promise to release a patch should the Activation Servers be taken down and a waiving of rights to take legal action of any third-party who rights software to allow the same, or a universal "key" that is held in escrow, to be released only should the Activation servers go down, that allows installation and use of the Software without Activation.
How It Would Work:
Basically, the Publisher needs to provide the User with a "back-door" that can bypass the Activation requirement should they chose to no longer allow Activations, either because it is costing them too much money or they are no longer in business. The best way for the User is if the Publisher has a patch or some sort of universal serial number that allows the User to bypass Activation; this patch/key is held in escrow until the Activation Servers go down and is then released to the general public. Of course, this may dramatically compromise the usefulness of the DRM, so other methods can be used, for example: providing source-code and funds that can be released to pay a programming team to successfully develop a patch after the fact. Alternately (but least palatable to the User) the Publisher can simply promise to release code and not prosecute should a third-party (e.g., a "cracker") want to develop some method to bypass the Activation (but, note, they must provide enough code to make this a possibility)
3) Right to P
Re:How about a DRM Bill of Rights (Score:5, Insightful)
I already have a DRM Bill of Rights.
It's called Thepiratebay. No DRM. Working cracks and good serials. No anti-user crap.
Why pay to get punished when pirating works better?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Piracy, unlike throwing garbage doesn't really harm anyone!
Unless you work for a game company whose revenues are down, copies pirated on the main torrent sites are way up, and is a publicly traded company so may legally be required to lay off employees to shore up their balance sheet...
No, people don't pirate to save themselves 60 $us that they could pay, they pirate because they simply wouldn't be able to pay for it, or maybe because the game has been so horribly ruined by DRM that you need to pirate it in order to actually play it.
Categorically untrue. I'm sure many people do pirate a game because they wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise, and I know I've used no-cd patches to make my media last longer, but I'm JUST as sure that people do pirate games just to avoid spending money on them, even if their bud
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:5, Insightful)
I love it when Americans make the tipping analogy, because it's so apt. You are aware that the American system of tipping is insane, right? The rest of the world think you're all fuckin' nuts when you go on about this stuff. There's nothing normal about refusing to pay your staff a reasonable rate and then demanding the customer get involved in compensating them.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I like the tipping system here.
I've been at restaurants where waitresses invade my personal space by touching me or rubbing on me while handing other diners their food, and I just refuse to tip them because of that. Usually they do it because they think it gets them more tips if they make me want to have sex with them. That kind of manipulation really pisses me off. Remember that this is an example of why I like the tipping system.
Another reason why I like the system here is that if I really like the servic
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:4, Insightful)
The tipping system in the US is insane. Waitresses should be paid normal wages, and should get tips only as reward for good service (or physical contact, for those so inclined).
Parent
I stray into off-topic land (Score:3, Informative)
There's nothing normal about refusing to pay your staff a reasonable rate and then demanding the customer get involved in compensating them.
I can only quote you in the name of truth. The moment the UK government found out that was happening here they started taking steps to make it illegal [guardian.co.uk], as it damn well should be.
Re:I am embarassed! at the mtv article (Score:4, Interesting)
No, being a decent waiter is the waiter's job, and they don't deserve any extra for doing what they're supposed to do. If they don't earn enough then they should go and demand more from their employer.
A tip is not a tip if it's mandatory. A tip is used to reward exceptional service. Simply serving food or mechanically pouring a beer or cup of coffee is not exceptional service. Now, when a taxi driver spent a while figuring out how to fit the large CRT I had bought into the car and helped me carry it up, that was very exceptional service and appropiately rewarded.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
We'll have to see how their GPG release goes, though. Stardock has real integrity to date, such that I see genuine word-of-mouth support for them on all manner of forums, pushing Sins and Gal Civ and The Witcher: Enhanced Edition (through impulse) instead of DRM laden titles.
I think they know they have real money value in these values if they stick to them, and they'd be foolish to throw away that money value, especially since they limit themselves to the PC market only (where piracy is much more rampant).
Re:Face it (Score:5, Insightful)
It's be fucking nice if they did release source code. What's the harm? Carmack did it.
Parent