[quote who="Raven X" reply="5" id="2630971"] 2. Will you ever, or do you think you'll ever have any plans to sell Stock Options? Please say "Yes" . I would Love to invest in Stardock's future my-self, even if only monetarily (and no I don't mean with a donation ). [/quote] Okay this is funny, because for the first time my wife and I are talking about starting a portfolio. Her job is offering stock options so I have been doing alot of research into that avenue. And
XeronX
LOL as usual Raven I prretty much agree with your assessment which is why I am even bothering asking here. If this were any other company I would assume all information goes through PR and Marketing to assess the impact that information would have on the bottom line. And that it would be tailoered to fit what they wanted it to convey. But Brad has earned from me a respect that I will say ( and is obviously apperent to anyone reading my posts) is rare for me to have in anyone in a
Just curious what OS are you planning to run. I know I built my Rig with 8 gigs of ram total. But thanks to the Vista OS and 32 bit system I came to a very nasty realization that I had much more ram than my OS could ever manage to utilize. It is a mistake I have learned from and will not ever repeat again. But as to date I have found no work around to the problem.
[quote who="Lord Cobol" reply="190" id="2630902"] What I always held is that tactical combat should be allowed to span multiple strategic turns. Combat lasts 10 tactical turns and then 'stops' to be resumed on the next strategic turn. Both armies are pinned to the tile during "Strategic Phase". That plus a sensible stacking limit would allow for multiple battles to develop, with re-enforcements arriving and perhaps wounded units leaving. It would allow for tile ench
Anyways..... He does bring up a good point if even at this point I am loathe to admit it. Brad can you tell us if those 100k DoS's were truly concurrent or not? I am pretty sure that would not violate any of the NDA's associated with companies policies. P.S. Myfist0... That is one disturbing avatar btw. where did you get that from?
*sigh* I was trying so hard to not let an emotional response take over. Obviously with my last post I failed. So you are right. In the future I will let my 1 year old make the aurgument with you because obviously that is the emotional level I am dealing with here. And another point mabey it is my age showing but it seems to me a respectful argument didn't include the statements you made like "What Fantasy land are you living in" and "you got it bac
Wow Arrrgg I would love to continue this because you are obviously an asshat, but i have a child that needs to be fed. So for another time.
Okay well lets look at the facts, 18000 users on line mean that they are online for more than an instant. Where as by that same logic it would have to mean that to make this story correct and factual, they would have had to by extension to do a DoS (Denial of Service) to 100000+ requests in the same instant that those 18000 users were in. That can you say with any credibility that they did 100k plus DoS's in an instant. I am sorry but that just doesn't sound even in th
Accusing, not in the least. Stating that it is a possibilty and that for the reasons I stated would be a possibility. Yes Do I think this is the case from what I have seen of this company, Hell No. But then again would you think that of all people it would be preists to molest children, No. It is always the quiet ones. See thats the beutiful part of critical thinking. Is you don't discount an argument because it goes against your p
[quote who="ZehDon" reply="2" id="2630651"]Two journals Brad made about Demigod had some information, including the number of server access requests that were denied on launch. Here's one, I can't find the other. Check the Demigod Journals and you'll find it eventually. [/quote] As to this post while it does help. 1 it does not list sales numbers, and if it did it also says didn't factor in DD sales. [quote who="-RAISTLIN-" reply="3" id=
To be honest Raist, if the powers at be thought a small amount of money could be spent (such as setting up a buch of bots) to influence the perception of certain ideas with the long term net effect of realizing a larger profit margin on their investment. they would do it in a heart beat. In political and News circles it is called spin and doctoring evidence. And it happens in the corparate world all the time. Now I am saying it happened here. but discounting the possibili
In another thread (one of the numerous about the effect of piracy) someone made an assertation that Demigod, a game produced by SD had on opening day 18000 registered users and 180000 pirated users on the servers. Now these number sound so outrageous to me as to seem they have to be complete BS. But I do try to find the nuggets of facts before I take a stance. Doesn't always work I'm human but I try. But since DG was a SD release and this is a SD game forum.
[quote who="Tridus" reply="156" id="2630600"] Quoting XeronX, reply 154 As for those of you who are arguing for RTS for MP's speed sake. While I can completely empasize where you are coming from. This is the first time in a very long time where we are going to get a game that actually has some meat, thought, creativity and power under it's hood. I don't care if the Battles take 3 hours as long as they are engrossing, spectacular, and require alot o
I just got done reading the last 3 pages of the "The Money Is On The Console" thread and that got me thinking about some of this. The biggest thing was W hy are we buying a PC exclusive title ? The awnser to that is as PC gamers we are generally snobs of the gaming world and we want games with all the bells and whistles. Depth, Story, Intricacy, and Complexity. With that
Wow Zehdon and Raistlin make some great arguments for their sides. Hands down both of you are to be commended. That being said I feel the need to chime in a few things brought up from my own perspective. First is that while I agree with Zehdon that piracy isn't "THE" issue, I do beleive it is a bigger issue than he is giving weight too. All the arguments he has forwarded about the other reason are probably spot on. If a company can make money off it they will. But that argumae
Not sure I would like the system per se. But have to admit it is a damn interesting idea. [e digicons]:\[/e]
Ya know I got to thinking when people said can you think about controlling 1000 plus units in TB. Could you imgine trying to control 1000+ units in real time. Seriously while I play the SC2 Beta I have at most 100, mabey 120 units very very tops. And even then in combat all I do is grab the entire lot and focus fire a single target at a time. I just don't have the time to do anything strategically/tactically deeper. What is sad is how effective that strategy can be in small
[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="86" id="2628520"] I doubt it. Turn/Tile based combat is more tactic&strategic oriented than the RTS style combat, and that is what matters. That is totally and completely untrue. Turn/tile based combat is essentially like a more complicated, glorified version of chess. The strategy essentially boils down to "Should I put this stack in that box, or in the box to the left?" Now, chess is a highly involved game and you
[quote who="Tormy-" reply="74" id="2628273"] Quoting Cyrogenic, reply 73 Can you imagine moving 1000 units individually? Why should you move 1000 units individually? We have squads you know. [/quote] LOL I was thinking exactly this Tormy. You have Single Units, Parties of 4, Companies of 10, Platoons of 50 I beleive, and I haven't seen what a legion is but I would assume by extension 100. The time it wou
[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="42" id="2627923"] Yea, originally the battles were continous turns, pixel-based ala Baldur's Gate. The problem users pointed out on the forums and we eventually agreed with is that it's kind of bait and switch. ...And it isn't bait & switch to, well, you know: announce that tactical combat will be continuous turns, and then change it to completely turn-based and tile-based because you're afraid it might be too much of a ba
Every time I see those screen shots it really makes me think about going and getting that game. I stopped after Civ 3, just only so much same old same old one can take. Though I have to admit that is beutiful.
Tcores Did I miss something. I know all combat is tile and turn based, which by extension makes dungeon "Combat" tile and turn based. But as for the dungeons themselves, I was under the impression there was no map associated with them at all besides whatever combat map it drops in. Have I missed something?
[quote who="RogueCaptain" reply="32" id="2627889"]Wow, am I the only one here who enjoyed X-com Apocalypse's real time/pause combat? I'm not saying there is anything inherently bad with tb combat but it has been known to get tedious in multiplayer depending on army size and how quick your opponents are. Hopefully we can manage civ functions like production and diplomacy during our opponent's turn to alleviate problematic tedium. [/quote] Well&nb
Actually it kinda was lol. While I can emphasize with the RTS'ers. When i first started looking at this game before I got into beta I saw it said TBS and my heart leapt. Everyone has RTS combat now even in their TBS's. You know how hard it is to find TBS Combat now-a-days. It is why alot of games don't last that long with me. I like to think, to strategize, and to surprise. With RTS's you can do it, but i am to old and slow now-a-days for that.
[quote who="Palinchron" reply="2" id="2627698"] Quoting kyogre12, reply 1 Tactical Battles. Tactical battles haven’t been part of the beta but they’ve been heavily discussed. Originally, tactical battles were designed to be RTS. Then Continuous turns. But as time has gone on, it’s become clear that the gameplay that people (and frankly that we enjoyed the most) was more closest to XCom. That is, turn based. Tile based. Moving units to the be