Brad Wardell's Blog


Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar 1.5X notes

Published on Wednesday, February 28, 2007 By Brad Wardell In GalCiv Journals

We're very pleased with the response Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar / Gold Edition have received.  Well over 95 out of 100 people appear to be glad they got it based on the poll.

We've also gotten some very good feedback from players that we have turned into the first of many free updates to the game.  There's a lot here to digest but some of the big changes are to how the AI plays (strategies updated are based on expert player feedback) as well as a new "garbage collection" function that goes through and removes unused AI ship designs (while crash reports have been few and far between, the one thing we've run into is the case where people have the new CPU options turned on and the AI will design new types of ships much more often which uses memory which, over time, can cause users with a relatively small amount of virtual memory to crash -- for reference, you should have at least 4X your RAM reserved as virtual memory on Windows XP or Windows Vista).

We also tweaked some of the startup settings as well as ship defense costs (which are now much cheaper).

1.5X is scheudled to be released in the next few days.

 

Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar
-1.5x Change Log-


+TWEAK: Nerfed both the Mega Pirate event and the regular Pirate event so that it picks a random AI player instead of the most powerful, and made sure that their fleet ability is not greater than 10 (which we did for the Mega event but not the normal random event).
 
+ FIX: Crash in diplomacy screen if the other race (like the Jagged Knife) did not have a homeworld.
 
+ FIX: Bug in combat code where the code that forces a winner in case of a tie was not considering if the defending ship was upgrading or not.
 
+ FIX:  Bug in improvement code that was interfering with projects that were not upgrades completing properly (including terraforming imps). This is something that a lot of people have been complaining about.
 
+ TWEAK: Changed it so that the option to save ship designs to disk does not affect templates; templates will always be saved to disk.
 
+ COSMETIC: updated xml data files that need to be translated with a node that says which fields to translate
 
+ FIX: Bug where AI ships would attack mining bases and not declare war.  Now AI ships will go around mining bases unless already at war with civ.
 
+ FIX: Bug where research from shared research treaties was not added to receiving civ’s tech research.
 
+ FIX: several alt-tab related crashes.
 
+ TWEAK: Activated code to display messages in debug.err if any ship templates or ship designs are missing.
 
+ TWEAK: fixed event text that had a period in the middle of a sentence.
 
+ TWEAK: fixed problem with a comment in PlanetImprovements.xml where having '--' in a comment was causing read errors for Galactopedia.
 
+ FIX: Old AI designed ships are removed from the ship design list and deleted when they are no longer in use by any civ (Should significantly neft high memory usage in late games).

+ TWEAK: Changed Superior Hulls description.

+ TWEAK: United Planets: now a higher chance of the 'Neutral Ground' issue being picked if it's not being enforced.

+ Decreased spacing between stars so that more stars can be fit on a given map (which means more planets as well)

+ Abundant setting produces more of whatever it is being specified for

+ Ship defenses use slightly less space and cost a lot less

+ Manufacturing capital now produces 33% bonus instead of 25%

+ Fusion, Anti-Matter and Quantum Power Plants are far less powerful (but still pretty powerful)

+ AI priorities on various technologies tweaked

+ AI more savvy at trading technologies

+ Ships are not quite as valuable in terms of tech trading at previous

+ Fixed AI bug where special treaties were valued extremely high if traded early on

+ AI evaluates value of special environment technologies based on whether they are useful to them or not

+ All AI players will tend to build more factories on planets

+ Some AI players are less likely to build orbital fleet managers depending on their defensive strategy

+ Last remaining AI personality will no longer build planetary improvements on special research/manufacturing tiles that don't match (previously it would sometimes override it if it felt it was for a good reason, all other AIs already avoided this)

+ Drengin aren't as aggressive at colonizing after the first couple game years unless it has a particular planet in mind

+ Drengin and Korath AI personalities now look at what their colonies are doing when deciding whether to research manufacturing or research technologies

+ Drengin and Korath AI personalities value propulsion techs far more than other players

+ Drengin and Korath AI personalities won't upgrade ships outside their sphere of influence

+ If AI determines it wants to go to war with someone, it will declare war even if relations are neutral

+ Improvements to the Altarian and Arcean AI personalities in making them research better

+ AI now keeps a better eye on planets defecting and why

+ AI will factor planet defections into its relations with a given player

+ AI will heavily factor influence starbases into relations with a given player if defections have occurred (tough or higher difficulty)

+ Torians now focus a lot more on manufacturing on planets than research

+ Torians no longer will build oribital fleet managers no matter what. They're living on the edge now.

+ Torians won't build farms on planets that have more than 12 food production

+ Torian researching significantly improved based on player suggestions/strategies

+ Improvements to Terran Alliance / Drath research based on player feedback

+ AI evaluates technologies for trading more individually regardless of player's diplomacy ability

+ AI slightly better at managing its economy

+ Fixed crash bug in which multiple new minors being created in a given game could cause a crash due to no available player slots being available

A Guided Tour of the Sins Beta!

Published on Monday, February 26, 2007 By Brad Wardell In Sins of a Solar Empire

Sins of a Solar Empire is an epic real-time strategy game. In terms of scale, Sins can take place across multiple star systems that each have their own planets. We're talking a truly massive scale. 

Stardock, the makers of Galactic Civilizations, and newcomer Ironclad have teamed up to create what we hope will become the definitive space-based real-time strategy game.  Ironclad has created a rich universe for Sins and a fantastic engine to carry it to fruition.

Sins of a Solar Empire is designed for the strategy gamer. It's not about who can click the fastest, it's about who can put together the most coherent strategy that requires the player to research new technologies, capture critical resources, and build the right mixture of ships that they can put at the right place at the right time. 

It's a game in which players can zoom in to control individual ships up close and personal, or zoom out to see an entire galaxy of ships and stars. A game where the user interface aids the player in implementing their strategy in exciting and innovative ways.

It's also a title that has been in development for quite awhile.  Some of the Ironclad team had worked on Homeworld: Cataclysm.  While it might be tempting for a new player to say that Sins of a Solar Empire is Galactic Civilizations + Homeworld + Supreme Commander/Total Annihilation combined into a single game, that would not give players the whole picture. Sins is truly a unique experience.  My job here is to help walk players through where we are in development and give you a taste of what is to come...

Note: What you are about to see is a work in progress. The game will be changing and much of the final graphics are not in the build I am playing. Plus, I am playing at low resolution with anti-aliasing off for debug purposesAs you increase the resolution and graphics detail, you get something that looks more like this:


Sins of a Solar Empire is being designed to be playable on low-end or the latest systems. The graphics scale with the power of your PC.

 

The Journey Begins...

When a player first begins a game, they can choose whether they want to play against the computer or multiplayer. One of the multiplayer options is to play on Ironclad Online which is a match-making service designed to make it easy to find players on the Internet. (Ironclad Online won't be part of the first beta.)

Once you select a new game, you choose what size galaxy to play on, how many players you want to have present, what side you want to play on, and so forth. These screens are still in flux so there's no point in showing those yet.  Once you've decided that, a random galaxy is generated and you are now responsible for your race.

Whose side are you on?

There are 3 different major factions in Sins of a Solar Empire. You have humans in the form of the Trader Emergency Coalition. The TEC being essentially a loose collection of traders who had to band together to fight the invading Vasari. The Vasari are an ancient and powerful race that has moved into this part of the galaxy.  Into the midst of this war has come the Advent. The Advent were humans that were exiled long ago because of the slow divergence in culture between the humans that become the TEC and those that became the Advent. A three-way war now exists; you choose whose side you are on.

Into the crucible

When you first get into the game, you are presented with your capital world.  Planets provide money. Or more to the point, people live on your planets and they pay taxes which provides you with your money resource.

Now, bear in mind, what you are seeing is going to be changing. The user interface and such is being modified so this is not representative of what players will see in the beta.  The screenshot doesn't really do it justice because the planet is full of life. If you zoom in, you see all those dots flying around as little ships flying in orbit going about their business. 

Players start out with a frigate factory. This shipyard produces small and medium sized ships.  The types of frigates one would build include a constructor frigate which allows players to mine asteroids for metal and crystals (the two non-money based resources needed to build things), as well as defensive platforms and structures that aid your economy, research, and industrial output.

One of the mantras you'll hear us state over and over is that our goal is to keep micro-management to a minimum. It's not about cranking out stuff the fastest or swarming players with units or tactically fighting out the battles (even though you can do this) but rather having the right units in the right place at the right time.

One of the ways Sins reduces micro-management is by allowing players to queue up orders. This not only applies to movement but combat targeting, ship actions, build orders for structures, upgrades, ship construction, and research. Things can even be queued if their prerequisite item is not yet complete.

In space, scale can really get crazy. Frigates are actually quite large compared to fighters (which aren't in this screenshot). But they are tiny compared to your flagship and your flagship is small compared to your orbital construction platform (which is a platform that once constructed increases the speed in which things are constructed around that planet).

The challenge with scale in a computer game is usability versus realism.  That is, if you make things too huge compared to other things, it gets very tricky to manage things. That's because by the time you zoom out enough to manage the big thing, the little things are tiny dots.

Now, in some games, such as Galactic Civilizations and other recent strategy games, if the player scrolls out enough, the units become iconized.  This is a good trade off but what we've found ends up happening is that expert players end up playing the game as if it's a chess board, thus missing out on the immersive elements of gameplay.

Ironclad's solution was to implement a feature called "Smart Scaling":

Smart Scaling turns ships into icons based on the size of the individual unit.  So before something becomes too small to easily see, it is turned into an icon. So big structures will remain "pretty" longer and the player can effectively have their cake and eat it too.

Zoom out enough and you will see your entire planetary system. Each planet has its own gravity well so you can't just zip into a given world and blow it up and leave.   That line around the planet marks the extent of the planet's gravity well.  Ships jumping through Phase Space must return to sub-light speeds once they get to the gravity well of a world.

So you want scale? Watch this:

Zoomed further...

And further. But look closely between the above screenshot and this one. This is Ironclad's Smart Scaling really showing off the goods. Rather than your units becoming a jumble of unmanageable units, they become individual pips. At a glance, you can see your strength in a given system which makes it much easier to manage fleets across a galaxy. You can still click on them if you want.

But let's keep zooming out...

Wow, look at all those planets.  In the setup options, players can choose to play around just a couple of worlds or they can play in a star cluster. Yes, it gets bigger:

Three star systems each with a bunch of planets around them. That would be an epic game.  The key here is that we want players to be able to control the proportions of the game. A small, fast, quick game or a long, epic-styled war of multiple star systems.

Now, the question that you might ask is, how do you manage your civilization from so far back? The answer is that you control it from the left control panel known the Empire Tree.   You can certainly click on ships and planets and on the map and control them. But we suspect most players will end up controlling things from the control panel. Look closely at how they're organized. Each star has planets and in each planet are your ships or enemy ships.

When engaged in combat, players don't have to guess or spend time zooming around the camera to see the size of the enemy force. Once they're in your planet's system, they show up on the interface. At a glance, you can see how powerful the attacking force is. 

The point is that as beautiful as the graphics in Sins can get, we have made gameplay the top priority which hopefully you can see in some of the innovations to RTS's that Ironclad is helping introduce.

Technology

Sins of a Solar Empire features unique technology trees per race; and the technology trees are large enough that it's unlikely that players will get through them all in a given game. As a result, players have to make tough choices over which technologies they will or won't have.  The technology tree allows us to eliminate the traditional "You have to build this building to build that building" type thing you see in RTS's.  It also allows for players to choose to focus their resources in a lot of different ways:

Players build Orbital Laboratories which unlock the ability to start queuing up research subjects. Additional laboratories allow you to research multiple subjects in parallel. Of course, building Orbital Labs and conducting research is expensive and those resources could be going to military ships, trade ships or other types of structures. 

There are two types of technology trees: combat and empire.  The combat tree allows players to build better and more powerful weapons and ships.

The empire tree allows players to construct better platforms to aid their economy and unlocks additional abilities for the player.

Combat

Players can micro-manage individual ships in battle all the way,  but Sins of a Solar Empire has a very strong unit AI that is designed to take care of the work when possible.  I.e. units won't just sit there taking a wallop. They'll flee if necessary or they'll attack depending on the type of unit (though they won't leave a given star system without your orders).

For instance, take a close look at this screenshot, see how some of the ships have red squares around them. At a glance, players can see which units are engaged in combat. Is it a support ship? Just click on it and then right-click on one of your other colonies right in the panel. You don't even have to zoom out, go to another screen or anything.

Another item from the screenshot to take note of - see how the planet has little dots at the top? Again, at a glance, I can see how out-numbered I am. I can also see the health of my ships all at once.

What's not in this screenshot is managing fleets which is one of the most exciting features in terms of allowing players to execute great strategies while reducing micro-management at the same time.  In Sins, players don't design starships ala Galactic Civilizations. They design fleets, and designing them is just a matter of the usual grouping of ships (i.e. drag select or ctrl-select and then hit a control-# key), or in new ways such as selecting pip groups in the Empire Tree. Due to the variety of ships in Sins, players can effectively build a fleet for different types of missions.

Diplomacy & Trade

Cranking out ships and blowing things up aren't the only way to victory. You can also play as the economic czar, pulling strings behind the scenes.

Here are a couple examples:  Players can build trade ships which they can send to their own planets or to alien worlds (which provides additional income). If you're trading with a given player, they are less likely to attack you.  Moreover, the money you earn from your trade routes allows you to secretly place bounties on other players. Bounties are your way of paying for the destruction of others.

Put a high bounty on a player and all the scum (and other races) will be tempted to go after that player. For each ship of that player they destroy, they get some of the money you've put into that bounty.  Hence, the economic czar could just sit back and trade and observe the galaxy being on fire while they slowly accumulated victory points.

Winning the game

Things are still in flux in this regard but there are two definite ways to win presently. The first way is of course conquest.  The second path is through victory points. Some planet systems contain special artifacts that, once visited by a colony frigate, produce victory points. Gain enough victory points and you win the game.

Availability

Historically, Stardock has released betas very early.  One might argue too early.  The idea was to get feedback from players as early as possible, but the downside is that many players would instantly assume that the game was like others where the beta was pretty close to final.

Let me give you an idea of what I mean:


Galactic Civilizations II: Beta 1

And believe me, that first shot is even uglier than the screenshot looks because that was our best effort to make it not look horrible.

But the success of Galactic Civilizations II has helped create a lot of interest in Sins of a Solar Empire. So one of the decisions we've made is that beta 1 won't be quite as "rough" as our usual betas are. Oh don't worry, it'll still be pretty awful. Unlike our other betas, however, you will actually be able to play the game to completion and the game mechanics will be there (the first GalCiv betas didn't even have AI).  So Sins's first beta will be a bit further along than GalCiv was but still early enough to be able to get feedback on players and implement it.

For that reason, we've decided to push the beta to the end of March. But hopefully, this walk-thru well help give players an understanding of what we're going for and even be able to provide feedback before the beta even arrives.


See you soon!

With the final version of Sins of a Solar Empire arriving at the end of this summer, we want to use the beta to iron out game mechanics, pacing, etc.  The first beta won't have multiplayer. We want to help nail down all the single player issues before moving to Beta 2 which will be the multiplayer beta.

Stay tuned!

WindowBlinds 5.5 Available!

Published on Friday, February 23, 2007 By Brad Wardell In WinCustomize News

Version 5.5 released for registered users!

Stardock has released WindowBlinds 5.5 for registered users and Object Desktop users.  The new version supports skinning of Windows Vista.  A new version of SkinStudio is in development to support skinning of some of the new GUI elements of Windows Vista as well.

Screenshots of WindowBlinds 5.5 on Windows Vista:

 

Visit: WindowBlinds Homepage

 

Animated Wallpaper on Windows Vista

Published on Thursday, February 22, 2007 By Brad Wardell In Vista Experience

In case you have been living in a cave, Microsoft has released a new Ultimate Extra called Windows DreamScene.

Windows DreamScene allows users who have purchased Windows Vista Ultimate to play high-definition video content as their desktop wallpaper. Pretty cool huh?

Microsoft selected Stardock Design to create some of the content for it including the default. For now, the only content they've released is the default one (Aurora). They are holding back on the other two dozen or so DreamScenes until the "final" version comes out in the Spring time-frame. 

Right now, I suspect Microsoft is working with the video driver makers to optimize their drivers to reduce the amount of CPU required to decode the video. On most systems, especially ones with good video cards and drivers, a typical DreamScene might use around 10% to 15% of the CPU which is pretty nominal in that it won't affect your work (and when you play a game, it'll pause itself automatically).  On a really high end system, it can be less than 5%.

Moreover, while Stardock Design was creating DreamScenes for Microsoft, their software team (makers of WindowBlinds) created a program that creates a specific animated wallpaper format -- .DREAM and as well as extended the capability of what animated wallpapers could do such as have triggered events and support for dynamic 3D generated content.  The first of that stuff is expected out in the last week of February.

Stardock's web team has also created a community site where users can upload their own .DREAM creations with one another.  This site, Dream.WinCustomize.com, has everything users need to get started.  

Animated wallpapers aren't a new idea. People have been trying to do it in various forms for years. The problem has always been one of reliability and performance.  Microsoft's work on Windows DreamScene demonstrates that the new Windows Vista accelerated desktop can do it without slowing down your Windows experience.

For more information:

 

 

Iconpackager 3.2 beta arrives on Object Desktop

Published on Thursday, February 22, 2007 By Brad Wardell In WinCustomize News

Stardock has released the first beta of IconPackager 3.2 (3.19) for Object Desktop users.  IconPackager allows users to change all their Windows icons by applying "packages" of icons. There are thousands of icon packages available on the net on websites such as WinCustomize.com, deviantART, Skinbase, and elsewhere.

IconPackager on Windows Vista took some effort due to the added new icons that were not easily found along with the new "Live Folders" which do require updated icon packages to support.

IconPackager also supports changing individual icons from their properties dialog (see screenshot below).

Stardock is in the process of releasing a tutorial that will make it easy for icon designers to create icons that support the Vista live folders.

The final version of IconPackager 3.2 is expected to be released next month to the general public.

Screenshots:

Visit: Object Desktop

Galactic Civilizations II: Gold Edition arrives at retail!

Published on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 By Brad Wardell In GalCiv II News

For strategy gamers who don't have Galactic Civilizations II at all you can now get Galactic Civilizations II: Gold Edition from the following stores:

  • Best Buy
  • Circuit City (imminent)
  • Fry's Electronics (imminent)
  • Gamestop / EB
  • Micro Center (imminent)
  • Walmart Canada

We'll be providing updates to retail availability for Gold Edition as more retailers come on-line.

The Socialist and the Capitalist

Published on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 By Brad Wardell In Politics
This past week I had a very interesting debate with JoeUser's resident socialist, Col Gene. He is always trying to find new and creative ways to advocate higher taxes on anyone who makes more money than he does. His argument always boils down to the deficit and that rich people can afford it.  The former argument is nonsensical because politicans will simply spend all they get and more. The latter is a classic socialist argument.  Below is some of the conversation.

Socialist claim: What I have said is that the distribution of wealth is skewed too fare toward one side.

Wealth isn't distributed. In a capitalistic society, wealth is earned. Person A provides Person B with a product or service in exchange for money.

Socialist claim: very wealthy for example pays far smaller % of their income to Social Security taxes then the low and middle income workers

Of course. That's because social security is CAPPED. There's only so much you pay in and that's how much gets paid back. 

Socialist claim: If your annual income is 1 Million dollars you are paying about.6% of your income in Social Security Taxes where a person making $25,000 is paying 6.2%. How is that fair?

What does fairness have to do with it. If I make $1 million and put $60k into a bank aboutn I am putting in .6%. On the other hand, if I make $20k and put in $1000 into the bank then I am putting in 5%.  So what is your point?

Social Security is, in theory, supposed to be a retirement plan by the government.  If I were emperor, I would do away with it entirely and then no one would have to put anything into it.

Socialist claim: The wealthy can pay slightly higher income taxes (like those in effect in the 1990's) with NO adverse impact on their life style. If we have a slight shift in the wealth to the middle and low income working families it would not only help many meet their most basic needs but they would spend almost 100% of that income that was shifted and help the economy.

There are so many things wrong with this statement I'm not sure where to begin.

First, what we pay in has nothing to do with whether we can afford it or not. The government, like the electric company, exists to provide its individual citizens with a service.  Stealing one man's earned income to give to another is wrong.

Secondly, you clearly have no idea of what the "rich" do with money. You are correct in that their lifestyles wouldn't change if you taxed them more. That isn't the point. The people with the highest incomes INVEST their money. That's HOW you get rich in the first place. You keep investing your money to make more money.  That investment is what creates jobs, opportunity, and new goodies for us to use. 

Taxing the rich more won't hurt the rich personally, but it will, in the long-run, hurt everyone else through fewer jobs, a slower increasing in standard of living.

Moreover, the # of Americans who don't have access to "basic needs" is trivial. I've mentioned this before but the poorest 25% of Americans live pretty well on average. Most have DVD players, TVs, Internet access, cars, and a slight majority of them even own their own home. They even get free medical care via Medicaid.  But even that's irrelevant. It is not the responsibility of the government to give away other people's earned money to other people.

You basically see the government as something that RULES us. This is completely contrary to what the founding fathers intended.  They saw the government as a glorified neighborhood association. For the first hundred years or so, the govenrment only taxed for services rendered.
 

Socialist claim: If you have a seven figure annual income (that would place you in the top 1%) then you paying another 5% in federal Income taxes would not impact you life style. What will impact all of us is the fact we are operating this government at a substantial deficit and have piled up a National Debt of almost $9 Trillion dollars which we must pay interest on EVERY Year. We will be paying $500 Billion PER YEAR in interest. That interest comes from the taxes you and I pay and is money that is not available for other obligations like Social Security and Medicare benefits.

You are correct, it wouldn't affect my lifestyle. I'd just have to lay off a worker or two because that's where my excess income goes to -- investing in my business.

I have also pointed out, repeatedly, that it is well known that the budget would be easily balanced if we simply FROZE spending increases for a couple years. No cuts needed. Just quit increasing spending until the tax receipts catch up.  The tax recepts of the federal government have nearly doubled since Bush came in. Imagine the surplus we would have if they hadn't increased spending at an even faster rate.

Socialist claim: I worked about 40 Years and paid my taxes so my parents and grandparents could receive their Social Security and Medicare.

So you admit social security is a pyramid scheme. 

I also work but see it as a moral obligation to help my family myself and not rely on the government.  Free citizens do not need the government to do the right thing. They do the right thing because they are free people.  I'm sorry you need the government to intercede for to take care of your parents and grandparents.

The issue that socialists have is that they want the government to take over the economy.  For the past 60 years, the normal level of government intrusion in the economy has been around 18%. By 1998, the government had managed to get to over 21% of the economy. Something needed to be done -- tax cuts. 

Take a look at this graph from the CBO:

Graph

Historically, the federal government was only confiscating around 18% of the generated wealth of the country. Bush helped get it back to something approaching normal. As you can see, however, social security is slowly going to intrude more and more as you get out into the future. Socialists think that's a good thing. They prefer the government rule us.

The basic problem with most socialists is that they have no understanding of economics. They  think if we just raise taxes everything will be fine. But that's not how it works. If you raise taxes, you are simply shifting wealth from the private sector into the public sector.  And who has a better track record of producing wealth? People like me or some clueless politician in Washington? 

Moreover, even if you raised taxes the 40% needed on the wealth to balance the budget next year, it would only be a temporary solution. In other countries, the government represents up to 30% of the GDP and guess what? They have debts too. Governments will always spend what they get because they have an incentive to do so. 

That is why the tax recepts and spending receipts aren't a good measure of what our tax rate should be.  The real question is, what % of our economy do we want the government confiscating.  Once you make that decision, then it's just a matter of the government living within its needs and making sure enough taxes are being collected to meet that number.

Look closely at this graph.  The government's tax income today is the same as it was when Bush came in.  Yet we have these scary deficits you mention.   So what is the cause then? Spending. We increased spending across the board:

You see the problem? Since Bush came in, spending just went berserk. And it's not because of the Iraq war alone. The government went on a spending spree.

So to sum up:

  1. Rich people are rich because they invest their money.
  2. If you tax the rich more, it won't affect their lifestyle but it will mean they have less to invest (look at how quickly the economy jumped back largely thanks to the tax cuts).
  3. If the rich invest less, people lose jobs.
  4. It is immoral IMO to advocate that the government should confiscate money from one person to hand to another who provided no service to the original person.
  5. Tax rates and spending levels are the wrong metric. It's what % of the economy you want the government to be involved in.
  6. We have a deficit today because we increased spending.
  7. Tax cuts are why the economy grew so fast after the recession.

The reason why the United States has been at the forefront of economic progress is because we have laws that encourage people to work very hard.  The moment you start penalizing people from working hard, the worse off all of us are.  I work on average 55 to 70 hours per week depending on how busy I am.  I do that all year round. I take maybe 2 weeks off per year (which is really just making up all the weekends I work).  As it stands today,  I am working about 20 to 30 hours per week for the government. That is, I'm working what amounts to nearly a second full-time job just to pay for the government.

And I support paying taxes because my country does so mcuh for me.  What I don't support is the government confiscating my income to give to others who hasn't earned it.  I think it's a toxic, evil thing for a government to do. It robs the earner of freedom and it saps the will out of the receiver. It's certainly not compassionate.

Free men and women control their own destiny. When we give power to the men with guns, we cease being free.

 

Should Stardock fix Microsoft's UAC?

Published on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 By Brad Wardell In WinCustomize News

In a new Macintosh advertisement, the PC has what looks like a body guard who keeps interupting the conversation with the Mac in the name of  "security".  The feature Apple is making fun of is called the User Account Control.

The idea behind UAC is to protect users from malicious software and other content that could affect the stability and integrity of the user's computer.  But many users have expressed utter disdain for it. As a result, UAC ends up being disabled by users much to the chagrin of Microsoft.

But what if there was a different solution? What if third-parties were able to modify how UAC worked?

For example, imagine the UAC remembering what users had given it permission to previously? Right now, every time I open up Stardock Central, I'm prompted by UAC. Very annoying.  What if after I selected "continue" it saved Stardock Central and its checksum such that it wouldn't come up again for that program as long as it was unchanged?

Another example would be after I select continue on the UAC, the account remains in an elevated state for say 5 minutes (or some user-defined time) so that anything else that needs UAC would automatically be passed.

I think just these two changes would significantly improve the usability of UAC to the point where most of the complaints would go away.

And I think these kinds of changes are absolutely necessary because, right now, users are just turning it off completely which is definitely not a good thing. You should definitely not turn off UAC but it is very understandable how annoying its current implementation can tend to be.

Microsoft has stated that any attempt to alter the functionality of UAC would be considered a security violation that would be dealt with accordingly. It's scary sounding stuff.  But if the alternative is that millions simply turn off this functionality or the bad reputation of UAC slows migration to Windows Vista then what's the best path? 

Which brings us back, should third-parties like Stardock step in and fix UAC on their own?  Or should the user base wait and hope that Microsoft enhances the UAC experience?

 

Dream Submission Guidelines

Published on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 By Brad Wardell In Animated Wallpapers

As the # of animated wallpapers submitted increases, we're having to establish some guidelines on what is and isn't going to be accepted:

  1. Content MUST loop. An animated wallpaper should have a reasonably transitioning loop.
  2. Do NOT submit content other people's work without their permission. We are allowing some leeway right now on this rule for content that is based on content distributed on the net until we determine the legality of this.
  3. Content must be high-definition. That means the vertical resolution needs to be at least 720 pixels.

Additional rules on fair use of video clips:

Fair Use allows for the limited reuse of copyrighted material so long as it is not done for financial gain of the person reusing the work, nor does it financially harm the original author by denying them sales etc.  In the case of Dream animated wallpapers, users can make limited reuse of video files created by other authors provided they meet the following requirements:

  1. The animations used in the .Dream file is either 15 seconds in length of shorter OR less than 25% of the original video file in length (whichever is shorter).  So if you found a 20 second video you want to use in a Dream, you can use no more than 5 seconds of that video.  Anything else, you are limited to 15 seconds.
  2. You provide credit to the original author in the skin comments AND provide a link to your original source.
  3. Understand that if the original owner of the work asks us to take it down, provided proof of ownership, we will comply immediately.
Failure to comply with these fair use rules will result in an item being rejected from the submission queue. 

If you find your work is being redistributed here against your wishes, please contact a site admin with some form of proof that you own the original work, and we will remove the offending entry immediately.

Is art worthless on the Internet?

Published on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 By Brad Wardell In WinCustomize News

Today Stardock Design released its first "Master" Dream to the Dream (animated wallpaper) gallery. It's the one Microsoft showed off at some of its events.  As some know, Microsoft worked with Stardock to make some of the animated wallpapers for use with Windows DreamScene. Windows DreamScene (the software) is a feature for Windows Vista Ultimate users.  Most of the content we created for Microsoft hasn't been released yet (it will be available from Microsoft).  In the process of creating the animated wallpapers for Microsoft, we made a bunch of extra ones for WinCustomize.com which had nothing to do with our work with Microsoft.

So far, Stardock Design has released 6 free .Dreams and 1 premium .Dream.  On top of that, Stardock has released DeskScapes as freeware and DreamMaker as freeware.  And of course, we host the Dreams here on WiniCustomize which, on their own, used over 2 TERRABYTES of bandwidth.  So from our vantage point, Stardock's been "the good guy". Providing lots of free stuff, lots of free software and providing a free site to get it on. 

But Stardock's also a business. The costs of producing all this has to be made up somewhere or else we wouldn't be able to keep doing it.  But some people seem to be very vocal in their outrage that artists won't work for free. They'll happily pay Microsoft $400 for Windows Vista Ultimate but cry bloody murder about paying third party artists $4.95 for content.  My Xbox 360 cost quite a bit too but amazingly, the games aren't free. Those "greedy" game companies! 

Here's some of the comments on Blissful Sunset:

"It's absolutely ridiculous that they're charging for this-- it's just wrong. But for people who own Vista Ultimate, just wait, I guarantee you that this will come w/ the final Dreamscene when it's released. "

According to this user, it's morally wrong for artists to be paid for their work.  He's quite incorrect about Blissful Sunset coming with the final.

Another user wrote this:

"The implication (with MS showing it at official events) is that this development is work that was part of your contract with MS and therefore has already been subsidized and is in fact being paid for by all of us by our shelling out extra bucks for Ultimate edition."

This falls under the "no good deed goes unpunished" category.  Microsoft was looking for high quality content to show off during their demos but didn't want to give away some of the stuff that will be coming in the final release so they asked us if they could show the extra content we made. We agreed to let them. After all, it's pretty cool to see your work up on stage. But this person (and others) have tried to argue that we should simply give away all the animated wallpaper for free that we've made because we made the ones that come with it.  How does that make sense?

Over at Valve's Steam website, a user posted "Stardock sux" and writes:

"This is just unbelievable. Stardock is now charging us for what is supposed to be a FREE Vista Ultimate Extra"

This line of thinking is equivalent to saying that someone who bought say Half-Life 2 via Steam is somehow entitled to HL2: Episode 0 and HL2: Episode 1 and so forth. After all, they paid for Half-Life, why should they have to pay for additional content?  In fact, that's been one of the trends in the "outrage" group. Sure, there's 18 dreams that are free. But they shouldn't have to pay for anything because they bought Windows Vista Ultimate. I just totally can't grasp that mindset.  In what universe does someone buying a version of Windows entitle them to free software and content created by third parties?  Heck, my cell phone tries to get me to pay money for additional ring tones!

So here's what's going to happen -- one of these 2 things are going to occur:

Possibility #1: Users decide animated wallpaper is worthless.  In that case, Stardock Design won't be creating any more for consumers. Remember, Stardock Design currently has a 6 to 1 ratio in free to premium content.  At that point, consumers would just have to hope that individual artists  --who understand that there's no chance they'll ever be able to even make some extra side income from their efforts-- will take the time to create spectacular animated wallpapers that loop perfectly and are encoded in high quality at high-definition. Maybe that would happen but I wouldn't count on it.

In addition, since the bandwidth bill would still exist, users would have to buy WinCustomize subscriptions to download after awhile.  So the "free beer" crowd would have to find their content elsewhere. But don't count on these being available on most sites. At 50+ megabytes a pop, it's a lot of bandwidth. Someone has to pay for it.

And of course, that would mean the software would have to start charging for extra features. Want to pay 3D dynamic content? The user would have to get the "Pro" version.  The point being, the costs of producing, supporting, and developing this stuff has to come from somewhere. Personally, I think a system which nearly everything is free but a handful of premium content isn't free is a pretty good arrangement for everyone.

Possibility #2: Enough users decide that there's value to animated wallpaper. If something comes along that is of exceptional quality happens to ask for a few bucks, then it's worth buying.  In that event, what would happen is that it would attract more and more talented people who would submit lots of free ones in the hope of eventually being able to occasionally release premium ones to help recoup their time and costs. It's worth mentioning one more time - Stardock Design's free to non-free ratio so far is 6 to 1. If other studios and independent artists of great skill start to do the same, that sounds like a win-win.

So far, the results have been good. In the first 4 hours of "Blissful Sunset" we sold over 200 copies of it. Whether that trend continues remains to be seen. There's always a big bump at the beginning. The typical WindowBlinds Master skin has an initial bump and then eventually trends to around 5 per day after awhile.  But even 5 per day, put over time, is worth it.  The author's share of that ends up being around $3,500 per year per skin (not counting the initial bump) -- enough to buy a new computer.  But skins are different because it's an established thing.  Animated wallpapers are brand-new. How things progress with animated wallpaper remains to be seen.