Why is it that the group that claims tolerance and open-mindedness as its mantra so intolerant and close minded in practice? What I speak of is the political left's tendency to interject their political beliefs into every venue that they can while at the same time, actively working to prevent those who disagree with them from having the ability to express their beliefs.

If I watch the MTV Music Awards, I can expect to have some left-winger denounce the war in Iraq.  If I was the Oscars, I can expect to be treated to more anti-US policy rhetoric along with some environmentalist ranting from someone who gets around by personal jet. If I watch Comedy Central or go to a concert or buy a music album or even play an on-line game without someone telling me that their point of view (always the left-wing point of view) is the only "correct" view and those who disagree with them are mean or cruel or more commonly "ignorant".

On PowerUser.TV, we recently discussed how an anti-war protester was protesting in the video game "America's Army" (a game made by the US military as a game/recruitment tool).  My response was that that user has every right to do that.  But I did note the irony that the US military allows the protester their say while left-wingers work nation wide to ban military recruiters from publicly funded campuses.  Tolerance, apparently, is a one-way street.

During the segment, I argued that this sort of thing tends to backfire because it is just another example of anti-war opponents trying to shove their views down the throats of everyone else and few people like that. I mentioned that I happen to support US action and that there had been some pretty positive results in Iraq that seem to be forgotten (20 million people no longer living under Saddam, free elections, etc.).  I never implied that I supported US action because I thought we should "liberate" Iraq. 

In response, on the PowerUser.TV comments a number of people complained about my beliefs.  In fact, they universally used the word "ignorant" to describe my views.  Apparently, ones knowledge on a subject is dependent on how closely your opinion matches that of a left-winger.  The more you disagree with a left-winger, the more ignorant you are.

The left loves that word "ignorant". It is their way of smugly dismissing people's opinions without having to really consider them.  The people insulting me on PowerUser.TV don't know me. They have no idea how much I know or don't know.  All they know is that I mentioned, very briefly, that I happen to support US military action in Iraq. That's it.  That was enough for them to decide that I'm "ignorant".

Anyone who has bothered to look into my background, what I've done and written and especially anyone who knows me personally I suspect will conclude that I'm not "ignorant".  The problem with so many on the left is that they cannot accept that intelligent, well educated, well informed people might have seen the same things they've seen and come to different conclusions.

If I discuss that topic with people who disagree with my conclusions about liberals/left-of-center people, I usually get some sort of moral equivalence argument. Someone will point out Fox News or some right-wing whacko.  If you point out Michael Moore you get Ann Coulter thrown in your face.  But the pattern is usually something that can most charitably be described as "Look at these hundreds of examples" with moral equivalence being "Oh  yea, here's a counter example" as if that makes the two things equal. 

You would be hard pressed to find truly equivalent examples of right-of-center people forcing their views on others. A left-winger watching Nascar doesn't have to worry about one of the drivers coming out and saying "And those of you who don't support the war, you are ignorant cowards."  Even during the heated recent election, right-wing celebrities didn't go on and say "Yea, the John Kerry is a fucking idiot." (the way several celebrities did to Bush or Bush supporters). 

And as we see on that PowerUser.TV thread, it's not me or right-wingers going on and saying how ignorant or cowardly or stupid or uneducated left-wingers are.  What's really ironic is that the left's response to the segment proves the point.  Center of right people (such as myself) are regularly subjected to left of center dogma in inappropriate venues. But we don't riot about it. We don't try to shout down those who do it. We get annoyed about it and that's about it.  That I even mentioned my position (not even making a much of a case for or against the war in Iraq) brought out more posts than any show we've had all using the word "ignorant" and some of them saying things like "Well those people protesting the war are just trying to wake you up."

Apparently, some opinions are simply the "correct" opinions. Those who disagree are "ignorant" and need to be educated. Incorrect opinions need to be subverted, buried, hidden and those who have those opinions shouted down and shamed.  The problem with that strategy, in a democracy, is that the voters tend to have the last laugh. Americans don't take kindly to bullies.

Microsoft has embraced gadgets.  Gadgets are essentially the same as widgets.  In Stardock's DesktopX, gadgets are widgets that are "stand alone" (i.e. effectively the same as programs).

One cannot ignore Microsoft's entry onto the stage.  The popular widget-enabling program, Konfabulator, was bought up by Yahoo and turned into Yahoo Widgets.

Stardock isn't terribly interested in being bought up, but we will be embracing and extending Microsoft's gadget platform.  Microsoft's gadget platform currently allows its content to run on the Windows Vista sidebar as well as be able to be placed on web pages.  Their gallery of gadgets shows some of the content already. On a website such as Live.com you can then add those gadgets to your website.

Personally, having gadgets on a web page reminds me of The Simpsons episode where Homer discovers the Internet and ends up making a home page full of flying toasters, dancing babies, and other junk.  By making Microsoft gadgets be able to run on both the desktop and on the web I fear you'll end up with the least common demonitator in gadgets being created. 

Stardock's plans for DesktopX make use of Microsoft's gadgets but go in a different direction.  The biggest problem we have with Microsoft's gadgets is that they are a pain to create, even with the SDK.  The problem isn't so much the tools but rather the same kinds of problems DesktopX anbd Konfabulator users have discovered over the years -- making a widget or gadget requires re-inventing the wheel each time.

What Stardock will be doing is creating software and technologies that act as libraries for gadgets. That is, make it so that gadget makers (or even entire desktop makers) can plug into their creations modules that already contain the necessary code for some function that they can then send inputs into. So making a clock or an RSS feed or some other common gadget would be the starting point rather than the end point.

Stay tuned...

Windows Vista is still a ways off and while we are all excited to upgrade to it when it comes out, to satisfy your Windows Vista appetite for now, Gamespot has an article up that talks about many cool ways (including WindowBlinds and ObjectDock) to turbo-charge your Windows XP experience.

 

When we said you could mod Galactic Civilizations II, we meant it.  And one of the features of 1.2 will be the example mod.  The first beta has an early stab at it but it will be in beta 2 (this week) that more meat comes into play for the mod.  One might argue that we went overboard with our example mod as it is arguably a mini-expansion pack unto itself.  These mods could be done by anyone mind you. There is no coding involved.  Below are two screenshots of alternative game interfaces that will be with th emod so you can get an idea of what is possible.

v1.2 will be FREE to all Galactic Civilizations II players.

 One of our favorite webzines have given Galactic Civilizations II a very thorough review from the point of view of a serious strategy gamer.

This review has the benefit of having taken a look at the game's progression through 1.0X, 1.1, and 1.11 and hence is able to watch the game's progression.

It concludes:

So, to answer my initial question, does Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords have that extra spark required to make it a classic? Can players finally lock away Master of Orion? In a word, yes. Every gameplay element in Galactic Civilizations II comes together to form an addictive, cohesive classic; every facet of the game, from the interface to the overall presentation, works seamlessly together to create that "just-one-more-turn" feeling that elevates the best turn-based strategy games to award material. Even minor dings like a slightly higher learning curve, a confusing technology tree or the lack of real multiplayer didn’t stop me from staying up until the wee hours vying for control of whatever galaxy I was conquering. Civilization IV may have conquered ancient human history, but Galactic Civilizations II has taken the same addictiveness into space, and could be a strong early contender for turn-based strategy game of the year.

Read the whole thing for a detailed wrap up of the game. Galactic Civilizations II is at a store near you or you can purchase it directly here where you can download it while you wait for your box to arrive.

Next week (June 6th) Apolyton is going to be releasing a half-hour audio interview that we did.  It goes into depth about some of the background on Galactic Civilizations II, the game industry, and what's next.  More to come on that soon.

The ship design feature of Galactic Civilizations II has become one of the most popular features in the game. It is far more popular than we had ever expected and gives us a lot of ideas in the future on how to make it even better.  While the coding team has been working on v1.1, v1.2, and soon v1.3, we tried to think of something for the art team to work on. Art, as many people know, is expensive. That is doubly true of art that involved being modeled, textured, rendered, lit, etc.  So the question was posed -- if we put up a mini-expansion for $9, would people buy it? The expansion would have had probably around 2 new hulls per ship style along with a ton of jewelry (10 hulls total I believe plus countless other parts).

While a narrow majority of people wanted it, it would have really required a super majority (i.e. like 75%) to justify the expense involved.  The decision was made to roll ship pieces into the expansion pack which we expect to announce early next month (it won't be out until near the end of this year). We've got the plot down for the campaign and that links does give away a couple of the features in the expansion. There will be more playable civilizations in the expansion pack but two of the existing ones will be destroyed by the end of the campaign and won't be in any future sequel as a major race.  The new poll lets players try to guess one of the 2 major civilizations to be making a final exist in the expansion.

Update: The campaign is NOT the main emphasis of the expansion. There will be a number of significant new features that the expansion will center around.  Moreover, while 2 races will be destroyed during the campaign, they will still exist (along with the 2 new ones) in sandbox mode. In a future sequel (ala a GalCiv 3 some years from now) they would be removed.

One of the nice things about being an indie title that isn't incredibly mainstream is that you can do things that wouldn't necessarily appeal to the casual player.

For instance, the expansion pack for GalCiv II has gotten its features, story, plot, etc. mapped out now.  We'll talk about that more soon.

But it will contain a campaign and it will be dark. Very dark.  Two of the major civilizations in GalCiv II will be wiped out. Eliminated. You'll still be able to play them in GalCiv II but come GalCiv III, they won't exist. Eradicated.  Individuals of the two races may still exist and show up in GalCiv III but as playable races, their histories will come to an end.

Two new civilizations will be introduced in the expansion pack which will have the native ability to make use of planets that the others can't use without research (the expansion will introduce the concept of special planet types that can't be colonized until you've researched the appropriate environment technology). A third civilization will be added too which  will act as the main villain (well, of course the Drengin are villains too but, well you'll see).

And if you think the blood thirsty Drengin are bad with their desire to enslave all the galaxy as "slavelings", there are worse things than the Drengin and we're not talking about the Dread Lords.

For people who are willing to put up with some rough edges, we have made the beta of 1.2 available on Stardock Central (see downloads area) to anyone who has purchased Galactic Civilizations II.

There is a pretty significant list of changes (see the link below) of what's in there.  Everything from a modified battle system, updated AI, user interface enhancements, as well as support for modding with the starts of our example mod.

Mods in GalCiv II are very powerful. The final example mod will actually provide an alternative UI, an alternative set of alien civilizations with an alternative tech tree.  One can imagine people creating total conversion mods where GalCiv II is basically just the engine for whatever sci-fi turn based strategy game you want.

But remember, it's still a beta so there are some rough edges in there. We expect to release another beta next week and then move to a final 1.2.

Has anyone noticed the starting conditions being better? That was something we spent some time on. Making the start-up positioning have more space between them.