I will admit Stardock is one of the "better" companies out there, but it is hardly perfect. I am more going after them for releasing this fluff piece in the face of gaming piracy and having no agreements from major industry shakers.

But Gas Powered Games? 'Nuff said on that one.

And Stardock does not always offer full refunds - it have given credits or partial refunds in the past, there have been isses with its download software, its products are not patch-free, its games are not the highest quality, there is no mention of ownership issues, and there are other issues with its non-gaming products.

Aye, it is still a decent company (relatively,) but I do not think it (much less GPG) is the company it claims to be nor is it realistic or working with the rest of the industry. As such, this is more wishful thinking than anything else...

We can all go "Huzzah!," but then everything else will go back to normal.

Too bad this is purely marketing fluff and that these "rules" do not seem to apply to either company...

And let us not talk about how unrealistic some of these are while people freely pirate...

Gearbox needs to get over itself.

It needs to slow down the ongoing churn of BiA games, it needs to fix the core flaws in the BiA series, it needs to focus more on quality than insulting other developers' games, and it should try doing someething different.

Typical EA mentality.

The previous movie did very good, but the lackluster game (averaged ~67% on reviews) did not sell amazingly well.

Having another hit movie on the way, one with even greater potential, EA decided to halt production rather than put in the effort to make a good or even great game. Now, seeing the chance to screw over games and make a quick buck, it may scramble to push something out the door.

Bravo, EA, bravo.

Molyneux's own words doom him.

What's the first, main rebuttal showing there is innovation? Citing graphics. Besides the obvious points already pointed out, I want more than a prettier version of Pong.

Second, he's content with the level of innovation - that's a really unfortunate thing for an artist to say or think.

Why is gaming so obsessed with graphics? Why are the budgets out of control? Why are there so many sequels? Where are the new experiences? Why is the player input still so limited or repetitive (how old is the mouse and keyboard now?) Why do so many games neglect their core strength - the player participation? Compared to all the other forms of media, why is gaming so restricted to so few genres, especially violent ones? Where are the new ideas? What about the artist or savy gamer; why is the industry so content to just re-release old games, just slightly updated graphically for the younger audience?

These are just a few of the many, many issues affecting the industry and Molyneux leads with...graphics. I'm sorry, but that is a major part of what is wrong with the industry right now.

And I don't want the industry to just run straight for some bizarre, artistic niche, but when I consider what gaming is capable of (you hear it, you see it, *and* you control it) and I look at how little it is doing, I do feel some regret. Further, living through the birth of commercial gaming, it's frustrating to see such limited growth. Even looking at things solely from the basis of evolution, there are many, many cases where, instead of building upon what we already know, we are releasing rehashes for the less experienced gamer (referring to general knowledge or experience, not challenge.)

I just think gaming can be significantly more robust - including more innovative - than it currently is.