Slashdot Mirror
Loki Speaks up on Chapter 11
The following is an email sent by Scott Draeker of Loki
Dear Friend of Loki:
As you may know, on August 3, 2001, Loki filed a Chapter 11 reorganization. As our valued customer, we wanted to let you know why we have elected to reorganize and how, if at all, it will impact our ongoing business.
Under US law there are two kinds of bankruptcy:
- Chapter 7 is a liquidation. We have not filed a Chapter 7 and have no intention of doing so.
- Chapter 11 is a reorganization. This will allow us to deal with our creditors fairly and equitably and at the same time continue to operate the company. We are still shipping products and porting new games and expect to be doing so for a long, long time.
Most of the debts we are restructuring through the Chapter 11 are well over a year old. They represent mistakes made by a young company. We've learned from our mistakes and become cash positive. Going forward we have every confidence that Loki will continue to be successful and grow.
We cannot say for certain how long Loki will remain in Chapter 11. It depends on many factors. However we do intend to bring the process to a conclusion as quickly as possible. Once our plan of reorganization is accepted by the court, our creditors will receive an agreed upon settlement and all other prepetition obligations will be fully and finally discharged.
During and after the reorganization your orders will continue to be honored. We will continue to provide end user support, bug fixes and new products. Negotiations are in progress to guarantee Loki a steady stream of additional AAA games to bring to Linux.
Most importantly, we'd like to thank each of you for your support over the years. Without our customers, we are nothing. The outpouring of support we have received in the last few days has been overwhelming, and we will continue to do everything we can to merit that support.
Kind regards,
Scott Draeker
President, Loki Software
I know there were some talk in the Be comunity of trying to get Loki to port games to Be. Even though I would have picked up both linux and Be copies up it was a lucky move on their part. I have bought serveral Loki games and really hope that the company can pull out of ch.11. I am afraid the damage has been done at least for the time being ... this is not good for the companies who are considering porting there games to Linux. But i will continue to give my support.
Neverwinter Nights is supposed to be released for Windows, Mac, and Linux at the same time, but with module creation tools only available for Windows. I was hoping Loki might be able to port the tools to Linux. Looks like the chances of that are extremely slim now. They seem to be trying to say that things aren't so bad, but it sounds like they're a lot worse than they are letting on.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Given what I know now, I'd say wait to buy Loki products until someone other than Scott Draeker is in charge there.
Why? Does it matter if they are still funcitoning or doing well for their product to be useful to someone?
If they have developed a game you want to play, there's no reason not to buy it dispite the condition they happen to be in. At best, in the long run it won't matter, at worse, there won't be any more patches for your software. You'll still have the game you purchased.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
That most likely wouldn't help. It isn't just the cost of the licensing that makes porting expensive. It is the sheer manpower required. Loki has written a LOT of stuff to help porting (SDL, etc), but it still isn't a non-trivial task. It requires skilled programmers, and a lot of time. If they sold games for $15 a piece, even if that gave them a profit, it wouldn't be enough to recoup costs.
Games cost $50 a piece for a reason. Sure, the media and packaging only make up $1 or $2, but when you factor in manpower, licensing, marketing, and other things, they might be making $10 or $15 on that $50 game. No matter how good a deal they get from the original publishers, there is no way they could make selling patches a profitable endeavour.
-[Blaine]- "'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."
He was replying to the post that started out:
I've been dissapointed by Loki once recently.
Since you ARE a complete fucktard, as evidenced by the fact that you proudly post as AC and use nouveau-slashdot-bandwangon words like "fucktard":
Every post is not necessarily a reply to the post immediately above it.
m00.
However, this poster is correct in his guess that it is the exception rather than the rule. I can't vouch for this statistic but according to this article
http://www.nmbiz.com/issues/00/Jan/Orion.htm
Only 8% of companies that file from Chapter 11 emerge. Other articles I've read have executives stating that being in Chapter 11 is like having the courts run your company. Agressively attacking debts (chapter 11 essentially protects you from having creditors shut down your company) and emerging quickly seems to be a key to success.
In the meantime, what the hell do you all know, yah nay-saying twerps. Of course Loki is going to put the best possible spin on what is obviously a life-support measure. They wouldn't be filing if they weren't about to be shredded by their creditors otherwise. But in the meantime, other than simply disappearing in a puff of venture capital like most of the ill-conceived and overextended startups of the last 5 years, they are working to pay off as much of their debts as possible on a sustainable schedule. In the meantime, they keep contributing to the economy, their employees still ahve a job, and they still have a chance. Whether they manage to be one of the 8% is up to their customers and how wise the choices they make going forward are.
Three and four digits? Try four and five, respectively.
Well, Loki could make contracts that would allow simply selling patches. Hopefully they could arrange that by paying little to no royalties -- after all it would result in more sales for the original 'doze game.
What part of the previous poster's story makes you think he's disappointed? Sounds like he tried the Windows version and ran into some problems. The he tried the Linux version and it worked well.
In case you're a complete fucktard, allow your good friend AC to spell it out for you:
Linux version == Loki
Windows version == Sierra
According to the article on Linux Today, the "employee" in question was also effectively a huge investor as well. He couldn't just "pack up and leave" because he'd already sunk large amounts of money into the company (including - again according to the claims in the article - paying for Loki's payroll off of his personal credit card! I'd say that, foolish or not, sinking over $100,000 into a company you work for is pretty strong incentive to hang around trying to get it profitable as long as possible...)
Personally, it's starting to sound like the best thing for Loki is to move on, either as a different "legal entity" or not (i.e. have Loki liquidate its assets and have the remaining employees and other interested parties start a new company, buying Loki's liquidated assets) or still as Loki, but with somebody besides Draeker running it.
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
I'm realizing more and more lately that I don't need pc's for games. I haven't bought a pc game in months, although I've bought about 20 Dreamcast games. I'm going to buy a ps2 in a couple of months (after the price drops) and I'll get all of my games on that. After all, they're going to start making the same games for both. My computer will now be for computer stuff....
now where's that codeweavers crossover thingie....
Certainly every man at his best state is but vapor
Also, LinuxGames did a retrospective article the night that the Loki news first broke. It covers history, achievements, difficulties, and the possible future of Loki. Read it here
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
There is more than a definate possibility of this.
So why does this make you disappointed in Loki? It was hardly their decision (unless, of course, you expect them to give out their work to you free of charge). Instead, how about aiming your disappointment at Sierra Studios?
Dinivin
Hell yeah!
They should push Deus Ex out the door whether its ready or not. That's the game I've been paying them for this whole time. I hope they can keep afloat until they release it.
Do they mean cash positive, like they have earnings above $0?
Or Amazon's definition, where you say you are cash positive (before all types of various expenses).
Retail sales of games for Linux would be more profitable if they would:
Click here or here.
Loki's whole goal is very laudable (making Windows games available natively for Linux.) However, as experience has shown, it isn't the most profitable venture in the world. Linux users are accustomed to getting their software for free, not paying for it. It therefore stands to reason that you cannot expect to make pots of money by taking software from a group of people who are used to paying for it (Windows users) and re-releasing it for those who are accustomed to downloading source tarballs (Linux users.)
/bin/ls to Windows users if we put it in a slick enough package and bought up enough ad space ("The Ultimate File Listing Tool for Windows!")
It seems to me that wealth creation could be maximized by doing the exact opposite thing: taking free games for Linux, packaging them, and then selling then to Windows users. What Windows user wouldn't purchase a copy of TuxRacer if he saw it on sale at Best Buy? XBill 2 would likely be a big hit. And think about it: the initial capital outlay is minimal (after all, the games are all free.) I'm willing to bet that we could sell
Loki's heart is in the right place, but if they want to dig themselves out of the hole that they have found themselves in, the best thing that they could possibly do is reverse their name to Ikol and start doing the exact opposite of what they're doing now.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
Apparently some of Loki's titles sold in the three digit range, and most others were in the low four digit. How long can they hold out until there's a larger userbase? (Linux fans buying titles as a gesture of support only won't last forever...)
Really the point is that rather than pumping more revenue into maintaining large old debts, they can use chapter 11 to free up that revenue so that they can restructure and grow the company. Then, in theory, they can pay those debts off when they are in a position that those debts aren't completely sucking up their revenue.
If they were in really dire stratis they'd do a chapter 7. Chapter 11 is usually a way to get above water from the initial costs of starting up, fast growth, etc.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Life ain't so grand for most of the rest of us. Most of us have to use our money to put food on the table instead of buying games we won't play.
Well, this happened in the past to DigiCash as many of you might remember. The point there was not that the company was really out of money, the point was to get rid of Dr. David Chaum. Look here for details. Today eCash Technologies is a successful company with continuing support from the PREVIOUS Investors (the ones that pulled the plug). So, I do not think that this is the end for Loki. If they focus on their successful business and have patient Investors PLUS MANY customers. But that shouldn't be a problem, should it?
no text
Who's right?
The more you know, the less you understand.
Why would you wast your money buying a console gaming system? You could take that money and buy a great PC with the capapbility to play dreacast, PS, PC, freaking Gameboy Advance games if you wnated to ... you could hook it up to your stereo and TV and you would be set! It just seems silly. No you don't need a PC for games but name a gaming system you can't play on the PC?
When I was fresh out of school I bought a car for about $10k. After a while I got a job near my parents house, so I moved back in to save cash. I was late on one of the payments on my car they called tried to convince me to give them the car. Since I lived with the parents and could use thier extra car at the time it seemed reasonable, I did it. I got a bill a month later for $9500. They had sold my $10,000 car for $500 can were charging me the balance. I told them to F- off. Eventually I paid them $3k and we settled it. This sounds like almost exactly the same thing that is happening with Loki.
Ahahahaha! I never thought of it that way, least I didn't pay money for my copy, but I feel, its a legal copy, someone else paid for it. :-(
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
At a guess, it's probably because close to 20 former employees are owed (on the average) about $10k - $12k in back wages -- discounting Mr. Colvin's quarter-million. Including two contractors, who were both stiffed.
...They represent mistakes made by a young company...
:)
Like a chair budget of $1000 per employee??
---- I made the Kessel Run in under 11 parsecs.
I enjoy an occasional game and REALLY don't want to keep a Windows box around just for that...
So go grab a Playstation 2 or Nintendo Gamecube when their prices drop. I've found it's more fun to play games that I can play with up to three of my friends in the same room than it is to play multiplayer over the 'net anyhow. It's also nice to be able to play on a big-screen TV set.
Another neat thing about consoles is that they're easy to pack up and take to a friend's place as well.
In the business literature, there are any number of cases where a company files for bankruptcy, and then finds that banks (or whatever) are MORE willing to lend them money.
The deal is that the "bankrupt" company restructures its current debt, creating a situation where it can take on more debt. Of course, the new debt will be more expensive (higher interest).
Usually, the debts are worked out s.t. the individual payments are less, but over a longer period. What ch. 11 does is force the creditors to rework the loans that are already outstanding.
just a thought.
ceci n'est pas un sig.
I also considered moving from Windows to Linux for many of my gaming needs. I, however, payed attention to the information regarding the Linux Tribes 2 port and was well aware that the Windows CD would not be patchable and that a seperate Linux specific version would need to be purchased, so I waited. I also understood the reason: Loki doesn't work for free, and they won't make money if people buy the Windows versions and just slap a patch to make them run under Linux. It was somewhat irritating that the Windows version was released several weeks earlier than the Linux version, though I did try the Windows version (borrowed a CD) under Windows 2000. The game, after three patches, would always crash with the oft-seen 'Unhandled Exception' error before I could play it. The Linux version, after installation, has played without a hitch every time.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
I'm looking for something that says, "How bad of a businessman do you have to be to finance your nearly-underwater company from your own not-so-deep pockets" that fits into a simple sound bite.
Cheers,
-- RLJ
Their products were well off the radar screen before they went chapter 11. Their services division, OTOH, is strong as ever.
I agree it's not the greatest news for Loki, but it doesn't have to be fatal.
What does it matter how they "end up" anyway? You'd still own the game (<nitpick> the license </nitpick>), so what would it matter anyway?
Almost all companies in the world started on money financed by personal debt. It would only be stupid if they didn't file for chapter 11 protection before they got in too deep.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
I've seen numerous people suggest that a simultanous Windows/Linux release would be best for both the Windows developer and Loki. That is not true for the Windows developer.
Most Linux gamers buy the Windows version. They dual boot, use wine, use a second PC, whatever. A Windows sale is better than a Linux sale for the developer, they don't have to share anything with Loki. A simultanous release would result in many Linux sales replacing Windows sales, bad for the developer.
After a few months the Linux vesion can be released and the purists who can only be reached with a native Linux version can be taken care of. As an added bonus other Linux loyalists who already purchased a Windows version will purchase a second copy to get a native Linux version.
In terms of when to release a Linux version, simultaneous or after the Windows version, the interests of the original developer and Loki are in direct conflict.
As to the theory that sales are lost when a port arrives after the original. The Mac porting experience shows this is not necessarily the case. Mac ports that followed the Windows version by a year or more zoomed to the top of the Mac sales charts. Their sales numbers being comparable to simultanous Windows/Mac releases.
Oddly enough, Loki has a small benefit from not having a simultanous release. They don't have to support a 1.00 product, they get a few rounds of bug fixes and patches in their initial release. This in no way make up for the loss of sales due to Linux gamers who will only buy the Windows version. However some Mac porting companies have had their "profits" wiped out supporting buggy 1.00 releases.
Scot mentions that most of the debts are over a year old. yeah, they have debts to activision from a while ago, but anything recent has been either paid off, or they could pay off easily, if they didn't have these few bigs one from the past on them. They probably have a few debts all over the place, but their really seeking an extension on one or two big ones that are bringing them down. That's what I got out of it at least. If they could cover their asses for a little longer, they'd be looking good. I could be wrong. *Shrugs*
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
Some of the executive will be spending a lot of time satisfying the courts and creditors. Most of the programmers and and game designers (those who don't have executive duties) will remained focused on doing game work.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
You try to make it in this world, you work hard, you put out good products that people enjoy, and what comes of it? Some older God, snobby old economy type, chains you to a rock bed and drips acid on your face for eternity.
Poor Loki. Poor, poor Loki.
Boycott Odin!
Dan
How does anyone come to a substansial conclusion from that email? Everyone is talking about how Chapter 11 means death but that is far from the truth if you don't know the specifics. Just because a company files for Chapter 11 doesn't mean it's anywhere near going out of business and since we don't know the specifics what's the FUD all about?
I think what happened was Loki was having a difficult time starting up. They finally started going and gaining income and either:
1. Neglected to pay some creditors.
2. Weren't in a position to pay creditors at the time.
3. Accountant totally forgot about it.
There are too many "ifs" to even speculate. So don't it makes you look like a jackass and in the mean time.. Play a game.
I am rooting for you, Loki, both because I believe in the Linux gaming community and I like what you are doing as a company. However, the news I read over at LinuxToday has me feeling troubled. Please, PLEASE shape up and try to make prudent decisions. You have a respomsibility both to your clients/fans as well as to your employees. Companies who don't deal fairly with their own people nor who make unnecessary blunders won't have the support of their customers for long.
Here's to more games for Linux!
Nerds around the world will stand in line for warcraft 3 based on the stuff I've seen so far.
Port away!
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Don't blame Loki Games for your ineptitude...
Pardon me, but here's another reality check question: just how lucrative do you figure the "porting-windows-games-to-linux" market is?
They're going to spend the bulk of their time satisfying the court (at first) and creditors (if they last that long) and their products will definately suffer as a result. It's more than most companies can bear.
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess? - Joshua (Wargames)
The only difference is whether or not you want to wait 1 year or so for the port, or 8 years.
Funny.
Back at LWE in NYC this Spring, Loki approached the now defunct Chilliware, looking for a buyout.
Many phone calls and meetings later, a sum of $250,000 was reached; this would give Chilliware 100% rights to Loki software.
$250k aint alot of cash folks. Any company that can go under for that small an amount, well. Sheesh...
BTW, other companies that almost sold out to Chilliware:
*GNUCash (Houston, we have a problem...)
*Hancom
*EasyLinux (Hi Hans!)
Luckily, Chilliware imploded, thanks to the CEO's wandering eye and hands.
-----------------
Oh yeah, I have the source for iceSculptor, Mentor and Mohawk, if anyone wants to buy it...Chilliware owes me some big cash, and since none of the 'principals' will respond, I'll take it this way instead.
-----------------
You are the CEO of a financially trouble linux company. Your tech stocks took a real plunge. You must somehow maintain your customers faith, and restructure the company to be a dominating force in the market. You have just sent out the letter, and the future is in your hands. I wonder if loki will think it's a big enough hit to market. (sell the life story and turn it into a game, kinda like a twist on pee wees big adventure) uh oh, i gotta run............ here comes a spork.
Remember that you are unique, just like everybody else.
The purpose of a Chapter 11 is to re-establish a relationship with your creditors so you can start getting your business setup again.
You file because of bad times, bad decisions, bad whatever. Hopefully it goes good, and it fades into history.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Oh come on, if everything was champagne and lollipops, they wouldn't have filed in the first place.
Given the history of VA, Penguin, and other pure linux companies, Loki will be reduced to the equivalent of loan sharking to finance the place in the long run. Reputable creditors will keep a safe distance.
I'd suggest instead buying the games you think you'd like to play, and not buying the ones you won't.
I don't fully understand the idea of supporting a company on principle, or based on who is in charge. If they produce quality product that I want, I'll buy it.
I can see arguments for not buying from companies whose owners have political or ethical stances you disagree with, like Dave Thomas of Wendy's (outspoken anti-homosexual). But because their president has poor business sense? That's the sort of thing that either they'll straigten out, or the market will straighten out for them, but doesn't seem like a worthwhile use of, effectively, a boycott. But hey, if you have moral and ethical issues with people who can't manage a company and its debts, knock yourself out.
-- Kate
It seems like they're just delaying the inevitable to me (seriously not trolling here). You simply don't file bankruptcy of any kind unless you are in dire straits. I'm rooting for them all the way, but no matter how you spin it chapter 11 = seriously troubled company.
Good luck to 'em.
Mordred
Seriously, I own a lot of Loki products and hope they stay around... I enjoy an occasional game and REALLY don't want to keep a Windows box around just for that...
.technomancer
mmm... Loki Good. Me want more.
Aliens? Magnetic Rings?! Bah! Who needs that when we have
I don't see how you can realistically operate a company with no line of credit. Loki will be sold, its almost certain.
So YOU'RE the one who's been breaking into my boxen...
All I can say is this:
I'm crossing my fingers for them!
I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for TripTic Blaster and Gran Turismo Safe driving edition.
I read the internet for the articles.
You unwittingly provided the counter-example to your own argument. Classic!
Had Loki been able to release Linux ports of games at the same time as the Windows versions, things may have been very different. I'd certainly have bought some of the games if I didn't have to wait.
Tribes 2 was released at just about the same time for Windows and Linux. As they work more with different game producers, the time difference between the windows and linux versions will most likely decrease.
....that they haven't tried writing their own games for linux ( and maybe porting them to Win later). I'm sure they have plenty of programming talent, add some graphic artists, some sound people, and a few plot/storyline guys & I'm sure they could pull off a decent RPG or something. Maybe they'll head this direction after they get out of Chapter 11.
Disclaimer (IANAGD) I Am Not A Game Designer
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
I remember when I was interviewing at Montgomery Ward in 97 for a network design engineer position. I didn't follow the news, so I didn't know MW had just filed ch. 11 the day before the interview. The director who interviewed me brought up the issue as soon as we sit down. It sounded almost exactly like this.
Ch. 11 gave them almost 4 years, but it still went down.
Didn't Wang do precisely this back in, what, the early 90s?
I've been dissapointed by Loki once recently. I was thinking of moving from windows to linux on my home gaming system, figured i'd be able to play tribes 2 in linux, since i had heard it was done. I didn't realize the windows cd isn't patchable (like q3a is). To make things worse, Loki only sells complete CDs, not patches. And after spending 70$ on the win version, i figured i may as well say in win than move to linux and pay it again. If he had, for example, been selling a 15 dollar patch, i may have migrated.
Ideally, i'd like game companies to follow id softwares q3a style and make everything cross platform.
08/15/2001: Wednesday Loki Is Dead ... Score: -1 Insightful
Loki, a company devoted to porting popular Windows games to the Linux platform, filed for bankruptcy protection early this week. Although this may look like the official death of Linux as desktop alternative, posters on Slashdot insist that this is all "good news" for Linux enthusiasts.
Owing millions of dollars in licensing fees to various game developers, Loki failed to find a market selling games to people who are not used to paying for software. It seems the company could not convince enough game enthusiasts to shell out another fifty bucks for a Linux version of a game they already own for Windows.
Most of the posts on Slashdot mourned the loss of a another Linux-friendly company. Although this was one of many Linux bankruptcies in the past few months, users of the operating system maintain that the desktop OS war has already been fought and won ... by Linux ... dammit.
Slashdot prides itself on the open-mindedness of its readership and the lively egalitarian debates held on its pages. For example, in response to one post questioning the need for Linux as a mainstream desktop operating system, a user responded with a mature and reasoned post:
"Fuck the shut up, all of you! I'm writing a bot to make sure that any anti-Linux poster gets banned from /. or at least modded down. All of your negativity is getting in the way of our free and open forum."
It is fortunate that the Linux community has such an open and democratic forum to vent their frustrations [if they were frustrations, which they certainly aren't]. Just as Henry Ford offered the public a panoply of colors for his early automobiles as long as they were black, Slashdot accepts the entire spectrum of opinion on issues of open source and the free software movement.
"You are all a bunch of ridiculous fucktards," wrote a user named Anonymous Coward. "To all of you FUD-mongers who see Linux only as a server OS only, you should troll someplace else. You are not wanted here in our welcoming community. Slashdot is all about freedom of speech. So, shut the hell up before I use my various /. Logins to flame you into oblivion!"
The quality of opinions expressed on Slashdot have remained high even as the quantity of posts grows exponentially. The reason for the sudden rise in traffic may have something to do with the increase in the amount of free time the average dot-com worker has these days.
Since Slashdot as much a game as message board [users are objectively "scored" on every post], some have devised tricks to get their comments moderated up. One of the easiest ways to accomplish this is to pick a random quotation and plug in the appropriate proper nouns for instant wisdom.
"Loki is dead." wrote one poster. "Long live Loki."
"I come here to bury Loki, not to praise them."
"Forst Pist," added another. "All your base are belong to us!"
All told, the Linux community is upbeat [and not at all defensive] about the recent round of set-backs [if you want to call them that, because they're not "set-backs" at all].
In the aftermath of Loki's demise, however, Linux users will always have their old stand-by to fall back on: playing stolen Windows games.
Jim42688: Go ahead, mod me down because I stuck a mirror in front of you...
Yes, TWA was acquired for about 3/4 billion $, I think. This was after a second chapter 11, or was it. I don't remember for sure.
OTOH, after reading recent posts, it seems that in this case chapter 11 may just be a ploy to screw people over.
This sounds like a valid business decision for a "dot-com" startup to be making especially given the market. I'm going to continue supporting Loki. They will ultimately succeed.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If anyone from Loki is reading this, are you planning on porting Heroes of Might and Magic IV? It's scheduled to be released next month (although that's not official) and I'm wondering if I should wait to buy the Linux version.
I want to buy the Linux version. I would prefer to buy the Linux version. However, I mostly just want to play the game. I've been playing III since it came out, and am eagerly awaiting IV. The reason I didn't buy III for Linux is that I had already bought it for Windows when it first came out.
What does everyone else here do? Say that the answer is "We're porting it. It will be a few months." What do you do? Buy both? Wait? I can't see waiting more than a couple of weeks. If it's a simultaneous release, I'll buy the Linux version. But if it's not?
Seems like there's no easy answer.
Well I've always said only a moron would get involved in a Linux company...
I guess we can count these two fellas in.
There are too many hidden issues here to guess why. If it is a csae where they owe some money to a few creditors, and most of these creditors are supportive of the restructuring then Loki will survive. If not then it will go into receivership and most likely into liquidation.
But as I have said before we do not know the details or issues behinde the restructuring.
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
CowboyNeal.
I like to play games, but I don't have a Windows machine[1] so the result is, I haven't played games lately. Dual-booting is not an option because I like to have things like mail, irc, browsers, etc, running all the time, I don't like it when these get interrupted and I don't like it when people can't reach me, even for a short time. So my solution to this: stop playing games. Possibly a good thing because I got more than the usual amount of work done, but the fact is, I enjoy games. A couple weeks ago I downloaded a Loki demo just out of interest - Heros of Might and Magic - had lots of fun, and realized that I really owe it to myself not to cut off this form of enjoyment. Maybe not go overboard like in the past, but just relax and play every now and then.
So ok, next thing, Loki does chapter 11 and I think "hey, it's my fault, I waited too long". Must be lots like me, maybe this is just the wakeup call we need. I'll pick up 2-3 Loki games this week. I mean, what's the downside? It will for sure help Loki in their time of need, and whatever happens, I've still got the game, right? And it's not like I can't afford it.
I guess I'll just make it a regular habit to buy whatever they come out with from now on. I mean, their titles are *great* and I don't give a rats ass how many months they've been out on Windows, because I don't run Windows. Simple.
[1]deleted the last Windows partition a few months ago after not using it for more than a year
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
If you have poor business practices, Chapter 11 is a short-term solution. If you need to adjust to changes in the economy or industry, Chapter 11 can provide needed protection and time. TWA is still around, and they filed Chapter 11 seven years ago.
In the earlier thread, I urged people to help out Loki by buying their games. In light of recent information (both obtained through friends in the biz and various web articles), I have changed my mind.
I've worked for companies where someone held things together using their personal credit. That's a sign of poor management at best, and sheer stupidity at worst.
Given what I know now, I'd say wait to buy Loki products until someone other than Scott Draeker is in charge there. That's what I intend to do, at least. I was going to buy the Linux port of Kohan this weekend (I own the PC version already); now, I think I'll wait and see where Lokie ends up before giving them my money.
All about me
I for one love all the loki games and think they do a better job on most of them than the original windows version!
Keep up the good work Loki!!
"it could just be the midgets. You've got to be careful with midgets in Spandex." --Jamie Richardson
I guess the point of this letter was to try to convince Linux fans that Chapter 11 wasn't the end of the world, that Loki wasn't going under.
I think Loki needs to not only restructure its debts, it needs to restructure its business practice. Instead of paying hefty royalties to produce Linux versions of games that are already released, perhaps Loki could focus on more "timeless" games. You know, the games that aren't based on the latest and greatest graphics (Tribes 2) and aren't any fun after a year. They're expensive to produce, require high-end hardware, and only have a short 1-2 year shelf life before nobody wants it.
I think Loki could make a fair amount of money creating a unique game and producing it for both Windows and Linux. I'm not convinced that money can be made in the porting business, but a well-run game design place can. Focus all of Loki on one good game, of whatever genre, and market it well. Sell both Linux and Windows versions. If you buy one version, you should be able to get a 50% or more off the price of the other version. Sure, Loki can still port a game or two (c'mon, port Civ III - I'll pay $50 for it!). I high-end game companies have a hard time making profits off of games because of expensive development costs. Loki has a solid base of games that work great and can generate some revenue while they develop their own games that have a sensible budget.
Too many game companies are focusing on great graphics and the latest 3D cards. Instead, the focus should be on playability and creativity. If Loki makes a great game and has a version for Linux and Windows, it's sure to make a good chunk of money.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
The reason they filed for chapter 11 is that their business is running well except for financial distress on loans that they've had for a while now. This means that if they can manage to get rid of their loans, the company will be doing fine. It's worth helping any company break out of financial distress as long as the company would be profitable otherwise. This is fairly basic economics.
Phluid!
If you really want to know what happened, check out this Linux Today Story.
Basically, Scott has been screwing his employees over for the last 18 months, and when he was told to pay up, cowardly claimed chapter 11 so that he could continue paying himself, and no-one else.
I think all of this sympathy is misplaced.
Most of the debts we are restructuring through the Chapter 11 are well over a year old.
We've... become cash positive.
It doesn't work that way. You may have income, but you're not positive if you can't pay your debts. Part of a successful reorganization is recognizing the situation you're in so you can fix it.
I wish them the best of luck, but they have some more thinking to do.
I've often wondered what the economics of a porting company like Loki are like. For instance Vendor X sells game Y for $49.95 and there are 100,000 potential customers, only 10,000 of them happen to be running a variant operating system that you aren't targeting. However, under further analysis you learn that 9,000 of them dual-boot to your target environment, so they're actually potential candidates anyways. So company Y comes along and offers to port your software for those 10,000 users. Now really despite the fact that it has a potential market of 10,000 users, really 9,000 were potential users already, so the porting is purely a convenience for them, and the 1,000 are truly bonafide new customers.
Anyways you can see how economically this can get pretty convoluted, and it must be under tight terms that porting contracts written: I would presume that for the majority of the prospective market the original game was a candidate already. Bleh.
Yes, it would be nice to have decent games under Linux, but Loki is a terrible company. The creditor that sued Loki and caused this whole situation with them filing for bankruptcy was a former employee whom Loki (Scott Draeker, specifically) robbed blind! He's just trying to get some of the money he invested in the company (while working there for 19 months and not being paid) back.
Support Loki's former employees (hint: all the good employees left the company already), but don't support the company or Scott Draeker.
keeping windows around merely to play a game is contrary to the very essence of why people prefer linux for their personal desktop systems. if they wanted to play games, they wouldn't have switched to linux
Untrue. It is a fallacy to believe that all Linux users have bought into the "religion". Many, probably most, simply feel that Linux and/or it's tools are more cost effective or useful.
There certainly is a huge Linux population who echo the sentiments that they only keep Windows around to play games. Your purist positions definitely seems to be a minority position.
Other than salaries, facilities and hardware expenses, what is there to spend money on? It's not like they have to buy operating systems or compilers or anything like that. I thought Linux was free (as in beer, as well as -dom) I guess it was those $700 office chairs.
What a second, I thought you guys called them "family reunions"!
"And if there's a game that you really wanted, you've already bought the Windows version -- months before the Linux port comes out. When the Linux port does finally come out, you may have moved on to the next game, or you may just not feel like paying for the game *again*. "
not true
linux users (meaning people who use linux as their personal/desktop OS) boycott Windows games for the same reason they boycott Windows itself. if there's a game that really 'needs' to be played, the typical linux user either tries to make it work in wine, or they get a console version of it. if neither version is available, the majority of linux users don't play it (and find another game).
keeping windows around merely to play a game is contrary to the very essence of why people prefer linux for their personal desktop systems. if they wanted to play games, they wouldn't have switched to linux.
No ... that's "if you like to play brand-new computer games". If you've grown up enough to realize that being six months or a year old doesn't make a game suck, then you're perfectly happy playing games that were released for winders earlier.
That said, lots of people do think that anything but the latest and greatest isn't worth playing, and the number of games available for Linux is significantly less than for windows, so people who play a lot of games may choose to have a windows machine. So yes, there's still a place for making more and better games for Linux.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
The problem with this thought is that it takes far fewer people to do a port and the domain of your project is greatly reduced (ie you don't have to worry about producing artwork) than doing a full game. Sure it costs a lot in royalties to port games but I'd bet it's far cheaper than paying the salaries for an entire dev team.
I think Loki could make a fair amount of money creating a unique game and producing it for both Windows and Linux. I'm not convinced that money can be made in the porting business, but a well-run game design place can. Focus all of Loki on one good game, of whatever genre, and market it well. Sell both Linux and Windows versions. If you buy one version, you should be able to get a 50% or more off the price of the other version. Sure, Loki can still port a game or two (c'mon, port Civ III - I'll pay $50 for it!). I high-end game companies have a hard time making profits off of games because of expensive development costs. Loki has a solid base of games that work great and can generate some revenue while they develop their own games that have a sensible budget. Too many game companies are focusing on great graphics and the latest 3D cards. Instead, the focus should be on playability and creativity.
I couldn't agree with you more! The _vast_ majority of the gaming industry today really appeals to the lowest common denominator ("Oooo! shiny thing!! Og must buy pretty thing _now_!") and it turns my stomach quite fankly. Instead of being adventurous gaming companies are largely going through the motions and cranking out game after monotonous game. In part I think this is because of the risk and large investment required to produce a game today as opposed to the lone wolf day where one guy could make a game by himself without regard to what the rest of the industry is up to. To be honest with you thought that's what the public is rewarding for the most part:
Games with copious amounts of eye candy but substandard gameplay and almost a complete lack of originality.
Seemingly gone are the days when I could curl up with a coke and a game that focused on _gameplay_ and had nearly infinite replay value. Most games today focus on eye candy first and the game second and sadly it's exactly what the public wants. This is precisely why I think the gaming industry needs a thriving indie scene to keep the big boys honest and to provide a little something for everyone. It is my great hope for ambitious projects such as CrystalSpace, WorldForge and SDL/OpenAL can provide the necessary building blocks to help small dev houses (or even a single person) to develop innovative, creative, well thought out games that compete effectively with large production houses.
If Loki makes a great game and has a version for Linux and Windows, it's sure to make a good chunk of money.
I really wish I could agree with you here. The gaming industry really requires deep pockets to tide you over in case your current game is a flop. By porting proven hits Loki gets to pick proven successful games and eliminates the roll of the dice that always occurs when producing a new game. Granted, Loki probably doesn't sell as many copies by waiting but it also substantially limits it's risks as well. Hopefully Loki can pull out of it's current financial problems and prosper. I'm all about anything that helps that guy in his basement with plenty of caffeine, an inspiring idea and a burning desire to make his dream a reality.
-Pato
G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
A *seriously* troubled company wouldn't bother with Chapter 11... they would just dissolve.
Any company will do as their lawyers and accounts advise them. Chapter 11 allows the company to not be liable for payment of debts, therefore allowing the owners to exit the business without losing a lot of money. Unscrupulous, yes. Businesslike, yes.
Click here or here.
I hope that Loki's contractors will be seeing at least some of the money Loki owe's them due to this. One ex loki contractor I know is owed several thousand by Loki and has been for quite some time now...
Had Loki been able to release Linux ports of games at the same time as the Windows versions, things may have been very different. I'd certainly have bought some of the games if I didn't have to wait.
Also note that Mac ports for games are similar, but they have one big difference -- a Mac cannot run modern PC games (PC emulators aren't quite good enough) but a Linux PC could always be dual booted into Windows. So a Linux user with a PC could always install Windows on another partition if he *really* needed it.
Because of this, the market for Mac games, even Mac ports of games that have been out for months on Windows boxes, is a good deal larger than the market for Linux ports of old Windows games.
they are doing a good job. i really wish they would do a little better. its a shame, because they are a bit ahead of their time.
i cant seem to come up with a sig.
i agree that having a company to port games is nice... but who really needs it??????? i mean... the Open source community can port games!!!!!!!!!!! we don't need the source if we can reverse engineer data files, think about freecnc, freeciv, and all the other fun games for linux!!!!
Sig you!
I don't care how much I get mod'd down for this or flamed, but best of wishes to you, Loki! It's good to know that a linux company out there can make money, even if they have to file a Chapter 11. Hope you get out soon and can get back to offerring great games for a great OS (well, OS'es anyway).
No wonder they fell apart! Honestly!
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Loki should have it's own "topic" logo and area... it REALLY ranks up there for most /.'s...
IT's for when you owe people money, and you can't pay. The idea is that you can stave off the creditors for a while, deal with them all fairly and evenly, and allow your company to start making some money. This doesn't mean 'making money because they don't have to pay bills'... it is designed to give them breathing room in order to dig their way out.
A *seriously* troubled company wouldn't bother with Chapter 11... they would just dissolve.
Seriously, these are good guys who actually provide quality products at reasonable prices. It would be a shame to see them go.
Buy Hex-Rated Stuff, fight the DMCA!
I sincerly hope that this recent news about loki doesn't mean the end for them. However have you
ever tried convince your local games shop to order in copies. I really hope they review thier distribution channel while restructuring. After all some of us aren't comfortable ordering merchendise from the internet (and is it any wonder with all the news about computer security problems).
I hope Loki stays around long enough to finish porting Viper CTR!
1) While I'm not a hardcore gamer, I enjoy playing a game from time to time
2) It makes sense to support a company who makes cool stuff for your platform of choice (similarly, I donated to Mandrake after downloading their latest release). I have a decent job and can afford to miss some cash in exchange for a quality product.
3) Not everything should/can be free. If you want Linux ports of closed source (ie: professional) games, someone will have to pay for them. Otherwise resign yourself to the fact that you'll have to resort to the likes of Tuxracer and Freeciv in terms of games (and I'm not dissing these games, they're written by hobbyists and simply don't compete in the professional game market).
So to sum it up, if you want Loki to be around a year from now, fork over some $ for a game. If you think the price is too steep, team up with your fellow Linux diehards and purchase a game for a few of you. While not exactly right/legal, it's still better if 3 people buy 1 game to share than nobody buying the game at all. Loki makes quality products for our favorite OS; I hope that they'll still be around a few years from now ...
I keep windows around purely for the games (and the scanner). Would I get rid of it in a heartbeat if I could play Diablo II and use my scanner in linux? Yes.
I use Linux whenever I can because I actually prefer the desktop, filesystem conventions, etc. I don't just use it because it's the "in thing to do." Not everybody in the world who runs linux runs it for the "religion". Some run it simply because they believe it to be a superior operating system (UNIX-like things in general for me) than windows, but they still have to keep windows around because they must bow down to the wishes of the local monopoly and all the businesses out there who support them (ahem, Blizzard).
--MonMotha
Seriously. Buying the license from EA (or whomever) can't cost that much, it should be possible to make a network/client model, and as we all remember, multi-player on C64 (or Atari x00) was doable.
Hell, I'd pay $20 for that. I'd even buy two copies to play against my wife.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
So, let's say that you buy the right to port title 'A' to Linux for US$200,000 and the right to port a less-popular title 'B' to Linux for US$35,000. You could easily lose money on the first deal and make it back up on the second one, even if it sells fewer copies. Game publishers will charge much more for 'hits' than duds, which is why the ported Linux games are usually pretty good titles, but not the cream of the crop titles (which probably cost much more to port than they could hope to recoup). Certain publishers are very harsh, which is probably why Halflife was never sold at retail....
Basically, the game publishers want money up front and they have no risk. The porting houses take on all the work and risk whenever they port a title; small companies like Loki and Aspyr can be hurt because they have no leverage -- it's a take-it-or-leave-it deal. Also, you probably won't see parity on title releases unless the developers believe in the moral proposition (id and Blizzard seem to be the only companies that do -- and id is the only one that will do it outside of Macintosh), because if the game is wildly successful the pulisher can make more money by squeezing the retail sales than by granting porting rights. After the game's sales dissipate they can get another injection of cash by selling the porting rights to smaller companies and let them assume the risk of sales. Hence, Linux is very tricky to play -- most users can just boot into Windows if they want to play a game badly enough (ahem, CmdrTaco + Diablo).
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
You don't get out much, do you?
when you have to memorize keys that represent buttons on a control...and then the screen flickers and game crashes...and it's not a 35 inch monitor, and you're kids and wife can't sit there by you and press the keys next to yours because it's stupid and when you try to adhere to licensing by buying games you play and you HATE pc joysticks because they're no good whatsoever....
wait...what was i saying???
I'm buying a decent desktop today, and with this news, I'm going to go buy a couple of games for it this weekend.
It's what I can do for what sounds like a great company.
My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!
Better yet why don't you put a book on your table and learn something so you can afford these games. I can't see how any geek who can afford a computer can't afford a small piece of software to go with it. I agree with Taco, I bought a few games from Loki that I haven't had time to really play yet. But one day I know I will, and the added bonus of buying loki software is you don't need to search for your CD to play them. They're installed on your harddrive and will sit there until you're good and ready.
What's the problem? Would you rather save your money for your next upgrade to windows?
If someone over at IBM or another big player wanted to bail Loki out of their financial problems they could and help fill a gap greatly need by the Linux community. According to another article on linuxtoday.com, Loki is 1.5 million dollars in debt. That is a drop in the hat for someone like IBM or a VC.
"With enough memory and hard drive space, anything in life is possible!"
You don't have to have bought into the Linux religeon. You just have to hate Microsoft.
And that is really, really easy for anyone who remembers what personal computers were like 10-15 years ago. Nothing RMS/ESR/LT says is a factor in that.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
To support Loki get one of these nine inexpensive titles ($9.99 or less):<BR>c ts/deptpage.asp?web_dept=PC+Games&web_sub_dept=Lin ux">Loki Games</A><BR><BR>
<A HREF="http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/produ
Go Loki!
Has anyone noticed that the "Loki's business model is flawed" arguments are mututally exclusive?
Either it's "Loki's business model is flawed because Linux users are used to not paying for software" or "Loki's business model is flawed because people who like to play games have already bought the Windows version".
Well, I'm willing to bet that people who have never used or bought software for a proprietary OS are in the minority of Linux users. And for those who have used a proprietary OS, it seems like the serious gamers amongst them maintain a Windows partition so they can play Windows games when they're released instead of waiting for a Linux port. In other words, they are accustomed to buying proprietary software.
So it seems that the only real flaw in Loki's business model is that their core audience is too impatient to wait for a Linux version.
Jay (=