Curt Schilling's 38 Studios Struggling Financially

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Curt Schilling's 38 Studios Struggling Financially

Posted by Soulskill on Friday May 18, 2012 @06:46AM from the welcome-to-the-big-leagues dept.

medv4380 writes "38 Studios, run by Curt Schilling, is having a hard time paying its bills and employees. The gaming community hasn't been happy with the company since the issue with an Online Pass for Single Player Content, which we discussed previously. Now, 38 Studios has bounced a check intended as a payment on its $75 million loan from the state of Rhode Island. If the company defaults, Rhode Island taxpayers will have to cover the loan and interest, which could total nearly $100 million."

158 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

who? by X0563511 · 2012-05-18 06:50 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Why do we care about this?

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
1. Re:who? by bmo · 2012-05-18 06:52 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Curt Schilling.
  Mr. Bloody Sock himself.
  You need to get out of your basement once in a while.
  --
  BMO
2. Re:who? by sunderland56 · 2012-05-18 06:56 · Score: 2
  
  A little bit of ketchup goes a long, long way.
3. Re:who? by chispito · 2012-05-18 06:56 · Score: 2
  
  Video games matter to a lot of nerds. Also, some nerds live in Rhode Island. Or are Red Sox fans. Really, there are a lot of angles here. I'm surprised you didn't think of any of them yourself.
  
  --
  The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
4. Re:who? by 0123456 · 2012-05-18 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  It might help if the summary mentioned some games they'd produced, so we'd know whether to care.
5. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  Only one game. Amalur. Came out a few months ago. Got good reviews.
6. Re:who? by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-05-18 07:17 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  You need to get out of your basement once in a while.
  Isn't this really the sort of knowledge gained by spending more time in the basement?
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
7. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  I have no idea. Who is this guy? Why is he notable? What games has his company made? What is this "bloody sock" nonsense that people are referring to? This isn't someone with the notability of Sid Meier or Sean Connery, yet people are talking about him like he's some household name.
8. Re:who? by paiute · 2012-05-18 07:47 · Score: 2
  
  Curt Schilling: 216 MLB wins
  Sean Connery: 0 MLB wins
  
  --
  If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
9. Re:who? by Rogue+Haggis+Landing · 2012-05-18 08:00 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  You need to get out of your basement once in a while.
  
  Isn't this really the sort of knowledge gained by spending more time in the basement?
  Schilling's Bloody Sock is one of the most famous incidents in American sports in the 21st century, and occurred during the most-remembered playoff series in baseball of the last few decades. Lots of people who aren't basement dwellers know all about it.
  
  A basement dweller hears Schilling's name and remembers that only 4.9% of the runs that Schilling allowed over his career were unearned, which is the lowest percentage for any pitcher with a long career. We, er, *they* know that this means that ERA undervalues Schilling, because preventing unearned runs is a skill -- you do it by striking out batters, not walking anyone, and getting batters to hit fly balls rather than ground balls.
  
  Basement dwellers, and a lot of other people, also know that Schilling has been a very outspoken conservative proponent of small government for many years. He'd say that a free-spending government corrupts the market, corrupts individuals, and leads to lots of waste. I guess he just went out and proved himself right!
  
  Now if you'll excuse me, Mom says that lunch is ready. Hope it isn't PB&J again!
10. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  And /. cares about MLB because...?
  Baseball is just about the most boring sport one can subject oneself too. Curling is faster paced and, more importantly, over sooner.
11. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:12 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  A basement dweller hears Schilling's name and remembers that only 4.9% of the runs that Schilling allowed over his career were unearned, which is the lowest percentage for any pitcher with a long career. We, er, *they* know that this means that ERA undervalues Schilling, because preventing unearned runs is a skill -- you do it by striking out batters, not walking anyone, and getting batters to hit fly balls rather than ground balls.
  Yeah, that's way more useful than being able to identify the classes of various starships.
12. Re:who? by binarylarry · 2012-05-18 08:16 · Score: 2
  
  How about: As a successful major league baseball player, he's banged more ladies than Captain Kirk.
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
13. Re:who? by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 08:38 · Score: 1
  
  Basement dwellers, and a lot of other people, also know that Schilling has been a very outspoken conservative proponent of small government for many years. He'd say that a free-spending government corrupts the market, corrupts individuals, and leads to lots of waste. I guess he just went out and proved himself right!
  This stuff about this person is all news to me, as I don't waste my time watching the idiotic and non-athletic children's game masquerading as a "sport" called baseball. However, I have noticed that most people, high-profile or not, who claim to be proponents of "small government" are generally liars or hypocrites, who will happily suck on the government teat any time they have an opportunity to. Defense contractors, for instance, are full of people claiming to be "small-government conservatives", yet they're all happily get overpaid for BS work courtesy the US taxpayer.
14. Re:who? by Jesus_666 · 2012-05-18 08:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Of course, Slashdotters who aren't from the United States will be hard-pressed to even name a baseball team*, will wonder why unearned runs aren't prevented by the referee and will wonder what a French New Age pop band has to do with sports. Baseball and American football, while big in the states, are entirely obscure in much of the rest of the world.
  
  * Well, I know that there is a team called the "Red Socks" but I have no idea whether it's a baseball or football team, nor do I care about it enough to ask Wikipedia.
  
  --
  USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
15. Re:who? by david.given · 2012-05-18 08:49 · Score: 2
  
  Apparently it's really popular in South Korea, too. Go figure.
  We also have it here in the UK; although we call it 'rounders', and it's usually played only by little girls.
16. Re:who? by toriver · 2012-05-18 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  And as a failed, state-backed video game company executive? Welcome to the world of "what have you done lately, not ages ago".
17. Re:who? by skids · 2012-05-18 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, Sports Geeks. Gotta love them. It takes a lot of talent to turn what is normally a social bridge into a social liability.
  
  --
  Someone had to do it.
18. Re:who? by Xphile101361 · 2012-05-18 09:11 · Score: 1
  
  This quote made my day
19. Re:who? by artor3 · 2012-05-18 09:11 · Score: 1
  
  So apparently Japan, Taiwan, Korea, the Philippines, and almost all of Latin America don't count. And to think, Europeans think Americans are insular...
20. Re:who? by Mattcelt · 2012-05-18 09:23 · Score: 2
  
  Curt Schilling: 216 MLB wins
  Sean Connery: 007 wins
  Fixed.
21. Re:who? by Jesus_666 · 2012-05-18 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  I said "much of the rest of the world", not "the entire rest of the world". I know that baseball is popular in certain parts of asia but that doesn't change the fact that in large parts of the world no one will know a baseball player even if he is a household name in places where baseball is celebrated.
  
  --
  USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
22. Re:who? by Jesus_666 · 2012-05-18 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  To be honest I pretty much only know the name from hearing it in movies or series (usually in relation with some character being a Red Sox fan even though they apparently never win, IIRC) so I wasn't sure about the spelling. I figured I must have had confused them with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
  
  And for the record, I'm from Germany and I don't give a shit about soccer, as well. That should serve to illustrate how I don't care about sports at all, given that most Germans are extremely enthusiastic about soccer even if, just like Hollywood's version of the Red Sox, we never win.
  
  --
  USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
23. Re:who? by artor3 · 2012-05-18 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  One would be hard pressed to come up with a story that is interesting to the whole world. Honestly, even setting aside the baseball angle, would your average Russian or Indian care about the bankruptcy of a small American video game shop?
24. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 09:36 · Score: 0
  
  I don't waste my time watching the idiotic and non-athletic children's game masquerading as a "sport" called baseball.
  Troll much
25. Re:who? by Rogue+Haggis+Landing · 2012-05-18 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  A basement dweller hears Schilling's name and remembers that only 4.9% of the runs that Schilling allowed over his career were unearned, which is the lowest percentage for any pitcher with a long career. We, er, *they* know that this means that ERA undervalues Schilling, because preventing unearned runs is a skill -- you do it by striking out batters, not walking anyone, and getting batters to hit fly balls rather than ground balls.
  
  Yeah, that's way more useful than being able to identify the classes of various starships.
  Of course it's not at all useful, which is the great beauty of it. Baseball probably has more nerd fans than any other American sport, in large part because it is an incredible generator of numerical data. Just look at Schilling's page at Baseball Reference. Look at all of those beautiful numbers!
  
  A baseball game is largely a series of discrete events with a relatively limited number of possible outcomes. A typical baseball game has maybe 250-300 pitches thrown in it, each one of which has a measurable outcome that can be described in a relatively small number of ways. Almost every plate appearance results in one of these 27 outcomes. We have box scores recording most or all of this information going back to 1918, and various more basic levels of data back to 1871.
  
  You can probably see where this is leading. Lots of data compiled over many years plus a relatively simple array of outcomes means that baseball is extremely well suited to the statistically inclined. There is a vast well of data to mine, you can create mathematical models of the game relatively easily, and, most importantly, many of these models do a decent job of describing what actually occurs on the field. And so now we have the vast and ever-expanding field of Sabermetrics, full of wonderful things like minor league equivalencies and extensive studies of the effects of a catcher's ability to "frame" a pitch. It's even possible to be a knowledgeable baseball fan and *never* watch a game or listen to one on the radio, but instead just look at the numbers every day. Almost like in The Matrix.
  
  Compare this to other team sports, like football (either kind) or basketball. In them, numerous people are involved in every play and you have no good way of recording this in a way you can put on a spreadsheet. You can watch a soccer game and see that the goal was scored because a player who never touched the ball made a great run that confused the defense. But it's very difficult to record this information in a form that is friendly to data analysis. Or think of American football -- how do you make a good statistical record of the play of an offensive lineman? It's very difficult. In baseball, the fundamental interaction is between the pitcher throwing the ball and the batter trying to hit it. It's almost binary, and everything else on the field is vastly less important. It's a game for numbers, it's a game for nerds.
26. Re:who? by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 09:42 · Score: 2
  
  No, it's an honest opinion, and probably shared by most everyone outside the USA. Are you some moronic baseball fan or something?
  Honestly, watching paint dry is more exciting than that "sport".
27. Re:who? by Jesus_666 · 2012-05-18 10:21 · Score: 1
  
  Would your average Slashdotter? This story is interesting for a reason. I am led to believe it is because 38 Studios used launch DLC to get around the first-sale doctrine, not because the CEO was apparently a reknowned baseball player at some point. The first-sale doctrine getting undermined is interesting to non-American Slashdotters because when companies get away with such nonsense in the States they will invariably try it elsewhere, too. American sports have no impact on my life; launch DLC does.
  
  Now, the summary also failed to mention the first-sale doctrine thing; I had to find that out through the related stories. But that's just the summary being badly written.
  
  --
  USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
28. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:17 · Score: 0
  
  I said "much of the rest of the world", not "the entire rest of the world". I know that baseball is popular in certain parts of asia but that doesn't change the fact that in large parts of the world no one will know a baseball player even if he is a household name in places where baseball is celebrated.
  It's big in North America, South America, and Asia. Total population of around 1 billion people. So that puts it behind: Association Football, Basketball, and maybe Cricket. The fact that you don't give a shit about it doesn't mean anything.
29. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:30 · Score: 0
  
  Baseball's popularity has declined much in Japan. Soccer is much more popular now, and professional baseball is really only something that middle-aged men and above follow.
30. Re:who? by arobadog · 2012-05-18 11:31 · Score: 2
  
  Baseball is very popular is Latin and South America. It also has quite a following in Japan and South Korea. As well as Canada. There are a significant number of people outside USA that like Baseball.
  
  --
  ...moving very slowly and winning footraces with smug satisfaction.
31. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  If he was such a hotshot sports player, you'd think he would be able to pay the 75 million dollars out of his pocket.
32. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 12:06 · Score: 0
  
  One would be hard pressed to come up with a story that is interesting to the whole world. Honestly, even setting aside the baseball angle, would your average Russian or Indian care about the bankruptcy of a small American video game shop?
  Many people will have heard of one of the many
  yellow submarines but few will have heard of the orange submarine.
33. Re:who? by spinkham · 2012-05-18 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  It's vaguely interesting to me because he used to be my aunt and uncle's next door neighbor in Kennet Square, PA. He seemed to be a nice guy, but his bulldogs were a bit over the top.
  I heard he played some stick-ball game or something also, but I must admit I don't care about that very much...
  
  --
  Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
34. Re:who? by artor3 · 2012-05-18 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  The first sale doctrine thing had nothing to do with the company's failure. The game sold well (though it probably would have sold better had it not been sandwiched between Skyrim and Diablo). The reason the company is failing is because Schilling took on huge amounts of debt, and missed his original release target by two years.
  The moral of this story, if there is one, is that you shouldn't loan money to capricious millionaires to help them fund their dream projects.
35. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 15:20 · Score: 0
  
  They're similar but not the same thing. They derive from similar bat-and-ball games, with Baseball actually pre-dating Rounders. Another baseball-type game is "Welsh Baseball" or "British Baseball."
36. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 15:22 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, it's really terrible when you go to an American web site and they occasionally bring up a topic that isn't of general interest to Europe.
37. Re:who? by HornWumpus · 2012-05-19 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  And they play cricket thought the former British empire (excepting the USA). Doesn't mean the GP isn't correct about both sports.
  I'd rather watch grass grow.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
38. Re:who? by bmo · 2012-05-19 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Baseball probably has more nerd fans than any other American sport
  Stephen Jay Gould has written more on baseball than any other palaeontologist alive or dead. You should read his essay on the demise of the .400 hitter.
  --
  BMO
39. Re:who? by Grishnakh · 2012-05-19 12:48 · Score: 1
  
  I've never played Cricket or watched it really, but it seems like it'd be a fun game to play with some friends, much like baseball (or better yet softball). It'd be a good game for children or teenagers. But for watching professionals do it in a giant stadium? No way. I'm not totally opposed to all spectator sports; once in a while I find a good game of hockey quite entertaining. But that's a sport that requires real skill and athleticism, not just brute strength, and there's actually a lot going on during a hockey game, unlike a baseball game. How baseball ever became a popular spectator sport I have no idea.
40. Re:who? by arth1 · 2012-05-19 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  I've never played Cricket or watched it really, but it seems like it'd be a fun game to play with some friends, much like baseball (or better yet softball). It'd be a good game for children or teenagers.
  Not in the US, it wouldn't. See, the cricket ball is hard. Harder than a baseball. It has a wooden core. People die from being hit by them. If Americans can't let children or teenagers play with real baseballs, cricket is right out.
  (That said, I'm sure there is a soft version of cricket too, but it will have less to do with cricket than softball vs baseball. Without the hard heavy ball, glances will be near impossible, and bowling the wicket a very different ball game.)
41. Re:who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-19 23:49 · Score: 0
  
  "Schilling's Bloody Sock is one of"
  Shouldn't that be Red Sox incident?
  Seems to be a lot of fuss for a game of rounders...
42. Re:who? by robsku · 2012-05-22 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  There is also similar game in Finland called "Pesäpallo" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pes%C3%A4pallo ), and is known as "Finnish Baseball" in english - sometimes it's referred as Finlands national sport, but really does not get even close to ice hockey in popularity so I don't really understand why (apart from it being invented here).
  
  --
  In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
43. Re:who? by robsku · 2012-05-22 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  * Well, I know that there is a team called the "Red Socks" but I have no idea whether it's a baseball or football team, nor do I care about it enough to ask Wikipedia.
  There's no such team in the NFL or the MLB. However, the Boston Red Sox are a professional baseball team (MLB). So, the one little fact you knew about sports was wrong. That's a shame.
  Is it not often *called* just "the Red Socks"?
  
  --
  In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
44. Re:who? by Fjandr · 2012-05-25 19:50 · Score: 1
  
  Eh, given how hard it is to actually change the system, maybe it's easier to just drain it dry. :)
Schilling. by jonnythan · 2012-05-18 06:51 · Score: 4, Informative

Jesus people.
It's Schilling.
1. Re:Schilling. by fdskfs · 2012-05-18 06:59 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Hey, it just continues the slashdot trend of calling anyone you don't agree with a shill!
2. Re:Schilling. by seepho · 2012-05-18 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  You've clearly never played beer-league softball.
3. Re:Schilling. by sunderland56 · 2012-05-18 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  Shill (noun)
  2. a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, [...]
  So Schilling is a shill. Are you sure the spelling is a mistake? He is, in fact, shilling.
4. Re:Schilling. by h4rr4r · 2012-05-18 07:14 · Score: 1
  
  That might work, I still contend that watching it would be boring though.
5. Re:Schilling. by seepho · 2012-05-18 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  I enjoy it, but my team is bad enough that I usually get drunk and heckle outfielders by the time the game ends. Then again, I also enjoyed watching curling when it was on TV in 2010. Shuster's a bum.
6. Re:Schilling. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:18 · Score: 0
  
  It is a different one to the one who creates the best cdrecord application for *NIX (Which the useless Linux community broke when they forked it).
7. Re:Schilling. by geminidomino · 2012-05-18 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, because derping around with fucking access keys for a CLI utility is such an efficient use of time...
8. Re:Schilling. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  Schlax bro
9. Re:Schilling. by scot4875 · 2012-05-18 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  No, not anybody you don't agree with. High UID accounts with very few posts that mostly happen to be first posts and a fairly predictable set of talking points.
  Just like you.
  --Jeremy
  
  --
  Jesus was a liberal
10. Re:Schilling. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-20 14:15 · Score: 0
  
  Schill (noun)
  2. a rich person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, [...]
so he bounced a check.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 06:52 · Score: 0

...foreclose on the sucker, and sell the shit off. should be a no brainer to me
1. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Darth+Snowshoe · 2012-05-18 07:36 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  See that's the problem. He took, how much, $75 million, of the state of Rhode Island's money (as a loan.) And spent it. It's gone. If you seize the company and put it up at auction, all you're going to get is a bunch of scratched-up aeron chairs and three-year-old computers. The state is out the money.
2. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 08:47 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I honestly don't see the problem here. What was the state of RI doing giving venture capital to a start-up business in the first place? Most new businesses fail, so VC is basically a big gamble; you're hoping the company is going to take off and you, being part-owner, will make a ton of money, the way the Facebook owners have done. Giving a loan to a start-up is utterly stupid, and normally it's only done when the company is going to use it to buy a lot of capital equipment, which of course becomes collateral and the bank can seize in the case of default. You'll never find a bank willing to loan you millions to fund a start-up that doesn't have any significant capital equipment (or probably any start-up at all; it seems to me that most business loans are only given to companies that have already "started up" and are successfully operating, but want to grow and need capital equipment to do that; banks don't like to make loans without collateral).
  So again, I fail to see the problem. The people of RI were stupid in giving this company so much (or any) money with no collateral except Aeron chairs, and were stupid to be in the business of angel investing. They deserve to lose their money for their stupidity. Maybe next time they'll do a better job electing leaders. At least the federal government investing in firms like Solyndra makes some kind of sense: Solyndra had tons of capital equipment (you can buy some of it on Ebay right now), and its business was something that seemed to be of genuine national importance (developing alternative energy technology). But a video game company? WTF? Not only is that not important, it's not even something we have a shortage of. There's tons of video game companies out there.
3. Re:so he bounced a check.... by toriver · 2012-05-18 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  Because he promised them he would create lots of jobs in the fastest-growing entertainment industry, maybe even making them believe the RI could become the next Austin for game companies.
4. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 09:26 · Score: 0
  
  The problem is that the deal was done behind closed doors in secret contracts. The "people" of Rhode island had nothing to do with this arrangement, but will be on the hook for it.
5. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Darth+Snowshoe · 2012-05-18 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  > The people of RI were stupid in giving this company so much (or any) money with no collateral
  > except Aeron chairs, and were stupid to be in the business of angel investing.
  That's a problem if you are one of the people in Rhode Island, or one of the people who Schilling employed (now holding a rubber check), or somebody that extended credit or resources to a (now broke) startup, or even one of the people who bought a great computer game that now has no support or upgrade path. Being stupid is not some kind of big flag that says "come exploit me, I deserve to have bad things happen to me". It's not a game, its people's money and livelihoods.
  Maybe what you instead mean to say is "I fail to see the problem -- for me." Or maybe "I have no empathy for anybody that does anything I wouldn't, in hindsight, do."
6. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  Anyone can make claims like that for almost any business. "We'll create lots of jobs!!" That doesn't mean the government should be funding every harebrained private business venture out there. It makes some sense if the industry, regardless of any jobs it creates, is of strategic national importance (e.g., having viable electric vehicles would greatly reduce or even eliminate our dependence on foreign oil, so even if they were built all by robots it'd be strategically important to the nation and the economy to have this capability). There's nothing remotely of national importance about making video games.
  And again, there's no shortage of games or game companies. What's RI going to "invest" in next? Some fast-talker who says he's going to build a new social networking website? Sounds like RI would be dumb enough to pour a bunch of money into that, just because Facebook has been highly successful.
7. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't matter; the people behind those closed doors were duly elected by the people of Rhode Island. They're on the hook for their own stupid decisions in the voting booth. Hopefully next time they won't make that mistake again, but I wouldn't be too sure.
  Everyone has the government they deserve.
8. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that people need to be responsible for their actions. Obviously, sometimes bad things happen, and that's why good societies have safety nets, etc., but overall the people of society are responsible, collectively, for choosing their own leadership, which runs the society and makes decisions on their behalf and for their welfare.
  If the people of a region are too stupid to pick good leadership, and instead pick incompetent or corrupt leadership, what are you going to do about it? What is your proposed solution for the problem? Eliminate elections and establish a dictatorship, hoping for a benevolent one? Allow some foreign power to invade and take over? Beg for some friendly and intelligent aliens to come run the place?
  Sure, it's sad if a whole region full of people are too dumb to pick non-corrupt leadership, but if they do, what can you do about it? Wringing your hands isn't going to help the situation.
  Moreover, we in the US have been doing a lot of this stupid stuff lately, and not just in RI. We keep picking horrible leadership. That's our fault, and if we want better leadership, then we need to start making better choices. But these days, I don't think American society is capable of it any more, so we're getting the government we deserve.
9. Re:so he bounced a check.... by eonlabs · 2012-05-18 12:31 · Score: 1
  
  This could be a success actually. Not for RI, but for the gaming community. I have to wonder how much $ and effort went into handling the flack from deciding to require take Ubisoft's approach to DRM (online and yes if they can help it), without having feet to stand on first. I wonder how many smaller capital firms and individual loaners are also listening to the band play on. $75 Million is not a small ship. Thinking about dusting and polishing the old shovel for this dig.
  
  --
  I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
10. Re:so he bounced a check.... by theshowmecanuck · 2012-05-18 14:15 · Score: 1
  
  Rhode Island... so doesn't that mean he borrowed mafia money? They're going to chop him up into little pieces and introduce him to Jimmy Hoffa. Now how you doin? All set?
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
11. Re:so he bounced a check.... by bryan1945 · 2012-05-18 15:27 · Score: 1
  
  Once again, that is what VCs do. What, you expect him to tell them "This company has a 5-10% chance of ever making money at best."? Like grishnak said above, government has no business in going after risky ventures. The people should be angry at the government who approved the deal.
  
  --
  Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
12. Re:so he bounced a check.... by bryan1945 · 2012-05-18 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  I can feel empathy for the employees, they are in the worst position. People who bought the game, they're out $50, so it sucks but it isn't that big a deal; it's a tank of gas. Everyone else that put money into the company knew it was a risk, and the word risk means it may not go your way. I don't need hindsight to know not to invest money in a startup, because to do so you just write off that money the second you cut the check. You're playing the lottery on getting any money back. If there was malfeasance, that's an entirely different story.
  
  --
  Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
13. Re:so he bounced a check.... by drkstr1 · 2012-05-19 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  I always take a bit of issue with this whole "we get the government we deserve" thing. What if the system was designed so that the only choices we have are horrible (for the majority of us at least)? The illusion of choice we have is false, and no amount of voting will fix that. The only thing that will fix this is activism, and, well... I guess we get the government we deserve then. :(
  
  --
  Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
14. Re:so he bounced a check.... by Grishnakh · 2012-05-19 16:43 · Score: 1
  
  That's what revolutions are for. If your government really sucks that bad, then you need to take to the streets and force a change; just ask the people of Tunisia.
So close by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-05-18 06:53 · Score: 1

They should have had a deeper crafting system, and fixed some of the oddities. I would have bought ALL the DLC if they had done that.
Seriously, my smithing is maxed out to 10, and I'm getting bottom rung components when I break up top of the line armor and weapons? It's like I became a smithing god when crafting a weapon, but when it's time to disassemble something, I turn into a three year old with a mallet.
The detection skill was a good idea, though.
1. Re:So close by PerfectionLost · 2012-05-18 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  I thought the demo looked pretty neat. That said, I didn't feel like paying AAA pricing for the game. If it was 40 I would have been all over it while I waited for D3.
Bad Investment --- again by cellocgw · 2012-05-18 06:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

Is there ever going to be a time when the pols realize that throwing massive tax breaks at corporations is a bad idea for the state/city/country they're supposed to be representing?
And BTW everyone in MA and NY knows about Schilling, the bloody sock, the piano in the lake, and a record-setting choke which led to the end of an 86-year curse.

--
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
1. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  Is there ever going to be a time when the pols realize that throwing massive tax breaks at corporations is a bad idea for the state/city/country they're supposed to be representing?
  When it starts being a bad idea for them.
  Which will be right after we ban lobbying and right before we implement punitive measures for such actions.
2. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Bigby · 2012-05-18 07:35 · Score: 1
  
  Tax breaks are fine, when done so in an unbiased manner. However, when they favor a specific corporation, a specific person, or people over corporations, or corporations over people, then you will get circumvention or entities taking advantage of the situation. Simply remove the bias in law.
3. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:48 · Score: 0
  
  Tax breaks work, there are countless examples. I'd list some but I'm not quite bored enough...it's intellectually dishonest to claim that they never work when surely you can think of dozens of examples where they have.
4. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Ihmhi · 2012-05-18 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  Is there ever going to be a time when the pols realize that throwing massive tax breaks at corporations is a bad idea for the state/city/country they're supposed to be representing?
  Even if there is, it won't work.
  Pennsylvania won't give tax breaks? I'll set up my company in New York!
  East Coast won't give tax breaks? I'll set up my company in the Midwest!
  U.S.won't give tax breaks? I'll set up my company in Canada!
  Western Hemisphere won't give tax breaks? I'll set up my company in Laos!
  
  --
  Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
5. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:23 · Score: 0
  
  It's an empty threat. Let the other states go bankrupt and deal with 15% income tax for a while.
6. Re:Bad Investment --- again by rogerz · 2012-05-20 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  Um, the main issue here was not a tax break, but a government loan guarantee. At least as bad, if not worse, since the moral hazard is blatantly obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense: Heads, we pay back the loan and keep all of the profits for our shareholders; the citizens of the sponsoring state get bupkis. Tails we declare bankruptcy, and the citizens of the sponsoring state get stuck with the loss from the loan.
  
  --
  If humans are mostly water, and beer is mostly water, then humans must be mostly beer.
7. Re:Bad Investment --- again by Fjandr · 2012-05-25 20:07 · Score: 1
  
  Which will be right after we ban lobbying and right before we implement punitive measures for such actions.
  I'm pretty sure the torches and pitchforks it'll take to implement the above changes would qualify as a preceding form of it being a bad idea for them. Those changes would never see the light of day without something big at stake for said pols.
Uh Oh by MrVictor · 2012-05-18 06:54 · Score: 0

Quick, someone tell Curt to auction off his bloody sock!
1. Re:Uh Oh by Jon_S · 2012-05-18 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  It was in a display case in cooperstown last time I visited there.
2. Re:Uh Oh by MrVictor · 2012-05-18 07:33 · Score: 2
  
  I wonder if he'll pull an OJ and try to break in and steal it.
When the shit hits the fan... by bmo · 2012-05-18 06:54 · Score: 1

This is what it looks like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BZ_6PkeO_g8
"It's like you're running away."
--
BMO
Kingdom of....what, exactly? by raydobbs · 2012-05-18 06:58 · Score: 1

Sounds like anyone who avoided their game dodged a serious bullet, and now this is the logical result. Learn the lesson Mr. Shilling - you brought this entirely upon yourself.
1. Re:Kingdom of....what, exactly? by 19thNervousBreakdown · 2012-05-18 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the combat in the game is one of the most fun action-RPG combat systems I've ever played. The story was also fairly interesting, and more mature than most.
  I ended up clicking past the dialog like I usually do, because good for a videogame means "absolutely fucking terrible" by literary standards, so I lost the story, and the extremely limited enemy variety (there were about 10 monsters total when you discount reskinnings) meant that the combat, while really, really good, also lost its charm, so I never ended up finishing it, but it was far from a "serious bullet".
  All in all though, if you're a videogame person, I'd say it's worth $20 easy just to try out the really neat combat system that they should totally tack onto one of the oodles of games that needs a fun one.
  
  --
  <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
ya by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-05-18 07:05 · Score: 1

I was sympathetic until I got to the Rhode Island loan guarantee.
Which reminds me -- for a proper response I need a popcorn icon. Get with the modern, Slashdot!

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Hypocrite (n): by American+AC+in+Paris · 2012-05-18 07:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

"There can be no question our country is in the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes. I also think there can be no question that it falls on us, the individuals, to find a way out of our own personal crisis." - Curt Schilling
It well and truly stinks that this man was ever allowed within ten feet of public funding in the first place. Even more confusing, though, is that he even pursued public funding in the first place.
It's enough to make one think that he never really believed the anti-gubmit pablum he was spouting in the first place.

--
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
1. Re:Hypocrite (n): by h4rr4r · 2012-05-18 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  Why is that?
  All of these anti-government types are like that. They love to suck that government teat and use all the services it provides, when it comes time to pay the tax bill that is when they start to complain.
2. Re:Hypocrite (n): by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:16 · Score: 0
  
  I think if you investigate the facts of this, you will see that you have mischaracterized his stance. Also, RI approached him, not the other way around.
3. Re:Hypocrite (n): by American+AC+in+Paris · 2012-05-18 07:36 · Score: 2
  
  From the Wayback Machine:
  
  At a news conference after the board meeting, Schilling said he’s been negotiating exclusively with Rhode Island for the last four months, and denied any intent to play one state off another. “This is a partnership,” he said. Under the terms of the deal, the state will issue $75 million in bonds, which would be purchased by private investors. 38 Studios is responsible for repaying the money, but if it can’t, the state would be responsible.
  Regardless of who approached whom, Mr. Shilling was clearly willing to enter into a government-guaranteed loan, and spent several months securing the deal. If I'm mischaracterizing Mr. Shillings' political beliefs, I'm happy to be directed to a more thorough examination of his beliefs.
  That said, given Mr. Shilling's political background and positions, I would indeed be surprised to learn he believes that government should take an active role in funding and guaranteeing loans to private enterprise, on principle.
  
  --
  Obliteracy: Words with explosions
4. Re:Hypocrite (n): by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  It's why "hypocrisy" and "cowardice" are the cornerstones of conservative 'thought' patterns.
5. Re:Hypocrite (n): by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 09:42 · Score: 0
  
  I believe people shouldn't just give their money to random people for no reason. However, if someone wants to give me money at random for no reason, I won't object. I don't see that as hypocrisy, and I think you have the same position yourself. It's perfectly consistent to say "I believe this activity should be illegal. It's not currently illegal, so I'll engage in it."
6. Re:Hypocrite (n): by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:18 · Score: 1
  
  "I believe this activity should be illegal. It's not currently illegal, so I'll engage in it."
  Aha! So that's how Republicans can rationalize all of their anti-gay stances.
7. Re:Hypocrite (n): by rogerz · 2012-05-20 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  Nice generalization. Of course, most of us "anti-government" types, are not actually "anti government"! Instead, we favor a government limited to its proper functions, none of which involve the initiation of force against innocents.
  And, to anticipate your brilliant retort - yes, I will take back whatever measly social security payments that remain when it is my turn, since the money was taken from me without my consent for all of those years. I will also use the public roads, which I never asked to be built, and the public schools, for which I have paid my share - against my will - many times over. I will do this knowing that I would have been more than happy had the government never got involved in any of these illegitimate functions, and that the free enterprise replacements for these would have been much more efficiently created and managed, had not the government monopolized these in the only way monopolies can actually exist - by the threat of the gun.
  All of which has absolutely nothing to do with OP. Shilling actively lobbied in favor of the loan, showing he did not disagree with the notion on principle. He was/is a hypocrite.
  
  --
  If humans are mostly water, and beer is mostly water, then humans must be mostly beer.
8. Re:Hypocrite (n): by Uberbah · 2012-05-25 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Nice generalization. Of course, most of us "anti-government" types, are not actually "anti government"! Instead, we favor a government limited to its proper functions, none of which involve the initiation of force against innocents.
  Except it's usually an accurate generalization, as wanting less government for the sake of less government is as sensible as wanting maximum government for the sake of it. That and the tendency of it to merely be an argument against spending one doesn't like. You never see conservatives complaining about how Social Security and the Air Force are unconstitutional, because they don't fall in the "strict" list of enumerated powers given to Congress.
The real story by MyLongNickName · 2012-05-18 07:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

Paying companies to relocation is a win for owners a loss for working stiffs. In the best scenario, tax payers in the new community get the benefit of more jobs at the expense of subsidizing millionaires. The old community losts the jobs the new community gains.
In this case, not only did the new community not gain jobs in the long term, but they are now responsible for $100M in loans. Brilliant job.
I like free markets. I have government in bed with big business.

--
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
1. Re:The real story by bmo · 2012-05-18 07:37 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  An you know what the real irony is here?
  Curt Schilling is a full-blown teabagger.
  --
  BMO
2. Re:The real story by MyLongNickName · 2012-05-18 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Curt Schilling is a full-blown teabagger.
  Well, the whole Boston thing made that obvious :)
  And yea... people are hypocrites, film at 11:00...
  
  --
  See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
3. Re:The real story by DaveGod · 2012-05-18 11:56 · Score: 1
  
  Ironically perhaps, in relatively-socialist (relatively) Europe the EU has to approve any significant "state aid"
  The primary reasoning given is it distorts competition between companies (thus ultimately harming the consumer), but also recognised in the criteria - and what most often causes us to hear about it - is distorting competition between member states.
  If a company relocates from A to B just because state aid is offered, there's a clear implication that the combined benefit gained by country B + company is less than the loss to country A. The company has to be compensated for losing some kind of natural advantage present in country A, so it must be inefficient.
  That's not to say state aid is necessarily bad. If it was a new company that wouldn't otherwise exist, it's actually pretty easy to make a good case for state funding. Maybe harder in US with the lower taxes, but here in UK, say 75% of the loan was going onto payroll for new jobs, well ~25% of that rolls straight back to the government in payroll taxes so they make ~19% hidden return right off the bat. More than half the money left in employees pockets will be spent on goods attracting VAT at 20% so there's another hidden return of ~6%. Oh and they avoided paying unemployment and some benefits, lets assume that would have cost them around 10% of the company's payroll so further hidden return of ~7%. Before you even start thinking about the jobs for suppliers the government gets back something like a third of their money just through taxes. If two other state-aid projects merely make enough other money to repay the loans and nothing more, a third project can completely fail and still government breaks even. If a project not only repays it's loans but keeps going for several years, the return can be astronomical - total payroll taxes make corporation tax receipts (even when completely fair, fully paid with no dodging) look like chump change.
  But of course, if it's a relocation, all those returns being generated by the new state are being lost by the old state - they're merely displaced. Also, if these "new" jobs result in a different company being unable to compete and go under, again the apparent gains are merely displacement.
  This is BEFORE we start thinking about whether it's fair that companies receive taxpayers' money, or whether it's fair that one company receives this advantage whilst another does not.
4. Re:The real story by MyLongNickName · 2012-05-18 14:20 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the insight. In some ways, Europe is ahead of us in understanding how free markets should work.
  
  --
  See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
No VC by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:08 · Score: 0

There was a good reason Curt couldn't get any VC funding
But I'm sure Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri has a lot of experience funding tech startups...
1. Re:No VC by Sez+Zero · 2012-05-18 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  But I'm sure Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri has a lot of experience funding tech startups...
  From TFA:
  
  Chafee opposed the loan guarantee as a candidate for governor.
2. Re:No VC by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:28 · Score: 0
  
  Current Gov Chafee opposed the loan, but Donald Carcieri was the Gov in 2010 and he pushed for it...
Solved by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:10 · Score: 0

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/story/2012-05-18/curt-schilling-38-studios-payment/55060556/1
FTA:
Gov. Lincoln Chafee (CHAY'fee) announced on Friday that the check from 38 Studios cleared.
1. Re:Solved by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:33 · Score: 0
  
  http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/story/2012-05-18/curt-schilling-38-studios-payment/55060556/1
  FTA:
  Gov. Lincoln Chafee (CHAY'fee) announced on Friday that the check from 38 Studios cleared.
  Yes, now Curt is in bed with the Providence mafia. There's only one profession that profits from being in bed with the Providence mafia - and it ain't video games...
2. Re:Solved by bmo · 2012-05-18 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  The Providence Mafia is a pale shadow of what it used to be.
  Luigi "Baby Shacks" Manocchio, the head of the mob, got sentenced to 66 months in prison last Friday. He's 84.
  Nobody knows what "Baby Shacks" actually means, btw.
  All the old ones that more or less knew what they were doing are dying out. The younger ones...not so bright.
  --
  BMO
3. Re:Solved by Grishnakh · 2012-05-18 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  All the old ones that more or less knew what they were doing are dying out. The younger ones...not so bright.
  That seems to be the case for most of the US population, not just mobsters.
As surprising as a Hollywood divorce by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:12 · Score: 4, Informative

All of us techies living in Mass. saw this coming. You had a sports celebrity non-businessman CEO on one side, and unsophisticated investors on the other who happened to be controlling $75 million of taxpayers' money. The agreement they signed pretty much compelled 38 Studios to build the payroll to an unsustainable level (since the state was trying to hoping to create a local tech industry) and thus burn money as fast as possible. Elementary budgeting and accounting skills were lacking.
1. Re:As surprising as a Hollywood divorce by couchslug · 2012-05-18 08:48 · Score: 1
  
  "unsophisticated investors" = dumbfuck jock sniffers.
  People who worship jocks deserve to get viciously exploited for being craven fools. The taxpayers get fucked, but they relentlessly vote in people who in a decent society would be broken on the wheel for corruption.
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
2. Re:As surprising as a Hollywood divorce by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 21:41 · Score: 0
  
  "unsophisticated investors" = dumbfuck jock sniffers.
  People who worship jocks deserve to get viciously exploited for being craven fools. The taxpayers get fucked, but they relentlessly vote in people who in a decent society would be broken on the wheel for corruption.
  Jobs was corrupt? I only ever heard of the parking in the disabled spot and the back dating of options which was wrong when everyone else did it but perfectly acceptable for "64K is enough".
Thank Goodness! by MogNuts · 2012-05-18 07:17 · Score: 4, Informative

All I can say is good riddance. I'm glad that a shitty game with an even shittier DRM practice is not rewarded. We should be happy about this.
Remember all the hub-bub that KoA was getting about even though it was single player you couldn't get 1/3 the game unless you purchased new? Yet all of a sudden, even though it's average score was a 7, it was getting rave or good comments all over every game sites message board. The astroturfing was so obvious and egregious. And the problem was, it was so prevalent and everywhere people actually genuinely believed it was a good game.
What pissed me off more though is that everyone was carrying torches the day before it was released about the DRM, and then "they just bent over and took it."
So I say good riddances and thank god. Because if that game sold well, you know damn well that would open the floodgates to needing online passes for single player games forever on...consoles!
Ugh.
1. Re:Thank Goodness! by Jackie_Chan_Fan · 2012-05-18 07:50 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  ... and then there was diablo 3.
  requires online and unique serial (non transferable) to play single player.
  Trust me, the rape never ended.
2. Re:Thank Goodness! by medv4380 · 2012-05-18 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  It was consensual Officer Bill. Last week Jackie came in and asked for KoA gave me money and I game him KoA. This week he came in asked for D3 and gave me money so I gave him D3. There was no rape involved. He actually asked for it. Others begged for it. I'm just their dealer. They know I lace with DRM.
3. Re:Thank Goodness! by Tharkkun · 2012-05-18 08:30 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  All I can say is good riddance. I'm glad that a shitty game with an even shittier DRM practice is not rewarded. We should be happy about this.
  Remember all the hub-bub that KoA was getting about even though it was single player you couldn't get 1/3 the game unless you purchased new? Yet all of a sudden, even though it's average score was a 7, it was getting rave or good comments all over every game sites message board. The astroturfing was so obvious and egregious. And the problem was, it was so prevalent and everywhere people actually genuinely believed it was a good game.
  What pissed me off more though is that everyone was carrying torches the day before it was released about the DRM, and then "they just bent over and took it."
  So I say good riddances and thank god. Because if that game sold well, you know damn well that would open the floodgates to needing online passes for single player games forever on...consoles!
  Ugh.
  Koa was an absolutely amazing game. The extra content was bound to a cd-key so present reselling used games. If you think resellers should be able to purchase used games for 10$, re-price them for $30-40 and take in double the profit compared to brand new game you're insane. I'd be pissed also if I was a publisher because you're dipping twice into the profits. Diablo 3. Not DRM. It's a online only game, period. Whether you make your session public or private is up to you but the game is played online. This was mad very clear over a year ago. DRM is designed to stop piracy. Always online is there to combat hackers and keep the Real Money Auction House legit. If you really think it's about piracy then you're delusional. Always online is going to become more and more common so you better suck it up now.
4. Re:Thank Goodness! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:41 · Score: 0
  
  I'm not a fan of the DRM crap either, but lets be fair here. The pass they included wasn't for 1/3 of KoA, it was for a short quest line that took maybe 2-3hours to complete. It was nothing really special or essential for the main story of the game. I wasn't happy about it, and I certainly wouldn't have bought the game had I known they were doing it, but lets not accuse them of preventing used game buyers from finishing the game just yet.
  
  As for KoA itself, I actually thought it was pretty good. Kind of like Fable, except way longer with a bunch more weapons. The main issue is that it was released fairly close to other high profile games. Lets be honest here, if you only had enough time/money for either Skyrim or KoA which would you choose? I think the sales numbers speak for themselves.
5. Re:Thank Goodness! by Nixoloco · 2012-05-18 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  All I can say is good riddance. I'm glad that a shitty game with an even shittier DRM practice is not rewarded. We should be happy about this.
  Have you actually even played Kingdoms of Amalur or are just ranting because of some stuff you read on the Internet? I have spent many hours playing and absolutely love it. It is quite the opposite of a "shitty" game.
  
  I played the console version, so I can't really speak of the DRM. It doesn't seem to have any more than any other console game. There is one quest (House of Valor) that is unlocked with a key you get when you buy it new, but you can get it as DLC. I bought it used for pretty cheap. Loved the game so much I didn't mind paying a bit for the one quest. The game has such a massive world that it is worth it and the action game play is fantastic. IMHO far superior game play than the Elder series. Then they released two new DLCs which are also massive new areas to explore and worth the cost to purchase.
6. Re:Thank Goodness! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:48 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, I don't see how anyone that likes action RPGs and actually played the game for a bit wouldn't love it (or at least like it a lot). It has a massive world and has wicked fun game play, alchemy, weapon crafting etc..
7. Re:Thank Goodness! by HapSlappy_2222 · 2012-05-18 08:50 · Score: 2
  
  If you think resellers should be able to purchase used games for 10$, re-price them for $30-40 and take in double the profit compared to brand new game you're insane.
  Uh, yeah.... then I'm insane. Or, at least, have an insane desire to be able to sell old stuff I don't use; perhaps on Craigslist or for store credit at a Gamestop clone. Whatever; it's my item, so it's my rules.
  
  Or, are YOU insane for thinking it's ok for products to be purchased once, and from that point on have absolutely zero (not depreciated... but ZERO) monetary value? Hmm. If I bought a lawnmower, but then moved to a place without grass, I guess I'd still be insane for wanting to sell my lawn mower to a store that re-sells used lawn mowers, yeah?
8. Re:Thank Goodness! by Nixoloco · 2012-05-18 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not a fan of the DRM crap either, but lets be fair here. The pass they included wasn't for 1/3 of KoA, it was for a short quest line that took maybe 2-3hours to complete. It was nothing really special or essential for the main story of the game. I wasn't happy about it, and I certainly wouldn't have bought the game had I known they were doing it, but lets not accuse them of preventing used game buyers from finishing the game just yet. As for KoA itself, I actually thought it was pretty good. Kind of like Fable, except way longer with a bunch more weapons. The main issue is that it was released fairly close to other high profile games. Lets be honest here, if you only had enough time/money for either Skyrim or KoA which would you choose? I think the sales numbers speak for themselves.
  I agree with you, except I don't like the gameplay in the Elder series. KoA has amazing game play and movement. It actually feels like an action game. The world is just so massive, that one locked quest (House of Valor) is miniscule. As you say, it isn't part of the main story line and it is far from 1/3. There are 100s of quests in the game.
9. Re:Thank Goodness! by beerdragoon · 2012-05-18 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  I'm all for bashing KoA because of the DRM, but a lot of people (myself included) actually liked the game. It has excellent action RPG combat and a gigantic world to explore with hundreds of quests to complete. Yes, the average rating wasn't in the 90% range, but most of the reviews were legitimately decent. If it weren't for the dick move on the DRM, I think a lot of people here might actually like this game.
10. Re:Thank Goodness! by hbar+squared · 2012-05-18 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  A third of the game? I believe it was ten quests and a crappy set of armor. And it isn't DRM, since it isn't required to play. Honestly, anyone who played this game long enough to enjoy the bonus material has earned it. Pick up a used copy, play it to completion, and then tell me that you really needed ten more quests.
11. Re:Thank Goodness! by _xeno_ · 2012-05-18 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  This has, strangely enough, next to nothing to do with Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning. 38 Studios didn't make that (exactly), they took an existing game that Big Huge Games was in the process of making and basically shoehorned their existing Amalur content into it.
  This is also why they're still losing money - they're trying to create a World of Warcraft killer, and they have nothing to show for it. Instead they had to buy another company's game and release it as their own.
  It's also unclear how much of the DRM included was done because 38 Studios wanted to and how much was done because EA insisted on it. Especially now that it's quite clear that 38 Studios was desperate to release anything, since they're circling the drain.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
12. Re:Thank Goodness! by MogNuts · 2012-05-19 03:51 · Score: 2
  
  Thank you. You couldn't have illustrated my points any better. You are the entire summation of what's wrong.
  So tell me, do you work for EA or 38 studios? Or did EA/38 hire an astroturfing firm to do the dirty work for them, and you are hired by them?
  Your first point: protection against double dipping. Did you miss the point that gamestop's revenue for used games is only 30% of its entire revenue. That 60 some percent is NEW sales? Guess you missed that.
  Point two: you said it yourself. Always online DOESN'T protect piracy. So why bring it up? And your point is even worse because it shows the truth: the only reason D3 did it was to make money off of YOUR work. YOUR grinding.
  Your last point: are you serious? You must work for one of these companies if your point is: "always online--everyone is doing it so suck it up." Really? Just wow. Always online is NOT acceptable, ever, unless it's completely unavoidable. "Hey, Ponzi schemes are all in the news now! Everyone is doing it. So what if people's entire life savings are gone. They're here--suck it up and take it!"
13. Re:Thank Goodness! by MogNuts · 2012-05-19 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Nixoloco, you are the only one who gets a pass on this because from your UID it doesn't seem like you're a paid astroturfer. So I'll give you your opinion. Not everyone likes the same games. For example, I loved the 2008 Alone in the Dark. Loved it. But the press gave it like a 3 or 5 IIRC.
  But fact is, the average for that game was a 70-75. So I can't give you a pass. It was a mediocre game and people knew it. But you're allowed a different opinion.
  And how can you argue about online passes on console SINGLE-player games? They are not acceptable--ever.
14. Re:Thank Goodness! by MogNuts · 2012-05-19 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  You're right. That's the problem. Blizzard knew we'd all complain, then take it up the ass anyway. They gambled. And I bet you then won already. If this was any other game, it would end up like Ubisoft and have sales for those games drop to almost nothing (that actually happened last quarter or year--forget when exactly).
  Problem is, it ruins it for everyone. Witness the copying of the extra $50 elite for BF3. Who just promised us they would never charge for map packs or charge for a stats service.
15. Re:Thank Goodness! by MogNuts · 2012-05-19 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  Requiring the user to buy a game new AND even worse require online activation for a SINGLE player game on a CONSOLE is never acceptable. Period. Full-stop.
16. Re:Thank Goodness! by robsku · 2012-05-22 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  Count me as insane as much as you like, but when you have a break from making love with Sony lawyers, please explain what you mean by "always online is there to combat hackers..." - maybe it's the insanity, but I don't understand, and yes, I believe it's very much about piracy and nothing else for parts where single player and private network gaming is artificially made to require "always online".
  ...but delusional/insane or not, I don't have to "suck up" anything - I have not and I will not buy games that require being online when there is no real need for it. I might buy a multiplayer game where official server is the only option and game server software is not available even for running in private network(s), but I dislike such practice and while possible, it's very unlikely that I ever actually will buy such games - I haven't so far.
  Voting with your feet/wallet is not "sucking it up", however saying that something is unfair and then bending over is - at least I have some respect for you as your comment does not indicate you being such a hypocrite.
  
  --
  In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
Bailout hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:22 · Score: 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQRxxd74yCk
spouting out unneeded advice by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 07:28 · Score: 0

He should be focusing on his business instead spouting out unneeded advice on running the Red Sox.
For what its worth... by gsgriffin · 2012-05-18 08:16 · Score: 1

You would think that some might have learned from the DotCom bubble and not go about it the very same way the Silly Valley did a decade ago. That's my two-Schillings worth.

--
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
The taxpayers have to cover interest on the loans? by artfulshrapnel · 2012-05-18 08:17 · Score: 1

I'm a little unclear on why so much. Only $50mil in loans have been paid out, but most articles suggest that taxpayers would be on the hook for both the loan AND the interest. Isn't the loan *from* the taxpayers? I understand that the budget might be $100mil *short* of its intended level as a result, but the taxpayers should only really be down the $50mil in cash that they've actually paid out.
Can someone with a better understanding of this kind of economics explain?
Don't buy it either by Sycraft-fu · 2012-05-18 08:39 · Score: 1

There are plenty of games that are not like that. While some publishers are trying for that crap, others are not and some are emphatic about not doing it. So buy games that don't do that. IF we vote with our wallets, it will work itself out long term.
1. Re:Don't buy it either by bryan1945 · 2012-05-18 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  The thing is, if:
  It's a good game
  Has no or minimal DRM (license key)
  Costs $20
  Will people suddenly decide to start paying for it instead of grabbing a torrent? Maybe 10-30%? You would, I would, probably our friends would. I'm not even sure what % of /. would pay for it, with the "all software should be free" contingent. Dang, now I'm all depressed.
  
  --
  Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
2. Re:Don't buy it either by MogNuts · 2012-05-19 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  I agree with you. Problem is, when has voting with your feet or wallet ever changed anything? CoD petition? They all bought the damn game anyway. Shitty ME3 ending? Still a record seller and people whined AFTER they bought the game knowing the shitty ending. People are whining left and right about D3, yet they knew about this atrocity a full YEAR before it was even released. Yet they bought it anyway.
  It seems the only way things are changed anymore is the outcry of bad press. So yes, we need to complain, and loudly.
Why is it ironic? by publiclurker · 2012-05-18 08:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

Teabaggers are normally self important blowhards who expect everyone else to sacrifice for their benefit.
As a RI'er by kilodelta · 2012-05-18 08:47 · Score: 1

This pisses me off to no end. I'm not a big fan of Bob Watson but I agree - I think former Governor Carcieri was starstruck and pushed this deal through.

And how curious - I wrote a blog post with a pro forma estimate of how much they should have burned through using 20 employees as my benchmark. It's been in operation for about a year now, and they did make $60 million on that game, probably half that was profit So Schilling got his $30 million investment back. But then there's the matter that of the $75 million, even at the 150 actual employees, they would only have spent about $40 million. So there is something going on here and Schilling should be on the fucking hook for this.

Mark my words, 38 Studios will fold. And Schilling will come out smelling like a rose. Meanwhile the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations will get left holding the bag, and we the tax payers will be each saddled with $100+ of tax increase to cover this ludicrously bad investment.
1. Re:As a RI'er by oh-dark-thirty · 2012-05-21 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  Fellow RIer here... The best strategy as a resident would probably have been to invest in the bonds themselves, if possible...it would have been the perfect hedge. Heads, we win...tails, we don't lose.
They asked for it. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:50 · Score: 1

Their first release is "Every Other Action RPG Ever Made". It's nothing new. It's Every Other Action RPG Ever Made. It's a 5 or a 6 on a ten-scale.
Ok, so you're Curt Schilling with your shovelware of a game, and you're gonna have EA publish the thing. EA, the most hated game publishing company of all time. AND you're gonna have the sack to ask for $59.99? On a title developed by a company nobody's heard of that's run by a bored baseball player? AND you're gonna deploy DRM? AND you're gonna play the retarded EA DLC / content lock games with us? With all the preorder bonus / Mass Effect 3 cross promotion trimmings? On your first time out? ON YOUR FIRST FUCKING TIME OUT, CURT?
It's not like 38 was some kickass company that sold out to a major publisher and got shittier and shittier over time. They drank the asshole sellout money-grab who-cares koolaid from day one, and they weren't shy about it.
It's like they purposefully exited the race gate, cut across 5 running lanes, made a mad dash off the track for the gamer killing grounds, only to shoulder-check Bioware off the chopping block, and look up at the executioner screaming "Me! Me Next! No, Me! My turn!".
Well, okay then. If you insist. Chop, motherfucker. Just don't have the audacity to suddenly look confused and try to scream "PIRACY!" before the blade drops.
1. Re:They asked for it. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 22:13 · Score: 0
  
  Had a ton of fun with KoA because the combat was fun and the world was unique. Get off your high horse bullshit "cliche not new what the fuck ever it's not original ah I'm gonna die!" and go actually enjoy something for once.
Nice Job 38 Studios... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 08:53 · Score: 0

Thanks for fucking up Rhode Island's economy.
1. Re:Nice Job 38 Studios... by mmcxii · 2012-05-18 11:55 · Score: 1
  
  Thank their government for taking risks of this nature with tax payer money.
2. Re:Nice Job 38 Studios... by oh-dark-thirty · 2012-05-21 08:26 · Score: 1
  
  There was an attempt in the legislature to cap the amount of money available to any one company, and it would have succeeded if the EDC Director Keith Stokes (who resigned last week) hadn't persuaded them to "hold off a little while, we're working on something".
Cheque has now cleared by sa1lnr · 2012-05-18 09:30 · Score: 1

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/18/38-studios-successfully-pays-1-125-million-to-rhode-island/
Re:The taxpayers have to cover interest on the loa by medv4380 · 2012-05-18 10:28 · Score: 1

It's actually a loan from bonds that have been sold, and those bonds have set interest rates on them. The bonds where just issued and insured by the state. The state would be on the hook for paying back the money on any bonds that were sold along with the interest. The State may have money that wasn't dispersed yet but they owe the interest on any bonds that were sold. Worst case they owe 100 million.
Good game but F up CEO's. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 11:17 · Score: 0

Are these guys also with EA if not they sure must be taking their cue from the same playbook, piss off as many gamers as they can all the way to bankruptcy.
They have now made a payment by mps01060 · 2012-05-18 11:30 · Score: 1

Looks like they made the payment now. They are likely still in trouble in the long run, but seem to have fixed this problem temporarily. http://news.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/2012/05/ri-gov-chafee-3.html
It's worse by Namarrgon · 2012-05-18 11:49 · Score: 3

So not only did he "negotiate" RI into loaning his startup $75M (which was a huge chunk of their $125M jobs-development budget, and was pretty controversial at the time), he did so claiming he'd sunk "$35-$38 million" of his own money into the company.
Turned out, the figure was closer to $3M, and he promptly paid himself back with the RI loan money, removing any personal stake in the success of his company.

--
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
poorly managed? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 14:36 · Score: 0

I did a phone interview with 38 Studios for a developer position early on (didn't take it, I had actually sent in my resume when it was first announced and literally took them a year to get back to me, at which point I was no longer interested). When I asked them about their development progress, the respose was something to the effect that they had dozens of artists industriously creating content, but very little actual software development had taken place. This suggested to me that the technical leads were maybe not so great in the software engineering/project management skills required to pull off a project of the scope of an MMO. Unfortunately, it seems I was right.
Soccer is more popular in south america by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 20:11 · Score: 0

With your "1 billion people" you are waaaaaay over estimating the number. The other guy is right, baseball is a sport which is mostly highly regarded in very few countries, and expecting people to know who schilling is, is the depth of arrogance. Yes slashdot *WAS* an US predominantely visited site back a at foundation. Now ? There is enough people from other country to warrant that thinking in an US-centric cultural mindset knowledge is stupidly snobbing a sizeable part of your audience. So the snarking reply to the guy who asked "who is shilling" are typical of the guy which never go out of his basement and think that his specific local knowledge is common knowledge. No it is not. Now go outside smell the free air , and recognize that US folk are NOT the sole reader of slashdot. Heck, are they even the majority now ? In a few years ?
Which gaming community? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-18 22:11 · Score: 0

'cause I haven't really seen anyone that WASN'T a journalist bitch about that so-called online pass. You know why they didn't BECAUSE IT WAS NOT AN ONLINE PASS IT WAS FREE DLC FOR BUYING THE GAME NEW! You could play the game completely without the so-called "online pass". All the code added was one quest-line that was a DLC quest. F*ck's sake you don't even read your own articles do you?
Weird definition of Latin America by ThiagoHP · 2012-05-19 05:08 · Score: 1
almost all of Latin America don't count
According to Wikipedia:
- Latin America population: 572 million
- South America population: 387.5 million (South America is part of Latin America)
- Venezuela population: 27 million (the only South American country that's really into baseball)
Considering all Latin American countries baseball fans except South America but including Venezuela, that's gives us a rough estimate of only 37% of the Latin American population being baseball fans. You're not helping in your 'Americans aren't insular' campaing. ;-)
Re:The taxpayers have to cover interest on the loa by trdrstv · 2012-05-21 03:42 · Score: 1

I'm a little unclear on why so much.
I'm still not sure why they gave them a loan to begin with. Don't most "Tax incentive packages" involve a grace period of simply not paying local / state/ real estate taxes ? Since when do they flat out become the venture capitol ?