Slashdot Mirror


Atari Facing $291 Million Debt Claim From... Atari

An anonymous reader writes "Atari declared bankruptcy earlier this year, and part of that process involves selling off its property in order to pay as many entities holding its debt as possible. The latest round includes a $30 million claim from Atari's parent company in France, and a $261 million claim from another subsidiary of that parent company. The $30 million debt is secured (in other words, they get priority on whatever's left in the U.S. Atari's coffers), but the $261 million debt is not, so they'll have to wait in line with everybody else." The article also lists some interesting sell-offs. The old Accolade brand got sold for $50,000, the Battlezone Franchise was sold to Rebellion Interactive for $566,500, and Wargaming World Limited purchased the Total Annihilation and Masters of Orion franchises. Stardock Systems, creators of Sins of a Solar Empire, picked up the rights to the Star Control franchise, which they intend to reboot. (Those who played it will recall that StarCon2 was the Best Game Ever. And it's been remade after the creators released the source code.)

121 comments

  1. holy fucking shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    new star control game?!

    ANYONE?!

    1. Re:holy fucking shit by Sowelu · · Score: 3, Informative

      God damn it. Stardock is going to ruin it with their awful, awful writing. GalCiv2 had the worst humor I've ever seen in a 4x game ever. I know that nobody plays 4x games for the writing, but it was so bad it hurt.

    2. Re:holy fucking shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes yes, *happy campers*.

    3. Re:holy fucking shit by ilsaloving · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      EJACULATION!

    4. Re:holy fucking shit by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Stardock makes awful, banal games that only a calculator could love (which they aren't glitching and crashing)

      Their version of Star Control will be horrific.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    5. Re:holy fucking shit by dottrap · · Score: 1

      Unless they work with Toys for Bob, they can't reference anything in Star Control 1 or 2 because Toys for Bob retains the copyright for the characters and story.
      http://www.incgamers.com/2013/07/open-source-star-control-2-team-express-doubts-over-atari-ip-sale

    6. Re:holy fucking shit by cheesybagel · · Score: 3

      For all the issues Galactic Civilization II had it was loads better than that piece of utter trash that was Elemental: War of Magic. Or the sequel for that matter. Blech. I expect more from a Master of Magic clone. Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic did it much better.

    7. Re:holy fucking shit by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      That's great, so Stardock will make Star Control 3 1/2 and hopefully Toys For Bob will regain the full IP when Stardock goes under.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    8. Re:holy fucking shit by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      GalCiv 2 was still bland as fuck though.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    9. Re:holy fucking shit by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah. For whatever reason I liked GalCiv better than GalCiv 2. I still prefer Master of Orion II from SimTex. But Sins of a Solar Empire was nice. Even though Stardock didn't develop the game. They just distribute it.

    10. Re:holy fucking shit by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Unless they work with Toys for Bob, they can't reference anything in Star Control 1 or 2 because Toys for Bob retains the copyright for the characters and story.
      http://www.incgamers.com/2013/07/open-source-star-control-2-team-express-doubts-over-atari-ip-sale

      The idea that Toys for Bob of all people would pursue a claim of someone ripping them off is pretty rich, given that Star Control was a thinly veiled ripoff of Starflight (which itself has a better claim to "best PC game of all time" than Star Control 2 does). Reiche was even involved in the Starflight development, so it's not like they didn't know exactly what they were doing.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    11. Re:holy fucking shit by Intropy · · Score: 1

      To pile on, yes the GalCiv series is extremely bland. Toss Endless Space onto that pile as well. Master of Orion II holds up remarkably well. The patterns for me is that a new entry into the genre comes out, I play it a couple of times, then I reinstall MOO2 and play that for a week.

    12. Re:holy fucking shit by jamstar7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I still play Masters of Orion 2. I have to run it in DosBox on my Linux machine, but it works...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    13. Re:holy fucking shit by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      It's not a "ripoff" since the lead designer of Starflight (Greg Johnson) worked on Star Control 2, and the lead designer of Star Control 2 worked on Starflight. How do you rip YOURSELF off?! You might as well just call Black & White a ripoff of Populous or Mass Effect a ripoff of KOTOR. Same people, similar concepts, different titles. Big deal...

    14. Re:holy fucking shit by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      No love for Total Annihilation?

      Honestly I liked the campaign mode of SC1 better anyways, but maybe thats because I never had a 3do and only played UQM single player.

    15. Re:holy fucking shit by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

      If its like 3, screw that.

      A brand means nothing if the authors are not there. You know, the guys who open sourced the game as "Ur-Quan Masters" because only the brand did not belong to them...

      And yes, i played the three Star Control games. 2 was the best, period. Since the second game was open sourced, its probably in the repository of your favorite distro.

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
    16. Re:holy fucking shit by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

      Both sc1 and sc2 were lots of fun to play with another person. At least the PC/DOS game.

      Unfortunately sc2 for 3do had "smooth zoom", which ruined the Ilrwrath ship. Thankfully, they added a "pc" switch to ur-quan masters (the open sourced edition).

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
    17. Re:holy fucking shit by C0R1D4N · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way except I run back to birth of the federation.

    18. Re:holy fucking shit by TeresaBriscoe · · Score: 1

      That was the first question in my mind.

    19. Re:holy fucking shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God damn it. Stardock is going to ruin it with their awful, awful writing. GalCiv2 had the worst humor I've ever seen in a 4x game ever. I know that nobody plays 4x games for the writing, but it was so bad it hurt.

      You find a planet already inhabited by subhumans.

      Good choice: Only settle in areas not populated by subhumans. (-60% productive area)

      Neutral choice: Move them to reservations. (-20% productive are)

      Evil choice: Free Slaves??! And they taste pretty good too!

      I thought it was funny.

    20. Re:holy fucking shit by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Apparently, Stardock has contacted the authors of Star Control 1 and 2 and is discussion with them on the new Star Control game. The linked post is from Brad Wardell, Stardock's CEO. Stardock been interested in doing a sequel to Star Control 2 for a while.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    21. Re:holy fucking shit by AllanNienhuis · · Score: 1

      The interesting twist on this is that Chris Taylor (of TA fame) is working for WarGaming now - so he gets to reboot his own title (assuming that's the plan). That's just plain awesome!

      --
      Don't judge me based on my high slashdot user id!
    22. Re:holy fucking shit by pthisis · · Score: 1

      This is a joke, right? If Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr leave the Beatles, they aren't allowed to write "Hey Dude" and "I Want to Hold You Man" to the tune of the originals and completely fail to pay John Lennon, George Harrison, and Apple Records. That's exactly what Star Control 2 did, though--it not only failed to reimburse Binary Systems, but also left the other developers out in the cold while pocketing money for work they did.

      And, yeah, I know that some of the developers from Binary went to Toys For Bob (I even mentioned one of the most important in my post). They completely screwed everyone else from the original dev team who didn't come with them, though. Which isn't maybe the worst crime in history, but it would make them wildly hypocritical if they try to pursue a similar claim against anyone else--which I'm not saying they've done, but my response was to someone who intimated that such action was on the table. It'd be ludicrous under the circumstances.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    23. Re:holy fucking shit by hawk · · Score: 1

      That's what I did with MOO2--played it for a day or two, and went back to (and still play) MOO . . .(never even stuck MOO3 into the drive).

      hawk

    24. Re:holy fucking shit by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      Offtopic? You idiots! Haven't you played Star Control 3?

  2. Master of Orion, please by Intropy · · Score: 1

    World of Tanks is pretty fun. Master of Orion is a completely different kind of game. Hope they can manage it okay. I'd love a decent sequel.

    1. Re:Master of Orion, please by captjc · · Score: 2

      I don't expect anything as good as MOO2. However, anything would be better than the buggy heap of crap that was MOO3. Personally, I would have loved to see Firaxis get that property.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    2. Re:Master of Orion, please by LurkNoMore · · Score: 2

      If they only made the in game ship combat control better and changed nothing else in MoO2, I would be happy to send them $50.

    3. Re:Master of Orion, please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have MoO3. I downloaded all the patches. The patches make the game non-buggy, but they don't make the game non-sucky.

  3. And who owns the old atari rights now days by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2, Informative

    And who owns the old atari rights now days?

    I think it's been a lot of spinoffs / buyouts over the years.

    1. Re:And who owns the old atari rights now days by Dan+East · · Score: 1

      I think Trepidity answered your question below. The Atari companies this article discusses were part of the hardware portion of Atari. The other software / IP side of Atari is totally separate and got passed around through the years and is now held by Warner Bros. That is if I interpreted Trepidity's post correctly.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    2. Re:And who owns the old atari rights now days by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      There wasn't a separate "hardware" portion of Atari, at least not when it was split in 1984. There was a computer/home-console division (which became Jack Tramiel's Atari Corp.), and an arcade division (Atari Games, later sold off). What the *precise* ownership of some of the gaming rights became as both those entities fizzled out towards meaningless from the mid-90s to early-noughties is unclear to me though.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  4. but what about D&D? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Atari owned the rights to make D&D based computer rpg's does that right get sold or returned to hasbro or is it under another branch of atari? If it is under this branch of atari what happens to the lawsuit against beam dog over the baldurs gate enhanced edition that is holding up the android and linux ports from being released.

    --
    ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    1. Re:but what about D&D? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      atari no longer has rights to d&d.. after lawsuits, licensing disputes and ownership changes...... tribune now owned by warner bros. self-publishes (dungeons & dragons online, formerly published by atari); and cryptic was sold-off to pwe and also self publishes (neverwinter, finished and released under pwe ownership).

    2. Re:but what about D&D? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      after daggerdale atari should never be allowed to touch D&D ever again, god what a shit game

  5. Re: $291 or $261? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you read the content? 30+261=291

  6. Re:$291 or $261? by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Atari Parent company: $30 million

    Atari subsidiary company: $261 million

    $30 million plus $261 million equals $291 million worth of debt owed to Atari entities

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  7. Re: $291 or $261? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    261 + 30 = 291

  8. A new game based off starcon2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *happy camper*

    1. Re:A new game based off starcon2? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Is StarCon2 anything like Atari's Star Raiders? I really miss that and BallBlaster.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:A new game based off starcon2? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Download, [compile], play, and tell us. http://sc2.sourceforge.net/

    3. Re:A new game based off starcon2? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      The Youtube videos don't look anything close.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  9. Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TA was one of my favorite RTS games. Really innovative, loads of fun. The expansion was awesome too.
    It's title and IP has been bought and re-sold by failing companies for years now, unfortunatly.

    The game has even been re-made by it's original creatores twice in a game called Supreme Commander. Though, that franchise has been suffering similar problems. (SC1 is good.. SC2, not so much. Seems to be made by different people? Can anyone confirm what's up with SC?)

    Any luck we'll see a new, legit TA game?

    1. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by Mr_Blank · · Score: 1

          Keep an eye on Planetary Annihilation.

      PROPRIETARY ENGINE TECHNOLOGY
      The Planetary Annihilation engine was built for this project, so we could make the game that we wanted to make. Built by the same engineers who built the Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander rendering engines.

    2. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any luck we'll see a new, legit TA game?

      Check out the Kickstarter project "Planetary Annihilation", It's the guys behind TA. Alpha acces is $83 on Steam ($40 for retail IIRC).
      It looks awesome imo.

    3. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by captjc · · Score: 1

      Last I heard, Wargaming was in talks to buy Gas Powered Games, I don't know if that's still a thing. However, if it does go through, there is a pretty good chance it could happen.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    4. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Planetary Annihilation is the technical and spiritual successor to both SC and TA. SC2 was made by Square Enix (oh god why, I can hear you say), but strangely the original designer of both TA and SC, Chris Taylor, claimed responsibility (or at least support) for its deviations from the core formula (most notably unit upgrades and noncontinuous resource gathering.) The goal was to simplify; the result was to alienate the only audience the brand had ever drawn; the lesson was for the next game—Planetary Annihilation, which to my knowledge doesn't include Chris Taylor but does have some GPG staff behind it—to return to TA's core qualities.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    5. Re: Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by msm8bball · · Score: 1

      Also check out springrts.com. It was inspired by TA. It is an engine with several clones of TA to choose from, plus new unrelated stuff. Open Source.

    6. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by the_saint1138 · · Score: 1

      Seconded. As a TA, SC, SC:FA fan, I'm seriously excited about Planetary Annihilation.

    7. Re:Total Annihilation - Will it ever come back? by V+for+Vendetta · · Score: 1

      Last I heard, Wargaming was in talks to buy Gas Powered Games, I don't know if that's still a thing.

      Wargaming acquired Gas Powered Games back in February

      .

  10. also none are actually Atari by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A fun fact is that neither of the two Ataris suing each other here are in any reasonable sense the original Atari. First of all, the original company split in 1984 due to financial difficulties, into two companies: 1) Atari Games, which owned the rights to the classic game IP; and 2) Atari Computer, which took over making actual hardware.

    Atari Games existed for a few year in the mid-'80s, but in the late '80s went defunct, getting bought up by Time Warner, which later became AOL, which later sold them to Midway Games, which was later acquired by Warner Bros. So it's basically a copyright holding company owned by some group of investors that is several degrees of separation removed from anyone who actually worked on an Atari game.

    Atari Computer initially did some interesting stuff, mostly notably putting out the Atari ST, and later the Atari 7800. They sort of tanked in the late-'80s/early-'90s though, when the Atari Lynx and the Atari Jaguar both fell hugely short of expectations. This half of the company then met the same fate as Atari Games: it de-facto ceased to exist, except as IP that got sold around between various companies that never had anything to do with its products, in this case Hasbro and Infogrames. And now two parts of this half are suing each other.

    The short version of the story is: Atari got split up in 1984, was defunct by 1993, and now two, of at least three, companies that own some kind of claim to the name "Atari" are suing each other, but none of them have anything to do with Atari, except insofar as they are leeches who've somehow ended up with the rights to exploit the trademark.

    1. Re:also none are actually Atari by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Informative

      The companies in this story were renamed "Atari" somewhat recently:

      Atari Inc. was formerly GT Interactive
      Atari SA and Atari Europe were formerly Infogrames Entertainment

      The French company Infogrames purchased GT Interactive and Hasbro Interactive. In the late 90's/early 2000's Hasbro bought the rights to the old Atari games and naming rights, which is what allowed Infogrames to rebrand the main company and their various divisions as "Atari."

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    2. Re:also none are actually Atari by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for atari games while it was 'Time Warner Interactive' in the 90's. While it had a new owner many of the original atari employees were still employed at that time. I worked with the original creators of asteroids, missile command, etc. It still seemed like the old atari games to me.

    3. Re:also none are actually Atari by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Atari Games existed for a few year in the mid-'80s, but in the late '80s went defunct, getting bought up by Time Warner, which later became AOL, which later sold them to Midway Games, which was later acquired by Warner Bros. So it's basically a copyright holding company owned by some group of investors that is several degrees of separation removed from anyone who actually worked on an Atari game.

      You're broadly right, but wrong in some of the details.

      "Atari Games" (the arcade division) existed under that name until well into the nineties, and after that as "Midway Games West", though as Midway left the arcade market in the early-noughties, that's now dead.

      Ironically, Warner Communications- one of Time Warner's predecessors- was the owner of Atari Inc. (i.e. *the* original Atari company) in its heyday from just before the VCS launch until the 1984 split.

      Atari Corporation (Tramiel's company that you mistakenly referred to as "Atari Computer") actually lasted until 1996, when it was basically shut down via a merger with a third-rate hard drive maker.

      Here's my potted summary of the timeline in full.

      You're mostly right, though. The original Atari is long gone, and any direct continuation of its original business (i.e. Atari Games and Atari Corp.) are now also long-dead. The current "Atari" have the name and IP in common, and that's it.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    4. Re:also none are actually Atari by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      I work for atari games while it was 'Time Warner Interactive' in the 90's. While it had a new owner many of the original atari employees were still employed at that time. I worked with the original creators of asteroids, missile command, etc. It still seemed like the old atari games to me.

      In your opinion, then, when did Atari Games "truly" die? Was it still meaningfully the same entity when Midway took it over and renamed it? Did it survive until Midway exited the arcade business in the early-noughties (which surely must be the latest point one could choose, as after that Midway Games West was apparently a trademark and IP holder only).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    5. Re:also none are actually Atari by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      "Atari Games" (the arcade division) existed under that name until well into the nineties, and after that as "Midway Games West", though as Midway left the arcade market in the early-noughties, that's now dead.

      Midway Games was owned by Williams since the late 80s so Midway Games West would've been an absorption by Midway into the Williams fold (Atari Games became Midway Games West to avoid trademark disputes with Hasbro). As part of the restructuring in the late 90s, Williams spun off Midway as a semi-independent company which created a pile of problems when in 1999, Williams shut down their pinball division.

      In a series of incredibly complex deals, Midway picked up Williams' video game assets, while giving Williams its pinball assets.

      Today, Midway is dead (bankruptcy) since 2009. But technically, they've owned Atari Games until 2003 when they closed Midway games West.

      And Atari Games became Time Warner Interactive, which was acquired completely by Midway in the early 90s, though it continued to operate under the Atari Games label for obvious reasons (brand recognition).

      End result is a huge mess as coin-op giants like Williams/Bally picked up arcade games then spun them off and closed down everything but slot machines. (These days, arcade gaming is dead because of well, the iPhone. Pinball though, is seeing a resurgence).

    6. Re:also none are actually Atari by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      These days, arcade gaming is dead because of well, the iPhone.

      I thought that- with the exception of some niche games like Dance Dance Revolution- arcade gaming had already all but died in most Western countries during the 1990s, when home consoles became as cutting edge as their arcade brethren. That was well before the iPhone. (It supposedly lasted longer in Japan, but even there it's apparently declined badly in recent years).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    7. Re:also none are actually Atari by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Thanks to you, MrEricSir, and AC following for getting some truth out. As a long-time (well, over the short time they existed, plus later on before I got a "PC") user of the ST line, I mostly liked and admired many of those involved many of those involved in both divisions, and valued the few conversations with Bob Brodie, John Townsend, Ken Badertscher, and others.

      For some early history, please see:
      http://mcurrent.name/atarihistory/atari.html
      starts with Nolan Bushnell at Ampex and goes from there.

  11. TA:MMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring on a Total Annihilation MMO, kthxbye

  12. Only in bizarro corporate land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can you buy a company, merge it into your company, but then somehow have your company not be responsible for any of the debt when it crashes.

    So if it succeeds, its "yay, look at all my company's new money"

    and if it fails its "wow, somebody really borked that, i'm sure glad -my- company isnt involved"

    1. Re:Only in bizarro corporate land by jythie · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah, look at blockbuster. They were bought, took on a billion dollars of their parent company's debt, then spun off with crippling loan payments.

  13. I think I'll get in on the action... by lord_mike · · Score: 2

    How much for the 3D Tic Tac Toe franchise?

  14. Stardock Published SoaSE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stardock published SoaSE, it was developed by Ironclad Games.

  15. Total Annihilation is dead. Long live TA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That game kicked the pants off every RTS from that era and all the RTS games that followed for a decade. I don't know who the hell Wargaming is, but if the comments about their existing products is anything to go on it's not good news for the TA franchise (hello micro-transactions... TA was always known for a gigantic arsenal of units, so I'm sure that'll be easy to profit off of).

    If any of you guys are still interested in a TA inspired game, I'd highly recommend Planetary Annihilation (http://www.uberent.com/pa/). It's being built by two of the leads from the TA project and looks more TA inspired then Supreme Commander ever was. Also, I have to give them mad props for building their own game engine from scratch and doing things *right*. It's looking like a great game and I seriously hope it becomes the game TA never was.

  16. That's odd... by Daetrin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So Stardock got the rights for Star Control but _not_ Master of Orion? I wonder if they were outbid, or decided to pass on it since they have Galactic Civilizations, their own decently reviewed and decently selling turn based 4x space game. They can always make GalCiv 3 not that they've passed on the opportunity to make MoO 3 (it's too bad no one ever made a third MoO game before) but even after all this time i think perhaps the MoO name might have given them some cachet (and thus sales) that GalCiv wouldn't get.

    As for Star Control, despite the issues with the original release of Elemental i have a moderate amount of faith in Stardock's ability to handle the game well, but they've demonstrated themselves to be both credible as a developer (Galactic Civilizations, Political/Corporate Machine) and as a publisher (Sins of a Solar Empire with Ironcald Games.) So i wonder if they're going to develop this game themselves, or farm it out to someone else. Someone like, i dunno, Toys for Bob? :)

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:That's odd... by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      They don't publish anymore, they just sell games on Steam.

      Awful, awful games.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:That's odd... by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Okay, judging from earlier comments you clearly have a hate-on for Stardock. I happen to disagree, since obviously i like both StarCon 2 and (most of) Stardock's games.

      However i'm not sure how you can say they don't publish games any more. How do you think games get on Steam? Believe it or not Valve is not the publisher of every game for sale on Steam.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    3. Re:That's odd... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      So Stardock got the rights for Star Control but _not_ Master of Orion? I wonder if they were outbid, or decided to pass on it since they have Galactic Civilizations, their own decently reviewed and decently selling turn based 4x space game. They can always make GalCiv 3 not that they've passed on the opportunity to make MoO 3 (it's too bad no one ever made a third MoO game before) but even after all this time i think perhaps the MoO name might have given them some cachet (and thus sales) that GalCiv wouldn't get.

      As for Star Control, despite the issues with the original release of Elemental i have a moderate amount of faith in Stardock's ability to handle the game well, but they've demonstrated themselves to be both credible as a developer (Galactic Civilizations, Political/Corporate Machine) and as a publisher (Sins of a Solar Empire with Ironcald Games.) So i wonder if they're going to develop this game themselves, or farm it out to someone else. Someone like, i dunno, Toys for Bob? :)

      I think as long as Stardock gets someone else to do the writing, a decent SciFi writer with a sense of humour. GalCiv 2 was a very good turn based strategy game (albeit with a steep learning curve) but the criticism that the writing was crap is a valid one. Gal Civ 2 was a good game on its gameplay rather than its story.

      Then again, seeing what passes for decent storywriting these days (erm Far Cry 3, Bioshock) Brad Wardell could vomit on a typewriter and be considered amongst the best writers of the modern day.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:That's odd... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, just being a good game instead a cool graphic effects show is just fine with me. Already there you beat 98% of the competition in my eyes. If I wan't a story, i'l watch a ... now wait a minute, i'll read a book. For explosions and effects I'll watch a movie. From game a want a good game, good writing , nice music & sounds, and great visuals come second.

      GalCiv2 is a great game.

    5. Re:That's odd... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen, the Masters of Orion franchise has already been slaughtered by MoO3, which many fans refuse to admit existence of.

  17. How sleazy by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    So if I want to rip off and steal investors and bank money all I have to do is create 3 shell companies move the debt around and pretend they are 3 entities then declare bankruptcies on all 3 where I get first dibs on my own debt. Then keep all the money again to myself since I get first dibs. Meanwhile pensioner and investor funds get screwed.

    Is there any ethics left or did I misinterpret this story? This should be illegal as none of us us individuals can do this with credit card debt as that of course would be irresponsible. But not here if it is for corps

    1. Re: How sleazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct. Add another layer or two and some shell aging, and you don't have a prayer of proving wrong-doing.

    2. Re: How sleazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      but But BUT JERB CREATORS!!!

      Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
      Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

      actually, yelling is called for in this case you nimrods.

    3. Re:How sleazy by V+for+Vendetta · · Score: 1

      Congratulations. You just figured out how the hedge fund company business works.

  18. Incorrect Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sins of a Solar Empire was not created by Stardock. It was developed by Ironclad games and published by Stardock.

  19. *happy campers* by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 1

    In complete agreement -- Star Control II was the best game ever. I normally don't fan-spam on /. but dagnabbit I just had to chime in.

    Of course, someone should take odds on whether or not a reboot can come close to doing as well as the orignal (the original #2 that is.. StarCon was a fine but simplistic game and StarCon 3 did not exist. IT DID NOT EXIST I TELL YOU). Still, I'll play a sequel just on the chance it comes close.

    Total Annihilation was one of my faves as well... along with absolutely everything Atari did in the 80s. How the mighty have fallen.

    1. Re:*happy campers* by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Of course, someone should take odds on whether or not a reboot can come close to doing as well as the orignal (the original #2 that is.. StarCon was a fine but simplistic game and StarCon 3 did not exist. IT DID NOT EXIST I TELL YOU). Still, I'll play a sequel just on the chance it comes close.

      The original was Starflight; Star Control II was a graphical facelift with some arcade stuff tacked on, a less interesting story, and much weaker RPG aspects. It's a good game and was a nice refresh, and it's obviously a little less dated looking, but basically everything it did well had been done better in Starflight (which is arguably the best PC game of all time if you adjust for era).

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    2. Re:*happy campers* by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The main problem is that Star Control II was an action adventure/RPG game and Star Control III just broke that by turning it into make a crappy strategy game.

      The core of it is the ship combat game. The next most important layer is the plot, dialog, and the navigation aspects.

    3. Re:*happy campers* by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Of course, someone should take odds on whether or not a reboot can come close to doing as well as the orignal (the original #2 that is.. StarCon was a fine but simplistic game and StarCon 3 did not exist. IT DID NOT EXIST I TELL YOU). Still, I'll play a sequel just on the chance it comes close.

      I agree with you on Star Control 2. I almost never play through an adventure game more than once, but I think I have been through it 3 times over the years...

      I will have to grudgingly acknowledge SC3's existence because I bought it the day it came out. And then returned it 3 days later. Funny thing is, you usually can't return video games after they are opened unless the media is defective. In this case the employee at the Fry's return counter must have been a SC2 fan as well, because when he asked me what was wrong with it, I just said "it's a horrible game!" and he took it back without any more questions :)

    4. Re:*happy campers* by Khyber · · Score: 0

      "Star Control II was the best game ever."

      Not even close. Try Brutal Doom sometime. Doom 3 should have been this, and you'd have been shitting your pants the entire way through.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:*happy campers* by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, Star Control was a strategy/action game, and Star Control II only used the combat aspect from its predecessor. Unfortunately for SC3, the one common feature of all three games (the melee) was broken beyond belief in SC3, so much that they had to add a key (F11, F12?) to force the enemy to stop running away all the time.

    6. Re:*happy campers* by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      along with absolutely everything Atari did in the 80s. How the mighty have fallen.

      ET was your fave? I thought the plot in that game was a bit mesed up.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re: *happy campers* by rcastro0 · · Score: 1

      This is a sincere tip, but sure to sound like a spambot: If you liked Starflight you should definitely take a look at FTL, "Faster Than Light". It is a modern indie game with retro graphics and Starflight 's soul, though game play has a different, more tactical flavor.

      Back in the PC XT era I had access to a pirated copy of Starflight but no crack. The copy protection method was such that after so many turns it would ask a question that a pirate couldn't answer and then halt the game. Very frustrating, as by then you' d have a full tripulation and would be just starting the fun.

      --
      Quem a paca cara compra, paca cara pagará.
    8. Re:*happy campers* by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 1

      I played ET for days trying to figure out WTF was going on. I still don't know. But I did, oddly, enjoy playing it and trying to figure it out.

      Actually, that's something I liked about SC2 as well -- I lost the first time I played, after many hours of game-play. By the time you figure out you've lost in SC2, a salvageable save-game was so old as to be basically useless, since one forgets all the places they hadn't visited or what they had and had not yet done.

      FWIW, I actually wondered if someone would mention ET when I made that post. Thanks. :-)

    9. Re:*happy campers* by happy_place · · Score: 1

      Of course the only game anyone remembers is SC2, because it broke out of the traditional SC I and III mold. The story is probably the best game story I've ever had the pleasure of playing through. it is the sort of thing that would be very difficult to construct today, mostly because it is so story based.

      That said, I really enjoyed the mining/exploration aspects of SC2 as well, landing, capturing lifeforms, landing on varying plantes, finding crystal planets for Tzo Crystals. And the customizable ship/armada mechanic really lent itself to a game that even now I enjoy playing again and again.

      In addition to the fun of taking on an UrQuan with an Arilou... ;)

      --
      http://www.beanleafpress.com
    10. Re:*happy campers* by happy_place · · Score: 1

      fan-spam away, the game deserves it!

      (spoilers below: if you haven't played the game...)

      Who can forget the sense of dread they first encountered earth in a slave shield, or intimidated the Spathi Captain Fwiffo, or the last Shofixti's face when you give him his little gift, or discovering the Enigmatic Arilous in Quasi-Space, or encountering the Syreen for the first time... and that love scene! Ahem. Or when you first faced off against a black UrQuan ship... or tricked the Ilwrath into believing you were their god... or the Thraddash into annihilating their latest culture until they joined you... Or being chased by far too many enemy ships into Hyperspace!

      The game had a lot of classic elements you still don't find today... ah well, one can only hope something new and as enticing comes along, but I suspect I'm more addicted to the sense of wonder it created back then, and the nostalgia I feel now, than what might be done today.

      --
      http://www.beanleafpress.com
    11. Re: *happy campers* by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the FTL mention, I'm not a fan of real-time strategies in general but if I get a hankering for one I'll check it out.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  20. Tax trickin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate it when companies use these kind of tricks to pay less tax, especially if they use venerable names like Atari. It works like this: company A buys company B cheaply, grants them a huge "loan" then lets company B default on that loan. Company B files for bankruptcy and company A has a large tax write-off. All nice and legal but very unethical.

  21. TURBINE, not TRIBUNE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean I know they look like anagrams, but still :)

  22. Desert Bus? by edxwelch · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know who bought the franchise for Desert Bus?
    http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/desert-bus-worst-videogame-time-160542705.html
    That was a classic.

  23. Re:$291 or $261? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like SOMEBODY isn't eating their iodized salt...

  24. Stardock Published (didn't create) Sins of a Solar by brit74 · · Score: 2

    > "Stardock Systems, creators of Sins of a Solar Empire, picked up the rights to the Star Control franchise, which they intend to reboot."

    Sins of a Solar Empire was created by Ironclad Games and published by Stardock. Stardock has developed their own games in the past, but let's give credit where credit is due: it belongs to Ironclad Games. It's sad that publishers get more credit and name recognition than developers these days.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sins_of_a_Solar_Empire

  25. Very interested to see what this does.... by Drakonblayde · · Score: 2

    to the Baldur's Gate franchise. Beamdog is basically in a holding pattern because Atari told them to cease and desist for now, which is holding up the Enhanced Edition of Baldur's Gate 2.

  26. Re:Stardock Published (didn't create) Sins of a So by binarylarry · · Score: 1

    Also note that Ironclad isn't working with Stardock on the follow up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sins_of_a_Dark_Age

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  27. Atari ST by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    Best 16 bit pc ever. I shed a tiny tear whenever I think about that machine and the Laser C compiler I got for it.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    1. Re:Atari ST by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Best 16 bit pc ever.

      You can make an Amiga into an Atari ST by adding a serial to MIDI adapter (the Amiga has 31250bps serial ports, so it's really just a level converter) but the Atari ST doesn't have the Amiga's bit blitter et cetera. Victory: Amiga :D

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Atari ST by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      And you can put a 68020 in your Amiga and leave all this "best 16-bit pc" talk behind.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    3. Re:Atari ST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Commodore CDTV is essentially an Amiga 500 with a MIDI interface. (And IR remote control and a CD reader.)

    4. Re:Atari ST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or put a 68040 or 68060 in your Atari. Can this pissing war end already? We all know both platforms were much, much better than the PC and Mac offerings of the time.

  28. Re:$291 or $261? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter. Jack Tramiel's Mastercard limit is $230M.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  29. Stardock didn't get all the rights by oldsak · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.incgamers.com/2013/07/open-source-star-control-2-team-express-doubts-over-atari-ip-sale
    Apparently they only got the trademark to the name "Star Control" and the copyright to Star Control 3. Unless the license the Star Control 2 content as well, we might get something very different with the Star Control name slapped on.

    1. Re:Stardock didn't get all the rights by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      http://www.incgamers.com/2013/07/open-source-star-control-2-team-express-doubts-over-atari-ip-sale

      Apparently they only got the trademark to the name "Star Control" and the copyright to Star Control 3. Unless the license the Star Control 2 content as well, we might get something very different with the Star Control name slapped on.

      as long as they have license to all the stuff in the universe, it's all the same. I'm pretty sure that's how they inteprete it, so they can use shofixtis and spathis.. or maybe they'll just remake the 3. the plot wasn't that bad, it's just couple of aspects that ruined it, like the map being a rotating ball.. no sense of exploration when you see everything right away.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Stardock didn't get all the rights by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Actually, the copyrights for Star Control 1 and 2 remain with the original developers, and Stardock has acknowledged that and is trying to work them for the new game. Or at least, that's what Brad Wardell, the CEO of Stardock, posted on the boards for the open source Star Control 2 game.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  30. Zombies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zombie Atari is suing Vampire Atari? There's a movie in here somewhere.(Nolan Bushnell - Undead Hunter! Watch as Nolan and his band of Chuck Cheese robots hunt Undead remnants of his former companies!)

  31. Yay for Star Control and Battlezone by Cyrano+de+Maniac · · Score: 1

    I don't have much to add other than I'm hugely excited for both Star Control and Battlezone. SC1 and SC2 were bedrock mainstays of my college days, and the hover-tank Battlezone released in 1998 was phenomenal.

    I've since moved on to play and enjoy The Ur-Quan Masters, but even shortly after SC2's heyday and before UQM was available, I remember paying for a legit download of the PC version of the game (late '98, early '99?). If we could get network mode Melee, I'd be tickled pink. If there were a persistent universe game (ala EVE) formed out of the Star Control franchise I'd lock myself away in a room and never see the light of day again.

    However I've never found a comparable game to the '98 Battlezone. The gameplay was terrifically fun, fairly easy to get started, the copy protection was a reasonable compromise (need one disc present among all the computers playing on the LAN), and I cannot remember a single stability, usability, or gameplay bug. I could very much see wasting away many hours if that were updated and brought to market again.

    --
    Cyrano de Maniac
  32. Stardock is a publisher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stardock did not make Sins of a Solar Empire. They published it. SoaSE was made by Ironclad Games.

  33. not at all surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I think Atari, I think Atari 2600. Face it, that was the last truly innovative and really good thing they made.

    1. Re:not at all surprised by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >When I think Atari, I think Atari 2600.
      Yeah because the 800 was just so far behind the curve when it was released in 1979. It's hardware was so dated it was continued conceptually in the Amiga (same designer). Bot had sprites, hardware assisted scrolling, display interrupts, multi channel sound and stuff like display lists/copper lists.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  34. Re:$291 or $261? by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    >It doesn't matter. Jack Tramiel's Mastercard limit is $230M.
    The late Jack Tramiel.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  35. Re:$291 or $261? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is probably what it is to pay off, his credit card debts.

  36. YAY FOR STAR CONTROL AND BATTLEZONE! by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

    No Blood, though...

  37. Infocom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they sell off Infocom? What did they get for that?

  38. RE: MOO2-BAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get MOO2 at Good Old Games. I did, and promptly lost a summer. :)

  39. Re:Master of Orion 2 by Dopefish_1 · · Score: 1

    As a matter of fact, there's still an active community that plays multiplayer Master of Orion 2 games over the Internet (via dosbox). Anyone interested, check out #moo2 on QuakeNet IRC.

    --

    #include <sig.h>
  40. SC2 by blazer1024 · · Score: 1

    Someone already rebooted Star Control II. It was called Mass Effect. :)

    I'm kidding, but seriously, go play Mass Effect 1 and compare it to SC2. There are a LOT of similarities there.

    For starters, check this out:

    http://aliens.wikia.com/wiki/Ur-Quan_Kzer-Za
    http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Thorian

    Heck, the thorian's mind controlled minions are even referred to as "thralls"

  41. Atari is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With them selling off everything related to the Company, its prized franchises. Their devaluing the IP to the point there won't be anything left.
    Company is done, with the trademark names of the game scattered out there, it will be legal hell trying put them under one programming house.
    Damn shame.

  42. Accolade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to the TFA at atariuser.com, only the accolade.com domain name got sold for $50k, not the brand name itself.