I'm afraid I agree with (the modest) Brad. Admittedly, I have not seen this article and I don't know the criteria that were applied, but as much as I like and admire Stardock (and I do very much) I think their output to date is somewhat small to rank them so highly. Unless I am missing something, Stardock's ouevre consists of one very good game (GCII, which I would consider an improved, more fully realized version of GCI, so not two games), one decidedly mediocre game (the budget priced Political Machines, which again I'd consider one game), and some undefined input into the development of another very good game, Ironclad's SOASE. While impressive for a small, niche developer, it seems a little low to be considred among the greatest of all time. And while GCII is very, very good, in my (obviously) subjective opinion it is not on the level of games so classic that creation of that game alone would be sufficient to make the list. Examples might be Bioware, if it had never developed any game but Baldur's Gate, id merely for Doom, New World Computing for HOMM alone, Microprose for Civ or CivII alone, Firaxis for either SMAC or CivIV alone (those devs are on the list, I hope). I am a big fan of Stardock, so I don't mean this post to be critical (though it will inevitably be so considered by fanboys), but merely a dash of realism.