Considering the fact that CD version is unplayable there is no 'if'.

I don't think it was on purpose or the first couple of updates would have fixed everything.  Which they didn't.

There is an if, in the strictest sense. We're talking about the DRM principle here. Yes, the game on the disk is.. bad, to say the least. But if it does start without an activation, then there is no DRM.

Obviously to get any mileage out of Elemental specifically people will need to patch the disk version, but that's not because of any DRM scheme, rather because the version that got put on the disk ended up being pretty crappy - and that's certainly not intentional.

Or you can go to anywhere.impulsedriven.com and download a full offline installation of the game that can be installed without an internet connection, so even the digital version technically doesn't have DRM.

I read some of the responses.....

Just FYI, this post was sort of meant as a joke before people get too serious about the issue   Feel free to post anything you like though, but keep in mind I was just kidding. 

Everyone knows the only Evil Genius in the world is me

 

Not a good enough reason. Blizzard games, even SC2 are famous for working perfectly under Linux. It is confirmed that at some point they kept internal Linux versions of their games - likely to ensure compatibility. They never stated they support Linux, yet among Linux players they are known for easy emulation. This translates into extra sales, listed as windows versions. Good for both sides.

You don't have to explicitely support Linux. Linux users are exceptional at helping themselves - that's how Linux came to be, and how it is today. There's generally not enough Linux people anywhere to support wide adoption, so you resort to the internet. Linux - by techies, for techies. Ubuntu is different, it has the highest number of windows immigrants with their mentality.



Thank you, this is informative. Yet wine is in constant development and games which don't work now likely will in the future. Demigod used not to, but now does. There's actually voting involved. Developers focus their attention on areas involved with highest voted apps.



Back then there was no Icculus's port.



Hell, it's not just Windows/Linux problem. It's a Windows/Windows problem. I read some interview with a core Windows developer, about his experiences talking to game developers. He tried to talk them into porting games to newer version of Windows. The majority openly responded they don't care about a game after the initial sales. In the retail days, sales dropped very quickly. Open source, open standards are exceptional at supporting old games. Think about Dosbox, other emulators, Fish Fillets, DooM and other adandonware. And yes, wine. The only thing contemporary DooM devs don't get right is fragmentation. Demo recording scene is pretty much gone. PrBoom is a source port which takes compatibility very seriously, and even has multiple options.

You can do fine if you adapt your tastes. I dabble in game design myself, and don't shy away from roguelikes, for example. But I do like some big games like ET:QW. It would be harder if these days most big studios weren't filled with Hollywood-mentality people. Rockpapershotgun is a PC-exclusive site which doesn't exclude small and independent games (although they rarely write about roguelikes, probably personal preference).



Hmm, I'll be careful.

But I hope I've shown that DRM causes collateral damage. I don't care how you twist the words. Online activation, online only, Stardock Goo. Any kind of limitation that an informed player wouldn't want himself. Most people understand the need for anti-cheating limitations like VAC and PunkBuster. These are specialised tools, they don't pretend to be something they aren't (like Steam, Impulse,  BattleNet2 which lump a lot of stuff together and are often defended with red herrings). There are PB-free servers and they can be enjoyed as long as they have vigilant admins.

Incorrect. Wine Is Not an Emulator. It's an implementation of Windows API. Performance hits happen, because it's not a perfect implementation, but absolutely not always. Funny, they even implement various Windows bugs if they affect compatibility.

 

 

The knowledge that the game developers will have a paying job come next week?

Are you for real ? Developing software is hard work, especially in an obscure, new direction or where no one likes to go. People are and will be paid for it.  People pay even for development of popular free software, including Firefox, OpenOffice and Apache. Even today the actual producers (programmers) are not paid for every sale of a copy of software. Mostly they are paid monthly. In the much glorified days of great works, people were paid to create specific works. You ordered a painting or a new music composition. There's a big disjoint between the work programmers are doing today and the way they are paid. It can't last forever.

I focus on programmers so much because they're one of few blocks which are set in stone. You can replace middlemen. There are areas where ease of use by an education-averse person is preferred to quality. For example, Microsoft Word and especially Excel is a database for technophobes, synchronised by @mail.

 

Yes, but if the end product does not sell, the organization can't attract money to pay for later development. There's simply no support. It doesn't matter if developers get royalties - what matters is that the people with the money to pay those developers can see that there is enough of a return on investment to fund additional development. At some level, there is a business involved and businesses need money to, at the very least, stay in business.

 

Games that do not sell well generally mean that a studio will close. That's simple fact. 

 

I'm well aware that freeware can be paid for. But there's a very real reason that free projects take a lot longer to produce. The people that work on freeware projects,  be it mods or open source or whatever, have to make money to pay the bills - that's just a fact of life. They can't devote all their time and effort into something when they have mouths to feed. As much as we would love to have entertainment for free, we can't ignore the fact that a bunch of people spent months and years making it. Without our support, we'd see a lot less produced by them because they won't be free to entertain us. They'll be busying doing other things to support themselves.

Those are sponsored projects, and the sponsors benefit from the products, their development or their wide-spread usage. How many open source games are funded by companies? I can't think of a single one. 

Warzone2100

Isn't that a failed commercial project that was then made open source? (Genuine question, that's just what I recall.)