10-07-2005, 05:21 AM | #41 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 32
|
I was thinking about the timing of Vivendi´s decision concerning the KG IX game...it was right after they released the trailer,wasn´t it?
At first,i thought that they didn´t follow the game´s progress,and were simply surprised with the quality of the project. But now,i realise that those guys (from Sierra) probably had been following the game´s progress,and,at the same time,planned a sequel to the game.They just didn´t want to pay a development team to start the game.They wanted to make sure they would have a good audience (read "buyers) for the game.And now,they are sure of it,and without spending one cent! They took advantege of the work done by the Phoenix studios. That´s awful,and i am not gonna buy the KG game if the Sierra decides to release it. What about you? |
10-07-2005, 06:31 AM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 948
|
Quote:
|
|
10-07-2005, 06:33 AM | #43 |
kamikaze hummingbirds
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Over there.
Posts: 7,946
|
Why dont the KQIX people just join with AGDI then or something?
__________________
The bin is a place for household rubbish, not beloved pets! |
10-07-2005, 06:47 AM | #44 |
Diva of Death
|
Josh: I'm not personally disputing that Vivendi has the right to shut down the project. But they way they've chosen to do it I find rather bizarre.
Point 1: There's been two SQ fangame prequels released so far, possibly other Sierra-based fangames too, and a number of other fangames in development. Nothing from Vivendi. Nothing that has caused those games to be closed/removed, anyway. Point 2: AGDI has permission to release remakes. Now, I would think that games that are essentially free and improved replacements for the original games would be a nightmare for a company's IP and sales, yet Vivendi's granted permission for AGDI to release them. Point 3: The KQIX fangame has been in production for something like 4 years, and, as you said, has received quite a bit of publicity. Vivendi has had years to shut them down, yet they wait until 2-3 months before it was going to be released. Point 4: Colin from the SQ7.org team has been in contact with Vivendi for quite some time. Yet the project is still going. You'd think if Vivendi was really worried about cancelling fangames they'd have also given the SQ7.org folks a cease & desist, yet they have not. Also, last I heard KQIX did not have any previous agreement/contact with Vivendi (although they did have contact with Roberta and Ken Williams). So I don't think this is a result of failed negotiations. So, while I don't dispute the fact that Vivendi has the right to close down a fangame, I find the IMHO inconsistency of their behavior towards fangames to be strange. I feel like I'm putting two and two together and getting five. Peace & Luv, Liz
__________________
Adventures in Roleplaying (Nov. 19): "Maybe it's still in the Elemental Plane of Candy." "Is the Elemental Plane of Candy anything like Willy Wonka's factory?" "If it is, would that mean Oompa Loompas are Candy Elementals?" "Actually, I'm thinking more like the Candyland board game. But, I like this idea better." "I like the idea of Oompa Loompa Elementals." |
10-07-2005, 07:34 AM | #45 | |
Diva of Death
|
I can't believe I almost forgot to address this:
Quote:
You know why? Because Roberta created and wrote most of the King's Quest world, whereas Vivendi did nothing but buy it up. And seeing as how in this case the original creator of the series knows of the project and has given it good wishes, I personally hold a lot, lot more weight over that then a company which technically owns the rights but has jack all emotional or creative energy vested in them as of yet. So, yes, I personally feel that the original creator of a work has the right to say how it's used and I would respect that with no grumblings. But why should I care overmuch about a company that has no creative involvement with the work whatsoever? Peace & Luv, Liz
__________________
Adventures in Roleplaying (Nov. 19): "Maybe it's still in the Elemental Plane of Candy." "Is the Elemental Plane of Candy anything like Willy Wonka's factory?" "If it is, would that mean Oompa Loompas are Candy Elementals?" "Actually, I'm thinking more like the Candyland board game. But, I like this idea better." "I like the idea of Oompa Loompa Elementals." |
|
10-07-2005, 08:05 AM | #46 | |
Master of time and space
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sverige
Posts: 1,480
|
Quote:
__________________
... |
|
10-07-2005, 08:30 AM | #47 | ||||||
Third Guy from Andromeda
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
|
Hi, Jeysie!
It's certainly fair to find Vivendi's actions (and timing) bizarre, but I think it's safe to presume that's only because neither you nor I nor most of the people here are privy to the decision-making process. Odds are very good that there was some rationale for it. Just because we don't know what that rationale is doesn't mean we can assume it was just an evil whim. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
--Josh |
||||||
10-07-2005, 08:57 AM | #48 | |
Third Guy from Andromeda
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
Of course, one could also ask whether or not Sierra On-Line ever contacted the estates of the creators of some of the various fairy tales that made up the KQ series to see if they had the moral leave to use them freely. But just for fun, let's say they did...that, for instance, Lewis Carroll's estate was asked for moral permission, even if legal permission was no longer necessary. I find it funny that one would argue moral grounds here. KQIX was chiefly written without Roberta's input or approval. Very late in the procedure, they got her "blessing," but that blessing was not based on a review of the material. Roberta refused to look at the specifics of the game. Her "blessing" amounted to, "Good luck with your project, go for it!" not "I approve of what you have my characters saying and doing, I approve of the direction you're taking the series I created, and I approve of your representation of this game being the next rightful game in the series I created." In other words, she did not (or, legally, could not) care overmuch about the future of the KQ series if she gave her blessing, sight unseen, to a fangame. But the point is: she had already done that. The Williamses freely sold the company. In other words: the same blessing she gave to the KQIX team, she had already given years ago when she sold the company (and, with it, the rights to the game). Why is it morally wrong for the company that PAID for those characters to assert their ownership, but NOT morally wrong for a company (the KQIX team) that did NOT pay for those characters? BTW: I urged the KQIX team many times, years ago, to consider renaming and recreating the game from a very early point, so as to be more respectful of Roberta (specifically: NOT to rewrite canon), to avoid conflict with Vivendi, and to avoid making presumptuous claims about what direction the series should move in and whether or not the game should be represented as being the next game in the series. For this, I was considered hostile to the project. I take no joy in seeing the project quashed, but I think it was easily preventable, and I think hubris got in the way. --Josh |
|
10-07-2005, 10:32 AM | #49 | ||||
Diva of Death
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nevertheless, I think what I'm basically saying here is that, again, to me the whole situation feels inconsistent. If Vivendi is going to shut down one fangame, they really need to shut down all of them, or at least give some concrete criteria of what they do and don't find acceptable and why, so every fan who wants to do a fanwork isn't looking over their shoulder with paranoia. You do make some good points, but again, they are true of all non-original fangames, so I don't think it's fair to pick and choose which games you condemn regarding them. That's what I'm really arguing about here: equal treatment (or perceived lack thereof). Peace & Luv, Liz
__________________
Adventures in Roleplaying (Nov. 19): "Maybe it's still in the Elemental Plane of Candy." "Is the Elemental Plane of Candy anything like Willy Wonka's factory?" "If it is, would that mean Oompa Loompas are Candy Elementals?" "Actually, I'm thinking more like the Candyland board game. But, I like this idea better." "I like the idea of Oompa Loompa Elementals." |
||||
10-07-2005, 10:48 AM | #50 |
Epinionated.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London
Posts: 5,841
|
What's the dif between this game and fanfic?
No-one's making any money out of it.
__________________
Starter of Thread Must Die. |
10-07-2005, 11:34 AM | #51 | ||||
Third Guy from Andromeda
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In the case of KQIX, though, last time I saw the docs, there were a great many events that intentionally reframed canonical events, changing, for instance, characters' motivations for their original actions, changing the nature of their relationships, etc. I think that's a clear show of disrespect to the original designer (whether or not that designer publicly comments or objects), and one definitely sees a lot of it in fangames. Quote:
As far as making criteria clear, I'm not at all sure a copyright holder has a responsibility to publicly declare what is or isn't fair use of their property. The existing presumption is that NO use of the property is fair. I would think the onus is on the designer or writer to seek out the copyright holder and find out what the criteria are...or at least make a good-faith effort to do so (and ensure a paper trail that documents it!). --Josh |
||||
10-07-2005, 11:37 AM | #52 | |
Codger
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,080
|
Quote:
In the consumer marketplace Brands come and go all the time. Just because Proctor and Gamble decides to stop making X doesn't mean they've relinquished ownership of the Brand. They may even decide to sell the Brand to Nestle, who also may decide not to manufacture X but that doesn't mean Nestle has relinquished ownership of the Brand. If I, as a longtime fan of X, decide that if they aren't going to manufacture it, I will, and I will call it by the very same Brand name. Should I expect a knock on my door? You bet! Can I control when, or even if, the knock will come? Absolutely not. Now, simply substitue Sierra On-Line for P&G; Vivendi Universal for Nestle; Kings Quest for Brand and KQIX for the remanufactured X I want to bring to market. And finally, does the Brand holder have a right to arbitrarily protect some of its Brands and not others? That's a little iffy. If a Brand holder neglects to protect the Brand, it may eventually find itself losing exclusive rights to that Brand, but that is not the case here.
__________________
For whom the games toll... They toll for thee Last edited by rtrooney; 10-07-2005 at 02:41 PM. |
|
10-07-2005, 12:48 PM | #53 | |||
Diva of Death
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I do agree that I doubt a company is legally required to specify what and what isn't acceptable to its fans. But it's certainly a sign of good faith towards your fans (since any PR person that hasn't been under a rock knows that if there's a creative work, sooner or later somebody's going to create fanworks based on it). I mean, for instance, if I want to go and write and post/play a Harry Potter fanfic or RPG or website I know ahead of time what is and isn't "acceptable" without having to worry about it. I don't have to get all paranoid. I do agree that the KQIX team should have addressed the issue since it's such a big and notable project, and it's a very good idea for any fangame team. But I still think it would be a sign of good faith if Vivendi acknowledged the desire of fans to create works and made some kind of official statement. Peace & Luv, Liz
__________________
Adventures in Roleplaying (Nov. 19): "Maybe it's still in the Elemental Plane of Candy." "Is the Elemental Plane of Candy anything like Willy Wonka's factory?" "If it is, would that mean Oompa Loompas are Candy Elementals?" "Actually, I'm thinking more like the Candyland board game. But, I like this idea better." "I like the idea of Oompa Loompa Elementals." |
|||
10-07-2005, 03:11 PM | #54 | |
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 298
|
Quote:
If I had the chance, I would have never started making a fan game--especially since Vivendi has plans to release a collectors box set of the King's Quest series. Um...now to be serious. They knew they were taking a chance by creating this game. To go further and say that they--in essence--got "what they deserved" is just plain backwards. I, for one, see Vivendi's late decision to shut down KQIX production as a cheap shot. Sorry, but a big, bad company like Vivendi should be a little ashamed. If their not, then I'll have to post those pictures I found of it on-line. Maybe then they'll turn a little red in the face. Kirk |
|
10-07-2005, 04:03 PM | #55 | |
Codger
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,080
|
Quote:
People/companies OWN their own Brands/Trademarks/Copywrites!!!! That you don't like that they decide to enforce their rights is entirely beside the point.
__________________
For whom the games toll... They toll for thee |
|
10-07-2005, 04:14 PM | #56 |
gaybrush threepwoody
|
Weren't the King's Quest games great? My favourite was King's Quest 5.
|
10-07-2005, 04:25 PM | #57 | |
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 298
|
Quote:
I come from Michigan and damn well do not care about the company enforcing its rights. I understand this and am not the moron you seem to imply me to be. Instead, I merely think it is fine for some amteurs to take the risk. And I feel that it is sad to see KQIX go. That you don't personally agree with my opinion is entirely beside the point. Now settle down. Kirk |
|
10-07-2005, 06:14 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 726
|
Well, my mouth stood like 3 minutes wide open.
It's the worst joke which isn't one, legally maybe right, ethically definately wrong. It's not really clear to me why they made this decision now after it was for so many years in development. It could be the trailer that got through to them because it spawned a big attention or it showed them that this game rivals even commercial releases and would take something away from their sale numbers, together it could have something to do with the rerelease of the KQ collection. For me it is like the shutdown of the S&M2 of amateur games. All what we have left are some pretty screenshots and an amazing trailer which we will probably watch again and again. And that so short before the final release! There are so many similiarities! On example of this historical case we maybe should also start a petition to show our anger against Vivendi. Many would surely sign it and in this regard it would be successful, but like we already know, it wouldn't reverse this decision. R.I.P. Well, at least, they're going on, but nevertheless it seems like a big waste of time and energy now, and only because this ****ing....however. |
10-07-2005, 10:18 PM | #59 |
Psycho Game Maker
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 208
|
Should of known better .
Copyright is copyright.
__________________
Enjoy today as Yesterday is gone and Tomorrow may never come! My Web site Deveron Murder Mystery Game Mikes Room |
10-07-2005, 10:52 PM | #60 |
Citizen of Bizarro World
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Htrae
Posts: 4,219
|
Should have known better. Verbs are verbs, after all.
__________________
By no rocket’s blue shade am no shells dead down there, Gave no proof all day long that the flag was unwhere! No say does am spar-strangled shroud hang limply! Under land of no free! Am us home coward-leeee! ~Excerpt from the Bizarro Anthem |