It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Here's a problem: I preordered SC Origins; and since Dec 17 it's been available as a Beta.

I haven't installed it or downloaded it.

Now I'd like to cancel it; mostly in protest at Stardock's ridiculous lawsuit.

Is it possible to get a refund?
No posts in this topic were marked as the solution yet. If you can help, add your reply
avatar
corinoco64: Here's a problem: I preordered SC Origins; and since Dec 17 it's been available as a Beta.

I haven't installed it or downloaded it.

Now I'd like to cancel it; mostly in protest at Stardock's ridiculous lawsuit.

Is it possible to get a refund?
This is probably something you should directly contact support over.

Personally, going by what I've read on this leading up to the current development, the signs of this escalating were written on the walls when the original devs starting acting melodramatic on blogs instead of acting professional. It could only progress worse from there, unless cooler heads prevail sooner than later.

This is more than likely due to the mess of confusion on who owns what from long before Stardock got their hands on it, so it'd be nice if they just settled and both made their games in their own merry ways. If one or the other has to rename their game, I could care less, so long as the games themselves are enjoyable and allowed to co-exist, as seemed to be the case originally.

It's also annoying to me that they start developing their own game after Stardock's gets some news. They've had all these years and promises (of which I'd been looking forward to), so for all this drama to start now...

Honestly, assuming they really do make their own game, it'd probably be fun. But so might Stardock's, which looks promising to me. I hate this level of bickering when we could get two potentially good games out of them.
Post edited February 24, 2018 by GalacticKnight
avatar
corinoco64: Is it possible to get a refund?
Beta is irrelevent. It's still a preorder. Refund should always be available for preorders anytime before the actual release. You need to open a support ticket to get the refund (which will possibly take a few days).
Post edited February 24, 2018 by Gydion
avatar
corinoco64: Is it possible to get a refund?
avatar
Gydion: Beta is irrelevent. It's still a preorder. Refund should always be available for preorders anytime before the actual release. You need to open a support ticket to get the refund (which will possibly take a few days).
So what is the status on Star Control Origins? Is it not ever going to be released now or does anyone know?
avatar
corinoco64: Here's a problem: I preordered SC Origins; and since Dec 17 it's been available as a Beta.

I haven't installed it or downloaded it.

Now I'd like to cancel it; mostly in protest at Stardock's ridiculous lawsuit.

Is it possible to get a refund?
avatar
GalacticKnight: This is probably something you should directly contact support over.

Personally, going by what I've read on this leading up to the current development, the signs of this escalating were written on the walls when the original devs starting acting melodramatic on blogs instead of acting professional. It could only progress worse from there, unless cooler heads prevail sooner than later.

This is more than likely due to the mess of confusion on who owns what from long before Stardock got their hands on it, so it'd be nice if they just settled and both made their games in their own merry ways. If one or the other has to rename their game, I could care less, so long as the games themselves are enjoyable and allowed to co-exist, as seemed to be the case originally.

It's also annoying to me that they start developing their own game after Stardock's gets some news. They've had all these years and promises (of which I'd been looking forward to), so for all this drama to start now...

Honestly, assuming they really do make their own game, it'd probably be fun. But so might Stardock's, which looks promising to me. I hate this level of bickering when we could get two potentially good games out of them.
http://lawfulmasses.com/stardock-star-control-part-1/#more-590
Summed up pretty well here.
avatar
GalacticKnight: This is probably something you should directly contact support over.

Personally, going by what I've read on this leading up to the current development, the signs of this escalating were written on the walls when the original devs starting acting melodramatic on blogs instead of acting professional. It could only progress worse from there, unless cooler heads prevail sooner than later.

This is more than likely due to the mess of confusion on who owns what from long before Stardock got their hands on it, so it'd be nice if they just settled and both made their games in their own merry ways. If one or the other has to rename their game, I could care less, so long as the games themselves are enjoyable and allowed to co-exist, as seemed to be the case originally.

It's also annoying to me that they start developing their own game after Stardock's gets some news. They've had all these years and promises (of which I'd been looking forward to), so for all this drama to start now...

Honestly, assuming they really do make their own game, it'd probably be fun. But so might Stardock's, which looks promising to me. I hate this level of bickering when we could get two potentially good games out of them.
avatar
s77338: http://lawfulmasses.com/stardock-star-control-part-1/#more-590
Summed up pretty well here.
Honestly, not a lot has changed from my opinion about this after watching the two videos. For one, it sounds like Atari still hasn't got a clue what it's doing and is really the true source of any conflict here, legitimate or otherwise.

Another is that a lot of this is just lawyers getting involved and throwing junk at the wall to see what will stick, on both sides. Like with the original devs' side suggesting that "how dare they make Galactic Civilizations games with inspirations from our games, and allow players to make custom content that could be lifted from our games", which is something gamers have done with any game that allows customizable player-influenced content. Like seeing Star Trek content made in Stellaris (or I guess Galactic Civilizations, even). Just a little silly from a gamer's point of view after decades of modding support and player-customizable content in gaming, official or otherwise.

It felt a little slimy seeing them use Wardell's quote of him basically saying that he loves the original Star Controls so much that he, too, was inspired to make custom unofficial Star Control-inspired content in his own Galactic Civilizations playthroughs as a point against them.

The rest is just Stardock really loving Star Control and wanting to do something truly Star Control'y and wishing they could work with the original devs on it, but doing their own thing because they can't, while the original devs seem to be floundering about, waiting until the last possible moment to announce they are also just starting work (or at least announcing they will) on something and getting into this situation despite having all sorts of opportunities to deal with it much earlier.

It's such a mess, and if this game ends up being renamed something else, whatever, it doesn't need "Star Control" to keep going. It's already its own universe separate from the classic games, as it is, and the videos digging into this stuff confirm this, anyway. It's just a bunch of PR and lawyers making a big mess at this point.

Frankly, I've been waiting for any potentially good Star Control game, or a Star Control-like game, to be made and released, and I'd have been happy having two such games. I hate drama, especially ill-timed (or well-timed, depending on who it benefits) drama like this.
Post edited April 15, 2018 by GalacticKnight
I just bought the game to support Stardock because I think the troll posts to boycott the game are ridiculous. :-P

Also, most of the reviews are not even about the game itself; just the lawsuit. GOG should delete all of those.
Post edited October 18, 2018 by gamebin
I also am leaning towards Stardock in this feud. I believe the original creators hated Stardock because they were able to get the rights when they could not. Stardock extended its hands to get the creators to participate in the development of the game but instead they used Stardock's announcement to make their own announcement thereby undercutting Stardock. I agree wholeheartedly that Stardock play hardball. Some people who are on the original developers' side are boycutting the Stardock game because they only heard from the developers' side of the story. Their mistake was making it very public and putting a bad spin on Stardock. After that , all good will between parties were gone and Stardock brought in its lawyers.
avatar
oninowon: I also am leaning towards Stardock in this feud. I believe the original creators hated Stardock because they were able to get the rights when they could not. Stardock extended its hands to get the creators to participate in the development of the game but instead they used Stardock's announcement to make their own announcement thereby undercutting Stardock. I agree wholeheartedly that Stardock play hardball. Some people who are on the original developers' side are boycutting the Stardock game because they only heard from the developers' side of the story. Their mistake was making it very public and putting a bad spin on Stardock. After that , all good will between parties were gone and Stardock brought in its lawyers.
sorry but thats bs stardock lied stole ,bullied and threatned and many other shady shit
they got what they deserved
avatar
oninowon: I also am leaning towards Stardock in this feud. I believe the original creators hated Stardock because they were able to get the rights when they could not. Stardock extended its hands to get the creators to participate in the development of the game but instead they used Stardock's announcement to make their own announcement thereby undercutting Stardock. I agree wholeheartedly that Stardock play hardball. Some people who are on the original developers' side are boycutting the Stardock game because they only heard from the developers' side of the story. Their mistake was making it very public and putting a bad spin on Stardock. After that , all good will between parties were gone and Stardock brought in its lawyers.
avatar
jaymilo: sorry but thats bs stardock lied stole ,bullied and threatned and many other shady shit
they got what they deserved
Sorry but what a trash response. Stardock clearly attempted multiple times to establish a good faith discussion with Paul and Fred with regards to licensing their IPs, they also offered to sell them back the trademark at cost very early in their exchanges. They declined and after Stardock spent millions on making the game Paul and Fred they act in directly bad faith using insider info to announce a new Star Control sequel Before Origins could be announced without even consulting Stardock. They are likely breaching Stardock's rightful trademark on the title and they had an illegitimate DMCA complaint filed to attack Stardock on a title they don't own and didn't help create. They then run a social media campaign directly attacking Stardock and Brad Warrel undermining the rightful legitimacy Stardock had to create the game. Buying the rights to a trademark isn't stealing, attempting to license out old IPs isn't bullying and the threats started with an illegitimate DMCA notice. If anything Stardock has been exceptionally measured in their responses to this.
avatar
jaymilo: sorry but thats bs stardock lied stole ,bullied and threatned and many other shady shit
they got what they deserved
avatar
Firetrucksrule: Sorry but what a trash response. Stardock clearly attempted multiple times to establish a good faith discussion with Paul and Fred with regards to licensing their IPs, they also offered to sell them back the trademark at cost very early in their exchanges. They declined and after Stardock spent millions on making the game Paul and Fred they act in directly bad faith using insider info to announce a new Star Control sequel Before Origins could be announced without even consulting Stardock. They are likely breaching Stardock's rightful trademark on the title and they had an illegitimate DMCA complaint filed to attack Stardock on a title they don't own and didn't help create. They then run a social media campaign directly attacking Stardock and Brad Warrel undermining the rightful legitimacy Stardock had to create the game. Buying the rights to a trademark isn't stealing, attempting to license out old IPs isn't bullying and the threats started with an illegitimate DMCA notice. If anything Stardock has been exceptionally measured in their responses to this.
Let's not forget how Paul and Fred left Star Control alone to be sold off in the first place, how they didn't seem to care about it up until Stardock had a working Star Control game, despite all the actual evidence per the official legal documents on both sides that they knew what was going on, and how it was after all this time that they finally merely announced that they intend to eventually get around to making a sequel that has no actual development done yet. All because Stardock finally did something with it and they, as far as it seems, wanted to get on that bandwagon of nostalgia.

This is over the course of years, decades even. Paul and Fred had all the opportunities to stop this, to get involved, and they were made generous offers that cost pocket change when compared to their legal costs in this childish tantrum of a legal battle. They were all happy and fine to be uninvolved until now. Going by the arguments made, it doesn't even entirely sound like it's all to defend the honor of Paul and Fred as it is to just hate on Stardock for various personal reasons. Certainly not based on any logic or research done into the legal mess or anything that I can discern.

I wanted a game by Paul and Fred. But this behavior, now up to the DMCA, which always seems to get used in the least proper ways, along with all the evidence released by both sides, only tells me they never intended to release a new Star Control of any sort. And it's hard to ignore the immature reactions and behavior from their end as a result of all this. Never meet your heroes, apparently.

It should be considered that combating perceived bullying by throwing hateful bullying right back isn't the best way to make allies and to help win arguments.
Post edited January 02, 2019 by GalacticKnight
"It should be considered that combating perceived bullying by throwing hateful bullying right back isn't the best way to make allies and to help win arguments."

Firstly what are you refrencing here?

so the creators OWN STAR CONTROL 1 and 2 AND IT's assets PERIOD right you got that?

they chose NOT TO WORK WITH A COMPANY that they didn't want to because instead they decided they did not like the deal or the licence request and terms set by Stardock

now Stardock decides to USE IP THEY DO NOT OWN PERIOD KNOWING FULL WELL THEY DON'T OWN IT OR LEGALLY CAN USE IT BUT THEY DO

https://www.scribd.com/document/396682032/Stardock-Systems-Inc-vs-Paul-Reiche-III-and-Robert-Frederick-Ford-Order-Denying-Motion-for-Preliminary-Injunction#from_embed?campaign=SkimbitLtd&ad_group=66960X1516586X17a14def1f2ea3e0852f05bc2a531659&keyword=660149026&source=hp_affiliate&medium=affiliate

read it and a learn a bit more

the creators are well with in their legal right

stardock are thiefs and brad in particular is a liar and a bully and sucked in to him
avatar
jaymilo: "It should be considered that combating perceived bullying by throwing hateful bullying right back isn't the best way to make allies and to help win arguments."

Firstly what are you refrencing here?

so the creators OWN STAR CONTROL 1 and 2 AND IT's assets PERIOD right you got that?

they chose NOT TO WORK WITH A COMPANY that they didn't want to because instead they decided they did not like the deal or the licence request and terms set by Stardock

now Stardock decides to USE IP THEY DO NOT OWN PERIOD KNOWING FULL WELL THEY DON'T OWN IT OR LEGALLY CAN USE IT BUT THEY DO

https://www.scribd.com/document/396682032/Stardock-Systems-Inc-vs-Paul-Reiche-III-and-Robert-Frederick-Ford-Order-Denying-Motion-for-Preliminary-Injunction#from_embed?campaign=SkimbitLtd&ad_group=66960X1516586X17a14def1f2ea3e0852f05bc2a531659&keyword=660149026&source=hp_affiliate&medium=affiliate

read it and a learn a bit more

the creators are well with in their legal right

stardock are thiefs and brad in particular is a liar and a bully and sucked in to him
As someone who's played the game (unlike a good portion of the negative reviewers on the store page, it seems), Star Control: Origins appears to contain no material from Star Control 1 or 2. It is, for all intents and purposes, an original game merely based on the gameplay styles of games like Star Control of the time, with some modernized features. The only commonality they really share is the title. Except for the use of humans, "Star Control", and vague mentionings of a long-gone ancient species/faction, of which most science-fiction has in common, all the aliens, ships, etc. are unique to Origins.

They didn't just chose not to work with Stardock, according to the various documentation provided by both sides, they knowingly allowed things to continue without interference from their end until, basically, the very last moment. Showing merely continued disinterest in "Star Control" from long before Stardock purchased anything from Atari, when they should have stepped in if something was done wrong then, too.

They had every opportunity to do something about it, if they cared enough to. Now, instead of a kickstarter for a new "Star Control" game of some sort (and why not one to buy what Atari was selling in the first place?), they're trying to do one to fight a legal battle that should never have happened, and I am finding it harder with each new development to find compassion for their less-than-professional actions. I'm not discounting or dismissing things Stardock has done in reaction to Paul and Fred, but the responses Stardock has gotten is wildly out of proportion compared to the shenanigans of Paul and Fred.

I'm a Star Control fan, I've been hanging on their promises for decades, and I find this sudden renewed interest in a property they've only paid lip-service to until someone made a similar game in the series more than a little fascinating.

As for the web link to "Document 102" which was filed in the last several days being used as undeniable proof that Stardock is in the wrong here, that would be a wrong assumption. The document primarily deals with the issue of the DMCA being used repeatedly by Paul and Fred since the beginning of their re-newfound involvement in "Star Control" and Stardock's attempt to stop or slow down the DMCAs being thrown at them. It contains some history, though it seems, again, focused on the DMCA and why Paul and Fred feel justified in using it. It doesn't seem to contain much in the way of the prior going-ons and details of the on-going legal battles, otherwise.

Before linking such documents as proof, it might be a boon to review them first to ensure they pertain to the specific points being made, if any clear specific points were offered.

In the end, this only highlights how, at the least, the final released product of Star Control: Origins is being slammed by the DMCA when it contains no content that Paul and Fred might object to. The DMCA is used to basically stop the theft of such content, so it appears it's merely being used out of spite at this point.

As for the "bullying" part, I refer to derogatory posts and reviews that have little to do with the game itself and more to do with knocking on Stardock and anyone who posts anything that seems even mildly supportive of them. To me, it just seems like a barely justified reason for Stardock haters to come out of the woodwork.
Post edited January 04, 2019 by GalacticKnight