In his Maximum PC column, T. Liam McDonald points out that a similar situation occurred with silent films. Copyright holders "protected" their intellectual property rights from enthusiasts but didn't do much to protect the property itself. The result is that most of the films produced in that era are gone. (I don't have the article in front of me but I know the number was greater than %50. I want to say it was damn close to %90.)

Don't think the same thing can happen with games? I do. Where's the source code for _Murder on the Zundernuf_? How about _Carrier Command_? Is it backed up somewhere? Probably, but on what? A ten year old tape? These two games were, in my opinion, two of the most creative, "genre busting" games of their day and continue to go unmatched. A replayable murder mystery game? A fun, replayable, non mission based, RTS that allows you to take control of vehicles and go on the attack? Have we seen games like that since or is there something to learn there? (To anyone thinking of replying with _BC3K_: note that I said "fun.")

"[The Washington Post article] cites Frogger as an example of an old game that can make a comeback."

Huh? Is Hasbro going to sell a fifteen year old ROM file packaged with MAME or something? Do they really think that would sell? (Granted, this is Hasbro we're talking about but still...) Did id's release of the _Quake_ source code hurt them in any way?

People are slowly starting to realize that game software is as much an artistic medium as film and TV is. Students of this medium will look back on its earliest examples, just as students of any medium does. It would be nice if there was something there to look back on.

The "should" question is an interesting one, but so far it seems to be a moot point. Underdogs has been around for some time, and, to date, the game publishers, at least as far as I know, haven't threatened that site or similar ones in any way. It's the publishers copyright, and if they're not interested in enforcing it, then the conclusion that there's no harm done seems pretty obvious to me.

Besides, if the publishers can't get a handle on warez of games that haven't even hit the store shelves yet, copies of titles that aren't even on their backlists anymore have got to be an extremely low priority.

"The "should" question is an interesting one, but so far it seems to be a moot point. Underdogs
has been around for some time, and, to date, the game publishers, at least as far as I know,
haven't threatened that site or similar ones in any way. It's the publishers copyright, and if
they're not interested in enforcing it, then the conclusion that there's no harm done seems pretty
obvious to me."


The obvious corrolary to that of course is that should doesn't matter when it comes to the law. It's entirely possible that all of those abandonware sites are breaking the law, and the publishers have every legal right to rake them over the coals, AND that none of that abandon ware hurts the publishers one bit. It wouldn't be the first time a publisher has vigorously defended their IP for no real economic reason that anyone could see, other than to guard against unforseen occurrences.


And Frogger did see the light of day as a 3D action game, twice....

"The obvious corrolary to that of course is that should doesn't matter when it
comes to the law. It's entirely possible that all of those abandonware sites are
breaking the law, and the publishers have every legal right to rake them over the
coals, AND that none of that abandon ware hurts the publishers one bit. It
wouldn't be the first time a publisher has vigorously defended their IP for no real
economic reason that anyone could see, other than to guard against unforseen
occurrences."

I agree with this completely. I don't think there's any question that these sites would be sunk if the publishers decided to go after them. And even in the titles that aren't "revived" like Frogger, there, at least at times, seems to be some promo value. For example, the CG CD has from time-to-time had give-away copies of old Infocom games, Ultimas, and Wizardry titles.

It's just interesting to me that for whatever reason the publishers haven't gone after these sites and they've been around for a while now.

"It wouldn't be the first time a publisher has vigorously defended their IP for no real economic reason that anyone could see, other than to guard against unforseen occurrences."

There are plenty of good reasons for publishers to both allow and fight abandonware.

On the bad side: It encourages the practice of downloading illegal copies of games. It may cut into sales of new games -- after all, if you're playing abandonware you're not playing Alice or Undying. It puts a product out there that may not work right. If the game says EA on it when you start it and it doesn't work, that may leave a negative impression. And don't surprised if these game companies field support calls about adandonware now and then.

On the good side: It should generate good will towards a company that says, "Go ahead, have at it." It also might prime the market for a sequel.

"On the good side: It should generate good will towards a company that says, 'Go
ahead, have at it.'"

Yeah, maybe they figure that if you can get a DOS game running on a modern machine you deserve to have it for free. ;)

"Yeah, maybe they figure that if you can get a DOS game running on a modern machine you deserve to have it for free. ;)"

Heh -- yeah, I'd like to buy a cheap used P-133 and just run old DOS games on it. That would be kind of cool. I don't have anywhere to put such a beast, though.

"On the bad side: It encourages the practice of downloading illegal copies of games."

That's why it's in the interest of game publishers that abandonware become legal. If there is a strong legal separation between downloading abandonware (which most people don't consider immoral) and pirating games, it won't be "an encouragement to download illegal copies of games" anymore.

Also, should a site like Underdogs be allowed to profit from downloading the games of others? I assume they're not running it as a non-profit charity. Obviously there are costs involved with bandwidth (though the games are tiny by modern standards), but are they revenue sharing, with creators and publishers, the profits from ad sales (okay, let's ignore the fact no one is making money on ad sales, but a year ago they may have been making a tidy profit)?

If a company wants to release its games, they should be the ones to dictating how they're released. And they won't release their old games for the reason Mark alluded to above; tech support. These games won't work on most machines, and they don't want the hassles.

Actually my wife and I are working on setting an old PC like that just to play old games like Clash of Steel and X-Com.

However I agree with you guys, the lack of support of abandonware is STUPID IMHO. Look at the positive press and amount of traffic a new fledgling company like Matrix Games got when they started working on modifying games that are, to be honest, years past their prime.

The amount of good will that could be generated by publihsers themselves releasing their game to free download is something I think most corporate suit types can't even imagine. And of course this just shows how out of touch (and the fact that they have probably never played a game in their lives) most large game companies are today with their community.

Heck put some of your old games on a failing title and maybe you can generate some new sales.

The warez issue is a big deal though. Many of these games are getting copied off of the duplication press by employees of distribution and replication companies and sent off the warez happy land. In fact when we were shopping for duplicators recently some of them have begun advertising that they have taken steps to make these practices "impossible" at their shops (yeah right ;)).

Just today, I ordered licensed versions of Donkey Kong, Spy Hunter, and Moon Patrol for my kids (wink). Not as expensive as most games for that platform (gameboy), but 'new' stuff.

Is anyone trying to keep track of which 'abandonware' games are truly no longer available in a licensed form? Or is there a bit of rationalization for what most probably don't want to admit is wrong?

I suspect that most people who are troubled by downloading illegal copies rationalize it.

With a lot of the videogames, I wonder if buying a used copy even gives you a legit license? I'm not sure that reselling games doesn't violate the EULA.

That actually depends on the particular EULA. Some allow resale, some don't. If they don't allow resale, I find it highly offensive and counter to the policies of the Copyright Act. The first sale doctrine applies to books, why not software?

There was just a story in the news about some new technology that Intel has patented. It links a particular copy of a game to the first console it is played on, so you cannot resell the game or even play it at a friend's house. Again, why doesn't the first sale doctrine apply?

I downloaded Master of Orion off an abandonware site two weeks ago, and am grateful I was able to do so.

I bought that game way back in the day, but I lost the original floppies and manual several years ago (I probably threw them out thinking I'd never want to play it again -- big mistake).

The site had a zip file of the version 1.3 game directory and a pdf of the ship pictures used in the manual for the copy protection. You can even find a pdf of the full manual if you look for it.

I don't know if anyone is still selling MOO; I certainly haven't seen it for sale in any store lately, even in the reissue box.

In a case like this, I don't see how a reasonable person can be too upset about my "warezing" MOO. It's not keeping me up at night.... oh wait, actually it is. MOO is still a great game, although I was never able to get very into MOO2. I'm frankly surprised at how little deterred I am by the crappy graphics.

All I need to do now is buy a replacement copy of Alan Emrich's strategy guide off eBay. Now THAT was a strategy guide! Perfect bathroom reading too (this is in no way an insult).

Also, I really enjoyed the interview here with Alan Emrich; I'm really looking forward to MOO3, just saw on their site it's estimated for early 2002, argh!

"The first sale doctrine applies to books, why not software"

I think that came about in response to the fact that you used to be able to install a game and then sell the physical software to someone else (thus, both of you would have the game).

Of course, now that most games come on CD and require the CD to be in the drive to run, it makes a lot less sense.

"I downloaded Master of Orion off an abandonware site two weeks ago, and am grateful I was able to do so."

What Infogrames should do is just release this game with the provision that no one can resell it and ask that anyone posting the binaries link to Infogrames homepage for MOO3. They get free advertising and free goodwill.

This is kind of interesting. It's not abandonware, but it's a java-based remake of Dungeon Master.

http://www.cs.pitt.edu/~alandale/dmjava/index.html

Looks pretty nice. The only thing I don't like is that it's not designed to be run as an applet. Instead you have to configure your PC to be a Java Version 1.3 Virtual Machine, whatever that means.

""The first sale doctrine applies to books, why not software"

I think that came about in response to the fact that you used to be able to install a game and then sell the physical software to someone else (thus, both of you would have the game).

Of course, now that most games come on CD and require the CD to be in the drive to run, it makes a lot less sense."

This doesn't take into account the fact that CD copying is possible. Granted, a lot of companies these days are finding ways to check and see if it's the original CD or not, and that helps, but not every company is doing this now, and most that are haven't been for long, which still makes it possible to buy, install, copy, and then distribute most games. (Even if you give or sell the original, and the buyer/receiver doesn't ever know, you can still keep a copy.) I'm sure that this is why.

I guess the real answer is that the first sale doctrine does apply to software, but the software companies try to limit it in the license because of the ease of copying the work. Book publishers don't care so much because the cost of their product is less than the cost to reproduce a copy. However, with the advent of reliable copy protection (unique CD keys a la Q3), the game industry's assumption of consumer dishonesty starts to lose strength. If the CD key & real-time online authentication make it so only one machine can run my copy (or a copy of my copy) at a single time, why shouldn't I be able to sell it to someone else?

"If the CD key & real-time online authentication make it so only one machine can run my copy (or a copy of my copy) at a single time, why shouldn't I be able to sell it to someone else?"

A lot of companies use the CD keys, but that only works for people who are playing online. If I copy a game, even if it has a CD key, and give that copy (or the original, and keep the copy) to someone else, along with the CD key, and neither of us ever gets online to use -- and never registers the product -- then that person could easily do the same thing. Granted with a game like Q3 that's not as likely to happen as, say Warcraft II or the Sims, but it could. As long as only one person registers it and they only play online one at a time, any number of people could have copies.

To take this one step further: If I buy a game, and one of my friends buys a game, and we make note of each other's CD keys, then if we distribute copies to five people each, and everyone has 2 CD keys -- well, then any two of those ten people can play online at once, and if we set up via LAN, we could all play at once (assuming the game supported ten players). So, my thoughts on the matter is that, even with CD keys, it's still to easy to cheat.

I wonder a little bit about games written by defunct companies. Does anybody here know what happens to the royalties, etc.?

John: I don't know if anyone is still selling MOO; I certainly haven't seen it for sale in any store lately, even in the reissue box.

I managed to find a copy of Master of Orion a few years back in a Microprose "Conquer the Universe" collection. It came with the CD versions of Master of Magic, X-Com, and X-Com 2. That collection was quite the find.

John: In a case like this, I don't see how a reasonable person can be too upset about my "warezing" MOO. It's not keeping me up at night.... oh wait, actually it is. MOO is still a great game, although I was never able to get very into MOO2. I'm frankly surprised at how little deterred I am by the crappy graphics.

Interesting. After playing MOO again, I was reminded me how much of an improvement MOO2 was, particularly concerning interface design.

- Alan

Al: A replayable murder mystery game? A fun, replayable, non mission based, RTS that allows you to take control of vehicles and go on the attack? Have we seen games like that since or is there something to learn there? (To anyone thinking of replying with _BC3K_: note that I said "fun.")

1.) Bladerunner
2.) Dungeon Keeper

I'm just annoyed that some reviewers think this kind of stuff is breaking new ground when it's actually just rehashing old concepts.

- Alan

Alan,

I managed to find a copy of Master of Orion a few years back in a Microprose "Conquer the Universe" collection. It came with the CD versions of Master of Magic, X-Com, and X-Com 2. That collection was quite the find.

That was quite the find, and sounds familiar to me, although I don't think it's for sale any longer. Thankfully I had the foresight to buy an extra copy of XCOM when it was reissued by Microprose as a value game a while back; I had some fun with that a few months ago. Great games one and all.

Interesting. After playing MOO again, I was reminded me how much of an improvement MOO2 was, particularly concerning interface design.

I found the colony micromanagement in MOO2 burdensome. Perhaps I could have given it more of a chance, but if I remember correctly it was released when I was still in the throes of an addiction to Red Alert.

Does anyone else find it extremely annoying to do a 1.6 gb install of a game to their hard drive then be expected to put the CD in to play? I shell out good money for the game and an 80 gb hard disk yet I have to find the CD to play. Luckily there is www.gamecopyworld.com and I can just grab the no-cd patch and the problem is solved. Even so I can't get past the idea that paying customers have to deal with this crap. Anyone else feel the same way?

John wrote:
"I found the colony micromanagement in MOO2 burdensome. Perhaps I could have given it more of a chance, but if I remember correctly it was released when I was still in the throes of an addiction to Red Alert."

I agree wholeheartedly. The first MOO was almost perfect in all respects with enough to do to keep you interested without overwhelming you with descisions. Also my favorite part of the first game, building a fleet with hundreds of ships, was removed from the 2nd. :/

With all this MOO talk, it sounds like you all NEED to play Starships Unlimited. It's absolutely the best MOO-like game I've played since the original. It's pausable real-time and it's positively fantastic. It's also designed by one guy. The shareware release is 2 MB and will probably take more of your time than most games you paid $40 for and installed 1.6GB of to your hard drive.

I kid you not. Everyone that enjoyes space 4X games needs to try StUn. Get it from ApeZone. I only wish I wasn't working on a review of another game currently so I could play it!

--Dave

I downloaded that a while back (after you mentioned it) but never got around to installing it. I will have to give it a try.

Xaroc: I agree wholeheartedly. The first MOO was almost perfect in all respects with enough to do to keep you interested without overwhelming you with descisions. Also my favorite part of the first game, building a fleet with hundreds of ships, was removed from the 2nd. :/

Ah, so I guess it just comes down to a matter of personal taste. In my opinion, the colony management in MOO2 was just an extension of the percentage boxes from the first game. Yeah, I also miss the mega-fleets, but I seem to recall that they were susceptible to streaming weapons. Ah, the memories.

Xaroc: Does anyone else find it extremely annoying to do a 1.6 gb install of a game to their hard drive then be expected to put the CD in to play? I shell out good money for the game and an 80 gb hard disk yet I have to find the CD to play. Luckily there is www.gamecopyworld.com and I can just grab the no-cd patch and the problem is solved. Even so I can't get past the idea that paying customers have to deal with this crap. Anyone else feel the same way?

Yeah. Actually, that only really bugs me if they don't give me multiple installation options. I'm just fine letting music and cutscenes stream from the CD, I mean since I need to have it in the drive anyhow...

- Alan

Alan wrote:

"Yeah. Actually, that only really bugs me if they don't give me multiple installation options. I'm just fine letting music and cutscenes stream from the CD, I mean since I need to have it in the drive anyhow... "

Even multiple installation options don't really help me. I want to go play a game of NHL 2001, then finish a mission on Sacrifice, and then maybe play Fallout Tactics. I don't want to have to switch CDs 2 or 3 times. I want to look at my games folder and know if I click on any icon the game is going to start up without me having to track down the CD.

---

Quote:

I want to look at my games folder and know if I click on any icon the game is going to start up without me having to track down the CD.

---

Murph wrote:

---

Quote:

I didn't even know that such a site as www.gamecopyworld.com existed. I visited yesterday, and it seems pretty cool. I could spend some quality time there, finding what I need for the games I have...

---

Xaroc wrote:

---

Quote:

Just remember to back up your original exe file before applying any of those no-cd files.

---