I've also added a few lines.

Stardock is a very good company and I think everybody should know.

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.

Well, I specifically addressed this issue in my post. One game would be enough, if it's good enough (and by good, I mean an innovative classic). By that standard, Doom, Civ, HOMM singly would be sufficient. Whille I think GCII is a very good game, I would not place it on the levels of those. Admittedly, that is my opinion, but what else can we go by? Yours may differ. And I wholeheartedly agree with you on Stardock's support, both of the game and of its customers; it is likely unmatched in the industry. (Especially since Paradox's support level seems to have declined, i.e., fewer patches, requiring payment for "expansions" that Stardock would give us for free. Napoleon's Ambition, anyone?) But it does not chnage my opinion if we are looking solely at the quality of the game development itself.

No doubt.

Quoting from the article:

"For some, their presence on the list is a simple matter of having released nothing but great games that elevated their reputation from mere mortals to legendary beings.  For others, it might be one moment that redefined what it meant to be a PC Gamer." (My emphasis)

I think that Stardock could definitely fall under the one moment category at least.  GalCiv2 redefined what expansion packs should be, and the gamers bill of rights is the only instance of a publisher addressing the DRM problem in an out of the box way.  Impulse is new, but it is already challenging Steam and appears to be heading for second place behind them, which is a tremendous feat in so short a time.  I think they deserve it.