Slashdot Mirror


Sid Meier Responds

Late in September we gave you the chance to put your questions to eminent game designer Sid Meier, the man behind the Civilization series. Creator of a series that has squandered the spare time of many a reader of this site, he took time out of the Civ IV release window to hand us back some thoughtful responses to your queries. Read on for the results of "Ask Sid Meier". 1. By Anonymous Coward:
What is your opinion on open source clones such as FreeCiv? FreeLoaders, or flatterers? :)

Response:
It's tough to make a blanket statement about all open source clones, but since developers and publishers rely very heavily on intellectual property rights, any infringement or dilution of those rights can be detrimental to companies, games, and consumers. In the case of Civilization, Take Two Interactive now owns all rights to the game series and fortunately, the franchise is still a mainstay at Firaxis...so we feel pretty protective of the IP.

2. By Surt (22457):
Keeping PC gaming alive:
What factors do you think help keep PC gaming alive when competing with consoles, and do you foresee that PC gaming will continue to survive when confronted with the next generation of consoles? From the reverse perspective, what prevents consoles from finally killing off PC gaming?

Response:
Believe it or not, I think the biggest thing PCs have going for them in the console war is the mouse/keyboard interface. So many game types are nearly unplayable without this simple mechanism. Real-time strategies, first-person shooters, point and click adventures, are all best suited to a mouse and keyboard. Another important factor is the innate upgradeability of PCs vs. consoles. The fact that you can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceless. PCs also benefit from fairly cost effective high-resolution monitors. Finally, you can't ignore how easy it is to connect PCs to the internet (another mouse/keyboard must by the way). Being able to quickly, easily, and cheaply connect is a major plus, as it allows all sorts of flexibility - from finding opponents to downloading patches and content to browsing forums and FAQs.

On the reverse side, consoles offer many positives as well. They represent a known quantity so it is easy to take advantage of everything they have to offer without worrying about the least common denominator. They are inexpensive to buy and easy to operate. They work well with your home theater and your living room without requiring a lot of technical know-how. Even with all of that, they will never "kill-off" computers because they aren't competing for the same market in the same fashion. There will always be room for both and that's good for me.

3. By codergeek42 (792304):
I think the big question on a lot of our minds is: Why did you start doing game design and programming in the first place?

Response:
I caught the computer bug in college, but never imagined that one day I would have a career making games for the computer. As a kid I really enjoyed playing board games and card games, and was interested in reading books about history, pirates, airplanes...all of which have been the topics in the games I've created. Bill Stealey and I started Microprose on a dare really...we were at a business conference together and were playing a flight-sim arcade game. Bill was really impressed that I kept winning and I told him that I could tell what the AI was going to do each time, so it was easy to win...and I said that I could make a better game in two weeks. Bill challenged me to do just that and so began our game development company.

4. By Avacar (911548):
Balance:
When building any strategy game, where do you start when you attempt to balance the game? Do you find that you personally need to playtest and try new concepts to balance games, or do the inherent mechanisms of your games lead towards making balance easier for you to achieve?

Response:
My whole approach to making games revolves around first creating a solid prototype and then playing and improving the game over the course of the 2-3 year development cycle...until we think it's ready for prime time. My experience in this area helps me to know what to do and where to start. I definitely spend a lot of time playing the game before I let anyone else look at it. I also have quite a code base that I've been using for a long time, so I know how certain systems will work before I even throw them in. Once the basics are in and I'm comfortable letting other people see it, I like to watch brand new players play it first. It's much harder to make a game balanced for newbies than for hard core gamers. I like to see where they have trouble and I try to eliminate things that are too troublesome or difficult to grasp... it's really important that players feel rewarded at all times, so this step is critical for that reason. Of course, once I have a good grasp on the new player experience, it's time to throw the game to the seasoned testers. For them, I just keep ramping up difficulty by factors of 2 until they beg for mercy - it seems to take longer than it used to for that to happen. :)

5. By WhiteBandit (185659):
Future Directions in Gaming:
I admire many of the great game designers who have pushed the boundaries in gaming (yourself, Will Wright and Peter Molyneux to name a few). However, I can't help but feel that many of today's genres are stale and a lot of new games are mostly repeating past formulas as we see many sequels or derivatives of previous games being released. This appears to be a trend that will continue. Where do you think the future of gaming is headed, and how hard is it to introduce radical new ideas into the industry?

Response:
The cost of making games has gone through the roof, so understandably, publishers want to invest in games that are sure to sell...and sequels for successful franchises are safe bets. It's very difficult to convince publishers to invest millions of dollars in a new game idea...it's too risky. And, fans certainly seem to want more of what they love...Civilization, AoE, Sims...we keep making those games because people keep asking for more.

The game industry will continue to grow and become a bigger part of main stream entertainment...and eventually take over the world J The constant advances in gaming systems will drive new ideas. I think we're just at the tip of the iceberg in gaming...there's so much more to come.

6. By Amoeba (55277):
Playability vs Graphics:
In any Slashdot gaming discussion, invariably the debate between playability vs. graphics comes up. "This game is pretty but the game sucks!" vs. "Nethack is all I need man." The games you've had a hand in seem to emphasize intricate strategy, with graphics taking a backseat for the most part. Some of the most successful games in the past have been very simple on the surface but can have amazing depth, all without gee-whiz factor of purty lights and bleeding-edge graphics engines. How much focus do you place on the graphical aspects of gaming, and do you think there is a way to achieve a balance without sacrifices on either end? How do you tackle that problem? When I got started, there was only so much you could do with graphics so we had to leave a lot up to the player's imagination. That was the beauty of those old games; the player filled in the gaps for you. If you put a green blob on the screen and called it a dragon, it had the tendency of becoming a dragon so long as you were engaging the player's mind. Times change, though, and technology marches on. People expect a lot more out of a computer or video game these days and we have to adjust. I still like to engage the player's imagination, but they don't have to fill in so many gaps themselves.

Response:
This is very cool because I don't have to use so many info screens to show players what they need to know - which is a dream come true for me. When we were remaking Pirates, it was very important to us that players be able to see the towns, discern their nationality, and see how large and wealthy they were all by looking at the screen. In Civ IV, the guys have taken that concept even farther and you can see at a glance everything you really need to know about a city.

On the other hand, it seems there are many times when graphics get the better of good judgment. I must say that I am a big fan of racing games like Gran Turismo, but sometimes it seems they are more focused on the replay than the race, which feels a little backwards to me. In fact, lately I've been let down by a bunch of racing games that looked amazing but were tragically flawed in some way. So, I'll stick with Gran Turismo 3.

One final note on this... Recently, I've been working on several prototypes and was surprised to find that I reached a point fairly early on when I just couldn't find any more fun in the concept - until I had some professionally created art. In the past, I was content to create my own art and never had any trouble envisioning gameplay, so this represents a fundamental change for me.

7. By truthsearch (249536):
AI:
I've been a huge fan of Civilization since it first came out. I've always thought the AI of the computer player is relatively good, especially how each has certain characteristics which differentiate them. But AI in strategy games doesn't seemed to have advanced drastically in the last 15 years. What do you imagine the next big advance in game AI will be? When will games really learn how you play? Will we not be able to tell the difference between a human and computer competitor? I probably shouldn't be telling you this, but in my opinion, the goal of AI is not necessarily to simulate a human response. The goal is to generate interest for the player by providing the illusion of a human-like response - or not at all human-like, if that's what it takes to engage the player. I'm not entirely sure that complex games like Civ could ever have true human responses because there is so much complexity that the AI would bring almost any machine to its knees.

Response:
Consider this: we have only recently been able to truly simulate intelligence that can compete with a human in chess. Chess is obviously a complex intellectual game, but it is ultimately fairly easy to define because there are only 64 squares and 6 types of movement. Plus, the rules of engagement are simple - attack and win. Add to that the huge amount of known strategy that has been collected and studied throughout the years and it is even more definable. In a game like Civ, we have over 80 units, all with different movement rates, strengths, special abilities, experience levels, etc. We also have to decide where to place cities, what to build, who to be nice to and who to make war with. We also have to decide what to research, what religion to spread, what Civics to adopt, etc. All in all, I don't expect to see anything close to true human intelligence any time soon, as long as games continue to get more complex.

9. By Chickenofbristol55 (884806):
Question:
Since the first Civilization game in 1991, how do you think the gaming industry has changed? And, is the change for the better or for the worse?

Response:
Obviously the gaming industry has grown exponentially since 1991. The cost of entry is much higher than it was when I started. The days of guys building a game in their garage and then selling it to a publisher are behind us, I'm afraid. To make a game today it takes more money, time, people, technology...which is why there are fewer independent developers and the big publishing houses run the show. Frankly, I liked it better in the old days, when things were less complicated (I'm showing my age here). We were breaking new ground, and it was really fun. Not to say that it's not fun now...I still love making games and have a bunch of new ideas for games I'd like to create.

The stakes are much higher now, but the quality of many of the games produced today is pretty impressive. The changes in the industry have definitely benefited the consumers - they have an array of game systems and games to choose from...and the competitive environment drives developers to strive to out-do each other...which pushes game design forward.

All things considered...there's nothing else I'd rather do for a living than make games. It's the best job in the world.

10. By TuringTest (533084):
What kind of game do you enjoy?:
Good games (and specially videogames) entail a great deal of simulation of reality; They are bits of everyday life simplified for casual enjoyment. What do you feel is more important for a game to be great and/or successful: that the mechanics create an environment with interesting and complex possibilities, or that they are fun and easy to grasp? Is balance required between these two design forces? And which of the two do you enjoy most in your own experiences as game player?

Response:
I like to play all kinds of games...on a variety of systems. My son and I play games on the PC, PS2, Xbox, GameCube...and they range from Warcraft, to Halo to Grand Turismo...to Civilization. :)

I definitely try to create, and most enjoy playing, games that strike a balance between depth/complexity and ease of use. My goal when making a game is to find the right mix of story and mechanics that will deliver many hours of fun to players. We try to put the player in a situation where they can be something great - King, Pirate Captain, Tycoon, Entrepreneur - and create an interesting world where they can have an adventure, build an empire, conquer the world etc. The game can be as deep as a player wants it to be. In Civ for example, a game can last from 1 hour to 40 hours, depending on what the player wants. I've watched kids play Civ on a very surface level and have a great time with it...and I've seen hard core gamers go as deeply into the game as possible...where things become pretty complex...and those folks have a fun experience too. We've tried to make Civ IV easy for anyone to pick up and play...and then created layers and layers of depth and complexity just waiting to be explored by those who dare to venture there. But...the interface remains familiar and easy-to-use throughout....and the visuals add a whole new dimension to the experience. Sorry for the shameless plug...but it's our baby. :)

365 comments

  1. Who's the shmuck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who sent the email to daddypants telling Zonk that it was "emminent" not "imminent?" I was so looking forward to all the jokes...

  2. Nice dodge by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's tough to make a blanket statement about all open source clones, but since developers and publishers rely very heavily on intellectual property rights, any infringement or dilution of those rights can be detrimental to companies, games, and consumers. In the case of Civilization, Take Two Interactive now owns all rights to the game series and fortunately, the franchise is still a mainstay at Firaxis...so we feel pretty protective of the IP.

    Apparently, Take Two also owns all rights to the Sid Meier's Personal Opinion franchise.

    Still, the rest of the interview was very interesting.

    1. Re:Nice dodge by Skater · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I think he did answer the question, or at least he came a lot closer to answering it than "dodging" would imply. He's telling the developers of those clones to be careful about copying or risk being sued. I get the impression he doesn't really like the clones that much, but he probably hasn't looked at them closely and so doesn't know how much or how little they copy his work.

    2. Re:Nice dodge by Sweetshark · · Score: 1

      Actually this dodge was pretty clumsy. And it is only needed if he is not happy about FreeCiv. I find it rather sad, that he cant find anything good about these games - FreeCiv for example was very innovative in multiplayer, networked Civing.

      Anyway, Im off to buy Quake4 for my linux box.

    3. Re:Nice dodge by stlhawkeye · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Apparently, Take Two also owns all rights to the Sid Meier's Personal Opinion franchise.

      Translation from Slashbot into English:

      I like Sid and his games and I'm pissed off that he cares about making money off his innovation instead of blindly embracing open source like I do. Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck. One more person I can't respect.

      Dude, seriously. If I was in his shoes and had my career aspirations, bankroll, retirement, and basically every financial aspect of my life hinging upon the legal protection of what amount to ideas, I'd wouldn't even be THIS evasion about it. I'd be saying something like, "Are you seriously asking me what I think of people who take my ideas and produce half-assed clones of them that they distribute for free while I'm trying to run a company that feeds six dozen developer's families?"

      Insert cliched rebuttal about how ideas don't have owners here.

      --
      "I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
    4. Re:Nice dodge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He also dodged question #8 apparently. Where did it go?

    5. Re:Nice dodge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you open sores make some real innovative games instead of games like tux racer and frozen bubble?

      Something a mother would be proud of.

    6. Re:Nice dodge by Observador · · Score: 1

      Is it me, or did Sid's answers where the dryest (read boring) to date in a Slashdot interview?

      OTOH, I've been asking myself for forever: What bussiness model can sustain open-source game developers?

      It doesn't seem to me like the traditional pay-for-support model works well with games. Subscription models will alienate some users...

      Ideas anyone?

      --
      I wish I could filter out the annoying Pickens articles...
    7. Re:Nice dodge by Sweetshark · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd be saying something like, "Are you seriously asking me what I think of people who take my ideas and produce half-assed clones of them that they distribute for free while I'm trying to run a company that feeds six dozen developer's families?"

      There are few things that the half-assed clones and Sid Meier's Civilization have in common that is not already in this:
      Civilization
      And that one was designed by Francis Tresham, so yes, I it makes me sore, if Sid bitches about "his" IP.
      Also the half-assed clones have features that are missing in the Civ games, or have been implemented there much later (useable networked gaming, hex tilesets, etc.)

    8. Re:Nice dodge by Jarlsberg · · Score: 1

      Well spoken, and this should not have been modded funny, but insightful. I guess it's only the grace of a few slashdotters that you haven't been modded flamebait ;)

    9. Re:Nice dodge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a note, on this very divisive subject...
      Ideas do not have owners, however an implementation is not an idea, it is an idea made into a product. Commercial or open source product, it is still 'ownable'. Don't like it? Roll your own. The problem comes in when people try to tell you you aren't allowed to 'roll your own' becuase it looks too much like their implementation.

      Also, I doubt Sid is losing sleep worrying about losing market share to any open source clone or competitor.

      Posting AC from work - sorry.

    10. Re:Nice dodge by Dracolytch · · Score: 1

      Well said. Right now I have an idea for a new game that's quite different than anything I've played before. I am concerned that as soon as I create it, an army of clones will erupt which are better than my original game (since I wouldn't have the budget of the cloners). I have the idea, put in the work, get screwed. My alternatives are what... Patents? Ugh!

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
    11. Re:Nice dodge by asuffield · · Score: 1

      You might have a point except for one small problem.

      What's the best civ game currently in existence? Freeciv. Meier hasn't produced anything really good since civ 2.

      So, translation of your message from Slashdot into English:

      I like money and Sid should be able to cash in on his idea despite the fact that it's inferior to equivalent games that people have been able to produce for free, without spending all that money on it.

      The free market doesn't work like that. If Sid, spending all that money and development time, can't make a game that's better than something people can throw together for free, then he doesn't deserve to make any money off it. If he can make a game that's better then he will make money off it. This is not a regulated market, people are going to play the better game.

    12. Re:Nice dodge by Skater · · Score: 1

      For your first question: Go back and read the Shatner interview. Those were some dry answers!

    13. Re:Nice dodge by misleb · · Score: 1

      As if half-assed clones of 5 year old games built on wholly different operating systems are really taking any businness away...

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    14. Re:Nice dodge by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Take Two Interactive now owns all rights to the game series and fortunately, the franchise is still a mainstay at Firaxis...so we feel pretty protective of the IP.

      Apparently, Take Two also owns all rights to the Sid Meier's Personal Opinion franchise.

      He's probably in an awkward position. He likely is heartened that his game concepts inspire others to produce similar (but not as interesting) variants, but has likely been warned by lawyers in the past not to make even the slightest remark that might be interpretted as condoning it, just in case it somehow ends up in court.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    15. Re:Nice dodge by misleb · · Score: 1

      You do what any self-respecting capitalist does, you get investors and GET a budget. Now quit whining. I'm sick of people who think that they are owed something because a novel idea flashed through their head while drinking a beer in a pub. If you aren't willing to WORK at your idea and accept the challenge from "cloners" you don't deserve squat.

      Meanwhile, someone else is going to have the same idea on their own and implement it while you are sitting on your ass whining.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    16. Re:Nice dodge by Cerberus7 · · Score: 1

      Look, don't end up like that lady who invented a pot that cooks and drains pasta but didn't get a patent. Go get your free inventor's kit and get started!

      --
      I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
    17. Re:Nice dodge by indifferent+children · · Score: 1, Insightful
      hinging upon the legal protection of what amount to ideas

      Unless Meiers has patents relating to Civ gameplay, he has no legal protection. Copyright only applies to 'expressions', not 'ideas'. Unless someone has copied his code or images, they have not infringed his 'IP'.

      If you don't want to share your ideas, then STFU. Then no one can 'steal' your ideas.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    18. Re:Nice dodge by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Think of all those years of "F/OSS" effort put into re-implementing someone else's game and putting new features on it, when that energy could have just been put toward creating an original franchise to showcase the power of OSS development.

      It seems that OSS will forever be known as a clone source, not open source. From copying Windows to copying Civilization. Isn't there a game designer out there with original ideas? Oh, right, they go onto make commercial games in a real company while the cloners stay behind and complain in places like Slashdot and IRC.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    19. Re:Nice dodge by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess it helps that you can't copyright the rules to a game or maybe they already would have.

    20. Re:Nice dodge by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 2, Informative

      Insert cliched rebuttal about how ideas don't have owners here.

      Wow, people are very mis-informed in this thread today. Game rules are un-copyrightable! You can copyright the art, the rulebook etc but the rules of the game get no protection.

    21. Re:Nice dodge by samsmithnz · · Score: 1

      I honestly don't think he's worried at all. These games are all based on Civ2 concepts, a game that compared to version 4 (and 3), seems a hundred years old. He's probably a bit worried, but also safe with the knowledge he's about 10 years ahead of them with ideas and progress (and resources)

    22. Re:Nice dodge by Sweetshark · · Score: 2, Informative

      Think of all those years of "F/OSS" effort put into re-implementing someone else's game and putting new features on it, when that energy could have just been put toward creating an original franchise to showcase the power of OSS development.

      You mean like http://www.wesnoth.org/?

    23. Re:Nice dodge by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Actually, I feel I must dissent. I found nothing whatsoever interesting about that interview at all. He said the same things that every other designer says. I suppose I was deluding myself to think that Sid Meier would have some special insight... but really, his responses were that of Joe game-fan.

      Idunno, I guess I just expected a guy who founded the 4X genre and stuck his name on the game title would be a bit more of a character.

    24. Re:Nice dodge by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > who take my ideas and produce half-assed clones

      Only thing is, in some cases the clones are *better*. I tried to like the Civ CTP demo enough to buy the game, really I did. If it had been even *close* to as much fun to play as Freeciv, I would have bought it just for the variety, but I found myself hating it, because the stupid UI kept getting in the way of the game. After that I never looked at a demo for another commercial civ game. (I did buy Railroad Tycoon II, though. That demo was actually fun, so I bought the game.)

      And yeah, the message he's sending to the Freeciv developers (notice especially the preface he slaps on it; he's implying that how he views any given "clone" might be contingent on something related to what follows) appears to be basically "Don't let me catch you doing anything questionable in its legality, because we will defend what we legally can." Okay, that's fair.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    25. Re:Nice dodge by Dracolytch · · Score: 1

      You ever try to raise a multi-million development budget on a game concept that hasn't proven itself in the marketplace? Didn't think so. It's hard enough to make money in proven fields, investors aren't interested.

      There's a long history of people who generate ideas that get screwed just because someone with deeper pockets squashes them. Your over-agressive, yet impractical, attitude reinforces that maybe patents aren't such a bad idea after all.

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
    26. Re:Nice dodge by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't know about open source games per se. But I think repositories of open source artwork, 3D models, sound, game engines, etc., might go a long way in lowering the cost of developing games. I'm not sure what license would be appropriate when it comes to sound and artwork.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    27. Re:Nice dodge by FS · · Score: 1

      stlhawkeye: I agree with your assessment, however I think there is something more intellectual and less "Slashbot" about the parent poster's comment. Personally I think it is great that people can make a (really good) living making games on two levels. First, I get to play good games. Second, they get to keep producing and improving them. It's no question that revenue drives gaming, not open source.

      I think it is reasonable to expect that Mr. Meiers would say something about his opinion in his response. I read the first question and answer and immediately thought this was going to be another lousy interview where the interviewee never answers the questions. Here's some political and economically sound answers he could have inserted: There are a few open source games that have done some innovative things. We've actually hired an open sourcer or two. You hopefully get the idea. Even an answer confessing he hasn't even noticed would at least acknowledge that he understood the question and attempted to answer.

      It did seem like a dodge.

    28. Re:Nice dodge by misleb · · Score: 1

      The point is that I don't think mere ideas are worth anything at all in a capitalist sense. Did it cost you anything to have an idea? No. All the value is in the implementation. And FYI, I'm not really even a big fan of capitalism. I think "intellectual property" will one day make capitalism as unworkable as communism (for different reasons). The screwed up patent system is just one symptom. But I digress...

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    29. Re:Nice dodge by jci · · Score: 1

      You read the Wow "responses", right?

      At least it wasn't another set of questions poured through a PR sieve.

    30. Re:Nice dodge by cheesybagel · · Score: 2, Informative
      Both Open and Closed Source companies make clones: see Dune II, Warcraft, Dark Reign, Total Annihilation, Age of Empires, Age of Wonders, etc.

      There are many original Open Source games. Including Nethack.

    31. Re:Nice dodge by julesh · · Score: 1

      There are few things that the half-assed clones and Sid Meier's Civilization have in common that is not already in this:
      Civilization


      Are you joking?

      1. The board game was developed under license from Microprose (as they were at the time).
      2. The game play of the board game is *nothing* like the gameplay of the video games. FreeCiv follows the various Civ tech trees much more closely than the board game, has wonders that are identical in every way to Civ/CivII (whereas the board game wonders have substantially different effects, and are built in a rather different way), and has the same unit selection as civ (whereas the board game only has a very limited unit selection). The board game does not feature city building. The board game resolves combat in an entirely different way.

      (although looking at the pictures you've linked to, that's a different board game from the one I played, it looks like it plays by the same principles... probably just an earlier version of it)

      Also the half-assed clones have features that are missing in the Civ games, or have been implemented there much later (useable networked gaming, hex tilesets, etc.)

      Most gamers I've discussed this with think that using hexagonal layouts for TBS games is actually inferior to square-with-diagonals like Civ, as it restricts movement to 6 directions, rather than the 8 available in Civ. While FreeCiv has network play, which was apparently added as an afterthought to the Civilization franchise, playing against computer players just doesn't work as well. Playing against FreeCiv AI on its hardest level I can easily beat it; against CivII I don't stand a chance unless I have a very lucky start. It also seems to lack a level that is as easy as Civ's easiest. I'm not familiar with any clones other than freeciv, so can't really comment on them.

    32. Re:Nice dodge by Sweetshark · · Score: 4, Informative
      The board game was developed under license from Microprose (as they were at the time).

      Kids today. Quoteth Wikipedia:
      Meier admits to "borrowing" many of the technology tree ideas from a board game also called Civilization (published in the United Kingdom in 1980 by Hartland Trefoil (later by Gibson Games), and in the United States in 1981 by Avalon Hill). The early versions of the game even included a flier of information and ordering materials for the board game. In an ironic twist, there is now a board game based on the computer game version of Civilization.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_(board_g ame)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_(compute r_game)
      The boardgame is from 1981, when the common Home-PCs didnt even have means to present a computergame like Civilization.

      (although looking at the pictures you've linked to, that's a different board game from the one I played, it looks like it plays by the same principles... probably just an earlier version of it)
      Well, yeah - you may have a point there.

      Most gamers I've discussed this with think that using hexagonal layouts for TBS games is actually inferior to square-with-diagonals like Civ, as it restricts movement to 6 directions, rather than the 8 available in Civ.
      Completely ignoring the fact that you can move sqrt(2) as wide in certain directions than in others. Hexes are the best representation of terrain, and were therefore used in almost all classic combat simulations and wargames like Squad Leader or even BattleTech.

      While FreeCiv has network play, which was apparently added as an afterthought to the Civilization franchise, playing against computer players just doesn't work as well. Playing against FreeCiv AI on its hardest level I can easily beat it; against CivII I don't stand a chance unless I have a very lucky start. It also seems to lack a level that is as easy as Civ's easiest.
      So they have very different key features and thus are very different games? Thats what I said ...
    33. Re:Nice dodge by naff · · Score: 1

      No, he is not joking.

      The game you are thinking of is
      Sid Meier's Civilization - The Boardgame which arrived 20 years after Civilization.

    34. Re:Nice dodge by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      I am reminded of a PJ Plauger editorial in C/C++UJ.
      Plaguer, a principle at Dinkumware, sells Standard
      Template Library implementations, among other stuff,
      to companies like Mr. Softy.

      Paraphrasing, he said: "Open Source? Bring it on.
      My market is people running real businesses who
      don't have time to fanny about with dogdy stuff."

      One question I'd like to pose to Sid is: do you
      ever look at F/OSS knockoffs of your games to
      figure out who to bring in for an interview?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    35. Re:Nice dodge by orcrist · · Score: 1

      I tried to like the Civ CTP demo enough to buy the game, really I did. If it had been even *close* to as much fun to play as Freeciv, I would have bought it just for the variety, but I found myself hating it, because the stupid UI kept getting in the way of the game. After that I never looked at a demo for another commercial civ game.

      The only thing the CTP games had in common with the real Civ franchise was this word: "Civilization". That was the result of some crazy legal battle whose details I am too lazy to look up. Freeciv is primarily modeled after Civilization I and II (note: no "Call to Power"). I think you would find Civ II compares much more favorably to Freeciv. I'll leave the debate as to which is better over all to those who care ;-)

      -chris

      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    36. Re:Nice dodge by Caspian · · Score: 1
      Also the half-assed clones have features that are missing in the Civ games, or have been implemented there much later (useable networked gaming, hex tilesets, etc.)

      Not to mention support for, say, Linux...
      --
      With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    37. Re:Nice dodge by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't GPL or creative commons work for artwork just as well as source code? How come an ecosystem of software got developed but there is nothing of similar scale in other intangible fields? The engines are under construction or completed, where are the graphics, sounds, and remaining things?

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    38. Re:Nice dodge by DRue · · Score: 1

      The point is that I don't think mere ideas are worth anything at all in a capitalist sense. Did it cost you anything to have an idea? No. All the value is in the implementation. And FYI, I'm not really even a big fan of capitalism. I think "intellectual property" will one day make capitalism as unworkable as communism (for different reasons). The screwed up patent system is just one symptom. But I digress...

      FWIW, Paul Graham recently published an essay on the exact same idea.

    39. Re:Nice dodge by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > The only thing the CTP games had in common with the real Civ
      > franchise was this word: "Civilization".

      Oh. This was not made clear to me. I just picked up the CTP demo because it was the only demo of a commerical Civilization game that I could find available for my operating system. I have too much experience with software in general and games in particular to shell out money for a game without seeing a demo first; the only commercial games I've *ever* purchased without playing a demo first are the Lost Treasures of Infocom, and that's a little bit different.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    40. Re:Nice dodge by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      While btech is big on selling you hex maps, I find that the best way to play battletech is the same way you play warhammer; with miniatures, and a ruler. The only difference is that with battletech, you need a protractor, because you have to pay for facing changes, too.

      This is one of the reasons I like RTS. Eventually, I figure, turn-based strategy games will go this way, too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:Nice dodge by tbmaddux · · Score: 1
      The boardgame is from 1981, when the common Home-PCs didnt even have means to present a computergame like Civilization.
      Avalon-Hill did put out a computer game that was clearly based on its Civilization board game, called Incunabula. Used to play it when we couldn't get a full group of people together to play Civilization, Diplomacy, or AD&D.
      --
      Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
    42. Re:Nice dodge by Chayak · · Score: 1

      Amen to that. Free software is great, open source is great, but I can't feed my family on free software.

  3. First-person shooters by GungaDan · · Score: 1, Interesting

    are best suited to mouse and keyboard control? I must be missing something here. Of course, my experience with "first-person shooter" games has been nil since "Duck Hunt" on the original NES. But still... does he honestly believe a mouse and keyboard are the best way to experience such games? Strikes me as odd.

    --
    Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    1. Re:First-person shooters by spleentor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      well i don't know about anybody else here, but i hate playing a fps on a console. i'll take my good ol' keytronic kb and intellimouse optical over a controller anyday.

    2. Re:First-person shooters by adavies42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, frankly. Two-sticking ala Goldeneye is tolerable, at least for a fairly simple FPS, but having easy access to dozens of keys for things like weapon switching, and having a mouse which can aim far more accurately than a joystick, still makes for a far better experience.

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    3. Re:First-person shooters by Andrewkov · · Score: 1
      Haha, Duck Hunt, the original FPS!

      Back in the doom days, I always prefered the keyboard over the mouse or joystick, but these days you have to use a mouse for aiming, just for the speed you get out of an analog device (your aim moves as quick as you move the mouse), whereas a keyboard is a fixed speed.

    4. Re:First-person shooters by Mprx · · Score: 1

      A mouse is near perfect as aiming device, much faster and more accurate than a light gun. The only other control method with any hope of being as accurate is mouse + trackball, and as most people learn with mouse it is not popular. If two equally skilled player compete, one with mouse+keys and one with console controller, the mouse+keys player will dominate.

    5. Re:First-person shooters by arkhan_jg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's the fine detail aiming with the mouse, combined with the movement and weapon selection on the keyboard. It only works because you have both of them on a desk, so you don't have to have something light enough or wieldy enough to hold in your hands.

      With consoles, you need a small controller you can hold in mid-air, so for example aiming and button use has to be done with your thumbs, rather than most of your fingers. I've played Halo on the PC and XBox, and the PC version is unquestionably better in my mind.

      That said, the next generation nintendo with it's gyro controllers will actually use the mid-air movement of the controller(s), so FPS games on it may well end up equal or superior to the PC experience. We'll see.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    6. Re:First-person shooters by Nos. · · Score: 1

      With current on the market controllers, yes, absolutely.

    7. Re:First-person shooters by Brakz0rz · · Score: 1

      There is no competition. While an analog stick offers good multidirectional movement the mouse is far more intuitive and accurate. It's easier to overshoot with a stick while the mouse tends to stop when you want it to.

      If you play a fps on a console you notice that the programmers have slowed down enemy responses to suit the sluggishness of the game controller. I noticed this when playing MOH:Allied Assault on my friends x-box. The analog stick can only rotate your line of sight at specific speeds (usually 3-4 levels of difference from the axis to the edge limit) where the mouse simply reacts at the speed which you move it.

      The problem most folks experience is getting used to pointing your 'head' with the mouse and walking with your keys. Once you get that down there is no going back.

      --
      "Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." - Denis Diderot
    8. Re:First-person shooters by PacketShaper · · Score: 1

      As opposed to your inherently clunky and inaccurate opposible digits with a 1/2 inch movement range to aim? I'll stick with my mouse... thanks

    9. Re:First-person shooters by Androclese · · Score: 1

      He is absolutely correct. With a track-ball and keyboard, I have better and more accurate control over any console controller out there.

      Play Call of Duty on PS2 and on a PC, the difference is instantly noticable; PC controls are vastly superior.

    10. Re:First-person shooters by doofusclam · · Score: 1
      Haha, Duck Hunt, the original FPS!

      What about Star Raiders in 1979 on the Atari, then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Raiders
    11. Re:First-person shooters by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, I do remember that one .. wasn't that the only game whereby they re-mapped the colour/black&white switch to toggle the map view or something? Really great game, by the way.

    12. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree 110%, I will not play FPS with a gamepad. Combine the pitiful resolution most consoles pump out (even in HD) with the alternately under or over responsive reticle control you wind up with on these tiny analog thumbsticks, aiming sucks hugely and becomes frustrating to the point of rage. The only FPS type game I have ever enjoyed on consoles employed a "close enough" aiming system where the reticle was snapped to a target if you got within 5-10 pixels of the edge of it (ala Goldeneye or Dark Forces on N64). It boggles my mind that anyone could possibly prefer a gamepad to KB+mouse for the current crop of FPSs.

    13. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you think Duck Hunt is a first person shooter shows how utterly unqualified you are to have any opinion on the matter. Play one and you'll see.

      Or to answer your question, yes, you are missing something.

    14. Re:First-person shooters by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I actually think a trackball is much better for FPS games. More gamers should give trackballs a try before they give the old "mouse is superior" line... there are good alternatives to mouses out there.

      But I think the point is that there's also a wide array of keys you can hit on the keyboard with your left hand. At least as many keys close to your fingers as buttons on an Xbox controller, plus the two mouse buttons and the scrollwheel, it just gives you more access to more inputs at once.

    15. Re:First-person shooters by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

      I'm going to go against the grain a bit, but I agree with you. I never really liked FPS on PC, but have found that I really like them on the consoles. A contoller makes more sense to me than a mouse/keyboard combination. I think a lot of it comes down to personal preference (ie, taste) and you will never convince either camp that the other is correct.

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    16. Re:First-person shooters by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I like the Kensington trackball, with lots of programable buttons and a keyboard. Just wish they made a left hand only keyboard. That would be cool.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    17. Re:First-person shooters by affliction · · Score: 1
      Two-sticking ala Goldeneye is tolerable, at least for a fairly simple FPS


      It's not tolerable at all. I would rather hack my arm off with a dull knife than play an FPS on a console. I tried playing Halo the other day for the first time. What an awful experience. You can't do anything with that controller.

      I will stick with my PC and my Half-life, thank you very much.
    18. Re:First-person shooters by benw1979 · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, I prefer the less accurate controls on consoles for first person shooters. I can't compete on the PC, because my dexterity limits me before the mouse does. On consoles, it's the other way around: the highly dextrous players are limited by the thumb-sticks (somewhat), and my dexterity is enough to keep up with the less accurate controls.

    19. Re:First-person shooters by maniac/dev/null · · Score: 1

      Do yourself a big favor and get a nostromo n52. You can find it easily on Froogle. I don't know how well it works with Linux since I play games on Windows, but I have found mine to be worth every penny. If even has three shift modes if you find 15 keys, a scroll wheel, and a D-pad just aren't enough.

    20. Re:First-person shooters by bcattwoo · · Score: 4, Funny
      Just wish they made a left hand only keyboard. That would be cool.

      Yeah,right.....for gaming.

    21. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People that use mice have tiny balls, people that use trackballs... now they've got big balls! Kensington Expert "Mouse" is the way to go for gaming, and just clicking around.

    22. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually that would be the other way around - technically. The Medal of Honor series started on consoles and were released later on PCs.

    23. Re:First-person shooters by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, I actually prefer a wheelchair for racing up the stairs. When on foot, the fact that I'm a parapalegic is what limits my climbing speed, while when everyone's in a wheelchair, I can keep up no trouble.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    24. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the Space Shuttle "simulator" for Atari 2600 (can't remember the name and am too lazy to google it) used every switch on the console but the power switch, IIRC.

    25. Re:First-person shooters by SebNukem · · Score: 1

      console pad -> 2 thumbs = 2 simultaneous actions
      kb+mouse -> 5 fingers on kb + 3 fingers on 3button mouse + X axis + Y axis = 10 simultaneous actions

      what else is left to say?

    26. Re:First-person shooters by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      Console games are also designed for less precision aiming. There is more leeway when aiming in a console fps - so you don't need to be spot on with your shots.
      On a pc, a good player can potentially get a killing head shot on someone who is so far away that the head itself is just a few pixels on the screen. Which is why so many of the good player crank up their screen resolution at the expense of graphical detail. Boom! Headshot!

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    27. Re:First-person shooters by Mithrandir3791 · · Score: 1
      Just wish they made a left hand only keyboard. That would be cool.


      You could always learn to use Left-handed Dvorak.
      --
      Iesus Christus magnus est.
    28. Re:First-person shooters by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Just wish they made a left hand only keyboard. That would be cool.

      They do. Not that I have ever tried one, but they do look interesting.

      Alternatively, there are also Dvorak keyboard layouts optimized for one handed typing too. I haven't tried those either, but the basic idea (moving all the commonly used keys to one side of the keyboard) is pretty sound.

    29. Re:First-person shooters by rebelcan · · Score: 1

      Okay... lets see.

      PS2 controller: one button for each analog controler ( that's 2 ), plus two buttons for each of your index fingers ( that's 4 ) coming to a total of 6. Not as much as 10, but much better than 2.

      XBox controller: almost the same as the PS2 controller, but you only have 4 buttons, since there is only one trigger for each index finger.

      Also, on each controller you have the D-pad ( 4 actions ) and four buttons plus start and stop ( and black and white on the xbox ) within a quick one-second push.

      Not saying that the console controllers are better, just saying they don't have '2 simultaneous actions'.

      I can't say for certian that keyboard + mouse is better, because for the better part of four years I've been using Linux. With that said, I'm going to have to go pick up a copy of UT2004 or Quake4 and see how they work out on Linux to do some of my own keyboard+mouse vs console controller testing.

      --
      God is dead -- Nietzsche
      Nietzsche is dead -- God
      Zombie Nietzsche lives! -- Zombie Nietzsche
    30. Re:First-person shooters by ucahg · · Score: 1

      A keyboard/mouse is worlds better than the dual-joystick monstrosity that console users have to put up with. Two joysticks isn't that bad, but it has a huge learning curve since it's quite unintuitive. Serious gamers can do it easily enough, but it scares away the casual gamer.

    31. Re:First-person shooters by ucahg · · Score: 1

      Do you really use 3 fingers on a 3-button mouse?

      I'm actually curious. I never do, only two (I move the index finger to the middle button when needed). It feels.. wrong.. to me to use 3 fingers.

      Hmmmmmmmmmm.

      Maybe I'm weird.

    32. Re:First-person shooters by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      But does better accuracy always make a game more fun? What about when the Nintendo Revolution arrives with shooters that involve aiming a gun-shaped controller? Which control scheme makes for a better game if it turns out most people are faster and more accurate with a mouse, but it's more fun to aim the plastic gun?

    33. Re:First-person shooters by sznupi · · Score: 1

      But...what's stopping anybody from connecting mouse to the console? The best FPS experience regarding controls was Quake2 on PS1 - mouse with two buttons in right hand, Dual Shock in the left - with shocks, WASD replaced by stick (yes analog), instant acces to three buttons and 4 more if I'll stop moving (similar thing to keyboard really). Moreover, PS2 can have USB keyboard/mouse attached...
      Don't be fooled, the real reason for the state of affairs is HOW consoles are used, not what is/can be attached to them. You don't often have place to put mouse/keyboard in your living room right in fron of the couch (not to mention you couldn't sit so comfortable). Keyboard/mouse IS NOT the strenght of the PC, it's typical placement - at the desk - is. Strenght and, at the same time, weakness. Because OTOH there's nothing like multitap, couch, big TV, beer, 4 friends; or big TV, good stereo (properly placed!)...mood overall.

      And BTW, Sid Meier shots PC in the foot by saying about "viable machine when upgraded 2 years after purchasing". Uhmmm...I purchased PS1 in 1995. 4 years later I still had top-notch game console. THIS is more priceless IMHO...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    34. Re:First-person shooters by mnmn · · Score: 1

      I used to play Quake II with the keyboard keys alone just like in doom and quake1. A friend showed me the mouse+keyboard control and I thought it was silly. Then he kicked my ass.

      Years on playing counterstrike source, I really wonder what can be more optimum for FPS than keyboard+mouse. I've swung between a mouse and a good trackball (logitech marble), and am currently using a mouse. Using the keyboard alone is unthinkable. Using a gamepad is as funny a joke as using the atari joysticks for a drawing program.

      If youre wondering whats best to control FPS games, just play head to head with friends using different controls. The control that always wins is best for FPS.

      And it WONT be the D-pad from nintendo.

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    35. Re:First-person shooters by SebNukem · · Score: 1

      yes

      moouse: button 1=primary fire, button 2=forward, button 3=backward
      kb: 4 fingers on crouch, strafe left, right, jump + thumb on secondary fire (space bar).

      you have complete freedom of moves even when you are shooting.

    36. Re:First-person shooters by orcrist · · Score: 1

      mmmmmmm.... Star Raiders. Man that makes me nostalgic :-)

      -chris

      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    37. Re:First-person shooters by CDarklock · · Score: 1

      What tends to make weapons easier to aim with a mouse than with a joystick is the mouse ballistics. Move it fast, and the mouse automatically decreases the resolution so your onscreen cursor covers a lot of ground. Slow it down, the resolution increases for pixel-perfect accuracy.

      Joysticks don't lend themselves well to this sort of thing, especially the new thumbstick variety that have all of an inch of throw between zero and max. The Xbox controller has worked better for me in that respect, but it's more me than the controller, because I have friends who feel far more comfortable with the PS2 controller. Different strokes and all that.

      I think the bottom line here is that we need more standardised controller customisation in console games. We should be able to set the sensitivity of our thumbsticks, and the ballistic level if we're satisfied with how that works, and reverse the X and/or Y axis. Every button should be reassignable. The strength of the vibration function should be customisable. And all of this should be provided in a standard library from the console manufacturer, so every game for that console has the exact same capability.

      The Revolution's gyroscopic controller notion is stupid, as all of us who remember "le Stick" can attest. The idea resurfaces every few years as "the next big thing", fails miserably in the marketplace because it's STUPID, and goes back underground until some other moron digs it up.

      Try using a tilt-sensitive controller for several hours, and let me know how cool it is then. It doesn't matter how well-engineered the controller is now, the human body still has the same design, and will still have the exact same problems.

      --
      Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
    38. Re:First-person shooters by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      I have to admit, I do love my hi-res razer diamondback mouse that I can adjust the sensitivity of on the fly. So much more expressive range of movement than trying to aim precisely on those tiny little thumbsticks.

      As far as tilt controllers go... I already do use them, gyration mice. I regularly use one on my mythbox at home, and another at work to go with our electronic whiteboards+projector. Being able to move the mouse away from the screen is quite handy, and being able to do it without a desk is even more useful.

      I still prefer my conventional mouse when I'm sitting at a desk, but I can easily see myself on my sofa, elbows on knees, using the nintendo controller just like I use the gyro mouse. People already move and tilt existing controllers; just watch someone playing halo in a tight spot, or a sports game - they move their body and arms in the direction of the characters movement.

      There will need to be good games that take advantage of the style of movement, not the same old games that try to map joysticks (or worse - buttons!) onto the gyro movement. If anyone can pull it off, it's nintendo. I honestly don't know if they will though, but it sounds interesting.

      I'm afraid 'le stick' was before my time; I didn't get into computing until the venerable rubber-keyed spectrum 48k. Still, looking at the age of it, it's possible technology has moved on a little to be a bit more responsive, and the console horsepower is a bit higher too. Maybe gyro's mass-market time has come; maybe not. Given nintendo's hugely successful track record in introducing controller innovation, I'm prepared to give em a chance.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    39. Re:First-person shooters by CDarklock · · Score: 1

      I honestly don't know why people view Nintendo as such an innovator with controllers. The DS touch screen is the only real innovation I've seen from Nintendo; everything else is pretty derivative of existing PC controllers. I could actually handwave the DS touch screen as derivative of the KAOSS pad from Korg, if I wanted to be extreme about it... but I can't in good conscience argue that pro audio gear constitutes a precedent for game controllers. ;)

      The observation that people already use "body english" in games is precisely what gives people the idea that it should be used as a control mechanism. This simply does not follow. The problem with gyroscopic controllers is that human beings have large muscle groups for infrequent and imprecise movements, and small muscle groups for frequent precision movements. Tilt controllers use the large muscle groups of the elbow and shoulder, rather than the small muscle groups of the hand and wrist, so prolonged usage is tiring and precision movement is difficult.

      That doesn't mean Nintendo hasn't "solved" this problem. Perhaps their version is very sensitive, and only needs to be moved slightly. Perhaps instead of the old tilt-sensitive technology, we have something more along the lines of the Fly pentop computer... perhaps something that inherently recognises gestures. There's certainly some interesting technological research coming out these days, and Nintendo may be positioning themselves as the Apple of the console world - much smaller market share than Sony or Microsoft, but an absolutely solid lock on that market share that no amount of marketing or proselytising can shake.

      --
      Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
    40. Re:First-person shooters by Hawke666 · · Score: 1

      The question was of fingers, not of buttons.

      Since you map forward and backward to two buttons, and you can't effectively do both at once, it doesn't matter if you use one finger or two.

      So do you use a separate finger for forward and backward, or move one finger from one button to the other? FWIW, I use 3 fingers, as well as all 5 mouse buttons (scroll up+scroll down)

    41. Re:First-person shooters by SebNukem · · Score: 1

      you are right. I use a separate finger for fw & bw, 1 on each mouse button. I find it faster than moving one finger between 2 buttons. I don't use a scroll button mouse. I hate it for 2 reasons: 1. the scroll button is usually very tiny and hard to click and 2. the scroll is too sensitive and keep scrolling without my wanting it. It drives me crazy.

    42. Re:First-person shooters by Hawke666 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that depends on particular hardware ... I find that the Microsoft devices tend to have a really easy-to-scroll wheel, with a hard-to-click middle button.

      IMO the Logitech devices (I use a Trackman Wheel) tend to strike a much better balance in this respect.

    43. Re:First-person shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I play Medal Of Honor on the PC and PS2, and I prefer mouse+keyboard over the PS2's analog sticks. Aiming with a mouse is much easier.

    44. Re:First-person shooters by JuzzFunky · · Score: 1

      I use a claw. http://claw.com.au/ It is very cool.
      Although I have also looked at the Belkin Nostromo(TM) SpeedPad n52 from http://belkin.com/

      --
      Unexpect the expected!
  4. What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The most popular questions from the slashdot comments don't get picked.

    For the second game developer interview in a row +5 modded questions about linux ports of the games have been posted and ignored.
    Come one, slashdot. Just ask the questions we've modded up.

    --

    "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    1. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      There's a good chance they emailed him all the score: 5 comments, and told him to answer 5 or so and he simply didn't respond to that one.

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    2. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Think about what you've just said. This being /., of course comments about linux posts are going to get modded up. That doesn't necessarily make them worthwhile or interesting questions in their own right, though.

    3. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 3, Funny

      Answer: To give the illusion of audience participation.

    4. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's really neither here nor there.
      The questions are supposed to be the ones that slashdot users and mods find interesting. The fact that a slasdhot editor disagrees shouldn't factor in.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    5. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Perhas you missed the part of the article where it was said they'd pass on the "10 best questions," not the "10 highest rated by the cheerleaders regardless of how asinine."

      Here, let me solve your problem.

      "We have no plans to port Civilization or any other game to Linux." - Sid Meier

    6. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Zonk · · Score: 2, Informative

      With some folks, like game developers, we're limited to only 10 questions. There were a lot more than 10 questions modded +5 in the original post, so the 10 questions to be sent needed to be the ones with the broadest appeal that would likely result in a substantial answer.

      I wish we could have covered all the questions that were voted popular too, but making games is a busy job and we needed to pick and choose.

    7. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Drey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's an alternate idea.

      * Let us rate the questions, like we do.
      * You tell the interviewee "we'd like you to answer at least 'x' of them" and then hand over the top-rated ones, all of them.

      And here's the important part:

      * Let the interviewee pick the questions. Maybe he or she will even choose to answer more then 'x' of them. Maybe they'll pick ones you wouldn't have.

    8. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the reply, Zonk.
      Maybe nextime you could post all on topic questions and ask him to pick ten, or answer more than that if he'd like?

      Given that Sid allowed loki to port Alpha Centauri to linux, it may have been something he would have wanted to answer.

      BTW, tuxgames.com has some more stock of alhpa centauri. Its the top seller again.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    9. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What CSM marked the parent "troll"? It's a perfectly fair comment IMHO.

    10. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      The most popular questions from the slashdot comments don't get picked.

      Really? Every single one of the questions asked was rated to +5. Maybe your most popular question didn't get picked, but your statement is baseless.

      There were 61 comments rated to +5 on the original story (note -- it's not the one that's linked to in the post; that links to the "Ask CivIV Devs" which in turn links to the proper story). They can only submit 10 questions to be answered (and hey, where'd #8 go?) -- submitting much more than that isn't reasonable. Can you imagine if you'd agreed to answer 10 questions and got a list of 60+ and were told "just answer the 10 you like"? If I was in that situation I'd answer precisely zero -- because you clearly don't understand what the hell your job is as an interviewer.

      For the second game developer interview in a row +5 modded questions about linux ports of the games have been posted and ignored.

      Uh, frankly, the answer is blindingly obvious. Even id Software, which provides Linux ports, has stated that it doesn't make financial sense. And their codebase is "relatively" easy to port because it's not completely tied to DirectX.

      Really, I do want to know what happened to question #8. We got jipped an answer! And maybe it'd even be the one to make you happy.

    11. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For the second game developer interview in a row +5 modded questions about linux ports of the games have been posted and ignored

      The reason this question is never asked is because the answer is always the same.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    12. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      Yes, those bastard /. editors. How dare they do this to us! Someone needs to do something about this. I'm so tired of being forced to read and comment on the things that THEY post! man, i'm NEVER coming back!

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    13. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      There were 61 comments rated to +5 on the original story (note -- it's not the one that's linked to in the post; that links to the "Ask CivIV Devs" which in turn links to the proper story). They can only submit 10 questions to be answered (and hey, where'd #8 go?) -- submitting much more than that isn't reasonable. Can you imagine if you'd agreed to answer 10 questions and got a list of 60+ and were told "just answer the 10 you like"? If I was in that situation I'd answer precisely zero -- because you clearly don't understand what the hell your job is as an interviewer.

      Good point. I clicked the link in this story's write up and didn't notice it was for the other interview. That one had 4 of its 36 +5 modded questions related to platforms other than windows. Guess we'll have to wait and see how that one goes.
      The world of warcraft repsonses left out any of the linux questions.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    14. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by JonToycrafter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thank you for the reply...but what about raising the maximum score on the "propose interview questions" stories to 10, 20, or infinity?

      This doesn't mean you have to pass on the highest-rated questions, but it's been a long time since the +5 meant much on these stories.

    15. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      I clicked the link in this story's write up and didn't notice it was for the other interview

      Yeah, that got me too... I started getting suspicious when not one of the questions appeared in the interview at all. Further research on the submitters showed the issue. If I'd been more attentive I would've realized the problem a whole lot sooner.

    16. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah...

      The world of warcraft repsonses left out any of the linux questions.

      The WoW responses also left out any useful content.

    17. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So?
      If we don't show interest, then there is no way games will _ever_ be ported to Linux.

    18. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by xappax · · Score: 1

      That method's certainly worth a try, but the problem I forsee is that some interviewees have a distinct "tilt" to what they want to talk about. Sometimes this is because they just want to advertise for their book/movie/software, so they'll pick the questions that let them glorify themselves as much as possible. Sometimes they're just really excited or focused on one particular aspect, so they'll just pick all the questions that let them prattle on about that topic.

      I mean, it's true that we want to hear what the interviewee has to say, but in general we want to hear what they have to say about a broad range of issues (not just the one thing they're really into), some of which they might prefer not to have been asked.

    19. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back when I used to work for a gaming site, we used to send in Q&As every so often, as well as host regular chats with the developers. We often got yelled at for not posting or asking the questions people wanted most but guess what? We didn't have mind-rays that controlled the developers' actions.

      Slashdot could have either sent the questions you wanted and not have received responses OR they may have not bothered sending those particular questions, knowing they wouldn't be answered at all or as well as some others might be.

      With the site I worked for, we all loved the game as much as the readers - probably more. We wanted the answers to the cool questions too. But the reality is that you just can't always get them for one reason or another.

    20. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      How about a poll to rate questions based on all highly moderated comments? Doesn't have to replace the existing poll, and would only add a couple days to the questions getting out to the interviewee.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    21. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Parity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >> For the second game developer interview in a row +5 modded questions about linux ports of the games have been posted and ignored

      > The reason this question is never asked is because the answer is always the same.

      No, it's not. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri from Firaxis Games was ported to Linux (and of course, just yesterday the Quake4 Linux client was released). So, even if the new Civ -isn't- going to be ported to Linux, this answer would be different from 'the usual' in that they actually have experience with having had a porting house convert one of their games. The answer might even be that they're willing to talk to LGP or someone.

      --
      --Parity
      'Card carrying' member of the EFF.
    22. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri from Firaxis Games was ported to Linux

      And how many copies did it sell? 3000?

      I'm sure if another Loki appeared and was willing to front the money to license the game and port it, Firaxis would listen to their proposal. But the easy answer is that there are zero companies currently doing such work, so it's an academic discussion.

    23. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by Drey · · Score: 1

      I agree that the interviewee might have a "tilt" but if the questions that got modded up don't reflect that "tilt", then they can't steer it that way. We've already seen interviewees with an agenda will stick to it anyhow. Finally, I'd rather see the interviewee "tilt" the interview then the /. editors. If "tilt" is going to get introduced anyhow, why not leave it to the person(s) answering the questions?

    24. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Judging by your skills as an 'editor', I don't think you could pick a shit nugget out of your ass, let alone decide what is or isn't important to the community as a whole.

      Judging by his skills as an 'editor', I think he spends all day picking his ass.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    25. Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions? by ReverendLoki · · Score: 1
      man, i'm NEVER coming back!

      Right on, brother! Preach it! I'm with you, 100%, and I'm not coming back to this free content again either!

      See ya tomorrow...

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  5. Re:Thanks, Sid! by LehiNephi · · Score: 1

    I fully agree. Thanks, Sid, for the thoughtful, candid responses. Like many others here, I played the original Civ (yes, 320x240 and all--boy was the Windows version eye-popping!), and I still play it occasionally today.

    This certainly is a marked contrast to the Interview with the Blizzard "developers", where all we got back was a load of marketing bull.

    --
    Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
  6. Civ IV shameless plug by mejesster · · Score: 1

    I know I'm ready to dive into those lucious layers of depth that Meier is tantalizing us poor souls with.
    Other than that, I do appreciate his plugs for mouse/keyboard and PC gaming in general. Come on developers, you can't ever give those damn controllers(or consoles) the versatility of a PC.

    --
    MacroHard - Boning you in a big way! (TM)
    1. Re:Civ IV shameless plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on developers, you can't ever give those damn controllers(or consoles) the versatility of a PC.

      No, but since they want to port the game between all available systems in order to have the largest potential customer base, they have to go with a lowest common denominator control. This is doubly so with the advent of the XBox, since it made the porting barrier between PC and console that much lower. Then you add the fact that they don't want to turn away casual gamers, which means they try to make a very simple interface that can be picked up almost instantly. You end up with point-and-grunt level of interaction on any system.

      The trick is to make your interface such that the game can be played and enjoyed with a mouse or controller, but where the keyboard can also be used to add a great deal more power and flexibility for those that want it. It's not that hard to do, as long as you plan to do it that way. Unfortunately, most games seem to ship 6 weeks before they're finished anyway, so nobody is going to waste time doing a second interface for the game until everything else works.

  7. What a dick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What does "intellectual property" have to do with clones, unless they are using assets lifted or derivatived from the original work? You can't own ideas and if you could, there would be no games industry.

    1. Re:What a dick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/derivatived/derived

      I've had a hard week

    2. Re:What a dick! by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Funny

      I know! That "flying around, shootin' at stuff"? That was my idea! But do I get any credit? NOOOOOOOOOO!!!

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    3. Re:What a dick! by EiZei · · Score: 1

      Well.. they did sue that Civilization: call to power makers but I can't remember how that went.

    4. Re:What a dick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm, Civilization Call to Power was released by the owner (Activision) of the Civilization series at the time it was released. They then sold the series to someone else who released Civilization III. There was no lawsuit...the company that produced CCTP had every legal right to distribute the game, despite the fact that most people hated it (I actually liked it myself, but I liked all of the CIV games...(CIV II being my favorite.)

    5. Re:What a dick! by Rycross · · Score: 1

      You can't own ideas, but you can own an implementation of an idea. I would imagine if they are lifting and copying exact functionality from Civ then there would be an issue, but from what I understand this isn't what they're doing.

    6. Re:What a dick! by lilmouse · · Score: 1

      Hey, you're getting dangerously close to violating my patent on a method to sue companies for IP crimes!

      Remember, in the US, you can own ideas!

      --LWM

  8. Slow games in Civilization by Eightyford · · Score: 1

    I really hope he figured out a way to make Civ4 playable after a hundred or so turns. I've been playing Civ3 on a pentium M lately and it's still way too slow when the game gets into the modern age.

    1. Re:Slow games in Civilization by tktk · · Score: 5, Funny
      I've been playing Civ3 on a pentium M lately and it's still way too slow when the game gets into the modern age.

      Hmm...you must have accidentally researched political red tape.

    2. Re:Slow games in Civilization by wo1verin3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've been playing Civ3 on a pentium M lately and it's still way too slow when the game gets into the modern age.

      As soon as your PC hits the modern age you'll be fine :)

    3. Re:Slow games in Civilization by thesandtiger · · Score: 3, Informative

      How much RAM do you have?

      I'm playing on an older P4 (2.something GHz I think) but I've got 1GB of RAM and I don't notice that much of a slow-down in the modern era. I usually play on huge worlds with lots of civs on them, too. I bought this machine about 3-4 years ago.

      There is a slowdown in gameplay, but you don't seem to be discussing that kind of thing since you are mentioning processor and not things like the actual gameplay. I find that by the modern era, in those huge worlds, I have so many things to move and do that each turn can take me 10 minutes or so. I definitely hope that, in Civ4, I'll have even better automating options for city stuff. (Civ 3 really pisses me off that, despite orders to the governors to never build units or to always build any city improvement they can, it still sometimes builds units, or shifts to "wealth" instead of building improvements from the expansion packs. GRR! All the time I save with automation gets spent fighting back against the automation when it misbehaves. Bad expansion!)

      Just recently, in honor of City of Villains, Civ4, Quake 4 and FEAR, I have bitten the bullet and upgraded to an AMD 64 system w/SLI and 2GB of RAM. What I spent in hardware costs, I'll save in heating expenses, for sure.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    4. Re:Slow games in Civilization by williamhb · · Score: 1
      I really hope he figured out a way to make Civ4 playable after a hundred or so turns. I've been playing Civ3 on a pentium M lately and it's still way too slow when the game gets into the modern age.
      Could just be because by the time you get to the modern age you haven't slept for 36 hours...
    5. Re:Slow games in Civilization by dalutong · · Score: 1

      I think the GP has a legitimate point -- the minimum specs for this thing are a 1.2+ Ghz processor, 64MB graphics with hardware T&L, etc.

      What performance will that really give you?

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    6. Re:Slow games in Civilization by jacen_sunstrider · · Score: 1

      Obviously a better one.

    7. Re:Slow games in Civilization by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

      Civ 3 really pisses me off that, despite orders to the governors to never build units or to always build any city improvement they can, it still sometimes builds units, or shifts to "wealth" instead of building improvements from the expansion packs. GRR!

      I'd call this a feature. Just like in real life, mayors, governers, committees, etc all make boneheaded moves, despite orders the Higher Ups. Especially when the subject of creating wealth comes up. Maybe Civ IV will have a feature that allows you to fire these guys and hire/appoint real yes-men. ;-)

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    8. Re:Slow games in Civilization by ilyaaohell · · Score: 1

      Umm, I don't know if you've been paying attention to PC games lately, but that is one of the lowest minimum requirements for a major big-budget game that I've seen in about a year.

      Most major game releases today work on nothing but the bleeding edge of gaming hardware (Doom 3, Half Life 2, F.E.A.R., etc). I don't know anyone whose computer can run any of these games (me included), but apparently enough people have that kind of hardware, or else they wouldn't spend millions of dollars creating these games.

      --
      UNIX: A computer user is defined as a programmer. WINDOWS: A computer user is defined as a consumer.
    9. Re:Slow games in Civilization by Lux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > What I spent in hardware costs, I'll save in heating expenses, for sure.

      Get AMD's CPU drivers if your motherboard supports Cool-N-Quiet (tm). I've tested it out, and my brand new AMD 64 chip underclocks to about 1 Ghz when idle. That translates to less heat, which can in turn lead to a quieter system, as well. (Some mobos can dynamically undervolt the fan to slow it down when the chip is cool.)

      What you save in electricity, you can use to heat your house more efficiently. :)

    10. Re:Slow games in Civilization by magicianeer · · Score: 1

      I play Civ 3 on a Mac 7600 (with G3 upgrade + 384MB ram + Panther).
      This machine dates back to 1998. Your Pentium M screams by comparison.

      My solution to the game performance is to turn off animations, turn off show AI moves, and play 5 City Challenge. It speeds game play in so many ways, and adds some wrinkles to game play. Its no crime if you get 6 or 7 cities later in the game either. A typical 5CC game takes me between 10 and 16 hours of total playing time spread over 2 weeks.

      Heh, I can conquer the world on Monarchy with only 5 cities.

      I own other, much faster machines that I use exclusively for work and slashdot.

      --
      You can have it good, fast, or cheap. Pick any two.
  9. Civ Dissapoints Met by codemakesmecry · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Used to play Civ but latelly it has been letting me down, I don't know maybe I am graphics junky but I want more.

    1. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by no_pets · · Score: 0

      No problem. The updated Civ IV will have greatly improved, 3-D graphics. I can hardly wait although the old graphics are still fine for me.

      --
      "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
    2. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by KarmaOverDogma · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I found that Civ II was the best version of the game, having seen and played CIV I, II, III, and Alpha Centauri.

      CIV II had really humerous videos of the advisory council, user customizable maps, continent sizes, climate choices, the ability to modify the landscape within the games via engineers, and if you chose to, beat the pants of the game by cheating inside of the game - not having to resort to hacking the game saves (making every hut a new city, unit, or most powerfully IMO a new discovery was amusing). Furthermore, the CIV II engine was a growth upon, not a near complete rebuilding of the original CIV I engine, like Civ II was to me. This obviously makes some people love or hate Civ III for that very reason (the power of culture in Civ III was a major change).

      Civ III, while cute, was too different in terms of added complexity to interest me for long. For me, any good simulation game is one where after you understand the core concept well enough, you can, with a little luck and good planning, have a decent chance of winning most scenarios hands down vs the computer AI; PvP is another matter, but the core knowledge of the games dynamics still allows for you to be a very challenging opponent to other players most of the time... I also wish they had brought back the real actors doing Advisory Counil Videos; CIV III could have stood to have been a bit more humerous.

      Anyway, I'm sure some may say Civ III's increase in complexity and depth are what made it great and that my dissatisfaction just shows I'm stupid/non adaptive or something like that - maybe so, but I have found that if a game is interesting enough for me I'll spend whatever time it takes to master the game. Few games do that for me any more and Civ II, Diablo II, and Alpha Centari were the last simulation games that really grabbed my attention for months on end (now I'm really showing my age).

      I hope Civ IV is just as captivating for me as II was...

      --
      uR iGn0ranc3, Their Power
    3. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, Diablo II is ancient and isnt a sim.

    4. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      I would have to say SMAC was my fav civ-type game. I never did play CivIII. At first, there was no PvP option, and I couldn't justify buying the game and then the expansion pack just to play against my friends. But I bought SMAC and Alien Crossfire, I still play those for hours on end. I missed the whole thrown room thing, i guess, but the ability to customize and upgrade units was awesome (i don't know if you can do this in CivIII). I think if you count the ways you can customize the units you could have somewhere around 250,000 different units, something like that.
      Damn, all this talk, i think i'm going to leave work early and go home and play.

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    5. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by hazzey · · Score: 1

      What I have heard (and it makes sense) is that the first Civ game you play will always be your favorite. I think that this makes perfect sense. That is the one that first openned your eyes to the Civ world and all other versions have to first live up to your expectations with your first game.

      That being said, what are people's favorite Civ and first Civ?

    6. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by Dan-DAFC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      CIV III could have stood to have been a bit more humerous.

      I found the following amusing when trying to change governments:

      You say you want a revolution?

      • Yes. You know it's gonna be alright.
      • No. You can count me out.
      --
      Suck figs.
    7. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not alone. While some of the concepts (like culture) were good, the game itself is actually pretty tedious. I still play Civ 2 on occasion, Civ 3 doesn't even get an install. It's a better simulation, perhaps, but doesn't feel like Civ. I hope that they put the spirit back into IV.

    8. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CivNet, baby! A forgotten gem.

    9. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      First played was the original Civilization (on the Amiga). Favorite has to be Civ 2, perhaps just because of all the additions that were made to the game.
      I always think Colonization was excellent and in sore need of an update.
      It makes me a little sad to think about all the great turn based strategy games of the past and how few remain today. Master of Orion 3 was a big disappointment.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    10. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by John+Muir · · Score: 1

      First played the original Civ.
      But Civ II beat it in my mind.
      Didn't like Alpha Centauri one bit.
      Civ III seems interesting but flawed.

      My favourite Civ experience actually was reading the manual to the original version some months after I bought it and had learned the game basics through intuition. I was on a roadtrip as a kid and was bored senseless, but the manual was good! Learned what those mystic icons were finally meant to be! ;-)

    11. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by mattis_f · · Score: 1

      First: Civ I
      Favorite: Civ II

      Civ III has the culture thing going for it, but I don't like the way trade is being done and I don't like you that you NEED a BIG civilization to stand any chance. In Civ II, thanks to trade and other stuff, territory did not matter that much. But in Civ III, because of the luxury items, the size of your empire is everything...

    12. Re:Civ Dissapoints Met by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      To me, Alpha Centauri. Civ1 was cool, Civ2 was almost perfect, but SMAC was perfect game-wise *and* had the user interface just right *and* had cool, interesting sci-fi stuff.

      Plus there was an actual Linux version (as opposed to Civ which only had those CTP knockoffs).

      I didn't like Civ3 interface much... =/

  10. PC Upgradability by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The fact that you can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceless.

    Yea, but the thing is that these days you can buy a new console for LESS than a decent video card...

    --
    TODO: Something witty here...
    1. Re:PC Upgradability by iocat · · Score: 3, Funny
      ...and the console is viable for 4-5 years, AND the games typically look, run, and play *better* the longer you own the console (as developers exploit the console better).

      Still, PCs are great machines. For coding console games. [duck]

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    2. Re:PC Upgradability by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      With a PC, you don't NEED to upgrade your graphics card all the time. When a console comes out there are many games unique to it that require an upgrade. When pc titles come out you can still run them on older hardware with some settings turned down. Very rarely will a game come out which won't even run on a 4-year old graphics card.

    3. Re:PC Upgradability by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

      4 years ago would mean a geforce 3 card. Try running modern games on a GF3 and sub-ghz cpu...

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    4. Re:PC Upgradability by Jarlsberg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it's still the same old console, as good or bad as it was two years ago. Not so with the PC :)

    5. Re:PC Upgradability by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      http://www.techwarelabs.com/reviews/video/ati_rade on9700p/

      http://firingsquad.com/hardware/r300/default.asp

      http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html? i=1685

      Maybe 4 years is pushing it, but just 3 years ago you could have had a 9700 Pro and 2 ghz Athlon XP processor. That same setup would still run most games just fine today.

    6. Re:PC Upgradability by Dracolytch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes an no... The xbox 360's releasing at like $400 for a complete package, while you can get a used xbox for like $100. Meanwhile, you can get a good solid midrange video card for $150.

      Consoles are going up in price as they try to match PCs in terms of graphics power. Since xbox and ps2 run at resolutions way lower than PC resolutions, they don't need the processing power PCs do. This is changing as TVs become HDTVs, and get the same resolution as computer monitors. I just built a /fast/ PC for a buddy for about $800. It looks to me like the prices are beginning to meet in the middle.

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
    7. Re:PC Upgradability by lewp · · Score: 1

      ... and play at 1/6-1/4 the resolution. I play at 1900x1200 with anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, and other goodies with a midrange PC; while console fanboys are getting all wet about the next gen systems doing 720p if they're lucky.

      Throw in the control advantages of a mouse and keyboard, the connectivity advantages of a real computer, and the fact that I'd have to buy a nice PC anyway to work, and the PC just keeps looking better and better.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    8. Re:PC Upgradability by Jeff+Carr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The advantage that I see is maintainability.

      When I want to, I can still play my favorite PC games from up to 20 years ago on my current PC (Masters of Magic, Curse of the Azure Bonds, Star Control, Dragon Wars, Nethack, etc). If I wanted to play my favorite non-PC games, I'd have to pick up a working Atari 2600, Sega Master System, Sega Genesis, Playstation, etc.

      Keeping all your favorite consoles in working order for the next 20 years would be more expensive than upgrading a PC every few years or so. Emulators on a PC can do the same job, but then once again you're using your PC for games...

      --
      The television will not be revolutionized.
    9. Re:PC Upgradability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This depends on what you consider a "decent" video card. The Xbox 360 will run you 300$ for the stripped down version! While I haven't heard the official launch price of the PS3, I expect a similar number. Meanwhile, a 200$ Nvidia 6600GT will run just about anything out there beautifully.

    10. Re:PC Upgradability by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure of that. I've got that exact card in my current system (AMD64 3000+, 6600GT, 1GB DDR) and some of the newer titles are starting to really push it quite a bit. They still run fine, but even today I have to run some games with the details down a bit to get acceptable frame rates. I'm not running insane resolution either. I typically run 1280x960, no AA.

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    11. Re:PC Upgradability by damiam · · Score: 1

      To confirm that, I'm typing this on a 3-year-old machine with a Radeon 9700 PRO, Audigy, and dual Athlon MP 2200 processors. It's played every game I've ever tried it with just fine, including Far Cry, Doom III, Half-Life 2, and Unreal 2004. Although, to be fair, a 4-year-old XBox will also play Doom III (if not quite as well) and it cost about 1/6 of what this machine cost.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    12. Re:PC Upgradability by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      I'm not running insane resolution either. I typically run 1280x960, no AA.

      Which is already higher than current consoles can manage, and roughly equivalent/higher than the next gen consoles (1080i = 1920x1080 @30fps (or 1920x540 @60fps), 720p = 1280x720 @60fps).

      And a 6600GT is under $140 now, not $200 like the GP suggested.

      For an entire PC that outspecs a PS2/GC/Xbox you'd pay under $300.

      The games that are "pushing" your 6600GT will be pushing the new gen of consoles as well -- they have drastically less CPU power (but have GPUs roughly equivalent to a low end 7800 series card). Their main advantages are a locked configuration (easier to optimize for) and a relatively low res output device (even at HD resolutions).

    13. Re:PC Upgradability by danila · · Score: 1

      It makes sense for the game developers to make graphics complex enough that you can play on highest settings only with the fastest card on the market. It doesn't mean than the 6600GT experience is bad, only that the X1000 experience is better.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    14. Re:PC Upgradability by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      As a point of interest, I believe all Xbox 360 games will be available up to 1080i, essentially matching your wondrous 1900x1200 resolution.

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    15. Re:PC Upgradability by $nickname_212 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      LOL, consoles are not like cheese or wine. Think about what you just wrote. "A console lasts 4-5 years." How many jumps in technology occur in that span of time. I don't even own my PC that I had 4-5 years ago anymore because it is irrelevent except for a paper weight or museum piece or hacking satellite receivers. In one year, I can have better graphics than a console. When the console comes out, it won't be better than what a PC can be because the same or similar technology will be available for a PC. And let's see, developers that take advantage of 2005 technology versus games that take advantage of tehcnology released in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. Can you even remember the games you were playing 4-5 years ago? If you own an XBox, you could look at your collection, but my desk has no room for old crusty PC games from 2000, much less 2003.

      Here is something to ruminate on: if the gaming industry waited for technological evolution at the console rate, technology would crawl and the experience between consoles possibly would be small. If it wasn't for the PC game industry, you wouldn't have a quantum leap in performance, quality, and experience that you will have between the XBox and XBox360 or Playstation2 and Playstation3. Who do you think drives the innovation for the latest and greatest video cards from ATI or NVidia? The bleeding edge is developed for the PC and consoles benefit from it.

    16. Re:PC Upgradability by LtOcelot · · Score: 1

      Yea, but the thing is that these days you can buy a new console for LESS than a decent video card...

      Utterly false. My last three video cards have cost around $100-$120 each; as long as you don't care to live on the bleeding edge (meaning, "decent" is good enough), you can get excellent price/performance ratios.

      (Comments like the parent's seem to get moderated up every time there's a discussion like this. Do the moderators in question actually know anything about buying hardware? Never mind, it was a rhetorical question.)

    17. Re:PC Upgradability by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Utterly false. My last three video cards have cost around $100-$120 each; as long as you don't care to live on the bleeding edge (meaning, "decent" is good enough), you can get excellent price/performance ratios.

      I wouldn't say it's utterly false. You can buy a Nintendo Gamecube for under $100 these days.

    18. Re:PC Upgradability by aj50 · · Score: 1

      I play Unreal Tournament 2004. It runs smoothly, with the settings turned down, on a GeForce 2 (64MB)

      --
      I wish to remain anomalous
    19. Re:PC Upgradability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? You can get a new console for less than $100?

    20. Re:PC Upgradability by iocat · · Score: 1
      If you wanted to, you could have better graphics capability on your PC today than Xbox 360 will when it comes out. But since TVs are not getting any better than HDTV at 1024p, there's really diminishing returns for Xbox 360s to have better graphics. That's why a 360 costs less than a good PC videocard.

      But consoles are indeed like fine wine or cheese. While PC game makers have to keep chasing new hardware and compatability standards -- and typically shipping games aimed more to a LCD than to the bleeding edge -- console game makers can work on totally exploiting the system, so that games do indeed get better looking as the life of a console goes on -- more polygons onscreen, faster drawing times, etc. The better graphics that fat PCs can display are typically limited to higher resolution textures or filtering effects, not more polygons than a scrub PC. So, do the games look better, or just cleaner? I don't know, and I'm sure its a matter of preference, but Halo 1 on a TV actually looks "better" to me than Counter Strike or Battlefield on a fat PC, where things are so high res that all I can really notice is how repetitive the textures are.

      If you don't want to play old games, great, but in much the same way old books aren't necessarily worse than new books, some old games are still fun -- even on PC (StarCraft, anyone?) I'm not really sure how the fact that your back catalog sucks is evidence of a good thing.

      Finally, yes, much of the console graphics technology is driven and derived from work which is seen first on PC -- especially if you're talking about the Xbox. Thank you for buying $500 videocards every year to "keep up" and subsidizing my $50/year videogame console!

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    21. Re:PC Upgradability by $nickname_212 · · Score: 0

      I am a PC games guy, but I like consoles when it comes to playing socially with my friends. I would never play a sports game like Madden, hockey, or racing on a PC. And I don't find much fun in playing those games by myself. The smack talk is the fun part for me. In any case, you can always down res your games on the PC to TV resolution, and the game will probably run much better because of it. I like higher resolution for the better detail either in how much screen I see in a game to better detail on objects like characters. I wouldn't say my back catalog sucks, but I haven't found the compulsion to try em out a second time. There isn't a single game that has captivated me so much that I have to play it now. It is a personallity thing as I don't reread books either, except computer books.

      My thing is that it is hard to say what will come out in the next 4-5 years in graphics evolution. It might not be just better detail, more polygons per pass, or applying texture to those polygons on a pass. There may be something quite extraordinary that will come out and it will be available to PC gamers first. In addition, it might be available a year (a year is forever in the computer industry) after consoles come out which would allow me to enjoy the wonders of the new technology for the next 3-4 years while you are stuck at old console technology. PC and consoles have been like this forever. It is not like the XBox and Microsoft entering the console market changed things. And like you said, it is going to cost $500, but you won't see me buying it unless it is close to virtual reality and there are some good porn games to go with it. I don't understand those that buy bleeding edge technology, probably much like you don't understand my reinvestment in new/old technology every year or so.

      I am not sure how development of games for a console is going to make drawing polygons to the screen any faster. Maybe they will develop algorithms to exploit 2005 hardware better, but how does that get you to the next step in technological evolution. That certainly doesn't prepare the industry so that they can reuse those algorithms in 2010 as things may be completely different by then. IMO, it is a waste of resources to try and get more out of the same thing when the industry has left that platform in the dust.

      In any case, there is no animosity on my part towards consoles. They fill a niche for me that PCs don't.

    22. Re:PC Upgradability by lewp · · Score: 1

      720p is required, 1080i is optional (see? or here?; and the console itself is going to cost you almost as much as the equivalent PC, sans display. That pretty effectively wipes out the whole "video cards are too expensive compared to consoles" point I was responding to.

      The Xbox 360 doesn't look like a particularly bad console, though. Once you can actually buy it (not anytime soon) outside of a $2000(!) system bundle, I'll probably pick one up. Dunno if I'll kick in a monthly fee to Microsoft in addition to my ISP to play online, though, my PC lets me do that for free. The extra $50 per controller stings, too, as does the extra $40 per memory card. Actually, maybe I'll stick with PC gaming... it's cheaper.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    23. Re:PC Upgradability by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

      Why. yes, I can

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    24. Re:PC Upgradability by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      An Xbox costs $400. Don't bother counting the worthless $300 version or the unbelievable bundles at the gaming stores-you'll be able to pick up a 360 at Wal-Mart or Target in the first week of release for the flat price, I guarantee it. This is already $600 less than the absolute minimum cost of a computer that can possibly compete graphics-wise. Add on to that a $200 video card every other year, maybe $100 in RAM every few years, and the cost of maintenance for a console is hardly comparable to a computer. Prefer PC gaming? Alright, I'm fine with that. Just don't claim it's cheaper.

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    25. Re:PC Upgradability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, talk about strawman arguments with those prices. Good thing you can put together systems for 1/2 that in the real world with quality componants...

    26. Re:PC Upgradability by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      You are simply not going to get a machine capable of the same performace as the Xbox 360 for less than a grand. If you can show me a site which sells the equivalent parts of what you'd get in a 360 for $500, I'll stop arguing

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    27. Re:PC Upgradability by Rhys · · Score: 1

      Games would look better in the PC world on low cost graphics hardware if you still ran at 320x200, but who really wants to do that?

      --
      Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
    28. Re:PC Upgradability by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Equivalent PC? We're talking about a console that has three 64 bit powerpc processors, each over 3GHz. Good game controllers for the PC are just as expensive as console game controllers, and the knockoff game controllers (sometimes these are decent, anyway) for the Xbox 360 will come along quickly enough. The Xbox 360, meanwhile, is going to cost less than the exciting high-resolution video card by itself, and we're talking about the $400 model here.

      If you think you can build a PC equivalent to something with three 3GHz PPC chips for $400, I want to know where the hell you're buying your parts.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    29. Re:PC Upgradability by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I spent $150 on my video card (radeon 9700 pro, IIRC, haven't used my desktop in a while) and it can't handle games with full detail at 720p resolution with any antialiasing. All Xbox 360 games must support 720p with 4xAA. Granted, many PC games have graphics that console games don't, at least with all the options turned on/up, but the Xbox is going to kick the living shit out of any $400 computer in the gaming department. Period.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    30. Re:PC Upgradability by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      For an entire PC that outspecs a PS2/GC/Xbox you'd pay under $300.

      Sure, that's true enough, but the PS2/GC/Xbox can be had for $100-130 brand spanking new now. They're not $300 any more.

      Show me a PC that can beat the Xbox 360 for $400, and I'll be very impressed. Keep in mind that you have to meet or exceed its power in every category. We're talking about a machine with three 64 bit PPC chips at 3GHz or more, here. Even if they're castrated as compared to the chips in, say, the G5 powermac, that's still going to be pretty ballsy. Being able to do 720p at 4xAA is no mean feat, either, and that's a requirement for all games.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Reusing Code == Unoriginal Game Play by katana · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I also have quite a code base that I've been using for a long time, so I know how certain systems will work before I even throw them in."

    My first thought on this was, Wow, wouldn't it be great to Open Source this code base. My second thought was, isn't this a symptom of a larger problem? We want code to be modular and reusable so complex games can be developed quickly, yet we complain that games aren't original enough because people are reusing code. Seems like a fundamental problem to me.

    1. Re:Reusing Code == Unoriginal Game Play by merdark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The overall "game logic" code is probably a very small fraction of the overall code base. All games need certain functions, game time/event code, graphics rendering code, animation code, etc etc. Reusing code does not have anything to do with game play being original or not, unless they are also reusing game logic ideas (and code).

    2. Re:Reusing Code == Unoriginal Game Play by ForumTroll · · Score: 1

      Nobody is complaining that games aren't original enough because they're reusing code. Reusing code hardly has a serious effect on the concept of the game. The concept of the game and the code which they're reusing are not that tightly coupled. Graphics code for instance is very reusable in many cases regardless of the type or concept of the game it is being applied too.

      --
      "A Lisp programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of nothing." - Alan Perlis
  12. Waste of a question by hellfire · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Keeping PC gaming alive:
    What factors do you think help keep PC gaming alive when competing with consoles, and do you foresee that PC gaming will continue to survive when confronted with the next generation of consoles? From the reverse perspective, what prevents consoles from finally killing off PC gaming?


    I missed this question when the original article asking for questions was posted. But this is a silly waste. Sid's answer is spot on, and I wish I knocked this down a knotch with a mod point.

    Lumping an entire market together and insisting they are direct competitors for the exact same dollar is stupid. Civ4 cannot be played well with a PS2 controller, and Grand Turismo plays crappy on a keyboard. You can find a way to make it work, but no one is going to spend the time to try to code it. It's a waste. The market will show you that there is room for both, and while there are lots of crossovers, you will also see that there are lots of areas where there is absolutely no crossover, simply because of interface issues.

    Sid makes some other great points about graphics and upgrades you can do to a PC. This goes into the fact that a $100-$300 console can run a fast paced racing game with better performance than a $1500 computer. PC games are notorious for being slow and skipping frames. Some console games do this, but that's considered a bug in the console game and it doesn't do so well if it performs badly. However, in the PC world if a game has godly system requirements for any reason, the blame is more often put on the PC and not the person who coded it to require too much power. Sometimes that's deserving but having to spend hours just to fine tune your system to play Quake or Doom is nuts.

    They are all gaming companies, but different games for different platforms will always be here, and I hope it gets even more diverse, because we need the diversity.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:Waste of a question by prefect42 · · Score: 1

      That used to be true, but my recent experience of Xbox and PS2 is that frame rate hit is now allowable on consoles...

      --

      jh

    2. Re:Waste of a question by Infinityis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not only is there a waste of a question, but apparently question #8 is completely missing. Did the editor/submitter remove question #8, or did Sid decline to answer a particular question? Any guesses as to what the omitted question might be?

    3. Re:Waste of a question by Radres · · Score: 1

      That wasn't my experience with racing games on PC vs. console.

      First, there is no reason why you can't hook up a console-type controller to a PC. There are even adapters that will allow you to directly connect a PS2 controller to the USB port on your PC. I'm sure that there are similar products for the other consoles. There is most definitely racing wheels for the PC. My experience with racing wheels has been that while on the PC I can tweak all of the variables like dead zone and response, the hardware-agnostic nature of the console will only allow you to adjust some parameters (Gran Turismo does not have a controller set up utility; you have to adjust the settings with the hardware itself), and ultimately the wheel you just spent money on is inferior to the controller that comes with the console because the dead zone can't be made narrow enough, or the pedals aren't responsive enough, etc.

      Second, there are some great racing games for the PC, like TOCA Race Driver 2, and more recently, GTR FIA GT Racing.

      The real reason why racing games have been vastly more successful for the console is because the console controller solution is "good enough" and there are way more consoles in circulations than gaming PCs, so the racing game developers are going to focus on producing their games for the larger market. It has nothing to do with the console performing better than the PC or not having access to a PS2-style controller on the PC. If anything, the performance is better on a PC and the control options are much more varied.

    4. Re:Waste of a question by MaineCoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PC games are notorious for being slow and skipping frames. Some console games do this, but that's considered a bug in the console game and it doesn't do so well if it performs badly.

      Many modern console games run 20-30 FPS, with 30 FPS being a 'goal'. They also generally do not necessarily attempt to run at a fixed frame rate, unlike consoles of previous generations. Unless, that fixed frame rate is capping off the frame rate at the lower end of a fluctuating spectrum so as to prevent uneven performance.

      --
      Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
    5. Re:Waste of a question by alen · · Score: 1

      a normal TV is less than 640x480 resolution where a PC is usually 1024x768 minimum. It takes a lot more horsepower to make graphics on a PC monitor compared to a TV. HDTV is around 1024x768, but a lot of the new PC graphics cards can play at 1600x1200. Do the math to see what the difference in pixels is.

    6. Re:Waste of a question by aslagle · · Score: 1

      Actually, the maximum HDTV resolution is 1080(i), which is 1920 x 1080.

    7. Re:Waste of a question by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Gran Turismo 3 and 4 work fine with the same wheel[s] on the PC as they do on the PS/2. Or well, they would, if they were on the PC. Certainly my logitech driving force ps2 wheel works great on my PC with colin mcrae rally. And, of course, the PS2 has USB ports (where the wheel plugs in) and at least one game (maybe only one game) supports plugging in a USB keyboard so you can use it to chat. Phantasy Star Online, maybe? Which is probably dead and gone now? Still, the point is, it can be done. The Xbox is also USB, and I have a cute little cable to plug USB into the Xbox so I can use USB kb/mouse in linux, xbox media center, or whatever. I think this is a stupid argument; let's just have mouse/keyboard games for consoles. They even sold a kb and mouse for the Dreamcast - I have both - so that you could use them with their web browser. They come in handy when using dreamcast linux, too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. My Question to Mr. Meier: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Frankly, I was surprised at your nomination. Many of us would like to know: With your background as a game designer, what in particular do you feel makes you qualified to sit on the Supreme Court?

    1. Re:My Question to Mr. Meier: by Discopete · · Score: 4, Funny

      He's probably got better qualifications than the actual nominee.

      {then again, so does a soapdish}

    2. Re:My Question to Mr. Meier: by julesh · · Score: 5, Funny

      It all started when he first researched Code of Laws back in '91...

    3. Re:My Question to Mr. Meier: by UltraAyla · · Score: 1

      he might be able to program the president a missile defense system that works

  14. Go ahead and try it, Sid by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 0, Troll

    "He's telling the developers of those clones to be careful about copying or risk being sued."

    Sue who for what? 100 developers and contributors for a portion of all the profits they've earned?

    Surely, after all the massive hits he's made and the piles of money he sleeps on, he can afford to be a little gracious towards an open source game project.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    1. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Hrvat · · Score: 1

      Even if Sid was as gracious as an angel, Take 2 still owns the rights and can sue whoever they want whether or not he approves. He is warning people that others own the IP and can sue.

      --
      TANSTAAFL
    2. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He doesn't own the IP anymore, Take2 does.

      And Take2, like any big publisher, will move to quash clone developers when they become a threat.

      It's a business. It's not there to promote independent developers, it's there to make money.

      We should be happy that Sid & Take2 are continuing to develop games, to improve the Civ franchise, instead of sitting back and slapping lawsuits on anyone who tries to copy older games.

      Disclaimer: I do not work for Take2, but I'm in the same building as them.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by goldspider · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Surely, after all the massive hits he's made and the piles of money he sleeps on, he can afford to be a little gracious towards an open source game project."

      Ahh, spoken like a true Socialist!

      'I say he's made enough money, and I think he should be compel^H^H^H^H^H^H happy to give back to the people who played his games!'

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    4. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Cyclon · · Score: 1

      Sue who for what? 100 developers and contributors for a portion of all the profits they've earned?

      Well, I'd guess their first target would be whoever runs the website that distributes FreeCiv to get it shut down. They could also try for damages from the same people for distributing the allegedly infringing materials.

    5. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      Sueing doesn't have to be "for" anything. There don't even have to be losses, expecially in copyright law. Statutory infringment does away with such silly notions.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    6. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by purple_cobra · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Pragmatist possibly, even idealist, but Socialist? Absolutely not. Even assuming you're another American who doesn't know the difference between Communism and Socialism would still mean your assertion is wrong.

    7. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by goldspider · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's about wealth redistribution: the GGP poster apparently resents the fact that Meier is wealthy, and feels that he hasn't been generous enough.

      When people dictate to others how generous they should be, it always reminds me of socialists who would compel Meier to fork over his fortune through taxation.

      OK, so maybe calling him a socialist was a stretch, but I have a huge problem with people who want to dictate the generosity of others.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    8. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by dangitman · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It's about wealth redistribution: the GGP poster apparently resents the fact that Meier is wealthy, and feels that he hasn't been generous enough.

      I don't see where he asked for the government to enforce it. Many people disagree about choices to do with money. That doesn't mean they want to use force. For example - does disapproving that someone spends all their money on hookers and cocaine mean that one necessarily wants the government to outlaw hookers and cocaine? Of course not. it's just a personal judgement.

      Meier has enough money to be comfortable, so suing people or being overly protective of his profits would seem greedy to many people. And greed is not usually considered a positive thing. Of course, he is free to be as greedy as he wants, but we don't have to respect him if he chooses to do so.

      *Note: I am not trying to suggest Meier is greedy here. Just deconstructing the logic of your post.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    9. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ahh, spoken like a true Socialist!

      The current boogeyman is "terrorist". Totalitarian socialistic regiments have either fallen (Soviet Union) or are converting themselves to totalitarian market economies (China), while the non-totalitarian mixed-economy commonwealths (most European countries, especially Nordic countries) have become corrupted by globalism for the benefit of large international corporations and to the detriment of their people.

      Osama bin Laden, on the other hand, has kept frustrating all US efforts to find him, and is still a viable boogeyman. Please use current boogeyman termonology; otherwise, the younger people here won't get your attempt to make the parent look bad.

      This message has been brought to you by Boomonology Inc - let us deliver your boogeyman !

      'I say he's made enough money, and I think he should be compel^H^H^H^H^H^H happy to give back to the people who played his games!'

      The grandparent didn't say so. The grandparent said that Sid can afford to be tolerant of people who are making a new game based on Civilization as a non-monetary-profit project. These people don't want Sids money, they want nothing from him except to be left alone. So far they have gotten what they want.

      However, I do find the very idea that you can get the government to stop someone from reimplementing your idea in the form of a new product deeply disturbing, and completely contrary to the idea of free market. Perhaps Wine should also be shut down, since they are reimplementing the Windows API, even if their product shares no code with Windows ?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    10. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You moron. Being gracious doesn't mean that they should sign over the rights to the game and step away. It means that maybe he could take a moment to say, "hey, glad you like my game enough to implement a primitive version of it for free, I've tried a couple out and they're pretty good".

      None of the free clones are going to compete with the latest civ at any point in time.

    11. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by delong · · Score: 1

      Sue who for what? 100 developers and contributors for a portion of all the profits they've earned?

      It's called an injunction. Take Two can prevent the OS developers from developing or distributing their game, by court order. Considering it's an obvious copy, as a matter of fact the copying is the whole draw, it would be fairly easy. Copyright holders own the exclusive right to create derivative works, so there really is no defense.

    12. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by lgw · · Score: 1

      People who call data sharing "piracy" will be added to my foe list.

      So if someone made an illegal copy of Sid's new game Pirates, what would you call that person while they're playing a pirate in that game? A copyright-infringing pirate? Clearly they're a Pirated Pirates Pirate!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    13. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      ianal, iirc, iddqd, there's precedent here - I don't think you can copyright or patent gameplay. The rule is, as far as I understand it, that you can copy every aspect of a game as long as you use no original trademarks, terminology, or content.

    14. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by cheesybagel · · Score: 1
      You cannot copyright a user interface. Microsoft taught that to Apple.

      You can however patent one.

    15. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by TheSunborn · · Score: 1

      Not really. The lemmings version, made in dmtml got in legal trouble. Do a google search on "lemmings dhtml" for the authors analyze of the problems with making clones of existing games, in a new media. Ofcause you could argue that freeciv is not a clone of any other game, because it mix from sereval civ games, and do add new elements.

      But the real reason there newer have been taken legal action against free civ, is that it is not a threat, to the sales of Civilization 4.

    16. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Ideas can't be owned. At best one may be granted a temporary monopoly on such by one or more governments. If that's socialism, then all of this planet is socialist. Yay socialism.:)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    17. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      "Considering it's an obvious copy, as a matter of fact the copying is the whole draw, it would be fairly easy."

      Wrong. COPYRIGHT PROTECTS EXPRESSIONS, NOT IDEAS! If the FreeCiv developers had copied Civilization source code or used Civilization graphics, they'd be in trouble. They did not. FreeCiv is totally clean. It is legal for FreeCiv to do what it did to Civilization for the same reason it is legal for Linux to do what it did to UNIX. Or do you think SCO has a case, too?

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    18. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Point 1) I don't think they can stop FreeCiv (see Monopoly clones)

      2) The game mechanics for Civilization probably took many man hours to make/design, protecting it to a point encourages people to come up with.

      3) I hope I still nhave a job/relationship 2 weeks after civIV comes out.

      Note, I do not think FreeCiv cuts in on Civilization in an real way, but if it was a perfect clone compatable with mods and multiplayer I bet it would, and there wopuld be lawsuits.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    19. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Trademark (Lemmings).

      I don't know the specifics, but rodents dhtml would have been safe.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    20. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

      "Ahh, spoken like a true Socialist!"

      I'm about as anti-Socalist as you can get.

      "'I say he's made enough money, and I think he should be compel^H^H^H^H^H^H happy to give back to the people who played his games!'"

      No, he should live and let live. I said nothing about compelling.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    21. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by delong · · Score: 1

      You cannot copyright a user interface. Microsoft taught that to Apple

      Civilization is not just a user interface. Microsoft won on the "look and feel" case largely because Apple had licensed the technology to Microsoft, which reduced Apple's rights to "thin" copyright protection. To my knowledge, the Civ knockoffs have not licensed the rights to Civ. Copyright protects intrinsic and extrinsic elements, and it isn't clear that knockoffs like FreeCiv would prevail in court.

    22. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by delong · · Score: 1

      Wrong. COPYRIGHT PROTECTS EXPRESSIONS, NOT IDEAS!

      And the knockoffs copy Civ's "expression". If they were just making a turn based world-conquest strategy game, there would be no issue. But they copy much of Civ's intrinsic elements. It would come down to whether they copied only functional elements, and whether their work is sufficiently transformative. I'm not convinced they would win.

    23. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      "They copy much of Civ's intrinsic elements."

      Such as what? Rules of a game aren't copyrightable. See [http://www.ipr-helpdesk.org/guias/imprimible/cuer po.jsp?guia=guia1&len=en&tipo=html%5D. They created their own code, designed their own art (heck, the tilesets aren't even that similar), and wrote their own documentation and strategy guides. All the games share are similar rules. If that's not what you meant by "intrinsic elements", please be more specific.

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    24. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      Gaah ... the link has an extra space on the end of it. Go to http://www.ipr-helpdesk.org/guias/imprimible/cuerp o.jsp?guia=guia1&len=en&tipo=html

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    25. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by tbannist · · Score: 1

      So now socialists are people who want to be left alone, and the good capitalist is the guy who it asking the government do him favours?

      Spoken like a true Republican!

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    26. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this arguement has gotten to that point in which it leaves it's originating factors so much that it becomes invalid.

      What I mean is this, lets look at the basics here:

      Sid M. is a guy who has a really cool idea. He worked very hard to make his really cool idea into a real product, then marketed and sold his product for whatever he could get for it, which is a really great thing. That's how the system is supposed to work. People make good products and people give money to the creators of those good products to show how much value it has.

      Now.. we have the next group. A bunch of people who think that not only is the idea cool, but it's so cool that they are willing to devote a ton of time and effort into making it EVEN COOLER. They want to make this product the UBERPRODUCT. and they will even do it for free because they love the idea so much. In fact, they think it's such s great idea that nobody should miss out on the idea just because they don't have enough money to buy the product.

      Well, here's where they cross the line. It's Sid's idea. Not thiers. everything they're doing stems from his original idea. They should defer to him completely, because in this context he is the "God Of The Idea".

      Now Sid.. Sid decided he made enough money on the idea, and doesn't want to own it anymore. So he sold the idea to a company who said "man, this is really valuable. We'll give you this big chunk of money for it.

      Well.. Sid sold his Godness to the company. Now Sid is just some guy, who once had an idea, but now is no longer in control.

      So what about this new company? They still think they can make money from the damned thing! ...by adding lots of cool new features! How are they different from the "free software" guys from before?

      They had enough respect for Sid to buy it from him, so they are God now.

      So what's all this boiling down to?

      If the "Free Software" guys wanted to do thier shit correctly, they should have bought the damned thing from Sid, and then re-worked it and given it away instead of charging for it. That's the RIGHT answer. You can have your cake and eat it too. You can be respectful to the value of people's Intellectual Property and also give away software for free, and work and develop from your heart without profit motive, but it requires a little capital to do that.

      So next time someone wants to start one of these initiatives, the first step should not be figuring out how to rip off someone's good idea, it should be "How can I get enough money to buy this good idea from them, so I can set it free in the way that I want to?"

      Thanks,

      n

    27. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a huge problem with people who want to dictate the generosity of others

      But that's exactly what copyright and patent laws do! They hand creators an artificial monopoly, taxing society for the assumed benefit (never proved, ironically enough) of creators and society. They are dressed up in the terminology of capitalism, but they are socialist meddling in the free market at their core.

    28. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Without copyright laws and patents, society would be forcing inventors and artists to work for nothing.

      Now there is certainly room to debate the scope and duration of copyrights/patents, but they are still necessary to protect the livelihoods of artitsts/inventors from people who feel entitled to the fruits of others' labor.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    29. Re:Go ahead and try it, Sid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >(...) while the non-totalitarian mixed-economy commonwealths (most European countries, especially Nordic countries) have become corrupted by globalism for the benefit of large international corporations and to the detriment of their people.

      Say what? Please elaborate, I'd like to know how my country (Denmark) is falling apart, because I'm not seeing it. Economy is better than ever, unemployment is low, record surplus on our state finances year after year allowing us to constantly reduce public debt (very unlike the US under the current administration btw.). We still have a well-functioning universal healthcare system and one of the strongest, if not the strongest, social security system in the world. From my experience (and I'm visiting Sweden and Norway quite regularly, think 4-5 times/year) the rest of Scandinavia is pretty much the same. The economic growth in central Europe (especially France, Germany etc.) might have slowed down a bit (albeit the economies there *are* still growing), but that's certainly not the case here in Scandinavia. In fact we're quite confident that we've struck a balance between capitalism/free market and socialism that enables us to have both prosporous *and* fair and equal societies.

      So, please enlighten me, did they tell you on Fox news that the "communists" over in Europe are falling apart or did you somehow reach that conclusion on your own? In the latter case, how?

  15. PC Gaming's Days are Numbered by TGK · · Score: 1

    I think the mouse and keyboard define a paradigm of control that has been very successfull - but by no means perfect. The mouse is a better aiming mechanism than, for example, a joystick, but still not better than an actual pointing mechanism like a gun.

    There has to exist some compromise between a tool built for the job and a tool built for all jobs - at last as long as we're defining our tools in a physical world. While a gun like object would probably be a better pointing mechanism for Quake 4, it's likely not the best pointing mechanism for Black and White 2.

    As the price of technologies like gyroscopic pointing devices and virtual keyboards come into the range of the average user, we may see a change in game controllers. In a battle where the controller preferance is no longer the defining characteristic seperating PC gaming from a living room set top box, the increased expense and varied specifications of the PC will likely prove a fatal blow to the platform.

    Ignoring my keyboard and mouse - I'd much rather be doing my gaming on a 40+ inch HD Tv with a nice Dolby 5.1-7.1 surround system than at my PC. With comparable prices between those two systems, Joe Sixpack isn't going to buy PC games if the interface suddenly doesn't matter.

    --
    Killfile(TGK)
    No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    1. Re:PC Gaming's Days are Numbered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ignoring my keyboard and mouse - I'd much rather be doing my gaming on a 40+ inch HD Tv with a nice Dolby 5.1-7.1 surround system than at my PC./


      Uhhhh... you can do this from your PC.... In fact, replace the 40" HDTV w/ a 30" HD Monitor and that is my gaming setup. Total cost about $3.5K and it's a complete media center as well and capable of 2x the resolution any current or soon to be released console is capable of. Plus I can actually get patches and mods for my games and do all the other utilitarian, non-game/media PC stuff with it.
  16. What I really want to know... by jason+ward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When's Civ IV being released?

    1. Re:What I really want to know... by no_pets · · Score: 1, Informative
      --
      "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
    2. Re:What I really want to know... by FusionDragon2099 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On Tuesday. No, really.

    3. Re:What I really want to know... by VMEbus · · Score: 1

      I believe it's next Monday, the 24th. I've pre-ordered it already :)

    4. Re:What I really want to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, Gamestop says I can pick up my copy on Monday, 10/24/05

    5. Re:What I really want to know... by manifoldronin · · Score: 1

      According to the "gone gold" announcement, it'll be shipped on 10/25 in the US, and one week after in Europe.

      --
      Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
    6. Re:What I really want to know... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      For the Mac?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    7. Re:What I really want to know... by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Amazon predicts my pre-order will arrive on Oct 26.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  17. Dinosours by MSBob · · Score: 1

    I regret my question wasn't picked but I'm really curious why the Dinosaurs project got abandoned. From the initial description it sounded like a terrific idea. Was the technology immature, was it too complex for an average gamer? I guess we'll never know the complete story behind that story.

    --
    Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
    1. Re:Dinosours by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      IIRC, he abandoned the idea because he had a hard time trying to make it "fun". I couldn't find the exact article i read but a similar one can be found here.

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
  18. Is this all you post anymore? by Work+Account · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Every time I see your username in the comment section it's next to a modded-up post "thanking" whatever the article is about.

    A Firefox article is posted, and within 15 minutes there's you with a "Thanks, Firefox developers!" comment.

    Google announces a new feature of their Print service and immediately it's "Thanks Google!!" in a comment of yours that shoots straight up to 4 or 5.

    I guess what I'm saying is... shut up.

    --

    If you "get" pointers add me as a friend (116)!
    1. Re:Is this all you post anymore? by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thanks, Work Account (900793)!!!

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    2. Re:Is this all you post anymore? by arafel · · Score: 1

      Without commenting on his specific example (because I can't be bothered to check his posting history), "thanks" is something people don't say enough of these days. Particularly with respect to free software.

      C'mon folks, drop your software authors a line to say thanks; bet it'll be well received.

  19. He actually responded! by moo083 · · Score: 1

    Wow, he responded.....unlike, some other developer team I know....(cough, cough, Blizzard, cough, cough)......

    Thanks a lot Sid! Very insightful.

  20. I can't believe he answered my question. But seriously, thanks again Sid, you have changed the way we play video games forever. Surely without you, someone else equally as brilliant would have come along. But in the end, what counts is that you were there, and YOU siezed the moment. Thanks.

    --
    public class null extends java applet { System.out.print ("Tabula Rasa"); }
  21. Re:Thanks, Sid! by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

    Hell yes.
    Those were great questions. Noticed how he answered them? Look closely, if you will, at the great examples and insight he shares?
     
    Hey, Blizzard! Sit up straight in your chair and pay attention. Stop staring out the window.

  22. Input devices by digidave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given his comments on input devices on PCs being so far ahead of those on consoles, I wonder what Sid Meier thinks of the Nintendo Revolution controller. It seems to close some gaps while widening others. Then it also does things the PC hasn't yet dreamed of. IMO, it will be perfect for playing strategy games.

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    1. Re:Input devices by NelsonM · · Score: 1

      I wonder the same thing. In the interview, he states that "the biggest thing PCs have going for them in the console war is the mouse/keyboard interface." Considering the Xbox 360 is rumored to support the mouse/keyboard interface, I'm wondering how much he keeps up to date on the latest news, and if the next generation of consoles will change his opinion any.

    2. Re:Input devices by tdsotf · · Score: 1

      Heck, no need to wait for the 360, I've got a keyboard and mouse for my PS2 (came with the linux kit). I even played Half-Life on the PS2 with them. Keyboard and mouse can be done on consoles now. Just more games need to support them.

    3. Re:Input devices by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Agreed. For an unseen product with only a commerical to show for it, I find it strange that I am so eager for its release.

  23. Disappointing... by glMatrixMode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a big fan of Civ1&2 and Alpha Centauri, I find Sid's answers to be very disappointing.

    The silliest one is the answer to Question 7.

    Sid makes the following argument : Chess, which has simple rules, is the current limit of what computer AI can do as well as a human. So Civilization 4, which has much more complex rules, is too difficult to allow computer AI to compete with humans.

    This argument is false : for instance, look at the traditional Asian "Go" game. It has very simple rules, much simpler than Chess. If Sid's argument made sense, computer should be able to play Go very well. But the reality is that as of today, Computers cannot compete with a skilled human. Thus : there is no direct relationship between the complexity of the rules, and the difficulty to design a strong AI.

    Not to mention Sid's answer to the question on Free clones... he has no interest in software freedom.

    --
    War doesn't prove who's right, just who's left.
    1. Re:Disappointing... by imsabbel · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      No, go is MUCH MUCH more complicated than chess. Not simpler.
      Much more degrees of freedom.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:Disappointing... by Kenja · · Score: 1
      You think Go is simpler then Chess?

      A common saying is that no two Go games have ever been played in the same manor. Do have any idea of the number of moves open to a player?

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:Disappointing... by glMatrixMode · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about the complexity of the *rules*. That is also what Sid was talking about. Go has simple rules. Chess has more complicated rules. Civ has even more complicated rules.

      By the way, I know a civ-like that's a very good AI that doesn't need to cheat at all to compete with a human (except in the most difficult levels). That's Galactic Civilizations, www.galciv.com. The trick is that the AI thinks while you're playing, so it gets lots of CPU time.

      --
      War doesn't prove who's right, just who's left.
    4. Re:Disappointing... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      Not to mention Sid's answer to the question on Free clones... he has no interest in software freedom.
      It stands to reason that Sid, being someone who makes his living creating and selling software, is not very interested in software freedom, and wants to retain and enforce the rights to his software. His added value to his games is arguably not the lines of codes, nor the artwork or sound effects, but his creative ideas and game concepts. Naturally he'd be pissed if someone wrote a free cloe of his games.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    5. Re: Disappointing... by Diablerie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not true.

      The reason that computer Go is much harder to implement that computer chess is because the problem space is much larger. Chess is played on an 8x8 grid, with only a few dozen possible moves on each turn. Go is typically played on a 19x19 grid, so at least at the beginning of the game, there are many times more possible moves. When you start calculating a few moves ahead, then things get *really* complicated. Also, despite the simple rules, distinguishing a good move from a bad move in Go is quite hard.

      The complexity of the rules is not that important -- it's the number of possible moves and figuring out the effect of each move that makes programming the AI hard. I think Sid's right on this one.

    6. Re:Disappointing... by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying Meiers doesn't know squat about AI? Blasphemy! I really don't understand your point though, i mean, i know you're not suggesting that the complexity of the rules has nothing to do with the difficulty to design a strong AI. oh wait, you are? wow. just wow.

      and then you get pissed cause you think sid should be grateful that people ripped off his game. i feel like i'm taking crazy pills!

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    7. Re:Disappointing... by amalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sid is not referring to the complexity of the rules themselves. He is referring to the branching factor -- that is, the number of possible situations some number of turns down the road. After each player's first moves in chess, there are precisely 324 possible positions. After each player's first turn in Civ 1, there are at least 4^(number of civs) possible positions (rest, found city, build road, disband, there are also more b/c I don't think it can start you on a 1x1 island). With five civilizations, this is already greater than the initial possibilities in chess. It grows far more rapidly from this, as you have choices of what to research, what to build, where to place cities, how much to research, etc. and there are also random events.

      Go, on the other hand, has over one hundred thousand possible board positions after each player has one move. After the second turn, there are over sixteen billion. This branching factor is what causes complexity for a computer. The actual mechanics of the rules have very little to do with it.

      --
      -Amalcon
    8. Re:Disappointing... by dakryx · · Score: 1

      His point was that civilization has more possibilities than a game of chess, and go has a hell of a lot more possibilities than civilization something of the order of 9x10^500.

    9. Re:Disappointing... by CoderBob · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand his argument. The simple rules of chess are only part of the equation, that amounts to reducing the number of options on any one given turn. Another portion of the equation is the existing "strategy base" available. Go, for instance, has a tremendous number of strategies- much more so than chess. Chess has a decent number of strategies, but in the end it's all about being able to "pick" the right move to match a current situation. Also, the ability to generate a "look-ahead" for a given move is incredibly important in AI. Let's say that, for instance, we want to us a capture as the end goal for any given move of chess (this sets the "value" of the move to 1.000. Moves without captures start at 0.000). If it takes 20ms to determine if a move results in a capture directly, we can look at 500 moves in one second to determine what moves would give us a score of 1.000. Also, for this example, there are only 4 moves available (restricting our problem set to make the example easier). There is one move that results in a direct capture, but we looked at all 4 first (80ms has passed). Now, we look at the positioning of all the pieces on the board after that move, calculate moves for the opponent, determine what is a move with as close to a 1.000 as possible, we determine what possible responses are, and before you know it, we've determined that taking that piece will likely result in putting our king in check. If you add complexity to the rules, all that checking takes longer. For a turn-based game like chess, that might not be so bad (waiting 10 to 20 seconds for your opponent to move isn't a big deal), but imagine it in any "real-time" game. You fire at your opponents light infantry with your machine gun turret. Twenty seconds later, the infantry starts to move towards the treeline, away from the turret, but it's too late. There were too many options for the AI to accurately predict the result of an action. Once you start adding in "memory" of the results of certain actions (a chess AI that learns that in certain situations, sacrificing a Queen for a lesser piece can be a good thing, for example) and checking the action against this "memory" also adds complexity. To get back to Go: Simple rules, yes, but the strategy base is so much more complex that it more than makes up for the simple rules in making the game itself incredibly complex to play.

    10. Re:Disappointing... by CoderBob · · Score: 1

      Shit. I hate when I forget to switch to plain text when I post. Sorry about that. It should be this:

      I don't think you understand his argument. The simple rules of chess are only part of the equation, that amounts to reducing the number of options on any one given turn. Another portion of the equation is the existing "strategy base" available. Go, for instance, has a tremendous number of strategies- much more so than chess. Chess has a decent number of strategies, but in the end it's all about being able to "pick" the right move to match a current situation.

      Also, the ability to generate a "look-ahead" for a given move is incredibly important in AI. Let's say that, for instance, we want to us a capture as the end goal for any given move of chess (this sets the "value" of the move to 1.000. Moves without captures start at 0.000). If it takes 20ms to determine if a move results in a capture directly, we can look at 500 moves in one second to determine what moves would give us a score of 1.000. Also, for this example, there are only 4 moves available (restricting our problem set to make the example easier). There is one move that results in a direct capture, but we looked at all 4 first (80ms has passed).

      Now, we look at the positioning of all the pieces on the board after that move, calculate moves for the opponent, determine what is a move with as close to a 1.000 as possible, we determine what possible responses are, and before you know it, we've determined that taking that piece will likely result in putting our king in check. If you add complexity to the rules, all that checking takes longer. For a turn-based game like chess, that might not be so bad (waiting 10 to 20 seconds for your opponent to move isn't a big deal), but imagine it in any "real-time" game:

      You fire at your opponents light infantry with your machine gun turret. Twenty seconds later, the infantry starts to move towards the treeline, away from the turret, but it's too late. There were too many options for the AI to accurately predict the result of an action.

      Once you start adding in "memory" of the results of certain actions (a chess AI that learns that in certain situations, sacrificing a Queen for a lesser piece can be a good thing, for example) and checking the action against this "memory" also adds complexity.

      To get back to Go: Simple rules, yes, but the strategy base is so much more complex that it more than makes up for the simple rules in making the game itself incredibly complex to play.

    11. Re:Disappointing... by kwieland+in+stl · · Score: 1

      I agree. Another question that was +5 (but not included) was about the AI on Galactic Civilizations. Galactic Civilizations has much more complexity then Civilization and yet has a much better AI.

    12. Re:Disappointing... by briancarnell · · Score: 1

      Well, what is definitely true is you are unable to read for content. Sid never said chess was simple, he said it had a small number of movement types (6) and squares (64), so it is fairly easy to *define*. Go would be significantly harder than chess to *define*. Something like Civ IV would be even more difficult to *define* than Go.

    13. Re:Disappointing... by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      I tried to play that game, it seemed to be very good/interesting. However, it had way too much of a learning curve for my short attention span. It wasn't like a Meiers game in that you could make it however complex you wanted; it started off extremely compex no matter what(it did have a good tutorial game, to be fair). Still a good game and i know a few people who love it.

      However, in your second paragraph it seems like you're saying that the civ AI needs to cheat on all difficulty levels. This simply isn't true, as far as i know. For SMAC atleast, on the first two difficulty levels the computer actually put the AI at the disadvantage and gave the human a lead. Then theres a middle difficulty where it's completely even. Then, only on the last two difficulty settings did the computer actually get the upper hand (the same upper hand that the person gets on the easy difficulty setting). I don't see anything wrong with doing the difficulty levels like this, since it seems like a better idea then creating 6 or so different AI sets for each difficulty level(multiply that times each faction and it makes it seem like an even worse idea).

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    14. Re:Disappointing... by Glock27 · · Score: 1
      I'm talking about the complexity of the *rules*. That is also what Sid was talking about.

      Not entirely. He did make the point that chess was played on an 8x8 board. That speaks to the size of the "game universe" and the same issue applies with go vs. chess. Complexity comes in many flavors.

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    15. Re:Disappointing... by J.R.+Random · · Score: 1

      I think that rather than "simplicity of the rules" what Sid really meant to say was "size of the combinatorial game space". With a 19 x 19 go board vs. an 8 x 8 chess board, the size of the go game tree is vastly larger than that of the chess game tree. Chess is just simple enough that a brute force alpha-beta search of the game tree to a fairly decent depth, combined with a good static evaluator, can produce a very good chess program. Although search certainly has a role in playing go, it is not possible to have a brute force search of the entire game tree beyond a few moves if you want to do it before all the protons in the universe decay. Civilization is much bigger than go in terms of its search space, so simple minded search of the sort done by chess programs is a non-starter.

    16. Re:Disappointing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not. The GalCiv AI cheats blatantly. GalCiv is probably the most overrated game I have ever had the misfortune to play.

    17. Re:Disappointing... by Svencer · · Score: 1

      Depends on your definition of complexity. Go is a more complex AI problem (because of the larger search space), but has a less complex rule set than chess.

    18. Re:Disappointing... by planetoid · · Score: 1

      From Wikipedia:

      Inspiration

      Meier admits to "borrowing" many of the technology tree ideas from a board game also called Civilization (published in the United Kingdom in 1980 by Hartland Trefoil (later by Gibson Games), and in the United States in 1981 by Avalon Hill). The early versions of the game even included a flier of information and ordering materials for the board game. In an ironic twist, there is now a board game based on the computer game version of Civilization.


      As much as Civilization rocks, Sid doesn't have much to stand on if he's claiming that anyone else who makes a Civilization-ish game is violating his intellectual property. You can't copyright a genre.

      --
      Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
    19. Re:Disappointing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but after each civilisation's first move, most Civ positions will be the same as each other. It shouldn't make much difference whether a player builds a city on their first turn, or moves left and builds next turn, or...

      But in chess, a different starting move can give the game a completely different character. Because the board is so densely packed, and different pieces can move in different ways, accuracy is very important.

    20. Re:Disappointing... by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      This argument is false : for instance, look at the traditional Asian "Go" game. It has very simple rules, much simpler than Chess. If Sid's argument made sense, computer should be able to play Go very well. But the reality is that as of today, Computers cannot compete with a skilled human. Thus : there is no direct relationship between the complexity of the rules, and the difficulty to design a strong AI.

      He was simply stating that the search complexity for his game would be much larger than chess. Just as Go's search complexity is MUCH larger than Chess'. 10^170 vs 10^50 according to http://ai-depot.com/LogicGames/Go-Complexity.html

    21. Re:Disappointing... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      This simply isn't true, as far as i know. For SMAC atleast, on the first two difficulty levels the computer actually put the AI at the disadvantage and gave the human a lead. Then theres a middle difficulty where it's completely even. Then, only on the last two difficulty settings did the computer actually get the upper hand (the same upper hand that the person gets on the easy difficulty setting).

      I don't know specifics for AC, but in Civ2, 3 there's a lot more collaboration between computer civs. This shows up a lot when it comes to technology - if all the civs trade tech whenever they can, you'll be left behind unless you do the same.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    22. Re:Disappointing... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With five civilizations, this is already greater than the initial possibilities in chess. It grows far more rapidly from this, as you have choices of what to research, what to build, where to place cities, how much to research, etc. and there are also random events.

      What I'd like to see is an AI that can formulate strategies and then use those strategies to prune their search space. Basically, say "I'm going to expand for awhile, how can this piece contribute?".

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    23. Re:Disappointing... by julesh · · Score: 1

      After each player's first moves in chess, there are precisely 324 possible positions.

      Err.. 400, actually. 16 possible pawn moves or 4 possible knight moves for each player gives 20x20 = 400.

      </pedant>

    24. Re:Disappointing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "because of the larger search space"

      Which is *exactly* the problem Sid talked about... sheesh.

    25. Re:Disappointing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, go is MUCH MUCH more complicated than chess. Not simpler. Much more degrees of freedom.

      You've totally missed glMatrixMode's point. Which was this: Chess's rules are more complex than Go's, just as Civilization's rules are more complex than Chess's. Yet Chess is much easier for an AI to play than Go because Chess's search space is smaller (fewer squares, so fewer degrees of freedom, as you say). This suggestions that the complexity of the rules is a poor indicator of the size of the search space and, thus, the ability of an AI to play the game well. Civilization may be much easier than Chess, despite its extra rules.

    26. Re:Disappointing... by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      The EASYNESS for Civilization AI is that there is no human who has practiced playing with those rules for last 40 years. In Civilization there are a LOT more degrees of freedom than in chess, so basicly exhaustive search isn't going to help. Fortunately for AI developers it takes time for humans to adapt fully for new rules. And with random starting positions SOME ai has better position than the player.
      Finally if AI:s have somewhere in their ruleset things that favour other AI:s over humans, the game becomes immediately harder for humans. Lastly they could cheat a litle, and youd never knew it.
      Like giving AI:s a 10% research boost. So with civilization there are ways of making AI more challenging without making it giving better solutions.
      And what I think that the AI:s in these games are just made by emulating the strategies of best human players.

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
  24. Now I'm jealous by aiken_d · · Score: 3, Funny
    I like to play all kinds of games...on a variety of systems. My son and I play games on the PC, PS2, Xbox, GameCube...and they range from Warcraft, to Halo to Grand Turismo...to Civilization. :)

    And all of that legitimately tax deductible. Nevermind how much fun the guy has at work, that's the really cool part. Government subsidized computers, console, and games. I'm in the wrong industry.*

    Cheers
    -b

    * (well, I do get to deduct pr0n, so I guess it's not all that bad)

    --
    If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
  25. Grand Theft Auto as Carjacking Prevention Trainer by Elyjah · · Score: 5, Funny

    Violence in current videogames? A South Carolina man was able to foil an attempted carjacking using methods learned from Grand Theft Auto. I think both sides of the "violent games" story need to be told!

  26. Please refer to my posting history, my good sir. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    Of course not. Please, feel free to check my posting history:

    http://slashdot.org/~CyricZ

    That said, when somebody does something worthy of appreciation, I will let them know that. Common courtesy, you know.

    Cheerios, my friend!

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  27. Spare time ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only spare time? Is homework spare time?

  28. Sid, you forgot to answer the most IMPORTANT one!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I Have My Freshamn YEAR OF COLLEGE BACK??!?!??!?!??!111oneoneone!!

  29. What are you, kidding me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Number of hours I've spent on Civ, Sid needs to be putting at least an hour a month here for a few years. Factor in all the other /. readers, and Sid Meier games, that number should ramp up to about 8 hours/week, for the next coupla years. Get comfy Sid, it's payback time.

    bkd

  30. Take2... by jd · · Score: 1
    The guys who forced David Braben into releasing Frontier: First Encounters early - when it still had numerous bugs - and allegedly owe him money over the fiasco? Yeah, I'd trust their opinion on Intellectual Property. Since you're in the same building and all, can you go over and tell them to cut the crap and release games WHEN they're ready? And to get First Encounters - along with their other games - to that point?


    I actually have a lot of sympathy for programmers wanting to make money. That's a perfectly valid purpose for programming. I have substantially less sympathy for companies that peddle faulty goods - knowingly - for the purpose of making money from goods that really don't yet exist, rather than waiting until they can make that money fairly and honestly.


    Sid Meier deserves sympathy and support for reputable conduct that deserves payment in kind. Take2 deserves a vacation in Siberia.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Take2... by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Take2/Rockstar went public a couple years ago, they are beholden to the same market misconceptions that drive business practices in tons of industries... quarterly earnings reports.

      Given some of the legal expenses Take2 has had over the past couple of years, it's no wonder that they rush games to market to get positive earnings reports... they need good news to offset speculation of lawsuits, etc.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  31. What will be new in Civ IV? by kidcharles · · Score: 1

    Ok, just so all of you know that I have cred, I played Civ I on the Amiga...

    I have to ask, how revolutionary or evolutionary is this latest incarnation of the game going to be? The original was a classic, but the fundamental gameplay, in my opinion hasn't really changed much over the life of the series. Do we really need a Civ IV? [/provocative]

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    1. Re:What will be new in Civ IV? by $nickname_212 · · Score: 0

      I can't remember the computer I played Civ I on, but I should have some credibility as it was a long time ago and I remember waiting for the day Civ I came out as a kid. In any case, I think there is a lot they can work on in the Civ series. AI is the number one thing me and my civ buddy lament. Diplomacy sucks as the computer can never negotiate. For instance, in Civ3, when the computer opponent offers something for money, I go through the cycle of finding out how low he will go. Now, if this was real life, I might be offended at this process of trying to low ball the other player without some kind of meaningfulreaosn or counter offer. My point here is that you can almost guess how the computer is going to treat you. How come it is that when the all the computer players get the upper hand, you don't find a computer player from some other portion of the world try to boost your position so you become a pain in the ass to your neighbors? This seems like a strong strategy and one I will play with opponents that are not close to me so one opponent doesn't come out dominating. I also hate the 20 turn rule for diplomatic exchanges. It seems too contrived and I can never remember when 20 turns is up. Why can't a diplomatic exchange last for as long as the two players find it advantageous? I also find the tech tree to be limiting in the sense that I almost always use the same strategy up the tech tree. That is boring. The only thing that limits researching certain techs sometimes is resources on the map. Also, there is no customization of technologies: like do you want more damage versus accuracy with your artillery; can you specialize your cavalry; tougher armor on your tanks. All you have in variability once a tech is discovered and you are building units is veteran versus non-veteran units and sometimes draft units. The only variable here is hit points. So, you end up building huge stacks of units just to assure victory. Taking over enemy cities is also a problem. The answer I came up with was to take cities over with a ridiculous amount of units and leave them in there at least until order had been restored. But that still didn't assure you that a city would not turn and you lose quite a few units. these are just some of the things that could be improved upon. I don't really care about the graphics and audio quality, although it makes the game a more pleasurable experience. So, I would say there is lots of room for improvement. One thing I really like over Civ1 and Civ2 is boundaries. I didn't really understand boundaries in Alpha Centauri so I never got into the game. But incorporating boundaries into the game was a feature I really appreciated.

    2. Re:What will be new in Civ IV? by John+Muir · · Score: 1

      You've just about summed up all the things I find annoying about Civ, being a player since the original when it came to DOS.

  32. Branching complexity... by wyoung76 · · Score: 1
    is the one Sid was more likely referring to.

    Given the limited number of possible moves in any given Chess position, and the amount of knowledge of the game amassed over the years, it becomes a relatively simple game for computers to play.

    Conversely (and any strong Go player can flame me for this) Go hasn't been nearly as well analysed as Chess, and proportionally doesn't have that same depth for computers to fall back on.

    Expand that to Civ, with Sid's descriptions of units, city placement (almost anywhere on solid ground), resources, multiple win/lose scenarios, diplomacy, a map larger than a Go board, etc., and you've got a branching complexity far in excess of either Chess or Go. AI in games just isn't about to catch up to the necessary requirements.

    And your comment on him having no interest in software freedom; I pose these questions back to you: Do you just want free software made by professionals? Would it even exist if he never got paid to do it in the first place? And doesn't he have a right to financially benefit from all the effort put into the creation of the software?

    I'm all for free software and open source, but for the right reasons.

    1. Re:Branching complexity... by Diablerie · · Score: 1
      Conversely (and any strong Go player can flame me for this) Go hasn't been nearly as well analysed as Chess, and proportionally doesn't have that same depth for computers to fall back on.


      No flameage required.

      You're absolutely right. Until fairly recently, there hasn't even been much interest in computer Go.

      There's a major difference between between knowing the game well, and being able to program a good AI. A good player won't necessarily be able make a good AI. Go, and chess masters for that matter, are good because of intuition and practice, and not just logic. That's not the sort of thing you can easily program or train an AI to do.
  33. Error in my question/response HTML by Amoeba · · Score: 1

    A minor note on my question that Sid answered:

    My question ends at "How do you tackle that problem?" and Sid's response begins from that point forward and not where the current Response: is listed.

    All that aside, the answer is not quite what I expected and was pleasantly surprised tha in some cases Sid needs the visuals in order to proceed. That method/criteria for balance never crossed my mind :)

    -Amoeba

    --
    Do not taunt Happy-Fun Ball
  34. The golden child by solomonrex · · Score: 1

    I'm a history guy, and I just love the original game, but Civ III IS too slow, Civ II is too uneven, and Civ I is just ancient now.

    For me, Alpha was the best. Everybody who tried it loved it. It was fast enough for my non-strategy friends and deep enough for me. And I think the well-defined factions were terrific, like a starcraft/civ mashup. I had great fun with the expansion set (which makes more sense than these 'multiplayer' civ games). It's takes the gold medal.

    I hope they update AC for Windows Vista or do a sequel. I'm dyin' here.

    1. Re:The golden child by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Everybody who tried it loved it.

      I didn't. Loved Civ I and II, but did not like AC or CivIII. I'm holding off on Civ IV because of that.

    2. Re:The golden child by Dehumanizer · · Score: 1

      Indeed. SMAC forever.

      --
      The Tlog - a technology blog
    3. Re:The golden child by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      I loved civ 1 and 2, but hated AC. It was crash prone, the tech tree was poor and I hated the randomized tech training aspect. The constant attacks by the planet was just annoying, and way, way too frequent (ok, planet's turn. TIme to fight off 5 more attacks per city, that have no real chance of winning). THe AI was extremely poor- it was simplistic to beat. And I can't remember, but was it even possible to turn off pods? I hate goodie huts in civ, I feel it cheapens the game if you get too lucky. I don't think you could turn them off in AC.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    4. Re:The golden child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I hated the randomized tech training aspect.

      Turn off Blind Research.

      The constant attacks by the planet was just annoying

      Set Native Life Forms to Rare

      And I can't remember, but was it even possible to turn off pods?

      Yes, turn on No Unity Scattering

    5. Re:The golden child by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Eh, its been a while, I guess I don't remember a few of the options. Regaurdless- I had far, far more fun with any of the 3 civ games or the call to power games than I did with AC.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  35. Mouse for common-- Movement, firing. It works. by Behrooz · · Score: 1

    The problem most folks experience is getting used to pointing your 'head' with the mouse and walking with your keys. Once you get that down there is no going back.

    Back in the joyful days of Jedi Knight 2 I picked up the habit of reversed mouse axis and putting +forward movement on mouse2. To this day, my friends think I'm insane, but I like not having to become a stationary target in order to inventively taunt my opponents, or perform other actions which require near-exclusive keyboard use for a moment. An additional factor is that most hardware/interfaces/games only accept so many simultaneous keyboard input channels, so offloading the most-used ones (movement and firing) to alternate mouse input makes a ridiculous amount of sense-- being able to effectively hit one more concurrent button than your opponents is an intangible but highly useful advantage.

    It's so satisfying when some fool starts typing back and stops moving till someone nails them, but there really is no going back-- reversed-mouse and mouse2 = forward for life. My friends hop on when I'm grabbing something out of the kitchen, and they're effectively helpless and bitch about my control scheme.

    Of course, I laugh at them too.

    Unfortunately, some games have issues with arcane controls-- the current bad example would be Battlefield 2, which while otherwise excellent, suffers from where the developers insisted on putting in the downright clunkiest UI I've ever seen-- key mappings for in-game actions are cross-linked to the key mappings for parts of the goddamn UI, which is downright slow, bad and wrong. I bring up the map window, and I have to remember which keyboard key I have bound to whatever mouse2 defaults to in order to access the functions that mouse2 would normally hit, simply horrible. Awesome game though.

    Even worse, the new BF2 patch made it so forward movement captures lots of the HUD input modes, so I have to stop moving like all of the other normal-control-scheme retards do in order to spot enemies or use the HUD-up radio menus, so it comes down to a choice between moving and shooting at the hostile armor I just spotted *or* lighting his position up on the HUD for my buddies so everyone knows to take cover and whip out the explosives. Being able to do both was much nicer, and I will thank them kindly if they stop crippling my interface further just 'cause none of their QA people use a rational control scheme.

    Anyway, the bottom line is that offloading forward movement onto mouse2 just makes sense, and game developers need to pick up on that with default settings and working interfaces that don't leave mousemovers as crippled as everyone else.

    --
    "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  36. nitpick by s20451 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IANAL, but I did have to pass the stupid law exam to be licensed as a professional engineer in Ontario. One thing I remember is that, under Canadian law, you cannot sue unless damages are incurred. This makes sense, in that a case where no damages are alleged would be a waste of the court's time.

    However, in IP cases, it seems like the damages can include loss of potential sales, or reduction of the value of a brand.

    As one consequence, I have heard other people argue that the GPL might not withstand a legal challenge, because violating it cannot incur monetary damages. Again, IANAL, but I'm sure some clever lawyer could come up with a counter-argument.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
    1. Re:nitpick by ultranova · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As one consequence, I have heard other people argue that the GPL might not withstand a legal challenge, because violating it cannot incur monetary damages. Again, IANAL, but I'm sure some clever lawyer could come up with a counter-argument.

      Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but I consider myself pretty clever, and that will have to do ;). The obvious counter-argument is that you license any code you own the copyrights to under as many different licenses as you want. This means that just because some code is available under GPL (and free to download - you can sell GPL'd product for a profit, you just can't charge extra for the source code later on, and you can't stop the buyer from making and selling and/or giving copies to other people, but lets ignore that for the moment), doesn't meant that you might not license it to, say, Microsoft under a non-GPL license for a shitload of money some day.

      However, if Microsoft (or anyone else) is free to break the terms of the GPL and incorporate GPL'd code into closed-sourced products, you lose the potential to sell them licenses to do that. So you have suffered potential losses. You can't show how much, but that doesn't seem to be stopping the RIAA/MPAA/BSAA/whatever from getting ridiciculous amounts of damages.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    2. Re:nitpick by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      I guess I should specify that I was talking about US law. If you make a prohibited copy of something in the US you are automatically liable for ~$250 (I can't recall the exact number, it is less than $1000). It doesn't matter if there are no damages whatsoever.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
  37. I'd rather have elegance than cuteness by ianscot · · Score: 2, Interesting
    CIV II had really humerous (sic) videos of the advisory council... Civ III, while cute...

    To each her own, but the cutesy videos of the council got very old very quickly. "Cute" isn't the goal at all in your typical world domination game, is it? Spaceward Ho, maybe...

    For me, any good simulation game is one where after you understand the core concept well enough, you can, with a little luck and good planning, have a decent chance of winning most scenarios hands down vs the computer AI...

    Perhaps you're unfamiliar with difficulty settings? The lowest setting in any Civ game would give you what you want.

    For my money I could do without essentially all of the graphic engine changes from II to III. The addition of "culture" and the way the previous games' rules (about military units being "away from home," about moving through "enemy" territory) were worked into it made for a huge, huge improvement. That was an elegant way to fold in some previously awkward and conspicuously unrealistic mechanics.

    In no game do I care a whit for repetitively "cute" video sequences that give me no useful information. Those things were painful after the first time through, and in a Civ game replay value is every-, every-, everything.

    --
    "Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
  38. Next Tuesday, October 25th by Prien715 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The game will be released on the 25th having entered final CD production on the 19th.

    Source

    --
    -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
    1. Re:Next Tuesday, October 25th by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      The game will be released on the 25th having entered final CD production on the 19th.

      And I'm already, in spirit, standing in the store staring forlornly at the shelf waiting for it to appear. There goes my life for the next while, but that's a pretty minimal impact anyhow. ;)

  39. What does the law say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is maybe-aside, maybe-not, but what does the law have to say about "clones"? As long as the clones don't directly copy any code or graphics, the user interface has typically not been subject to copyright law (I thought). For example, I thought Apple sued Microsoft over the appearance of Windows, and Lotus sued Borland over a menu system that emulated that in the 1-2-3 spreadsheet. I thought both cases generally decided that the program, but not the interface, was protected.

    Wouldn't that suggest that it's legally not a problem to make a clone of a game (until, of course, software patents enter the picture)? Or, unless the "civ" part of "freeciv" is considered as trademark infringement?

    1. Re:What does the law say? by mike2R · · Score: 1

      I think this is where "you have the right to hire a lawyer to defend yourself" rears its ugly head.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
  40. Kind of off-topic, but... by Xeirxes · · Score: 1

    I wonder if Sid will ever make another Covert Action? I really loved that game.

  41. Priceless? by dangitman · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The fact that you can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceles

    No, that has a very definite price. Consoles are still viable machines two years (and longer) after purchase without any upgrades. They generally have much better compatibility with new games than old computers do.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
    1. Re:Priceless? by $nickname_212 · · Score: 0

      Sure, there is a price, but the ability to upgrade is priceless. There is no ability to upgrade with a console to date. So, while you are playing games that are designed for a machine in 2005, a PC gamer can be playing games designed for technology that came out in summer of 2006, winter of 2006, summer of 2007, winter of 2007, summer of 2008 and winter of 2008. If I take into account that technology seems to eclipse itself every 6 months, it seems that console gamers are playing games built for a machine that is quickly obsolete. Next Xmas, PC gamers will be buying games that exploit technology of 2006 while console gamers will be buying games built to exploit the hardware of 2005. So, how long does it take before the PC game experience makes the console experience seem old? Not long in my estimation. The only time a console is relevent to a PC on technological terms is on its release date.

    2. Re:Priceless? by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Sure, there is a price, but the ability to upgrade is priceles

      No it's not. At the maximum, it's worth as much as a whole new machine. But it is rarely worth even that much - because at some point your motherboard becomes the bottleneck and it doesn't make any more sense to upgrade the components on it.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    3. Re:Priceless? by $nickname_212 · · Score: 0

      Even a brand new machine could be upgraded in 6 months to a years time, but I haven't had a need to buy a brand new machine in years and upgrading the motherboard is easy and inexpensive. For instance, I was uisng the NVidia NForce Gen1 board till last Xmas. I think I got around 2-3 years out of it before games forced me to upgrade(mainly EQ2 because of I maxed out the video card interface on the motherboard at 4x AGP). So, I needed to buy a motherboard that supported either PCIx or AGP 8x. I upgraded the board to a NForce 2 and it cost me $60. I didn't need to upgrade my RAM or processor(AMD 1800) and I got an ATI 9800 video card for around $100. So, I spent around $160 dollars to be ahead of the console curve. But in terms of upgrading to take advantage of technology that is more current than a year old console and to play the games that take advantage of the newer hardware for more spectacular effects and realism is priceless to me. All I see with a console is an aging piece of equipment that will be stuck in 2005 with games programmed to 2005 technology. Besides, isn't it priceless that the market allows you to upgrade to a complete machine every 4 years or so with new technology and games? Else, is it really worth upgrading your old XBox because as you put it, "it is rarely worth even that much". What is the argument for upgrading from an XBox, especially when you can mod it and get a arcade emulator to play even more games on it. PC Gamers just ride a quicker change wave with games to match while console users enojy a slower change wave with a modest investment.

  42. Re:Mouse for common-- Movement, firing. It works. by SebNukem · · Score: 1

    Man, I totally agree with you on everything. mouse2=forward good, BF2 interface bad. I could have posted the exact same speech!

  43. Nintendo Revolution by squidsoup · · Score: 1

    Interesting. If the mouse and keyboard interface is all he really feels seperates the PC and console markets, what does this mean in terms of the Revolution? The Nintendo Revolution has an interface that will allow for PC style games to be played on a console.

  44. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by WillyMF1 · · Score: 2, Funny
    That said, when somebody does something worthy of appreciation, I will let them know that. Common courtesy, you know.

    F*kn canadians. :P

  45. Oh really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Sid Meier: "The days of guys building a game in their garage and then selling it to a publisher are behind us, I'm afraid."

    Guess somebody forgot to tell Marcos Healy.

    http://www.ragdollkungfu.com/

    1. Re:Oh really? by Teancum · · Score: 1
      Sid Meier: "The days of guys building a game in their garage and then selling it to a publisher are behind us, I'm afraid."

      Guess somebody forgot to tell Marcos Healy.


      The days are long gone when people will simply play your game just because it exists... a benefit that the early game designers had back elsewhen.

      When the first personal computers were being marketed, it is hard to understand that the number of people involved with the industry was incredibly small. Apple Computer sold 10,000 computers their first year, and was considered a wild success at that, having a huge market share compared to the other computer manufacturers.

      One thing that many of these early adopters were hungry for, because it took time, money, and effort to get going, was simply any sort of computer software. Simply put, if it compiled successfully and didn't crash your computer after 10 minutes, most software was considered successful. There were dozens of companies that threw together quick and dirty games covering almost every topic you can imagine, and many of these early computer games were successful simply because they existed. The tough part was trying to figure out how to "market" the software and get it into the hands of ordinary computer users when not only was the internet not available, neither were BBSs. A few computer clubs, swap meets, and some early computer hobbiest magazines were about all you had, or conventions like COMDEX, but even then those gatherings would only have a regional draw of just a few hundred people.

      Into this sort of environment, you could put together a computer software company in your garage, and the logistics of trying to get your software into the hands of 10% of all computer users for a particular brand of computer weren't all that difficult. If you tried to ship a CD to 10% of the PC owners in the USA alone.... it would take a major investment and be a huge task. Of course, the internet makes a huge difference today on distribution methods and targeting smaller niche communities. That is really where a garage computer company still is able to succeed: a small niche application where major software development companies don't want to bother or don't think it is worth their time to develop specalized software for a small audience. Even then, there are enough programmers out there now that even these small niches are getting filled. That just wasn't the case 30 years ago.
  46. Light gun accuracy by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    A mouse is near perfect as aiming device, much faster and more accurate than a light gun.
    And I think that's the crux of why people play online games with a mouse. You know exactly where you're aiming and have very fine control over it. Contrast it over a light gun which requires gross motor movements, sighting, and usually no firm idea of where exactly you're pointed at. I remember playing Operation Wolf on the Nintendo was virtually impossible with the light gun versus the control pad. And the various House of the Dead games are definitely easier with the mouse than with the light gun. ^_^ Although I still prefer Typing of the Dead... "Ever kill a zombie with your bare hands?"

    In the end, a lot of it comes down to computer games being wish fulfillment. You don't want to be limitted by your crappy physical skills, so you use devices that simplify things. Although I highly enjoy playing shooting games in the arcade (particularly the Police 911 series... got to love the full control over dodging), using a mouse is still far easier. And really, what's more important? Being 133t and playing with a light gun for aiming in Quake? Or keeping from getting pasted by an utter n00b who's using his mouse to aim? (and yes, leetspeak used for dramatic emphasis)

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  47. Re:Mouse for common-- Movement, firing. It works. by clarinetkid · · Score: 1

    You too, eh?
    I play with an old logitech mouse that has a thumb button at the base of the left side (not near the top, like the new ones... yuck!), and I map my forward movement to that. It's right under where my thumb naturally rests while holding the mouse, so it's nearly perfect for movement.

    The reversed axis thing is anathema to me, though. It's for flight sims only, and only with a proper joystick. Otherwise, it makes me dizzy. My college roommate played used reversed axes. He first gamed on flight sims, and described the reversed axis something like this: "Visualize the mouse as the top of your character's head. Grab it and move it forward, he looks down. Pull back, he looks up." With a control scheme like that, I always figured he had some anger issues.

    --
    Code monkey?????!!! I dissect code monkeys!
  48. These were "our" questions? Huh? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

    If you look at the first article, there were at least 4 questions about moddability which a +5 from readers. This is by far the most interesting announcement about Civ4. Why are there no questions about it? And why did he get asked such stupid and platitudes? This was not an interview by nerds and produced appropriately lame answers.

    1. Re:These were "our" questions? Huh? by julesh · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's because he probbly has little to do with the modability of the game; those questions will undoubtedly be asked to the dev team instead.

    2. Re:These were "our" questions? Huh? by petrus4 · · Score: 1

      I would agree, and I also noticed that Sid's answers were, for the most part, framed very carefully in such a way as to ensure that his corporate paymasters would be happy with them. To me there was a very fake feel to his responses...about the only time he comes out of that is when he talks about how he preferred it in the time before monolithic bloodsuckers like EA came to dominate the landscape. For the rest of it, his answers came off as spin to my mind, for the most part.

      I guess (especially since Microprose went broke) he feels that he has to be a good boy these days and make all the appropriate corporate noises ("I love Big Brother! Sodomise me again, please.") if he wants to be allowed to create at all.

      Sad.

  49. Too bad there are only NINE questions there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad there are only NINE questions there... I guess when your sid you can only waste so much time.

    1. Re:Too bad there are only NINE questions there... by Alkaiser · · Score: 1

      I was about to say the same thing, AC.

      --
      Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  50. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    I'm British. Nevertheless, many Canadians have learned well from our example. They are indeed amongst us as the most polite people around.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  51. Freeloaders? Flatterers? by dogbreathcanada · · Score: 2, Funny

    What are these? Game clones? Clones of what? Google wasn't bringing anything up in its top results.

    1. Re:Freeloaders? Flatterers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lies: www.dosgamesarchive.com/download/game/149

  52. Re:Mouse for common-- Movement, firing. It works. by rebelcan · · Score: 1

    One thing I've found strange is that on a PC, I can't stand reverse y-axis. On the console however, it's nearly essential to me. It's probably from my days of playing Duke Nukem 64 ( yes, 64, as in the version released for the Nintendo 64 ).

    --
    God is dead -- Nietzsche
    Nietzsche is dead -- God
    Zombie Nietzsche lives! -- Zombie Nietzsche
  53. Interesting: by The+Shrewd+Dude · · Score: 0

    Curious how the little quote thing at the bottom of the page says today: "Without adventure, Civilization is in full decay." -- Alfred North Whitehead

  54. "fan editions" shouldn't even be an issue by 0biter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this is a great example of how peoples notion of *what culture is* is being hugely diluted by the massive corporate push for expanded intellectual property rights.

    back in the Good Old Days, kids used to be able to draw inspiration from comic books, movies, games, art, books, and anything else to make their own. i'd wager that we've all done it at one point or another, because its not only a way of learning, its a way of consuming, interpreting, and reproducing culture. sure a lot of it was straight out copying. but no one mistook the original for the interpretation.

    Now, the open-source movement is trying to make its own Civ tribute. There's no mistaking that their efforts are a pale imitation of the original, an interpretation of something that inspired them. Yet here we go with the corporatist bravado -- from an artist like Sid Meyer fer gawd sakes! Does Take Two really feel threatened by the equivalent of a childs interpretation? should they?

    obviously, i'm not talking about propogating Madonnas latest MP3 across the net anymore than i'm saying people should indiscriminantly copy the retail version of Civ4. i'm talking about the right to take that MP3, rip sections from it, mix it in your own interpretation, and share it with the world. i'm talking about drawing inspiration from a great game, taking what you like from it, complimenting the author with your own efforts, and sharing that with who ever cares. that should be the right we all enjoy for all time, not the right for some abstract entity to keep making money off us long after death. or is that why you makes games Sid?

    i don't think so. artists, programmers, designers, and all the other creative producers of intellectual property should remember what the production and reproduction of culture means: that their work will live beyond them and be enjjoyed by as many people as possible. nuts to Take Two and Sid Meyer for forgetting that people -- not dollars -- is what their efforts are all about.

  55. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by YomikoReadman · · Score: 1

    I think that it was implied to stop being a karma whore and post those as AC. That way, the folks get props and you don't get bashed for being a shameless karma whore.

    On a personal note, I could care less whether you stop or not, seeing as I've got plenty karma to burn and all that.

    Not a flame, not a troll, just trying to interpret for the unwashed masses of /.

    Cheers. ^^v

    --
    I have no regrets, this is the only path.
    My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
  56. Re:Grand Theft Auto as Carjacking Prevention Train by patternjuggler · · Score: 1

    Violence in current videogames? A South Carolina man was able to foil an attempted carjacking using methods learned from Grand Theft Auto. I think both sides of the "violent games" story need to be told!

    I haven't played a GTA where you can violently open a car door or throw a hot beverage in someone's face. What I've learned from GTA about carjacker escape is to either get out of the car and shoot the carjacker with your UZI, or simply drive away.

  57. Re:Grand Theft Auto as Carjacking Prevention Train by Celsius+233 · · Score: 1

    You need the Hot Coffee mod.

    --
    Denham's Dentrifice, Denham's Dentrifice, Denham's Dandy Dental Dentrifice, Denham's Dentrifice Dentrifice Dentrifice.
  58. "comes down to personal preference" by Errandboy+of+Doom · · Score: 1

    The mouse+keyboard camp has two specific arguments, both about the resolution of control:
    1) More buttons are accessible on a keyboard, therefore more control.
    2) A thumbstick lacks the control of a mouse, their range is directly correlated with their resolution.

    The pro-controller camp responds with:
    "Well, everything's subjective."

    Pretty weak. Let mouse/keyboard combos compete with console controllers online, then we'll see how subjective it is. It's a tool designed for a function. Its effectiveness can be measured.

    1. Re:"comes down to personal preference" by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1
      All I can relate is my own experience. When I play a UT LAN party with a group of friends, I suck. Near the bottom everytime using the mouse/keyboard combo. If I play a round of Halo with a group of friends, I finish in the top 3 everytime. Folks can argue it, but for me, I am much, much better with a console controller than with a keyboard and mouse. Since the new Xbox 360 controllers will attach via USB and be usable on PCs, I'm sure my experience is not unique.

      What I have noticed in the debate, somewhat akin to your statements, is that PC gamers are quick to point out all the benefits of their sytem whilst the console gamers really don't care and just want to play. YMMV, take with heavy doses of NaCl, opinion invalide in MN, OH, & HI, see store for details.

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    2. Re:"comes down to personal preference" by orcrist · · Score: 1

      When I play a UT LAN party with a group of friends, I suck. Near the bottom everytime using the mouse/keyboard combo. If I play a round of Halo with a group of friends, I finish in the top 3 everytime. Folks can argue it, but for me, I do much, much better when everyone's using a console controller than when everyone's using a keyboard and mouse.

      FYP ;-)

      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    3. Re:"comes down to personal preference" by Hawke666 · · Score: 1

      "I am much, much better with a console controller than with a keyboard and mouse."

      Are you that much better, or is everyone else that much worse?
  59. Development Cycle...shameless Valve bashing by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1
    My whole approach to making games revolves around first creating a solid prototype and then playing and improving the game over the course of the 2-3 year development cycle...until we think it's ready for prime time. ~Sid
    2-3 years after you have a prototype? You mean you don't get an idea for a game, tell all the fans of your products it will be out in 6 months, then push back the release date by another 6 months right before each major gaming convention? What kind of company is this? Where's the suspense? Don't tell me it's included in the game itself. I suppose there's no gravity gun in this Civ IV game that you're releasing either?
  60. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by Lucas.Langa · · Score: 1

    Sid Meier reads the thread and thinks "Wow, these are the most hardcore Civ players... What have I done..."

    --
    Build a tool even an idiot can use and only an idiot will want to use it. -S.O.B.
  61. "Civ Dissapoints Met" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Civ Dissapoints Met"

    That a headline?
    Which one? Piazza? fuck him!

    Go Sox!

  62. MODS PARENT FLAIMBAIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is he getting interesting mods for telling someone else to shutup? Sounds like flaimbait to me

  63. Re:Thanks, Sid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh my god, you fucking KARMA WHORE. If I had mod points, I'd mod you down.

  64. Sometimes, Evidence Helps. by Errandboy+of+Doom · · Score: 1

    In this debate, "PC gamers are quick to point out all the benefits of their sytem whilst the console gamers really don't care."

    I completely agree.

  65. OSS gaming by EightBits · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I find it really odd that people have been bitching about some of Sid's responses about clones of his games. The big argument I have seen here is the same old OSS stuff we hear trying to rationalize moral stances. I wonder how many people here read the interview with an open mind. Sid just gave all OSS gamers and would-be developers the idea of a lifetime and I haven't seen anyone actually mention it yet because they're all too busy complaining about the clone comment.

    Sid mentioned in the interview:

    It's very difficult to convince publishers to invest millions of dollars in a new game idea...it's too risky.

    This is the golden apple here! To all OSS game developers, if you want to contribute to the open source communities AND to the game industry in a meaningful way, develop games based on new game ideas. Be radical. Be innovative. Be crazy. You are in a position to beta test ideas that the game industry can never possibly afford to put themselves in. If you are an OSS game developer, instead of trying to make clones of games and risk legal action, why not take the road less traveled and develop new games based on ideas we have never seen before. Try contacting people like Sid and volunteering to develop these new game ideas. The gaming companies can certainly use an infusion of new genres and ideas and OSS could be the best test-bed for these ideas. For all who take the stance that the whole world should be OSS, this is also the way to do that. Develop your new game ideas as OSS games and be the first, the original. One of the reasons clones like FreeCiv are seen as half-assed (as I saw someone mention earlier) is because it isn't the first. If it were the first, it might be looked at as a better game or at least not half-assed. The original is almost always more likeable than the clones.

    I'm normally not the type of guy that tries to find the good in everything, but it seems a lot of the OSS people are always trying to find the bad in everything. Instead of trying to find ways of accusing people of being "the man" and trying to stomp you for participating in OSS, take a look at the whole picture and you just might find some good stuff in there like this.

    And, on a subject slightly differnt than the subject of this post indicates: Sid, thank you very much for your responses. I enjoyed reading the interview and am extremely envious of you. Back on my C64, I always dreamed of putting out the next big game but never had the balls to see it through. And you're right. It is very difficult to get into the gaming business today. I wish it weren't so because I would love to join the ranks of game developers from my garage/basement.

  66. Viable machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The fact that you can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceless


    This is really a disavantage. A console is always viable (for running its games) infinite years after has been on the market without adding nothing.
  67. Best line ever by Zorgoth · · Score: 1

    Please don't go...the drones need you...the look up to you...
    a quiting screen on AC
    nearly brought me to tears.

    --
    -------------------------------END--COMMUNICATION- --------------------------
    1. Re:Best line ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aside from the spelling, you also need a psychiatrist.
      Oh yeah, when that mournful voice spoke, I could barely see through the sheen of tears on my face as I forced myself to click OK. I could hear in my mind the cries and wails of the poor sad drones as I left. That awful sound will haunt me for the rest of my life.

  68. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by LordNightwalker · · Score: 1

    Just finished going over your posting history... I'm somewhat surprised you actually use it in your defense. If I had a posting history like that, I'd actually go to great lengths not to point it out to people. :p

    I mean, like what's your problem with that Barry dude anyway? He criticizes you in one slashdot thread, and you immediately start singling him out and criticizing about every post he makes just to get even. Then when he points out you're trolling, suddenly he's the one attacking you "ad hominem" and you start going all "19th century phylosopher" on him about how he's not "engaging in a rational discourse", completely disregarding the fact that you were neither...

    You do have some insightful posts in there too, I grant you that... Maybe instead of spending your energy on getting even and harassing those who dare criticize you, even if it's only once, you might employ that energy towards cramming out more informative and insightful posts. Stop taking things personal man, this is slashdot. Bask in the warm comforting knowledge that 90% of the people here are complete and utter morons, and just ignore them. That's what I do mostly anyway. *grin*

    --
    Install windows on my workstation? You crazy? Got any idea how much I paid for the damn thing?
  69. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    I will disregard your suggestion, but I will thank you for making it.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  70. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    I have no problem with Barry. I am sure he is a fine gentleman. I do not, however, condone the ad hominem attacks he launched during several recent debates. It is poor style, and I frankly do not think it is proper.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  71. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    I've never actually played any of his games. I'm just thanking him for taking the time out of his very busy schedule to come talk with us.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  72. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by Lucas.Langa · · Score: 1

    You gotta be kidding. So you are convinced that your "Thank you" posts are necessary and fun, even if you don't have any idea of who the person you thank is? Way to go, way to go. Regards, Lucas Langa

    --
    Build a tool even an idiot can use and only an idiot will want to use it. -S.O.B.
  73. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    I know exactly who he is, even if I have never played any of his games, Lucas. Much like you most likely (or at least you should) know who Andy Tanenbaum is, even if you haven't used Minix.

    Thanks for your compliments, Lucas.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  74. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by Lucas.Langa · · Score: 1

    A valid statement. Although, what you miss is that all these "Thank you, Slashdot loves you!" posts are pretty pointless and disturbing for many Slashdotters. Speaking of Andy Tanenbaum, I in fact used Minix some years ago and own a couple of his books. So, to end this whole argument I'll just remind you that you are dubbed the latest Arch Karma Whore here. Check this term and see why people see you like that. It's not they don't like you nick or something. It's all about your posts. Slashdotters likes post are interesting, present a new view on some thing or are funny. Try to keep up. Regards, Lucas Langa

    --
    Build a tool even an idiot can use and only an idiot will want to use it. -S.O.B.
  75. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    Indeed, manners, respect and courtesy are something that many Americans fear. And if they fear such things, then I do not care! I will show respect like a true gentleman does, and they will just have to accept it. Indeed.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  76. what else should he say by ksquire · · Score: 1

    i dunno... i read it as, "of course i can't say that I condone it otherwise activision can use our name again". (remember) as for 'freeciv' i am not sure if he cares, given that there's little indication that they are competing with his ability to make a living.

    it's that IP that allows him to keep doing what he does and not have to work for EA.

    --
    http://joystick101.org getting in depth, with games.
  77. Re:Grand Theft Auto as Carjacking Prevention Train by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who are you, Devin Moore's mother? If slashdot gave an award to the person who posted the stupidest comment, you'd win a prize. Do you think someone could learn how to stop a pickpocket by playing GTA? Ha ha ha ha ha! What a nut.

  78. Garage games? by phorm · · Score: 1

    The days of guys building a game in their garage and then selling it to a publisher are behind us, I'm afraid

    There are a few smaller companies that do such things. Certainly there are also a lot of tools for making such games, and in some areas a rather large open-source community behind them. I've always looked at OGRE as being one of my favorites from a perspective of capabilities/possibility. There are also a lot of sweet code samples.

    The downside is that the organization/requirements of the libs is a bit off, and even following the forum I've only been able to get my test projects (in Quanta) to make it to the point where they segfault :-(

    Still, I haven't played with it in awhile, and certainly others seem to do fairly well. The biggest problem I have is the consumer/marketing focus on flashy graphics. All the coding talent in the world won't get you far on your own unless you have skills (or help from somebody with skills) in graphics and probably sound as well.

    Some of the games definately look cool/promising though, but they big money is probably still in being bought out by a larger gaming firm... sadly.

    I wish some of the old devs like SM who now have 'made their way' might look at amassing groups of the smaller companies and helping them market (for a cut of the pie, but a reasonable one). Certainly it would be nicer than seeing their dreams swallowed by larger behemoths to join in the 'bargain bin' collection or and endless line of sequels.

  79. Re:Please refer to my posting history, my good sir by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 1

    Indeed, manners, respect and courtesy are something that many Americans fear

    And by making such a blanket statement you are ironically displaying a lack of manners, respect, and courtesy. At the least you could quantify your sample size and survey methods. Having lived amongst these "Americans" all my life I'd have to disagree. Your statement seems akin to me writing, "Indeed, dentists and oral hygeine are things many British fear."

  80. Hm. by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

    We "fear" manners, respect and courtesy? I.E. they make us shake in our cowboy boots?

    --

    +++ATH0
  81. Variety is the spice of life. by dynooomite · · Score: 0

    Response: I like to play all kinds of games...on a variety of systems. My son and I play games on the PC, PS2, Xbox, GameCube...and they range from Warcraft, to Halo to Grand Turismo...to Civilization. :)

    See fanboys, it is okay to enjoy a varitey of games. You don't have to insult fpss' every chance you get because you would rather play a sucky dungeon crawler.

    *Que shooting star and "The More You Know" string.

    --
    Linux Friendly since, like awhile.
    1. Re:Variety is the spice of life. by praxis · · Score: 1

      "See fanboys, it is okay to enjoy a varitey of games. You don't have to insult fpss' every chance you get because you would rather play a sucky dungeon crawler."

      See fanboy, it is okay to ejoy a variety of games. You don't have to insult dungeon crawlers because you would rather play a FPS.

  82. Fucking Idiot by LordMyren · · Score: 1

    In a game like Civ, we have over 80 units, all with different movement rates, strengths, special abilities, experience levels, etc. We also have to decide where to place cities, what to build, who to be nice to and who to make war with. We also have to decide what to research, what religion to spread, what Civics to adopt, etc. All in all, I don't expect to see anything close to true human intelligence any time soon, as long as games continue to get more complex.

    I'm gonna hatemyself for saying this, but... *cough* moron *cough*.

    Computer intelligence may be going no where, but our ability to gather redonculously huge amounts of data and run signal processing on our data to extract trends we still dont understand... that is ever increasing. As games get more complex and more multi-faceted this trend will come to dominate.

    Imagine if there were tactical elements to WoW. You couldd have one WHOPPER (eh? eh?) of a learning system watching PvP battles to exact winning tactics and strategies. Winners tended to heal more. Winners waited around a corner. Trends would begin to emerge.

    Metcalf's law states the the value of any system is determined by the square of the number of participants. Obviously Mr. Meier still has a classical hollistic model of AI where each civilization is a monolithic AI playing against other self-same AIs. The problem here is that he is playing a finite game. Whoo! You have 80 units! Thats a very big matrix to determine combat advantage Mr. Meiers. But its inherently a finite system, a simple matrix by nature of each AI element being a monolithic entity.

    There will never be emerging ai behaviors for your systems. The best you can hope for is players attributing their Sim's catching on fire to spontaneous combustion. AI only has a chance through the network; it is through the massive rise in complexity that computer AI will come to take hold-- when the AI can crunch huge potential data sets and evolve hideous numbers of very very short term permutations to decide upon tactics that computer AI will ever have a chance. Your AI is dumb because you built it sir, it will always have all the limitations it had the day it was coded, because in truth you never let it decide anything, its nothing more than discrete decision making paths. Of course that will never advance. We can only build our decision making models so complex, only to emulate such a degree of humanity. Thats not AI. Thats just a robot.

    All real intelligence is derived from the knowledge of the interconnected nature of realities.

    Then again, Armored Core is my game of choice. You'd have to know it to know. Sweet sweet customizability.
    Luv,
    LordMyren