So after reading through most of the thread, it becomes apparent that it is in fact Microsoft that should be sued here, not Seagate! What a shock!
Yes, I'm kidding, but only half. Sure, Windows isn't the only OS that reports disk size in GB when it really means GiB... but then, Seagate is also not the only HD manufacturer using the "false" numbering system.
Sadly, by now the misuse of the prefixes in OS's has become so widespread that by far the easiest solution is for HD manufacturers to just given in and use the same incorrect nomenclature. What I'd really like to see though is a lot of OS patches.
What you seemed to miss with this story is that it is impossible to rate something like a game with such a high precision. Wrong. What both you and the article writer are missing is that game ratings are not and never were intended to be any kind of absolute data point. They're relative. It's the whole point of rating games. If a reviewer gives a game a rating of 88, it means he thought the game was very good. Not quite good enough to qualify for an "Editor's Choice" ("9-star")rating, but still very good - and noticeably better than games rated at 80 (or an "8-star"). He also thought it was not quite as good as past games his publication rated at 89, but slightly better than games rated at 87. That kind of information is valuable to me. But above all, you have to remember that both the ratings and reviews are purely the opinion of the reviewers. That's why your best bet is to find a publication who's ratings are most consistent with your own opinion over the course of the last year, and use them to get an idea if you'll like new games you haven't played yet. That's how they're intended to be used. Anyone who expects more than that is guaranteed to be disappointed, no matter how many reviewers or what rating system the publication uses.
So the moral of the story is, if the magazine or website you happen to be reading game reviews on doesn't give what you want, find one that does, instead of crying about that one and spoiling it for the people who do like them.
That all depends on the gamer. Personally, I love PC Gamer's 1-100 rating system, while I really don't like 10-star systems, and the 5-star ones just about drive me nuts. If you're really that hard up for a 10-star, just look at the first number. Simple as that. Some of us like to know how a dozen "9-star" games stack up against each other. If I've only got the extra cash/time to buy and play one at the moment, it matters. Also, PC Gamer has a really good system with any game at 90+ getting an Editor's Choice award. And personally, I like it that they have a rating system in which no game has ever scored 100. And that's because every game always has had some legitimate small flaw that could have been fixed to improve the game, and they usually detail what that flaw is. (And no, it's not something stupid like Yoshi's tongue snapping back in too quick.)
Long story short, Mark Wilson is just not enough of a geek to appreciate all the information there. So as far as I'm concerned, he can QQ more.
The real problems these days are too many publications giving in to pressure from the developers/publishers trying to buy a good score and review.
I know where you're coming from. In fact, I've never participated in a raiding guild for precisely those reasons. But over time, and partly due to the fact that some of my long-time internet friends have been involved in raiding guilds, I've also come to see that perspective. To someone like you or me who wants to play a game and have fun from the opening cutscene to the credits at the end, it seems like way too much work (hey, I already worked my butt off to buy the game...). But the truth is, these people raid because they know it's what they have to do to get what they want out of the game. And despite the fact that it sounds like a lot of boring work, they actually do enjoy it and have fun doing it. (Well, not all of them do, but for the most part it's true.) And most of those players are just relieved when someone who knows and understands the game steps in to fill a leadership role and tells them what they need to do. And despite it looking like work, it's relaxing precisely because they know it doesn't have real-world implications like their real world job does, and if things really blow up... well, they can just reroll somewhere else, transfer servers with a name-change, etc. etc.
But that said, MMOs in general (and perhaps WoW in particular) still offer real world value, because it puts people in a position where they have to work together and/or be a good leader to get what they want out of the game. While there are no "real-world" consequences for just jumping ship when things go sour, you also won't accomplish what you want in the game so it's a lot more beneficial to work things out and stick together. And most players realize that.
(though this confidence may not carry over so much into real life when you see a real person rolling their eyes at you.) For me it actually has. But yes, YMMV.
I've never gotten into Dune (too many other higher priority entertainments out there) so I really can't comment on what you wrote there. I could add a few more *possible* weak explanations for the rest, but I don't think it would really matter much, as I think we've pretty much played out this discussion.
So I'll wrap up my end by saying thanks for your insightful responses. (Even if we were massively off-topic here, heh.)
The difference is, MMOs give you a chance to work on actual leadership with real people who all have their own real goals, in a situation where you're called upon to lead anywhere from 5 to 40 (possibly more, depending on the game) people. And for a measly $15 a month. Let's see you put together a 20-employee (or even 5, for that matter) soccer team or lawn mowing company for a $15/mo investment.
Oh yeah, and most people play WoW on the $300 PC they bought for e-mail and web browsing, so you can't count in the equipment as part of the investment.
Let me stress again, the important thing to consider here is that this is not a simulation. You're not going through some leadership or management program your employer provides for you, where they try to simulate various scenarios. It's real people, who all have their own personalities and wants, and they'll darn well let you know what those are.
I myself am not by nature a great leader. I'd never want to try to run a guild or lead a raid. But I've often found myself leading by default in 5-mans simply because I'm more skilled/experienced at whatever we're doing, and it's definitely improved my leadership skills.
If Yoda could knock around Star Destroyers, he could have come out of hiding and blown up the original Death Star just by looking at it. That certainly removes drama from the story. It starts to get as lame as the Christ story where you have an all-powerful God getting crucified as a sacrifice to himself to atone for the character flaws of the very people he created so he would no longer be mad at them. Huh? The point is, if Jedi are powerful enough to fling around Star Destroyers, you've removed all drama from the story. It's like watching old black and white Superman episodes where he's taking on normal human gangsters. Yawn. Where's the drama in that? It's like watching Hulk Hogan stomp on kittens. Yeah, I thought about that too. That's probably the only *real* reason they didn't showcase the full powers they said the Jedi have. That said, here's a few more things to consider story-wise. First, one reason the Jedi didn't use their powers for such massive attacks is that such a massive disturbance in the force would surely have revealed them and likely their location to Vader and Sidious. Second, remember that at the times of the Death Stars, Yoda was either dieing or dead (leaving Luke as the only Jedi), and Luke wasn't quite ready yet to do anything that massive. Heck, on the first Death Star, Luke was barely trained enough to use a lightsaber, let alone the force. Is this more nuanced and thought-out than the writers intended? Probably. But it does seem to fit.
Now, as to why we don't see more massive attacks from the Jedi in the prequels... well, my personal view on that is "who cares". Those are already such a fucked up mess, one more "little detail" like that hardly matters.
But to get back on the real topic, perhaps I'm mistaken and most people do not see the Jedi as being as powerful as I see them. If that's the case, then it's also possible to make an MMO with "fake" Jedi, allowing everyone to be a not-so-uber Jedi with no problems. They would just have to be more powerful and more of an accomplishment than they were in SWG after the massive fuckup.
I don't like the uber-buffing of Jedi abilities that started with the prequels. See, that's what I don't get. I only watched the prequels once, and didn't really like them much. All my personal perceptions on how powerful the Jedi are come from the OT. The thing is, the Jedi way is defensive, not offensive. You'll never see a true Jedi wielding the full power of the force, unless it's absolutely necessary to defeat a Sith. They do only as much as needed. After watching Luke's training with Yoda, I was left with the impression that Yoda, in his better days, could have tossed that X-wing into space without breaking a sweat, and probably smacked around some Imperial Star Destroyers as well. He didn't because he was a Jedi.
But perhaps size does matter, despite what Yoda said. (Hey, he was small...)
I dunno. Yoda has been established as pretty much the most powerful Jedi at the height of the Jedi's power. Yet it required him to focus just on the X-Wing in ESB to move it out of the swamp. Yeah, but that was when he was damn near dead of old age. Also, in that scene you don't see him moving anything smaller with the force, therefore for all we know he would have needed as much effort to move a leaf or a grain of sand. According to Yoda, Luke's only limitation in regards to the size of the object was his own mind.
I don't usually rip my CDs and store them on my computer, in my opinion that's a waste of HD space Not to rag on you, but wow... maybe it's time to upgrade to a bigger hard drive? With 500GB drives down to $110, seems to me a lot more cost-effective than trying to store CDs.
That's what I really like about Guild Wars. Yeah, ArenaNet has made some changes in the past that upset a lot of players (never enough to cause anything close to a mass exodus) but now their policy is that any changes they're considering on the actual skills (powers, spells, moves, etc. for those who've never played GW) are tested live first to get feedback. Yes, actual live testing over the course of a weekend, not testing on some obscure test server that only about 5% of the players ever use. And even after live testing and subsequent implementation, they're not afraid to revert those changes later if something unforeseen results.
You're setting up a false dichotomy. General Grevious would require a lot of work for a jedi to take down, epic battles could be fought against hordes of sith, large beasts with lightsaber resistance (as seen in the expanded universe) could create challenges. If Boba Fett can beat Darth Vader, then mid-level bounty hunters should give low-level jedis problems. It's true that a lightsaber makes a significant number of encounters one-shots, but against a master or a large animal it's not a matter of hitting them once, it's a matter of wearing them down through swordplay. Well, part of the problem is that episodes I-III aren't entirely consistent (yeah, understatement, I know...) with IV-VI. General Grievous wouldn't be that difficult for a real Jedi in most situations. He's a machine. Use the force to push him off the edge, rip his limbs off, crush him into scrap metal, rip down stones to smash him, etc. etc. He's a lot smaller than an X-Wing. Yeah yeah, you can make up all kinds of "reasons" why this or that boss isn't vulnerable to the force, light-sabers, etc. but then you're right back to fake Jedi. The simple truth of the matter is, in it's pure original form, the only thing that can block a lightsaber is another lightsaber, and the only thing that can block the force is the force. There are no other defenses. So that leaves us fighting Sith all the time. That would get old really quick.
As for ripping down big buildings, that's not very star-wars either. The biggest things we see being thrown around easily are girders. You can lift an x-wing with concentration, and that's it. The force has its limits, and in a world where it's plentiful, there are other ways to balance it. Really? Yoda told us size doesn't matter with the force. So perhaps the reason we don't see more mass destruction of buildings, etc. is that the majority of the time when we see the Sith it's in their best interests to keep things intact, while Jedi simply don't behave that way. Or perhaps more likely, the story just worked better this way. Either way, if you unleash hordes of 12-year-olds with that much power over a virtual environment and no repercussions, well it doesn't take much to visualize what would happen.
Since BioWare cashed out to EA, I assume you mean "I have faith that a good developer like _EA_ can come up with a balanced system" Yeah... I keep trying not to think too much about that. Hopefully EA will keep their grubby little fingers out of the pie.
Yeah, but that still doesn't deal with how powerful Jedi are. So everyone can become a Jedi after about 3 to 6 months of playing (a typical amount of time for someone to hit max level and equipment in most MMOs). So we can expect by 6 months after release to have thousands of Jedi running around, one-shotting the biggest bosses, ripping down big buildings with the force, obliterating everything in their path, etc. Or did you mean fake Jedi, as in SWG style? Either way I'll pass.
I purposely didn't posit any specifics on what it would take to become a Jedi in option 2, because I haven't come up with any. But it seems to me it's really the only solution that's going to make a Star Wars MMO work, and I have faith that a good developer like BioWare can come up with a balanced system. Because as you said, if no one can be a Jedi lots of people will be disappointed, and won't by the game. But by the same token, everyone knows what a real Jedi is, and we also know that it simply won't work to have everyone be able to be a real Jedi in an MMO. Nothing would be a challenge for anyone, ever. There also wouldn't be too many buildings standing anywhere, as they'd be destroyed within minutes of being created. People would buy it, play it for a month, and move on to something else. So the alternative is to let everyone be a fake Jedi, except no one's going to be fooled because we've all seen the movies. The first time you stick your level 1 lightsaber into any other living being and it doesn't die instantly, all suspension of disbelief ceases.
This is the only option that they never tried with SWG, and I'd guess that's ultimately why it failed. Simply put, no matter how time-consuming you make it to become a Jedi, if you don't limit the actual number of possible Jedi, eventually everyone will be one. And if you make it so time consuming that the majority of people can't reach it by at least the 1 year mark, you probably won't have many people beyond a year anyway. Likewise, if you make it so difficult that most people simply don't have the skill to become one, you'll have multitudes crying and either getting their way or leaving, once again leading back to everyone being a fake Jedi, or having very few players. So they saw the inevitable and hastened it along, as well as their own demise.
Or possibly they're not making a Star Wars MMO at all, though that's a bit hard to believe at this point.
And we won't even get into the issue of a Jedi being either weak but omnipresent among players, something you have to spend months unlocking, or hard to unlock and weak. Good luck solving that issue. I can only think of a couple real solutions.
1. Simply don't allow anyone to be a Jedi.
2. Create a limited number of Jedi "slots" based on the population of the shard/realm. Like say for instance only.5% of the population can be Jedi. It would require both time and skill to become a Jedi. Jedi would be quite powerful - but the downside to becoming a Jedi would be that you could die permanently, creating an open slot for someone else to become a Jedi. Or at least be reverted to a "normal" character upon death or something like that, though I prefer the "permanent death" potential. Risk vs. reward.
PC Gamer (my personal favorite gaming mag) costs about $20 for a 1-year subscription. If you can find any kind of decent wireless router for $10 you're doing really good.
I mean if we want to let TV define what words mean to us I guess we can do that. As opposed to letting one kook in a corner define what words mean? No thanks, I'll stick with TV's definition.
Maybe I should have specified too that the working out must be to improve the game players talent in that game. Someone who is a proof-reader but works out every night, does not make proof-reading a sport all of a sudden. Video gamers can be ripped for sure, but beyond some hand/back stamina their strength won't really improve their game. Which shows how much you really know about professional video gamers: nothing.
Hint: playing WoW 14 hours a day != professional video gamer.
And gaming being a real sport, misses because mainly you can be 500 pounds and be a champion. Which is no small feat I'm sure, and congrats and regards to the champions in that sport, seriously. But that doesn't make it an actual sport. Game. Competition, there are plenty of other categories that define it just as well. Only by your definition of sport. I prefer my own, which I won't hesitate to admit having ripped off from Webster. But thanks for playing.
Like I predicted I was modded a troll because people take a specific word seriously. I don't know why, because some of these players are tremendous athletes and I don't intend on taking that away from them just because I don't think what they do should be considered sport. Wrong. Like someone else pointed out, you were modded troll for being an arrogant dick. Your opinion does have value. Just not more than the opinion of anyone else, and less than most people posting here since you're pretty much entirely ignorant of the issue at hand.
Slashdot Mirror
So after reading through most of the thread, it becomes apparent that it is in fact Microsoft that should be sued here, not Seagate! What a shock!
Yes, I'm kidding, but only half. Sure, Windows isn't the only OS that reports disk size in GB when it really means GiB... but then, Seagate is also not the only HD manufacturer using the "false" numbering system.
Sadly, by now the misuse of the prefixes in OS's has become so widespread that by far the easiest solution is for HD manufacturers to just given in and use the same incorrect nomenclature. What I'd really like to see though is a lot of OS patches.
1.) Create game simulating life
2.) Have characters drink Hot Coffee
3.) ??????
4.) Profit!
And getting a view of the non-pixelated nudity in The Sims was so easy anyone could do it. It's really surprising nothing ever came of that.
So the moral of the story is, if the magazine or website you happen to be reading game reviews on doesn't give what you want, find one that does, instead of crying about that one and spoiling it for the people who do like them.
That all depends on the gamer. Personally, I love PC Gamer's 1-100 rating system, while I really don't like 10-star systems, and the 5-star ones just about drive me nuts. If you're really that hard up for a 10-star, just look at the first number. Simple as that. Some of us like to know how a dozen "9-star" games stack up against each other. If I've only got the extra cash/time to buy and play one at the moment, it matters. Also, PC Gamer has a really good system with any game at 90+ getting an Editor's Choice award. And personally, I like it that they have a rating system in which no game has ever scored 100. And that's because every game always has had some legitimate small flaw that could have been fixed to improve the game, and they usually detail what that flaw is. (And no, it's not something stupid like Yoshi's tongue snapping back in too quick.)
Long story short, Mark Wilson is just not enough of a geek to appreciate all the information there. So as far as I'm concerned, he can QQ more.
The real problems these days are too many publications giving in to pressure from the developers/publishers trying to buy a good score and review.
Hmm. I'm sure there's supposed to be a "Boom, headshot!" in there somewhere.
I know where you're coming from. In fact, I've never participated in a raiding guild for precisely those reasons. But over time, and partly due to the fact that some of my long-time internet friends have been involved in raiding guilds, I've also come to see that perspective. To someone like you or me who wants to play a game and have fun from the opening cutscene to the credits at the end, it seems like way too much work (hey, I already worked my butt off to buy the game...). But the truth is, these people raid because they know it's what they have to do to get what they want out of the game. And despite the fact that it sounds like a lot of boring work, they actually do enjoy it and have fun doing it. (Well, not all of them do, but for the most part it's true.) And most of those players are just relieved when someone who knows and understands the game steps in to fill a leadership role and tells them what they need to do. And despite it looking like work, it's relaxing precisely because they know it doesn't have real-world implications like their real world job does, and if things really blow up... well, they can just reroll somewhere else, transfer servers with a name-change, etc. etc.
But that said, MMOs in general (and perhaps WoW in particular) still offer real world value, because it puts people in a position where they have to work together and/or be a good leader to get what they want out of the game. While there are no "real-world" consequences for just jumping ship when things go sour, you also won't accomplish what you want in the game so it's a lot more beneficial to work things out and stick together. And most players realize that.
I've never gotten into Dune (too many other higher priority entertainments out there) so I really can't comment on what you wrote there. I could add a few more *possible* weak explanations for the rest, but I don't think it would really matter much, as I think we've pretty much played out this discussion.
So I'll wrap up my end by saying thanks for your insightful responses. (Even if we were massively off-topic here, heh.)
The difference is, MMOs give you a chance to work on actual leadership with real people who all have their own real goals, in a situation where you're called upon to lead anywhere from 5 to 40 (possibly more, depending on the game) people. And for a measly $15 a month. Let's see you put together a 20-employee (or even 5, for that matter) soccer team or lawn mowing company for a $15/mo investment.
Oh yeah, and most people play WoW on the $300 PC they bought for e-mail and web browsing, so you can't count in the equipment as part of the investment.
Let me stress again, the important thing to consider here is that this is not a simulation. You're not going through some leadership or management program your employer provides for you, where they try to simulate various scenarios. It's real people, who all have their own personalities and wants, and they'll darn well let you know what those are.
I myself am not by nature a great leader. I'd never want to try to run a guild or lead a raid. But I've often found myself leading by default in 5-mans simply because I'm more skilled/experienced at whatever we're doing, and it's definitely improved my leadership skills.
Now, as to why we don't see more massive attacks from the Jedi in the prequels... well, my personal view on that is "who cares". Those are already such a fucked up mess, one more "little detail" like that hardly matters.
But to get back on the real topic, perhaps I'm mistaken and most people do not see the Jedi as being as powerful as I see them. If that's the case, then it's also possible to make an MMO with "fake" Jedi, allowing everyone to be a not-so-uber Jedi with no problems. They would just have to be more powerful and more of an accomplishment than they were in SWG after the massive fuckup.
But perhaps size does matter, despite what Yoda said. (Hey, he was small...)
That's what I really like about Guild Wars. Yeah, ArenaNet has made some changes in the past that upset a lot of players (never enough to cause anything close to a mass exodus) but now their policy is that any changes they're considering on the actual skills (powers, spells, moves, etc. for those who've never played GW) are tested live first to get feedback. Yes, actual live testing over the course of a weekend, not testing on some obscure test server that only about 5% of the players ever use. And even after live testing and subsequent implementation, they're not afraid to revert those changes later if something unforeseen results.
Yeah, but that still doesn't deal with how powerful Jedi are. So everyone can become a Jedi after about 3 to 6 months of playing (a typical amount of time for someone to hit max level and equipment in most MMOs). So we can expect by 6 months after release to have thousands of Jedi running around, one-shotting the biggest bosses, ripping down big buildings with the force, obliterating everything in their path, etc. Or did you mean fake Jedi, as in SWG style? Either way I'll pass.
I purposely didn't posit any specifics on what it would take to become a Jedi in option 2, because I haven't come up with any. But it seems to me it's really the only solution that's going to make a Star Wars MMO work, and I have faith that a good developer like BioWare can come up with a balanced system. Because as you said, if no one can be a Jedi lots of people will be disappointed, and won't by the game. But by the same token, everyone knows what a real Jedi is, and we also know that it simply won't work to have everyone be able to be a real Jedi in an MMO. Nothing would be a challenge for anyone, ever. There also wouldn't be too many buildings standing anywhere, as they'd be destroyed within minutes of being created. People would buy it, play it for a month, and move on to something else. So the alternative is to let everyone be a fake Jedi, except no one's going to be fooled because we've all seen the movies. The first time you stick your level 1 lightsaber into any other living being and it doesn't die instantly, all suspension of disbelief ceases.
This is the only option that they never tried with SWG, and I'd guess that's ultimately why it failed. Simply put, no matter how time-consuming you make it to become a Jedi, if you don't limit the actual number of possible Jedi, eventually everyone will be one. And if you make it so time consuming that the majority of people can't reach it by at least the 1 year mark, you probably won't have many people beyond a year anyway. Likewise, if you make it so difficult that most people simply don't have the skill to become one, you'll have multitudes crying and either getting their way or leaving, once again leading back to everyone being a fake Jedi, or having very few players. So they saw the inevitable and hastened it along, as well as their own demise.
Or possibly they're not making a Star Wars MMO at all, though that's a bit hard to believe at this point.
Slashdot seems to be ok, but it looks like it killed launchpad.net's drives.
1. Simply don't allow anyone to be a Jedi.
2. Create a limited number of Jedi "slots" based on the population of the shard/realm. Like say for instance only
It's really a shame that I'm out of mod points and that this post is almost certain to get buried beneath several dozen samples of garbage.
PC Gamer (my personal favorite gaming mag) costs about $20 for a 1-year subscription. If you can find any kind of decent wireless router for $10 you're doing really good.
Hint: playing WoW 14 hours a day != professional video gamer. And gaming being a real sport, misses because mainly you can be 500 pounds and be a champion. Which is no small feat I'm sure, and congrats and regards to the champions in that sport, seriously. But that doesn't make it an actual sport. Game. Competition, there are plenty of other categories that define it just as well. Only by your definition of sport. I prefer my own, which I won't hesitate to admit having ripped off from Webster. But thanks for playing. Like I predicted I was modded a troll because people take a specific word seriously. I don't know why, because some of these players are tremendous athletes and I don't intend on taking that away from them just because I don't think what they do should be considered sport. Wrong. Like someone else pointed out, you were modded troll for being an arrogant dick. Your opinion does have value. Just not more than the opinion of anyone else, and less than most people posting here since you're pretty much entirely ignorant of the issue at hand.