"players who have been playing the game for the better part of half a decade"
Nice one. EVE's been "online" for 4 years (hardly the "better" part of half a decade, though if you'd said "almost" half a decade I'd have let it slide). Hell, I probably quit it before you even started...go back to the sims ya wannabe;)
I quit EVE a while back (after the last "scandal") so I have no vested interest in this current round of crap thats going down.
EVE management (CCP) really need to get their shit together. They have a great game, but they are blowing it by running it in such an unprofessional manor. If they really want people to take them seriously, they need to look at how 90% of the rest of the MMO industry runs things (Devs not allowed to use GM clients on live and GM's only allowed to work from a supervised central company location). None of this "MSN a Dev for personal service" crap.
Their IA is a joke. Everything they "investigate" is "Not our problem, the people reporting this are a joke, everyone keep playing (paying)".
Look at the latest drama. WTF (Why The Fheck) would a _developer_ become involved _instantly_ (within 40 seconds) after being summoned by some BoB guy to sack a volunteer for bumping a dread (big fekking deal, you had to re-align). I mean, come on, who would be stupid enough to think there ISN'T some sort of nepotism going on. Oh, of course the BoB guy that said "He's just a friend, aren't devs allowed to have friends" would be that stupid, but who else really?
CCP has a great game, it's a shame they dont have management that realises how serious this kind of thing is. Blizzard do (even if they are the McDonald of gaming). Hell, even Vanguard devs aren't allowed Dev access on live servers (or AC, or, *insert most MMO's here*).
"In short, the fact that he is talking about how MMORPG's may make it hard for RPG's to be considered good is irrelevant, because he has yet to make a game that I would have considered decent even in the pre-MMORPG days."
Feargus has been associated with some of THE greatest RPG's (IMHO) ever made, and if you don't consider one of them "decent":
Fallout Fallout 2 Icewind Dale Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter Icewind Dale II Planescape: Torment Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance II
Then your taste in RPG's is...well...very, very different to most folks.
I see your point, but I don't agree it means "Vista selling more than XP" is bunk. It's a statement of fact and therefore can't be false.
The thing about a "record" is it is set until broken, not until it's broken plus some for inflation. Regardless of the inflationary effects of population increase, it is still a fact that "x" sold more than "y".
As an example, sports records aren't ajusted to account for better training techniques and/or steroids are they?
If they tried to draw a conclusion like "Vista is more popular because it sold more copies than XP", then yes, I'd agree that that is bunk for the very reason you stated.
I'm going to wait for the "Super Mega Hugmoungous Elite XBox 10k Vista Pro Ultimate" edition that M$ will release next...you know, when they feel sales are starting to flag. It'll make ice cubes too!!
I'd be semi amazed if any regular/. folks didn't see this coming (and the constant string of "must have" upgrades that M$ will keep releasing in the months/years to come). Console gaming cheaper than PC? Pft, I'll give it 3-5 years before M$ "fix" that little problem...
It's a binary problem, either Vista outsold XP in raw numbers or it didn't. If it did in fact sell more, how can the claim "Vista has sold more copies than XP did in the same time period" be "bunk" exactly?
If "it" gets to the stage "it" can play WoW, I guess it wouldn't be too long after that that "it" signs up to Digg and starts arguing about WoW Vs "all-other-MMOG's" and "Wii Vs PS3 Vs Xbox360"...not long after that the experiment will be deemed a failure...
Actually, I wouldn't see Microsoft intorducing some sort of "Buy a bug/exploit" scheme as being a PR disater at all, quite the opposite. They'd have to be fairly particular about what defines "a bug/exploit" though, or at least define a reasonable scale.
Heck, they'd probably end up with the most secure OS on the planet if the offer $10-20k US for a bug/exploit.
Actually, humans arent exactly, or maybe purely, "natural". We're the only species thats extended our lifespans, and quality of life, through artifical means (drugs, machines, etc). Up until recent times (geologically speaking) you were pretty lucky to even make it to 30 years old...
This isn't about the creators (i.e. The artist that actually made the music), they hold copyright for lifetime + 70 years, this is about recording publishers greed (i.e. the music companies) extending their portion of the copyright.
"In reality, songwriters already have a 70 year copyright - that is the length of their lifetime plus 70 years; the 50-year rule applies to recording owners like, er, the BPI's major label donors."
This is only about the corporations getting an extension, not the artists. This being the case, why would any artist put their name to it?
I thought I'd reached maximum cynicism when it comes to greed in the music industry, but every now and then something like this comes along and makes me revise upward yet again...
I'm so over hearing about "compensation for poor starving artists". They should go and get a real job if they can't make money "being an artist".
And no, I don't DL music, movies or software unless it's via a legitimate DL service. Hell, I hardly even listen to music, watch movies or TV any more thanks to it being an "industry". As soon as entertainment became an "industry" the _really_ creative folks were marginalised out and most of whats left is just crap formula pulp generated by droids...
Thanks to those that replied with decent info, I've actually learned a few things.
It seems to me, going by several replies, that the initial cost _may_ possibly be a little more for OSS setup (setting up scripts etc), but from there on there is very little work required.
Seems to me that the TCO over, say, 3-4 years would actually end up being a lot more for the MS setup rather than the OSS one.
I can understand people getting <b>annoyed</b> about stuff related to them, but angry? People are getting onto shakey ground (personality wise) if they really are getting angry about which console "rulz".
It's also a shame that some console owners feel the need to deface a public resource to validate the choice they made in the "war".
It's a shame more people don't get angry enough to get off their arses to go and vote. Or get angry about the other dozens of issues mankind is now facing.
But no, lets get angry about a plastic box that cranks out pixels which may, or may not, crank out pixels faster than another one...
You can use it to deny anything (mostly because the steps you lay out are actually all unrelated, but hey, why let logic/the truth stand in the way of a good story, yeah?)
Lets see:
1. The pacific ocean has fish 1a All oceans have fish 2. Therefore, man is not having an impact on todays fish.
or
1. I got drunk on Friday 1a Everyone gets drunk Friday 2. Therefore, getting drunk is not having an impact on my relationship.
Maybe:
1. I voted Bush 1a. Everyone votes Bush 3. Therefore, Bush isn't having an effect on Man.
Slashdot Mirror
"players who have been playing the game for the better part of half a decade"
;)
Nice one. EVE's been "online" for 4 years (hardly the "better" part of half a decade, though if you'd said "almost" half a decade I'd have let it slide). Hell, I probably quit it before you even started...go back to the sims ya wannabe
if you don't care, why bother reading/commenting on the story?
I agree, but I'm not in goonanything. In fact I quit after the last CCP debacle...
I quit EVE a while back (after the last "scandal") so I have no vested interest in this current round of crap thats going down.
EVE management (CCP) really need to get their shit together. They have a great game, but they are blowing it by running it in such an unprofessional manor. If they really want people to take them seriously, they need to look at how 90% of the rest of the MMO industry runs things (Devs not allowed to use GM clients on live and GM's only allowed to work from a supervised central company location). None of this "MSN a Dev for personal service" crap.
Their IA is a joke. Everything they "investigate" is "Not our problem, the people reporting this are a joke, everyone keep playing (paying)".
Look at the latest drama. WTF (Why The Fheck) would a _developer_ become involved _instantly_ (within 40 seconds) after being summoned by some BoB guy to sack a volunteer for bumping a dread (big fekking deal, you had to re-align). I mean, come on, who would be stupid enough to think there ISN'T some sort of nepotism going on. Oh, of course the BoB guy that said "He's just a friend, aren't devs allowed to have friends" would be that stupid, but who else really?
CCP has a great game, it's a shame they dont have management that realises how serious this kind of thing is. Blizzard do (even if they are the McDonald of gaming). Hell, even Vanguard devs aren't allowed Dev access on live servers (or AC, or, *insert most MMO's here*).
"In short, the fact that he is talking about how MMORPG's may make it hard for RPG's to be considered good is irrelevant, because he has yet to make a game that I would have considered decent even in the pre-MMORPG days."
Feargus has been associated with some of THE greatest RPG's (IMHO) ever made, and if you don't consider one of them "decent":
Fallout Fallout 2
Icewind Dale Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter Icewind Dale II
Planescape: Torment Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance II
Then your taste in RPG's is...well...very, very different to most folks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feargus_Urquhart
Remember, if we don't stop them now, the school kids have already won!!
I see your point, but I don't agree it means "Vista selling more than XP" is bunk. It's a statement of fact and therefore can't be false.
The thing about a "record" is it is set until broken, not until it's broken plus some for inflation. Regardless of the inflationary effects of population increase, it is still a fact that "x" sold more than "y".
As an example, sports records aren't ajusted to account for better training techniques and/or steroids are they?
If they tried to draw a conclusion like "Vista is more popular because it sold more copies than XP", then yes, I'd agree that that is bunk for the very reason you stated.
I'm going to wait for the "Super Mega Hugmoungous Elite XBox 10k Vista Pro Ultimate" edition that M$ will release next...you know, when they feel sales are starting to flag. It'll make ice cubes too!!
/. folks didn't see this coming (and the constant string of "must have" upgrades that M$ will keep releasing in the months/years to come). Console gaming cheaper than PC? Pft, I'll give it 3-5 years before M$ "fix" that little problem...
I'd be semi amazed if any regular
Bunk?
It's a binary problem, either Vista outsold XP in raw numbers or it didn't. If it did in fact sell more, how can the claim "Vista has sold more copies than XP did in the same time period" be "bunk" exactly?
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Many people recognise that fact, but some people still persit in it...
Pr0n AND and you can game on it!!
I guess that settles the "Next Gen" war...
If "it" gets to the stage "it" can play WoW, I guess it wouldn't be too long after that that "it" signs up to Digg and starts arguing about WoW Vs "all-other-MMOG's" and "Wii Vs PS3 Vs Xbox360"...not long after that the experiment will be deemed a failure...
Actually, I wouldn't see Microsoft intorducing some sort of "Buy a bug/exploit" scheme as being a PR disater at all, quite the opposite. They'd have to be fairly particular about what defines "a bug/exploit" though, or at least define a reasonable scale.
;o)
Heck, they'd probably end up with the most secure OS on the planet if the offer $10-20k US for a bug/exploit.
Someone should suggest the idea to them
Actually, humans arent exactly, or maybe purely, "natural". We're the only species thats extended our lifespans, and quality of life, through artifical means (drugs, machines, etc). Up until recent times (geologically speaking) you were pretty lucky to even make it to 30 years old...
This isn't about the creators (i.e. The artist that actually made the music), they hold copyright for lifetime + 70 years, this is about recording publishers greed (i.e. the music companies) extending their portion of the copyright.
From the article:
"In reality, songwriters already have a 70 year copyright - that is the length of their lifetime plus 70 years; the 50-year rule applies to recording owners like, er, the BPI's major label donors."
This is only about the corporations getting an extension, not the artists. This being the case, why would any artist put their name to it?
I thought I'd reached maximum cynicism when it comes to greed in the music industry, but every now and then something like this comes along and makes me revise upward yet again...
Apple recently filed a patent for a device that uses LiPo.
;o)
If Apples using em, they'll be be trendy enough that everyone will want em
I'm so over hearing about "compensation for poor starving artists". They should go and get a real job if they can't make money "being an artist".
And no, I don't DL music, movies or software unless it's via a legitimate DL service. Hell, I hardly even listen to music, watch movies or TV any more thanks to it being an "industry". As soon as entertainment became an "industry" the _really_ creative folks were marginalised out and most of whats left is just crap formula pulp generated by droids...
"Sell these products do"
I didn't know Yoda works for IT Wire!
Thanks to those that replied with decent info, I've actually learned a few things.
It seems to me, going by several replies, that the initial cost _may_ possibly be a little more for OSS setup (setting up scripts etc), but from there on there is very little work required.
Seems to me that the TCO over, say, 3-4 years would actually end up being a lot more for the MS setup rather than the OSS one.
37 characters ought to be enough for anybody!! /joke off
I, for one, welcome our new overlord-joke hating overlords...
Heck, they're just game consoles.
I can understand people getting <b>annoyed</b> about stuff related to them, but angry? People are getting onto shakey ground (personality wise) if they really are getting angry about which console "rulz".
It's also a shame that some console owners feel the need to deface a public resource to validate the choice they made in the "war".
It's a shame more people don't get angry enough to get off their arses to go and vote. Or get angry about the other dozens of issues mankind is now facing.
But no, lets get angry about a plastic box that cranks out pixels which may, or may not, crank out pixels faster than another one...
...that angry console fanbois are actually pretty retarded...and very angry...about shit that doesn't actually matter...
:/
Seriously guys, go and get angry about something WORTH getting angry about
Love your logic dude.
You can use it to deny anything (mostly because the steps you lay out are actually all unrelated, but hey, why let logic/the truth stand in the way of a good story, yeah?)
Lets see:
1. The pacific ocean has fish
1a All oceans have fish
2. Therefore, man is not having an impact on todays fish.
or
1. I got drunk on Friday
1a Everyone gets drunk Friday
2. Therefore, getting drunk is not having an impact on my relationship.
Maybe:
1. I voted Bush
1a. Everyone votes Bush
3. Therefore, Bush isn't having an effect on Man.
QED right?