researchers in the US who argue that the spread of 'corrupted blood' in World of Warcraft might provide clues to the way a real world population would cope with the prospect of a global pandemic. I would just log off.
Apparently Mitch Bradley even believes that a 10-year old could replace an XO motherboard. I don't see why not; 10-year olds have been replacing motherboards in China for years.
Actually the AI in WoW is a lot better than EQ, the humanoids will run from fights to get help, unless they are lesser humanoids that don't really care about dying. Animals always fight till they die, some will howl for assistance though.
WoW does a lot with stances for warriors, and rogues actually have to be behind or in front, or in stealth to pull off some of their moves.
See...I often wonder how much this guy actually looked at WoW, when he made these statements, because as far as MMOs go, Blizzard has done more in terms of adding new gameplay to WoW than any other I've played, even if it's just polished what was done so long ago, it's different enough.
Hes got some massive hurdles ahead of him and anyone that attempts these things. One of which is, people.
-Improving Combat- It's an MMOG, and that means there's a lot of data that has to be processed simply from a technical point of view. Anything outside of the Hack/Slash + buttons for spells/abilities means the player may have to deal with a ton of data, if you're talking about adding in combos combined with group dynamics, and this may exclude a very large percentage of the gaming populace. MMOGs appeal to a lot of people because of their simplicity. Many many people play World of Warcraft who are not gamers, and enjoy it because it is easy for them to manage combat.
-Artificial Intelligence- This is probably the area that needs the most work, and will make all other areas look better. That is to say, by improving the AI, you can make combat seem more fluid and dynamic. Not, auto-attack, ability 1, ability 2, ability 1, ability 2. Loot corpse. Creatures never adapt to a player, instead developers opt. to simply add various creatures with their own weaknesses/strengths towards the various classes in the game. This gives players a feeling of power in some instances and weaknesses in others.
Your problem here is balancing challenge and fun. If you want a 'smart' NPC it's pretty simple in an MMO.
if IsHealerPresent() then
TargetHealer();
Kill(); end
You'll have the smartest NPCs ever spawned in an MMO, and the fewest number of players ever. So, while I think this area needs the most work, you're going to have a real challenge in making the AI, smart...but not captain obvious.
-Strategic Demands- Your real problem here is people. If you want strategy. Then people have to be willing to follow the will of a select few. Good luck here. For the ones that will, they will be labeled as elitists and you will find them in the biggest 'raid guilds'. They will have the best gear in the game. Your other players will feel left out of the design decisions, and quit the game. If you need further proof of this, just look at an RTS (Real Time Strategy) game. How does the game function? Do several people control an army? No, it's a single individual player controlling hundreds of units, and factories. People tend to dislike being told what to do, and so a lot of people are going to dislike playing a game where all they are doing is following orders.
-Ethical Choices- Players will make the choices that gets them the most gear, best gear, or most money. They will care not for being good, or bad. They play the game, most of the time to be 'The Best', and will do whatever it takes. If you're going to punish a player for a choice you gave them, they will not be your biggest fan.
I mean, of all the people that played Oblivion, how many people DIDN'T join the black hand (assassin's guild) because they didn't want to be 'Evil'.
Hes got some massive hurdles ahead of him and anyone that attempts these things. One of which is, people.
-Improving Combat-
It's an MMOG, and that means there's a lot of data that has to be processed simply from a technical point of view. Anything outside of the Hack/Slash + buttons for spells/abilities means the player may have to deal with a ton of data, if you're talking about adding in combos combined with group dynamics, and this may exclude a very large percentage of the gaming populace. MMOGs appeal to a lot of people because of their simplicity. Many many people play World of Warcraft who are not gamers, and enjoy it because it is easy for them to manage combat.
-Artificial Intelligence-
This is probably the area that needs the most work, and will make all other areas look better. That is to say, by improving the AI, you can make combat seem more fluid and dynamic. Not, auto-attack, ability 1, ability 2, ability 1, ability 2. Loot corpse. Creatures never adapt to a player, instead developers opt. to simply add various creatures with their own weaknesses/strengths towards the various classes in the game. This gives players a feeling of power in some instances and weaknesses in others.
Your problem here is balancing challenge and fun. If you want a 'smart' NPC it's pretty simple in an MMO.
if IsHealerPresent() then
TargetHealer();
Kill();
end
You'll have the smartest NPCs ever spawned in an MMO, and the fewest number of players ever. So, while I think this area needs the most work, you're going to have a real challenge in making the AI, smart...but not captain obvious.
-Strategic Demands-
Your real problem here is people. If you want strategy. Then people have to be willing to follow the will of a select few. Good luck here. For the ones that will, they will be labeled as elitists and you will find them in the biggest 'raid guilds'. They will have the best gear in the game. Your other players will feel left out of the design decisions, and quit the game. If you need further proof of this, just look at an RTS (Real Time Strategy) game. How does the game function? Do several people control an army? No, it's a single individual player controlling hundreds of units, and factories. People tend to dislike being told what to do, and so a lot of people are going to dislike playing a game where all they are doing is following orders.
-Ethical Choices-
Players will make the choices that gets them the most gear, best gear, or most money. They will care not for being good, or bad. They play the game, most of the time to be 'The Best', and will do whatever it takes. If you're going to punish a player for a choice you gave them, they will not be your biggest fan.
I mean, of all the people that played Oblivion, how many people DIDN'T join the black hand (assassin's guild) because they didn't want to be 'Evil'.
Because they aren't the same. A franchise Apple store says, "Hi, I'm a Mac...err Apple store." These stores have, and will always be dedicated to selling one brand. However, when you take a general store and make a secret agreement to only stock Apple gear. Then it's a Mac of a different color. Because now customers don't know it's actually an Apple store, and now these poor customers are being forced to buy Apple's because that's all they see.
You may say, "but why don't they just go online and buy something else", well that's all well and good...but most people don't do that. They go into their favorite retail stores, like, best buy, look around, find something they like and buy it. Especially when it's a component like Intel, you think people care if they get an Intel or AMD? No, they just want it to work and be cheap. But, if that store only sells computers with Intel chips, then AMD gets squeezed out of the market, even if their product is superior.
Part of having a free market is that the CONSUMER is the one that gets to make the choice. That is, per your example, Apple were extremely popular amongst the consumers, then stores would stock more apple equipment to meet the demand made by the consumers. However, if per your example, Apple offers kickbacks to the store to only stock their equipment so that consumers are forced to purchase the Apple brand, then it is no longer a free market where the consumer makes the decision on what products will succeed. This is BAD. And yes, there is something legally wrong with two independent companies agreeing to divide up a geographic area to only allow a certain product to be purchased there. The difference between this and a partnership though from my point of view, is simply scale. It's a thin line to walk, but when a single store or a few stores control nearly all of a particular market of items, then those stores might be breaking the anti-trust laws that have been put in place if they agree with another company to only allow product X to be sold in their stores.
And while for whatever reason you may think this is good in the short term, it extinguishes new competition from rising to the surface to compete on an even playing field. Thus leading to the end or at the very least, the slowing with which new ideas, new products, new widgets make it to the market for you to buy.
All anti-trust laws are in place to keep YOU safe, so that YOU get to decide if you want to buy Intel or AMD...or Sun.
Microsoft does support Home brewing 360 games. The XNA framework, and their game creator club has really opened up new doors for home brew developers. I mean, for a company to do more than releasing a thin wrapper on OpenGL is really cool. Yeah...they charge the creators a $100 yearly fee to use their service, but you get access to a huge amount of guides and art content for your games to go along with whatever you create. Which, being a hobbyist game developer is a real killer for a project. Because most programmers are not artists.
The only thing I wish MS would do differently is make it so people outside of the game creators club could play your games. If they did that, it would be very, very cool. (oh and hurried up and added XBox Live support to XNA for everyone and not just specially recognized games).
Wasn't the whole point of the transporter to move matter, and the state of matter? This article says they want to sent the state of matter without sending the matter.
I feel if someone tried to implement this as a transporter they would end up with a remote cloning station, like the device from The Prestige. Useful, but I think this is like saying a Fax machine moves us closer to a Star Trek transporter.
Give me a call when someone develops the Heisenberg Compensator.
There already is a place to dump it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain/ But it's never going to open as long as people continue to believe Nuclear energy is some kind of demonic source of power.
Nintendo is using their wiimote technology to determine when the wiimote flies from the users hand, and will now deploy an airbag before striking your HDTV.
Please return your wiimote for the new version with the wiirbag.
Even Duke Nukem came out of hiding to answer a few questions.
Duke Nukem hides from no man or manpig, he just got tired of kicking ass without bubble gum and went to pick some up when he ran into the interviewers.
The Tao project is working on porting XNA for the The Mono project (which is a port of.Net). So theoretically, you could write it in XNA, and run mono on the PS3/Linux and bring any XNA game to the PS3/Linux. At some point in the future. Check it out.
XNA is an input and graphics interface wrapper, like Direct X but sits 1 tier higher. It also provides some objects to store typical things every game engine designer has to write for a new game engine so that you don't need to reinvent the wheel. It is NOT a template for 2D games. XNA is NOT a game engine. There is NO restriction on art content. You can include whatever models and textures you want. It's even a piece of cake to include vector and pixel shaders.
In fact, the demo game provided with XNA is a 3D game. Styled like the old spacewars games. 3D and 2D are both easily doable on XNA. Why you may be seeing more 2D than 3D is simple. Indie game developers are not often artists, and it is far simpler to create a 45x45 animated gif of a player, than it is a 2 million polygon, parallax and normal mapped, skeletal player model. Not that 3D art needs to be nearly that complex...but in a 2D world, people don't expect the things they have become accustomed to after all the triple-A game titles, with the budget of a small Hollywood movie.
If you indeed did "look into it" you saw a few screenshots and derived your judgment solely from that.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh wait...
No one will remember Red vs. Blue; Only Coke vs. Pepsi.
Actually the AI in WoW is a lot better than EQ, the humanoids will run from fights to get help, unless they are lesser humanoids that don't really care about dying. Animals always fight till they die, some will howl for assistance though.
WoW does a lot with stances for warriors, and rogues actually have to be behind or in front, or in stealth to pull off some of their moves.
See...I often wonder how much this guy actually looked at WoW, when he made these statements, because as far as MMOs go, Blizzard has done more in terms of adding new gameplay to WoW than any other I've played, even if it's just polished what was done so long ago, it's different enough.
But everything could be taken a lot further.
Hes got some massive hurdles ahead of him and anyone that attempts these things. One of which is, people.
:)
-Improving Combat-
It's an MMOG, and that means there's a lot of data that has to be processed simply from a technical point of view. Anything outside of the Hack/Slash + buttons for spells/abilities means the player may have to deal with a ton of data, if you're talking about adding in combos combined with group dynamics, and this may exclude a very large percentage of the gaming populace. MMOGs appeal to a lot of people because of their simplicity. Many many people play World of Warcraft who are not gamers, and enjoy it because it is easy for them to manage combat.
-Artificial Intelligence-
This is probably the area that needs the most work, and will make all other areas look better. That is to say, by improving the AI, you can make combat seem more fluid and dynamic. Not, auto-attack, ability 1, ability 2, ability 1, ability 2. Loot corpse. Creatures never adapt to a player, instead developers opt. to simply add various creatures with their own weaknesses/strengths towards the various classes in the game. This gives players a feeling of power in some instances and weaknesses in others.
Your problem here is balancing challenge and fun. If you want a 'smart' NPC it's pretty simple in an MMO.
if IsHealerPresent() then
TargetHealer();
Kill();
end
You'll have the smartest NPCs ever spawned in an MMO, and the fewest number of players ever. So, while I think this area needs the most work, you're going to have a real challenge in making the AI, smart...but not captain obvious.
-Strategic Demands-
Your real problem here is people. If you want strategy. Then people have to be willing to follow the will of a select few. Good luck here. For the ones that will, they will be labeled as elitists and you will find them in the biggest 'raid guilds'. They will have the best gear in the game. Your other players will feel left out of the design decisions, and quit the game. If you need further proof of this, just look at an RTS (Real Time Strategy) game. How does the game function? Do several people control an army? No, it's a single individual player controlling hundreds of units, and factories. People tend to dislike being told what to do, and so a lot of people are going to dislike playing a game where all they are doing is following orders.
-Ethical Choices-
Players will make the choices that gets them the most gear, best gear, or most money. They will care not for being good, or bad. They play the game, most of the time to be 'The Best', and will do whatever it takes. If you're going to punish a player for a choice you gave them, they will not be your biggest fan.
I mean, of all the people that played Oblivion, how many people DIDN'T join the black hand (assassin's guild) because they didn't want to be 'Evil'.
--
Changed my default to Plain Old Text
Hes got some massive hurdles ahead of him and anyone that attempts these things. One of which is, people. -Improving Combat- It's an MMOG, and that means there's a lot of data that has to be processed simply from a technical point of view. Anything outside of the Hack/Slash + buttons for spells/abilities means the player may have to deal with a ton of data, if you're talking about adding in combos combined with group dynamics, and this may exclude a very large percentage of the gaming populace. MMOGs appeal to a lot of people because of their simplicity. Many many people play World of Warcraft who are not gamers, and enjoy it because it is easy for them to manage combat. -Artificial Intelligence- This is probably the area that needs the most work, and will make all other areas look better. That is to say, by improving the AI, you can make combat seem more fluid and dynamic. Not, auto-attack, ability 1, ability 2, ability 1, ability 2. Loot corpse. Creatures never adapt to a player, instead developers opt. to simply add various creatures with their own weaknesses/strengths towards the various classes in the game. This gives players a feeling of power in some instances and weaknesses in others. Your problem here is balancing challenge and fun. If you want a 'smart' NPC it's pretty simple in an MMO. if IsHealerPresent() then TargetHealer(); Kill(); end You'll have the smartest NPCs ever spawned in an MMO, and the fewest number of players ever. So, while I think this area needs the most work, you're going to have a real challenge in making the AI, smart...but not captain obvious. -Strategic Demands- Your real problem here is people. If you want strategy. Then people have to be willing to follow the will of a select few. Good luck here. For the ones that will, they will be labeled as elitists and you will find them in the biggest 'raid guilds'. They will have the best gear in the game. Your other players will feel left out of the design decisions, and quit the game. If you need further proof of this, just look at an RTS (Real Time Strategy) game. How does the game function? Do several people control an army? No, it's a single individual player controlling hundreds of units, and factories. People tend to dislike being told what to do, and so a lot of people are going to dislike playing a game where all they are doing is following orders. -Ethical Choices- Players will make the choices that gets them the most gear, best gear, or most money. They will care not for being good, or bad. They play the game, most of the time to be 'The Best', and will do whatever it takes. If you're going to punish a player for a choice you gave them, they will not be your biggest fan. I mean, of all the people that played Oblivion, how many people DIDN'T join the black hand (assassin's guild) because they didn't want to be 'Evil'.
Because we automatically subtract 4.1 for being on Windows?
Because they aren't the same. A franchise Apple store says, "Hi, I'm a Mac...err Apple store." These stores have, and will always be dedicated to selling one brand. However, when you take a general store and make a secret agreement to only stock Apple gear. Then it's a Mac of a different color. Because now customers don't know it's actually an Apple store, and now these poor customers are being forced to buy Apple's because that's all they see.
You may say, "but why don't they just go online and buy something else", well that's all well and good...but most people don't do that. They go into their favorite retail stores, like, best buy, look around, find something they like and buy it. Especially when it's a component like Intel, you think people care if they get an Intel or AMD? No, they just want it to work and be cheap. But, if that store only sells computers with Intel chips, then AMD gets squeezed out of the market, even if their product is superior.
Part of having a free market is that the CONSUMER is the one that gets to make the choice. That is, per your example, Apple were extremely popular amongst the consumers, then stores would stock more apple equipment to meet the demand made by the consumers. However, if per your example, Apple offers kickbacks to the store to only stock their equipment so that consumers are forced to purchase the Apple brand, then it is no longer a free market where the consumer makes the decision on what products will succeed. This is BAD. And yes, there is something legally wrong with two independent companies agreeing to divide up a geographic area to only allow a certain product to be purchased there. The difference between this and a partnership though from my point of view, is simply scale. It's a thin line to walk, but when a single store or a few stores control nearly all of a particular market of items, then those stores might be breaking the anti-trust laws that have been put in place if they agree with another company to only allow product X to be sold in their stores.
And while for whatever reason you may think this is good in the short term, it extinguishes new competition from rising to the surface to compete on an even playing field. Thus leading to the end or at the very least, the slowing with which new ideas, new products, new widgets make it to the market for you to buy.
All anti-trust laws are in place to keep YOU safe, so that YOU get to decide if you want to buy Intel or AMD...or Sun.
Just have rainbows shoot out of someones neck when they are decapitated.
Microsoft does support Home brewing 360 games. The XNA framework, and their game creator club has really opened up new doors for home brew developers. I mean, for a company to do more than releasing a thin wrapper on OpenGL is really cool. Yeah...they charge the creators a $100 yearly fee to use their service, but you get access to a huge amount of guides and art content for your games to go along with whatever you create. Which, being a hobbyist game developer is a real killer for a project. Because most programmers are not artists.
The only thing I wish MS would do differently is make it so people outside of the game creators club could play your games. If they did that, it would be very, very cool. (oh and hurried up and added XBox Live support to XNA for everyone and not just specially recognized games).
Nope, that's what made the transporter so magical. You Cut. You don't Copy Paste Delete.
Wasn't the whole point of the transporter to move matter, and the state of matter? This article says they want to sent the state of matter without sending the matter.
I feel if someone tried to implement this as a transporter they would end up with a remote cloning station, like the device from The Prestige. Useful, but I think this is like saying a Fax machine moves us closer to a Star Trek transporter.
Give me a call when someone develops the Heisenberg Compensator.
What do you do with all the millions of batteries after they no longer hold a charge?
There already is a place to dump it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain/ But it's never going to open as long as people continue to believe Nuclear energy is some kind of demonic source of power.
Does this officially mean we have a device to move planets?
Don't stop him, hes on a roll!! psst: it was a quote from Animal House
At least the Start button will finally make a lot more sense.
This is obviously a scout sent by the creature.
Awaken Godzilla and pals, we must defend Tokyo from the giant squid monster!
This just in.
Nintendo is using their wiimote technology to determine when the wiimote flies from the users hand, and will now deploy an airbag before striking your HDTV.
Please return your wiimote for the new version with the wiirbag.
Even Duke Nukem came out of hiding to answer a few questions.
Duke Nukem hides from no man or manpig, he just got tired of kicking ass without bubble gum and went to pick some up when he ran into the interviewers.
The Tao project is working on porting XNA for the The Mono project (which is a port of .Net). So theoretically, you could write it in XNA, and run mono on the PS3/Linux and bring any XNA game to the PS3/Linux. At some point in the future. Check it out.
http://www.taoframework.com/Mono.Xna
No. To everything.
XNA is an input and graphics interface wrapper, like Direct X but sits 1 tier higher. It also provides some objects to store typical things every game engine designer has to write for a new game engine so that you don't need to reinvent the wheel. It is NOT a template for 2D games. XNA is NOT a game engine. There is NO restriction on art content. You can include whatever models and textures you want. It's even a piece of cake to include vector and pixel shaders.
In fact, the demo game provided with XNA is a 3D game. Styled like the old spacewars games. 3D and 2D are both easily doable on XNA. Why you may be seeing more 2D than 3D is simple. Indie game developers are not often artists, and it is far simpler to create a 45x45 animated gif of a player, than it is a 2 million polygon, parallax and normal mapped, skeletal player model. Not that 3D art needs to be nearly that complex...but in a 2D world, people don't expect the things they have become accustomed to after all the triple-A game titles, with the budget of a small Hollywood movie.
If you indeed did "look into it" you saw a few screenshots and derived your judgment solely from that.
What about vehicles? Is there a Pope Mobile?
But what will? brb, bible study. afk, crusade. brb, bathroom. brb, confession.