The meaning of all things is variable and should be. Though if society chose to label gaming under another term than sport. Like you know gaming... But when played competitively the duel meaning is fine and sport is fitting again.
I beat this game. And gave a truly random answer to my youtube watching friend. 1st time. It was not a common number. I think some peoples states of minds can be set. Or I'm just a genetically engineered mutant. But yeah... you can generate a random number if you let the universe help. Requires a bit of insanity though.
But is humanity as a whole random... what about your neighborhood, or the nation, now thats a question... how random is the universe... badum tish...
Well I will say that randomness lies in perception. Since the idea of random is a human construct. We have no external conscious reference for "random".
I would say my definition of random is: Sufficiently unpredictable by a model (analog or digital) or algorithm. And you are totally correct by that definition. People are hardly random. Most of the time... (cue creepy jaws music).
You probably could predict at least a post like this. But could you predict how it was assembled... no that is truly random =) Well you could predict that it would be assembled with letters, or electrons stored on a device and delivered by signals. But the way in which all those things are assembled. Pretty random, still nope. Probably because its based on a system with rules we all understand. Our definition of truly random than is bound by our understanding of things.
The wind is still moving and the windmill is still moving against it. Pressure still has not decreased. Apparently there is an equilibrium somewhere probably you could break it down to friction. At this point it cannot overcome resistance somewhere and stops accelerating.
*I know I said I would not posit theories, but I do not want to wait the time it takes to -AC this.
This is what I immediately thought. But than I read more comments about rocks... I like that perspective more. Since this thing is traveling in a straight line.
Thanks for helping to correct an erroneous belief I had of Bernoulli's principle. Not that he was wrong or anything just that the way in which it was taught to me.
After reading your article I can see were your coming from. I am not a lawyer but I would rule the shapes of the blocks in tetris to be "devices" in playing the game. I disagree with the ruling. But that doesn't invalidate your point. Tis sad in my opinion to see the laws used this way.
Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game.
You could copywrite a rule book defining those things. But that does not mean someone couldn't just get another author to write one and call the 'field' the 'playing square' instead. Particularly if the rules are sufficiently paraphrased I don't think there would be too much of an issue. Call it the "grid". Or even use things that can't be easily trademarked. There were quite some battles over these issues. And it was won in the favor of people reproducing games enough that TSR and then Wizards of the Coast came up with campaign settings and the D20 system instead of just a system. They made their real money off of Forgotten Realms. Or licensing that. Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Planescape, etc... and the characters within.
I suppose that depends on how you define gameplay.
It is possible to make a game with extremely simple gameplay, if that gameplay is polished and pleasant. With a good and complex narrative however. That is a different formula I think than you are imagining perhaps. I say that it can work. Even a bit of poor gameplay can be made up for by Narrative. I don't remember the Ultima series having amazing stat systems and RPG elements, they were just glossed over. However they were complex enough to metagame.
Increasingly complex gameplay does not add as much to a game beyond a point of marginal return. Narrative may however.
But adventure games. Star Trek 25th Anniversary for example. Extremely simple rules. The gameplay consists of exploring environments with left and right click and a few action buttons. But lots of narrative. A lot of dialog to explore, some for fluff and some for important clues. Although that particular example is an exception because you pretty much need to access the library computer and do some mathematical thinking to complete the game, making gameplay interesting again. Perhaps the best example off the top of my head might be the Longest Journey games which offer a lot of depth and context but the puzzles were simple and straight forward. Even some bad gameplay such as fetch quests.
By the way I hated fighting things in the Ultima games. I couldn't understand the stats or items. But I managed to play through it as a kid anyway. Because I had to know what happend to the Avatar and his pals and Britannia.
Sorry to provide a counterpoint to your good post. I generally agree that gameplay is critical.
Well if you consider the atomic energy stored in all the air molecules being moved by the wind... imagine a few grams of air being moved 20 ft. About as much as a twinkie... it could level the entire City of New York.
I posit no theories just humor. And interest in seeing what slashdot can muster here... Remember kids, we have not figured EVERYTHING out about the universe just yet.
Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form.
Subject: Re: calories burned by thinking Answered By: omnivorous-ga on 31 Jul 2004 04:14 PDT
Nordie2 --
In 1986, researchers isolated both the "at rest" and "active" consumption of calories in the brain. Since then we've learned quite a bit about brain activities, particularly as PET scans have been applied to monitor glucose consumption in the brain.
As a result, we know lots of things, including that: * energy consumption in the brain is related to learning. In other words, once you've learned something (like mastering that chess game), the energy consumption goes down.
* energy consumption in the brain is more than two times higher for children under age 4. This is no surprise because they are learning and building brain structure. The brain's energy consumption levels around age 10 to 12.
* IQ can effect energy consumption. After learning a task, lower IQ people have to exert more energy to complete a task than high IQ people who have learned the same task.
ENERGY CONSUMPTION =====================
Energy consumption by the brain is 230-247 calories, based on 17 calories/gram and human brain sizes of 1,350-1,450 grams. During periods of peak performance, adults increase that energy consumption by up to 50%, according to psychology lecturer Mark Moss, of the University of Northumbria.
While this may not seem an extraordinary amount of energy, the brain may use 30% of a body's total energy, while being only 2?3% of total body mass.
Moss cites the original 1986 work of Siebert, Gessner, and Klasser on the energy supply of the central nervous system in his thesis. The thesis, particularly the chapter 1 introduction, is a good and not overly technical discussion of what we know about brain activity, including descriptions of how PET scans are being used to monitor glucose consumption in the brain. I've linked the first chapter:
Though there have been a few built around the aforementioned franchises engines, but they aren't in long term mental storage for me;p Wikipedia has a few lists...
Your correct. They were the last major triple A title I played that used an in house engine. And I have a love hate with it and the Elder Scrolls Construction set. But I thought it was worthy of praise.
There hasn't been a triple aaa title released that didn't have it's own in house engine developers that I know of...
**** ramble ramble ramble *** list some more triple A's with their own engines.
The monks I listened to which were native to the region. I'm not going to say India specifically (you are absolutely correct). Talked about how commoners or peasants would eat fish and other non-approved foods. Not sure what the other specifics were. Mostly seafood was the big gripe they had. But they said things like. It is ok for common man not speaking divine spiritual enlightenment to eat meat. That polluting their bodies would not hinder their lives because the food was more about cleansing the soul properly and being pure than providing fuel.
I really wish I could dig up the specifics because it had very good references to the specific culture. But it was an audio mp3 I downloaded from an international website talking about regional lifestyles and the choice to become a monk and the requirements.
I did not know this, but http://endless-space.amplitude-studios.com/ which is on par with a Civ game to some degree in depth. (or maybe even a bit better since it's further abstracted from reality) Is a really good Unity3d game.
Even nightmare bots that have all the aimbot data on you are able to be killed.
But people like Esports for the intellectual interaction between one or more players and the game. If you think winning consistently against skilled CTF'ers is easy. I say go play quake live in a pro clan. Heck get recruited first. To a real pro clan.
Though I wager IBM can make some pretty brutal AI. And even simplistic AI can overwhelm individual humans in swarms with ease (such that it is dumbed down to kindergarten level in most games on purpose).
Even the simple AI of Everquest was nerfed repeatedly from alpha, to beta, to expansion after expansion until it was meaningless. If you read about the tests the developers did though, they had a lot of fun. And at release the interaction between different AI's in the world made the game interesting and somewhat thought provoking. And EQ was a SIMPLE game.
I eagerly await that game with brutal AI that takes years of training and experimentation and a dedicated team to "game". Nothing beats real life yet though.
Another layer deep. The Buddhist monks live an extremely minimalistic and conservative lifestyle. And the diets they have would not work for most of the other people in the society. If your sitting around meditating and praying all day you are likely much more able to subsist on vegetable broth and whatever the common folk bring to you. That might have something to do with your 30% of India is vegetarian. I have listened to monks speak about their diets and the differences between theirs and the peoples of their countries. They are usually on starvation diets.
Slashdot Mirror
The meaning of all things is variable and should be. Though if society chose to label gaming under another term than sport. Like you know gaming... But when played competitively the duel meaning is fine and sport is fitting again.
Upwind. I have no idea how this thing works downwind =)
I beat this game. And gave a truly random answer to my youtube watching friend. 1st time. It was not a common number. I think some peoples states of minds can be set. Or I'm just a genetically engineered mutant. But yeah... you can generate a random number if you let the universe help. Requires a bit of insanity though.
But is humanity as a whole random... what about your neighborhood, or the nation, now thats a question... how random is the universe... badum tish...
Well I will say that randomness lies in perception. Since the idea of random is a human construct. We have no external conscious reference for "random".
I would say my definition of random is: Sufficiently unpredictable by a model (analog or digital) or algorithm. And you are totally correct by that definition. People are hardly random. Most of the time... (cue creepy jaws music).
You probably could predict at least a post like this. But could you predict how it was assembled... no that is truly random =) Well you could predict that it would be assembled with letters, or electrons stored on a device and delivered by signals. But the way in which all those things are assembled. Pretty random, still nope. Probably because its based on a system with rules we all understand. Our definition of truly random than is bound by our understanding of things.
The wind is still moving and the windmill is still moving against it. Pressure still has not decreased. Apparently there is an equilibrium somewhere probably you could break it down to friction. At this point it cannot overcome resistance somewhere and stops accelerating.
*I know I said I would not posit theories, but I do not want to wait the time it takes to -AC this.
I like rocks, sails, and sail-cars =) Thanks! (Because I will admit this explanation worked for me in understanding this)
This is what I immediately thought. But than I read more comments about rocks... I like that perspective more. Since this thing is traveling in a straight line.
Thanks for helping to correct an erroneous belief I had of Bernoulli's principle. Not that he was wrong or anything just that the way in which it was taught to me.
That was like reading a sweet and succulent treat to a mind such as mine. I love your website.
After reading your article I can see were your coming from. I am not a lawyer but I would rule the shapes of the blocks in tetris to be "devices" in playing the game. I disagree with the ruling. But that doesn't invalidate your point. Tis sad in my opinion to see the laws used this way.
Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game.
You could copywrite a rule book defining those things. But that does not mean someone couldn't just get another author to write one and call the 'field' the 'playing square' instead. Particularly if the rules are sufficiently paraphrased I don't think there would be too much of an issue. Call it the "grid". Or even use things that can't be easily trademarked. There were quite some battles over these issues. And it was won in the favor of people reproducing games enough that TSR and then Wizards of the Coast came up with campaign settings and the D20 system instead of just a system. They made their real money off of Forgotten Realms. Or licensing that. Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Planescape, etc... and the characters within.
I suppose that depends on how you define gameplay.
It is possible to make a game with extremely simple gameplay, if that gameplay is polished and pleasant. With a good and complex narrative however. That is a different formula I think than you are imagining perhaps. I say that it can work. Even a bit of poor gameplay can be made up for by Narrative. I don't remember the Ultima series having amazing stat systems and RPG elements, they were just glossed over. However they were complex enough to metagame.
Increasingly complex gameplay does not add as much to a game beyond a point of marginal return. Narrative may however.
But adventure games. Star Trek 25th Anniversary for example. Extremely simple rules. The gameplay consists of exploring environments with left and right click and a few action buttons. But lots of narrative. A lot of dialog to explore, some for fluff and some for important clues. Although that particular example is an exception because you pretty much need to access the library computer and do some mathematical thinking to complete the game, making gameplay interesting again. Perhaps the best example off the top of my head might be the Longest Journey games which offer a lot of depth and context but the puzzles were simple and straight forward. Even some bad gameplay such as fetch quests.
By the way I hated fighting things in the Ultima games. I couldn't understand the stats or items. But I managed to play through it as a kid anyway. Because I had to know what happend to the Avatar and his pals and Britannia.
Sorry to provide a counterpoint to your good post. I generally agree that gameplay is critical.
Well if you consider the atomic energy stored in all the air molecules being moved by the wind... imagine a few grams of air being moved 20 ft. About as much as a twinkie... it could level the entire City of New York.
I posit no theories just humor. And interest in seeing what slashdot can muster here... Remember kids, we have not figured EVERYTHING out about the universe just yet.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html
Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form.
Well, Unity does contain a lightmapping tools named 'Breast'...
FTFY
Subject: Re: calories burned by thinking
Answered By: omnivorous-ga on 31 Jul 2004 04:14 PDT
Nordie2 --
In 1986, researchers isolated both the "at rest" and "active"
consumption of calories in the brain. Since then we've learned quite
a bit about brain activities, particularly as PET scans have been
applied to monitor glucose consumption in the brain.
As a result, we know lots of things, including that:
* energy consumption in the brain is related to learning. In other
words, once you've learned something (like mastering that chess game),
the energy consumption goes down.
* energy consumption in the brain is more than two times higher for
children under age 4. This is no surprise because they are learning
and building brain structure. The brain's energy consumption levels
around age 10 to 12.
Wayne State University
"Brain Surges," (DiCresce, undated)
http://www.med.wayne.edu/wayne%20medicine/wm97/brain.htm
* IQ can effect energy consumption. After learning a task, lower IQ
people have to exert more energy to complete a task than high IQ
people who have learned the same task.
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
=====================
Energy consumption by the brain is 230-247 calories, based on 17
calories/gram and human brain sizes of 1,350-1,450 grams. During
periods of peak performance, adults increase that energy consumption
by up to 50%, according to psychology lecturer Mark Moss, of the
University of Northumbria.
While this may not seem an extraordinary amount of energy, the brain
may use 30% of a body's total energy, while being only 2?3% of total
body mass.
Moss cites the original 1986 work of Siebert, Gessner, and Klasser on
the energy supply of the central nervous system in his thesis. The
thesis, particularly the chapter 1 introduction, is a good and not
overly technical discussion of what we know about brain activity,
including descriptions of how PET scans are being used to monitor
glucose consumption in the brain. I've linked the first chapter:
University of Northumbria
"Oxygen Administration, Cognitive Performance and Physiological Responses,"
(Mark C. Moss, PhD Thesis 1999)
http://psychology.unn.ac.uk/mark/chapter1/chap1.htm
Google search strategy:
learning + "glucose consumption" + calories
"size of human brain"
Best regards,
Omnivorous-GA
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=381608
Cliffy B gets a call from Peter Alau to confirm the "Make Better Button" that's powering Gears of War 3..
Be careful what you wish for... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jace_Hall_Show#Season_3
It's out there...
Of you know games could require a dedicated entropy generator.... or server/client architecture for AI...
Though there have been a few built around the aforementioned franchises engines, but they aren't in long term mental storage for me ;p Wikipedia has a few lists...
Your correct. They were the last major triple A title I played that used an in house engine. And I have a love hate with it and the Elder Scrolls Construction set. But I thought it was worthy of praise.
There hasn't been a triple aaa title released that didn't have it's own in house engine developers that I know of...
**** ramble ramble ramble *** list some more triple A's with their own engines.
*seeking not speaking =/
The monks I listened to which were native to the region. I'm not going to say India specifically (you are absolutely correct). Talked about how commoners or peasants would eat fish and other non-approved foods. Not sure what the other specifics were. Mostly seafood was the big gripe they had. But they said things like. It is ok for common man not speaking divine spiritual enlightenment to eat meat. That polluting their bodies would not hinder their lives because the food was more about cleansing the soul properly and being pure than providing fuel.
I really wish I could dig up the specifics because it had very good references to the specific culture. But it was an audio mp3 I downloaded from an international website talking about regional lifestyles and the choice to become a monk and the requirements.
I did not know this, but http://endless-space.amplitude-studios.com/ which is on par with a Civ game to some degree in depth. (or maybe even a bit better since it's further abstracted from reality) Is a really good Unity3d game.
You missed on small point. Perception. Some people are better at it than others. And games that play on perception can be fun.
Even nightmare bots that have all the aimbot data on you are able to be killed.
But people like Esports for the intellectual interaction between one or more players and the game. If you think winning consistently against skilled CTF'ers is easy. I say go play quake live in a pro clan. Heck get recruited first. To a real pro clan.
Though I wager IBM can make some pretty brutal AI. And even simplistic AI can overwhelm individual humans in swarms with ease (such that it is dumbed down to kindergarten level in most games on purpose).
Even the simple AI of Everquest was nerfed repeatedly from alpha, to beta, to expansion after expansion until it was meaningless. If you read about the tests the developers did though, they had a lot of fun. And at release the interaction between different AI's in the world made the game interesting and somewhat thought provoking. And EQ was a SIMPLE game.
I eagerly await that game with brutal AI that takes years of training and experimentation and a dedicated team to "game". Nothing beats real life yet though.
Another layer deep. The Buddhist monks live an extremely minimalistic and conservative lifestyle. And the diets they have would not work for most of the other people in the society. If your sitting around meditating and praying all day you are likely much more able to subsist on vegetable broth and whatever the common folk bring to you. That might have something to do with your 30% of India is vegetarian. I have listened to monks speak about their diets and the differences between theirs and the peoples of their countries. They are usually on starvation diets.
A nursing mother would not be fed the same food.