He got mentioned more than 50 times in the following debate, that's much more than just a question.
There's also the fact that had it been his blackberry or voicemail, there is potential for sensitive information to be leaked, something we don't have to worry about with Joe the Plumber.
I don't get it, first you guys complain that Obama came out of nowhere and we don't know anything about him, but then you complain that the media is biased and spending more time on Obama than McCain. You're never happy are you?
...since when did companies routinely invest in research and then give the results away for free, unless there was some other way to make money off it?
It is questionable if it is acceptable to do so if they are end-term on a horrific disease, due to the chance of recovery.
The girl in India thought that she was at the end-term of humanity with zero chance of recovery. According to what she knew, even your definition makes her suicide acceptable.
Somebody mentioned that development teams back then consisted of 3 people, whereas today it's often 30 or more. For the big budget games it can get into the 100s.
As for the rest of your post, while porting can be done efficiently, it often isn't, and things would be easier if nobody had to think about it in the first place. If Java became a viable language for high end games, perhaps things would be different.
First, most mainstream games were multi-platform, except for consoles where there was a lot of exclusives....Finally, as for your comment that "porting" is a waste of time, it really depends on your point of view. In a way, porting means you can reuse a lot of the same and make a full new product for another customer.
But if you don't have to port in the first place you have more time to spend on the game itself.
Second, if you compare the same game for the Amiga, the Atari ST, the C64 and the PC, you will realize that most used the full potential of each machine. The lowest common denominator thing is what happens now, because suits who want to squeeze every pennies out of anything basically took over the whole gaming industry.
You forgot to mention that utilizing the full potential of multiple systems today is much more difficult than it was when everything was 10 times less complicated.
Sure, for the company, it would have been better if everyone had the exact same computer (the same way it would be better for car parts maker if everyone had the exact same car), but during those time it was the consumer who was the king, not the shareholders.
If nobody installed or uninstalled programs from their computer once they bought it, just as few people modify the components in their cars, then your analogy would hold up. Since that's not the case, and people with different computers expect to be able to use the same programs, having standards (read: monopolies) at certain levels benefits both the consumer and the companies at higher levels.
That is, of course, as long as the monopoly isn't being abused, and I still have to figure out how to fix that problem. Perhaps if a single open source distro of Linux was dominant we'd get somewhere, but branching off is inevitable in that scenario.
First off, you went off on a tangent completely unrelated to the point at hand. I'm not talking about the fact that computers had orders of magnitude less power than they do today, so the creativity, small development teams, and all that are completely unrelated. The only relevant thing you said was that games tended to focus on one platform, and I don't want to have to buy two or more computers just to have access to all the games being made.
Remember those times before the IBM PC became a standard? I don't since I'm only 17, but from what I hear, it sucked. Programs had to be written for 50 different instruction sets and could only really make use of the lowest common denominator. If linux or macs suddenly became popular among gamers, games would start to suck when designers waste time porting and reporting their graphics engines and whatnot. Competition at the platform level is not going to improve things at the program level.
Perhaps it could drive all the operating systems to become much better, and then after a few years resettle on a new standard. But while that's happening all the games will suck, and I don't want to go through college while the industry is in such a state.
To clarify, I'm not saying we have to stick with Windows, but I do think there should be a standard OS. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to suddenly change something like that.
At some point data has to enter my house, be it through a cable buried in US territory, or via radio waves traveling through US airspace, so no matter how much long range wireless equipment and satellites google gets their hands on, the government still has the power to regulate (to some extent) what I get to see as long as I'm living in the country. I'm not saying it's a good thing, it's just a fact.
The pack will feature NetDevil's Warmonger (pictured), a complete action game allowing players to use destructive powers to destroy walls, floors, and whole buildings to open new paths or close existing ones.
It is outrageous for them to waste money combing through blogs to shut up complaints.
You make it sound like they're killing these people. They aren't wasting their money on ads, they're improving their image by providing better service, which is definitely something they're allowed to do.
Some of us put things like customer service and social responsibility above profit.
I'll give you social responsibility, but the majority of the time, companies only care about customer service because it's good for business, meaning more profit. Only locally owned and operated stores frequently break that rule.
Some might say that social responsibility is only for good public image, but I have enough faith in humanity to assume that there's a large number of corporations run by good people.
Slashdot Mirror
All he did was ask a question.
He got mentioned more than 50 times in the following debate, that's much more than just a question. There's also the fact that had it been his blackberry or voicemail, there is potential for sensitive information to be leaked, something we don't have to worry about with Joe the Plumber.
10 million people play this game, that's about the same number of people who use linux, and we have a lot more articles about that floating around.
I don't get it, first you guys complain that Obama came out of nowhere and we don't know anything about him, but then you complain that the media is biased and spending more time on Obama than McCain. You're never happy are you?
Yeah, just the other day I tried to go to http://asdlfjkas/ and got redirected to google. It's time for a revolution!
That's right, find new ways to circumvent laws, instead of dealing with the actual problem.
...since when did companies routinely invest in research and then give the results away for free, unless there was some other way to make money off it?
Yeah, I was wondering about that. Maybe they thought the radiation could mess with some of their instruments?
Actually, throwing money at an organization that is being forced to make loads of budget cuts would solve their main problem.
It is questionable if it is acceptable to do so if they are end-term on a horrific disease, due to the chance of recovery.
The girl in India thought that she was at the end-term of humanity with zero chance of recovery. According to what she knew, even your definition makes her suicide acceptable.
1. It was a merger, not an outright purchase 2. The development teams are still completely independent
That's what they said about transistors.
Bit of mixed message though.
Anything to backup the claim of "10 times"?
Somebody mentioned that development teams back then consisted of 3 people, whereas today it's often 30 or more. For the big budget games it can get into the 100s. As for the rest of your post, while porting can be done efficiently, it often isn't, and things would be easier if nobody had to think about it in the first place. If Java became a viable language for high end games, perhaps things would be different.
First, most mainstream games were multi-platform, except for consoles where there was a lot of exclusives....Finally, as for your comment that "porting" is a waste of time, it really depends on your point of view. In a way, porting means you can reuse a lot of the same and make a full new product for another customer.
But if you don't have to port in the first place you have more time to spend on the game itself.
Second, if you compare the same game for the Amiga, the Atari ST, the C64 and the PC, you will realize that most used the full potential of each machine. The lowest common denominator thing is what happens now, because suits who want to squeeze every pennies out of anything basically took over the whole gaming industry.
You forgot to mention that utilizing the full potential of multiple systems today is much more difficult than it was when everything was 10 times less complicated.
Sure, for the company, it would have been better if everyone had the exact same computer (the same way it would be better for car parts maker if everyone had the exact same car), but during those time it was the consumer who was the king, not the shareholders.
If nobody installed or uninstalled programs from their computer once they bought it, just as few people modify the components in their cars, then your analogy would hold up. Since that's not the case, and people with different computers expect to be able to use the same programs, having standards (read: monopolies) at certain levels benefits both the consumer and the companies at higher levels.
That is, of course, as long as the monopoly isn't being abused, and I still have to figure out how to fix that problem. Perhaps if a single open source distro of Linux was dominant we'd get somewhere, but branching off is inevitable in that scenario.
First off, you went off on a tangent completely unrelated to the point at hand. I'm not talking about the fact that computers had orders of magnitude less power than they do today, so the creativity, small development teams, and all that are completely unrelated. The only relevant thing you said was that games tended to focus on one platform, and I don't want to have to buy two or more computers just to have access to all the games being made.
Remember those times before the IBM PC became a standard? I don't since I'm only 17, but from what I hear, it sucked. Programs had to be written for 50 different instruction sets and could only really make use of the lowest common denominator. If linux or macs suddenly became popular among gamers, games would start to suck when designers waste time porting and reporting their graphics engines and whatnot. Competition at the platform level is not going to improve things at the program level.
Perhaps it could drive all the operating systems to become much better, and then after a few years resettle on a new standard. But while that's happening all the games will suck, and I don't want to go through college while the industry is in such a state.
To clarify, I'm not saying we have to stick with Windows, but I do think there should be a standard OS. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to suddenly change something like that.
At some point data has to enter my house, be it through a cable buried in US territory, or via radio waves traveling through US airspace, so no matter how much long range wireless equipment and satellites google gets their hands on, the government still has the power to regulate (to some extent) what I get to see as long as I'm living in the country. I'm not saying it's a good thing, it's just a fact.
Except they have to connect to a mainland internet company, through whom the government can regulate what data enters and leaves google navy.
I would be very, very surprised if that was any cheaper than just buying 2, one manufactured as a GPU, the other as a CPU.
The pack will feature NetDevil's Warmonger (pictured), a complete action game allowing players to use destructive powers to destroy walls, floors, and whole buildings to open new paths or close existing ones.
It is outrageous for them to waste money combing through blogs to shut up complaints.
You make it sound like they're killing these people. They aren't wasting their money on ads, they're improving their image by providing better service, which is definitely something they're allowed to do.
Some of us put things like customer service and social responsibility above profit.
I'll give you social responsibility, but the majority of the time, companies only care about customer service because it's good for business, meaning more profit. Only locally owned and operated stores frequently break that rule.
Some might say that social responsibility is only for good public image, but I have enough faith in humanity to assume that there's a large number of corporations run by good people.
Better than putting every two lines on the same line.
blizzard should sue that would be awesome
That's why I said test, not check. If they had used it and realized that they were having spyware issues, it would have aroused suspicion.