While he puts the smack down on apps that require frequent changes between the mouse and the keyboard, I've had a pretty good solution to that one for a while now. I broke my right hand (my mouse hand) about 3 years ago, forcing me to have it in a cast for 13 weeks cause of the stupid pins they had to put in it. Well, that forced me to learn to type one & mouse one handed. After I got my right hand back in working shape, I then had a very high one-handed typing speed, and can keep my hand on the mouse for mouse operations, with out having to switch at all. Normally this is for MMI development packages, but, also applies to some programing cases, and to some other things like AutoCAD.
Someone else mentioned that they don't belive in that 'zoned feeling'. You may not be a programmer then, or at very minimum, you've never been one of those people who's initals are at the top of the score board at the arcades. In that environment, being 'in the zone' isn't just an option, it's almost the only way to be numero uno on 'em.
I still get that feeling, however, setting and programing, and even more so, setting and playing something like Quake2 or Unreal Tournament. He makes a very good case about layout of the keyboard affecting the ability to get 'in the zone' - any first person shooter I play gets the keyboard portion of the mappings changed completely, so that I don't think about the keys anymore. I'm just at one with the game (and slaughtering people left and right.) Over all, keyboard isn't the greatest interface, but, the ability to remap applications to get that same 'effiency' I get in UT and Q2 would be awsome, and help capture that 'zoned' feeling much easier!
One person already commented that this was just a way for them to ask for help. So? This looks like the perfect way to do it! This isn't turning Unreal Tournament into an Open Source style project, but instead, allows the people who enjoy the game the most to make sure it runs perfectly smooth on thier hardware. Granted - there's only a small part of the system that's GPL'd. For those people who will eventually whine that the whole thing should be GPL'd - it's more open than you think alread if you haven't checked out the game closely. Most objects within the game are scripted, and allow very easy access to most objects. It's not designed to be replaced, of course, but allows for people to extend the game further using Unreal script. But over all - this looks like a great way for game companies to do things! Why? Well, the get the benefit of everyone who wants to see the game become more than it was at release time doing some tweaking on it. Just enough of it isn't open to prying eyes so that you can't just copy what they have, slap a new lable on it, and call it thiers. They can still make money, which means they can afford to bring us another great game later. Internally, all the scripting is open to editing that people who want to can add new stuff. To me, it sounds like a very winwin relationship, and profitable at that! For those who wonder if gamers can code - yep. Not saying all of them are great, but, there's already been some seriously kick butt 'Mutators' (small script extensions to the game) written for UT even before it hit the shelves thanks to the gamers who were fans of Unreal!) For those who haven't checked it out, go hit http://www.PlanetUnreal.com/Mutation and check out the 'Giants!' and 'FatBoy' mutators that were written by fans of the game!
Books are horrid media? Huh? Lets see... I don't think the next Stephen King book is going to come out in web page format. Web pages suck when you are on a plane, unless you have downloaded the pages ahead of time onto your laptop. It's hard to read a web page in bed, unless you want to use a wireless modem or wireless ethernet card in your laptop. It's hard to hand a non-net user or PHB a copy of a web page containing all of ERS's essays and works, unless you really want to print it all out. It's hard to curl up with a good web page on a big ol' comfy chair. It's hard to give someone a favorite web page for thier birthday. A web page can be edited for content at any moment - a book cannot. While at first that sounds like a disadvantage, for people who study thier history, they know how important a non-changeable record of events can be! Staring at a screen for upteen hours while you try and read book online would suck. Bad enough I live in front of the screen while programming at work and home, but, to be forced to read everything from a screen would suck. I could go on further. Both have thier uses. As for your comment about him being on crack - think again. Unless you are one of those people who never have lapes of memory, and don't spend a great deal of time assimilating information, you'd know that sometimes the source of information can blur - the content is remembered, the media was forgotten. And ya know - asking moderators to mark something up or down is just dumb. Think about that for a minute - they base things on thier feeling of the post, not the pleading at the end. So moderators - mark this post up!
What's wrong with Open Source style development becomming commercialized? For quite a few products, it's a sensible move for the most part (depending on your choice of license), so I don't see any problems there. Corporate support of Open Source style development is the shot in the arm that many projects need - it allows people who worked on a project as a hobby to work on the same project as a job, something akin to being paid to do what you loved to do in the first place! As for the people behind the source becoming interested in making money, either from the work that they have done on Open Source style projects, or on projects independant of Open Source projects (IE - having a real job, or building a new company) - So? Most of them will continue to contribute as they have time for doing so, just like they do now. And the desire to have a decent life and not spend all of thier time struggling just to pay the bills isn't bad - nor is actually accomplishing the goal. As for the increased number of followers of the Open Source style development - I can only view that as a good thing. Yeah, new lamers come along into the scene (*SIGH*), but, new coders come along with that. More people are now working on projects. The people who did all the original work on Open Source style projects are getting credit and recognition for thier efforts. I can't see any of this as bad, and none of it seems like a corrupting influence. I'm still not sure what the point of this article was, to be honest. Was it to point out the personality of these people involved in Open Source style projects? Was it to point out that many of them are moving on and doing something different with thier lives? Was it to point out the obvious, that Open Source style development is getting a larger and larger following? I read it twice, just to make sure, and it's a very all over the road type of piece, IMHO, that seems to not attempt to address a single issue, but instead, just rambles. Next time, pick an area, and stick with it. (Yeah, you can moderate me down for that comment... but read the article again, and realize it's true.)
To me, it's pretty nice to see this happen! For some reason, PHB's don't like to buy into a web page as a source of information, unless it's something like WSJ online! But, when it comes to dead trees versions, they have a tendancy to take it more as 'truth' than finding a copy of ESR's essays online at a Linux site. Everyone should buy a copy of this book for Christmas - and give it to the local PHB. Of course, the problem is still to get them to read it, rather than having it on thier shelf as part of the most current wave of 'in vouge' management books. While ESR and his essays are not perfect, TC&TB is excellent. And personally - I'm going to get myself one for my bookshelf. Not particularly for reference or anything, but instead, so those who enter my office can tell what I support.
I kinda disagree with that sentment. It's pretty hard to go from having a good game idea to the final stage of putting the box on the shelf to buy. Programming is the hardest stage - the second hardest is finding someone willing to take the risk, buy the rights, and distribute your work of art. The development cycle on most games if this type is currently 18 months (of course, the first Unreal was 5+ YEARS. Eeks!) That's not just one guy working on it at night (which is what I do) for 18 months. That's 5 or 6 guys (or even larger teams) working thier tails off for 18 months, and towards the end, working ungodly hours to make it all come together. Someone has to pay for that - most people can't just fork down that much cash, and pay thier own paycheck along with a whole teams paychecks. That's where companies like GT Interactive come in. They sign a contract, pay thier wages, etc. When the game is done and ready to go, GT takes the box from there, and runs with it. The downside is, from time to time, companies like GT screw you. That's pretty much what happened with Epic here, I think. They obviously were ready for a Linux version - and GT said no. Epic made thier effor, but, GT killed the idea. Someone also mentioned Epic being spineless because they didn't fight it. Considering the product went gold (burned to the master CD, basically) only a short time ago, if they got into a pissing match over the Linux version shipping or not, thing would get even worse. GT holds the cards when it comes to how it ships. Once Epic signed that contract, way back, with GT to make UT become a real product, and GT passed them the cash to get things going, it was all out of thier hands in many ways.
A couple of people who have posted on here so far said that they wouldn't buy UT because GT won't be shipping the Linux version in the box. Well, think a moment - Epic Megagames (UT's authors) didn't make the decision. GT made the decision. Epic, on the other hand, went through a lot of effor to make sure the Linux port existed, was up to par, etc. They did thier bit for the OS revolution here - GT dropped the ball. I'm still buying UT on Monday when it hits the shelves - I support Epic. However, I'm going to be following my purchase up with an email to GT, and to Infogrames to point out how much of a mistake this sort of thinking is, based on my feelings as a customer when it comes to Linux support. Not to talk bad about them but, this *IS* GT we are talking about. They've managed to have thier hands on some seriously good sellers (Unreal, Deer Hunter (*SIGH* A chart topper when it comes to sales. Go fig.) - and managed to still have serious problems financially (strong sales, and still big losses? Wow.) I'm hoping Infogrames becoming majority shareholder in GT might turn things arround. Anyway - write letters to explain how you, as a Linux user, feel about thier decision. Don't hurt Epic's pocketbook just cause the twits above them screwed it up for them.
For me, it's incredibly rare to see a BDOS on my NT server. Last time I saw one it was because a piece of hardware went kaput. 2 years ago, same thing happened - a piece of hardware went kaput (in particular - the system harddrive died!) For some reason, mine doesn't have much problem - but then again, it's main function in life is email server and file server. It does serve web pages too, but, it does't get many hits (and isn't supposed to!) It's a Dual PPro - I dread the day I move to bigger hardware - I figure whatever magic that's made this one so stable will be gone!
If what they propose is really the structure of the universe (ok, a multiverse I guess) then conservation of energy would apply across all of the various universes - not just to a single universe. In the way that they propose this, you are right. There are some serious problems with how things would end up interacting with each other. Of course there could be more too it - what if massive gravity fields automatically extend a massive object (a star, for instance) across multiple dimensions? The theory leaves a lot of unanswered questions, and for every answer, there's an entirely new set of questions to be asked.
That will change over time...
on
New ATi 3D Chip
·
· Score: 1
I think that's a bit of a temporary situation, really. Right now, almost all the first person shooters are competing for 'wow factor' in the area of visuals. Some of them do include some cool features and all, but, all in all they are the same game with beefed up graphics. However - there are companies that do currently produce games that make use of 3D hardware that aren't just the same FPS over and over. Dungeon Keeper 1 & 2 is a good example. So is the upcomming 'God Sim' Black & White (something I am REALLY waiting for!). There's new flight sims making good use of the hardware, Bullfrog's expansion of the Theme Park series, RTS games, etc., etc., etc. I also think you should look back in the past a little more about those 'orginal' ideas - for each original game there were a dozen that came right after it that tried to do the same game, but better. Looking back even futher, look in the arcades at things like Galaga, Galaxians, and the tons of other games that were just like them. For now there isn't a whole lot of innovation, but there is some. But, as the FPS market gets more and more glutted, and becomes less viable for new developers looking for a part of the action, 3D hardware will get pushed in other directions instead. It's a cycle that happens all the time, this particular one being not very different from the rest of the game cycles that have occured before it.
Re:New Graphics Card from Me, Inc.
on
New ATi 3D Chip
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, but I'm sure it's going to be obsolete next year, just like the rest of the graphics hard right?;-) Plus, is there really a market for something like this? I mean, isn't this new generation of cards more than enough power for any game or application that end users could possibly want to run in the first place?
Re:Ummm... I meant to write "VooDoo"
on
New ATi 3D Chip
·
· Score: 1
Sure it was... of course, there are some people who would swear by your typo!
The only thing I disagree with is I think anything polygon based will eventually be a dead end also, and will start yet another generation of more 'organically' styled displays.
Got quite a long ways before that happens, though - think of the amount of information nessisary for a 15" x 15" x 15" display that produces true 3D holographic display!
Of course, the next step beyond that would be something that produces not only 3D, but 'solid' displays that can be touched, ala Holodeck concept. Of course - better be prepared to actually duck that rail gun shot!
Slashdot Mirror
While he puts the smack down on apps that require frequent changes between the mouse and the keyboard, I've had a pretty good solution to that one for a while now. I broke my right hand (my mouse hand) about 3 years ago, forcing me to have it in a cast for 13 weeks cause of the stupid pins they had to put in it. Well, that forced me to learn to type one & mouse one handed. After I got my right hand back in working shape, I then had a very high one-handed typing speed, and can keep my hand on the mouse for mouse operations, with out having to switch at all. Normally this is for MMI development packages, but, also applies to some programing cases, and to some other things like AutoCAD.
Someone else mentioned that they don't belive in that 'zoned feeling'. You may not be a programmer then, or at very minimum, you've never been one of those people who's initals are at the top of the score board at the arcades. In that environment, being 'in the zone' isn't just an option, it's almost the only way to be numero uno on 'em.
I still get that feeling, however, setting and programing, and even more so, setting and playing something like Quake2 or Unreal Tournament. He makes a very good case about layout of the keyboard affecting the ability to get 'in the zone' - any first person shooter I play gets the keyboard portion of the mappings changed completely, so that I don't think about the keys anymore. I'm just at one with the game (and slaughtering people left and right.) Over all, keyboard isn't the greatest interface, but, the ability to remap applications to get that same 'effiency' I get in UT and Q2 would be awsome, and help capture that 'zoned' feeling much easier!
One person already commented that this was just a way for them to ask for help. So? This looks like the perfect way to do it! This isn't turning Unreal Tournament into an Open Source style project, but instead, allows the people who enjoy the game the most to make sure it runs perfectly smooth on thier hardware. Granted - there's only a small part of the system that's GPL'd. For those people who will eventually whine that the whole thing should be GPL'd - it's more open than you think alread if you haven't checked out the game closely. Most objects within the game are scripted, and allow very easy access to most objects. It's not designed to be replaced, of course, but allows for people to extend the game further using Unreal script. But over all - this looks like a great way for game companies to do things! Why? Well, the get the benefit of everyone who wants to see the game become more than it was at release time doing some tweaking on it. Just enough of it isn't open to prying eyes so that you can't just copy what they have, slap a new lable on it, and call it thiers. They can still make money, which means they can afford to bring us another great game later. Internally, all the scripting is open to editing that people who want to can add new stuff. To me, it sounds like a very winwin relationship, and profitable at that! For those who wonder if gamers can code - yep. Not saying all of them are great, but, there's already been some seriously kick butt 'Mutators' (small script extensions to the game) written for UT even before it hit the shelves thanks to the gamers who were fans of Unreal!) For those who haven't checked it out, go hit http://www.PlanetUnreal.com/Mutation and check out the 'Giants!' and 'FatBoy' mutators that were written by fans of the game!
Books are horrid media? Huh? Lets see... I don't think the next Stephen King book is going to come out in web page format. Web pages suck when you are on a plane, unless you have downloaded the pages ahead of time onto your laptop. It's hard to read a web page in bed, unless you want to use a wireless modem or wireless ethernet card in your laptop. It's hard to hand a non-net user or PHB a copy of a web page containing all of ERS's essays and works, unless you really want to print it all out. It's hard to curl up with a good web page on a big ol' comfy chair. It's hard to give someone a favorite web page for thier birthday. A web page can be edited for content at any moment - a book cannot. While at first that sounds like a disadvantage, for people who study thier history, they know how important a non-changeable record of events can be! Staring at a screen for upteen hours while you try and read book online would suck. Bad enough I live in front of the screen while programming at work and home, but, to be forced to read everything from a screen would suck. I could go on further. Both have thier uses. As for your comment about him being on crack - think again. Unless you are one of those people who never have lapes of memory, and don't spend a great deal of time assimilating information, you'd know that sometimes the source of information can blur - the content is remembered, the media was forgotten. And ya know - asking moderators to mark something up or down is just dumb. Think about that for a minute - they base things on thier feeling of the post, not the pleading at the end. So moderators - mark this post up!
What's wrong with Open Source style development becomming commercialized? For quite a few products, it's a sensible move for the most part (depending on your choice of license), so I don't see any problems there. Corporate support of Open Source style development is the shot in the arm that many projects need - it allows people who worked on a project as a hobby to work on the same project as a job, something akin to being paid to do what you loved to do in the first place! As for the people behind the source becoming interested in making money, either from the work that they have done on Open Source style projects, or on projects independant of Open Source projects (IE - having a real job, or building a new company) - So? Most of them will continue to contribute as they have time for doing so, just like they do now. And the desire to have a decent life and not spend all of thier time struggling just to pay the bills isn't bad - nor is actually accomplishing the goal. As for the increased number of followers of the Open Source style development - I can only view that as a good thing. Yeah, new lamers come along into the scene (*SIGH*), but, new coders come along with that. More people are now working on projects. The people who did all the original work on Open Source style projects are getting credit and recognition for thier efforts. I can't see any of this as bad, and none of it seems like a corrupting influence. I'm still not sure what the point of this article was, to be honest. Was it to point out the personality of these people involved in Open Source style projects? Was it to point out that many of them are moving on and doing something different with thier lives? Was it to point out the obvious, that Open Source style development is getting a larger and larger following? I read it twice, just to make sure, and it's a very all over the road type of piece, IMHO, that seems to not attempt to address a single issue, but instead, just rambles. Next time, pick an area, and stick with it. (Yeah, you can moderate me down for that comment... but read the article again, and realize it's true.)
To me, it's pretty nice to see this happen! For some reason, PHB's don't like to buy into a web page as a source of information, unless it's something like WSJ online!
But, when it comes to dead trees versions, they have a tendancy to take it more as 'truth' than finding a copy of ESR's essays online at a Linux site. Everyone should buy a copy of this book for Christmas - and give it to the local PHB. Of course, the problem is still to get them to read it, rather than having it on thier shelf as part of the most current wave of 'in vouge' management books. While ESR and his essays are not perfect, TC&TB is excellent.
And personally - I'm going to get myself one for my bookshelf. Not particularly for reference or anything, but instead, so those who enter my office can tell what I support.
I kinda disagree with that sentment. It's pretty hard to go from having a good game idea to the final stage of putting the box on the shelf to buy. Programming is the hardest stage - the second hardest is finding someone willing to take the risk, buy the rights, and distribute your work of art. The development cycle on most games if this type is currently 18 months (of course, the first Unreal was 5+ YEARS. Eeks!) That's not just one guy working on it at night (which is what I do) for 18 months. That's 5 or 6 guys (or even larger teams) working thier tails off for 18 months, and towards the end, working ungodly hours to make it all come together. Someone has to pay for that - most people can't just fork down that much cash, and pay thier own paycheck along with a whole teams paychecks. That's where companies like GT Interactive come in. They sign a contract, pay thier wages, etc. When the game is done and ready to go, GT takes the box from there, and runs with it. The downside is, from time to time, companies like GT screw you. That's pretty much what happened with Epic here, I think. They obviously were ready for a Linux version - and GT said no. Epic made thier effor, but, GT killed the idea. Someone also mentioned Epic being spineless because they didn't fight it. Considering the product went gold (burned to the master CD, basically) only a short time ago, if they got into a pissing match over the Linux version shipping or not, thing would get even worse. GT holds the cards when it comes to how it ships. Once Epic signed that contract, way back, with GT to make UT become a real product, and GT passed them the cash to get things going, it was all out of thier hands in many ways.
A couple of people who have posted on here so far said that they wouldn't buy UT because GT won't be shipping the Linux version in the box. Well, think a moment - Epic Megagames (UT's authors) didn't make the decision. GT made the decision. Epic, on the other hand, went through a lot of effor to make sure the Linux port existed, was up to par, etc. They did thier bit for the OS revolution here - GT dropped the ball. I'm still buying UT on Monday when it hits the shelves - I support Epic. However, I'm going to be following my purchase up with an email to GT, and to Infogrames to point out how much of a mistake this sort of thinking is, based on my feelings as a customer when it comes to Linux support. Not to talk bad about them but, this *IS* GT we are talking about. They've managed to have thier hands on some seriously good sellers (Unreal, Deer Hunter (*SIGH* A chart topper when it comes to sales. Go fig.) - and managed to still have serious problems financially (strong sales, and still big losses? Wow.) I'm hoping Infogrames becoming majority shareholder in GT might turn things arround. Anyway - write letters to explain how you, as a Linux user, feel about thier decision. Don't hurt Epic's pocketbook just cause the twits above them screwed it up for them.
For me, it's incredibly rare to see a BDOS on my NT server. Last time I saw one it was because a piece of hardware went kaput. 2 years ago, same thing happened - a piece of hardware went kaput (in particular - the system harddrive died!) For some reason, mine doesn't have much problem - but then again, it's main function in life is email server and file server. It does serve web pages too, but, it does't get many hits (and isn't supposed to!) It's a Dual PPro - I dread the day I move to bigger hardware - I figure whatever magic that's made this one so stable will be gone!
If what they propose is really the structure of the universe (ok, a multiverse I guess) then conservation of energy would apply across all of the various universes - not just to a single universe. In the way that they propose this, you are right. There are some serious problems with how things would end up interacting with each other. Of course there could be more too it - what if massive gravity fields automatically extend a massive object (a star, for instance) across multiple dimensions? The theory leaves a lot of unanswered questions, and for every answer, there's an entirely new set of questions to be asked.
I think that's a bit of a temporary situation, really. Right now, almost all the first person shooters are competing for 'wow factor' in the area of visuals. Some of them do include some cool features and all, but, all in all they are the same game with beefed up graphics. However - there are companies that do currently produce games that make use of 3D hardware that aren't just the same FPS over and over. Dungeon Keeper 1 & 2 is a good example. So is the upcomming 'God Sim' Black & White (something I am REALLY waiting for!). There's new flight sims making good use of the hardware, Bullfrog's expansion of the Theme Park series, RTS games, etc., etc., etc. I also think you should look back in the past a little more about those 'orginal' ideas - for each original game there were a dozen that came right after it that tried to do the same game, but better. Looking back even futher, look in the arcades at things like Galaga, Galaxians, and the tons of other games that were just like them. For now there isn't a whole lot of innovation, but there is some. But, as the FPS market gets more and more glutted, and becomes less viable for new developers looking for a part of the action, 3D hardware will get pushed in other directions instead. It's a cycle that happens all the time, this particular one being not very different from the rest of the game cycles that have occured before it.
Yeah, but I'm sure it's going to be obsolete next year, just like the rest of the graphics hard right? ;-) Plus, is there really a market for something like this? I mean, isn't this new generation of cards more than enough power for any game or application that end users could possibly want to run in the first place?
Sure it was... of course, there are some people who would swear by your typo!
The only thing I disagree with is I think anything polygon based will eventually be a dead end also, and will start yet another generation of more 'organically' styled displays.
Got quite a long ways before that happens, though - think of the amount of information nessisary for a 15" x 15" x 15" display that produces true 3D holographic display!
Of course, the next step beyond that would be something that produces not only 3D, but 'solid' displays that can be touched, ala Holodeck concept. Of course - better be prepared to actually duck that rail gun shot!