Early emission of neutrinos prior to a supernova's detection by light is an explanation under the current model, but it is interesting that if this CERN experiment proves to have discovered a new FTL phenomenon in neutrinos, I wonder if that could change the explanation for neutrinos as an early warning detection system for super novas (i.e. could it be that the neutrinos are not being emitted early, but are being emitted at the same time as light and then arriving superluminally?)
So what I'm reading here is, "Star Wars actually has more realistic tech, and Star Trek is built on more fantasy epeen tech."
Star Wars blast shields are actually able to dissipate phaser energy; the star destroyers would eat the Enterprise up, as blast cannons can punch right through even the best variable modulation energy shields with ease, since that's a technology that was developed and discarded 25,000 years ago in the era of the Old Republic, most likely. Prove me wrong..... (Lesson here: this is how Cowboys and Indians work: "Bang, I shot you!" "No I shot you first! bang!")
Star Trek is about as "SF" as Star Wars, I hate to say it. They're both Space Opera. Star Trek just does a better job at making its technobabble sound vaguely relevant and scientific, while Star Wars technology is primarily fueled by Rule of Cool. Hyperspace or Subspace....Heisenberg Compensators or Hyperdrive Motivators....blasters or phasers....."Same difference, different Fantasy Space."
Interesting that they don't look at the data differently: this suggests to me, at least with RDR, that the game obviously had a lot of successful marketing, enough to get a much larger buy-in from gamers than just those who intended to play the game to completion. It also suggests that despite the critical acclaim for the game, it clearly wasn't as appealing to the vast majority of those who bought it. The data isn't saying, "most people don't want long games," but rather, "most people who bought this game did not find it worth their time to continue playing."
Also, the data appears to assume that a very long game like RDR is somehow going to be played in short order. So if only 10% of the player base for RDR finished it in the first 18 months, I wonder how many more people finish it in 36 months? Hell, I've been playing Fallout 3 at least once or twice a month for the last few years now and I'm only just beginning to reach saturation point for that game....and I still have unexplored areas and two DLC packs I've haven't seen! Plus, I own RDR, I fully expect I will finish it by 2014 or so. But if Rockstar expects me to rip through that game in two weeks or so, I hate to inform them, but I have: A: a life that demands my time, and B: I like my wild west in small, measurable doses of 2-4 hours tops. So I figure I will get to it when I get to it, and that will hopefully be sooner than later now that Fallout 3 is (finally) reaching saturation point for me!
You do realize that in a game like Mass Effect or RDR you're not going to find a few hundred people willing to play thespian to provide an interesting storyline and personalities, right? That the sort of experience these game offer is closer to reading a novel than running around playing cowboys and indians? Also, when one spends a long day at work talking to people all day, sometimes you just want to relax and enjoy yourself when you get home without engaging in the delightful mike chat of racist a-holes in CoD or Halo (both of which I enjoy as well, with the mike muted). I mean, seriously, when I get home and read a good book or watch a movie, I don't exactly like some idiot blathering on behind me....why do I want that in my games?
For an example of post apocalypse with some color that works quite well, I offer you Enslaved: Journey to the West.
That said, I am in total agreement with you: keep yer damn "colors" out of my Fallouts and Rages and Borderlands. And get off my damn lawn!
I am reasonably sure that that is exactly what they are looking for: the exertion of other universes on our own. An example of a known phenomenon that some have suggested might be an example of this is the "Great Attractor," although how widely regarded that hypothesis is among real astronomers is unknown to me (google gets a lot of odd hits on searching for "Great Attractor evidence of another universe.")
Given that molestation is statistically most likely to be caused by a known relation, it is clearly a logical to extend the ban to parents and relatives of the children as well. Teachers are probably statistically less likely then uncles and aunts to be molesting kids, after all, so at this point the only friends a child should safely have on facebook are total strangers, as they are the demographic statistically least likely to be threatening.
(Surely your concern about teachers was presented as facetious irony....it was, right? Right?)
I'll go out on a limb and suggest quality is not the issue; the games in question are generally very well regarded (Assassin's Creed, at least).
So if the pirates have simply rendered themselves invisible to Ubisoft, does this mean that they are continuing to harm legitimate users by giving game publishers the incorrect appearance of successful DRM? Put another way...the DRM appears to be working, so it will continue on, insuring that the legitimate player base will consist only of those willing to participate & pay money for the DRM scheme as presented, all while liberating the pirates to play away, invisible to Ubisoft's roaming Eye of Sauron?
There is no side here I can take. I'll continue to not buy and not pirate games with this sort of DRM, problem solved. I don't buy....company does not get my dollars; won't be noticed by them since this is not apparently the usual way to vote against bad behavior with publishers; I don't pirate, so I don't contribute to the root problem in the first place...but again, its purely for personal conscience, since apparently the norm is to pirate the hell out of everything and let the brain rationalize why later on.
Seiously, the only proper solution here is to boycott the game and NOT pirate it. period. Am I the only one who understands that this is the only reasonable solution? If I want Ubisoft or whomever to realize that they need to meet me halfway by not DRMing their games to death, then I also need to meet them halfway by demonstrating that I DO NOT PIRATE THEIR DAMNED GAMES.
I actually do want to play Assassins Creed 2, Driver: San Fran and whatever else they produce. But if they make DRM that is punishing to the legitimate user, the answer is not to run out and authenticate theri worries with piracy....the answer is to find a different publisher (and they are out there) that offers its games free of DRM, and support that publisher.
YMMV. I've gotten a great deal of mileage and enjoyment out of L4D and L4D2 but have found Killing Floor--while also fun and very much the same style of game--to be a bit less accessible and engaging over time.
In any case, I have to agree that the "director" feature in L4D makes for a more compelling and unpredictable experience while it still manages to insure that the game is both challenging and surprising at the same time. Definitely not a case of "modify the game to let the players win." Quite the opposite, often!
I think you misread the article. We're talking about Borders, not Barnes & Noble. Borders was the store that for years now refused to make me pay for the privilege of getting discounts, regularly sent me 30 and 40% off coupons and offered a relaxed environment that might feel pompous if you just rolled in from the stix but was otherwise as neutral and pleasant an environment as one could get without going straight to the local business brick and mortar shops.
Well, for what it's worth the introductory experience that the current trial account offers is the same deal, and all it does is limit certain forms of communication that are normally abused by spammers; actualy in-game chat with other live people still exists, but in certain channels (local, for example). Likewise, because of the leveling mechanic for guilds I can see why they restrict that feature as well. This is still a limited-feature trial run, even if they removed the 14-day restriction. Unfortunately, I don't think that you're the guy this is aimed at; there are plenty of MMOs out there with no restrictions and a F2P model that supports what you're contending would open this up for you, but WoW is still designed as a pay-to-play model and they need to make sure there's an incentive to subscribe. It sounds like you really just wanted unlimited level 1-20 F2P and at this point I doubt you'd subscribe anyway if you're not willing to even give the existing trial a shot; I don't fault you, though; this game may cost only a small amount per month, but if you end up playing for years as so many have, it can add up over time. There are plenty of F2P MMOs out there that are decent experiences without necessary buy in that you really should investigate (i.e DDO, LTRO, Champions Online and more to come I am sure).
Aside from that, I feel obliged to point out that the cost fo entry is more like $20, with the battle chest on Amazon which includes the core game and the first two expansions, then another $30 for Cataclysm (although the core game includes all the level 1-60 Cataclysm revised content, fyi). So $50 right now for ownership of the whole game, plus the $15 sub fee is more correct.
Usually bad teeth are associated with the rise of agriculture. Dental quality in teeth drops after the development of sophisticated agricultural mechanisms for a variety of reasons, including the fact that teeth wear more readily with grains and seeds that are ground into powder for baking, often with stone mortars and tools that contribute to the wear on teeth through stone particles. Among pueblo indian groups in the southwest US for example the simple mortar/matate process of stone-grinding corn was the key reason for wear on tooth enamel over time. Additionally, the increase in a carbohydrate/sugar-saturated diet leads to increased tooth decay from teeth that had weakened enamel. Prior to this point, hunter-gatherer societies had a much higher ratio of meat products and unprocessed plant products in their diet and tooth wear wasn't nearly as evident; however, as best I can recall the lifespan of the typical hunter-gatherer was also lower, so the percentage of a given population that lived long enough to display severe wear and decay on teeth was also going to be lower.
Yarnosh, you must have a very shallow life experience. I feel sorry for you, as clearly you have never (maybe even can't) understand the profound effect of the written word. I, for example, can assert strongly that many books have made my experience in the world more profound and meaningful. So have many films, but neither set of experiences could replace or improve on the other.
I'm not going to argue that film or print are preferential or that one is more capable of evoking a certain profound experience over the other, but I will say that each medium has its unique strengths and weaknesses, and neither can effectively replace the other. To argue otherwise (either suggesting film could never rival books in impact, or vice versa) is at best a specious argument and depends on a narrow perspective in life.
...A fine idea. After all, if we just locked up all the women who dressed provactively and got raped, that ought to teach them.
Even better, next time you leave your door unlocked and get robbed, why are the cops wasting their time looking for some crook when clearly You and your unlocked door should be put away in jail. What audacity, leaving your door open, then daring to suggest that the guy who walked in and stole all your stuff was merely demonstrating your callous criminal behavior!
Torchlight. It's newer, shiny, made by the guys who made the original Diablo, and is decidedly age-appropriate (unless something happens in the latter half of the game I am unaware of, since I've never gotten more than ten hours in).
You might also consider Eschalon I and II, both are a bit more involved and "adventure-ey" with detailed stories and such, but they might fit the bill, and I don't recall any age-inappropriate stuff, myself.
But then, I don't honestly recall anything "inappropriate" in Diablo I or II either....so my sense of perspective on this may be skewed.
And yes, as everyone is delightedly pointing out, these games are technically Rogue-likes or action RPGs, or hacknslashers but the adventure game appelation technically means "point and click and solve obscure puzzle" types.
By that logic, my claim that I will spontaneously start extruding gold nuggets from my nostrils today has exactly as much merit as a chemist who tries to explain why snot doesn't convert to gold.
I have 4.5 billion years' worth of reasons to believe that the Rapture was not destined to happen, ever. I think that's a bit weightier than some old cook on TV having punishment and affirmation delusions with a date attached.
I figured it must have happened and worked out just fine because none of the usual riff-raff showed up at my door Saturday and Sunday morning asking me to convert to their faith. Sayonara!
Slashdot Mirror
Early emission of neutrinos prior to a supernova's detection by light is an explanation under the current model, but it is interesting that if this CERN experiment proves to have discovered a new FTL phenomenon in neutrinos, I wonder if that could change the explanation for neutrinos as an early warning detection system for super novas (i.e. could it be that the neutrinos are not being emitted early, but are being emitted at the same time as light and then arriving superluminally?)
Completely wrong! I'd have Carrie Fisher, circa 1977 in my holodeck. Hmmm. Maybe Natalie at the same time.
So what I'm reading here is, "Star Wars actually has more realistic tech, and Star Trek is built on more fantasy epeen tech." Star Wars blast shields are actually able to dissipate phaser energy; the star destroyers would eat the Enterprise up, as blast cannons can punch right through even the best variable modulation energy shields with ease, since that's a technology that was developed and discarded 25,000 years ago in the era of the Old Republic, most likely. Prove me wrong..... (Lesson here: this is how Cowboys and Indians work: "Bang, I shot you!" "No I shot you first! bang!")
Star Trek is about as "SF" as Star Wars, I hate to say it. They're both Space Opera. Star Trek just does a better job at making its technobabble sound vaguely relevant and scientific, while Star Wars technology is primarily fueled by Rule of Cool. Hyperspace or Subspace....Heisenberg Compensators or Hyperdrive Motivators....blasters or phasers....."Same difference, different Fantasy Space."
Yep, time to turn in that card!
Interesting that they don't look at the data differently: this suggests to me, at least with RDR, that the game obviously had a lot of successful marketing, enough to get a much larger buy-in from gamers than just those who intended to play the game to completion. It also suggests that despite the critical acclaim for the game, it clearly wasn't as appealing to the vast majority of those who bought it. The data isn't saying, "most people don't want long games," but rather, "most people who bought this game did not find it worth their time to continue playing." Also, the data appears to assume that a very long game like RDR is somehow going to be played in short order. So if only 10% of the player base for RDR finished it in the first 18 months, I wonder how many more people finish it in 36 months? Hell, I've been playing Fallout 3 at least once or twice a month for the last few years now and I'm only just beginning to reach saturation point for that game....and I still have unexplored areas and two DLC packs I've haven't seen! Plus, I own RDR, I fully expect I will finish it by 2014 or so. But if Rockstar expects me to rip through that game in two weeks or so, I hate to inform them, but I have: A: a life that demands my time, and B: I like my wild west in small, measurable doses of 2-4 hours tops. So I figure I will get to it when I get to it, and that will hopefully be sooner than later now that Fallout 3 is (finally) reaching saturation point for me!
You do realize that in a game like Mass Effect or RDR you're not going to find a few hundred people willing to play thespian to provide an interesting storyline and personalities, right? That the sort of experience these game offer is closer to reading a novel than running around playing cowboys and indians? Also, when one spends a long day at work talking to people all day, sometimes you just want to relax and enjoy yourself when you get home without engaging in the delightful mike chat of racist a-holes in CoD or Halo (both of which I enjoy as well, with the mike muted). I mean, seriously, when I get home and read a good book or watch a movie, I don't exactly like some idiot blathering on behind me....why do I want that in my games?
For an example of post apocalypse with some color that works quite well, I offer you Enslaved: Journey to the West. That said, I am in total agreement with you: keep yer damn "colors" out of my Fallouts and Rages and Borderlands. And get off my damn lawn!
I am reasonably sure that that is exactly what they are looking for: the exertion of other universes on our own. An example of a known phenomenon that some have suggested might be an example of this is the "Great Attractor," although how widely regarded that hypothesis is among real astronomers is unknown to me (google gets a lot of odd hits on searching for "Great Attractor evidence of another universe.")
Given that molestation is statistically most likely to be caused by a known relation, it is clearly a logical to extend the ban to parents and relatives of the children as well. Teachers are probably statistically less likely then uncles and aunts to be molesting kids, after all, so at this point the only friends a child should safely have on facebook are total strangers, as they are the demographic statistically least likely to be threatening. (Surely your concern about teachers was presented as facetious irony....it was, right? Right?)
I'll go out on a limb and suggest quality is not the issue; the games in question are generally very well regarded (Assassin's Creed, at least). So if the pirates have simply rendered themselves invisible to Ubisoft, does this mean that they are continuing to harm legitimate users by giving game publishers the incorrect appearance of successful DRM? Put another way...the DRM appears to be working, so it will continue on, insuring that the legitimate player base will consist only of those willing to participate & pay money for the DRM scheme as presented, all while liberating the pirates to play away, invisible to Ubisoft's roaming Eye of Sauron? There is no side here I can take. I'll continue to not buy and not pirate games with this sort of DRM, problem solved. I don't buy....company does not get my dollars; won't be noticed by them since this is not apparently the usual way to vote against bad behavior with publishers; I don't pirate, so I don't contribute to the root problem in the first place...but again, its purely for personal conscience, since apparently the norm is to pirate the hell out of everything and let the brain rationalize why later on.
Microsoft? Really? I'll remember that next time I try to play one of my many games that are tied to Games for Windows Live.
Seiously, the only proper solution here is to boycott the game and NOT pirate it. period. Am I the only one who understands that this is the only reasonable solution? If I want Ubisoft or whomever to realize that they need to meet me halfway by not DRMing their games to death, then I also need to meet them halfway by demonstrating that I DO NOT PIRATE THEIR DAMNED GAMES. I actually do want to play Assassins Creed 2, Driver: San Fran and whatever else they produce. But if they make DRM that is punishing to the legitimate user, the answer is not to run out and authenticate theri worries with piracy....the answer is to find a different publisher (and they are out there) that offers its games free of DRM, and support that publisher.
You're not the only one. Took me almost a day before I found out who she was and started getting all the jokes...
YMMV. I've gotten a great deal of mileage and enjoyment out of L4D and L4D2 but have found Killing Floor--while also fun and very much the same style of game--to be a bit less accessible and engaging over time. In any case, I have to agree that the "director" feature in L4D makes for a more compelling and unpredictable experience while it still manages to insure that the game is both challenging and surprising at the same time. Definitely not a case of "modify the game to let the players win." Quite the opposite, often!
I think you misread the article. We're talking about Borders, not Barnes & Noble. Borders was the store that for years now refused to make me pay for the privilege of getting discounts, regularly sent me 30 and 40% off coupons and offered a relaxed environment that might feel pompous if you just rolled in from the stix but was otherwise as neutral and pleasant an environment as one could get without going straight to the local business brick and mortar shops.
Startlingly well presented and cogent post.
I can quit anytime, really I can....
Well, for what it's worth the introductory experience that the current trial account offers is the same deal, and all it does is limit certain forms of communication that are normally abused by spammers; actualy in-game chat with other live people still exists, but in certain channels (local, for example). Likewise, because of the leveling mechanic for guilds I can see why they restrict that feature as well. This is still a limited-feature trial run, even if they removed the 14-day restriction. Unfortunately, I don't think that you're the guy this is aimed at; there are plenty of MMOs out there with no restrictions and a F2P model that supports what you're contending would open this up for you, but WoW is still designed as a pay-to-play model and they need to make sure there's an incentive to subscribe. It sounds like you really just wanted unlimited level 1-20 F2P and at this point I doubt you'd subscribe anyway if you're not willing to even give the existing trial a shot; I don't fault you, though; this game may cost only a small amount per month, but if you end up playing for years as so many have, it can add up over time. There are plenty of F2P MMOs out there that are decent experiences without necessary buy in that you really should investigate (i.e DDO, LTRO, Champions Online and more to come I am sure). Aside from that, I feel obliged to point out that the cost fo entry is more like $20, with the battle chest on Amazon which includes the core game and the first two expansions, then another $30 for Cataclysm (although the core game includes all the level 1-60 Cataclysm revised content, fyi). So $50 right now for ownership of the whole game, plus the $15 sub fee is more correct.
Usually bad teeth are associated with the rise of agriculture. Dental quality in teeth drops after the development of sophisticated agricultural mechanisms for a variety of reasons, including the fact that teeth wear more readily with grains and seeds that are ground into powder for baking, often with stone mortars and tools that contribute to the wear on teeth through stone particles. Among pueblo indian groups in the southwest US for example the simple mortar/matate process of stone-grinding corn was the key reason for wear on tooth enamel over time. Additionally, the increase in a carbohydrate/sugar-saturated diet leads to increased tooth decay from teeth that had weakened enamel. Prior to this point, hunter-gatherer societies had a much higher ratio of meat products and unprocessed plant products in their diet and tooth wear wasn't nearly as evident; however, as best I can recall the lifespan of the typical hunter-gatherer was also lower, so the percentage of a given population that lived long enough to display severe wear and decay on teeth was also going to be lower.
Yarnosh, you must have a very shallow life experience. I feel sorry for you, as clearly you have never (maybe even can't) understand the profound effect of the written word. I, for example, can assert strongly that many books have made my experience in the world more profound and meaningful. So have many films, but neither set of experiences could replace or improve on the other. I'm not going to argue that film or print are preferential or that one is more capable of evoking a certain profound experience over the other, but I will say that each medium has its unique strengths and weaknesses, and neither can effectively replace the other. To argue otherwise (either suggesting film could never rival books in impact, or vice versa) is at best a specious argument and depends on a narrow perspective in life.
...A fine idea. After all, if we just locked up all the women who dressed provactively and got raped, that ought to teach them. Even better, next time you leave your door unlocked and get robbed, why are the cops wasting their time looking for some crook when clearly You and your unlocked door should be put away in jail. What audacity, leaving your door open, then daring to suggest that the guy who walked in and stole all your stuff was merely demonstrating your callous criminal behavior!
Torchlight. It's newer, shiny, made by the guys who made the original Diablo, and is decidedly age-appropriate (unless something happens in the latter half of the game I am unaware of, since I've never gotten more than ten hours in). You might also consider Eschalon I and II, both are a bit more involved and "adventure-ey" with detailed stories and such, but they might fit the bill, and I don't recall any age-inappropriate stuff, myself. But then, I don't honestly recall anything "inappropriate" in Diablo I or II either....so my sense of perspective on this may be skewed. And yes, as everyone is delightedly pointing out, these games are technically Rogue-likes or action RPGs, or hacknslashers but the adventure game appelation technically means "point and click and solve obscure puzzle" types.
By that logic, my claim that I will spontaneously start extruding gold nuggets from my nostrils today has exactly as much merit as a chemist who tries to explain why snot doesn't convert to gold. I have 4.5 billion years' worth of reasons to believe that the Rapture was not destined to happen, ever. I think that's a bit weightier than some old cook on TV having punishment and affirmation delusions with a date attached.
I figured it must have happened and worked out just fine because none of the usual riff-raff showed up at my door Saturday and Sunday morning asking me to convert to their faith. Sayonara!