In Quake1, the rocket launcher is a) more powerful, and b) fires faster than the RL in Q3.
You forgot to mention the weapon changing speed of Q1 vs Q3, in Q3 there's a good half second between weapon changes, whereas in Q1 you can bounce someone off the ground into the air, and then pin them to the ceiling with the lightning gun, only to finally finish them off with a shotgun blast. (And yes, the good players do this more often than you'd think)
I think that perhaps you haven't really witnessed just how quick Q1 can get. Go and download a few competition demos in DM4 and you'll see just how insanely quick people can get around.
Re:New map with the download!
on
PanQuake
·
· Score: 1
Pretty amazing, especially considering that.wad files were the map format for Doom.
Re:Had a little fun, got a little sick
on
PanQuake
·
· Score: 2
"By the way, has anyone else noticed after playing games like q3 the original quake just doesn't seem like much of a challenge at all!"
Substitute 'games like q3' with 'multiplayer' and
you're more on the ball. The reality is that if you played anyone half-good at Quake 1 they'd whip your sorry ass. Q1 is so much faster that I can't stand to play any of the later games. (CounterStrike is pretty quick at times, too, but it's a completely different game)
The ultimate purpose of a lightweight portable is most definately not to provide a secure terminal. Firstly, I ask you these questions:
a) What are all the current portables being used for?
- The smaller ones are being used for calendars, notepads, address books, occasionally wap/web and email. The larger ones are mostly used for word processing, email, web browsing, and other day to day stuff.
b) Just how secure do you need to be? Do you really think anyone is going to go to the trouble of setting up a hardware keyboard logger to capture YOUR traffic?
Even if you have sensitive stuff that you need to do from all around the place, the large majority of people do not.
And finally, why OpenBSD? If you're being client-only, then Linux, MacOS, FreeBSD, or even Windows are pretty much just as secure as OpenBSD. If you can't connect to any ports on the machine, how can there be any security vulnerabilities?
Don't just spout bollocks for the hell of it, have a point next time please.
Unfortunately, it is the LCD which uses more power than all of the other components put together. So, what Linux really needs is a utility that can halve the brightness of the backlight, which are currently only available for Windows.
...especially the ones that ran on PCBoard. That was one f'n sweet system. You could program extremely flexible little scripts called PPE's, which then compiled into some weird bytecode.
When I ran my board, you connected and were faced with a whole suite of pre-login stuff, (like rules, disclaimer, new user voting, etc) all accessible from a light-bar driven menu.
I really miss those days because the people were real people. It's hard to explain, but everything seems so superficial over the internet. The only thing that comes vaguely close to the bulletin board atmosphere is the online gaming communities that exist in isolated pockets around the world.
"Then again, he makes toys for a living, he's not your average businessman (his loss)."
I don't see how you can equate him not being a businessman to being 'his loss'. Would you rather be a shrewd businessman, or an extremely talented inventor capable of designing, constructing, and launching your own manned space craft?
And what's most interesting about this clever strategy is that it formed naturally, in an almost anarchic fashion. Eventually we will see whether the best of man's business planning is any match for the forces of nature.
I just wish that I could see it all in fast motion, whereas the reality is that I probably won't even notice. "Microsoft? What's that?"
"Envisional Ltd., which sells software and services for monitoring intellectual-property rights violations online... decided to pursue the ring-tone research on its own."
Well, it's obvious then. Envisional Ltd. is a company that does very little at all, if anything. They 'monitor intellectual-property rights violations'? They'd be more aptly labled 'master serach engine operators'.
Isn't it obvious that this kind of controversial announcement, with no industry backing whatsoever, is simply an effort to gain public attention and therefore clients?
Not to mention that people with good (or better still, photographic) memories can reproduce text, images, and sounds pretty accurately anyway.
Even if you put someone inside a custom built room, frisk them for recording devices, and show them the media, nothing short of erasing their own memory can prevent copyright infringement.
Doesn't this seem a bit rash, calling for the extinction (or endangerment) of the trained IT professional?
I think what the potential clients don't realise is when their 'self-healing' server really fucks up, they're going to have to pay through the nose for an IBM tech. to come out and fix things.
Human intelligence is not something that can be easily substituted. There will always be a level on which something can, and most likely will, go wrong - and these non-sentient machines with no arms or legs will be helpless.
I imagine that shortsightedness on behalf of the authors of rfc1149 meant that they'd specified duct-tape, when they didn't know that it would be inhumane to do so. Carrier pidgeons do not take kindly to having duct tape attached and then subsequently ripped off, not to mention the fact that the packet itself could become torn in the process.
There is always room for improvement over existing protocols.
"Picking out the faint signal of the spacecraft's eight-watt transmitter..."
What the hell?! Eight-watt is absolutely miniscule. Does anyone else find this absolutely amazing that such a tiny signal could be picked up from billions of miles away?
Considering that a 10-watt FM transmitter I was playing with barely travelled a couple of km, this just blows my mind. (sure, it should be considered that this was on Earth where there is a lot of radio noise, but still...)
Not only is it an option, it's an extremely viable and worthwhile option.
I work for an ISP that began as a medium-sized ISP, and by acquiring other medium and small ISPs they have become a fairly large ISP. 'Buying Customers' is especially useful when you're looking to set up a Point Of Presence in another state or rural location.
Don't you think the money could be better spent on awarding better, or more, prizes to the top players? Wouldn't there be way more incentive for people to get into the game if they knew that the top 100 (or 50, or 30) players would receive kickass prizes?
I mean, it's not like it's a huge hassle for people to bring their pc's in. I've never had any problems getting mine to an event and set up correctly, and it seems that the only people who do are those with faulty hardware (quickly remedied).
This would mean that there could be a greater number of really competitive players, each battling for the multitude of prizes, with glory being the optional extra.;)
OR, better than all that, they could just get people to bring their own machines whilst curbing the excessive (AU$195 = US$100!) entrance fee.
You make good and valid points. An apt characterisation of the Slashdot mentality.
However, I do believe your citing the silencing of spam as hypocracy. There is a big difference between seeking freedom of speech, as opposed to freedom to advertise. Observe this comparison:
It's perfectly okay for me to:
a) Have a racist, sexist, homophobic web page.
b) Say bad things about Christians on a message board.
But it is not okay for me to:
a) Email people, unsolicited, with racist/sexist/homophobic comments that may upset people.
Similiarly with spam:
It's okay to:
a) Set up a web page advertising my product or service.
But, it's not okay to:
a) Send personal email messages to people, unsolicited, promoting my product.
b) Post inappropriate advertising on message boards and open forums. (this is to the discretion of the forum operators, however)
See my point? Spam is bad because it wastes people's time, and sometimes even offends them. I definately do not agree that people should be jailed for spam, that is absolutely rediculous. But I do believe that when a spammer does, against the AUP of their ISP, spam a few thousand people, they should be punished by removal of their account or even a fine of some sort.
I don't really see how this is in conflict with the ideal of free speech.
"Maybe if they listen to Britney Spears or Boyz in the Hood... but not an appreciater of good music."
I think the definition of what is 'good music' and what is not is irrelevant, especially since what we would classify as 'bad music' tends to be the most popular.
"sales have gone up since the whole mainstream mp3 thing"
To me, this is one of the most crippling arguments in the whole MP3/napster/whatever debate.
Music sales have been going up for about, hrmm, the last 50 years or more. This is due to the fact that there is constantly more and more music out there to buy. Trying to calculate the number of sales lost, however, is no simple task. This is because every single album will have different sales. Because the market relies largely on people's tastes (okay, that's a stretch), there is no real way of projecting the sales for any particular album, hence no way to calculate losses.
I am pretty sure that there are many people out there who have not bought an album/single or two because they have it as mp3s.
Or, why not apply an accoustic-analysis procedure and create a file that, when fed to the appropriate program, reproduces the music almost exactly how it was played! Still free?
If you play guitar and can't transpose a riff between keys (especially when you've got the original to compare to, and it's obviously wrong) then you should probably just give up.
Slashdot Mirror
"Quake 3 IS inherently faster than Quake 1. The game units have stayed pretty much the same size, but players can run faster"
Err, this simply is not true. I find it strange that you've said this, considering you've "looked at the code".
"and there's also strafe-jumping, where you can go up to 1.5 times faster than when you run"
Strafe-jumping originated in Quake1, and with skill you can reach huge speeds, even up to 3x (!!!) your normal running speed.
"shoot more rapid-fire weapons (machine gun, plasma gun, lightning gun, BFG)."
In Quake1, the rocket launcher is a) more powerful, and b) fires faster than the RL in Q3.
You forgot to mention the weapon changing speed of Q1 vs Q3, in Q3 there's a good half second between weapon changes, whereas in Q1 you can bounce someone off the ground into the air, and then pin them to the ceiling with the lightning gun, only to finally finish them off with a shotgun blast. (And yes, the good players do this more often than you'd think)
I think that perhaps you haven't really witnessed just how quick Q1 can get. Go and download a few competition demos in DM4 and you'll see just how insanely quick people can get around.
Pretty amazing, especially considering that .wad files were the map format for Doom.
Substitute 'games like q3' with 'multiplayer' and you're more on the ball. The reality is that if you played anyone half-good at Quake 1 they'd whip your sorry ass. Q1 is so much faster that I can't stand to play any of the later games. (CounterStrike is pretty quick at times, too, but it's a completely different game)
The ultimate purpose of a lightweight portable is most definately not to provide a secure terminal. Firstly, I ask you these questions:
a) What are all the current portables being used for?
- The smaller ones are being used for calendars, notepads, address books, occasionally wap/web and email. The larger ones are mostly used for word processing, email, web browsing, and other day to day stuff.
b) Just how secure do you need to be? Do you really think anyone is going to go to the trouble of setting up a hardware keyboard logger to capture YOUR traffic?
Even if you have sensitive stuff that you need to do from all around the place, the large majority of people do not.
And finally, why OpenBSD? If you're being client-only, then Linux, MacOS, FreeBSD, or even Windows are pretty much just as secure as OpenBSD. If you can't connect to any ports on the machine, how can there be any security vulnerabilities?
Don't just spout bollocks for the hell of it, have a point next time please.
Unfortunately, it is the LCD which uses more power than all of the other components put together. So, what Linux really needs is a utility that can halve the brightness of the backlight, which are currently only available for Windows.
"see how we steal your software and 'invent' file sharing in Windows XP"
...
No, no, no! It's not 'invent', it's much more devious: they use the term 'innovate'.
Think about it
That'd be 27B/6 - 'twenty-seven b stroke six'. :)
Great movie.
...especially the ones that ran on PCBoard. That was one f'n sweet system. You could program extremely flexible little scripts called PPE's, which then compiled into some weird bytecode.
When I ran my board, you connected and were faced with a whole suite of pre-login stuff, (like rules, disclaimer, new user voting, etc) all accessible from a light-bar driven menu.
I really miss those days because the people were real people. It's hard to explain, but everything seems so superficial over the internet. The only thing that comes vaguely close to the bulletin board atmosphere is the online gaming communities that exist in isolated pockets around the world.
*sigh*
"Then again, he makes toys for a living, he's not your average businessman (his loss)."
I don't see how you can equate him not being a businessman to being 'his loss'. Would you rather be a shrewd businessman, or an extremely talented inventor capable of designing, constructing, and launching your own manned space craft?
I know what I'd prefer.
And what's most interesting about this clever strategy is that it formed naturally, in an almost anarchic fashion. Eventually we will see whether the best of man's business planning is any match for the forces of nature.
I just wish that I could see it all in fast motion, whereas the reality is that I probably won't even notice. "Microsoft? What's that?"
"...cell phone usage is pervasive enough that users are looking for ways to distinguish their cell phones' rings from others."
Funny, I usually have no trouble distinguishing my phone from the others _because it's in my own fucking pocket_!
Just how retarded do they think the users are?
Wait a second...
"Envisional Ltd., which sells software and services for monitoring intellectual-property rights violations online... decided to pursue the ring-tone research on its own."
Well, it's obvious then. Envisional Ltd. is a company that does very little at all, if anything. They 'monitor intellectual-property rights violations'? They'd be more aptly labled 'master serach engine operators'.
Isn't it obvious that this kind of controversial announcement, with no industry backing whatsoever, is simply an effort to gain public attention and therefore clients?
Can we be a little bit more extreme, please?
"a ban on all encrypted traffic for which no key is in escrow for easy policing."
There just simply was not nearly enough hyperbole in that statement!
What do we want? MORE HYSTERIA!
When do we want it? NOW!
Not to mention that people with good (or better still, photographic) memories can reproduce text, images, and sounds pretty accurately anyway.
Even if you put someone inside a custom built room, frisk them for recording devices, and show them the media, nothing short of erasing their own memory can prevent copyright infringement.
Doesn't this seem a bit rash, calling for the extinction (or endangerment) of the trained IT professional?
I think what the potential clients don't realise is when their 'self-healing' server really fucks up, they're going to have to pay through the nose for an IBM tech. to come out and fix things.
Human intelligence is not something that can be easily substituted. There will always be a level on which something can, and most likely will, go wrong - and these non-sentient machines with no arms or legs will be helpless.
"I also suspect CAT might cause a segment fault."
;)
Wouldn't that be netcat?
I imagine that shortsightedness on behalf of the authors of rfc1149 meant that they'd specified duct-tape, when they didn't know that it would be inhumane to do so. Carrier pidgeons do not take kindly to having duct tape attached and then subsequently ripped off, not to mention the fact that the packet itself could become torn in the process.
There is always room for improvement over existing protocols.
"Picking out the faint signal of the spacecraft's eight-watt transmitter..."
What the hell?! Eight-watt is absolutely miniscule. Does anyone else find this absolutely amazing that such a tiny signal could be picked up from billions of miles away?
Considering that a 10-watt FM transmitter I was playing with barely travelled a couple of km, this just blows my mind. (sure, it should be considered that this was on Earth where there is a lot of radio noise, but still...)
Not only is it an option, it's an extremely viable and worthwhile option.
I work for an ISP that began as a medium-sized ISP, and by acquiring other medium and small ISPs they have become a fairly large ISP. 'Buying Customers' is especially useful when you're looking to set up a Point Of Presence in another state or rural location.
Don't you think the money could be better spent on awarding better, or more, prizes to the top players? Wouldn't there be way more incentive for people to get into the game if they knew that the top 100 (or 50, or 30) players would receive kickass prizes?
;)
I mean, it's not like it's a huge hassle for people to bring their pc's in. I've never had any problems getting mine to an event and set up correctly, and it seems that the only people who do are those with faulty hardware (quickly remedied).
This would mean that there could be a greater number of really competitive players, each battling for the multitude of prizes, with glory being the optional extra.
OR, better than all that, they could just get people to bring their own machines whilst curbing the excessive (AU$195 = US$100!) entrance fee.
You make good and valid points. An apt characterisation of the Slashdot mentality.
However, I do believe your citing the silencing of spam as hypocracy. There is a big difference between seeking freedom of speech, as opposed to freedom to advertise. Observe this comparison:
It's perfectly okay for me to:
a) Have a racist, sexist, homophobic web page.
b) Say bad things about Christians on a message board.
But it is not okay for me to:
a) Email people, unsolicited, with racist/sexist/homophobic comments that may upset people.
Similiarly with spam:
It's okay to:
a) Set up a web page advertising my product or service.
But, it's not okay to:
a) Send personal email messages to people, unsolicited, promoting my product.
b) Post inappropriate advertising on message boards and open forums. (this is to the discretion of the forum operators, however)
See my point? Spam is bad because it wastes people's time, and sometimes even offends them. I definately do not agree that people should be jailed for spam, that is absolutely rediculous. But I do believe that when a spammer does, against the AUP of their ISP, spam a few thousand people, they should be punished by removal of their account or even a fine of some sort.
I don't really see how this is in conflict with the ideal of free speech.
"Maybe if they listen to Britney Spears or Boyz in the Hood... but not an appreciater of good music."
I think the definition of what is 'good music' and what is not is irrelevant, especially since what we would classify as 'bad music' tends to be the most popular.
To me, this is one of the most crippling arguments in the whole MP3/napster/whatever debate.
Music sales have been going up for about, hrmm, the last 50 years or more. This is due to the fact that there is constantly more and more music out there to buy. Trying to calculate the number of sales lost, however, is no simple task. This is because every single album will have different sales. Because the market relies largely on people's tastes (okay, that's a stretch), there is no real way of projecting the sales for any particular album, hence no way to calculate losses.
I am pretty sure that there are many people out there who have not bought an album/single or two because they have it as mp3s.
Or, why not apply an accoustic-analysis procedure and create a file that, when fed to the appropriate program, reproduces the music almost exactly how it was played! Still free?
Oh wait...
If you play guitar and can't transpose a riff between keys (especially when you've got the original to compare to, and it's obviously wrong) then you should probably just give up.
Idiot.