I don't know if 'on crack' is supposed to imply things being better normally. I thought it meant they were over the top.
Anyway, I think Wave is one of the coolest things to happen in years. Here's how I'd like to use it, in the setting of indie game development:
- Art buddy takes time off his work to make a new animated character in FBX format, complete with skins in a prescribed format
- Adds it to the Art Resources wave. A wizard appears asking him a few questions and generates a class from a template to handle this new piece of art
- The Art Resources wave commits the art and code to Subversion
- The Codebase wave looks at Subversion, sees the testing version has been updated and checks out the new changes. A dedicated Visual Studio machine rebuilds and publishes the binary to the Builds wave for the testing team
- The XNA coder finishes his changes and updates his version with the new classes and artwork from Subversion. After some testing he marks this build for publication and the Builds wave is updated again.
- Artist and coder wonder how they ever had time to work before Google Wave.
It seems like it'd take a lot of the pain out of open source collaboration and even make it easier to get beta versions out for public testing while reaping in feedback.
"The medication works by suppressing the "suicide mechanism" of cells hit by radiation, while enabling them to recover from the radiation-induced damages that prompted them to activate the suicide mechanism in the first place."
So it turns the cell into a cry for attention?
Seriously though, saving cells damaged by radiation sounds like a shortcut to cancer. Is the claim of 'enabling cells to recover' realistic?
You don't even need to change it to resell it. That's how the license works.
I guess all the guys releasing code under the BSD license are slobbering idiots who can only benefit from your mighty opinion. It's too bad they didn't think the situation out as well as you did.
Zed Shaw convinced me I never wanted anything to do with open source development. That very rant you just linked helped me decide it was better to use what was available then fuck off leaving open source in the dust. I concluded if you don't have complete, absolute control over your project then the Zed Shaws of the world are going to take all of your successes and mar them with whiny drama antics.
Slashdot does itself a great disservice publishing this sort of story. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. Sometimes, no matter how bad you think a whiner is, he has supporters who want to keep hearing him whine.
The other thing to keep in mind is that dogs endear themselves with pack behaviour, something cats don't quite take to.
Dogs are extremely engaging, attentive and loyal and that's pretty much all they had to do to ensure their survival alongside humanity.
Cats, lacking this instinct, had to evolve to be cute as well or face getting eaten. Therefore the most personable, adorable and lovely cats had a much better chance of survival.
I guess that goes quite a way to explaining why cats are much elegant appearing and nicer to touch than dogs. Imagine an animal that looked like a dog and behaved like a cat. We'd eat that fucker to extinction as a service to the world.
You're talking less about immersion and more about engagement. Movies aren't engaging, but they can be enjoyable in ways games can't.
As far as immersion goes, sometimes it's more enjoyable when you have to work at being immersed. Rogue has been mentioned several times in this article's comments. Leaving more work for the imagination to do often means more enjoyment when you finally manage to engage the player. A sense of presence and involvement - immersion - follows.
I agree with the sentiment that more realistic graphics take away the effort of imagination. This leads players who are immersed to sort of sit back and be less actively involved in the engagement of a game.
I'm not sure what the answer is. I do know that in order to meet the perceived standards of being a commercially viable game, you have to meet certain visual criteria. I'm still always surprised by games like Echochrome or Braid that defy these criteria and still get published. In a sense, their being simplistic and abstract in their visuals is an original thing in itself: but only for the current state of gaming.
Abstract games do work. It's just that they don't work unless they're compelling in every other way.
A pretty but otherwise bland game will leave you bored. The key point here is the ability to entertain comes from several angles. The ability to be entertained by something is also subjective. There's no point in Slashdot routinely knocking Doom IV as bland and an attempt to put a new engine to use, because it has a target market who enjoyed it.
Games with good gameplay, good graphics and a compelling storyline are, sadly, a little rare. Part of the reason games like Portal are perceived as winners in every category is that Portal was unique and fresh. Therefore speed of release is also a factor in our perceived enjoyment of a game.
So what's left? What sure-fire thing can a game developer do to ensure his game is well received once he's met all other criteria for an entertaining game? Be original - that's pretty much it.
You can't avoid the first wave of games to take advantage of a new graphics technique or newer hardware being primarily about these upgraded features.
Decent games with an intricate backstory and well thought out gameplay do take time to make. It's not surprising that they arrive in the later waves.
It's definitely a decent goal to continue pushing towards photorealistic visuals. I'm excited about how the options and challenges are diversifying. I'm yet to see convincingly realistic characters simulated, but with some of the mocap solutions bieng developed, that's not far off. I can't wait to record myself with a webcam and have every little nuance of my expression mapped to an avatar.
You receive a binary each time you load the game. Hosting it on a website and re-downloading it with java each time doesn't circumvent the license. If you want the source, perhaps you could approach them about rectifying their license obligations.
The cheapest option could be a Nokia N770. They're not quite as daylight readable as e-ink surfaces, but still not bad. The bonus is you're getting a mini-linux environment in your hand. I run RDP on mine and connect to a Windows 7 box when I'm around home.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if 'on crack' is supposed to imply things being better normally. I thought it meant they were over the top.
Anyway, I think Wave is one of the coolest things to happen in years. Here's how I'd like to use it, in the setting of indie game development:
- Art buddy takes time off his work to make a new animated character in FBX format, complete with skins in a prescribed format
- Adds it to the Art Resources wave. A wizard appears asking him a few questions and generates a class from a template to handle this new piece of art
- The Art Resources wave commits the art and code to Subversion
- The Codebase wave looks at Subversion, sees the testing version has been updated and checks out the new changes. A dedicated Visual Studio machine rebuilds and publishes the binary to the Builds wave for the testing team
- The XNA coder finishes his changes and updates his version with the new classes and artwork from Subversion. After some testing he marks this build for publication and the Builds wave is updated again.
- Artist and coder wonder how they ever had time to work before Google Wave.
It seems like it'd take a lot of the pain out of open source collaboration and even make it easier to get beta versions out for public testing while reaping in feedback.
On behalf of most of slashdot, I only wish I had a real life to put before games.
You forgot:
c} Develop superhuman radiation powers, buy stock in anti-radiation therapy then go around pushing your stock price up.
Some parts of Spore were enjoyable and lived up to expectations.
Whereas Bioshock was a very bad FPS, Spore was more like five hit and miss minigames.
"The medication works by suppressing the "suicide mechanism" of cells hit by radiation, while enabling them to recover from the radiation-induced damages that prompted them to activate the suicide mechanism in the first place."
So it turns the cell into a cry for attention?
Seriously though, saving cells damaged by radiation sounds like a shortcut to cancer. Is the claim of 'enabling cells to recover' realistic?
They'll be able to get more precious lines of code in.
I wonder how many lines of code slashbot editors feel is enough to make it a triple-A title.
You don't even need to change it to resell it. That's how the license works.
I guess all the guys releasing code under the BSD license are slobbering idiots who can only benefit from your mighty opinion. It's too bad they didn't think the situation out as well as you did.
Oh my god, this is THAT loser?
Zed Shaw convinced me I never wanted anything to do with open source development. That very rant you just linked helped me decide it was better to use what was available then fuck off leaving open source in the dust. I concluded if you don't have complete, absolute control over your project then the Zed Shaws of the world are going to take all of your successes and mar them with whiny drama antics.
Slashdot does itself a great disservice publishing this sort of story. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. Sometimes, no matter how bad you think a whiner is, he has supporters who want to keep hearing him whine.
The other thing to keep in mind is that dogs endear themselves with pack behaviour, something cats don't quite take to.
Dogs are extremely engaging, attentive and loyal and that's pretty much all they had to do to ensure their survival alongside humanity.
Cats, lacking this instinct, had to evolve to be cute as well or face getting eaten. Therefore the most personable, adorable and lovely cats had a much better chance of survival.
I guess that goes quite a way to explaining why cats are much elegant appearing and nicer to touch than dogs. Imagine an animal that looked like a dog and behaved like a cat. We'd eat that fucker to extinction as a service to the world.
What does waking up have to do with that?
Believe you me, I don't get laid twice either.
> Movies aren't engaging,
Movies aren't IMMERSIVE. My bad.
You're talking less about immersion and more about engagement. Movies aren't engaging, but they can be enjoyable in ways games can't.
As far as immersion goes, sometimes it's more enjoyable when you have to work at being immersed. Rogue has been mentioned several times in this article's comments. Leaving more work for the imagination to do often means more enjoyment when you finally manage to engage the player. A sense of presence and involvement - immersion - follows.
I agree with the sentiment that more realistic graphics take away the effort of imagination. This leads players who are immersed to sort of sit back and be less actively involved in the engagement of a game.
I'm not sure what the answer is. I do know that in order to meet the perceived standards of being a commercially viable game, you have to meet certain visual criteria. I'm still always surprised by games like Echochrome or Braid that defy these criteria and still get published. In a sense, their being simplistic and abstract in their visuals is an original thing in itself: but only for the current state of gaming.
Abstract games do work. It's just that they don't work unless they're compelling in every other way.
A pretty but otherwise bland game will leave you bored. The key point here is the ability to entertain comes from several angles. The ability to be entertained by something is also subjective. There's no point in Slashdot routinely knocking Doom IV as bland and an attempt to put a new engine to use, because it has a target market who enjoyed it.
Games with good gameplay, good graphics and a compelling storyline are, sadly, a little rare. Part of the reason games like Portal are perceived as winners in every category is that Portal was unique and fresh. Therefore speed of release is also a factor in our perceived enjoyment of a game.
So what's left? What sure-fire thing can a game developer do to ensure his game is well received once he's met all other criteria for an entertaining game? Be original - that's pretty much it.
You can't avoid the first wave of games to take advantage of a new graphics technique or newer hardware being primarily about these upgraded features.
Decent games with an intricate backstory and well thought out gameplay do take time to make. It's not surprising that they arrive in the later waves.
It's definitely a decent goal to continue pushing towards photorealistic visuals. I'm excited about how the options and challenges are diversifying. I'm yet to see convincingly realistic characters simulated, but with some of the mocap solutions bieng developed, that's not far off. I can't wait to record myself with a webcam and have every little nuance of my expression mapped to an avatar.
There is no way he's getting laid twice.
Well now nobody's going to help you shop.
Pure evil partnered with Linux?
I'm pretty sure that can't happen. I'm going to pray to Linus for guidance.
The Ferrari FXX is faster and better performing than the Bugatti Veyron. Just saying.
You receive a binary each time you load the game. Hosting it on a website and re-downloading it with java each time doesn't circumvent the license. If you want the source, perhaps you could approach them about rectifying their license obligations.
I saw the title and thought of the Bungie game. I got quite excited.
Right. On top of that, the magic bean we traded it all for - the internet - isn't even real. You can't hug an internet. We're fucked.
When I checked a year ago, the N770 was still around for $170 new, so the 810 would definitely be a tempting prospect. It's a big upgrade.
It's going to be real fucking useful on the internet. This is an idea whose time has come and gone.
Ubuntu is a distro. QT is more of a graphics and application framework.
The cheapest option could be a Nokia N770. They're not quite as daylight readable as e-ink surfaces, but still not bad. The bonus is you're getting a mini-linux environment in your hand. I run RDP on mine and connect to a Windows 7 box when I'm around home.