Developer panels. They had the developers spend time talking with people at the con and announcing upcoming content. So while I doubt the developers were actively planning the convention (that'd be marketing's job), they were still involved with the con itself and preparing material for it. Which would, indeed, be time not spent developing the game.
That's still turn based - turn based doesn't mean "everyone picks an action and they all resolve," it means "based on turns" and in FFX's case, each "turn" only one participant got to take an action.
It's essentially Final Fantasy Tactic's "charge" system (in fact, I think FFX called their system "Charge Time Battle" or something weird like that) - each participant in the battle takes a turn, and then has to recharge a "charge" count based on their speed. The character with the lowest "charge" count goes next. So characters with high recharges would get to go more often than other characters. (Making Haste fun.)
Unlike FFT, actions occured immediately - in FFT, actions also had to be "charged" before occuring. Most actions "charged" fast enough that they occured immediately after the character received a turn, but some took longer. However, in FFX, actions could have longer recharge times, making a character have to recharge longer after certain actions - which is why using a Summons limit would cause them to allow opponents to get in several attacks before they were ready again.
In any case, it's still turn based - not pseudo-real time like Active Time Battle is. Once a character was charged in ATB, other characters kept on charging. A character only actually performed an action after the action was selected - so if you didn't do anything, your characters would still be attacked, in "Active Time."
FFX didn't use Active Time Battle, it used a turn based system...
Yes, FFX's system was better than ATB is, because you don't have any pointless pauses while waiting for bars to fill, turns just occur in order and the action only stops to allow the player to select a new command. However this new system isn't the turn based system FFX used. The interview doesn't give enough information to say more than that, though.
Assuming you're using Firefox 1.5 or higher (or Seamonkey 1.0 or higher?), I've created some CSS rules to make Slashdot use a Serif-style font and move the comment score below the title. I would have just copy-pasted the rules directly into the comment, but Slashdot's stupid broken <ecode> tag bravely mangled all attempts. So instead you'll have to live with a link to the rules on my personal site - no, I'm not spying on you.:)
(Why move the scores below the title and not next to the title? Because my attempt to move it next to the title didn't look quite as nice as I'd like thanks to the current setup. At some point in the future I may create a set of rules to move it to the right of the title, but it's going to be a long set of rules.)
The moon has to be the right phase, which only occurs for 1 hour every real day or 2.
Because I happen to know how to find this out...
In Vana'diel (the world FFXI takes place on), a moon cycle takes 84 Vana'diel days. The moon is divided into 12 phases, each lasting seven days. (The crescent and gibbous phases are doubled compared to Earth moon phases, so those last fourteen days, but it's easier to think of it as 12 phases.)
Vana'diel time runs 25 times faster than Earth time. So a complete moon cycle occurs every 84/25 Earth days, or 3.36 Earth days. Since each moon phase lasts seven days, you have 7/25 Earth days during which to craft. That gives a total of 6.72 hours every 3.36 days during which crafting has the highest success rate.
Except success rate isn't just determined by the phase of the moon, it's also determined by the day of the week. A Vana'diel week has eight days, every craft skill will have maximum success on only one day during the eight days of the Vana'diel week. So you actually have less than an hour every three or so Earth days where crafting success is maximized.
Notice that the phase lasts only seven days, though. That means that each moon cycle, one day does not occur during the optimal phase. So if you're trying to level that craft, you have to wait for a span of less than an hour that only occurs once every two moon cycles. (84 * 2 / 8 = 21 exact, so only two days swap off missing the cycle.)
For added fun, many people believe that the direction your character is facing also influences crafting results...
Of course you are, to the extent that you're paying them at all by using Google and viewing ads. The entire point behind Google is that it uses "intelligent searching algorithms" to filter out the nonsense and only show actual relevant results.
When Google starts seeing itself in the business of deciding what sites I should or should not see based on their evaluation of the sites content, they become useless to me.
I find that statement really amusing, because that's exactly what Google sells themself as doing. They evaluate the site based on their PageRank algorithm, and decide what you should or should not see based on that. The entire point behind Google is that it filters content. A search is a filter, and then the order is determined based on other filters. Google is a filter - that's why you use it, to filter out things that aren't relevant to what you're looking for.
What Google is doing here is declaring that some blogs aren't worth appearing on Google News, and is removing them as a source from Google News (although not the Google Search index). You'll still be able to find them using Google, just not Google News, since Google News is supposed to be a filter returning only valid news sites. (Why it still returns results from Slashdot in that case is anyone's guess.:))
I disagree that the two are equal. The buzz I got about the Wii name decision was "wow, that's a silly name, but I'll still buy one." The PS3, on the other hand, had a whole vibe of "well, I'll probably buy a PS3 because that's where the games'll be" going into E3 which rapidly changed into "$600 for the useful version? Screw that!"
My general thoughts on the next-gen consoles before and after:
Before E3: "Well, I don't want an XBox360 because it doesn't have any exclusive titles I care about. I'm unsold on the Revolution's wand, but I'm definitely eager to try it once demo units hit stores. I'll probably get a PS3, though, because it'll be the one with the games I want to play."
After E3: "$600?! DualShake?! WTF?! Forget this! Maybe if they release a PS3 with force-feedback controllers at a reasonable price at some point after I've bought an HDTV. Otherwise, forget about it. I'll just get a Wii, and giggle about the name. WIIIIIIIIIII! WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII! Hehehehe."
The Sony-fanboy side of me can't help but keep thinking "maybe they were joking, it must still be in development, I'm sure they'll make the real announcement in September." But there's no way I'm buying what they showed at E3 for $600. $300, maybe. $600? I'd rather get a DS and a Wii.
Nope. XUL is rendered using the same rendering engine that renders the webpages.
Simplest way to prove this is to install the DOM inspector and poke around the various XUL elements and corresponding CSS rules. Another way is to note the differences between how Firefox widgets work on Windows XP and how actual Windows XP widgets work.
First off, Firefox menus do not fade in and out like Windows menus do. When you open a menu, it's supposed to fade in. Selecting a menu options should cause the menu to fade out, with the selected menu options fading out slower than the rest of the menu. Firefox menus just appear and then vanish.
Next off, on the Options screen, group labels in Firefox are black. They should be blue (in the default blue Windows XP theme). Drop-down menus should slide down when clicked, they don't.
Under GNOME when I used it, Firefox screwed up the menus in one theme, but none of the others.
Anyway, XUL is rendered with the exact same engine that renders webpages. Mozilla just implemented some non-standard CSS rules that indicate that certain CSS blocks should be drawn like native widgets. But they most certainly are not rendered using native widgets.
A lot of Firefox's UI is written using JavaScript. Firefox's JavaScript runs in a single thread.
I've tried to make an extension that did some work in JavaScript in a background thread. All JavaScript runs in the UI thread, so it couldn't be done.
If I'm wrong, someone please, please, please post how to write multithreaded JavaScript extensions. I'm interested!
So, yeah, making the UI multithreaded would be a large task since anything done in JavaScript is single threaded, because the interprettor is single threaded. My attempt to run JavaScript in another thread only succeeded in crashing the browser.
The 360 release was an opportunity for S-E to address this; to revamp the hideously outdated quest-log, to put in some easily-identified, tightly structured quests to break newbies into the game and teach them the basics of playing while also getting their low level gear for free and, in short, to make the game FUN to play with a character below level 50, which is something that's always been lacking.
This is my single largest complaint about FFXI: the UI sucks. Now, to be fair, WoW's isn't all that good (although it is better) but WoW has UI mods and so most of the UI problems get resolved by someone. (Even better, Blizzard has frequently added some of the most popular third party features back into the default UI, many times improving on them.)
What I'd really, really, really, like to see Square-Enix do is revitalize Vana'diel by updating the graphics for the PC and XBox360, and to take the time to fix up the flaws in the client. My biggest complaint with FFXI on the PC is that you are disallowed from playing the game in a window. Fortunately there are third-party solutions to this, but those violate the TOS - but I'd rather violate the TOS than be kicked off when some random application decides to pop up a dialog. ("Your mouse's batteries are running low - oh, and your party just died because FFXI disconnected you because it no longer has full screen exclusive mode.")
I really want to enjoy FFXI, I really do, but... Square-Enix really doesn't seem to be interested in evolving FFXI past the limitations of the PS2 on the non-PS2 platforms. The PS2 might not support as advanced a client as the PC or the XBox360, but there's no reason to hold the newer platforms back to the limits of the PS2. Especially when it comes to the UI - the PS2 and XBox360 are limited by the constraint of requiring them to work with just the basic controller. The PC client should take advantage of the keyboard and mouse, and not just remap the PS2 buttons onto the keyboard.
You mean DualShake, not DualShock. "Dual" referred to the two analog sticks, which the DualShake has. "Shock" referred to the force feedback, which Sony removed from the DualShake.
According to Sony, this has nothing to do with their losing a patent case with Immersion Corporation and is because their motion sensing technology would be "confused" by the force feedback technology.
It's worth noting that the Wii controller will support rumble technology along with motion detection. Personally, I'm curious if the hastely-added "motion" technology wasn't the only reason force feedback was removed, and if it weren't also due to battery concerns, since the new controller is wireless. I have a feeling that the motion feedback was added for three reasons:
To try and steal some thunder from the Wii.
To try and provide a reason why they removed the force feedback function due to the ongoing lawsuit with Immersion Corporation.
Because when the controller contained force feedback technology, the battery life in the wireless controller was far too short.
Although this is all wild speculation on my behalf.
On Slashdot, digg, and other gaming sites I've been looking at, the Sony fanboy has overnight become an endangered species.
No kidding. Before E3, I figured I'd probably be getting a PS3 about a year after they were released. Now, I'm not so sure I'll ever be getting a PS3, or at least not within the next several years. ("$500 for the cheap one?! I'll wait until I finally get an HDTV, and then think about it.")
There's no way in hell I'm paying $500 for a console, no matter how good it is. I was already planning on waiting until the PS3 price dropped to around $300 before considering a purchase (about a year or two after it launches), now I think I may just be passing on it completely.
Especially if force feedback controllers are never reintroduced. I want my controller to rumble, dammit.
Or at least, that's what I'm getting out of the whole thing. We already knew the PS3 was going to be expensive to produce. The only question was how much Sony would charge for the machine.
"However, when released, both [PlayStation and PlayStation 2] had sales that were unthinkable for previous game machines. This is because both offered experiences that could not be had on previous machines." [SCEI president Ken Kutaragi said.] "Things like next-generation graphics and various services via the network. And, as with the PS and PS2, we believe people who like games will, without question, purchase it."
Seriously, I never had any intention of buying any of the next-gen consoles when they were released (that includes the Wii; by the time it comes out, I may finally get around to getting a DS:)), but the more I hear about the PS3, the more I realize I'm definitely not going to be buying any of the first-generation PS3s. Two versions, one an un-upgradable "cheap" version, weird controllers without force feedback, and the $500/$600 price tag all are making me that much more willing to wait for a PS3.
I'm more than willing to wait until the PSThwii gets released, with a single version that supports everything, and hopefully with wireless controllers that support force feedback. Oops, sorry, that's supposed to be "PSthree" in the style of the "PStwo" and "PSone" rereleases.
and allayed any fears I had that this was a last-minute gimmick designed to tear interest away from the Wii.
So, in other words, the Sony gimic worked to tear your interest away from the Wii. Sony must be ecstatic.
Anyone remember the pressure-sensitive buttons on the PS2 controller? Anyone remember any game that used them? The only one I recall was Metal Gear Solid 2, and with that game, I only succeeded in screwing up the amount of pressure required, accidently shooting guards I only wanted to hold up. Supposedly some driving games used it, but I don't play driving games, so I can't verify that. Bottom line is that I really didn't notice any games using the pressure sensitive buttons - and even if they did, I wasn't actively using them, instead just pressing the button like I always did.
I can't help but feel that this new "motion sensitive" feature will go the way of the "pressure sensitive" buttons - very few games will bother using them, since they're not really a core feature of the controller. Try as I might, I cannot imagine twisting a PS2 controller around for any length of time. It's just too heavy and too unweildy to continuely wave around. Imagine having to hold your PS2 controller steady, because accidently tipping it might do something unintended. (To be fair, I can't imagine twisting the Wii remote around for any length of time either, but not having held that, I'm willing to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.)
Just like the pressure sensetive buttons, this whole motion sensitive thing on the PS3 controller feels like a pointless gimic. Apparently they're also trying to use that to distract from the fact that they've removed force feedback from their controllers in response to a patent lawsuit. I dunno about anyone else, but I like having force feedback.
The whole PS3 "DualShake" thing still sounds like a gimic to me, just like the PS2 "DualShock" was essentially a gimic. I'd much rather have force feedback than be required to wave a DualShock controller around in the air. (And, yes, it's been confirmed that the final PS3 controller looks exactly like the PS2 controller - except it's wireless. It's not that boomerang thing.)
Sony is producing a multimedia powerhouse with some (stolen) unconventional input; as I've argued before (when people complained about the Wii's one handed controller) you can't do much with 6 axis control when your hands are together (try it, hold a book and rotate it in as many ways as you can, now try with a remote control)
Anyone remember the pressure-sensitive buttons that Sony added to the PS2 controller? It's not entirely un-Sony like to add useless features to a controller that no one really uses.
About the only game I can remember playing that used the pressure-sensitive buttons was Metal Gear Solid 2, where lightly pressing on the button would bring the gun up, and pressing hard would fire.
Quite a few guards met an untimely end when I merely meant to point a gun at them, and not fire off a few rounds through their head...
I think some driving games supposedly used them, but I don't really play driving games all that much, so I can't recall any. Other than that, I can't remember playing any game that used the pressure-sensitive buttons. If any of them did, I certainly didn't notice!
I have a feeling this "motion sensitive" feature in the PS3 controller's going to be used about as much, given that it's an attempt to add a checkbox in a feature comparison chart and not an attempt to actually make a useful feature.
To be fair, it's not an entirely inconsistant view. Many people dislike Microsoft for using their monopoly in operating systems to try and take over other markets. (Examples include the "browser wars," which Microsoft won more due to Netscape screwing up than anything else, and the "new" media player wars, where iTunes seems to still be quite alive.)
So, in that sense, Microsoft is still being "evil" with the XBox - they're using the money they have from PC software sales, and trying to enter into the market by selling the XBox at a loss. (Although I'm not entirely sure how big a loss and how different they are from other consoler sellers.)
It's sort of like if, say, Sony where to try and use the PS3 to try and sneak a new media format into people's houses to "win" the next "format wars."
Wait a second...
(Just in case anyone wonders, as far as I'm concerned, they're both evil. I have a PS2 because the games I want to play are on the PS2 and not the XBox. I expect I'll be getting a PS3 for the same reason - not out of any love for Sony. However, I most certainly will not be getting a PS3 when they're released.)
I'm currently replaying through Kingdom Hearts II on Proud ("hard") Mode (as in, the PS2 is on next to my computer and I've got KH2 paused) but you have to admit: the gameplay in KH2 is, simply put, lousy. It's far too easy (mashing X will get you through almost anything) and in sections far too gimicy (complete silly minigame, beat up now-vulnerable boss, repeat).
The only reason to play the game is, honestly, for the story. If you don't care about the story and don't want to watch the cutscenes, there's really no reason to be playing the game. It's all fan service - that's not a troll, it's the honest truth.
If you're not a Square-Enix or Disney fan, the game will be amazingly boring. It's really not that good a game. For comparison, before I started playing KH2, I was playing a lot of Devil May Cry 3, and the difference in gameplay between the two is amazing. DMC3 requires quite a bit of strategy and actual timing to play - if you just spam "attack" you're going to die. (Of course, DMC3 also requires a lot of spamming "attack" for certain moves.) In KH2, even on the hardest difficulty level, you can easily make it through most sections by spamming attack. Some of the more gimicy boss battles require some amount of skill in targetting your spammed combo, but that's it.
Of course, I also highly doubt that the same group of people that think of Nintendo as a kid's platform will be playing KH2 for much the same reason. I somehow can't imagine anyone saying, with a straight face, "Nintendo is for kids - now excuse me, I'm gonna go sing along with Ariel, Donald Duck, and Goofy, before heading over to talk with Winney the Pooh."
Luigi jumped higher in the Japanese SMB2 ("The Lost Levels"). If you look at the title screen you'll notice that you have two options: Mario Game and Luigi Game. There was no two-player.
Mario runs faster than Luigi but doesn't jump as high. Luigi jumps higher than Mario but doesn't run as fast. Both characters would "slide" a little when they stopped running - Mario stopped faster than Luigi.
So the jumping thing is canon from the Japanese SMB2, not the American SMB2.
However, Shyguys have appeared in the various Super Mario RPGs (along with other US SMB2 enemies) so it would seem that it's canon-ish, at the very least.
The Wikipedia article on The Lost Levels lists a bunch of gameplay features and comparisons from The Lost Levels. It's worth noting that The Lost Levels version of SMB2 is actually quite a bit easier than the original SMB2 - the Wikipedia article lists why. (In The Lost Levels, you have The ability to save and trestart at any level, so if you find a backwards warpzone you can easily restart the level you started from. The poison mushrooms were changed to be vibrant purple, looking nothing like normal mushrooms. There are other minor changes to enemy AI that makes the game easier as well.)
To the best of my knowledge Azureus doesn't yet, but intends to. You can read about their Vivaldi system on their wiki. (Version as of the time I posted.) It's designed to compute nodes that are close to each other so that Azureus can pick closer peers.
However, they don't actually use it yet, according to that page. But there is work towards it.
1) Is Aero relevant to Vista's inner workings, i.e. is it a real limitation to its functionality if missing? If yes, how severe a limitation?
Aero is just a new graphics engine for Windows Vista. Removing it makes Windows fall back on the current graphics engine used in Windows XP. (Well, presumably a slightly newer version, but you get the idea.) A Linux analogy would be xgl (Aero) versus standard X.
Essentially the only limitation is that you won't get transparent window title bars and the icons won't be as flashy. So it's hardly a limitation, unless you like your eyecandy. (And some people do.)
2) How does Aero differ from numerous attempts at 3D desktops that are already out there? Why will users really miss it?
It's not a 3D desktop, it's a plain 2D desktop that uses 3D acceleration to speed the GUI. Chances are that most people will actually find that using Aero will reduce CPU usage and (potentially) lessens memory usage for the graphics layer, since it offloads much of that work to the GPU.
Essentially it uses the 3D graphics abilities of the graphics card to handle rendering 2D graphics. This is practically identical to the way OS X and xgl work - both use the 3D acceleration abilities of a graphics card to render 2D graphics.
As for "will users really miss it" - that's a definite maybe. My dad just spent a good week or so getting xgl running on his desktop to generate Aero-style effects under KDE, so some people want the eye candy. But other people probably won't even notice it's missing. It depends on the user.
3) What are the chances that Aero will stay off-limits to "pirates" for any extended period of time?
No, of course not. I mean, who could ever sneak in something malicious to http://host/report?q=SELECT+%2A+FROM+CUSTOMERS? I really wish I was kidding, the first response to "we should never do this" was "oh, so we should be using POST instead?"
But, yeah, these types of problems aren't exactly new. Although there are quite a few people out there who seem to believe that if you simply hide the location bar via window.open, you remove all chances of tampering with the request. Likewise with using POST over GET. It's something that people should be able to figure out, but not necessarily something that people do figure out.
Really? Sweet, I may be able to get Oblivion after all. Now if only they remove the CD check in some patch, it'll definitely be in my list of games to purchase.
Sometime after I upgrade my PC to be able to actually play Oblivion...
Seriously, could one of the Slashdot editors please clear this up? The article ends with:
From THE WAL-MART EFFECT by Charles Fishman. Reprinted by arrangement with The Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Group (USA), Inc. Copyright (c) Charles Fishman, 2006. Charles is a senior writer for Fast Company magazine.
So, is this a direct plagirism from Fast Company magazine? Is this used by permission from Charles Fishman? Is this a joint venture between Slashdot and Fast Company magazine?
It's not quite a direct copy of the Fast Company version - they changed it from using HTML paragraph tags to misusing the <br> tag.
So - what's up? Where did the article come from? Fast Company? The book's author? The publisher? A complete and total ripoff? What?
I'm going to vote for #6. His kids want to use the stuff that daddy makes, and conciously choose to use Microsoft products because their father runs the company that makes them.
I highly doubt Ballmer would have choosen to say his kids were "brainwashed" into using Microsoft products unless he was joking. "Brainwashed" is a curious choice of words if he really did forbid non-Microsoft products.
If you read the interview, and not the Slashdot article, he actually says:
[Fortune:] Do you have an iPod?
[Ballmer:] No, I do not. Nor do my children. My children--in many dimensions they're as poorly behaved as many other children, but at least on this dimension I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod.
My reading of that isn't that he forbids them from using it, it's that his children support their father and his buisness. I have no idea how old his kids are (and neither does Wikipedia) but depending on age, it's quite believable that his kids just like emulating their father and therefore choose to use Microsoft products.
I read it as kind of a geek joke - Ballmer's kids are "brainwashed" into using Microsoft products because it's what their father uses.
Not that all kids use what their parents use - my father uses KDE and Opera, but I'm currently posting this from GNOME using Firefox. But when I was younger, and my dad bought OS/2 for our home computer, I believed him when he said it was the greatest desktop OS ever...
I'm gonna take a wild guess that Steve Ballmer is, in fact, capable of joking, and that his kids aren't really forbidden from using Google or iPods, but instead really are Microsoft supporters. It's not really unheard of for kids to be fanatical about things their parents are involved in.
I expect that Ballmer's kids really are "brainwashed" in the sense that they believe in their dad and the company they work for. I doubt they've been actually forbidden from using it, they'd just rather use the tools their dad makes.
I know I've heard plenty from my father about how the projects he works on are the world's greatest... I'm tempted to name names, but I think I'll pass for now.
Slashdot Mirror
Developer panels. They had the developers spend time talking with people at the con and announcing upcoming content. So while I doubt the developers were actively planning the convention (that'd be marketing's job), they were still involved with the con itself and preparing material for it. Which would, indeed, be time not spent developing the game.
That's still turn based - turn based doesn't mean "everyone picks an action and they all resolve," it means "based on turns" and in FFX's case, each "turn" only one participant got to take an action.
It's essentially Final Fantasy Tactic's "charge" system (in fact, I think FFX called their system "Charge Time Battle" or something weird like that) - each participant in the battle takes a turn, and then has to recharge a "charge" count based on their speed. The character with the lowest "charge" count goes next. So characters with high recharges would get to go more often than other characters. (Making Haste fun.)
Unlike FFT, actions occured immediately - in FFT, actions also had to be "charged" before occuring. Most actions "charged" fast enough that they occured immediately after the character received a turn, but some took longer. However, in FFX, actions could have longer recharge times, making a character have to recharge longer after certain actions - which is why using a Summons limit would cause them to allow opponents to get in several attacks before they were ready again.
In any case, it's still turn based - not pseudo-real time like Active Time Battle is. Once a character was charged in ATB, other characters kept on charging. A character only actually performed an action after the action was selected - so if you didn't do anything, your characters would still be attacked, in "Active Time."
FFX didn't use Active Time Battle, it used a turn based system...
Yes, FFX's system was better than ATB is, because you don't have any pointless pauses while waiting for bars to fill, turns just occur in order and the action only stops to allow the player to select a new command. However this new system isn't the turn based system FFX used. The interview doesn't give enough information to say more than that, though.
Assuming you're using Firefox 1.5 or higher (or Seamonkey 1.0 or higher?), I've created some CSS rules to make Slashdot use a Serif-style font and move the comment score below the title. I would have just copy-pasted the rules directly into the comment, but Slashdot's stupid broken <ecode> tag bravely mangled all attempts. So instead you'll have to live with a link to the rules on my personal site - no, I'm not spying on you. :)
(Why move the scores below the title and not next to the title? Because my attempt to move it next to the title didn't look quite as nice as I'd like thanks to the current setup. At some point in the future I may create a set of rules to move it to the right of the title, but it's going to be a long set of rules.)
Because I happen to know how to find this out...
In Vana'diel (the world FFXI takes place on), a moon cycle takes 84 Vana'diel days. The moon is divided into 12 phases, each lasting seven days. (The crescent and gibbous phases are doubled compared to Earth moon phases, so those last fourteen days, but it's easier to think of it as 12 phases.)
Vana'diel time runs 25 times faster than Earth time. So a complete moon cycle occurs every 84/25 Earth days, or 3.36 Earth days. Since each moon phase lasts seven days, you have 7/25 Earth days during which to craft. That gives a total of 6.72 hours every 3.36 days during which crafting has the highest success rate.
Except success rate isn't just determined by the phase of the moon, it's also determined by the day of the week. A Vana'diel week has eight days, every craft skill will have maximum success on only one day during the eight days of the Vana'diel week. So you actually have less than an hour every three or so Earth days where crafting success is maximized.
Notice that the phase lasts only seven days, though. That means that each moon cycle, one day does not occur during the optimal phase. So if you're trying to level that craft, you have to wait for a span of less than an hour that only occurs once every two moon cycles. (84 * 2 / 8 = 21 exact, so only two days swap off missing the cycle.)
For added fun, many people believe that the direction your character is facing also influences crafting results...
Of course you are, to the extent that you're paying them at all by using Google and viewing ads. The entire point behind Google is that it uses "intelligent searching algorithms" to filter out the nonsense and only show actual relevant results.
I find that statement really amusing, because that's exactly what Google sells themself as doing. They evaluate the site based on their PageRank algorithm, and decide what you should or should not see based on that. The entire point behind Google is that it filters content. A search is a filter, and then the order is determined based on other filters. Google is a filter - that's why you use it, to filter out things that aren't relevant to what you're looking for.
What Google is doing here is declaring that some blogs aren't worth appearing on Google News, and is removing them as a source from Google News (although not the Google Search index). You'll still be able to find them using Google, just not Google News, since Google News is supposed to be a filter returning only valid news sites. (Why it still returns results from Slashdot in that case is anyone's guess. :))
I disagree that the two are equal. The buzz I got about the Wii name decision was "wow, that's a silly name, but I'll still buy one." The PS3, on the other hand, had a whole vibe of "well, I'll probably buy a PS3 because that's where the games'll be" going into E3 which rapidly changed into "$600 for the useful version? Screw that!"
My general thoughts on the next-gen consoles before and after:
Before E3: "Well, I don't want an XBox360 because it doesn't have any exclusive titles I care about. I'm unsold on the Revolution's wand, but I'm definitely eager to try it once demo units hit stores. I'll probably get a PS3, though, because it'll be the one with the games I want to play."
After E3: "$600?! DualShake?! WTF?! Forget this! Maybe if they release a PS3 with force-feedback controllers at a reasonable price at some point after I've bought an HDTV. Otherwise, forget about it. I'll just get a Wii, and giggle about the name. WIIIIIIIIIII! WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII! Hehehehe."
The Sony-fanboy side of me can't help but keep thinking "maybe they were joking, it must still be in development, I'm sure they'll make the real announcement in September." But there's no way I'm buying what they showed at E3 for $600. $300, maybe. $600? I'd rather get a DS and a Wii.
Nope. XUL is rendered using the same rendering engine that renders the webpages.
Simplest way to prove this is to install the DOM inspector and poke around the various XUL elements and corresponding CSS rules. Another way is to note the differences between how Firefox widgets work on Windows XP and how actual Windows XP widgets work.
First off, Firefox menus do not fade in and out like Windows menus do. When you open a menu, it's supposed to fade in. Selecting a menu options should cause the menu to fade out, with the selected menu options fading out slower than the rest of the menu. Firefox menus just appear and then vanish.
Next off, on the Options screen, group labels in Firefox are black. They should be blue (in the default blue Windows XP theme). Drop-down menus should slide down when clicked, they don't.
Under GNOME when I used it, Firefox screwed up the menus in one theme, but none of the others.
Anyway, XUL is rendered with the exact same engine that renders webpages. Mozilla just implemented some non-standard CSS rules that indicate that certain CSS blocks should be drawn like native widgets. But they most certainly are not rendered using native widgets.
A lot of Firefox's UI is written using JavaScript. Firefox's JavaScript runs in a single thread.
I've tried to make an extension that did some work in JavaScript in a background thread. All JavaScript runs in the UI thread, so it couldn't be done.
If I'm wrong, someone please, please, please post how to write multithreaded JavaScript extensions. I'm interested!
So, yeah, making the UI multithreaded would be a large task since anything done in JavaScript is single threaded, because the interprettor is single threaded. My attempt to run JavaScript in another thread only succeeded in crashing the browser.
This is my single largest complaint about FFXI: the UI sucks. Now, to be fair, WoW's isn't all that good (although it is better) but WoW has UI mods and so most of the UI problems get resolved by someone. (Even better, Blizzard has frequently added some of the most popular third party features back into the default UI, many times improving on them.)
What I'd really, really, really, like to see Square-Enix do is revitalize Vana'diel by updating the graphics for the PC and XBox360, and to take the time to fix up the flaws in the client. My biggest complaint with FFXI on the PC is that you are disallowed from playing the game in a window. Fortunately there are third-party solutions to this, but those violate the TOS - but I'd rather violate the TOS than be kicked off when some random application decides to pop up a dialog. ("Your mouse's batteries are running low - oh, and your party just died because FFXI disconnected you because it no longer has full screen exclusive mode.")
I really want to enjoy FFXI, I really do, but... Square-Enix really doesn't seem to be interested in evolving FFXI past the limitations of the PS2 on the non-PS2 platforms. The PS2 might not support as advanced a client as the PC or the XBox360, but there's no reason to hold the newer platforms back to the limits of the PS2. Especially when it comes to the UI - the PS2 and XBox360 are limited by the constraint of requiring them to work with just the basic controller. The PC client should take advantage of the keyboard and mouse, and not just remap the PS2 buttons onto the keyboard.
You mean DualShake, not DualShock. "Dual" referred to the two analog sticks, which the DualShake has. "Shock" referred to the force feedback, which Sony removed from the DualShake.
According to Sony, this has nothing to do with their losing a patent case with Immersion Corporation and is because their motion sensing technology would be "confused" by the force feedback technology.
It's worth noting that the Wii controller will support rumble technology along with motion detection. Personally, I'm curious if the hastely-added "motion" technology wasn't the only reason force feedback was removed, and if it weren't also due to battery concerns, since the new controller is wireless. I have a feeling that the motion feedback was added for three reasons:
Although this is all wild speculation on my behalf.
No kidding. Before E3, I figured I'd probably be getting a PS3 about a year after they were released. Now, I'm not so sure I'll ever be getting a PS3, or at least not within the next several years. ("$500 for the cheap one?! I'll wait until I finally get an HDTV, and then think about it.")
There's no way in hell I'm paying $500 for a console, no matter how good it is. I was already planning on waiting until the PS3 price dropped to around $300 before considering a purchase (about a year or two after it launches), now I think I may just be passing on it completely.
Especially if force feedback controllers are never reintroduced. I want my controller to rumble, dammit.
Or at least, that's what I'm getting out of the whole thing. We already knew the PS3 was going to be expensive to produce. The only question was how much Sony would charge for the machine.
Right... no one's ever seen next generation graphics before, or even various services via the network.
Seriously, I never had any intention of buying any of the next-gen consoles when they were released (that includes the Wii; by the time it comes out, I may finally get around to getting a DS :)), but the more I hear about the PS3, the more I realize I'm definitely not going to be buying any of the first-generation PS3s. Two versions, one an un-upgradable "cheap" version, weird controllers without force feedback, and the $500/$600 price tag all are making me that much more willing to wait for a PS3.
I'm more than willing to wait until the PSThwii gets released, with a single version that supports everything, and hopefully with wireless controllers that support force feedback. Oops, sorry, that's supposed to be "PSthree" in the style of the "PStwo" and "PSone" rereleases.
And to think, if anything, I'm a Sony fanboy...
So, in other words, the Sony gimic worked to tear your interest away from the Wii. Sony must be ecstatic.
Anyone remember the pressure-sensitive buttons on the PS2 controller? Anyone remember any game that used them? The only one I recall was Metal Gear Solid 2, and with that game, I only succeeded in screwing up the amount of pressure required, accidently shooting guards I only wanted to hold up. Supposedly some driving games used it, but I don't play driving games, so I can't verify that. Bottom line is that I really didn't notice any games using the pressure sensitive buttons - and even if they did, I wasn't actively using them, instead just pressing the button like I always did.
I can't help but feel that this new "motion sensitive" feature will go the way of the "pressure sensitive" buttons - very few games will bother using them, since they're not really a core feature of the controller. Try as I might, I cannot imagine twisting a PS2 controller around for any length of time. It's just too heavy and too unweildy to continuely wave around. Imagine having to hold your PS2 controller steady, because accidently tipping it might do something unintended. (To be fair, I can't imagine twisting the Wii remote around for any length of time either, but not having held that, I'm willing to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.)
Just like the pressure sensetive buttons, this whole motion sensitive thing on the PS3 controller feels like a pointless gimic. Apparently they're also trying to use that to distract from the fact that they've removed force feedback from their controllers in response to a patent lawsuit. I dunno about anyone else, but I like having force feedback.
The whole PS3 "DualShake" thing still sounds like a gimic to me, just like the PS2 "DualShock" was essentially a gimic. I'd much rather have force feedback than be required to wave a DualShock controller around in the air. (And, yes, it's been confirmed that the final PS3 controller looks exactly like the PS2 controller - except it's wireless. It's not that boomerang thing.)
Anyone remember the pressure-sensitive buttons that Sony added to the PS2 controller? It's not entirely un-Sony like to add useless features to a controller that no one really uses.
About the only game I can remember playing that used the pressure-sensitive buttons was Metal Gear Solid 2, where lightly pressing on the button would bring the gun up, and pressing hard would fire.
Quite a few guards met an untimely end when I merely meant to point a gun at them, and not fire off a few rounds through their head...
I think some driving games supposedly used them, but I don't really play driving games all that much, so I can't recall any. Other than that, I can't remember playing any game that used the pressure-sensitive buttons. If any of them did, I certainly didn't notice!
I have a feeling this "motion sensitive" feature in the PS3 controller's going to be used about as much, given that it's an attempt to add a checkbox in a feature comparison chart and not an attempt to actually make a useful feature.
To be fair, it's not an entirely inconsistant view. Many people dislike Microsoft for using their monopoly in operating systems to try and take over other markets. (Examples include the "browser wars," which Microsoft won more due to Netscape screwing up than anything else, and the "new" media player wars, where iTunes seems to still be quite alive.)
So, in that sense, Microsoft is still being "evil" with the XBox - they're using the money they have from PC software sales, and trying to enter into the market by selling the XBox at a loss. (Although I'm not entirely sure how big a loss and how different they are from other consoler sellers.)
It's sort of like if, say, Sony where to try and use the PS3 to try and sneak a new media format into people's houses to "win" the next "format wars."
Wait a second...
(Just in case anyone wonders, as far as I'm concerned, they're both evil. I have a PS2 because the games I want to play are on the PS2 and not the XBox. I expect I'll be getting a PS3 for the same reason - not out of any love for Sony. However, I most certainly will not be getting a PS3 when they're released.)
I'm currently replaying through Kingdom Hearts II on Proud ("hard") Mode (as in, the PS2 is on next to my computer and I've got KH2 paused) but you have to admit: the gameplay in KH2 is, simply put, lousy. It's far too easy (mashing X will get you through almost anything) and in sections far too gimicy (complete silly minigame, beat up now-vulnerable boss, repeat).
The only reason to play the game is, honestly, for the story. If you don't care about the story and don't want to watch the cutscenes, there's really no reason to be playing the game. It's all fan service - that's not a troll, it's the honest truth.
If you're not a Square-Enix or Disney fan, the game will be amazingly boring. It's really not that good a game. For comparison, before I started playing KH2, I was playing a lot of Devil May Cry 3, and the difference in gameplay between the two is amazing. DMC3 requires quite a bit of strategy and actual timing to play - if you just spam "attack" you're going to die. (Of course, DMC3 also requires a lot of spamming "attack" for certain moves.) In KH2, even on the hardest difficulty level, you can easily make it through most sections by spamming attack. Some of the more gimicy boss battles require some amount of skill in targetting your spammed combo, but that's it.
Of course, I also highly doubt that the same group of people that think of Nintendo as a kid's platform will be playing KH2 for much the same reason. I somehow can't imagine anyone saying, with a straight face, "Nintendo is for kids - now excuse me, I'm gonna go sing along with Ariel, Donald Duck, and Goofy, before heading over to talk with Winney the Pooh."
Luigi jumped higher in the Japanese SMB2 ("The Lost Levels"). If you look at the title screen you'll notice that you have two options: Mario Game and Luigi Game. There was no two-player.
Mario runs faster than Luigi but doesn't jump as high. Luigi jumps higher than Mario but doesn't run as fast. Both characters would "slide" a little when they stopped running - Mario stopped faster than Luigi.
So the jumping thing is canon from the Japanese SMB2, not the American SMB2.
However, Shyguys have appeared in the various Super Mario RPGs (along with other US SMB2 enemies) so it would seem that it's canon-ish, at the very least.
The Wikipedia article on The Lost Levels lists a bunch of gameplay features and comparisons from The Lost Levels. It's worth noting that The Lost Levels version of SMB2 is actually quite a bit easier than the original SMB2 - the Wikipedia article lists why. (In The Lost Levels, you have The ability to save and trestart at any level, so if you find a backwards warpzone you can easily restart the level you started from. The poison mushrooms were changed to be vibrant purple, looking nothing like normal mushrooms. There are other minor changes to enemy AI that makes the game easier as well.)
To the best of my knowledge Azureus doesn't yet, but intends to. You can read about their Vivaldi system on their wiki. (Version as of the time I posted.) It's designed to compute nodes that are close to each other so that Azureus can pick closer peers.
However, they don't actually use it yet, according to that page. But there is work towards it.
Aero is just a new graphics engine for Windows Vista. Removing it makes Windows fall back on the current graphics engine used in Windows XP. (Well, presumably a slightly newer version, but you get the idea.) A Linux analogy would be xgl (Aero) versus standard X.
Essentially the only limitation is that you won't get transparent window title bars and the icons won't be as flashy. So it's hardly a limitation, unless you like your eyecandy. (And some people do.)
It's not a 3D desktop, it's a plain 2D desktop that uses 3D acceleration to speed the GUI. Chances are that most people will actually find that using Aero will reduce CPU usage and (potentially) lessens memory usage for the graphics layer, since it offloads much of that work to the GPU.
Essentially it uses the 3D graphics abilities of the graphics card to handle rendering 2D graphics. This is practically identical to the way OS X and xgl work - both use the 3D acceleration abilities of a graphics card to render 2D graphics.
As for "will users really miss it" - that's a definite maybe. My dad just spent a good week or so getting xgl running on his desktop to generate Aero-style effects under KDE, so some people want the eye candy. But other people probably won't even notice it's missing. It depends on the user.
Slim to nil. :)
No, of course not. I mean, who could ever sneak in something malicious to http://host/report?q=SELECT+%2A+FROM+CUSTOMERS? I really wish I was kidding, the first response to "we should never do this" was "oh, so we should be using POST instead?"
But, yeah, these types of problems aren't exactly new. Although there are quite a few people out there who seem to believe that if you simply hide the location bar via window.open, you remove all chances of tampering with the request. Likewise with using POST over GET. It's something that people should be able to figure out, but not necessarily something that people do figure out.
Really? Sweet, I may be able to get Oblivion after all. Now if only they remove the CD check in some patch, it'll definitely be in my list of games to purchase.
Sometime after I upgrade my PC to be able to actually play Oblivion...
Seriously, could one of the Slashdot editors please clear this up? The article ends with:
So, is this a direct plagirism from Fast Company magazine? Is this used by permission from Charles Fishman? Is this a joint venture between Slashdot and Fast Company magazine?
It's not quite a direct copy of the Fast Company version - they changed it from using HTML paragraph tags to misusing the <br> tag.
So - what's up? Where did the article come from? Fast Company? The book's author? The publisher? A complete and total ripoff? What?
I'm going to vote for #6. His kids want to use the stuff that daddy makes, and conciously choose to use Microsoft products because their father runs the company that makes them.
I highly doubt Ballmer would have choosen to say his kids were "brainwashed" into using Microsoft products unless he was joking. "Brainwashed" is a curious choice of words if he really did forbid non-Microsoft products.
If you read the interview, and not the Slashdot article, he actually says:
My reading of that isn't that he forbids them from using it, it's that his children support their father and his buisness. I have no idea how old his kids are (and neither does Wikipedia) but depending on age, it's quite believable that his kids just like emulating their father and therefore choose to use Microsoft products.
I read it as kind of a geek joke - Ballmer's kids are "brainwashed" into using Microsoft products because it's what their father uses.
Not that all kids use what their parents use - my father uses KDE and Opera, but I'm currently posting this from GNOME using Firefox. But when I was younger, and my dad bought OS/2 for our home computer, I believed him when he said it was the greatest desktop OS ever...
I'm gonna take a wild guess that Steve Ballmer is, in fact, capable of joking, and that his kids aren't really forbidden from using Google or iPods, but instead really are Microsoft supporters. It's not really unheard of for kids to be fanatical about things their parents are involved in.
I expect that Ballmer's kids really are "brainwashed" in the sense that they believe in their dad and the company they work for. I doubt they've been actually forbidden from using it, they'd just rather use the tools their dad makes.
I know I've heard plenty from my father about how the projects he works on are the world's greatest... I'm tempted to name names, but I think I'll pass for now.