Hold up there just a second buddy. If he can't be given credit for fighting Nazis he shouldn't be given the blame for murdering Native Americans either. Show a little consistency there.
Amount of content in Guild Wars < Amount of content in World of Warcraft Amount of Content in a GW update/expansion < Amount of content in a WoW update/expansion Number of Servers needed for GW < Number of servers needed for WoW
Gee, how do they manage to keep costs so low?
While we're at it: Number of players of GW < Number of players of WoW
"Angel" is quite a popular costume for minor and major hotties at Gen Con, but there was one Angel who stood out from all the others this year.
She had brown (like a falcon) feathered wings (feathered, as in completely covered by individual feathers) that had about a 8-foot wingspan. I can't verify for certain, but i think the wings actually extended and folded up as well. The times i saw her they wer always extended because someone always wanted to take a picture of her.
As for hotness - i don't know. She was thin and had a very well-constructed set of wings. The wings were really that impressive.
f SWG had EVE-online's time-based skill training system and solid ground / space combat and missions, it would be one of the most cool games in existence.
So..if SWG didn't suck it would be cool? I must say that's quite a compelling argument.
I think you have lost at life and just proved how you can't recognize humor and irony when they're staring you in the face, jumping up and down, shouting "Hey look at me! I'm humorous and ironic!" Thank you for trying.
The price of freedom is sometimes inconvenience. Instead of bitching you should consider yourself lucky. You have now suffered and sacrificed for your rights. You sir, are a real patriot.
As I recall, there was exactly one path through the game, and you basically had to be playing according to a set script which seemed to have no flexibility.
Correction: two paths. Almost every scene had a mirrored version where the left/right moves were reversed.
Definitely better to look at than to play, but i still think of it fondly none the less.
But isn't playing the game sort of integral to the whole concept of it, just as viewing the Mona Lisa is indivisible from the things that make the Mona Lisa art?
When you talk about the Mona Lisa you can talk about the materials that make up the physical object or the processes that went into building that physical object, but that's not really an artistic discussion. You can only meaningfully discuss the Mona Lisa as art if you talk about what it looks like, which necessarily involves the act of viewing it.
In the same vein, when it's not actually being played, a computer game is just a collection of files on a computer. Those may or may not have their own artistic merits, but they are not The Game. It is the act of interacting with those files with the aid and interpretation of a computer (IE playing) that turns those into The Game.
I think Ebert is wrong, but the act of viewing and the act of playing ARE integral to the art of their respective media. Viewing the painting is what makes the painting art, playing the game is what makes the game art.
That "dorks never get laid" joke just gets funnier every time we hear it. It has no been used so many times now that its humor value is approaching infinity. That's why no one laughs anymore when they hear it - it's a form of humor that's too funny for their puny brains.
I can only speak for myself, but if i would still be playing the game with or without the Blizzard/Warcraft names, then there are probably a lot of other people who would be doing the same.
When answering the question according to my own perspective i was assuming the readers of my answer would be smart enough to infer that i thought my answer was generalizable. Clearly i overestimated at least one person's intelligence.
Think more carefully.
(I feel slightly lame for taking the time to respond to your pointless comment, but i'm a little prickly today about being called an idiot by anonymous jerks and i'm willing to wade into the mud on occasion just for the hell of it. This is the thing i'm really curious about: Why did you think it was worth your time and effort to point out that you thought i was stupid? Did it make you feel good about yourself? It certainly didn't take a significant amount of effort, but why did you feel compelled to even take that little bit of time out of your day? Me? I'm bored at work and feeling a little quarrelsome and curious. How about you?)
Well, the playerbase in WoW seems to be split roughly 50-50 with those who think that skill trumps class and those who think that WoW PVP is Rock-Paper-Scissors. Of course, all the people who have said skill are rogues so...;)
I've played a rogue and i've played a mage, and i can say without hesitation or doubt, that if it were somehow possible for me to play both characters at once against one-another, my rogue wouldn't even break a sweat killing my mage.
I've also played a warrior enough to have gotten the base abilities i know i would use against a rogue or mage, and it seems obvious that certain ones would rip up a rogue, but very few would help me against a mage.
Of course, in every discussion on class balance in WoW, the topic of 1-on-1 vs. group balance also comes up. Usually, those who are accused of being the most overpowered will claim that group v group negates any 1v1 imbalances, and that is what WoW is really designed for. There may be truth to that claim, but it doesn't help the frustration you feel when you're out in the middle of no where and the rock to your scissors comes looking to start a 1v1 fight. That's die or run, and quite often running isn't going to work.
What it all boils to is this: if it's not fun, fix it.
I wouldn't even classify that as an article. It comes across as a whiny complaint from someone who got WTFPWNT one too many times.
Yes, WoW does have balance issues, so does SWG, so do most MMOs. Big ones. So what should be done about it? "Don't make everyone the same and don't be heavy-handed with the nerfs." Great advice. Please tell me something that every 12-year-old on the forums hasn't already figured out.
Let's talk about what constitutes balance. Is a rock-paper-scissors schema a balanced schema? Sure, "rogues beat mages, mages beat warriors, and warriors beat rogues" means that everybody wins sometimes and everybody loses sometimes. It's also boring as hell for a mage to know that if opponent = rogue and luck != divine intervention mage = dead mage.
Can you balance everyone so that they are roughly equal in PVE while still making them balanced in PVP? DDO has already said that they're not going to do any balancing for PVP if they include it at all. Their focus is on group PVE play. Is that how it has to be done?
Put a religious symbol in your tattoo somewhere. I've never had anything but compliments from my bosses and coworokers. Suddenly descriminating against a tattooed freak becomes discriminating against a religion. Of course, both are equally wrong, but it's more obvious to the weak-minded when it's religion.
I'm sure they did this a lot when they were hunting down all the jedi between eps III and IV. But of course, it's not so simple as that.
The jedi has supernatural reaction times, so two guys flanking him are likely to end up shooting each other.
Then there's the phenomenal athletecism and mobility of the jedi - they fire, he leaps over the head of one, and even if they miss each other, he's now standingh behind one, with that one between himself and the other.
You're also assuming that the jedi didn' sense them coming (precognition) and just make sure they couldn't flank him, or use the mind-control trick to order one (or both) of them to not shoot him.
I always wondered why the futuristic technology never included fully automatic weapons. Sure, the jedi can block a few shots a second, but what happens when you up the rate to 30 or 60 shots per second. Why no vulcan cannon-style blasters that fill the whole area with hot plasma death?
Maybe if i was more than a casual Star Wars geek i'd know the answer to that one.
Slashdot Mirror
Hold up there just a second buddy. If he can't be given credit for fighting Nazis he shouldn't be given the blame for murdering Native Americans either. Show a little consistency there.
Mmmmmmmmm...White Castle.
Dear Apple,
Don't be a dick. Especially about stupid things.
Sincerely,
A potential consumer.
Brittney Speard? No matter how i interpret that it's something i'd be tempted to watch.
I call it Home Deposit because that's where all my money goes.
Can I choose the CowboyNeal option?
What part of "terrorism and child pornography" was confusing?
Amount of content in Guild Wars < Amount of content in World of Warcraft
Amount of Content in a GW update/expansion < Amount of content in a WoW update/expansion
Number of Servers needed for GW < Number of servers needed for WoW
Gee, how do they manage to keep costs so low?
While we're at it:
Number of players of GW < Number of players of WoW
Coincidence? I think not.
Boring. Repetitive. Encourages griefing. Oh yeah sign me up for a double helping of that.
The more i hear about this game the less i want to play it.
"Angel" is quite a popular costume for minor and major hotties at Gen Con, but there was one Angel who stood out from all the others this year.
She had brown (like a falcon) feathered wings (feathered, as in completely covered by individual feathers) that had about a 8-foot wingspan. I can't verify for certain, but i think the wings actually extended and folded up as well. The times i saw her they wer always extended because someone always wanted to take a picture of her.
As for hotness - i don't know. She was thin and had a very well-constructed set of wings. The wings were really that impressive.
f SWG had EVE-online's time-based skill training system and solid ground / space combat and missions, it would be one of the most cool games in existence.
So..if SWG didn't suck it would be cool? I must say that's quite a compelling argument.
I think you have lost at life and just proved how you can't recognize humor and irony when they're staring you in the face, jumping up and down, shouting "Hey look at me! I'm humorous and ironic!"
Thank you for trying.
The price of freedom is sometimes inconvenience. Instead of bitching you should consider yourself lucky. You have now suffered and sacrificed for your rights. You sir, are a real patriot.
Correction: two paths. Almost every scene had a mirrored version where the left/right moves were reversed.
Definitely better to look at than to play, but i still think of it fondly none the less.
But isn't playing the game sort of integral to the whole concept of it, just as viewing the Mona Lisa is indivisible from the things that make the Mona Lisa art?
When you talk about the Mona Lisa you can talk about the materials that make up the physical object or the processes that went into building that physical object, but that's not really an artistic discussion. You can only meaningfully discuss the Mona Lisa as art if you talk about what it looks like, which necessarily involves the act of viewing it.
In the same vein, when it's not actually being played, a computer game is just a collection of files on a computer. Those may or may not have their own artistic merits, but they are not The Game. It is the act of interacting with those files with the aid and interpretation of a computer (IE playing) that turns those into The Game.
I think Ebert is wrong, but the act of viewing and the act of playing ARE integral to the art of their respective media. Viewing the painting is what makes the painting art, playing the game is what makes the game art.
DELETE FROM usertable WHERE usertype = "PEDANTIC TWIT";
"Guide to Never Getting Laid. Ever."
That "dorks never get laid" joke just gets funnier every time we hear it. It has no been used so many times now that its humor value is approaching infinity. That's why no one laughs anymore when they hear it - it's a form of humor that's too funny for their puny brains.
I think the real problem is that they kept the broomsticks. You try acting with a wooden rod poking you in the colon!
I can only speak for myself, but if i would still be playing the game with or without the Blizzard/Warcraft names, then there are probably a lot of other people who would be doing the same.
When answering the question according to my own perspective i was assuming the readers of my answer would be smart enough to infer that i thought my answer was generalizable. Clearly i overestimated at least one person's intelligence.
Think more carefully.
(I feel slightly lame for taking the time to respond to your pointless comment, but i'm a little prickly today about being called an idiot by anonymous jerks and i'm willing to wade into the mud on occasion just for the hell of it. This is the thing i'm really curious about: Why did you think it was worth your time and effort to point out that you thought i was stupid? Did it make you feel good about yourself? It certainly didn't take a significant amount of effort, but why did you feel compelled to even take that little bit of time out of your day? Me? I'm bored at work and feeling a little quarrelsome and curious. How about you?)
Yes. The Warcraft/Blizzard brand means nothing to me, but i love WoW . . . when i'm not busy hating the bugs. But it's definitely more love than hate.
Well, the playerbase in WoW seems to be split roughly 50-50 with those who think that skill trumps class and those who think that WoW PVP is Rock-Paper-Scissors. Of course, all the people who have said skill are rogues so... ;)
I've played a rogue and i've played a mage, and i can say without hesitation or doubt, that if it were somehow possible for me to play both characters at once against one-another, my rogue wouldn't even break a sweat killing my mage.
I've also played a warrior enough to have gotten the base abilities i know i would use against a rogue or mage, and it seems obvious that certain ones would rip up a rogue, but very few would help me against a mage.
Of course, in every discussion on class balance in WoW, the topic of 1-on-1 vs. group balance also comes up. Usually, those who are accused of being the most overpowered will claim that group v group negates any 1v1 imbalances, and that is what WoW is really designed for. There may be truth to that claim, but it doesn't help the frustration you feel when you're out in the middle of no where and the rock to your scissors comes looking to start a 1v1 fight. That's die or run, and quite often running isn't going to work.
What it all boils to is this: if it's not fun, fix it.
I wouldn't even classify that as an article. It comes across as a whiny complaint from someone who got WTFPWNT one too many times.
Yes, WoW does have balance issues, so does SWG, so do most MMOs. Big ones. So what should be done about it? "Don't make everyone the same and don't be heavy-handed with the nerfs." Great advice. Please tell me something that every 12-year-old on the forums hasn't already figured out.
Let's talk about what constitutes balance. Is a rock-paper-scissors schema a balanced schema? Sure, "rogues beat mages, mages beat warriors, and warriors beat rogues" means that everybody wins sometimes and everybody loses sometimes. It's also boring as hell for a mage to know that if opponent = rogue and luck != divine intervention mage = dead mage.
Can you balance everyone so that they are roughly equal in PVE while still making them balanced in PVP? DDO has already said that they're not going to do any balancing for PVP if they include it at all. Their focus is on group PVE play. Is that how it has to be done?
Put a religious symbol in your tattoo somewhere. I've never had anything but compliments from my bosses and coworokers. Suddenly descriminating against a tattooed freak becomes discriminating against a religion. Of course, both are equally wrong, but it's more obvious to the weak-minded when it's religion.
I'm sure they did this a lot when they were hunting down all the jedi between eps III and IV. But of course, it's not so simple as that.
The jedi has supernatural reaction times, so two guys flanking him are likely to end up shooting each other.
Then there's the phenomenal athletecism and mobility of the jedi - they fire, he leaps over the head of one, and even if they miss each other, he's now standingh behind one, with that one between himself and the other.
You're also assuming that the jedi didn' sense them coming (precognition) and just make sure they couldn't flank him, or use the mind-control trick to order one (or both) of them to not shoot him.
I always wondered why the futuristic technology never included fully automatic weapons. Sure, the jedi can block a few shots a second, but what happens when you up the rate to 30 or 60 shots per second. Why no vulcan cannon-style blasters that fill the whole area with hot plasma death?
Maybe if i was more than a casual Star Wars geek i'd know the answer to that one.
That is bloody brilliant! If Blizzard doesn't get their act together, WoW is getting DELETED from my computer!
I heard that improved framerate, but not lag itself. Are you suggesting that Fix Lag actually induces lag?