Have you played CS:S? It is an absolutely incredible online multiplayer experience.... I never played the original CS...
It may occur to you, then, that perhaps most of the people who have no interest in CS:S have played the original? And, seeing that there's little more than a graphical update between it and the original, perhaps people were looking for a little more, y'know, innovation in the years they've spent on the title?
UT2k4 isn't particularly stellar, but it has a variety of gameplay types and several mods which are fairly new and interesting. I'd prefer to play it than Valve's rehash of CS.
Wow, those guys really know how to milk their customers! Releasing two versions and telling everyone about it, knowing full well that they'll be powerless to resist the urge to buy every version of the movies ever created and released!
But wait! It seems that I, an ordinary fellow, have managed to avoid their devilish plot and buy only the extended editions that I actually wanted! Either I have singlehandedly thwarted their brilliant scheme, or perhaps I just have some fucking self-control.
Let me start by saying that I'm not a major user of Google News; I prefer to remain somewhat apart from news media of any sort.
However, from your linked article, the comments tend to read a bit like:
I've been saying for a long time that Google News is unbelievably left wing. On a business level I'm pretty sure what they are doing is trying to position themselves for the European and Asian markets. They run a disproportionate number of stories from the Chinese news service. They have gone so far as to cover Israel stories with Arab media. They think that'll land a little more jingle in their pocket. The guys who run it are too rich to get all hung up in bourgeois lowly issues like patriotism towards America. They're citizens of the world, and now that they have billions they want to go to the right parties.
And there are several examples of particular search terms, articles, etc., which return several sources believed to be slanted to the left (or unbiased, if you're on the left) and a few sources believed to be slanted to the right (or unbiased, if you're on the right). Then we have the article linked in this Slashdot post, which brings up a few examples of a particular search term that returns several sources believed to be slanted to the right and a few sources believed to be slanted to the left.
All this really seems to say to me is that Google News is run algorithmically (which we knew) and that it's probably more balanced than either story says--it's just not balanced for every input you might choose give it. The algorithm isn't perfect, but when both sides cry out "it's biased the other way!" then it's probably as good as it's going to get.
Re:Demo later than release -- seems normal to me
on
Doom 3 Demo Available
·
· Score: 1
If my game received an average review score of 88.6%, I'd be pretty satisfied with that level of mediocrity!
The best explanation I could come up with was the fact that the Walmart logo has a star in the middle, so perhaps people were mutating "Wal*mart" into "Walm*rt."
I can't honestly think of any other reason for it, it seems a bit stupid to me.
Yeah, Firefox beta, right up there next to Mozilla 1.7.2. Just keep talking about how it's all 'unfinalized, buggy beta software' and I'm sure you'll convince a lot of people to stop using Internet Explorer.
That being said, I'm glad to see the bugs being acknowledged and fixed, even if I don't personally agree with the way some of these bugs have been handled.
You may find it useful to read the article linked in the summary, which specifically states:
Washington's new statute also mostly does away with service charges such as "dormancy" fees--sometimes $1 or $2 a month--that kick in if certificates go unused after a certain period.
The grandparent of this post isn't complaining about the fact that the story is about Doom and that games aren't 'news,' blah blah blah, as your reply seems to indicate. The grandparent was complaining that this is a release date that comes from Best Buy, a retailer, and not id, who are of course the people actually developing the product.
In other words, we have no idea whether or not this is the correct date; it's just when Best Buy has it listed on their page. I wouldn't be planning any hardware upgrade schedules just yet if I were you.
I believe (and I could be wrong) that Mozilla does the same sort of "intelligent" javascript analysis; however, if an onClick() calls a popup from a domain other than the current site (so, say, you're on fileplanet.com and it tries to popup from downloads.fileplanet.com), it won't allow the popup.
On the plus side, at least in Firebird, a little "i" icon appears in the lower left corner of the bar when a popup is blocked. Clicking that will bring up an "unblock this domain" window, and another click there will save you from all popup troubles associated with that site.
You misunderstood the point of the original poster.
The article said that the RIAA was paying out $12.63 to more than 3.5 million consumers, so it's paying at least 44.2 million dollars.
The parent of the original poster was commenting that sending the $13 back to the kid whose life savings was taken away was just returning his own money; however, that $12000 only comprises 0.0000271% of the total settlement, so I highly doubt they're somehow covering it all with it.
Your analogy is incorrect. Or, rather, it addresses an entirely different issue.
I stand by my original post, stating that the purpose of a benchmark is, without a doubt, to provide an apples-to-apples comparison of two or more products. What you're looking for when you address game performance and the like should be handled in a review, where they look at numerous benchmarks as well as real-world performance to draw conclusions about the hardware.
No single benchmark will ever provide an entirely accurate picture of a piece of hardware, just as no single piece of real-world data will either. It's the reviewer's job to interpret the results based on the tests they chose to run, wherein the consumer can then purchase based on the review.
So, in conclusion, saying that benchmarks don't matter because workloads in practice are more variable than those found in synthetic benchmarks is, itself, based on an apples-to-oranges comparison.
As the article rather clearly states, this seems less like an optimization and more like a "cheat"; they changed their code slightly, without changing the actual work being processed on the card (according to them) and some of Nvidia's products dropped in performance "as much as 24.1%."
Additionally, what the Nvidia driver appears to do is to detect when 3DMark is running and replace its operations with some manual operations chosen by Nvidia. If the purpose of the benchmark is to provide an objective, apples-to-apples comparison, it doesn't seem quite so accurate any more when Nvidia's cards are doing one set of operations and everybody else's cards are doing something else.
"Seems to me they just managed to ban the most popular Internet game ever."
Er. Counter-strike, the most popular internet game ever? How about when I log onto Battle.net via Starcraft, and the statistics tell me (among other things) that there are more than 70000 people playing Starcraft (used purely for example) right now? The number of people playing Half-Life (and its associated mods)? About 47000, according to Gamespy's figures.
How on earth did you get 'most popular Internet game ever' out of numbers like that?
In a relationship, at least in my experience, someone needs to make an attempt at reconciliation after a fight occurs.
In this case, it's likely that the original poster was upset, angry, and not thinking clearly, probably something along the lines of "I'm not apologizing, she can apologize to me," whereas his girlfriend attempted to reconcile--or at least start on that path--but didn't want to take it any further than email. After all, once the email is sent (and it's a valid form of communication; perhaps she didn't feel like talking to him in realtime because she was angry), her thought is that she made the attempt and if he didn't respond, well, he's not interested.
Both decisions were made out of anger and without clear thought, but it's by no means a 'weird, anti-social, email-only relationship' in my eyes.
Personally, I found The All-Seeing Eye to be much less bloated than Gamespy 3D. I have both a registration to Gamespy 3D (which I originally got years ago) and to the Eye, and I never (never!) go back to using Gamespy any more, because the Eye is just that much faster.
Ironically, you're merely continuing another meme with your post; every time someone posts a rehash of an old joke, there's inevitably a few posts that talk about how old the joke is and how we should all stop posting about it.
Of course, this is merely part of the complaining-about-people-who-complain-about-old-jo kes meme, so it's all rather pointless.
It's true on my end; two of the three (share email and share other personal information) were indeed checked. A few quick clicks and I'm back to normal. Not like I really use the account anyways.
Re:It's not the broken mods that piss people off..
on
New Q3A Patch And Mods
·
· Score: 1
Football players shouldn't train as hard as they do, it's just a game. And they don't deserve multi-millon dollar salaries either. Personally, (this is all my opinion) I don't think you should be paid for playing a computer game, be it Half-Life, Quake 3, what else; this merely glorifies the twitch reflex. If you work so long at a game that it's mortally upsetting to you when the authors make adjustments which lower your skills (even though it's quite likely you'll get used to it eventually), you're probably trying too hard.
Slashdot Mirror
It may occur to you, then, that perhaps most of the people who have no interest in CS:S have played the original? And, seeing that there's little more than a graphical update between it and the original, perhaps people were looking for a little more, y'know, innovation in the years they've spent on the title?
UT2k4 isn't particularly stellar, but it has a variety of gameplay types and several mods which are fairly new and interesting. I'd prefer to play it than Valve's rehash of CS.
Wow, those guys really know how to milk their customers! Releasing two versions and telling everyone about it, knowing full well that they'll be powerless to resist the urge to buy every version of the movies ever created and released!
But wait! It seems that I, an ordinary fellow, have managed to avoid their devilish plot and buy only the extended editions that I actually wanted! Either I have singlehandedly thwarted their brilliant scheme, or perhaps I just have some fucking self-control.
Let me start by saying that I'm not a major user of Google News; I prefer to remain somewhat apart from news media of any sort.
However, from your linked article, the comments tend to read a bit like:
And there are several examples of particular search terms, articles, etc., which return several sources believed to be slanted to the left (or unbiased, if you're on the left) and a few sources believed to be slanted to the right (or unbiased, if you're on the right). Then we have the article linked in this Slashdot post, which brings up a few examples of a particular search term that returns several sources believed to be slanted to the right and a few sources believed to be slanted to the left.
All this really seems to say to me is that Google News is run algorithmically (which we knew) and that it's probably more balanced than either story says--it's just not balanced for every input you might choose give it. The algorithm isn't perfect, but when both sides cry out "it's biased the other way!" then it's probably as good as it's going to get.
If my game received an average review score of 88.6%, I'd be pretty satisfied with that level of mediocrity!
I was wondering that myself, actually.
The best explanation I could come up with was the fact that the Walmart logo has a star in the middle, so perhaps people were mutating "Wal*mart" into "Walm*rt."
I can't honestly think of any other reason for it, it seems a bit stupid to me.
Yeah, Firefox beta, right up there next to Mozilla 1.7.2. Just keep talking about how it's all 'unfinalized, buggy beta software' and I'm sure you'll convince a lot of people to stop using Internet Explorer.
That being said, I'm glad to see the bugs being acknowledged and fixed, even if I don't personally agree with the way some of these bugs have been handled.
You may find it useful to read the article linked in the summary, which specifically states:
Washington's new statute also mostly does away with service charges such as "dormancy" fees--sometimes $1 or $2 a month--that kick in if certificates go unused after a certain period.
You don't understand.
The grandparent of this post isn't complaining about the fact that the story is about Doom and that games aren't 'news,' blah blah blah, as your reply seems to indicate. The grandparent was complaining that this is a release date that comes from Best Buy, a retailer, and not id, who are of course the people actually developing the product.
In other words, we have no idea whether or not this is the correct date; it's just when Best Buy has it listed on their page. I wouldn't be planning any hardware upgrade schedules just yet if I were you.
I believe (and I could be wrong) that Mozilla does the same sort of "intelligent" javascript analysis; however, if an onClick() calls a popup from a domain other than the current site (so, say, you're on fileplanet.com and it tries to popup from downloads.fileplanet.com), it won't allow the popup.
On the plus side, at least in Firebird, a little "i" icon appears in the lower left corner of the bar when a popup is blocked. Clicking that will bring up an "unblock this domain" window, and another click there will save you from all popup troubles associated with that site.
You misunderstood the point of the original poster.
The article said that the RIAA was paying out $12.63 to more than 3.5 million consumers, so it's paying at least 44.2 million dollars.
The parent of the original poster was commenting that sending the $13 back to the kid whose life savings was taken away was just returning his own money; however, that $12000 only comprises 0.0000271% of the total settlement, so I highly doubt they're somehow covering it all with it.
Recursive Eccentric Cable User's Reuse of Standard Video Episodes
RECURSVE? Aren't you missing an 'I'?
Your analogy is incorrect. Or, rather, it addresses an entirely different issue.
I stand by my original post, stating that the purpose of a benchmark is, without a doubt, to provide an apples-to-apples comparison of two or more products. What you're looking for when you address game performance and the like should be handled in a review, where they look at numerous benchmarks as well as real-world performance to draw conclusions about the hardware.
No single benchmark will ever provide an entirely accurate picture of a piece of hardware, just as no single piece of real-world data will either. It's the reviewer's job to interpret the results based on the tests they chose to run, wherein the consumer can then purchase based on the review.
So, in conclusion, saying that benchmarks don't matter because workloads in practice are more variable than those found in synthetic benchmarks is, itself, based on an apples-to-oranges comparison.
As the article rather clearly states, this seems less like an optimization and more like a "cheat"; they changed their code slightly, without changing the actual work being processed on the card (according to them) and some of Nvidia's products dropped in performance "as much as 24.1%."
Additionally, what the Nvidia driver appears to do is to detect when 3DMark is running and replace its operations with some manual operations chosen by Nvidia. If the purpose of the benchmark is to provide an objective, apples-to-apples comparison, it doesn't seem quite so accurate any more when Nvidia's cards are doing one set of operations and everybody else's cards are doing something else.
"Seems to me they just managed to ban the most popular Internet game ever."
Er. Counter-strike, the most popular internet game ever? How about when I log onto Battle.net via Starcraft, and the statistics tell me (among other things) that there are more than 70000 people playing Starcraft (used purely for example) right now? The number of people playing Half-Life (and its associated mods)? About 47000, according to Gamespy's figures.
How on earth did you get 'most popular Internet game ever' out of numbers like that?
In a relationship, at least in my experience, someone needs to make an attempt at reconciliation after a fight occurs.
In this case, it's likely that the original poster was upset, angry, and not thinking clearly, probably something along the lines of "I'm not apologizing, she can apologize to me," whereas his girlfriend attempted to reconcile--or at least start on that path--but didn't want to take it any further than email. After all, once the email is sent (and it's a valid form of communication; perhaps she didn't feel like talking to him in realtime because she was angry), her thought is that she made the attempt and if he didn't respond, well, he's not interested.
Both decisions were made out of anger and without clear thought, but it's by no means a 'weird, anti-social, email-only relationship' in my eyes.
Personally, I found The All-Seeing Eye to be much less bloated than Gamespy 3D. I have both a registration to Gamespy 3D (which I originally got years ago) and to the Eye, and I never (never!) go back to using Gamespy any more, because the Eye is just that much faster.
Ironically, you're merely continuing another meme with your post; every time someone posts a rehash of an old joke, there's inevitably a few posts that talk about how old the joke is and how we should all stop posting about it.
o kes meme, so it's all rather pointless.
Of course, this is merely part of the complaining-about-people-who-complain-about-old-j
It's true on my end; two of the three (share email and share other personal information) were indeed checked. A few quick clicks and I'm back to normal. Not like I really use the account anyways.
Football players shouldn't train as hard as they do, it's just a game. And they don't deserve multi-millon dollar salaries either. Personally, (this is all my opinion) I don't think you should be paid for playing a computer game, be it Half-Life, Quake 3, what else; this merely glorifies the twitch reflex. If you work so long at a game that it's mortally upsetting to you when the authors make adjustments which lower your skills (even though it's quite likely you'll get used to it eventually), you're probably trying too hard.