Okay so you dislike my writing style, but trolling slashdot about it with a goofy post is just annoying to me. Why don't you discuss the article instead of going off-topic?
Nehwon was a very fun experience for me to play; a DM once tossed my character into that realm for a quest and I enjoyed myself tremendously. He made excellent use of the Grey Mouser and Fafhrd characters. Fun fun fun!:-)
Finally someone with a brain; yes, D&D was created with multiple sources, but you are so correct in stating what should be obvious to most; everyone who has had anything to do with RPG has been influenced by Tolkien.
A collection of several different databases that looks like a single database to the user. An example is the Internet Domain Name System (DNS).
Anyone who has coded a CRPG knows that there are quite a few tables and sometimes even interconnected databases in use at any given time while the engine is working; and for some, a bsp file could be considered its own database. Your comment was largely out of context, anyway.
adj : (fine arts) deriving from more than one source or style
> Like BFGs, Sonic's prediliction for picking up shiny rings, and Mario's mushroom habit?
I said rules, not design; you appear to be confusing the two.
> > "Hit points, stats, skills and all were first developed by Gary"...by reading what wargamers had been doing for decades...
This appears to be out of the scope of the article; the article was not about wargaming.
> If there's anything of substance in there, it's pretty well hidden by the layers of ignorance, error, unreasoning hostility, and naked opinion.
You can discourage me if you like, but why? Why would you discourage someone for trying to identify with RPG and come to terms with some problems that exist in porting PnP to CRPG?
If I knew it was that important for me to spell out the differences between the interface problems and the AI problem, it would have been an article about video game design, and not an article about standards. Just because your focus was not met in the article, is no reason for you to slight it, and without any supporting evidence, to boot.
First of all, let me just say that you do raise some valid points, yet you appear to think you know me, when you could not possibly know anything about me.
To suggest that I know nothing about RPGs, is equivalent to saying that you are capable of knowing someone, and evaluating someone, after reading 2500 words they scrawled out for a discussion website. That demonstrates some negativity from you that is unwaranted, and offensive.
> He uses buzzwords to hint at computer knowledge, but uses them in such a nonsensical manner as to suggest he's trying to get revenge on geeks for the jokes they've played on social science journals.
In regards to the use of the phrase "server client", I believe I was missing a / character there. That was a typo. And actually it should have read "client/server".
> And in what sense is Temple of Elemental Evil a client?
The way I see it, TOEE is a client. Permissions must be met for it to run, and it must execute code under an OS in order to function. I guess I'm suggesting that the TOEE is linked into the operating system it's running under, and therefore it typically is a client. There's no multiplayer, but I believe there is cause to define programming video game engines, that the engine itself is the server and the client consists of the loaded modules/levels and media. That's the basic schema of video game design, so it does surprise me you did not pick up on this.
> "intepreting rules" was the job of the programmer
I strongly disagree. This is the reason that so many CRPGs out there have difficulty when they have been ported from PnP; the creators of the PnP are the rules interpreters, and they delegate that power by creating rules to the DM. Programmers need to get their grimy hands off of the rules, because the rules belong to the game designers!
How it leads to standards violations is because the programmers are often overstepping boundaries by coding quirky routines in order to get necessary effects out of the game and squash bugs along the way. Often, programmers misinterpret the rules written by PnP designers, for what ever reason. When I create a set of rules for PnP, and someone takes them and interprets them, they may or may not understand my meaning; if I did my job, even, they still may misinterpret me. There are countless examples of this in TOEE.
> The author makes some statements about Troika's development of ToEE. Maybe we could learn something from some of them. But how can we assume they have anything to do with the game's actual development, when they're surrounded by pure gibberish?
This was kind of a troll statement, imho, yet I will answer it as if it was not. The gibberish you speak of, is perhaps your own inability to comprehend what I'm saying in the article. Perhaps you could provide some more examples of gibberish that I could answer to, and help you to understand better what I'm saying. You see, you are essentially proving, by misinterpreting my article, that programmers do in fact have a tendency to read things a certain way, and to some extent, form their own opinions on the material. My thoughts are that you perhaps failed to do your homework, or you were somehow incapable of reading the article the way it was intended to be read, and the blame, if any, would fit squarely on my shoulders, because I'm the author and it's my duty to explain myself coherently enough for others to understand immediately what I'm saying. Ahh, but of course; that is the way we all go through life, stumbling at times before some solid progress is made. Cast the first stone...:-)
> If you would put yourself into that role I think you would understand that in general field usage you would get killed very quickly.
Yes, I can imagine how many other weapons that it would get caught up on while being brought down on someone. You can't whip around a huge halbred with any kind of accuracy, really. It's really a weapon of intimidation rather than one of skill or practical application. In days of yore, warriors used intimidation to trigger low morale in the enemy, and very large halbreds would succeed in most. They are used by city law enforcement because of their appearance more than their effectiveness. Would you steal anything if you knew that blade was coming down on your arm? Likely not!
But in shoulder to shoulder combat, the halbred is about as useful as a loaf of bread.
If you're going up against heavy armor, the halbred would likely only be useful during the first charge and then you would have to switch to your swords for close combat. A row of halbreds would indeed give the enemy something to taste!!
The thought of it, really gives me shivers and I think I'll be using it in my next PnP session.:-)
I'm the author of the article at k5, and I just wanted to ask you a few questions and respond to your comment:
> Once anyone focuses more on making the RPG compliant so that the numbers balance out, they've lost the point of the game altogether.
The compliance that I'm talking about has nothing to do with stats; it's compliance of concepts to enable better programming. This compliance is stats-based, but it's also hearted in the role playing experience.
The best games I've played were from first to third level, when the whole backstory is focused on, and the character is being melded into being. The story is what I focus on when I DM, and I often simplify results and stats in order to achieve a faster pace of decision making. Role playing is about the player's decisions and how they change the story.
> Most of the author's gripes were about storyline or AI.
I'm the author of the k5 article, and I will say that my problems with TOEE are rules based problems leading to systemic bugs. The d20 rules are too subjective, and as a result, an objective use of them failed the game. Without a DM to ref the gameplay, TOEE suffers from a lot of leftover problems from implementing the d20 system. Most of the bugs in the game are there as a result of the rules and the needed programming to sustain the rules.
Furthermore, I pointed out in the article that these problems come from a plethora of complications as a result of using d20; the publishers were expecting miracles, the designers were playing whack-the-mole with bugs, and the system was very difficult to get under control.
The story module that this game was built on was likely one of the better elements of the game, IMHO, because it was a classic module for Greyhawk, and it's indeed a very fun world to play in. The story of the game could have been better implemented, but I maintain, and I maintained in the article, that the designers were likely too busy working on problems with d20 to have time to work on the more abstract elements of the game. You don't have time to tell a great story if you are too busy doing other things.
ROI is great, but what about mods that have an impact on the social conditions, such as Doom for Columbine and the 9/11 game? These have been examined by the NYT and yet the communities have discouraged the production of such mods, because they are tasteless.
I speak from experience, being the creator of Doom for Columbine; I have been outcast from most modding communities, such as Gamespy and The Mod Database, because of the suspected outcome of DFC, that it could be tasteless or that it *was* tasteless.
This is before the mod was even released, or before development had begun; people either understood what I was going for or they rejected it outright.
Movies about these same topics are considered wonderful, heartwrenching accounts of what occured in both tragedies, but video games are exempt from the same artistic liberty?
I am not sure if Doom for Columbine will see the light of day. We had a development team that was ready to go, but with the press we received, many backed away to save their careers from scrutiny, but I challenge this same scrutiny as being an ignorant attempt to control the use of modding to shed light on tragedy and get a sense of what tragedy must have been like.
We started Doom for Columbine as an anti-violence project, where the main character would attempt to understand violence in media in order to further the story and develop characters, much like a movie would on the same subject.
No matter which angle we planned for, the audience still hated the idea, largely because of the use of the word Columbine, without regard to any possible design account we may have implemented.
Most of the views of the audience were from the standpoint that Doom for Columbine would be a mod based in the reality of the perpetrators of the massacre, and not the story we were going to tell.
After considerable thought, I believe it's necessary to engauge the audience for their lack of understanding, and portray the events from the perspective of Klebold and Harris, because these were disturbed people, and they were disturbed for a good reason; they were living lives that were damaged daily by a lack of understanding from those around them. They were trying to be unique, and in doing so they were set apart from everyone and outcast. This lack of acceptance from peers is what was largely responsible for what happened at Columbine, combined with the easy access to weapons in America and the impatience/emotions of youth.
Therefore, as a game designer and writer, I must engauge my audience and that means I must take the hard road for design, and do so without concern for the consequences -- because that is exactly what a writer does. They write the truth.
How is modding any different? We have all the tools to create stories and examine truth, but many mods are just a ray of light apart from the base game; Counter Strike is not far from Half Life, except for new elements to gameplay. The story is missing; there is no CS story. And how is CS any different from a 9/11 game? It's the same subject matter, yet CS is separate from human history in that these are generic terrorism events, or counter-terrorism events that lead to a different outcome each match. It's the same, but it's missing the story. Is that the only reason CS is so widely accepted?
What if CS was a game about specific terrorist groups and their detailed planning of terrorist attacks? Would that be more or less acceptable? Would it be a better experience? Could that be used by law enforcement to train officers?
Because if Doom for Columbine was a true account of what happened at Columbine, law enforcement could get an understanding of the evil they are up against from youth today, and maybe, just maybe, some kid will decide to just play the fucking game instead of actually hurting anyone.
Scotts makes toilet paper, not grass. WTF??? I don't know if I want my grass messed with, guys. Maui Wowie made by a toilet paper company? What will they think of next? I hope they don't want me to wipe my ass with it...
I would have noticed it more but these to drunk fools were sitting behind us and they kept commenting through the whole move and kicking our chairs, farting noises and belches, laughing during quiet moments in the film; they made the film seem better than it was. If it weren't for them, I would have seen how horrible it really was, I guess.
I feel stupid for getting mad at the idiots behind us...
But the problem with the Hulk was the plot, and the style of the special effects.
The best kind of effects for the Hulk would have been a more glowing character; if the Hulk was green, maybe he was more luminescent. The painted green look of him was just stupid and annoying. Bright green is an eyesore; and that's not the point of the Hulk comics... he's so enraged, he turns green and smashes everything. But he goes back to normal and carries a great deal of guilt in doing so. Furthermore, the muscular movement looked very rubbery, even though it was CG; it didn't look authentic.
The camera angles were almost always flat; they should have done more lower angle shots up, to portray how menacing the Hulk really is. That was a mistake, to show Hulk at face-level, because he looks goofy as hell that way, and who's going to see him at face level?
But I guess that's the way the comic is. Hollywood could have adapted better to it. And where's the angst in the character? Gone. Where's the guilt? Gone. It was all absent.
Oh and what about that horrible video game? Cell shading is soooooo 1993.
The story was adequate, but what was missing was the depth in the story; ie: the framework was okay, but there wasn't much development past framework.
Good call, AC... it's true that we can't tell anything about these movies from their trailers; they are detatched from the film; separate, alternate even, as one is made by marketing folks and the other is made by everyone else. And that's the kicker, really; so many films go underrated as their trailers sucking down money that isn't there, treat the whole experience as a kind of myriad of cash potential and that's when the art is gone.
The Punisher trailer, in comparison, appears quite bleak of content. Sadly, I am a Punisher fan who is wondering WTF they were doing in that movie. Punisher looks really awful from the trailer, and that bothers me. I'm the guy with the punisher jacket you saw back in the early 90's, fyi...
That's the fine line for the industry; I think with a franchise like Spiderman, the movie will be fun regardless of what plot details leak... I mean it's an action movie, so the total experience is what you're paying for, unlike other movies where the plot matters much more (because it's all some generes have, plot), while the action/comic genre offers more in terms of the experience. Spiderman 1 was very pleasing, but the Hulk was missing plot/char development. I think Spiderman 2 will be better, but I won't know for sure until after I've seen it in theatres (and hence the catch 22 of all moviegoers today, really). Downloading the trailer now...
In the words of the immortal Id Software, SPOOOOGE!!!!!
This card has awesome features. I can't wait to get one and use it with DooM 3 when it's released.
From TFA: > Although its throughput is impressive, the 250Gb does show higher CPU utilization in NTttcp. However, the chipset's throughput performance is easily worth a couple of extra CPU cycles.
I concur. With faster CPUs on the market, this might not mean much in the long run anyway. Cycles that can take the load off could be worth the performance risk, and I would love to see it run DooM 3 and a custom map from Headshot or ZTN. I bet it'll handle level design pretty well too, from the specs.
> However, the relative closeness of most of our benchmark scores isn't conclusive enough to declare the nForce3 250Gb a winner on performance alone. That's where the 250Gb's robust arsenal of integrated peripherals and excellent ForceWare software enters the picture.
Very true. The extras do matter, and I can't wait to hear the difference with the audio apps that go with this, for example. Is it me or are companies like Nvidia going the extra mile with all the features lately? This trend is impressive, rather than annoying to me... I don't see it like a cop-out... but like they seem to care more for the details, which is good.
To me, the most interesting part of the whole Smart Car debate, is the human facets of it, whereby humanity has to decide if they are going to relinquish control of their driving to a more automated system. The benefits are there, indeed, but some people just hate giving up power (which will cause the big problems, if you ask me). Eventually this will lead to a total-control model, whereby drunk driving would become a thing of the past, tickets would be a thing of the past, driving lessons would be a thing of the past, and speed limits would be a thing of the past. Accidents will likely still occur until the system had all the kinks worked out of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay so you dislike my writing style, but trolling slashdot about it with a goofy post is just annoying to me. Why don't you discuss the article instead of going off-topic?
Nehwon was a very fun experience for me to play; a DM once tossed my character into that realm for a quest and I enjoyed myself tremendously. He made excellent use of the Grey Mouser and Fafhrd characters. Fun fun fun! :-)
Finally someone with a brain; yes, D&D was created with multiple sources, but you are so correct in stating what should be obvious to most; everyone who has had anything to do with RPG has been influenced by Tolkien.
... that no Simpsons were harmed in the making of this article!
From dictionary.com: distributed database
A collection of several different databases that looks like
a single database to the user. An example is the Internet
Domain Name System (DNS).
Anyone who has coded a CRPG knows that there are quite a few tables and sometimes even interconnected databases in use at any given time while the engine is working; and for some, a bsp file could be considered its own database. Your comment was largely out of context, anyway.
From dictionary.com: bastardized
...by reading what wargamers had been doing for decades...
adj : (fine arts) deriving from more than one source or style
> Like BFGs, Sonic's prediliction for picking up shiny rings, and Mario's mushroom habit?
I said rules, not design; you appear to be confusing the two.
> > "Hit points, stats, skills and all were first developed by Gary"
This appears to be out of the scope of the article; the article was not about wargaming.
> If there's anything of substance in there, it's pretty well hidden by the layers of ignorance, error, unreasoning hostility, and naked opinion.
You can discourage me if you like, but why? Why would you discourage someone for trying to identify with RPG and come to terms with some problems that exist in porting PnP to CRPG?
We all have to start somewhere...
If I knew it was that important for me to spell out the differences between the interface problems and the AI problem, it would have been an article about video game design, and not an article about standards. Just because your focus was not met in the article, is no reason for you to slight it, and without any supporting evidence, to boot.
First of all, let me just say that you do raise some valid points, yet you appear to think you know me, when you could not possibly know anything about me.
:-)
To suggest that I know nothing about RPGs, is equivalent to saying that you are capable of knowing someone, and evaluating someone, after reading 2500 words they scrawled out for a discussion website. That demonstrates some negativity from you that is unwaranted, and offensive.
> He uses buzzwords to hint at computer knowledge, but uses them in such a nonsensical manner as to suggest he's trying to get revenge on geeks for the jokes they've played on social science journals.
In regards to the use of the phrase "server client", I believe I was missing a / character there. That was a typo. And actually it should have read "client/server".
> And in what sense is Temple of Elemental Evil a client?
The way I see it, TOEE is a client. Permissions must be met for it to run, and it must execute code under an OS in order to function. I guess I'm suggesting that the TOEE is linked into the operating system it's running under, and therefore it typically is a client. There's no multiplayer, but I believe there is cause to define programming video game engines, that the engine itself is the server and the client consists of the loaded modules/levels and media. That's the basic schema of video game design, so it does surprise me you did not pick up on this.
> "intepreting rules" was the job of the programmer
I strongly disagree. This is the reason that so many CRPGs out there have difficulty when they have been ported from PnP; the creators of the PnP are the rules interpreters, and they delegate that power by creating rules to the DM. Programmers need to get their grimy hands off of the rules, because the rules belong to the game designers!
How it leads to standards violations is because the programmers are often overstepping boundaries by coding quirky routines in order to get necessary effects out of the game and squash bugs along the way. Often, programmers misinterpret the rules written by PnP designers, for what ever reason. When I create a set of rules for PnP, and someone takes them and interprets them, they may or may not understand my meaning; if I did my job, even, they still may misinterpret me. There are countless examples of this in TOEE.
> The author makes some statements about Troika's development of ToEE. Maybe we could learn something from some of them. But how can we assume they have anything to do with the game's actual development, when they're surrounded by pure gibberish?
This was kind of a troll statement, imho, yet I will answer it as if it was not. The gibberish you speak of, is perhaps your own inability to comprehend what I'm saying in the article. Perhaps you could provide some more examples of gibberish that I could answer to, and help you to understand better what I'm saying. You see, you are essentially proving, by misinterpreting my article, that programmers do in fact have a tendency to read things a certain way, and to some extent, form their own opinions on the material. My thoughts are that you perhaps failed to do your homework, or you were somehow incapable of reading the article the way it was intended to be read, and the blame, if any, would fit squarely on my shoulders, because I'm the author and it's my duty to explain myself coherently enough for others to understand immediately what I'm saying. Ahh, but of course; that is the way we all go through life, stumbling at times before some solid progress is made. Cast the first stone...
> If you would put yourself into that role I think you would understand that in general field usage you would get killed very quickly.
:-)
Yes, I can imagine how many other weapons that it would get caught up on while being brought down on someone. You can't whip around a huge halbred with any kind of accuracy, really. It's really a weapon of intimidation rather than one of skill or practical application. In days of yore, warriors used intimidation to trigger low morale in the enemy, and very large halbreds would succeed in most. They are used by city law enforcement because of their appearance more than their effectiveness. Would you steal anything if you knew that blade was coming down on your arm? Likely not!
But in shoulder to shoulder combat, the halbred is about as useful as a loaf of bread.
If you're going up against heavy armor, the halbred would likely only be useful during the first charge and then you would have to switch to your swords for close combat. A row of halbreds would indeed give the enemy something to taste!!
The thought of it, really gives me shivers and I think I'll be using it in my next PnP session.
I'm the author of the article at k5, and I just wanted to ask you a few questions and respond to your comment:
> Once anyone focuses more on making the RPG compliant so that the numbers balance out, they've lost the point of the game altogether.
The compliance that I'm talking about has nothing to do with stats; it's compliance of concepts to enable better programming. This compliance is stats-based, but it's also hearted in the role playing experience.
The best games I've played were from first to third level, when the whole backstory is focused on, and the character is being melded into being. The story is what I focus on when I DM, and I often simplify results and stats in order to achieve a faster pace of decision making. Role playing is about the player's decisions and how they change the story.
> Most of the author's gripes were about storyline or AI.
I'm the author of the k5 article, and I will say that my problems with TOEE are rules based problems leading to systemic bugs. The d20 rules are too subjective, and as a result, an objective use of them failed the game. Without a DM to ref the gameplay, TOEE suffers from a lot of leftover problems from implementing the d20 system. Most of the bugs in the game are there as a result of the rules and the needed programming to sustain the rules.
Furthermore, I pointed out in the article that these problems come from a plethora of complications as a result of using d20; the publishers were expecting miracles, the designers were playing whack-the-mole with bugs, and the system was very difficult to get under control.
The story module that this game was built on was likely one of the better elements of the game, IMHO, because it was a classic module for Greyhawk, and it's indeed a very fun world to play in. The story of the game could have been better implemented, but I maintain, and I maintained in the article, that the designers were likely too busy working on problems with d20 to have time to work on the more abstract elements of the game. You don't have time to tell a great story if you are too busy doing other things.
ROI is great, but what about mods that have an impact on the social conditions, such as Doom for Columbine and the 9/11 game? These have been examined by the NYT and yet the communities have discouraged the production of such mods, because they are tasteless.
I speak from experience, being the creator of Doom for Columbine; I have been outcast from most modding communities, such as Gamespy and The Mod Database, because of the suspected outcome of DFC, that it could be tasteless or that it *was* tasteless.
This is before the mod was even released, or before development had begun; people either understood what I was going for or they rejected it outright.
Movies about these same topics are considered wonderful, heartwrenching accounts of what occured in both tragedies, but video games are exempt from the same artistic liberty?
I am not sure if Doom for Columbine will see the light of day. We had a development team that was ready to go, but with the press we received, many backed away to save their careers from scrutiny, but I challenge this same scrutiny as being an ignorant attempt to control the use of modding to shed light on tragedy and get a sense of what tragedy must have been like.
We started Doom for Columbine as an anti-violence project, where the main character would attempt to understand violence in media in order to further the story and develop characters, much like a movie would on the same subject.
No matter which angle we planned for, the audience still hated the idea, largely because of the use of the word Columbine, without regard to any possible design account we may have implemented.
Most of the views of the audience were from the standpoint that Doom for Columbine would be a mod based in the reality of the perpetrators of the massacre, and not the story we were going to tell.
After considerable thought, I believe it's necessary to engauge the audience for their lack of understanding, and portray the events from the perspective of Klebold and Harris, because these were disturbed people, and they were disturbed for a good reason; they were living lives that were damaged daily by a lack of understanding from those around them. They were trying to be unique, and in doing so they were set apart from everyone and outcast. This lack of acceptance from peers is what was largely responsible for what happened at Columbine, combined with the easy access to weapons in America and the impatience/emotions of youth.
Therefore, as a game designer and writer, I must engauge my audience and that means I must take the hard road for design, and do so without concern for the consequences -- because that is exactly what a writer does. They write the truth.
How is modding any different? We have all the tools to create stories and examine truth, but many mods are just a ray of light apart from the base game; Counter Strike is not far from Half Life, except for new elements to gameplay. The story is missing; there is no CS story. And how is CS any different from a 9/11 game? It's the same subject matter, yet CS is separate from human history in that these are generic terrorism events, or counter-terrorism events that lead to a different outcome each match. It's the same, but it's missing the story. Is that the only reason CS is so widely accepted?
What if CS was a game about specific terrorist groups and their detailed planning of terrorist attacks? Would that be more or less acceptable? Would it be a better experience? Could that be used by law enforcement to train officers?
Because if Doom for Columbine was a true account of what happened at Columbine, law enforcement could get an understanding of the evil they are up against from youth today, and maybe, just maybe, some kid will decide to just play the fucking game instead of actually hurting anyone.
> you have to dumb things down for lawmakers to understand what they're dealing with
I don't buy that for one second; ever read legalese?
Bring out the GIMP!!!!!!!!!
Grrrrr!!! ARGHHH!!!!
*salivating* "Yes master?"
Dammit, I'm confused because of the Maui Wowie.
Scotts makes toilet paper, not grass. WTF??? I don't know if I want my grass messed with, guys. Maui Wowie made by a toilet paper company? What will they think of next? I hope they don't want me to wipe my ass with it...
> The Hulk totally blew!
I would have noticed it more but these to drunk fools were sitting behind us and they kept commenting through the whole move and kicking our chairs, farting noises and belches, laughing during quiet moments in the film; they made the film seem better than it was. If it weren't for them, I would have seen how horrible it really was, I guess.
I feel stupid for getting mad at the idiots behind us...
But the problem with the Hulk was the plot, and the style of the special effects.
The best kind of effects for the Hulk would have been a more glowing character; if the Hulk was green, maybe he was more luminescent. The painted green look of him was just stupid and annoying. Bright green is an eyesore; and that's not the point of the Hulk comics... he's so enraged, he turns green and smashes everything. But he goes back to normal and carries a great deal of guilt in doing so. Furthermore, the muscular movement looked very rubbery, even though it was CG; it didn't look authentic.
The camera angles were almost always flat; they should have done more lower angle shots up, to portray how menacing the Hulk really is. That was a mistake, to show Hulk at face-level, because he looks goofy as hell that way, and who's going to see him at face level?
But I guess that's the way the comic is. Hollywood could have adapted better to it. And where's the angst in the character? Gone. Where's the guilt? Gone. It was all absent.
Oh and what about that horrible video game? Cell shading is soooooo 1993.
The story was adequate, but what was missing was the depth in the story; ie: the framework was okay, but there wasn't much development past framework.
Looks like you might be able to still donate to this project here. Could help them cover some court fees?
Good call, AC... it's true that we can't tell anything about these movies from their trailers; they are detatched from the film; separate, alternate even, as one is made by marketing folks and the other is made by everyone else. And that's the kicker, really; so many films go underrated as their trailers sucking down money that isn't there, treat the whole experience as a kind of myriad of cash potential and that's when the art is gone.
The Punisher trailer, in comparison, appears quite bleak of content. Sadly, I am a Punisher fan who is wondering WTF they were doing in that movie. Punisher looks really awful from the trailer, and that bothers me. I'm the guy with the punisher jacket you saw back in the early 90's, fyi...
That's the fine line for the industry; I think with a franchise like Spiderman, the movie will be fun regardless of what plot details leak... I mean it's an action movie, so the total experience is what you're paying for, unlike other movies where the plot matters much more (because it's all some generes have, plot), while the action/comic genre offers more in terms of the experience. Spiderman 1 was very pleasing, but the Hulk was missing plot/char development. I think Spiderman 2 will be better, but I won't know for sure until after I've seen it in theatres (and hence the catch 22 of all moviegoers today, really). Downloading the trailer now...
In the words of the immortal Id Software, SPOOOOGE!!!!!
This card has awesome features. I can't wait to get one and use it with DooM 3 when it's released.
From TFA:
> Although its throughput is impressive, the 250Gb does show higher CPU utilization in NTttcp. However, the chipset's throughput performance is easily worth a couple of extra CPU cycles.
I concur. With faster CPUs on the market, this might not mean much in the long run anyway. Cycles that can take the load off could be worth the performance risk, and I would love to see it run DooM 3 and a custom map from Headshot or ZTN. I bet it'll handle level design pretty well too, from the specs.
> However, the relative closeness of most of our benchmark scores isn't conclusive enough to declare the nForce3 250Gb a winner on performance alone. That's where the 250Gb's robust arsenal of integrated peripherals and excellent ForceWare software enters the picture.
Very true. The extras do matter, and I can't wait to hear the difference with the audio apps that go with this, for example. Is it me or are companies like Nvidia going the extra mile with all the features lately? This trend is impressive, rather than annoying to me... I don't see it like a cop-out... but like they seem to care more for the details, which is good.
They'll replace it with an infrastructure tax that will be worth 5x as much in profit.
To me, the most interesting part of the whole Smart Car debate, is the human facets of it, whereby humanity has to decide if they are going to relinquish control of their driving to a more automated system. The benefits are there, indeed, but some people just hate giving up power (which will cause the big problems, if you ask me). Eventually this will lead to a total-control model, whereby drunk driving would become a thing of the past, tickets would be a thing of the past, driving lessons would be a thing of the past, and speed limits would be a thing of the past. Accidents will likely still occur until the system had all the kinks worked out of it.
Me first.