as a followup point. they have a series that is among the best-selling games of all time. it's hard to think of a franchise worth more than GTA. they got there with mindless violence, not mindless sex. it's hard to imagine them taking a huge risk like this intentionally. which is probably exactly why this minigame was cut from the product. granted, this is pure speculation, but it's not better or worse than your assumption that it was meant to be found.
there is no blowjob scene in this game. someone has to break their EULA in order to get to the scene in question. what is the difference between downloading a ptach that "enables" this disabled content, and one that just simply pastes it on top? (like nude skins for Quake, say). answer: from the kids stnadpoint, from the parents standpoint, from an accessibility standpoint, there is no difference.
you can't hold rockstar responsible for stuff they DIDNT put in the game.
now, if you're going to argue from the poitn of view that they MEANT for people to find and enable this content, i would please ask you to provide some shred of evidence towards this. considering you're the one making the accusation, the onus IS on you to provide the proof. i would remind you that this is only going to HURT sales of the game, get it pulled from shelves, and probably end with them dragged before some federal commission and tighter government regulations all around. simply saying "well it's OBVIOUS they wanted it to be found!" isn't going to convince me.
i mean really. if a kid can download and apply a patch, he is already in a position to see way more nudity than what is offered in this game.
you may think that's a strawman, bringing up internet porn, but think about it. the point of the ESRB rating is to inform the parents of the content of the game. which, in my opinion, the "M" rating did accurately. the sex scenes aren't in the game. they were disabled.
from a parent's standpoint, what is the difference between downloading a third-party mod that enables disabled content, and applying a third-party mod that adds newly-created content? they are identical in their difficulty/accessibility to a kid, and both insert content into the game that the developer did not intend to appear there!
it is drawing boobies on the title page of "Harry Potter" and then sueing JK Rowling, citing an unfinished but steamy scene she deleted from her hard drive as evidence.
you know they could write some very simple games for this thing, that would be really neat... imagine a whack-a-mole type game, where all your keys are blank, and one will light up with some mole image or whatever, and you have to hit that key before it changes. the possibilities are endless.
granted i'm not exactly running the latest hardware, but every click on a radio button seemed to illicit a lot of blinking and flashing on the part of the other buttons. maybe it's just javascript running slowly as the DIVs move around or something, but i prefer to think of it as simple jealous from the other buttons in that group. "click me instead!" "no me!"
in any case, i'm all for flashy design, but this seems to be more trouble and more cumbersome than it's worth, unless that javascript can be optimized to not be so slow.
like it or not, the browser has become a vital platform for application development. unfortunately, client-side scripting is far more efficient than hitting the server every time the user interacts with a UI.
why stop there? why not keep your computer turned off and locked in the corner? it's just asking for trouble by running scripts and executables all over the place.
when is microsoft going to patch their OS so it no longer runs any code?
well i think the idea is, you could be on some trusted site, and some porn site spyware/adware could pop up a javascript browser and for all intents and purposes it would look like it came from the trusted site.
any first person shooter, first of all. also, Everquest 2. honestly, WoW uses some pretty low poly-count graphics, low rez textures (especially on scenery like trees) and pretty simple lighting technology.
luckily, all the greatness in the game is in how this non-cutting edge tech has been leveraged to render things in a very charming and accessible way.
nothing new here... any outsider can tell you that Blizzard's magic comes from a ridiculous amount of polish on existing concepts. more specifically -- nice cinematics, charming characters, fluid and attractive UI, and the elimination of genre X's most annoying bits. none of that's in dispute.
but hey, good luck on your current projects and i wish you all the luck in the world at unseating the king! =)
If anything, World of Warcraft's huge success has been understated. It is now four times the size of Everquest at its peak. That's monstrous, for a game that charges a monthly subscription.
that quote's incredibly misleading. hit ctrl-alt-del, open your task manager, and click on the "processes" tab. how many of them have a number greater than 1 in the "threads" column? almost all of them, right? including all the big ones that are likely to bog anything down. software nowadays is generally multithreaded.
dear god, why would you reward such a pathetid and inept display of direction and screenwriting by going and paying seven times the normal price? christ, i would have thought natural selection would have taken care of souls like you by now.
i never promised jack squat regarding boycotting blizzard. slashdot is made up of many different people with wildy diverse opinions. you're completely entitled to express yours, by means of angry posts or boycotts, but if you call me a hipocrite, you are mistaken.
so it's designed to keep people coming back. this is new? this is illegal? next i suppose you'd like to ban soap operas and cliffhanger endings? there's nothing here worthy of your umbrage or scorn. there's no chemical dependence, like with cigarettes or heroin, and there's no game mechanic of punishment for not playing that is akin to what smokers and junkies go through. every user is ultimately totally free to close the app at any time. it just takes the tiniest bit of will power.
and sure, ultimately, World of Warcraft can be reduced to meaningless machinations, but so can everything else in life. everything from art to entertainment to ambitions to love onward, if you so choose, can be taken apart and reduced to its most crass base components. but if you choose to completely deconstruct everything you encounter that you enjoy, you're going to lead a very magicless life.
so, you're incapable of or unwilling to lose yourself in the game. well, that doesn't mean you have to look down your nose at people who can still step back and enjoy the diversion.
actually i have a friend who is on dialup, and he has relayed to me several times in-game how astonished he is that game actually functions reasonably well on dial-up.
having said that, what are you doing with dial-up in this day and age, man??
Indestructable cars are mandated by car manufacturers. Every racing game (perhaps excluding a few single marque titles?) has either licenced recognisable cars with no damage, or fictional cars with damage.
this isn't true. The Test Drive series offered crashable versions of real cars, and Need For Speed: Porsche Unleashed provided a very realistic body damage model. in fact, there have been a lot of games with real licensed cars that took damage. i think the GT people keep saying "it's the manufacturers!" as a cop-out.
Slashdot Mirror
as a followup point. they have a series that is among the best-selling games of all time. it's hard to think of a franchise worth more than GTA. they got there with mindless violence, not mindless sex. it's hard to imagine them taking a huge risk like this intentionally. which is probably exactly why this minigame was cut from the product. granted, this is pure speculation, but it's not better or worse than your assumption that it was meant to be found.
there is no blowjob scene in this game. someone has to break their EULA in order to get to the scene in question. what is the difference between downloading a ptach that "enables" this disabled content, and one that just simply pastes it on top? (like nude skins for Quake, say). answer: from the kids stnadpoint, from the parents standpoint, from an accessibility standpoint, there is no difference.
you can't hold rockstar responsible for stuff they DIDNT put in the game.
now, if you're going to argue from the poitn of view that they MEANT for people to find and enable this content, i would please ask you to provide some shred of evidence towards this. considering you're the one making the accusation, the onus IS on you to provide the proof. i would remind you that this is only going to HURT sales of the game, get it pulled from shelves, and probably end with them dragged before some federal commission and tighter government regulations all around. simply saying "well it's OBVIOUS they wanted it to be found!" isn't going to convince me.
i mean really. if a kid can download and apply a patch, he is already in a position to see way more nudity than what is offered in this game.
you may think that's a strawman, bringing up internet porn, but think about it. the point of the ESRB rating is to inform the parents of the content of the game. which, in my opinion, the "M" rating did accurately. the sex scenes aren't in the game. they were disabled.
from a parent's standpoint, what is the difference between downloading a third-party mod that enables disabled content, and applying a third-party mod that adds newly-created content? they are identical in their difficulty/accessibility to a kid, and both insert content into the game that the developer did not intend to appear there!
it is drawing boobies on the title page of "Harry Potter" and then sueing JK Rowling, citing an unfinished but steamy scene she deleted from her hard drive as evidence.
open source? "key saver" functionality? sweeeeet.
... imagine a whack-a-mole type game, where all your keys are blank, and one will light up with some mole image or whatever, and you have to hit that key before it changes. the possibilities are endless.
you know they could write some very simple games for this thing, that would be really neat
it's a shame that in geek circles Macromedia has co-opted that word, and made it a dirty one to boot.
granted i'm not exactly running the latest hardware, but every click on a radio button seemed to illicit a lot of blinking and flashing on the part of the other buttons. maybe it's just javascript running slowly as the DIVs move around or something, but i prefer to think of it as simple jealous from the other buttons in that group. "click me instead!" "no me!"
in any case, i'm all for flashy design, but this seems to be more trouble and more cumbersome than it's worth, unless that javascript can be optimized to not be so slow.
like it or not, the browser has become a vital platform for application development. unfortunately, client-side scripting is far more efficient than hitting the server every time the user interacts with a UI.
why stop there? why not keep your computer turned off and locked in the corner? it's just asking for trouble by running scripts and executables all over the place.
when is microsoft going to patch their OS so it no longer runs any code?
well i think the idea is, you could be on some trusted site, and some porn site spyware/adware could pop up a javascript browser and for all intents and purposes it would look like it came from the trusted site.
any first person shooter, first of all. also, Everquest 2. honestly, WoW uses some pretty low poly-count graphics, low rez textures (especially on scenery like trees) and pretty simple lighting technology.
luckily, all the greatness in the game is in how this non-cutting edge tech has been leveraged to render things in a very charming and accessible way.
nothing new here ... any outsider can tell you that Blizzard's magic comes from a ridiculous amount of polish on existing concepts. more specifically -- nice cinematics, charming characters, fluid and attractive UI, and the elimination of genre X's most annoying bits. none of that's in dispute.
but hey, good luck on your current projects and i wish you all the luck in the world at unseating the king! =)
If anything, World of Warcraft's huge success has been understated. It is now four times the size of Everquest at its peak. That's monstrous, for a game that charges a monthly subscription.
that quote's incredibly misleading. hit ctrl-alt-del, open your task manager, and click on the "processes" tab. how many of them have a number greater than 1 in the "threads" column? almost all of them, right? including all the big ones that are likely to bog anything down. software nowadays is generally multithreaded.
dear god, why would you reward such a pathetid and inept display of direction and screenwriting by going and paying seven times the normal price? christ, i would have thought natural selection would have taken care of souls like you by now.
i never promised jack squat regarding boycotting blizzard. slashdot is made up of many different people with wildy diverse opinions. you're completely entitled to express yours, by means of angry posts or boycotts, but if you call me a hipocrite, you are mistaken.
actually, the question was "think of a number, any number." and he didn't phrase it as the question to the ultimate answer.
the closest we ever get is when arthur picks the answer from his own brain using random scrabble peices:
"What do you get if you multiply 6 times nine?"
Forty-two.
poops keeps the sig wher it is.
you are one sad, humorless fellow.
sure we do. maybe not the old geezer ones. but the 20-somethings grew up on all kinds. punk, rap, and bluegrass top my list.
i see. i assume you wish you'd spent that time in remedial spelling classes.
so it's designed to keep people coming back. this is new? this is illegal? next i suppose you'd like to ban soap operas and cliffhanger endings? there's nothing here worthy of your umbrage or scorn. there's no chemical dependence, like with cigarettes or heroin, and there's no game mechanic of punishment for not playing that is akin to what smokers and junkies go through. every user is ultimately totally free to close the app at any time. it just takes the tiniest bit of will power.
and sure, ultimately, World of Warcraft can be reduced to meaningless machinations, but so can everything else in life. everything from art to entertainment to ambitions to love onward, if you so choose, can be taken apart and reduced to its most crass base components. but if you choose to completely deconstruct everything you encounter that you enjoy, you're going to lead a very magicless life.
so, you're incapable of or unwilling to lose yourself in the game. well, that doesn't mean you have to look down your nose at people who can still step back and enjoy the diversion.
nope, 100% wrong. None of this will happen.
actually i have a friend who is on dialup, and he has relayed to me several times in-game how astonished he is that game actually functions reasonably well on dial-up.
having said that, what are you doing with dial-up in this day and age, man??
Indestructable cars are mandated by car manufacturers. Every racing game (perhaps excluding a few single marque titles?) has either licenced recognisable cars with no damage, or fictional cars with damage.
this isn't true. The Test Drive series offered crashable versions of real cars, and Need For Speed: Porsche Unleashed provided a very realistic body damage model. in fact, there have been a lot of games with real licensed cars that took damage. i think the GT people keep saying "it's the manufacturers!" as a cop-out.
"you're kidding, that guy on the news is a robot monkey?"