* You can't press left and right buttons at the same time! Absolutely useless for gaming, although admittedly you don't need to do this anywhere else (that I'm aware of).
IIRC, 3DSMax has some camera manipulations that require holding down the left and right mouse buttons - the middle mouse button may have the same effect, but I think that the middle mouse has it's own function as well (e.g. panning).
In addition, programs such as MSPaint allow you to right-click while holding down the left mouse button to cancel your current action.
While it isn't used in day-to-day usage, any semi-serious graphics manipulation program will eventually have the need to hold both the left and right mouse buttons even on a 5-button mouse.
Their support policy allows 2 no-charge support requests by phone or e-mail. There is unlimited installation support by phone. There is also free support through newsgroups and partners.
The more advanced versions of Windows XP do not have this charge.
If the user is incapacitated by such a small difference in the layout of menus or toolbars, then he's got more problems than any sysadmin is qualified to deal with.
Users are incapacitated by The Bleeding Obvious. Given the amount of people that are likely to be confused by things that are obvious, you can be sure that there will be more people confused by something that does not have the same look and feel.
The myth that Linux can't interact with Windows was blown out of the water years ago, and continuing to repeat it simply generates more heat than light.
Whether or not Linux can or cannot interact with Windows is a seperate issue. I am talking about whether or not it mimicks the GUI of Windows.
In windows, users can instantly reach the floppy by going to A:\. Under Linux, you go to the/mnt/floppy mount-point, or by using a GUI shortcut to reach the floppy instead. When a user finds that typing a:\ does not work, that user would be slowed down a bit when he searches for that floppy shortcut - or would contact the help desk if no shortcut is immediatly visible.
I am aware that mtools attempts to add transparancy between Linux and Windows floppy disk usage. However, this doesn't appear to provide transparent access by itself. Unless you have a distribution that supports automounting floppy disks or otherwise install an automounter yourself, you will have to deal with support requests that pertain to basic operating system usage.
If most of those computers are "pubic access" to surf the net and check webmail, just dump Windows for any one of the major linux distros.
Library computers are not necessarly browser kiosks.
Some people use the library computers to do work, which means users expect to read/write MS Word documents. Some of these users don't know how to use anything other than Microsoft Word and would completely panic when forced to use the "forign" OpenOffice.org (unless it is skinned to look no different), and can also panic on very subtle differences between Windows and XWindows.
What these kids don't understand is that simply by attending the school they lose the majority of their rights. Since they are minors, the school becomes their de facto guardian while they are there, and thusly, it has power that supercedes their rights.
FYI, some of those kids in high-school are at or above the age of 18. Adults of sound mind do not have a legal guardian.
Also, some cell phones are in the name of the student's parents. In this case, the student just has to keep it in "locked" mode, and tell the school to obtain the unlock code from the owner of the cell phone.
The school claims it "is to improve security and stop the sale of drugs and stolen goods." The cell phone checking does absolutly nothing to prevent (or handle) these incidents since there is no record of numbers that are about to be called. In addition, the school does not have the investigative power to identify these items in question - this is handled by the police and they require a search warrent.
The Louisana politicians cannot and are not defending a law by plopping random comments that were already identified. If they were defending the law, they would actually have a minimal amount of success as opposed to undermining their own stance on the issue.
Their rationalizations are as follows:
"The last thing we need is some video game promoting violent and illegal behavior. I understand where they are coming from. They feel like we are trying to stop the sale of these videos and in fact we are," he said referring to the video game industry.
[...]
"We can't legislate morality but certainly we can stop these games from being sold in Louisiana, getting into the hands of our children. It's the least we could do."
[...]
"You assume the character of a mass murderer. You go out and kill people as violently as you can because you score more points."
He continued by saying that the games "teach a kid how to kill, how to rape, how to defile a person, how to kill an officer" and that game makers "hide behind the fact that it's a cartoon."
It is trivial to rip apart these points blindfolded. The video games he is referring to aren't available on the market, period. In the mean time, it nets in the Rainbow Six series as collateral damage since supressing terrorism is considered violent.
If he is instead attempting to refer to GTA3, then he's obviously attempting something shady - especially since killing enough officers causes the SWAT and National Guard to get involved, and especially since there is no rape in the game at all.
...especially if you can make it through the following:
I can make my way through that, but that's considered trivial. Also, if you can make your way through that, it would mean that it is easier to make the change since people can still read the "garbled" text as it changes. The original proposal by Mark Twain suggests doing it a step at a time rather than doing a complete overhaul.
As for the article itself, it's an extremely bad recommendation. There is no pattern for changing the spelling and can easily damage the English language. For example, "new gnu" gets converted to "nue nue" resulting in teachers docking you for doubling a word when they mangled the language in the first place. Language reform attempts that do not take homonyms into account are bound to fail.
it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae.
And just in case someone may actually believe the scrambled text, here's a rebuttal. Try reading the following: 1) A vheclie epxledod at a plocie cehckipont near the UN haduqertares in Bagahdd on Mnoday kilinlg the bmober and an Irqai polcie offceir 2) Big ccunoil tax ineesacrs tihs yaer hvae seezueqd the inmcoes of mnay pneosenirs 3) A dootcr has aimttded the magltheuansr of a tageene ceacnr pintaet who deid aetfr a hatospil durg blendur
These sentences fit the requirements, but become increasingly difficult to read - especially when the last word almost looks like a similar word. In addition, the scrambling blindingly kills Proper names, which risks making it difficult to find an appropriate reference (especially on other news sites.)
While there is some truth to the text in question (e.g. pattern recognition), it requires the brain to work harder and can break down on uncommon or complex words.
FTA: Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that "80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys."
20% is a pretty bad false positive rate.
Only if WGA is only capable of detecting unauthorized volume license keys. For reference, WGA will flag WINE as an unauthorized copy of Microsoft Windows.
While false positives do exist, 100% events - 80% known positives != 20% false positives.
I would recommend this guy get a lawyer, and go after this coffee house when this nonsensical bullshit is over. He should get at a minimum, free coffee and internet for a year.
In other words, going to a parking lot, putting blankets on the truck's windows and staying there for hours should require companies to provide free food. By extension, loitering in a mall should provide a free year-long shopping spree.
If life were like that, you wouldn't need a VISA card.
They don't ask those questions. You obviously have never been involved in jury selection. They ask if you know the parties involved.
They have to ask those questions about profession and education - by law.
As it is a jury of peers, you need to filter out those who have an education in law, or otherwise practise law - if there is a law expert in the jury, it is highly likly that a single person can influence the decision unfairly.
FYI, I know a person that was called for jury duty - when she was asked her current profession, she told them that she worked at a fast food restaurant. They put down "Expediter" or some other fancy term. Based on that information, education and profession, she was allowed on the jury - there is no further information provided to either two parties (aside from misc questions during the juror's interview).
The profession is also asked for a second reason - neither side wants to have too many people of the same profession as it implies that there is some form of lopsided jury.
While I could see this coming as soon as I read the law itself (and I'm a layman), there's Another Law in the same stat that is receiving full support of the game industry.
The difference with this law is that it only targets sexual content - and thus is allowed to use the "Millar" test. The one that is blocked uses vague/ambiguous definitions that could (in theory) be used to ban the game of Chess.
If you had a couple blue-haired ladies in front of every EB store (or whatever) holding up signs that say "This store sells filth to minors", they would probably be very motivated to meet with community groups and find an arrangement which everybody can live with.
Then again, it would cause people to wonder what they are protesting about - or even worse, advertise the game that they are trying to berate.
The game 25 To Life would almost be an unknown game, if it weren't for the fact that it was hyped by these "protesters". However, the immense hype caused people to wonder what was going on and purchsed the product in question - turned out that it was a robot killer rather than a cop killer since no cop of a sane mind would attempt to shoot through hostages. (Except in non-standard circumstances not present in day-to-day American Crime.)
The same applies to Manhunt - I would have never heard of the game if it weren't hyped.
Regardless, both games are rated 'M'. Minors can't use direct tactics to obtain the game. (If they successfully use social engineering, then they are old enough to play the game.)
I've got this crazy notion that people can work shit like this out for themselves without the aid of the nanny state.
As I mentioned above, they can - by not advertising these games for the manufacturers. In fact, the retail stores and manufacturers can create a press release claiming success on a new form of advertising that does not require any budget (at least none within the company) - from there, you can tell what comes next.
It's auto-attack feature is nice... but TA:K demonstrated that it does not handle "melee-range" units. That game needed a patch to add a "Move-fight" command.
It still has some of the flaws I mentioned - you still have to individually select units to pull them back for repair (although there are ways around this), and units still stop in their tracks when their targets are destroyed (and queueing orders doesn't count, because of the neat trick of pulling units back to mess up tactics).
It is to C&C, Starcraft and other RTSs what chess is to checkers.
Total Annihilation uses a large quantity of units - however, most of these units are highly similar with a stanadard forward-firing attack mounted on a turret. This is checkers.
C&C, however, makes sure that there is counterability - Minigunners defeat Rocket Solders which defeat Tanks, which defeat Minigunners (although this isn't a simple closed loop.) In Chess, the Queen is countered by the knight (especially through forks), and through anti-queen tactics.
In my opinion, most modern RTS games feel just as advanced as C&C. Here's a quick test to show why:
- Select a group of units, and assign them to hotkey 1. - Have them attack an enemy group. Naturally, they overwhelm them and are victorious. - Some your units are damaged and need to be sent back to base for repair. Do so without pulling away healthy units. While you can do this on Dark Reign, Red Alert 2, and a few other games... most games on the market do not support Auto-repair or otherwise send damaged units back to base without micromanaging them. - While you were attacking the enemy forces, you were naturally building up another attack force with your build panel on the right-hand side of the screen. Select those new units and add them to group 1. - Oh look, the enemy is launching another attack - have group 1 engage and destroy them. (They will do so easily, since the computer AI sucks.) - Now, since the enemy base is weakly defended, have your reinforced group obliterate the enemy in one large swarm. To do so, wait until your reinforcements join up, and charge (which will be forever in every modern game other then Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 - as units stop in their tracks as soon as their assigned target is destroyed.)
The order of events shown above are highly reasonable in a military assault. However, RTS games have the most basic of flaws in unit AIs that prevent these things from being possible - and these flaws are fixable by anyone who knows what they are doing.
Arrows are large, heavy and strike with enough force to penetrate plate armour.
Only if the arrow is fired from a longbow. If you use anything less, then the arrow can easily bounce off properly smithed armor. Just remember that good steel plate armor can even protect against an arquebus.
The purpose of the short bow used in Theif is to fire the special-issue ammunition, mainly because using regular arrows is not recommended at the highest difficulty setting. In particular, it is designed to fire: - Water arrows, which extinguish fire (including fire elementals and robots) - Holy water arrows, which harm undead (which are resistant to other weapons.) - Fire arrows, which are loud but are good for taking out armor (and use a flat trajectory). - Gas arrows, which instantly knock-out an enemy. - Noisemaker arrows, which are decoys.
Also, being hit with the sword as it happens in the Thief series "should" normally kill guards quickly - instead, you need to do 4 hits before they start panicking and 1 last hit to prevent them from alerting others. (Not that it matters, since you are not supposed to kill people.)
Why do science and God always have a problem co-exisiting?
They don't.
God, being a God, can instantly redefine anything and thus render a "known" law to no longer be correct. That's generally why you see so many perpetual motion machine designs - someone discovers a loophole in physics which gets closed immediatly afterward.
The Flying Spegatti Monster, which is also a God (but probably a different one or an idolized one), is capable of plopping in evidence of evolution.
Gods do not have problems co-existing with Science. Religion may have that problem, but that's a human organization rather than a deity itself.
OK, great. This info was freely available on their web site 8 years ago.
A moot point, since developers are *NOT* guarenteed to remain on the project for 8 years.
If the docs are not available, then only the developers who managed to obtain the docs legally can consider working on that portion of the code. No new developers means that support will drop sooner or later - might as well drop it right away rather than wait for it to enter disrepair.
You know what, if you'd wanted this 15 years ago, you would have phoned them up, given them the EXACT SAME INFO THEY'RE ASKING FOR on their web site, and they would have mailed it to you.
A lot can happen in 15 years - specs change, newer designs come out, etc.
If Microsoft published a defective software, the least they should do is to offer FREE UPGRADES to Windows XP-SP2 for Windows 98 users.
From the vulnerability description:
An attacker would need to convince a user to visit a Web site that could force a connection to a remote file server.
This is a browser vulnerability, which is resolved by upgrading your browser, locking down your browser, or getting a different browser. While Outlook is affected, they really contract HTML rendering to Internet Explorer.
Or otherwise, give the users their money back.
Sure, giving the money back for Internet Explorer is an acceptable option.
Chilhood obesity? Bad behaviour? Game 'addiction'? The best cure for all the these ailments is a hard fucking slap and being told you get off your ass and get a life.
Question: What are children supposed to do?
They cannot play football - their soccer mom would berate them for not "trying hard enough" when they are already leading by 12 points.
They cannot socialize with others - for obvious reasons. Naturally, those symptoms are fallbacks because they don't need to worry about the other child abusing peers.
They cannot take up other hobbies - they already have school work and an existing hobby.
I'm all open to suggestions, but berating them just because they don't have comfortable alternatives is no different than administering random shocks to lab rats (who basically become afraid of doing anything and doing nothing, resulting in neurotic behaviour.)
Better yet, lets just take off every safty label in existance and let the problems with self discipline and stupidity sort itself out.
Safety labels are required - if you do that, there will be no reference to handling hazardous chemicals - and would obviously drop chemistry back down to alchemy.
Likewise, children/adults have no other information that something can be corrosive (e.g. bleach) and may follow an incorrect procedure to wash the bleach off (i.e. not take the full 20 minutes to rince away all chemicals.)
exchange server limits: you can only use 1000 Exchange servers in the forest can only handle 60,000 queues
Yes, and MSVC is a rotten compiler since it only allows me to use 16383 local variables in a function.
(If you are bumping into what is normally an arbitrary high limit, you may want to reconsider your network or e-mail design before switching to a different mail system. )
Have to push back here. The problems with ratings systems (TV, Movies, and Video Games), have -always- been made worse by the unwillingness of the industries to provide -full disclosure-.
Full Disclousure doesn't work that well - it would generally fill up the entire box, and doesn't work at all for moddable games.
The closest you can get to Full disclosure is the current ESRB rating system - a large rating code, and rating descriptors on the back. If parents have trouble find either of these, then that's their own problem.
That's why you have multiplayer FPS games like Quake. In Quake, anyone can get any weapon on the map without having to make enough money to buy it and without leveling up or anything like that.
You still have to obtain the weapon. The purchase cost is being at a specific point on the map while the weapon may be picked up, as opposed to "money" or "experience levels". Just because a weapon is "there" does not mean a thing if a camper can sit in a location and wipe out all resistance attempting to come close to the weapon.
Case in point: E1M5 - where a rocket launcher in plain view can be guarded by a player on the upper platform. As soon as an enemy approaches the area containing the launcher, he gets cut to shreads - the elevator up won't work either since it has a loud alarm (general elevator noise) attached. Running out of rockets? Jump down and quickly reload, and climb back up. You can't do squat to get the rocket launcher if the enemy already has control over that zone.
It never ceases to amaze me how the "gamer crowd" completely discards the idea that maybe, just maybe, children shouldn't have access to all video game content
Actually, that's not correct - and is really a superficial symptom of what is being compained about. There is no problem with 'M' being on the cardboard box and retailers asking that people should be over 17+ (or at least make it appear plausible enough if there's no ID available.)
What we have seen, and object to: - Outright banning of violent games, while movies and hockey don't receive the same treatment. While obscenities are not protected by First Amendment, Violence != Obscene unless you count 80+% of all literature to be just as obscene (including Little Red Riding Hood.) - Banning excessivly violent game sales to minors, with criteria using traditional definitions of excessive violence. In that list provided (treating as is as opposed to the actual legislation), the list is poorly formed - identical offences are listed twice (decapitation, amputation, dismemberment and mutilation are subsets of aggrivated assault). - Banning violent games sales, with absurd definitions of excessive violence. These absurd restrictions state that games should not allow assaulting cops - thus a criminal mastermind will gain an invulnerablity device as soon as he enters the police acadamy (and appears to otherwise keep his nose clean.) Some others restrict violence against women, which is one of the most sexist things I've seen since similirly treated males have no protection - at this rate, we might as well undo Sufferage and go back to the 1800s. - Banning sales to minors based on ESRB rating. This does not work, since the ESRB is not infallible - they rated Oblivion as 'T' in spite of the maximum amount of Gore. - Violence-as-porn bills. While this may be acceptable, it is completely moot since it provides an entirely inconsistant basis that varies from place to place. If children are allowed to watch cockfighting, why can't they play Command & Conquer? As a side note, these violence-as-porn must treat the work as a whole and the game must not have artistic, scienfic, or literary merit - most games already meet these criteria. - And lastly, I am offended that these legislative bills don't attempt to ban the game of Chess. This game involves the equivalent of kidnapping high-ranking government officials by the players, and killing off their supporters - there is absolutly no reason why abstracted violence should be treated any differently than graphic violence.
In Ontario, I heard that there is legislation being introduced that restricts 'M' games to minors. While the one of the above argument applies, it's not as important since it does not carry as much weight in Canada. However, 'M' is a "soft" rating meaning that it may be worked around in some special circumstances.
And do the opponents of video game ratings apply their logic consistently? Do they also oppose movie ratings, and age limits on the purchase of porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms?
Video game ratings and movie ratings are not the same as age limits for porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms. The former are done by the industry, and the latter is done by the government.
If you are talking about opponents to video game legislation, then it's still something different. What is currently being signed into law is a hard restriction that makes no exceptions and keeps smacking head first into first-amendment challenges. Cigarettes, alcohol, firearms and automobiles are unsafe in a person too young - these are restricted as a public safety issue.
The only thing that really counts is the bit about porn - perhaps it is a double standard
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, 3DSMax has some camera manipulations that require holding down the left and right mouse buttons - the middle mouse button may have the same effect, but I think that the middle mouse has it's own function as well (e.g. panning).
In addition, programs such as MSPaint allow you to right-click while holding down the left mouse button to cancel your current action.
While it isn't used in day-to-day usage, any semi-serious graphics manipulation program will eventually have the need to hold both the left and right mouse buttons even on a 5-button mouse.
Their support policy allows 2 no-charge support requests by phone or e-mail. There is unlimited installation support by phone. There is also free support through newsgroups and partners.
The more advanced versions of Windows XP do not have this charge.
Users are incapacitated by The Bleeding Obvious. Given the amount of people that are likely to be confused by things that are obvious, you can be sure that there will be more people confused by something that does not have the same look and feel.
Whether or not Linux can or cannot interact with Windows is a seperate issue. I am talking about whether or not it mimicks the GUI of Windows.
In windows, users can instantly reach the floppy by going to A:\. Under Linux, you go to the
I am aware that mtools attempts to add transparancy between Linux and Windows floppy disk usage. However, this doesn't appear to provide transparent access by itself. Unless you have a distribution that supports automounting floppy disks or otherwise install an automounter yourself, you will have to deal with support requests that pertain to basic operating system usage.
Library computers are not necessarly browser kiosks.
Some people use the library computers to do work, which means users expect to read/write MS Word documents. Some of these users don't know how to use anything other than Microsoft Word and would completely panic when forced to use the "forign" OpenOffice.org (unless it is skinned to look no different), and can also panic on very subtle differences between Windows and XWindows.
FYI, some of those kids in high-school are at or above the age of 18. Adults of sound mind do not have a legal guardian.
Also, some cell phones are in the name of the student's parents. In this case, the student just has to keep it in "locked" mode, and tell the school to obtain the unlock code from the owner of the cell phone.
The school claims it "is to improve security and stop the sale of drugs and stolen goods." The cell phone checking does absolutly nothing to prevent (or handle) these incidents since there is no record of numbers that are about to be called. In addition, the school does not have the investigative power to identify these items in question - this is handled by the police and they require a search warrent.
Their rationalizations are as follows:
It is trivial to rip apart these points blindfolded. The video games he is referring to aren't available on the market, period. In the mean time, it nets in the Rainbow Six series as collateral damage since supressing terrorism is considered violent.
If he is instead attempting to refer to GTA3, then he's obviously attempting something shady - especially since killing enough officers causes the SWAT and National Guard to get involved, and especially since there is no rape in the game at all.
I can make my way through that, but that's considered trivial. Also, if you can make your way through that, it would mean that it is easier to make the change since people can still read the "garbled" text as it changes. The original proposal by Mark Twain suggests doing it a step at a time rather than doing a complete overhaul.
As for the article itself, it's an extremely bad recommendation. There is no pattern for changing the spelling and can easily damage the English language. For example, "new gnu" gets converted to "nue nue" resulting in teachers docking you for doubling a word when they mangled the language in the first place. Language reform attempts that do not take homonyms into account are bound to fail.
And just in case someone may actually believe the scrambled text, here's a rebuttal.
Try reading the following:
1) A vheclie epxledod at a plocie cehckipont near the UN haduqertares in Bagahdd on Mnoday kilinlg the bmober and an Irqai polcie offceir
2) Big ccunoil tax ineesacrs tihs yaer hvae seezueqd the inmcoes of mnay pneosenirs
3) A dootcr has aimttded the magltheuansr of a tageene ceacnr pintaet who deid aetfr a hatospil durg blendur
These sentences fit the requirements, but become increasingly difficult to read - especially when the last word almost looks like a similar word. In addition, the scrambling blindingly kills Proper names, which risks making it difficult to find an appropriate reference (especially on other news sites.)
While there is some truth to the text in question (e.g. pattern recognition), it requires the brain to work harder and can break down on uncommon or complex words.
Only if WGA is only capable of detecting unauthorized volume license keys. For reference, WGA will flag WINE as an unauthorized copy of Microsoft Windows.
While false positives do exist, 100% events - 80% known positives != 20% false positives.
Sorry, wrong distribution.
Caldera Linux had tetris during install, but Corel Linux did not.
In other words, going to a parking lot, putting blankets on the truck's windows and staying there for hours should require companies to provide free food. By extension, loitering in a mall should provide a free year-long shopping spree.
If life were like that, you wouldn't need a VISA card.
They have to ask those questions about profession and education - by law.
As it is a jury of peers, you need to filter out those who have an education in law, or otherwise practise law - if there is a law expert in the jury, it is highly likly that a single person can influence the decision unfairly.
FYI, I know a person that was called for jury duty - when she was asked her current profession, she told them that she worked at a fast food restaurant. They put down "Expediter" or some other fancy term. Based on that information, education and profession, she was allowed on the jury - there is no further information provided to either two parties (aside from misc questions during the juror's interview).
The profession is also asked for a second reason - neither side wants to have too many people of the same profession as it implies that there is some form of lopsided jury.
Because those chess clubs would ask for legal fees when they win, as it looks like an obnoxious lawsuit.
A better method would be to attack the law directly, as the ESA and the entire industry does. Since their actions are 100% successful...
While I could see this coming as soon as I read the law itself (and I'm a layman), there's Another Law in the same stat that is receiving full support of the game industry.
The difference with this law is that it only targets sexual content - and thus is allowed to use the "Millar" test. The one that is blocked uses vague/ambiguous definitions that could (in theory) be used to ban the game of Chess.
Then again, it would cause people to wonder what they are protesting about - or even worse, advertise the game that they are trying to berate.
The game 25 To Life would almost be an unknown game, if it weren't for the fact that it was hyped by these "protesters". However, the immense hype caused people to wonder what was going on and purchsed the product in question - turned out that it was a robot killer rather than a cop killer since no cop of a sane mind would attempt to shoot through hostages. (Except in non-standard circumstances not present in day-to-day American Crime.)
The same applies to Manhunt - I would have never heard of the game if it weren't hyped.
Regardless, both games are rated 'M'. Minors can't use direct tactics to obtain the game. (If they successfully use social engineering, then they are old enough to play the game.)
As I mentioned above, they can - by not advertising these games for the manufacturers. In fact, the retail stores and manufacturers can create a press release claiming success on a new form of advertising that does not require any budget (at least none within the company) - from there, you can tell what comes next.
It's auto-attack feature is nice... but TA:K demonstrated that it does not handle "melee-range" units. That game needed a patch to add a "Move-fight" command.
It still has some of the flaws I mentioned - you still have to individually select units to pull them back for repair (although there are ways around this), and units still stop in their tracks when their targets are destroyed (and queueing orders doesn't count, because of the neat trick of pulling units back to mess up tactics).
Total Annihilation uses a large quantity of units - however, most of these units are highly similar with a stanadard forward-firing attack mounted on a turret. This is checkers.
C&C, however, makes sure that there is counterability - Minigunners defeat Rocket Solders which defeat Tanks, which defeat Minigunners (although this isn't a simple closed loop.) In Chess, the Queen is countered by the knight (especially through forks), and through anti-queen tactics.
In my opinion, most modern RTS games feel just as advanced as C&C. Here's a quick test to show why:
- Select a group of units, and assign them to hotkey 1.
- Have them attack an enemy group. Naturally, they overwhelm them and are victorious.
- Some your units are damaged and need to be sent back to base for repair. Do so without pulling away healthy units. While you can do this on Dark Reign, Red Alert 2, and a few other games... most games on the market do not support Auto-repair or otherwise send damaged units back to base without micromanaging them.
- While you were attacking the enemy forces, you were naturally building up another attack force with your build panel on the right-hand side of the screen. Select those new units and add them to group 1.
- Oh look, the enemy is launching another attack - have group 1 engage and destroy them. (They will do so easily, since the computer AI sucks.)
- Now, since the enemy base is weakly defended, have your reinforced group obliterate the enemy in one large swarm. To do so, wait until your reinforcements join up, and charge (which will be forever in every modern game other then Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 - as units stop in their tracks as soon as their assigned target is destroyed.)
The order of events shown above are highly reasonable in a military assault. However, RTS games have the most basic of flaws in unit AIs that prevent these things from being possible - and these flaws are fixable by anyone who knows what they are doing.
Only if the arrow is fired from a longbow. If you use anything less, then the arrow can easily bounce off properly smithed armor. Just remember that good steel plate armor can even protect against an arquebus.
The purpose of the short bow used in Theif is to fire the special-issue ammunition, mainly because using regular arrows is not recommended at the highest difficulty setting. In particular, it is designed to fire:
- Water arrows, which extinguish fire (including fire elementals and robots)
- Holy water arrows, which harm undead (which are resistant to other weapons.)
- Fire arrows, which are loud but are good for taking out armor (and use a flat trajectory).
- Gas arrows, which instantly knock-out an enemy.
- Noisemaker arrows, which are decoys.
Also, being hit with the sword as it happens in the Thief series "should" normally kill guards quickly - instead, you need to do 4 hits before they start panicking and 1 last hit to prevent them from alerting others. (Not that it matters, since you are not supposed to kill people.)
They don't.
God, being a God, can instantly redefine anything and thus render a "known" law to no longer be correct. That's generally why you see so many perpetual motion machine designs - someone discovers a loophole in physics which gets closed immediatly afterward.
The Flying Spegatti Monster, which is also a God (but probably a different one or an idolized one), is capable of plopping in evidence of evolution.
Gods do not have problems co-existing with Science. Religion may have that problem, but that's a human organization rather than a deity itself.
A moot point, since developers are *NOT* guarenteed to remain on the project for 8 years.
If the docs are not available, then only the developers who managed to obtain the docs legally can consider working on that portion of the code. No new developers means that support will drop sooner or later - might as well drop it right away rather than wait for it to enter disrepair.
A lot can happen in 15 years - specs change, newer designs come out, etc.
From the vulnerability description:
This is a browser vulnerability, which is resolved by upgrading your browser, locking down your browser, or getting a different browser. While Outlook is affected, they really contract HTML rendering to Internet Explorer.
Sure, giving the money back for Internet Explorer is an acceptable option.
Consider your cheque for $0.00 to be in the mail.
Question: What are children supposed to do?
They cannot play football - their soccer mom would berate them for not "trying hard enough" when they are already leading by 12 points.
They cannot socialize with others - for obvious reasons. Naturally, those symptoms are fallbacks because they don't need to worry about the other child abusing peers.
They cannot take up other hobbies - they already have school work and an existing hobby.
I'm all open to suggestions, but berating them just because they don't have comfortable alternatives is no different than administering random shocks to lab rats (who basically become afraid of doing anything and doing nothing, resulting in neurotic behaviour.)
Safety labels are required - if you do that, there will be no reference to handling hazardous chemicals - and would obviously drop chemistry back down to alchemy.
Likewise, children/adults have no other information that something can be corrosive (e.g. bleach) and may follow an incorrect procedure to wash the bleach off (i.e. not take the full 20 minutes to rince away all chemicals.)
Yes, and MSVC is a rotten compiler since it only allows me to use 16383 local variables in a function.
(If you are bumping into what is normally an arbitrary high limit, you may want to reconsider your network or e-mail design before switching to a different mail system. )
Full Disclousure doesn't work that well - it would generally fill up the entire box, and doesn't work at all for moddable games.
The closest you can get to Full disclosure is the current ESRB rating system - a large rating code, and rating descriptors on the back. If parents have trouble find either of these, then that's their own problem.
You still have to obtain the weapon. The purchase cost is being at a specific point on the map while the weapon may be picked up, as opposed to "money" or "experience levels". Just because a weapon is "there" does not mean a thing if a camper can sit in a location and wipe out all resistance attempting to come close to the weapon.
Case in point: E1M5 - where a rocket launcher in plain view can be guarded by a player on the upper platform. As soon as an enemy approaches the area containing the launcher, he gets cut to shreads - the elevator up won't work either since it has a loud alarm (general elevator noise) attached. Running out of rockets? Jump down and quickly reload, and climb back up. You can't do squat to get the rocket launcher if the enemy already has control over that zone.
Actually, that's not correct - and is really a superficial symptom of what is being compained about. There is no problem with 'M' being on the cardboard box and retailers asking that people should be over 17+ (or at least make it appear plausible enough if there's no ID available.)
What we have seen, and object to:
- Outright banning of violent games, while movies and hockey don't receive the same treatment. While obscenities are not protected by First Amendment, Violence != Obscene unless you count 80+% of all literature to be just as obscene (including Little Red Riding Hood.)
- Banning excessivly violent game sales to minors, with criteria using traditional definitions of excessive violence. In that list provided (treating as is as opposed to the actual legislation), the list is poorly formed - identical offences are listed twice (decapitation, amputation, dismemberment and mutilation are subsets of aggrivated assault).
- Banning violent games sales, with absurd definitions of excessive violence. These absurd restrictions state that games should not allow assaulting cops - thus a criminal mastermind will gain an invulnerablity device as soon as he enters the police acadamy (and appears to otherwise keep his nose clean.) Some others restrict violence against women, which is one of the most sexist things I've seen since similirly treated males have no protection - at this rate, we might as well undo Sufferage and go back to the 1800s.
- Banning sales to minors based on ESRB rating. This does not work, since the ESRB is not infallible - they rated Oblivion as 'T' in spite of the maximum amount of Gore.
- Violence-as-porn bills. While this may be acceptable, it is completely moot since it provides an entirely inconsistant basis that varies from place to place. If children are allowed to watch cockfighting, why can't they play Command & Conquer? As a side note, these violence-as-porn must treat the work as a whole and the game must not have artistic, scienfic, or literary merit - most games already meet these criteria.
- And lastly, I am offended that these legislative bills don't attempt to ban the game of Chess. This game involves the equivalent of kidnapping high-ranking government officials by the players, and killing off their supporters - there is absolutly no reason why abstracted violence should be treated any differently than graphic violence.
In Ontario, I heard that there is legislation being introduced that restricts 'M' games to minors. While the one of the above argument applies, it's not as important since it does not carry as much weight in Canada. However, 'M' is a "soft" rating meaning that it may be worked around in some special circumstances.
Video game ratings and movie ratings are not the same as age limits for porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms. The former are done by the industry, and the latter is done by the government.
If you are talking about opponents to video game legislation, then it's still something different. What is currently being signed into law is a hard restriction that makes no exceptions and keeps smacking head first into first-amendment challenges. Cigarettes, alcohol, firearms and automobiles are unsafe in a person too young - these are restricted as a public safety issue.
The only thing that really counts is the bit about porn - perhaps it is a double standard