Attention is a currency. Right now Facebook, Google and co are making fortunes by converting our attention to cash through advertising. All we get in exchange is being tolerated on their properties as long as we are willing to be fed crappy adverts. We're not even consumers, we're like serfs of the medieval ages. As it stands, both merchants (ad-buyers) and peasants (consumers) are being screwed, and the nobility (Google, FB & co) takes it all. The merchants buy ads with cash hoping it will translate to sales so they get their money back from peasants, but it's a perverse system where the merchant that spends the most in ads gets to push and sell its product - however crappy it is. If you can't pay enough cash to nobility, they make your life as a merchant very difficult. Peasants have it even worse as they end up giving both attention to ads for (mostly crappy) stuff *and* money to the merchants (of which a good chunks end up with the nobility). It's a vicious circle where both merchants and peasants are indentured to the nobility which has no incentive in figuring out a better way for everyone.
But what if we got payed for our attention? What if there was a marketplace where we could signal what we think has value for other people and get payed if we where right? Suddenly we would have a system where true value would be recognized and where people who helped point out that value (by giving it attention first) would be rewarded. This seems like a much better system for both merchants and peasants but, of course, not for the current nobility.
It's really not that hard to imagine how game-inspired software could tremendously help learning in every field.
The only problem is very few people are actually sitting down and doing it properly. There are precious little good exemples for the time being but it will come, eventually. One such good exemple is Chaim Gingold's upcoming interactive primer on geology. I also read that Khan's academy is developing a sort of leveling structure on top of its courses and I would not be surprised if that turned out to be tremendously effective.
I'm not arguing that computers will completely replace a teacher anytime soon (especially for good, one on one teaching) - but in many, many less than ideal cases it seems obvious good software would be very useful.
>"it would have been more interesting if the book was an actual discussion of the shortcomings of the mass media, why it is in the place it's in and what could be done to change it. Those topics are covered but in such a brief way that they almost seem like an afterthought."
Then again, if you were really looking for an insightful analysis of centralized media, maybe your time would have been better spent reading Marshall McLuhan or Noam Chomsky than Drew Curtis.
When I started Nevrax it was with the idea that all the code would be GPL both on the client and the server side. Following a dispute over corporate strategy with the VCs funding the company, a good chunk of the core team left (myself included). From that point on, the remaining managment and shareholders slowly closed more and more of the code - destroying in the process the spirit and the vision over which the company had been founded. In the end, destroying the company itself.
If Xavier Antoviaque and the folks behind this initiative think they can bring the ideas underlying Ryzom back to life , I sincerly wish them the best of luck.
Before anyone goes off about how AIs will eventually replace us, my company runs a (GPL and GNU/linux friendly) poker site and the last thing i am worried about is bots taking over humans in no-limit games. To win consistently against serious players an AI would need to be a LOT smarter than what the guys from Alberta have. It would need to have a serious grasp of human psychology. It might happen, eventually, but by then society might have changed so much that "money" might also be an obsolete concept...
And even if such software existed, it would basically mean that you couldn't win at online poker anymore because skill would not be relevant anymore. That wouldn't be very different from the current situation with player-versus-casino luck games (like roulette or slots). And we can all see how poorly these are doing, right?:)
Actually, "Werwölfe von Düsterwald" is available in english under the name "The Werewolves of Millers Hollow". Originally, it's a Russian folkgame (were you had to uncover spys) that has been brilliantly redesigned by two frenchmen : Philippe des Pallières and Hervé Marly under the name "Les Loups-Garous de Thiercelieux".
As far as Board & Card games go, a quick pick from my personnal favorites would be (in no particular order): - Ticket to Ride my favorite point to point movement game. Excellent introduction to quality board gaming. - The Cockroachpoker a fast and pure bluff game, ideal for parties. - Bang! a card game in the Wild West were the sheriff and the deputy try to shoot the outlaws and guess who the Renegade is before he shoots them. - Citadels an card game where you try to build the nicest citadel and which has a very smart power selection system. Excellent game with beautiful paintings. - Nicht die Bohne, a fast and vicious card game. - The Republic of Rome, has the most beautiful cooperative/competitive system I've ever seen but I'd only recommend it to serious gamers since it's quite complex.
For more, have a look at BoardGameGeek and Bruno Faidutti's (Citadel's author)website.
At Mekensleepwe're thinking exactly the same way. We wanted to work on persistent, social, online games. And we wanted to release it all as Free Software. Unsurprisingly, publishers were not in a hurry to follow us there (not that I cared) and, from my previous experience, I had learned about the dangers of vulture capital. So we decided that working on a small scale product was the way to go. With a little luck, it will provide a sustainable stream of revenues and at a minimum, it got us further along on the technological side of things.
So far, things are looking good.
Indeed, the futur looks rosy for independent, self published, developpers. If the Korean and Chinese markets are any indication, there will be somemassive successes. And for the less successful - those who won't have enough pull to attract players by themselves - online distribution structures like Manifesto Games will help. Also in-game advertising seems about to become a big trend, at least for a certain type of games. I'm not saying it's a good (or bad) thing for gaming, only that smart indy developpers will take advantage of it.
To sum it up, if you can afford it and you know were you're going, I highly recommend self-publishing.
`It's an extreme sport.
Ha hahahaha! I just knew it! I said it would happen back in 2002 right here on slashdot.
"I actually was at the presentation given by Okamoto san at the GDC. At the time I had noted a few interesting things apart from his lengthy talk on the PS3's architecture. One third of his talk was reserved for Gnu/Linux on PS2, which at the time seemed like a lot to me. AND he also talked about the research his team was doing on GUIs and showed a couple of weird looking screenshots. AND he kept raving about Sony's alliance with IBM and how closely they were going to work together and how much he was interested in everything IBM was doing (he was talking about grid computing at the time). And we all know how IBM is interested in GNU/Linux, don't we? So, I might be totally off base and, yes, this is total speculation at this point. But here goes: I really wouldn't be that suprised if Sony decided that the best way to compete with MS on the software side was to co-opt a GNU/Linux distro, slap a "made in Sony" GUI on it, et voilà! PS3 is ready to take on mighty MS on the software side! And if that ever happens, remember: you read it here first..."
I just loooooove being right (and yes, autoquoting myself is nice too)!:)
He's just sour he couldn't come up with the GPL in the first place. All he has done with his so-called "open source initiative" is try to steal the FSF's thunder. The guy is chronically jalous of RMS.
If not, he would acknowledge that the GPL is far more than the licence of Linux. Truth is, the GPL is the constitution of the Free Software movement. As such, it protects all software under it. Not just Linux.
The french association of Game Producer (APOM) has already taken position against software patents in an open letter to the former French Minister.
Here's a slightly improved Google translation for the french impaired:
Position of the APOM on directive COM(2002)092 relating to the patentability of the "inventions implemented by computer"
Mister the Prime Minister,
The APOM is the French association of producers of multi-media works. It gathers 80 percent of the French producers of video games, an industry which employs many designers, programmers, and creators of high level whose competence is internationally recognized. The APOM is very worried by the current proposal for a European directive on the "inventions implemented by computer", more commonly called "directive on software patentability ". After careful reading, it appears to us that the initial text proposed by the Commission [ 1 ], as well as the version resulting from the working group on the intellectual property of the Council [ 2 ], would be extremely detrimental to our industry.
Indeed, the major part of the process of creation of multi-media works, such as for example video games, consists in developping and processing, in a single and original way, a combination of simple elementary ideas.
To authorize the privatisation of these elementary ideas, as the texts of the Commission and the Council allow, would not have any inciting effect on innovation and creation, but instead, would put every developper under the threat of possible attacks in counterfeit of such software patents. In the United States already, the toxicity of software patents on the innovation and SME innovation are more and more recognized [ 3 ], and were the subject of a report of the Federal Trade Commission [ 4 ]. Bill Gates himself recognized explicitly that software patents are harmful to innovation, and that they are a monopolistic weapon that Microsoft must exploit in order to preserve its dominant position [ 5 ].
Legalization by Europe of software patents would have the same noxious effect, and would put European SME under the threat of the software patents already granted in great number by the European Patent Office to large non-European companies, for the moment fortunately invalid in front of the courts, such as a patent on the "progression bar" [ 6 ], used in almost all the software, or the patent on the breeding and the control of virtual creatures [ 7 ]. These patents and of others, granted by the OEB in spite of their manifest absence of technical nature, illustrate clearly that it is impossible to make a conceptual distinction between "technical" and "non-technical" software, and that any allegedly restrictive legalization of the brevetage of intellectual methods will inevitably lead to total software patentability, which constitutes a serious threat for multi-media and software creation.
The APOM considers that copyright/right of author, supplemented by the rights on models and trademarks, is amply sufficient to protect works multi-media. These rights make it possible to protect the creators against infringment, while not putting legal hurdles to the creation of new works.
The APOM is thus very satisfied with the form of the directive voted by the European Parliament, which, by limiting the patentable subject-matter to the sole innovations having a material effect, wether they make use of a computer or not, prevents in effect the appropriation of intellectual methods, the building blocks of software creation. The APOM is also pleased with the parliamentary amendments relating to interoperability, which prevent the creation of abusive monopolies on data formats and the communications protocols necessary to the handling of sounds and images such as in network games.
The APOM considers that, within the framework of the support plan for the creators of video games, as decided by Mr. the Prime Minister, it is essential that the French government guarantees
- RMS was useful at one time but he should now leave serious persons do the real work. - RMS is too extreme - RMS is a crackpot - RMS is a communist - RMS is a dirty hippy that smells bad - GNU/Linux is childish/idotic/ego-driven - The GPL is not free/ viral etc...
I just wish for once all the idiots who will inevitably spout their mouth would just shut up.
Richard Stallman has consistently proved he was a true visionnary. He forsaw the problems with software and copyright law 20 years ago and devised an extremely clever answer : the GPL.
Not only that but he gave us great software to work with. Some he wrote himself (GCC, GDB, Emacs), some he inspired others to write.
He warned us many times when few would listen. About the importance of protecting freedom. About the importance of tracking copyright ownership. About software patents. About the right to read. Every time he's been criticized, ridiculed or dismissed as a lunatic and every time he was right.
It is time to recognize Richard Stallman's place in history as a great modern philosopher.
So I, for one, would like to thank deeply RMS for dedicating his life to our freedom. For standing tall when no one else would.
In poker you play against other player ; in blackjack you play against the house.
Blackjack used to be a game of chance with odds that could be slightly turned against the house in favour of the player if he played "perfectly". For this he needed to calculate odds given the number of cards left in the dealer's shoe and bet accordingly. If the game was played this way online, it would be a disaster for casinos as bots would rule the game. Online however, the deck is shuffled after each hand and there is no way of calculating the odds. Therefore, online blackjack has become a pure game of luck which is why bots are useless and why you shouldn't play blackjack.
On the other hand, bots can help you calculate odds in online poker. But that's only part of the game and they are largely ineffective against any decent players as they cannot understand human psychology as well as they can calculate odds.
Unlike chess - where bots are very effective - poker is not an information complete game. Therefore a player's skill depends strongly on his ability to "read" and bluff other players. Which is why poker bots will probably remain useless for a very long time. Probably until we reach hard AI.
I work with Loic, on the Free Software based, virtual poker clubwe are developing. The point is we are not scared of bots, on the contrary: we think bots will stay pretty much ineffective for a long time to come. But if you've made one and want to prove us wrong, you're welcome to try on our test server.
>Aside from FFXI, Horizons and Ragnarok Online every other game in that graph has stagnated or is in decline.
Nonono : that's not how you should look at it. What you're seeing only show that players are gaining/loosing interest in specific games. Now, what you really should be looking at is that the aggregate number of MMP players is growing very fast.
>As the market for PC games declines
I'm sorry, but you still haven't explained how that would happen...
>Unfortunately developers aren't driving the market, the consumers are.
Absolutely. And as long as consumers buy PCs, developpers will make games for them.
>The "An Analysis of MMOG Subscription Growth" that you linked to [...]doesn't show whether the PC versions of these titles are dropping off or stagnating compared to the console versions or not, which was what the article was inferring.
Not exactly, no. The article was comparing console games in general with PC, MMP games - which is silly. It also said that the number of player playing MMPs was stagnating. I posted this link in order to show how this statement is false. Nothing more, nothing less.
Personnally, as long as the PC market exists and grows, I couldn't care less how it fares relatively to the consoles market since I have no intention of developping on consoles anyway. I don't mind if PCs grow 2% while consoles grow 20%. Good for them. Myself, I'd rather stay free on the PC. Even with a smaller market.
>MS just announced their new, and free I think, SDK that will allow simple development for PC and the XBox
Sorry but I have learned long ago not to trust MS. My shop uses only cross platform APIs (OpenGL, SDL,etc...). No proprietary crap for me, thank you very much.
It implies that MMPs are the only type of games still being played on PC, which is dumb. Not only that, it also states that "their growth appears almost stagnant" which is, of course, completely false.
I'm a game developper working on MMPs. I've been hearing about the demise of the PC as a gaming platform for *years*. Every year brings its new fad : consoles, cell phones, set top boxes, PDAs, next-gen consoles, online consoles, you name it...
And you know what ? The PC is still alive and kicking.
And you know why ? Because as long as PCs are bought, some people will want to buy games to play on them, and some developpers will want to take advantage of a free platform.
A platform where they don't need to beg for development kits. A platform where they don't have to pay a for the privilege of releasing a game. A platform where they are free to develop whatever game they wish without going through the hoops of "concept approval" (going through the hoops of a publisher is bad enough). A platform where their imagination isn't restricted by the DRM crap that console makers are going to shove down everybody's throat.
So maybe all the big action/sports/movie franchise will keep moving on consoles. And who cares really? It's all the same old, boring stuff anyway. But I'm pretty sure you'll keep on seeing original, cool games appearing on the PC first. And it won't be just the MMP games...
Just like the Internet, the Free & Open Source Software community, Slashdot, Sharereactor or your average MMOG.
And like in any social network, you have the "mainstream" and the "fringe" folks. Call them "Fakesters", "Trolls", "Leeches", "Role Players" or "PKers", the "fringe" always has a different set of values and beliefs (v&bs). Which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing as they can often be very entertaining/interesting/though provoking.
However problems may arise when the v&bs of the fringe come in direct conflict with the v&bs of the community at large while, at the same time, the "mainstream" doesn't have the means to isolate itself from the behavior of the "fringe".
Friendster-the-company should have designed a way for the "Friendsters" to isolate the behavior of "Fakesters" without having to delete them. Something like the moderation system on slashdot. Maybe it's still possible to modify the social rules of this particular network and maybe it's too late and any deep change would kill it.
In any case, what this story illustrates once again is that designing software for social networks is hard. As hard as dealing with humans can be...
>They're planning to release open API's, anyone can create their own objects and sell/share them, create new parts of There for themselves and other.. once you start doing that, the 'Metaverse' moniker starts to stick.
It remains to be seen how "open" the APIs will be. And most importantly, under what license...
At my new company (Mekensleep) we are working on something quite similar to "There", except that the engine we are using, called NeL, has alreadybeen released under the GNU GPL. In addition to our new -still secret!;)- project, NeL is being used in my previous company's MMORPG: Ryzom (see here for more screenshots..
>I find it hard to believe so many of them would back it to the tune of $33 million if they didn't see a heckuva lot more potential in this than just another virtual chat room.
On the other hand, I vividly remember how much money was burned on idiotic business plans during the.com era. So I think I can safely say that the amount of money invested in a company is not necessarily the best way to measure the quality of its project...
Of course there are more games on consoles than on PCs: the market for console games is much bigger, it's easier to target a game for a console and there's a less piracy going on.
However it doesn't make sense to say that because there are more games being done for consoles therefore the PC as a gaming platform is obsolete.
Console games are more action driven and can be consumed in short sessions: such as racing, fighting, or platform games. PC games are geared towards longer sessions and complex interaction: such as simulation, strategy or online games. It's apples and oranges really...
It's going to be interesting to see how consoles perform online, but my guess is that to significantly take online gaming out of the hands of the PC, consoles will have to absorb some of the PC attributes. They've already started with the network adapter and the HD but eventually they'll have to go all the way to the keyboard. Unless some kind of revolutionnary input method comes along first but I don't think that's going to happen.
Anyway, PC games will be there as long as the PC itself. Let's not forget that from a developper standpoint, the console is to the PC what proprietary software is to Free Software...
But in the end, there's no reason why both plateform couldn't co-exist peacefully. And you know what? That's exactly what's going to happen...
Please don't get me wrong: I'm certainly not saying the game won't be a success. I'm sure it will go over a million player. Also, the Jedi thing was simply an example, I could have picked ten others...
All I'm saying is that, IMHO, the most successful Persistent Worlds will be the ones that break away from old media licenses to invent their own identities.
>I can't help but think that the MMORPG bandwagon is not likely to live into 2005 anyway. I'm tired of games that just put a new candy-coating on games I played before.
It's not so much about the game mechanics or the graphics as it is about the community. Just look at all the text muds that keep on going...
The big difference between Persistent worlds and the rest of online gaming is that PW have real communities that can interact inside the world by other means than shooting at each other.
That alone makes me believe that not only will MM games be there in 2005 but there will be many, many more. Each catering to their community in their own unique way. Eventually, there could even be one persistent world for every economically sustainable niche...
The problem with these licenses
on
Marvel Goes MMPORG
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The problem with licenses such as Marvel, Star Wars, or LOTR is that they were never created with MM (Massively Multiplayer) games in mind.
Take Star Wars: most people will want to be a Jedi, right? But you can't have 100k Jedis running around choping heads with their light sabers: that just wouldn't work nor would it be true to the license. So the designers have to come up with game design tricks to limit the number of people that can be a Jedi at any given time. And that's just one example of the hundreds of problems that will pop up when you to stick a license on a MM game: it's like trying to force a square peg in a round hole.
Persistent worlds are communities. As such they have dynamics of their own and the best way to stick to these dynamics is to craft a world specifically around them.
I believe that, in the long run, MM games that will be the most successful will be the ones that take into acount the nature of online communities and tailor their game design accordingly. Unfortunately, licenses that come from other media aren't flexible enough to do this...
Slashdot Mirror
Attention is a currency. Right now Facebook, Google and co are making fortunes by converting our attention to cash through advertising. All we get in exchange is being tolerated on their properties as long as we are willing to be fed crappy adverts. We're not even consumers, we're like serfs of the medieval ages.
As it stands, both merchants (ad-buyers) and peasants (consumers) are being screwed, and the nobility (Google, FB & co) takes it all.
The merchants buy ads with cash hoping it will translate to sales so they get their money back from peasants, but it's a perverse system where the merchant that spends the most in ads gets to push and sell its product - however crappy it is. If you can't pay enough cash to nobility, they make your life as a merchant very difficult. Peasants have it even worse as they end up giving both attention to ads for (mostly crappy) stuff *and* money to the merchants (of which a good chunks end up with the nobility). It's a vicious circle where both merchants and peasants are indentured to the nobility which has no incentive in figuring out a better way for everyone.
But what if we got payed for our attention? What if there was a marketplace where we could signal what we think has value for other people and get payed if we where right? Suddenly we would have a system where true value would be recognized and where people who helped point out that value (by giving it attention first) would be rewarded. This seems like a much better system for both merchants and peasants but, of course, not for the current nobility.
Maybe it's time for the revolt of the serfs...
It's really not that hard to imagine how game-inspired software could tremendously help learning in every field.
The only problem is very few people are actually sitting down and doing it properly. There are precious little good exemples for the time being but it will come, eventually. One such good exemple is Chaim Gingold's upcoming interactive primer on geology. I also read that Khan's academy is developing a sort of leveling structure on top of its courses and I would not be surprised if that turned out to be tremendously effective.
I'm not arguing that computers will completely replace a teacher anytime soon (especially for good, one on one teaching) - but in many, many less than ideal cases it seems obvious good software would be very useful.
>"it would have been more interesting if the book was an actual discussion of the shortcomings of the mass media, why it is in the place it's in and what could be done to change it. Those topics are covered but in such a brief way that they almost seem like an afterthought."
Then again, if you were really looking for an insightful analysis of centralized media, maybe your time would have been better spent reading Marshall McLuhan or Noam Chomsky than Drew Curtis.
Just a passing thought...
I find it immensely sad that it has come to this.
When I started Nevrax it was with the idea that all the code would be GPL both on the client and the server side. Following a dispute over corporate strategy with the VCs funding the company, a good chunk of the core team left (myself included).
From that point on, the remaining managment and shareholders slowly closed more and more of the code - destroying in the process the spirit and the vision over which the company had been founded. In the end, destroying the company itself.
If Xavier Antoviaque and the folks behind this initiative think they can bring the ideas underlying Ryzom back to life , I sincerly wish them the best of luck.
Before anyone goes off about how AIs will eventually replace us, my company runs a (GPL and GNU/linux friendly) poker site and the last thing i am worried about is bots taking over humans in no-limit games. To win consistently against serious players an AI would need to be a LOT smarter than what the guys from Alberta have. It would need to have a serious grasp of human psychology. It might happen, eventually, but by then society might have changed so much that "money" might also be an obsolete concept...
:)
And even if such software existed, it would basically mean that you couldn't win at online poker anymore because skill would not be relevant anymore. That wouldn't be very different from the current situation with player-versus-casino luck games (like roulette or slots).
And we can all see how poorly these are doing, right?
Actually, "Werwölfe von Düsterwald" is available in english under the name "The Werewolves of Millers Hollow". Originally, it's a Russian folkgame (were you had to uncover spys) that has been brilliantly redesigned by two frenchmen : Philippe des Pallières and Hervé Marly under the name "Les Loups-Garous de Thiercelieux".
As far as Board & Card games go, a quick pick from my personnal favorites would be (in no particular order):
- Ticket to Ride my favorite point to point movement game. Excellent introduction to quality board gaming.
- The Cockroachpoker a fast and pure bluff game, ideal for parties.
- Bang! a card game in the Wild West were the sheriff and the deputy try to shoot the outlaws and guess who the Renegade is before he shoots them.
- Citadels an card game where you try to build the nicest citadel and which has a very smart power selection system. Excellent game with beautiful paintings.
- Nicht die Bohne, a fast and vicious card game.
- The Republic of Rome, has the most beautiful cooperative/competitive system I've ever seen but I'd only recommend it to serious gamers since it's quite complex.
For more, have a look at BoardGameGeek and Bruno Faidutti's (Citadel's author)website.
At Mekensleepwe're thinking exactly the same way. We wanted to work on persistent, social, online games. And we wanted to release it all as Free Software. Unsurprisingly, publishers were not in a hurry to follow us there (not that I cared) and, from my previous experience, I had learned about the dangers of vulture capital.
So we decided that working on a small scale product was the way to go. With a little luck, it will provide a sustainable stream of revenues and at a minimum, it got us further along on the technological side of things.
So far, things are looking good.
Indeed, the futur looks rosy for independent, self published, developpers. If the Korean and Chinese markets are any indication, there will be some massive successes. And for the less successful - those who won't have enough pull to attract players by themselves - online distribution structures like Manifesto Games will help. Also in-game advertising seems about to become a big trend, at least for a certain type of games. I'm not saying it's a good (or bad) thing for gaming, only that smart indy developpers will take advantage of it.
To sum it up, if you can afford it and you know were you're going, I highly recommend self-publishing.
`It's an extreme sport.
Ha hahahaha! I just knew it! I said it would happen back in 2002 right here on slashdot.
:)
"I actually was at the presentation given by Okamoto san at the GDC. At the time I had noted a few interesting things apart from his lengthy talk on the PS3's architecture. One third of his talk was reserved for Gnu/Linux on PS2, which at the time seemed like a lot to me. AND he also talked about the research his team was doing on GUIs and showed a couple of weird looking screenshots. AND he kept raving about Sony's alliance with IBM and how closely they were going to work together and how much he was interested in everything IBM was doing (he was talking about grid computing at the time).
And we all know how IBM is interested in GNU/Linux, don't we?
So, I might be totally off base and, yes, this is total speculation at this point. But here goes: I really wouldn't be that suprised if Sony decided that the best way to compete with MS on the software side was to co-opt a GNU/Linux distro, slap a "made in Sony" GUI on it, et voilà! PS3 is ready to take on mighty MS on the software side! And if that ever happens, remember: you read it here first..."
I just loooooove being right (and yes, autoquoting myself is nice too)!
ESR is such a troll.
He's just sour he couldn't come up with the GPL in the first place. All he has done with his so-called "open source initiative" is try to steal the FSF's thunder. The guy is chronically jalous of RMS.
If not, he would acknowledge that the GPL is far more than the licence of Linux. Truth is, the GPL is the constitution of the Free Software movement. As such, it protects all software under it. Not just Linux.
The french association of Game Producer (APOM) has already taken position against software patents in an open letter to the former French Minister.
:
Here's a slightly improved Google translation for the french impaired
Position of the APOM on directive COM(2002)092 relating to the patentability of the "inventions implemented by computer"
Mister the Prime Minister,
The APOM is the French association of producers of multi-media works. It gathers 80 percent of the French producers of video games, an industry which employs many designers, programmers, and creators of high level whose competence is internationally recognized. The APOM is very worried by the current proposal for a European directive on the "inventions implemented by computer", more commonly called "directive on software patentability ". After careful reading, it appears to us that the initial text proposed by the Commission [ 1 ], as well as the version resulting from the working group on the intellectual property of the Council [ 2 ], would be extremely detrimental to our industry.
Indeed, the major part of the process of creation of multi-media works, such as for example video games, consists in developping and processing, in a single and original way, a combination of simple elementary ideas.
To authorize the privatisation of these elementary ideas, as the texts of the Commission and the Council allow, would not have any inciting effect on innovation and creation, but instead, would put every developper under the threat of possible attacks in counterfeit of such software patents. In the United States already, the toxicity of software patents on the innovation and SME innovation are more and more recognized [ 3 ], and were the subject of a report of the Federal Trade Commission [ 4 ]. Bill Gates himself recognized explicitly that software patents are harmful to innovation, and that they are a monopolistic weapon that Microsoft must exploit in order to preserve its dominant position [ 5 ].
Legalization by Europe of software patents would have the same noxious effect, and would put European SME under the threat of the software patents already granted in great number by the European Patent Office to large non-European companies, for the moment fortunately invalid in front of the courts, such as a patent on the "progression bar" [ 6 ], used in almost all the software, or the patent on the breeding and the control of virtual creatures [ 7 ]. These patents and of others, granted by the OEB in spite of their manifest absence of technical nature, illustrate clearly that it is impossible to make a conceptual distinction between "technical" and "non-technical" software, and that any allegedly restrictive legalization of the brevetage of intellectual methods will inevitably lead to total software patentability, which constitutes a serious threat for multi-media and software creation.
The APOM considers that copyright/right of author, supplemented by the rights on models and trademarks, is amply sufficient to protect works multi-media. These rights make it possible to protect the creators against infringment, while not putting legal hurdles to the creation of new works.
The APOM is thus very satisfied with the form of the directive voted by the European Parliament, which, by limiting the patentable subject-matter to the sole innovations having a material effect, wether they make use of a computer or not, prevents in effect the appropriation of intellectual methods, the building blocks of software creation. The APOM is also pleased with the parliamentary amendments relating to interoperability, which prevent the creation of abusive monopolies on data formats and the communications protocols necessary to the handling of sounds and images such as in network games.
The APOM considers that, within the framework of the support plan for the creators of video games, as decided by Mr. the Prime Minister, it is essential that the French government guarantees
In no particular order:
- RMS was useful at one time but he should now leave serious persons do the real work.
- RMS is too extreme
- RMS is a crackpot
- RMS is a communist
- RMS is a dirty hippy that smells bad
- GNU/Linux is childish/idotic/ego-driven
- The GPL is not free/ viral etc...
I just wish for once all the idiots who will inevitably spout their mouth would just shut up.
Richard Stallman has consistently proved he was a true visionnary. He forsaw the problems with software and copyright law 20 years ago and devised an extremely clever answer : the GPL.
Not only that but he gave us great software to work with. Some he wrote himself (GCC, GDB, Emacs), some he inspired others to write.
He warned us many times when few would listen. About the importance of protecting freedom. About the importance of tracking copyright ownership. About software patents. About the right to read. Every time he's been criticized, ridiculed or dismissed as a lunatic and every time he was right.
It is time to recognize Richard Stallman's place in history as a great modern philosopher.
So I, for one, would like to thank deeply RMS for dedicating his life to our freedom. For standing tall when no one else would.
Live long, RMS, and never give up.
Poker is very different from Blackjack.
In poker you play against other player ; in blackjack you play against the house.
Blackjack used to be a game of chance with odds that could be slightly turned against the house in favour of the player if he played "perfectly". For this he needed to calculate odds given the number of cards left in the dealer's shoe and bet accordingly. If the game was played this way online, it would be a disaster for casinos as bots would rule the game. Online however, the deck is shuffled after each hand and there is no way of calculating the odds. Therefore, online blackjack has become a pure game of luck which is why bots are useless and why you shouldn't play blackjack.
On the other hand, bots can help you calculate odds in online poker. But that's only part of the game and they are largely ineffective against any decent players as they cannot understand human psychology as well as they can calculate odds.
Unlike chess - where bots are very effective - poker is not an information complete game. Therefore a player's skill depends strongly on his ability to "read" and bluff other players. Which is why poker bots will probably remain useless for a very long time. Probably until we reach hard AI.
I work with Loic, on the Free Software based, virtual poker club we are developing. The point is we are not scared of bots, on the contrary: we think bots will stay pretty much ineffective for a long time to come. But if you've made one and want to prove us wrong, you're welcome to try on our test server.
;)
I'll be glad to take your chips. In person!
>Aside from FFXI, Horizons and Ragnarok Online every other game in that graph has stagnated or is in decline.
Nonono : that's not how you should look at it. What you're seeing only show that players are gaining/loosing interest in specific games.
Now, what you really should be looking at is that the aggregate number of MMP players is growing very fast.
>As the market for PC games declines
I'm sorry, but you still haven't explained how that would happen...
>Unfortunately developers aren't driving the market, the consumers are.
,etc...).
Absolutely. And as long as consumers buy PCs, developpers will make games for them.
>The "An Analysis of MMOG Subscription Growth" that you linked to [...]doesn't show whether the PC versions of these titles are dropping off or stagnating compared to the console versions or not, which was what the article was inferring.
Not exactly, no.
The article was comparing console games in general with PC, MMP games - which is silly. It also said that the number of player playing MMPs was stagnating. I posted this link in order to show how this statement is false. Nothing more, nothing less.
Personnally, as long as the PC market exists and grows, I couldn't care less how it fares relatively to the consoles market since I have no intention of developping on consoles anyway.
I don't mind if PCs grow 2% while consoles grow 20%. Good for them. Myself, I'd rather stay free on the PC. Even with a smaller market.
>MS just announced their new, and free I think, SDK that will allow simple development for PC and the XBox
Sorry but I have learned long ago not to trust MS.
My shop uses only cross platform APIs (OpenGL, SDL
No proprietary crap for me, thank you very much.
Sorry, but this article is just misinformed crap.
It implies that MMPs are the only type of games still being played on PC, which is dumb. Not only that, it also states that "their growth appears almost stagnant" which is, of course, completely false.
I'm a game developper working on MMPs.
I've been hearing about the demise of the PC as a gaming platform for *years*.
Every year brings its new fad : consoles, cell phones, set top boxes, PDAs, next-gen consoles, online consoles, you name it...
And you know what ?
The PC is still alive and kicking.
And you know why ?
Because as long as PCs are bought, some people will want to buy games to play on them, and some developpers will want to take advantage of a free platform.
A platform where they don't need to beg for development kits.
A platform where they don't have to pay a for the privilege of releasing a game.
A platform where they are free to develop whatever game they wish without going through the hoops of "concept approval" (going through the hoops of a publisher is bad enough).
A platform where their imagination isn't restricted by the DRM crap that console makers are going to shove down everybody's throat.
So maybe all the big action/sports/movie franchise will keep moving on consoles. And who cares really? It's all the same old, boring stuff anyway.
But I'm pretty sure you'll keep on seeing original, cool games appearing on the PC first. And it won't be just the MMP games...
Here's a couple of links to prove my point.
The day the PC as a gaming platform dies, is the day the PC dies.
>It's a two tape video
Indeed it's very good. But before being a documentary, it's a book. And as often, the book is even better than the movie.
>There are more, and I'd love to see replies with links to this rapidly growing class of services/apps, with brief descriptions attached. Thanks
Then you should check this list. Already quite big and growing fast...
Just like the Internet, the Free & Open Source Software community, Slashdot, Sharereactor or your average MMOG.
And like in any social network, you have the "mainstream" and the "fringe" folks.
Call them "Fakesters", "Trolls", "Leeches", "Role Players" or "PKers", the "fringe" always has a different set of values and beliefs (v&bs). Which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing as they can often be very entertaining/interesting/though provoking.
However problems may arise when the v&bs of the fringe come in direct conflict with the v&bs of the community at large while, at the same time, the "mainstream" doesn't have the means to isolate itself from the behavior of the "fringe".
Friendster-the-company should have designed a way for the "Friendsters" to isolate the behavior of "Fakesters" without having to delete them. Something like the moderation system on slashdot. Maybe it's still possible to modify the social rules of this particular network and maybe it's too late and any deep change would kill it.
In any case, what this story illustrates once again is that designing software for social networks is hard.
As hard as dealing with humans can be...
>They're planning to release open API's, anyone can create their own objects and sell/share them, create new parts of There for themselves and other.. once you start doing that, the 'Metaverse' moniker starts to stick.
;)- project, NeL is being used in my previous company's MMORPG: Ryzom (see here for more screenshots..
.com era.
It remains to be seen how "open" the APIs will be. And most importantly, under what license...
At my new company (Mekensleep) we are working on something quite similar to "There", except that the engine we are using, called NeL, has already been released under the GNU GPL.
In addition to our new -still secret!
>I find it hard to believe so many of them would back it to the tune of $33 million if they didn't see a heckuva lot more potential in this than just another virtual chat room.
On the other hand, I vividly remember how much money was burned on idiotic business plans during the
So I think I can safely say that the amount of money invested in a company is not necessarily the best way to measure the quality of its project...
Yeah, right. Keep stomping monkey boy... ;)
Of course there are more games on consoles than on PCs: the market for console games is much bigger, it's easier to target a game for a console and there's a less piracy going on.
However it doesn't make sense to say that because there are more games being done for consoles therefore the PC as a gaming platform is obsolete.
Console games are more action driven and can be consumed in short sessions: such as racing, fighting, or platform games.
PC games are geared towards longer sessions and complex interaction: such as simulation, strategy or online games.
It's apples and oranges really...
It's going to be interesting to see how consoles perform online, but my guess is that to significantly take online gaming out of the hands of the PC, consoles will have to absorb some of the PC attributes. They've already started with the network adapter and the HD but eventually they'll have to go all the way to the keyboard. Unless some kind of revolutionnary input method comes along first but I don't think that's going to happen.
Anyway, PC games will be there as long as the PC itself.
Let's not forget that from a developper standpoint, the console is to the PC what proprietary software is to Free Software...
But in the end, there's no reason why both plateform couldn't co-exist peacefully.
And you know what? That's exactly what's going to happen...
Please don't get me wrong: I'm certainly not saying the game won't be a success. I'm sure it will go over a million player.
Also, the Jedi thing was simply an example, I could have picked ten others...
All I'm saying is that, IMHO, the most successful Persistent Worlds will be the ones that break away from old media licenses to invent their own identities.
>I can't help but think that the MMORPG bandwagon is not likely to live into 2005 anyway. I'm tired of games that just put a new candy-coating on games I played before.
It's not so much about the game mechanics or the graphics as it is about the community. Just look at all the text muds that keep on going...
The big difference between Persistent worlds and the rest of online gaming is that PW have real communities that can interact inside the world by other means than shooting at each other.
That alone makes me believe that not only will MM games be there in 2005 but there will be many, many more. Each catering to their community in their own unique way. Eventually, there could even be one persistent world for every economically sustainable niche...
The problem with licenses such as Marvel, Star Wars, or LOTR is that they were never created with MM (Massively Multiplayer) games in mind.
Take Star Wars: most people will want to be a Jedi, right?
But you can't have 100k Jedis running around choping heads with their light sabers: that just wouldn't work nor would it be true to the license. So the designers have to come up with game design tricks to limit the number of people that can be a Jedi at any given time. And that's just one example of the hundreds of problems that will pop up when you to stick a license on a MM game: it's like trying to force a square peg in a round hole.
Persistent worlds are communities. As such they have dynamics of their own and the best way to stick to these dynamics is to craft a world specifically around them.
I believe that, in the long run, MM games that will be the most successful will be the ones that take into acount the nature of online communities and tailor their game design accordingly. Unfortunately, licenses that come from other media aren't flexible enough to do this...