I just returned my BFG card and got it replaced a few weeks ago. It was only a couple of months old when it failed. Not the quality I expected from such a big-name company.
So who is making quality graphics cards and standing by their warranty these days?
I won't buy them, and I won't try to download any of these games, even if they ARE successfully cracked. Besides being illegal, it would just give UbiS*** ammo for their claims that they are losing sales to pirates.
Don't buy and don't download cracked games. Maybe then all these idiot companies will get the message.
How does the existence, or non-existence, of middlemen affect my perceived value?
I see a hardcover at $20 - $30. I get a physical copy that can be used anywhere without special technology. I get the right to resell it when I am done with it. A hard drive crash will not delete it. To me, that has value. A $14.99 digital copy that has none of these advantages seems to me to have little value. That perception does not depend on middlemen, or the cost of paper. It depends on the usefulness of the product. Whether or not the publisher and author save costs by publishing electronically is not my problem.
Considering the fact that you get no physical copy and are encumbered by DRM, it seems to me that fair pricing is as follows: $9.99 for the period when the only physical copy available for sale is hardcover, $4.99 once the paperback comes out.
Anything above these prices is, to me, a rip-off.
This explains why I have never purchased an e-book, yet the bookshelves in my home are overflowing.
Bnetd was created to bypass Blizzard's cd key check so people could play pirated versions of Starcraft online.
No. That was just ONE of the things bnetd did. And the reason it bypassed cd-checks was because (as I read some years ago) Blizzard refused to provide the info that would have allowed the programmers to check cd-keys. The PURPOSE of bnetd was to create an open server product that would address many of the shortcomings of Battle.Net
Now, I have some sympathy for BLIZZARD not wanting info about their cd-key algorithm to become public, but the bnetd developers DID try to cooperate with BLIZZARD on that issue.
Pirating was the main reason for bnetd. Period. If you can't come to terms with this, then you aren't living in reality.
And back in the day the movie and TV companies claimed that the main reason for VCRs was the pirating of broadcast content. Didn't make it true.
What I REALLY want to know is: Who is responsible for the taking away of the fair use rights we used to have as a result of SONY vs BETAMAX? The law used to state that even if the primary use might be piracy, it was still legal provided there were significant non-infringing uses! BLIZZARD vs bnetd seems to have changed that.
As more people discover streaming video, and demand better picture quality and less jittering, the demand for bandwidth will skyrocket. One HD movie per week would be over 200GB per year, probably closer to double that.
I used it to set up a demand dialler and firewall on my old 486.
It was interesting because there was an error in the diald package. The distro included a newer version that used different file locations, but the install script still used the old file locations. I learned a lot figuring that one out!
I found WC2 had only 1 mission that was near impossible. WC3 had several, as did WC4.
In the case of Thief 3 . . . Quite a lot of the people who played it first like it.
Actually, I know this to be true. However, several of those people that I know revised their opinion of Thief 3 after going back and playing Thief 1 and 2.
every Civ game has at least a couple low difficulties that should be trivial for anyone who enjoys that sort of game.
I found Civ3 and 4 had no difficulty levels that were easy, let alone trivial. As I said, "Even at the easiest difficulty settings these games are very hard to beat."
Might and Magic IX - Went for eye candy over game play.
The third Krondor game - More eye candy, virtually no game play.
Thief 3 - "Consolized" the game. Missions were composed of several small linked play areas instead of large rambling areas to explore. This was done to adapt the game to console hardware limitations.
MOO3 - An example of change for its own sake. Did anyone actually like this game?
Wing Commander III and IV - Examples of challenge disorder. There were too many missions in these games that were virtually impossible to beat, and the dynamic difficulty setting system made it impossible to adjust the games to your personal skill level.
SimCity 2 and later - Added too much complexity, ruining the game experience. Remember: KISS!
Civ3 and 4 - More challenge disorder. Even at the easiest difficulty settings these games are very hard to beat.
There are more, I am sure, but I'll let other Slashdotters come up with them. And yes, I am aware that many people enjoyed many of these games but, speaking from my own knowledge (from conversations with other gamers), each of the games I have listed lost a large part of their audience, with only the hard core fans of the franchise claiming to like them.
The problem with Vista -now- really is primarily PR.
The launch kinks have mostly been worked out.
I've heard that one before.
The driver situation has significantly improved.
Which is why, last time I did a Vista install, both the printer and network drivers mysteriously disappeared a week later, only to mysteriously reappear the next day. New equipment, with Vista certified drivers, btw.
And the price of 'suitable hardware' has continued its downward trend.
Okay, I'll give you that one.
The only major obstacle in the face of Microsoft really is public perception that "Vista sucks"
and this perception exists, perhaps, because Vista really DOES suck?
I keep hearing that the problems with Vista have been solved, but every time (yes, EVERY time) I have tried Vista, or set it up for someone, I have had problems. I simply no longer believe any claims that Vista has been fixed.
I tossed it because it has such poor support for Win98 guests (no shared folders, or other tools). I run many older OSes as guests, so I'm sticking with VMWare.
You can take a basic app and write add-ons. Each customer that needs a new feature gets an add-on written (or possibly modified if there is an existing add-on that is close to what is needed). Customers only run the add-ons they need, keeping the interface uncluttered.
I am amazed at how many people buy this stuff not caring (or not knowing) the hazards of the crap the game publishers include in the name of copy protection.
After an earlier version of SecuRom destroyed the CD drive of a friend of mine (we're pretty sure it was SecuRom - it died a couple of hours after installing the game and beginning to play, and research on the net indicated SecuRom had caused many other people's drives to die) I have avoided all games with intrusive copy protection such as SecuRom. However, I am aware that I am definitely in the minority.
My "Who cares?" should more properly have been phrased, "Why should I care?" I don't care anymore. I have bought one game in the last 18 months, and I am quite content playing it and the dozens of other games I bought in the 2 decades previous, none of which have potentially damaging additions like SecuRom.
You see, I talk to people who say the same thing, but it's not what I've experienced.
I have run into drivers (sound, printer and network) disappearing and reappearing apparently at random. I have run into many situations where Vista refuses to talk to one or more XP, Win9x and Linux machines, while happily working with others on the same network. I had a friend who had his Vista laptop refuse to burn a home movie because it apparently thought it was copyrighted. (Worked fine on his XP desktop!) I have had Vista refuse to work with legacy software, forcing the business user to pay for an unwanted upgrade. And these are just some of the Vista problems I encountered.
As for the recent networking problem, I eventually got it working (after Vista decided the other computers no longer existed) as follows: I discovered that I could force Vista to see another computer by using the search window and manually entering the computer name (e.g: \\desktop). Only the search window allowed Vista to see the other computer. Full network maps did not, even after manually installing LLTP on the XP machines (which was needed because LLTP does not install to an XP SP3 machine since SP3 supposedly includes LLTP but actually does not). Figuring this out got the Vista machine working on the network - until it mysteriously stopped the next day. Once I had forced Vista to see another machine. I was able to map a folder from that computer as a network drive, and tell Vista to reconnect at login. I did that for each machine on the network. Now the new Vista machine can see the XP machines and access them, and vice-versa.
In other words you didn't want to pay for XP so you moved to Linux. It has nothing to do with it's activation requirement (other than that it stopped you from using stolen software.
I don't know about you but, while I find activation and WGA annoying, they aren't enough to make me completely leave the Windows platform. For me it isn't Windows' activation that's making me get more serious about Linux (Ive been a light user for 10+ years), it's the problems with Vista.
My sister-in-law just got a new laptop for her business. Of course, it came with Vista. It took me over 2 hours yesterday to get the Vista machine to work on the XP network. This morning, after a couple of hours of use, for no apparent reason, the Vista machine quit working on the network. It took me 4 hours to get it back, and I am still unsure that the Vista machine will keep working on the network.
Vista is broken. I have talked to people who say it's not, but that's not my experience. Personally, I will NOT use Vista. Once XP goes the way of Win9x, unless Windows7 is MUCH better (which seems unlikely), I will forgo all things Microsoft and go completely Gnu/Linux or Mac.
Linux is NOT a better consumer operating system than Windows and anyone who says it is is fooling themselves.
It depends on your definition of "better," doesn't it? While I have often had difficulty getting Linux systems set up, I have never had the problems with Linux that I have had with Vista, and once I got something to work in Linux, it NEVER stopped working unless I changed it and messed it up. I can't say that about Windows, particularly Vista.
Slashdot Mirror
I just returned my BFG card and got it replaced a few weeks ago. It was only a couple of months old when it failed. Not the quality I expected from such a big-name company.
So who is making quality graphics cards and standing by their warranty these days?
It might lead to more sales, but not from me.
I won't buy them, and I won't try to download any of these games, even if they ARE successfully cracked. Besides being illegal, it would just give UbiS*** ammo for their claims that they are losing sales to pirates.
Don't buy and don't download cracked games. Maybe then all these idiot companies will get the message.
How does the existence, or non-existence, of middlemen affect my perceived value?
Indeed, it doesn't.
Then don't tell me there's a problem with my reasoning. Tell me that you are pointing out how it looks on the other side. There is a difference.
How does the existence, or non-existence, of middlemen affect my perceived value?
I see a hardcover at $20 - $30. I get a physical copy that can be used anywhere without special technology. I get the right to resell it when I am done with it. A hard drive crash will not delete it. To me, that has value.
A $14.99 digital copy that has none of these advantages seems to me to have little value. That perception does not depend on middlemen, or the cost of paper. It depends on the usefulness of the product. Whether or not the publisher and author save costs by publishing electronically is not my problem.
Considering the fact that you get no physical copy and are encumbered by DRM, it seems to me that fair pricing is as follows:
$9.99 for the period when the only physical copy available for sale is hardcover,
$4.99 once the paperback comes out.
Anything above these prices is, to me, a rip-off.
This explains why I have never purchased an e-book, yet the bookshelves in my home are overflowing.
I fail to see that this will do much good when the bittorrent protocol is blcked on many ISPs (including mine).
No. That was just ONE of the things bnetd did. And the reason it bypassed cd-checks was because (as I read some years ago) Blizzard refused to provide the info that would have allowed the programmers to check cd-keys. The PURPOSE of bnetd was to create an open server product that would address many of the shortcomings of Battle.Net
Now, I have some sympathy for BLIZZARD not wanting info about their cd-key algorithm to become public, but the bnetd developers DID try to cooperate with BLIZZARD on that issue.
And back in the day the movie and TV companies claimed that the main reason for VCRs was the pirating of broadcast content. Didn't make it true.
What I REALLY want to know is: Who is responsible for the taking away of the fair use rights we used to have as a result of SONY vs BETAMAX? The law used to state that even if the primary use might be piracy, it was still legal provided there were significant non-infringing uses! BLIZZARD vs bnetd seems to have changed that.
Hear, Hear!
For now, perhaps.
As more people discover streaming video, and demand better picture quality and less jittering, the demand for bandwidth will skyrocket. One HD movie per week would be over 200GB per year, probably closer to double that.
I used it to set up a demand dialler and firewall on my old 486.
It was interesting because there was an error in the diald package. The distro included a newer version that used different file locations, but the install script still used the old file locations. I learned a lot figuring that one out!
I found WC2 had only 1 mission that was near impossible. WC3 had several, as did WC4.
Actually, I know this to be true. However, several of those people that I know revised their opinion of Thief 3 after going back and playing Thief 1 and 2.
I found Civ3 and 4 had no difficulty levels that were easy, let alone trivial. As I said, "Even at the easiest difficulty settings these games are very hard to beat."
Might and Magic IX - Went for eye candy over game play.
The third Krondor game - More eye candy, virtually no game play.
Thief 3 - "Consolized" the game. Missions were composed of several small linked play areas instead of large rambling areas to explore. This was done to adapt the game to console hardware limitations.
MOO3 - An example of change for its own sake. Did anyone actually like this game?
Wing Commander III and IV - Examples of challenge disorder. There were too many missions in these games that were virtually impossible to beat, and the dynamic difficulty setting system made it impossible to adjust the games to your personal skill level.
SimCity 2 and later - Added too much complexity, ruining the game experience. Remember: KISS!
Civ3 and 4 - More challenge disorder. Even at the easiest difficulty settings these games are very hard to beat.
There are more, I am sure, but I'll let other Slashdotters come up with them. And yes, I am aware that many people enjoyed many of these games but, speaking from my own knowledge (from conversations with other gamers), each of the games I have listed lost a large part of their audience, with only the hard core fans of the franchise claiming to like them.
Which one? The remake and the original take different views.
You forgot security.
Once MS stops patching holes in WinXP, you either have to move on, or run everything in a sandbox.
And when that happens, I will almost certainly move to Linux as my primary OS (right now, for various reasons, it is secondary).
In my opinion they are right.
The problem with Vista -now- really is primarily PR.
The launch kinks have mostly been worked out.
I've heard that one before.
The driver situation has significantly improved.
Which is why, last time I did a Vista install, both the printer and network drivers mysteriously disappeared a week later, only to mysteriously reappear the next day. New equipment, with Vista certified drivers, btw.
And the price of 'suitable hardware' has continued its downward trend.
Okay, I'll give you that one.
The only major obstacle in the face of Microsoft really is public perception that "Vista sucks"
and this perception exists, perhaps, because Vista really DOES suck?
I keep hearing that the problems with Vista have been solved, but every time (yes, EVERY time) I have tried Vista, or set it up for someone, I have had problems. I simply no longer believe any claims that Vista has been fixed.
Fine, I looked at the new features list. One or two interesting items, but nothing that makes me sit up and go "Gotta have it!"
I tossed it because it has such poor support for Win98 guests (no shared folders, or other tools). I run many older OSes as guests, so I'm sticking with VMWare.
It doesn't have to be that way.
You can take a basic app and write add-ons. Each customer that needs a new feature gets an add-on written (or possibly modified if there is an existing add-on that is close to what is needed). Customers only run the add-ons they need, keeping the interface uncluttered.
Don't people use auto-update?
Unfortunately, you are correct.
I am amazed at how many people buy this stuff not caring (or not knowing) the hazards of the crap the game publishers include in the name of copy protection.
After an earlier version of SecuRom destroyed the CD drive of a friend of mine (we're pretty sure it was SecuRom - it died a couple of hours after installing the game and beginning to play, and research on the net indicated SecuRom had caused many other people's drives to die) I have avoided all games with intrusive copy protection such as SecuRom. However, I am aware that I am definitely in the minority.
My "Who cares?" should more properly have been phrased, "Why should I care?" I don't care anymore. I have bought one game in the last 18 months, and I am quite content playing it and the dozens of other games I bought in the 2 decades previous, none of which have potentially damaging additions like SecuRom.
It has SecuRom. I won't buy it.
You see, I talk to people who say the same thing, but it's not what I've experienced.
I have run into drivers (sound, printer and network) disappearing and reappearing apparently at random. I have run into many situations where Vista refuses to talk to one or more XP, Win9x and Linux machines, while happily working with others on the same network. I had a friend who had his Vista laptop refuse to burn a home movie because it apparently thought it was copyrighted. (Worked fine on his XP desktop!) I have had Vista refuse to work with legacy software, forcing the business user to pay for an unwanted upgrade. And these are just some of the Vista problems I encountered.
As for the recent networking problem, I eventually got it working (after Vista decided the other computers no longer existed) as follows: I discovered that I could force Vista to see another computer by using the search window and manually entering the computer name (e.g: \\desktop). Only the search window allowed Vista to see the other computer. Full network maps did not, even after manually installing LLTP on the XP machines (which was needed because LLTP does not install to an XP SP3 machine since SP3 supposedly includes LLTP but actually does not). Figuring this out got the Vista machine working on the network - until it mysteriously stopped the next day. Once I had forced Vista to see another machine. I was able to map a folder from that computer as a network drive, and tell Vista to reconnect at login. I did that for each machine on the network. Now the new Vista machine can see the XP machines and access them, and vice-versa.
As far as I am concerned, Vista is broken.
I don't know about you but, while I find activation and WGA annoying, they aren't enough to make me completely leave the Windows platform. For me it isn't Windows' activation that's making me get more serious about Linux (Ive been a light user for 10+ years), it's the problems with Vista.
My sister-in-law just got a new laptop for her business. Of course, it came with Vista. It took me over 2 hours yesterday to get the Vista machine to work on the XP network. This morning, after a couple of hours of use, for no apparent reason, the Vista machine quit working on the network. It took me 4 hours to get it back, and I am still unsure that the Vista machine will keep working on the network.
Vista is broken. I have talked to people who say it's not, but that's not my experience. Personally, I will NOT use Vista. Once XP goes the way of Win9x, unless Windows7 is MUCH better (which seems unlikely), I will forgo all things Microsoft and go completely Gnu/Linux or Mac.
It depends on your definition of "better," doesn't it? While I have often had difficulty getting Linux systems set up, I have never had the problems with Linux that I have had with Vista, and once I got something to work in Linux, it NEVER stopped working unless I changed it and messed it up. I can't say that about Windows, particularly Vista.