people tak about switching to the PC because their are so much more in the way of Music apps. As a professional, this is far from the truth.
What!?
You're kidding right? Two words: Sonic Foundry.
Let me put it this way. Sound Forge is the Photoshop of digital audio. What Linux needs is the Gimp of Sound Forge, and then Acid.
If Linux wants _many_ new fans, an Acid-alike will do it. Acid is _the_ sh*t. So called "serious" musicians will try to tell you it's a toy, etc. But it most certainly is not... it's (part of) the future of music!
(BTW I am a "serious" musician. I play many real instruments at way beyond the "4 chord braindead" level. I just don't have my head up my ass).
gribbly
P.S. If there are any coders who have been harbouring an impulse to write a Linux Acid-alike... contact me. I am a designer by trade, and hereby offer my services in a design and co-ordination role. So if you would like a neat document that describes exactly how everything should work from an end-user perspective, let me know.
...is of critical importance. My background is game design and before that QA (i.e., playtesting). I am a firm believer in the power of the tester -> coder feedback loop, as I have seen it work magic any number of times.
What I think Linux needs, and what I am trying to bring to it, is less coders. Note that I don't say less technical folk, because that's not what I mean. It is possible to be tech-aware without actually being a coder. I consider myself to fall into that category. To be specific, I run Slackware on my laptop (been through Redhat and Mandrake). I have all sorts of trouble configuring it, but persevere, ask friends, etc., and generally get it sorted. I am technical enough to configure most things, compile source distributions, compile my own kernels. Generally I cannot make meaningful modifications to the source before I compile it, however.
What I hope to contribute as I come up to speed on linux (been using -- hmm sounds dodgy -- for ~ 6 months now) is feedback. My personal interest is audio -- I am a heavy user of Sonic Foundry's Windows products. For the most part they are very well designed. I am constantly on the look out for linux apps that offer the same functionality (slim pickings so far =), and when I find them plan to use them and offer feedback from an end user perspective. My QA background makes me very fussy about UI, so the programmers of such a project can expect detailed nitpicking, suggestions and (as a side effect) bug reports.
So I suppose I'm saying that OSS could use more people like me:) People with an interest in migrating their core activities to an obviously superior platform, with the inclination to be actively involved in enhancing available applications, and with enough technical knowledge not to make utterly inappropriate/unfeasible suggestions ("why isn't there a paper clip that pops up to help me?"). Communications skills also help (as in any QA role).
Ideally, developers would slowly form relationships with trusted end-users, and learn to trust their judgment on interface and other end-user issues.
I don't think there's much to be gained from trying to make linux a "lowest common denominator" OS like Windows. Linux/Unix already does an excellent job of being a LCD OS in a specific context -- I have a friend who works with the police, and didn't even know he ran linux! His sysadmin has done a great job of insulating him and other non-technical users from stuff they simply don't need to know about (as an aside, linux is clearly superior in this regard. Any idiot can browse to C:\Windows and delete it, but that same idiot is limited to deleting their own home directory under linux). Also, if you're going to try to make "idiot friendly" config tools you have to go the whole nine yards. Half doing it is worse than not doing it at all.
In conclusion I'd say I think things are on the right track. I and people like me need to basically start whingeing louder about UI issues. The coders who listen will be rewarded with much larger user bases. In the meantime, intelligently written scripts are a much better option that half-assed GUI tools. I found OSS (as in Open Sound System) a dream to install, lack of GUI notwithstanding.
OK. I'm what you might call a Virtua Fighter obsessive, so I feel qualified to field this one.
The key things are:
1) Competition. Most fighting games are pretty ordinary as single player games. The real action is multiplayer. A group of friends that play together regularly (winner stays on) or (adrenalin rush) challenging random players at the arcade is really, really fun.
2) Knowledge. It is critical to pick a game you like (because of how it looks, what it's called, the skimpiness of the female characters outfits, whatever) and _get good at it_. Play it a lot, and learn it properly. Once you have one game down, the basics of timing and strategy are transferable.
3) Strategy. Once you know what you're doing, it's all down to reflexes and strategy. Some games favour reflexes, but any (good) fighting game allows someone with average reflexes (like me) to a beat a 14 year old with no strategy. Range, timing, offence/defence, counterattacking, feints, fakes, all of these things are useful in any decent fighting game.
4) Combos. This is the creative side of fighting games. It just means creating sequences of moves that you know have a good chance of doing big damage to your opponent. Most games allow you to do float combos (where you knock your opponent in the air, then punish them as they "float") which tend to be very enjoyable. Some moves will be very tricky to pull off, so the feeling of managing it in a real fight is satisfying (go look up SPoD somewhere VF is discussed...).
The basic idea -- to me anyway -- of fighting games is to mimic the _strategies_ of a real fight, but modified so that (1) it's not over in a couple of seconds and (2) it looks flashier (all those spinning, jumping kicks that would get you killed on the street can be thoroughly abused in a game!).
Good fighting games: Street Fighter (2D, but tuned to perfection), Virtua Fighter series (VF3tb is latest and greatest).
Bad fighting gamse: Soul Calibur (loads of fun, but collision detection is too dodgy/random), Tekken (same problem, plus too easy).
Give it a try! Dreamcast (which spawned this thread) is currently fighting game console of choice. And the standard joypad is fine... don't listen to the whingers!
The graphics on the DC are insane... won't be surpassed by anything except the PSX-2. Beyond that, the games are supurb. I don't regard fighting games as "mindless entertainment". Virtua Fighter 3tb is an extrodinary game, worth buying a DC just for that (then there's Sega Rally, Soul Calibur, Shenmue, SFA3Z, Chu Chu Rocket, NFL2K, and on and on). I don't think I can explain the depth and strategy inherent in VF3 without making _way_ too long, so if you want to hear me wax lyrical check this out! DC rocks very hard. gribbly.
XTree Gold did it for me...
on
Interface Zen
·
· Score: 1
...I was so damn fast with that thing, and could perform the most bizarre filespec operations without thinking (I was working as a QA manager at the time, and was always wobbling files around networks). I use Win98 for work now, and Explorer is _soooooo_ slow in comparison, all because of the lowest common denominator "idiot proofing" approach.
"Are you sure you want to delete these 3 item(s)?"
Arrgh!!!!!!!! No, I just pressed [Delete] to see what would happen!
They made a Windows (3.1) version of XTree, but I couldn't use it because _they changed the keyboard shortcuts_. Insanity.
BTW, I fully endorse the zen analogy. I don't think it's a misapplication of the term "zen" at all. After all the traditional response to the question "what is zen?" is to choose an item immediately in front of you and say "zen is (that item)". Zen is that 17" Samsung monitor.
Also, just to really cover the bases here, Kurt Vonnegut makes an interesting observation that reading is "Western meditation". Think about it... hours in another world, staring at arcane little symbols with no real awareness of the outside world. Ahh... my whole life is pursuit of these zen-states. Games, music, programming (although I suck as a coder) are all excellent paths.
The real action in this area is in console games. Banjo Kazooie (Rare) had awesome dynamic music, all done via MIDI. Totally seamless blending of different threads of music depending where you move -- you could have fun standing on musical "borders" and listening to the music blend. Zelda64 also does this (not as well).
But the coolest yet (IMO) is NiGHTs on the Sega Saturn (I know, I know). That had MIDI music that could evolve via a genetic algorithm depending on your treatment of little AI creatures in the game. Now _that's_ neat!
Slashdot Mirror
...this. I think it's interesting that MS are diversifying so obviously. Are they concerned about the PC market?
gribbly.
people tak about switching to the PC because their are so much more in the way of Music apps. As a professional, this is far from the truth.
What!?
You're kidding right? Two words: Sonic Foundry.
Let me put it this way. Sound Forge is the Photoshop of digital audio. What Linux needs is the Gimp of Sound Forge, and then Acid.
If Linux wants _many_ new fans, an Acid-alike will do it. Acid is _the_ sh*t. So called "serious" musicians will try to tell you it's a toy, etc. But it most certainly is not... it's (part of) the future of music!
(BTW I am a "serious" musician. I play many real instruments at way beyond the "4 chord braindead" level. I just don't have my head up my ass).
gribbly
P.S. If there are any coders who have been harbouring an impulse to write a Linux Acid-alike... contact me. I am a designer by trade, and hereby offer my services in a design and co-ordination role. So if you would like a neat document that describes exactly how everything should work from an end-user perspective, let me know.
...is of critical importance. My background is game design and before that QA (i.e., playtesting). I am a firm believer in the power of the tester -> coder feedback loop, as I have seen it work magic any number of times.
:) People with an interest in migrating their core activities to an obviously superior platform, with the inclination to be actively involved in enhancing available applications, and with enough technical knowledge not to make utterly inappropriate/unfeasible suggestions ("why isn't there a paper clip that pops up to help me?"). Communications skills also help (as in any QA role).
What I think Linux needs, and what I am trying to bring to it, is less coders. Note that I don't say less technical folk, because that's not what I mean. It is possible to be tech-aware without actually being a coder. I consider myself to fall into that category. To be specific, I run Slackware on my laptop (been through Redhat and Mandrake). I have all sorts of trouble configuring it, but persevere, ask friends, etc., and generally get it sorted. I am technical enough to configure most things, compile source distributions, compile my own kernels. Generally I cannot make meaningful modifications to the source before I compile it, however.
What I hope to contribute as I come up to speed on linux (been using -- hmm sounds dodgy -- for ~ 6 months now) is feedback. My personal interest is audio -- I am a heavy user of Sonic Foundry's Windows products. For the most part they are very well designed. I am constantly on the look out for linux apps that offer the same functionality (slim pickings so far =), and when I find them plan to use them and offer feedback from an end user perspective. My QA background makes me very fussy about UI, so the programmers of such a project can expect detailed nitpicking, suggestions and (as a side effect) bug reports.
So I suppose I'm saying that OSS could use more people like me
Ideally, developers would slowly form relationships with trusted end-users, and learn to trust their judgment on interface and other end-user issues.
I don't think there's much to be gained from trying to make linux a "lowest common denominator" OS like Windows. Linux/Unix already does an excellent job of being a LCD OS in a specific context -- I have a friend who works with the police, and didn't even know he ran linux! His sysadmin has done a great job of insulating him and other non-technical users from stuff they simply don't need to know about (as an aside, linux is clearly superior in this regard. Any idiot can browse to C:\Windows and delete it, but that same idiot is limited to deleting their own home directory under linux). Also, if you're going to try to make "idiot friendly" config tools you have to go the whole nine yards. Half doing it is worse than not doing it at all.
In conclusion I'd say I think things are on the right track. I and people like me need to basically start whingeing louder about UI issues. The coders who listen will be rewarded with much larger user bases. In the meantime, intelligently written scripts are a much better option that half-assed GUI tools. I found OSS (as in Open Sound System) a dream to install, lack of GUI notwithstanding.
Message ends!
gribbly.
OK. I'm what you might call a Virtua Fighter obsessive, so I feel qualified to field this one.
The key things are:
1) Competition. Most fighting games are pretty ordinary as single player games. The real action is multiplayer. A group of friends that play together regularly (winner stays on) or (adrenalin rush) challenging random players at the arcade is really, really fun.
2) Knowledge. It is critical to pick a game you like (because of how it looks, what it's called, the skimpiness of the female characters outfits, whatever) and _get good at it_. Play it a lot, and learn it properly. Once you have one game down, the basics of timing and strategy are transferable.
3) Strategy. Once you know what you're doing, it's all down to reflexes and strategy. Some games favour reflexes, but any (good) fighting game allows someone with average reflexes (like me) to a beat a 14 year old with no strategy. Range, timing, offence/defence, counterattacking, feints, fakes, all of these things are useful in any decent fighting game.
4) Combos. This is the creative side of fighting games. It just means creating sequences of moves that you know have a good chance of doing big damage to your opponent. Most games allow you to do float combos (where you knock your opponent in the air, then punish them as they "float") which tend to be very enjoyable. Some moves will be very tricky to pull off, so the feeling of managing it in a real fight is satisfying (go look up SPoD somewhere VF is discussed...).
The basic idea -- to me anyway -- of fighting games is to mimic the _strategies_ of a real fight, but modified so that (1) it's not over in a couple of seconds and (2) it looks flashier (all those spinning, jumping kicks that would get you killed on the street can be thoroughly abused in a game!).
Good fighting games: Street Fighter (2D, but tuned to perfection), Virtua Fighter series (VF3tb is latest and greatest).
Bad fighting gamse: Soul Calibur (loads of fun, but collision detection is too dodgy/random), Tekken (same problem, plus too easy).
Give it a try! Dreamcast (which spawned this thread) is currently fighting game console of choice. And the standard joypad is fine... don't listen to the whingers!
For more VF3 ranting, go here!
gribbly.
The graphics on the DC are insane... won't be surpassed by anything except the PSX-2. Beyond that, the games are supurb. I don't regard fighting games as "mindless entertainment". Virtua Fighter 3tb is an extrodinary game, worth buying a DC just for that (then there's Sega Rally, Soul Calibur, Shenmue, SFA3Z, Chu Chu Rocket, NFL2K, and on and on). I don't think I can explain the depth and strategy inherent in VF3 without making _way_ too long, so if you want to hear me wax lyrical check this out! DC rocks very hard. gribbly.
...I was so damn fast with that thing, and could perform the most bizarre filespec operations without thinking (I was working as a QA manager at the time, and was always wobbling files around networks). I use Win98 for work now, and Explorer is _soooooo_ slow in comparison, all because of the lowest common denominator "idiot proofing" approach.
"Are you sure you want to delete these 3 item(s)?"
Arrgh!!!!!!!! No, I just pressed [Delete] to see what would happen!
They made a Windows (3.1) version of XTree, but I couldn't use it because _they changed the keyboard shortcuts_. Insanity.
BTW, I fully endorse the zen analogy. I don't think it's a misapplication of the term "zen" at all. After all the traditional response to the question "what is zen?" is to choose an item immediately in front of you and say "zen is (that item)". Zen is that 17" Samsung monitor.
Also, just to really cover the bases here, Kurt Vonnegut makes an interesting observation that reading is "Western meditation". Think about it... hours in another world, staring at arcane little symbols with no real awareness of the outside world. Ahh... my whole life is pursuit of these zen-states. Games, music, programming (although I suck as a coder) are all excellent paths.
Hej,
gribbly
The real action in this area is in console games. Banjo Kazooie (Rare) had awesome dynamic music, all done via MIDI. Totally seamless blending of different threads of music depending where you move -- you could have fun standing on musical "borders" and listening to the music blend. Zelda64 also does this (not as well).
But the coolest yet (IMO) is NiGHTs on the Sega Saturn (I know, I know). That had MIDI music that could evolve via a genetic algorithm depending on your treatment of little AI creatures in the game. Now _that's_ neat!
grib