I'll second your suggestion for GFI. Not only is the product server based, meaning I had to go through no training with my users for a client install and maintenance, but with the auto-update of the Bayesian filters, it really keeps on top of things. My small office tends to get a lot of spam due to the age of the domain name, so when I installed this application, my users were suddenly able to actually get work done again.
iBill.com was also used by the Make Money Fast Hall of Humiliation (mmfhoh.org) back in 1997. Don't know if any of the members are in the lists, or if even the exposed names go back to 1997, but this would be baaaaaad for those members that received death-threats back in the day for their activities.
There weren't any "cheaters" (that I recall) in AC before I left it
IIRC, the speed hack was a problem for AC players from day one. If you left during beta, I would agree with your statement.
MS/Turbine had no problems with people poking around in the memory
Turbine had a stated policy against exploiters and hackers. However, Turbine was notoriously not enforcing that policy for at least a full year into the life-cycle of the game. Only until a money duplication exploit began to ruin the game economy did they act.
Blizzard currently has a serious problem with 3rd party applications and their client. They've entrusted too much information to the client, IMHO, so that's left, for them, a security issue that they've been trying to address for some time now.
Actually, all allowed WoW modifications are through a scripting language, and the game loads the modifications up internally. Any third party programs that would do something like scan for memory locations would be against WoW's EULA.
And whilst we're talking of citing sources: where's your for your alleged chinese law regarding pandas? or did you pull that out of your arse as well?
Had I pulled that out of my "arse", you'd certainly be smelling it by now. As it is, had you the sense to read the link I provided, you wouldn't fail to understand my earlier reply so miserably. Perhaps rudimentary English fails you as well as your capacity for intelligent discourse?
Ironic you say this, since Warcraft III had Pandaren's and Panda mobs in it, eh? And yes, it was in China. Not to mention there is a "panda cub" pet in WoW right now.
It's indirectly ironic, at best. Warcraft 3 had Pandaren in a non-violent, NPC role. In WoW, the Panda Cub pet is a non-combat pet. Both are specific examples of how Pandas haven't been used in a violent capacity.
This my friend, is the lamest and least thought out excuse anyone has ever some up with against them.
You may need to look closely at how you treat your friends. If I'm your friend, I might take umbrage at your callous attempt at calling me lame. It's practically juvenile to think that by interjecting this thought into the conversation that I've come up with this idea all on my own, don't you agree?
Here's an excellent example of the discussion and debate regarding why Pandaren won't be consdered for the expansion (as well as a couple of decent examinations of how WoW operates in China). There has been hubbub on both sides of the issue in the official forums, but reading them for any worth is like attempting to stick a large ice pick up your nose -- and then twisting it.
Ever hear of censoring? Just retexture them to a different kind of bear in the Chinese version if it is such a problem. (Which it isn't.)
You seem to have a really good source on the nature of the Alliance race, or the problems Blizzard has or has not had with distribution in China. Are you shooting from the hip here, or do you have anything to cite?
Sure, it could be anything, but I betting Pandaren for now..
I'd think you'd lose that bet. WoW is big in China, and Chinese law forbids the Panda to be involved in artwork featuring murder or violence (I don't have the actual law at hand, so I can only provide you with a summary). Hence, no Pandaren.
I'd personally play a Pandaren. Hell, I'd personally play an Ooze, if that was the new race.
How many times are we going to refer to SirBruce's charts as definitive? He's mentioned publicly, as well as on the site itself, that his numbers are based on press releases and hearsay. Additionally, the companies themselves use the same terms to describe different metrics ("registered users" vs. "subscribed users" vs "active users" vs "active accounts", etc).
Sure, there are no other independent sources out there compiling this information, but surely we don't have to be subjected to yet another gaming journalist that believes he or she has found the penultimate source material for another dissertation on the meaning and existence of online games. Do we?
My mom is 40 years old and she has a level 37 Warlock on WoW. I messaged her on MSN after reading this asking about her experience. She is not shy about the fact that she is a woman and she has used vent now and then and she hardly ever gets a reaction like this article describes.
Gravedigger: No "dig" against your mom, but Teleios is hot (properly pronounced "hawt"). Perhaps that's the difference.
Thanks Raph -- if you notice, I didn't specify AGC, I specified an AGD..."conference". I guess I could have put "periodic meeting/discussion at an undisclosed meeting where, unfortunately, everyone was wearing pants". "Conference" just sounded better. Sorry for the confusion.
I don't think there are many MMO players out there who aren't painfully aware of Sony's existance in the MMO field. Or more accurately, aren't painfully aware of Sony's inpetitude.
Sony set the bar so low for customer service and game quality with EverQuest that they've become something of a running joke amongst many players.
I read the PR carefully, and it doesn't state that SOE will be doing anything more than distributing the titles. The quote from Jason clearly outlines the advantages that Turbine is receiving from this agreement: Exposure to retail.
Turbine has an in-house Customer Service department. While they've had their problems in the past (I challenge you to find one MMO company out there where there haven't been complaints lodged against the customer service department), they're certainly no Verant/SOE.
I guess I don't usually associate the term "firewall" with spam filtering. The article only touches on their use of the terminology in the quote that you've selected. Otherwise, it's a general discussion of filtering techniques and the effects of spam on the internet.
If they're maintaining that they filter out spam prior to it hitting the email server, or well before it hits the email client, then they really need to get out more before making the claim that they're the only one to do it. My personal fav these days is GFI MailEssentials, which stops spam at the server level by examining the incoming SMTP traffic.
I think people would have taken the lead developer much more seriously if she hadnt conducted the interview from a hottub wearing only a bathing suit and some bunny ears.
If you read the interview carefully, you'll notice that she's 9 months pregnant with twins.
which will get you 5 games on par with Prince of Persia SoT or Civ 3
And so you spend all that money on games that will likely be reduced in price within that year's time to levels that don't even compare with your subscription fee.
For example: Civ 3 latest expansion (which includes the original game, and all expansions to date) was selling for 9.95 from Amazon recently. As they use that as an example, I find it very hard to understand how'd you end up getting a value out of this as a player.
I'd like to plug a former employer, if I may. If you can find a gym that subscribes to the service, it's definitely the geek way to work out.
I don't, myself (obviously, if you've seen a recently picture), but when I did, I spent most of my time tracking numbers and trying to reach level 34 in Stationary Biking.
In jr high/hs, a number of friends got me hooked on the local Apple BBS scene. It wasn't until college that I started getting into running a few of my own. I got to know all of the local sysops, and we felt like the kings among our peers (those peers being the types with which your common RPGamer wouldn't condescend to socialize).
A favorite memory was hosting a local convention where we got the guy who wrote Qmodem to show up and give a talk about the future of BBSing. At that time, he spoke of interlinked BBSes using a packet switching network as a way of synching the disparate message stores.
A while after that, I hooked up a couple of my endeavors to the ISCA Fido node, and started in on global messaging. At that time, I participated in (as many did) in a flame war with Joel Rosenberg over the term "Cyberpunk" in sf.fandom (Joel's a fantasy/sf writer of some note).
Of course, as soon as I discovered free MUDing, nothing was ever the same for me, and I never looked back.
Not all gaming sites get the treatment that IGN, GameSpot, or GameSpy get, you know.
Of course not. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to list them off like that.
The subject in question, and the thread to which you were responding, was questioning the ethical quandry faced by typically volunteer reviewers that are submitting otherwise unprofessional works to outlets where advertisers pull the strings through the use of gifts that are heartily appreciated. The gaming site that you described doesn't fall into this category, thereby rendering the post a non-sequitor, right?
because you aren't doing anyone a favour. If I buy a $50 game based on your review then I can never trust your opinion again.
Hey, I was making a point about the way advertisers and PR companies promote games, and the influences they apply to otherwise inexperienced volunteer "journalists". I wasn't stating that I, personally, only give games good reviews.
Regular readers should notice that you never give bad reviews.
Regular readers would know to make the distinction I made, above.
If you can't be honest then you are *just* advertising not "relying on advertising".
If we take this out of the realm of a personal attack, I agree with you. The problems arise in the fact that the reviewers with which we're dealing are not professional journalists, are easily swayed by the expenses of maintaining a hobby, and don't have the background to easily judge the problematic ethics of accepting what amounts to payola for their efforts.
I suspect they're looking for site-wide bias rather than the personal bias you describe.
But I'm describing a personal bias. I'm describing a bias where the impetous for a favorable review comes from advertising dollars and an overpowering amount of swag. None of those apply to the individual reviewer directly (unless said reviewer also maintains the site).
reviewing games arent a mathematical thing, its giving your opinion.
Sure, but when you're given so much stuff that it's ethically questionable, and those people who make the games are also paying your utility bills -- you may be inclined to give it a better rating, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Gary Whitta has pics up on G+, as he is in the same line with Woz: https://plus.google.com/114522811866073303399/posts
I'll second your suggestion for GFI. Not only is the product server based, meaning I had to go through no training with my users for a client install and maintenance, but with the auto-update of the Bayesian filters, it really keeps on top of things. My small office tends to get a lot of spam due to the age of the domain name, so when I installed this application, my users were suddenly able to actually get work done again.
iBill.com was also used by the Make Money Fast Hall of Humiliation (mmfhoh.org) back in 1997. Don't know if any of the members are in the lists, or if even the exposed names go back to 1997, but this would be baaaaaad for those members that received death-threats back in the day for their activities.
There weren't any "cheaters" (that I recall) in AC before I left it
IIRC, the speed hack was a problem for AC players from day one. If you left during beta, I would agree with your statement.
MS/Turbine had no problems with people poking around in the memory
Turbine had a stated policy against exploiters and hackers. However, Turbine was notoriously not enforcing that policy for at least a full year into the life-cycle of the game. Only until a money duplication exploit began to ruin the game economy did they act.
Blizzard currently has a serious problem with 3rd party applications and their client. They've entrusted too much information to the client, IMHO, so that's left, for them, a security issue that they've been trying to address for some time now.
I'm sure some WoW "plugins" work the same way.
Actually, all allowed WoW modifications are through a scripting language, and the game loads the modifications up internally. Any third party programs that would do something like scan for memory locations would be against WoW's EULA.
And whilst we're talking of citing sources: where's your for your alleged chinese law regarding pandas? or did you pull that out of your arse as well?
Had I pulled that out of my "arse", you'd certainly be smelling it by now. As it is, had you the sense to read the link I provided, you wouldn't fail to understand my earlier reply so miserably. Perhaps rudimentary English fails you as well as your capacity for intelligent discourse?
Ironic you say this, since Warcraft III had Pandaren's and Panda mobs in it, eh? And yes, it was in China. Not to mention there is a "panda cub" pet in WoW right now.
It's indirectly ironic, at best. Warcraft 3 had Pandaren in a non-violent, NPC role. In WoW, the Panda Cub pet is a non-combat pet. Both are specific examples of how Pandas haven't been used in a violent capacity.
This my friend, is the lamest and least thought out excuse anyone has ever some up with against them.
You may need to look closely at how you treat your friends. If I'm your friend, I might take umbrage at your callous attempt at calling me lame. It's practically juvenile to think that by interjecting this thought into the conversation that I've come up with this idea all on my own, don't you agree?
Here's an excellent example of the discussion and debate regarding why Pandaren won't be consdered for the expansion (as well as a couple of decent examinations of how WoW operates in China). There has been hubbub on both sides of the issue in the official forums, but reading them for any worth is like attempting to stick a large ice pick up your nose -- and then twisting it.
Ever hear of censoring? Just retexture them to a different kind of bear in the Chinese version if it is such a problem. (Which it isn't.)
You seem to have a really good source on the nature of the Alliance race, or the problems Blizzard has or has not had with distribution in China. Are you shooting from the hip here, or do you have anything to cite?
Sure, it could be anything, but I betting Pandaren for now..
I'd think you'd lose that bet. WoW is big in China, and Chinese law forbids the Panda to be involved in artwork featuring murder or violence (I don't have the actual law at hand, so I can only provide you with a summary). Hence, no Pandaren.
I'd personally play a Pandaren. Hell, I'd personally play an Ooze, if that was the new race.
How many times are we going to refer to SirBruce's charts as definitive? He's mentioned publicly, as well as on the site itself, that his numbers are based on press releases and hearsay. Additionally, the companies themselves use the same terms to describe different metrics ("registered users" vs. "subscribed users" vs "active users" vs "active accounts", etc).
Sure, there are no other independent sources out there compiling this information, but surely we don't have to be subjected to yet another gaming journalist that believes he or she has found the penultimate source material for another dissertation on the meaning and existence of online games. Do we?
About a year ago.
RTFM. Although the article references this old tale in comparison, the bulk of the article is about a recent scam.
My mom is 40 years old and she has a level 37 Warlock on WoW. I messaged her on MSN after reading this asking about her experience. She is not shy about the fact that she is a woman and she has used vent now and then and she hardly ever gets a reaction like this article describes.
Gravedigger: No "dig" against your mom, but Teleios is hot (properly pronounced "hawt"). Perhaps that's the difference.
Thanks Raph -- if you notice, I didn't specify AGC, I specified an AGD..."conference". I guess I could have put "periodic meeting/discussion at an undisclosed meeting where, unfortunately, everyone was wearing pants". "Conference" just sounded better. Sorry for the confusion.
I don't think there are many MMO players out there who aren't painfully aware of Sony's existance in the MMO field. Or more accurately, aren't painfully aware of Sony's inpetitude.
Sony set the bar so low for customer service and game quality with EverQuest that they've become something of a running joke amongst many players.
I read the PR carefully, and it doesn't state that SOE will be doing anything more than distributing the titles. The quote from Jason clearly outlines the advantages that Turbine is receiving from this agreement: Exposure to retail.
Turbine has an in-house Customer Service department. While they've had their problems in the past (I challenge you to find one MMO company out there where there haven't been complaints lodged against the customer service department), they're certainly no Verant/SOE.
I guess I don't usually associate the term "firewall" with spam filtering. The article only touches on their use of the terminology in the quote that you've selected. Otherwise, it's a general discussion of filtering techniques and the effects of spam on the internet.
If they're maintaining that they filter out spam prior to it hitting the email server, or well before it hits the email client, then they really need to get out more before making the claim that they're the only one to do it. My personal fav these days is GFI MailEssentials, which stops spam at the server level by examining the incoming SMTP traffic.
I think people would have taken the lead developer much more seriously if she hadnt conducted the interview from a hottub wearing only a bathing suit and some bunny ears.
;)
If you read the interview carefully, you'll notice that she's 9 months pregnant with twins.
You've got one twisted imagination, my friend.
which will get you 5 games on par with Prince of Persia SoT or Civ 3
And so you spend all that money on games that will likely be reduced in price within that year's time to levels that don't even compare with your subscription fee.
For example: Civ 3 latest expansion (which includes the original game, and all expansions to date) was selling for 9.95 from Amazon recently. As they use that as an example, I find it very hard to understand how'd you end up getting a value out of this as a player.
I'd like to plug a former employer, if I may. If you can find a gym that subscribes to the service, it's definitely the geek way to work out.
I don't, myself (obviously, if you've seen a recently picture), but when I did, I spent most of my time tracking numbers and trying to reach level 34 in Stationary Biking.
In jr high/hs, a number of friends got me hooked on the local Apple BBS scene. It wasn't until college that I started getting into running a few of my own. I got to know all of the local sysops, and we felt like the kings among our peers (those peers being the types with which your common RPGamer wouldn't condescend to socialize).
A favorite memory was hosting a local convention where we got the guy who wrote Qmodem to show up and give a talk about the future of BBSing. At that time, he spoke of interlinked BBSes using a packet switching network as a way of synching the disparate message stores.
A while after that, I hooked up a couple of my endeavors to the ISCA Fido node, and started in on global messaging. At that time, I participated in (as many did) in a flame war with Joel Rosenberg over the term "Cyberpunk" in sf.fandom (Joel's a fantasy/sf writer of some note).
Of course, as soon as I discovered free MUDing, nothing was ever the same for me, and I never looked back.
Not all gaming sites get the treatment that IGN, GameSpot, or GameSpy get, you know.
Of course not. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to list them off like that.
The subject in question, and the thread to which you were responding, was questioning the ethical quandry faced by typically volunteer reviewers that are submitting otherwise unprofessional works to outlets where advertisers pull the strings through the use of gifts that are heartily appreciated. The gaming site that you described doesn't fall into this category, thereby rendering the post a non-sequitor, right?
because you aren't doing anyone a favour.
If I buy a $50 game based on your review then I can never trust your opinion again.
Hey, I was making a point about the way advertisers and PR companies promote games, and the influences they apply to otherwise inexperienced volunteer "journalists". I wasn't stating that I, personally, only give games good reviews.
Regular readers should notice that you never give bad reviews.
Regular readers would know to make the distinction I made, above.
If you can't be honest then you are *just* advertising not "relying on advertising".
If we take this out of the realm of a personal attack, I agree with you. The problems arise in the fact that the reviewers with which we're dealing are not professional journalists, are easily swayed by the expenses of maintaining a hobby, and don't have the background to easily judge the problematic ethics of accepting what amounts to payola for their efforts.
I suspect they're looking for site-wide bias rather than the personal bias you describe.
But I'm describing a personal bias. I'm describing a bias where the impetous for a favorable review comes from advertising dollars and an overpowering amount of swag. None of those apply to the individual reviewer directly (unless said reviewer also maintains the site).
Sure, but when you're given so much stuff that it's ethically questionable, and those people who make the games are also paying your utility bills -- you may be inclined to give it a better rating, right?
I have to say, from the game reviewer's standpoint, that it's hard to give a game a bad rating.
1) You have advertisers. Typically, these people keep your site alive. They're expecting you to review their game.
2) You like games.
3) You get tons of swag, press passes, the royal treatment at trade shows, and a ridiculous amount of geek cred.
4) Did I mention that you like games?
5) You get to mention Sanya Thomas' butt in casual conversation. (see?)
6) It's a freaking game. What's not to like about a game? (well, unless it's Final Fantasy XI -- which I refuse to admit is actually a game)
Mystery@Warcry.com
Now, all you fanboys -- back away slowly.
Wow, you'd think someone would have thought of that say, seven years ago, or something.