The problem with saying "half of gamers are female" is in how you identify someone as a "gamer." If you identify someone who plays phone games but doesn't own a console and hasn't purchased a AAA game since they left high school as a "gamer," you're not going to be pulling from the same pool as people who would be interested in actually playing StarCraft II or League of Legends competitively. For the purposes of identifying the gender game in e-sports, those casual gamers are not "gamers." And if that means that the pool of available players shifts to something like 75% male (I have no idea if this is true or not, this is entirely a hypothetical), then the gender gap does not appear *as* bad (but obviously would still exist). And if that means the pool shifts to 90% male, then the gender game as it applies to e-sports basically does not exist, because the gender gap in e-sports would be a result of the gender game in competitive games in general, and not an e-sports specific problem.
When I play at those difficulties, I don't really play a game, I just follow an algorithm(build order, research focus, etc), and if I don't do that I will lose.
That is a game. It might not be the game you're looking for, but it's still a game. I'm not going to, e.g. tell professional StarCraft 2 players or speed runners for various games that they are not playing a game. They're just not playing a game I want to play, even if they're playing it in the exact same game engine with the same tools I am. Optimization, memorization, and execution are all "game" skills. For some people, a game isn't fun until they're maximizing those specific attributes, for others, the more important those attributes are to success the less fun the game is. But it's still a game.
As for "better AI", I think what you're really looking for is a strategy game with a human opponent.
Just because EA is dishonest and poorly intentioned doesn't mean that the article summary needs to be dishonest and poorly intentioned, too. All it does is distract from the discussion of the actual problem and give astroturfers and apologists something to latch onto and distract from the issue. An honest submission is always better.
This is wrong. The rating is never forwarded by the app. Clicking 5 within the app brings you to the Play Store page where you can give the app whatever score you want. Clicking "1-4" opens up a feedback submission form and does not bring you to the Play Store page.
It's not shilling and it's not astroturf. Millions of gamers feel this way about Valve and Steam simply because they like the products and services they've been provided, and they like the general corporate attitude they've seen from Valve.
I was like 14 when I saw Starship Troopers and the satire was painfully obvious to me. I loved it, but my friend and I were practically the only people in the theater on opening weekend. Also it had tits.
You can make a good argument for speed limits under 70 mph, or even as much as 80 mph, as only existing to generate revenue. But going well over 100 mph really and truly is endangering yourself and anyone else on the road around you, which is what this person did.
> Seeing as how both Windows and MAC users can dual boot Linux, not really much of an issue...
For like 95% of consumers, this is too big of a hurdle to play a game. Half of them would probably nuke their entire hard drive in the process, and then blame Valve.
If HL3 materializes in the next 5-6 years or so, it will be on all platforms: Windows, Mac, Xbox One, PS4, Linux. Valve still has to make money, and their primary interest is in building trust with their users. Telling people "we're forcing you to move over to our new system by putting our most anticipated game of all time exclusively on that system" would be perceived as a huge "fuck you, do as we say" by consumers, and a lot of that trust they've built up over the past 10 years (since the original debacle of HL2 requiring Steam) would be thrown away, just so they could try to force people onto Valve's preferred platform.
You buying one doesn't make a successful platform. A minority of people, mostly artists, really liked the first Surface Pro, too. Yet millions of them still sit in warehouses.
Valve, at least, has already moved onto the model of no longer selling you the game, but selling you bits on a server that you can't "steal" anyway. See: hats.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant "gender gap."
The problem with saying "half of gamers are female" is in how you identify someone as a "gamer." If you identify someone who plays phone games but doesn't own a console and hasn't purchased a AAA game since they left high school as a "gamer," you're not going to be pulling from the same pool as people who would be interested in actually playing StarCraft II or League of Legends competitively. For the purposes of identifying the gender game in e-sports, those casual gamers are not "gamers." And if that means that the pool of available players shifts to something like 75% male (I have no idea if this is true or not, this is entirely a hypothetical), then the gender gap does not appear *as* bad (but obviously would still exist). And if that means the pool shifts to 90% male, then the gender game as it applies to e-sports basically does not exist, because the gender gap in e-sports would be a result of the gender game in competitive games in general, and not an e-sports specific problem.
That is a game. It might not be the game you're looking for, but it's still a game. I'm not going to, e.g. tell professional StarCraft 2 players or speed runners for various games that they are not playing a game. They're just not playing a game I want to play, even if they're playing it in the exact same game engine with the same tools I am. Optimization, memorization, and execution are all "game" skills. For some people, a game isn't fun until they're maximizing those specific attributes, for others, the more important those attributes are to success the less fun the game is. But it's still a game.
As for "better AI", I think what you're really looking for is a strategy game with a human opponent.
2004.
Just because EA is dishonest and poorly intentioned doesn't mean that the article summary needs to be dishonest and poorly intentioned, too. All it does is distract from the discussion of the actual problem and give astroturfers and apologists something to latch onto and distract from the issue. An honest submission is always better.
This is wrong. The rating is never forwarded by the app. Clicking 5 within the app brings you to the Play Store page where you can give the app whatever score you want. Clicking "1-4" opens up a feedback submission form and does not bring you to the Play Store page.
In case you were serious, beta.slashdot.org.
I feel like if editing were allowed, but all previous version were still viewable, then the intent behind not allowing editing would be preserved.
Or we can all just recognize it for the throw-away medium it is and stop putting so much weight on things said on it.
No it doesn't. Running the Steam client on SteamOS requires a Steam account.
It only takes one person who likes a piece of software to write a post promoting or defending it. It doesn't make them a paid shill.
It's not shilling and it's not astroturf. Millions of gamers feel this way about Valve and Steam simply because they like the products and services they've been provided, and they like the general corporate attitude they've seen from Valve.
If he actually understood probability he wouldn't have wasted his money on lottery tickets.
Like I said, I mostly just though it looked like a poem. ;)
I was mostly referring to your unnecessary use of linebreaks.
What is this, iambic pentameter? I've never been good with poetry.
I had 1.5 mbps cable internet in 1997. Just because you didn't know about the internet didn't make it hard to get.
I was like 14 when I saw Starship Troopers and the satire was painfully obvious to me. I loved it, but my friend and I were practically the only people in the theater on opening weekend. Also it had tits.
You can make a good argument for speed limits under 70 mph, or even as much as 80 mph, as only existing to generate revenue. But going well over 100 mph really and truly is endangering yourself and anyone else on the road around you, which is what this person did.
I was honestly hoping for an Animal House analogy. Was disappointed by the third line when I realized he meant to say Animal Farm.
> Seeing as how both Windows and MAC users can dual boot Linux, not really much of an issue...
For like 95% of consumers, this is too big of a hurdle to play a game. Half of them would probably nuke their entire hard drive in the process, and then blame Valve.
If HL3 materializes in the next 5-6 years or so, it will be on all platforms: Windows, Mac, Xbox One, PS4, Linux. Valve still has to make money, and their primary interest is in building trust with their users. Telling people "we're forcing you to move over to our new system by putting our most anticipated game of all time exclusively on that system" would be perceived as a huge "fuck you, do as we say" by consumers, and a lot of that trust they've built up over the past 10 years (since the original debacle of HL2 requiring Steam) would be thrown away, just so they could try to force people onto Valve's preferred platform.
I just don't see it happening.
You buying one doesn't make a successful platform. A minority of people, mostly artists, really liked the first Surface Pro, too. Yet millions of them still sit in warehouses.
Valve, at least, has already moved onto the model of no longer selling you the game, but selling you bits on a server that you can't "steal" anyway. See: hats.
Isn't this precisely the type of thing archive.org exists for?