I play oblivion and when I kick objects or hit them with an arrow or spell or warhammer, they go flying accurately.
Oblivion's physics aren't as complex as they appear. They're just rigid body collisions. That lets you set up Rube Goldberg contraptions and domino stunts in the construction set (complete with comical Altmer abuse in some of the videos I've seen), but it's pretty shallow as far as simulations are concerned. If Bethesda had gone for dynamic destructible environments, then maybe, maybe, grass rendering would stop being the bottleneck in the game engine.
If you want to see the limits of Oblivion's physics engine, use cheat codes to create an uber-hero. Max out your Strength, Agility, and Marksman stats, and enemies start flying around like bad guys in a John Woo film when you hit them with an arrow.
Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio, lossless formats that support up to 7.1-channel 24-bit 96KHz audio, are optional audio codecs in the Blu-Ray spec. I know NIN's "Ghosts I-IV" Deluxe Edition comes with a Blu-Ray disc, but I'm not sure what codec Trent chose. (I don't have $75 for the deluxe edition anyway. Went for the $10 sans-DRM Apple Lossless download.)
As long as artists like Trent Reznor care about audio quality, you'll be able to find lossless high quality recordings. Let the manufactured pop idols have 128Kbps MP3.
I don't think Microsoft cares that Blu-Ray is Sony's standard, just that it's not Microsoft's standard.
From there, the decision to forget about a high-definition player add-on for this generation makes sense. The attach rate for the HD-DVD drive wasn't very good (typical for a console add-on), but Microsoft was willing to take that hit for the sake of promoting HD-DVD. (Not to mention keeping up with the Playstation 3 Joneses.) A Blu-Ray movie player for 360 would be just another console accessory that doesn't sell enough to justify the cost. (See also: Sega CD)
XBox "720", if it uses an optical drive at all, will probably use Blu-Ray out of necessity. As a baseline for the platform, it will be far easier to justify that cost as upfront R&D.
Well, in the SS2/Bio comparison, those serve specific purposes.
FTL/Utopia: More accurately, Von Braun/Rapture. They're not just settings. In both stories, they are remarkable, even revolutionary achievements. The Von Braun was humanity's first faster-than-light starship. Rapture is not just a habitat, but an entire city built on the ocean floor. Wonders such as those require massive investments in R&D, money, power, and ego. A premise like that gives a writer fertile ground for big stories.
Psionics/Plasmids: I was speaking more of the implementation, with a limited number of slots for powers, and different categories of upgrades, each with their own limited slots.
The Many/Splicers: Both are cannon fodder, but their in-story origins are similar in that they were once normal people. The Many were crew members of the Von Braun and the Rickenbacker who fell victim to a biological infestation. Splicers are citizens of Rapture who, due to a shortage of Eve, have been grotesquely mutated and driven mad by withdrawal. In both games, your most persistent threat comes from victims of circumstance.
Unless you've played System Shock 2, that is. Ken Levine can use the phrase "spiritual successor" all he wants, but the story was System Shock 2.1.
Warning: Here Be Spoilers
There are so many elements that are almost directly parallel between the games:
Polito = Atlas
SHODAN = Fontaine
XERXES = Ryan
Diego = Tennenbaum
Delacroix = MacDonagh
Korenchkin = Suchong
FTL travel = pseudo-Objectivist utopia
Psionics = Plasmids
The Many = Splicers
Multiple ammo types per weapon = Multiple ammo types per weapon
Vending machines = Vending machines
That said, I still enjoyed the game, because it was fun and well-executed. The art direction provides an incredible sense of place, with its underwater setting, Art Deco architecture, and Junkyard Wars improvised weapons. The root conflict is certainly more interesting. Ryan and Fontaine are both megalomaniacs at heart, regardless of their faux-religious veneers. (Notice how Fontaine countered Ryan's escalating Ayn Rand-like rhetoric by smuggling in bibles and rosaries to help recruit the disillusioned working class?) That's a better hook than SHODAN's scheming to get the Von Braun to the remains of Citadel. They did add new game play elements, like the Big Sister/Little Daddy dynamic, crafting, and photography research. And who can forget Sander Cohen?
But that still doesn't do anything for my disappointment in the similarities. I saw the Atlas/Fontaine switch coming from a mile away, because I remembered Polito and SHODAN. I was hoping that Levine would surprise us old SS2 fans with a different plot twist. (I will give him credit for tricking us into thinking that Atlas' "wife" and "son" would be parallels of Suarez and Siddons from SS2.)
ED was the best thing that could happen to Electric Blasters. Back in the days before I4, we had all six-slotted for damage because we were the weakest Blaster powerset. ED grabbed us by the lapels and screamed "You're supposed to be Sappers! Slot some Endurance Drains!"
Now my Elec/Elec eats bosses for lunch, solo. Pop an anti-mez inspiration (if necessary), run in, Short Circuit, Power Sink. I'm at full endurance, the boss is sucked dry, and with Endurance Mods on all my attacks, that boss won't come back unless I have a run of misses.
Oh, and my favorite forum sig:
I am Tank. I stand between the teammate and the mob. We are Tank. We stand between the squishy and the debt.
My first sub-brick-sized mobile phone was a Samsung flip phone. The "flip" section was designed to only cover the keypad, leaving the screen, menu nav keys, and send/end keys exposed at all times. It also had a key-guard that, by default, would automatically engage when the phone was closed. Clever, right? (Well, for its day, it was.)
There was only one problem: To disengage the key-guard, you had to hold down the always-exposed menu select button! Worse, if the key-guard was disengaged while the phone was closed, it wouldn't turn on again until you opened and re-closed the phone.
I don't know how many times I killed the key-guard as I leaned against a desk or something. Most of the time, I just ended up deep in some unexpected menu, but I recall at least two accidental phone calls initiated while the phone was in my pocket. Eventually, I got a case, and tucked some paper under the button area to make it harder to accidentally kill the key-guard.
Samsung must have gotten the hint, because my next phone didn't have any exposed keys when the flip was closed.
Gee, why don't you heap a little more condescension on there while you're at it?
Get the hint, fool: She's converted. You "won". I suppose you expected her to be a Linux user from the womb, but not everybody is born into the Cult Of Twitter.
Let go of that hatred and spite for one lousy stinking minute, and celebrate without that contemptuous sneer on your face.
I wasn't picking on the Camry in particular. (Well, yes I was. This is Motor Trend, not Consumer Reports. Buff mags aren't supposed to reward soulless appliances. Infiniti G35 for teh win! But I digress.)
I was just picking out a representative sample of a long-standing trend in the automotive press. As long as Motor Trend, Car & Driver, and Automobile have been handing out awards, there have been brand loyalists scoffing that "$RIVAL_BRAND paid you off! There's no way that piece of crap can beat my $LOYAL_BRAND!" It's too old to even be a running gag anymore.
Jobs' presence in this Macworld/PC World story certainly puts a different twist on things, but the "don't say bad things about Brand X" stories have been around for a long, long time.
And you wonder why you constantly get Troll moderations, Twitter?
Do you think its because, maybe, just maybe, YOU'RE AN ASSHOLE?!
Go ahead, mod me down all you want. I'm sure your fucking sock-puppet account has some points. I don't give a fuck anymore. Twitter, you have so completely poisoned this place that I can't possibly care.
Nothing but sanctimonious, tactless bile and hatred. A grown man acting like a 7-year-old on a daily basis.
AND YOU'RE FUCKING PROUD OF IT, TWITTER! How fucking sad is that?
You love to spread your hatred. You feed on all the negativity you inflict on us. And I'll be DAMNED before I let it poison me any longer.
Guess, what, Twitter. I'm going to continue to use every operating system I can get my hands on, whether it be Linux, Windows, or Mac OS. I will continue to base my personal IT decisions on suitability to task. I will not worship a fucking software license like it was a god.
AND THERE ISN'T A FUCKING THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, YOU LITTLE SHIT.
Save your snarky reply. Don't waste your time on one of your patented juvenile posting-of-links distortions. They are meaningless. You are meaningless.
Um, no. Both are threats to Microsoft. Linux, as a product, is obvious.
Open source, as a larger concept, is a threat to Microsoft because it is the antithesis of their power base. Microsoft has gained and held its control over the industry by clutching tightly its file formats and protocols. The only reason we ever got Office compatibility and the SMB protocol in the Open Source realm is because of careful reverse engineering and the hope that Microsoft's patent lawyers would keep their guns holstered.
I think Microsoft is realizing that the problem isn't the source, which is eroding as a base of power, but the software patents. On the one hand, they hold enough to crush pretty much anybody they choose. At the same time, they've already been victimized once by Eolas. The Novell deal shows how reluctant Microsoft is to really enforce their software patents. It's as much a defensive action for Microsoft as it is for Novell. Obviously, Novell can step out from under that Sword of Damocles. Microsoft, however, by not filing a straight-up patent suit, avoids throwing the first punch in a barroom full of patent trolls, all of whom are itching for a brawl.
Note the firm, definitive language Gates uses in that message: "wondering", "whether we shouldn't try", "Maybe there is no way", "Maybe we could define the API's", "maybe we could patent something"
Just once, bring proof.
Fill in the vast, gaping void between Bill Gates' thinking-out-loud speculation and the final ACPI specification, demonstrating exactly where Microsoft took action to sabotage the process.
try arguing with something of substance rather than my supposed writing style, history or personality. You can't really, because there is little of substance behind M$.
That's a bit hypocritical, don't you think? Your OP has nothing of substance, which is exactly what I was pointing out. It has nothing to do with your writing style or personality -- it has everything to do with the emptiness of a lot of your posts. I'm not arguing from the standpoint of defending MS, I'm arguing from the standpoint of being sick of hearing anti-MS chum that doesn't add anything of value to the discussion. Do you understand the distinction?
Amen, brother! Can I get a witness from the congregation?
C++ has that problem, but Microsoft was a bit more efficient with that in.Net. It tries to share code wherever possible.
For structs and values, code is generated per-type. Thus, there are separate code blocks for List<int> and List<DateTime>, but multiple List<int> instances will share code.
For classes, all instances share one single code block. Thus, List<LeftHandedScrewdriver> and List<SelfSealingStemBolt> share code.
My local landline monopoly/DSL ISP is ahead of that game. They'll have none of that "[X] I agree to the TOS and AUP" web form nonsense.
Their Self-install kit included my hardware (modem, filters, cables), a cheat sheet with the particulars of the account (IP, gateway, DNS, POP3, etc.), a sheet with the TOS and AUP, and a self-addressed stamped envelope. I had to return the top sheet of the TOS/AUP (retain the yellow copy for your records), signed and dated, within 30 days, or else my account would be suspended.
Of course, the coverage area of the entire phone company is less than two counties, so it's a little easier for them to run a tight ship.
So, once again, you've decided to talk about me behind my back. And with the oft-repeated assertion that I am a "paid Microsoft shill". Way to kick off my weekend.
I want you to prove your assertion that I am an employee of, or a contractor hired by, Microsoft Corporation. And no, links to previous postings on Slashdot do not count as "proof".
If that doesn't work out for you, you might try seeking psychiatric help. Maybe you can ask them if it's normal for a random jobber on a message board to feel that he's been singled out by a massive multinational corporation.
The way you've shown anything that proves the estimates you continually cite as fact?
I can not state with authority that 1 in 4 computers are in a botnet, because I am citing an unscientific estimate. Likewise, you can not state with authority that 1 in 4 Windows installations are in a botnet, because you are (indirectly) citing an unscientific estimate. Not that it stops you from trying.
In fact, any time somebody asks you to cite a source for your outrageous assertions, you quickly clam up. We're still waiting for your proof that Microsoft litigated the Zaurus out of existence.
So what's it going to be, Twitter? Accountability or spite? Your choice.
You're the one denying that "1 in 4 computers" could include operating systems that you don't loathe and despise with every beat of your blackened, shriveled heart. Why else would you continue to link to your own comments on the subject, instead of the original, OS-agnostic source?
By the way, here's that original source article that Twitter can't bring himself to link to.
You just replied to me with a link to the post I was replying to in the first place. Brilliant! I guess you can't really explain what Windows has to do with any of this, so your only recourse is the Twitter Tautology:
Windoze is teh sux00r. Therefore, Windoze is teh sux00r.
If this is the only way you can force Windows into the debate, you've already lost.
Slashdot Mirror
Oblivion's physics aren't as complex as they appear. They're just rigid body collisions. That lets you set up Rube Goldberg contraptions and domino stunts in the construction set (complete with comical Altmer abuse in some of the videos I've seen), but it's pretty shallow as far as simulations are concerned. If Bethesda had gone for dynamic destructible environments, then maybe, maybe, grass rendering would stop being the bottleneck in the game engine.
If you want to see the limits of Oblivion's physics engine, use cheat codes to create an uber-hero. Max out your Strength, Agility, and Marksman stats, and enemies start flying around like bad guys in a John Woo film when you hit them with an arrow.
Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio, lossless formats that support up to 7.1-channel 24-bit 96KHz audio, are optional audio codecs in the Blu-Ray spec. I know NIN's "Ghosts I-IV" Deluxe Edition comes with a Blu-Ray disc, but I'm not sure what codec Trent chose. (I don't have $75 for the deluxe edition anyway. Went for the $10 sans-DRM Apple Lossless download.)
As long as artists like Trent Reznor care about audio quality, you'll be able to find lossless high quality recordings. Let the manufactured pop idols have 128Kbps MP3.
I don't think Microsoft cares that Blu-Ray is Sony's standard, just that it's not Microsoft's standard.
From there, the decision to forget about a high-definition player add-on for this generation makes sense. The attach rate for the HD-DVD drive wasn't very good (typical for a console add-on), but Microsoft was willing to take that hit for the sake of promoting HD-DVD. (Not to mention keeping up with the Playstation 3 Joneses.) A Blu-Ray movie player for 360 would be just another console accessory that doesn't sell enough to justify the cost. (See also: Sega CD)
XBox "720", if it uses an optical drive at all, will probably use Blu-Ray out of necessity. As a baseline for the platform, it will be far easier to justify that cost as upfront R&D.
At least until The Simpsons spin off Apu.
Well, in the SS2/Bio comparison, those serve specific purposes.
Unless you've played System Shock 2, that is. Ken Levine can use the phrase "spiritual successor" all he wants, but the story was System Shock 2.1.
Warning: Here Be Spoilers
There are so many elements that are almost directly parallel between the games:
That said, I still enjoyed the game, because it was fun and well-executed. The art direction provides an incredible sense of place, with its underwater setting, Art Deco architecture, and Junkyard Wars improvised weapons. The root conflict is certainly more interesting. Ryan and Fontaine are both megalomaniacs at heart, regardless of their faux-religious veneers. (Notice how Fontaine countered Ryan's escalating Ayn Rand-like rhetoric by smuggling in bibles and rosaries to help recruit the disillusioned working class?) That's a better hook than SHODAN's scheming to get the Von Braun to the remains of Citadel. They did add new game play elements, like the Big Sister/Little Daddy dynamic, crafting, and photography research. And who can forget Sander Cohen?
But that still doesn't do anything for my disappointment in the similarities. I saw the Atlas/Fontaine switch coming from a mile away, because I remembered Polito and SHODAN. I was hoping that Levine would surprise us old SS2 fans with a different plot twist. (I will give him credit for tricking us into thinking that Atlas' "wife" and "son" would be parallels of Suarez and Siddons from SS2.)
ED was the best thing that could happen to Electric Blasters. Back in the days before I4, we had all six-slotted for damage because we were the weakest Blaster powerset. ED grabbed us by the lapels and screamed "You're supposed to be Sappers! Slot some Endurance Drains!"
Now my Elec/Elec eats bosses for lunch, solo. Pop an anti-mez inspiration (if necessary), run in, Short Circuit, Power Sink. I'm at full endurance, the boss is sucked dry, and with Endurance Mods on all my attacks, that boss won't come back unless I have a run of misses.
Oh, and my favorite forum sig:
I am Tank. I stand between the teammate and the mob. We are Tank. We stand between the squishy and the debt.
My first sub-brick-sized mobile phone was a Samsung flip phone. The "flip" section was designed to only cover the keypad, leaving the screen, menu nav keys, and send/end keys exposed at all times. It also had a key-guard that, by default, would automatically engage when the phone was closed. Clever, right? (Well, for its day, it was.)
There was only one problem: To disengage the key-guard, you had to hold down the always-exposed menu select button! Worse, if the key-guard was disengaged while the phone was closed, it wouldn't turn on again until you opened and re-closed the phone.
I don't know how many times I killed the key-guard as I leaned against a desk or something. Most of the time, I just ended up deep in some unexpected menu, but I recall at least two accidental phone calls initiated while the phone was in my pocket. Eventually, I got a case, and tucked some paper under the button area to make it harder to accidentally kill the key-guard.
Samsung must have gotten the hint, because my next phone didn't have any exposed keys when the flip was closed.
Erris is Twitter's goddamned motherfucking sockpuppet.
Gee, why don't you heap a little more condescension on there while you're at it?
Get the hint, fool: She's converted. You "won". I suppose you expected her to be a Linux user from the womb, but not everybody is born into the Cult Of Twitter.
Let go of that hatred and spite for one lousy stinking minute, and celebrate without that contemptuous sneer on your face.
I wasn't picking on the Camry in particular. (Well, yes I was. This is Motor Trend, not Consumer Reports. Buff mags aren't supposed to reward soulless appliances. Infiniti G35 for teh win! But I digress.)
I was just picking out a representative sample of a long-standing trend in the automotive press. As long as Motor Trend, Car & Driver, and Automobile have been handing out awards, there have been brand loyalists scoffing that "$RIVAL_BRAND paid you off! There's no way that piece of crap can beat my $LOYAL_BRAND!" It's too old to even be a running gag anymore.
Jobs' presence in this Macworld/PC World story certainly puts a different twist on things, but the "don't say bad things about Brand X" stories have been around for a long, long time.
The Toyota Camry, Motor Trend's 2007 Car Of The Year.
Three cheers for across-the-board competence! Hip! Hip! Hooray!
Undue advertiser influence in magazine publishing is as old as the hills.
Allow me to translate the previous conversation:
And you wonder why you constantly get Troll moderations, Twitter?
Do you think its because, maybe, just maybe, YOU'RE AN ASSHOLE?!
Go ahead, mod me down all you want. I'm sure your fucking sock-puppet account has some points. I don't give a fuck anymore. Twitter, you have so completely poisoned this place that I can't possibly care.
Nothing but sanctimonious, tactless bile and hatred. A grown man acting like a 7-year-old on a daily basis.
AND YOU'RE FUCKING PROUD OF IT, TWITTER! How fucking sad is that?
You love to spread your hatred. You feed on all the negativity you inflict on us. And I'll be DAMNED before I let it poison me any longer.
Guess, what, Twitter. I'm going to continue to use every operating system I can get my hands on, whether it be Linux, Windows, or Mac OS. I will continue to base my personal IT decisions on suitability to task. I will not worship a fucking software license like it was a god.
AND THERE ISN'T A FUCKING THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, YOU LITTLE SHIT.
Save your snarky reply. Don't waste your time on one of your patented juvenile posting-of-links distortions. They are meaningless. You are meaningless.
Damn, that felt good.
Erris is Twitter's sockpuppet account.
Um, no. Both are threats to Microsoft. Linux, as a product, is obvious.
Open source, as a larger concept, is a threat to Microsoft because it is the antithesis of their power base. Microsoft has gained and held its control over the industry by clutching tightly its file formats and protocols. The only reason we ever got Office compatibility and the SMB protocol in the Open Source realm is because of careful reverse engineering and the hope that Microsoft's patent lawyers would keep their guns holstered.
I think Microsoft is realizing that the problem isn't the source, which is eroding as a base of power, but the software patents. On the one hand, they hold enough to crush pretty much anybody they choose. At the same time, they've already been victimized once by Eolas. The Novell deal shows how reluctant Microsoft is to really enforce their software patents. It's as much a defensive action for Microsoft as it is for Novell. Obviously, Novell can step out from under that Sword of Damocles. Microsoft, however, by not filing a straight-up patent suit, avoids throwing the first punch in a barroom full of patent trolls, all of whom are itching for a brawl.
Prove it.
Provide concrete proof that Microsoft's direct actions sabotaged the ACPI specification.
REPEATING YOUR THEORY OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS NOT PROOF.
I fully expect a predictably juvenile ad hominem attack. I don't expect "proof", because we all know damn well that you don't have any.
Note the firm, definitive language Gates uses in that message: "wondering", "whether we shouldn't try", "Maybe there is no way", "Maybe we could define the API's", "maybe we could patent something"
Just once, bring proof.
Fill in the vast, gaping void between Bill Gates' thinking-out-loud speculation and the final ACPI specification, demonstrating exactly where Microsoft took action to sabotage the process.
Amen, brother! Can I get a witness from the congregation?
C++ has that problem, but Microsoft was a bit more efficient with that in .Net. It tries to share code wherever possible.
For structs and values, code is generated per-type. Thus, there are separate code blocks for List<int> and List<DateTime>, but multiple List<int> instances will share code.
For classes, all instances share one single code block. Thus, List<LeftHandedScrewdriver> and List<SelfSealingStemBolt> share code.
Maybe because you've been caught getting your sock puppets mixed up before.
Maybe because you've been caught talking shit behind my back.
Maybe because all you have in your life is hatred and spite.
But mostly, It's because you seem to enjoy inflicting all of that bitterness on the rest of us. That is a pretty sick attitude, if you ask me.
My local landline monopoly/DSL ISP is ahead of that game. They'll have none of that "[X] I agree to the TOS and AUP" web form nonsense.
Their Self-install kit included my hardware (modem, filters, cables), a cheat sheet with the particulars of the account (IP, gateway, DNS, POP3, etc.), a sheet with the TOS and AUP, and a self-addressed stamped envelope. I had to return the top sheet of the TOS/AUP (retain the yellow copy for your records), signed and dated, within 30 days, or else my account would be suspended.
Of course, the coverage area of the entire phone company is less than two counties, so it's a little easier for them to run a tight ship.
So, once again, you've decided to talk about me behind my back. And with the oft-repeated assertion that I am a "paid Microsoft shill". Way to kick off my weekend.
I want you to prove your assertion that I am an employee of, or a contractor hired by, Microsoft Corporation. And no, links to previous postings on Slashdot do not count as "proof".
If that doesn't work out for you, you might try seeking psychiatric help. Maybe you can ask them if it's normal for a random jobber on a message board to feel that he's been singled out by a massive multinational corporation.
The way you've shown anything that proves the estimates you continually cite as fact?
I can not state with authority that 1 in 4 computers are in a botnet, because I am citing an unscientific estimate. Likewise, you can not state with authority that 1 in 4 Windows installations are in a botnet, because you are (indirectly) citing an unscientific estimate. Not that it stops you from trying.
In fact, any time somebody asks you to cite a source for your outrageous assertions, you quickly clam up. We're still waiting for your proof that Microsoft litigated the Zaurus out of existence.
So what's it going to be, Twitter? Accountability or spite? Your choice.
You're the one denying that "1 in 4 computers" could include operating systems that you don't loathe and despise with every beat of your blackened, shriveled heart. Why else would you continue to link to your own comments on the subject, instead of the original, OS-agnostic source?
By the way, here's that original source article that Twitter can't bring himself to link to.
You just replied to me with a link to the post I was replying to in the first place. Brilliant! I guess you can't really explain what Windows has to do with any of this, so your only recourse is the Twitter Tautology:
If this is the only way you can force Windows into the debate, you've already lost.