Better, easier-to-use tools won't necessarily yield more cookie-cutter games. In fact, I think exactly the opposite will be true. Tools that make game design more accessible to non-techs should (hopefully) allow more people the ability to tell stories in this medium.
Another consideration is that these tools will likely allow developers to make games more quickly and cheaply than is currently possible. If games require a smaller investment in time and money, then developers and publishers will hopefully be more willing to go out on a limb and try something new.
Lately there's been a lot of discussion on/. about class action lawsuits being directed at record companies, the RIAA, and Macrovision because of the latter's Safe Audio anti-piracy technology, but this sort of "protection" measure could serve as real grounds for a class action suit.
Introducing technology that physically harms an individual's real property is a far cry from data noise that makes it annoyingly difficult to exercise that person's right in a debatably legal manner. The real kicker, though, is the lack of any warning! I've got a couple of CDs that include tracks of shuttle launches and avalanches and such, and they have warnings that playing them at too high a volume could damage my equipment.
This is in some ways similar to beating someone to death after they've broken into your home (which is an analogy I'm sure some industry spokesperson will make), except that what a music fan is doing is not necessarily illegal and it certainly isn't a threat to life and limb. It's also worth pointing out that in many cases the home owner could still be liable in a civil court, even if they didn't do anything criminal.
When they stop losing money on piracy, are they going to make CDs cheaper?
...and "concerned" politicians and parents will be this part:
"They seemed able to focus on what they were doing much better than other people and also had better general co-ordination," said one of the researchers. "The skills they learned on computers seem to transfer to the real world."
Then the skills they'll mention will be sniping, street fighting, and mass murder, not rhythm (Samba de Amigo), driving (Gran Turismo), or mouse-saving...er, problem solving (Chu Chu Rocket).
True, we are allowed to time shift, and perhaps they're not allowed to stop us (I'll bet a good team of attorneys could convince your average judge otherwise).
As far as I know, though, there's no legal requirement for them to make it possible for us to do so.
I'm from Arkansas, near Little Rock, and I love the state...but you're really fighting an uphill battle!
Don't get me wrong, LR and especially Hot Springs have reasonably active, sophisticated artistic communities, but not what you'd find in some places. Add to that the general, nearly universal disdain with which "real" artists and critics regard computer art, and you're in a nearly no-win situation. Not only does CG have a stigma attached to it to begin with, but you're unlikely to find an appreciative crowd in Little Rock, either for really new art forms or for CG, much less the combination of the two.
In short, I wouldn't take it too personally. If you're really serious about exhibiting your work, I'd suggest trying to go through some of the departments at UALR to arrange an exhibit, like the Computer Science and Art departments, and maybe even the Math department. At least in the CSCI and Math departments you might find some who would appreciate the technical sophistication of what you've done, and in the Art department you might find at least a few people who would be forward-thinking enough to give your art a look. Good luck!
"Sure, Thag, it was really hard to paint that stuff on the wall of a cave, by torchlight, using only clays and berry juices...but come on! It doesn't even really look like a buffalo!"
--Unknown Prehistoric Art Critic
If a whirring, stumbling, plastic thing doesn't freak out your cats, then your cats are obviously much more sedate than mine! If my cat freaks out when he sees one of those little toy Stomper 4x4's, then he'd have a spasm over one of these.
Geez, chase him around the yard with a radio-controller car just once, and he's scarred for life....
Another great way to fight this would be to get OEMs to help us! Micro$oft may be a virtual desktop OS monopoly, but they still make lots of money from the likes of Dell and Gateway. If hundreds or thousands of PC shoppers began telling GW and Dell that they would not buy PCs made by companies that did not include a full copy of the OS that would leave those companies with few choices:
a) Pony up the dough for an extra license per PC in order to include a retail copy, or
b) Offer other OSes like Linux or BeOS, or
c) Loose customers.
Faced with these choices, manufacturers could place an enormous amount of pressure on M$. With a full-scale OEM revolt, Gates and Co. would have strong incentive to reverse their policy. At the very least it would be nearly impossible for them to continue claiming it was something OEMs asked for!
In the Wired article, Mark Litvack, vice president and director of worldwide legal affairs for the MPAA (as if that makes him qualified to comment on computer issues), made the following statement:
"He is transporting individuals electronically to locations in order to facilitate the illegal copying of DVDs. His behavior is analogous to driving someone to a home so that they may burglarize the home."
Ignoring (for the moment) the fact that technically he isn't transporting anyone anywhere, it seems to me that this would be more analogous to a taxi driver picking up a fare and taking him to a bar that is a known hang-out of drug dealers. The driver doesn't know if his passenger is going to deal drugs, and he probably doesn't want to.
Actually, an even better analogy would be asking someone for directions to said drug bar. If they give you those directions, are they dealing drugs?
NOTE: I do not mean to directly compare DeCSS to drugs, nor am I attempting to make any sort of judgment about either, I just needed a good real-world example of something that is illegal that one has to go to a specific place to acquire. Besides, to listen to the MPAA talk, you'd think DeCSS was worse!
"Sega said the attempts by some game developers to make games more difficult using artificial intelligence will not answer the needs of the hardcore gamers, because they will eventually learn all the tricks."
What happened to the DC commercials that claimed "it is thinking?" That kind of implies superb AI to me. Huh. I guess not. Or maybe they were referring to the marketing department....
And the other one:
"Sega also hopes to woo gamers away from PCs, which allow users to play a limited number of games over the Internet."
As opposed to the unlimited number of games the DC will let you play online? Even if online gaming really takes off for the Dreamcast, I really can't imagine there being more online games for any one console than for the PC, at least not for the lifespan of the Dreamcast. I love it when reporters swallow press releases whole without even bothering to pause and chew on them first.
Sega does have an interesting approach to overcoming language barriers, though, by allowing players to choose from a menu of common phrases, which are pre-translated for foreign players. On the other hand, that seems like a pretty limited way to build an interactive online community to me.
I'll think keep my keyboard and PC, and stick to EverQuest and Legend of the Red Dragon for the time being, thank you!
These are so much monopolies as they are licenses. In my neck of the woods, Mariot pays for the rights to and provides the food service for on-campus. This benefits of a system like this typically outweigh any concequences.
I really do see consequences outweighing benefits on my campus. We have four dining facilities all run by the same monopoly, and as on-campus students we are forced to buy meal plans at the beginning of each semester. The cost of these plans is the same regardless of how much we eat, and we get no refunds. Under this system, there are almost no incentives for the monopoly to provide better services. Imagine the level of service we would be given, though, if the four dining centers were competing for our money!
But back to the real issue at hand here.... I agree with you about the phone service, and I can see other potential for abuse. Consider all of the alternative long-distance services (10-10-yadda-yadda, 1-800-CALL-MOM, credit card calling cards, whatever), and imagine the fit the FCC would throw if a college or university blocked phone access to those numbers!
There's also potential for further abuse by other companies here, as well. Imagine if all of your phone service was provided by a single carrier (either your subscribed long-distance service was provided by your local carrier or vice versa), or if that same carrier was your ISP (either through DSL or AOL after they own everything). Is it at all inconceivable that AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or any other phone company might not try to block access to any other similar service?
In these cases, I could see your ISP/phone company blocking such access on the grounds of bandwidth, too!
It doesn't really matter what kind of institution it is, this looks like a case of a monopoly trying to perpetuate itself by blocking access to similar services.
Does it really seem so unbelievable that a university would want a monopoly? Of course not!
Universities already have forced monopolies in on-campus housing and on-campus food service in most places (although admittedly this isn't universal), and many universities seem to be pretty intent on keeping them.
Monopolies are great business for the institutions that have them, and I'm sure that Clemson (and most other colleges) would love to keep theirs. In this case, online long-distance probably isn't widely used yet, but if they quash it now while there aren't many people to complain, then it'll be easier than trying to stop everyone from using it a few years from now.
Slashdot Mirror
Another consideration is that these tools will likely allow developers to make games more quickly and cheaply than is currently possible. If games require a smaller investment in time and money, then developers and publishers will hopefully be more willing to go out on a limb and try something new.
Introducing technology that physically harms an individual's real property is a far cry from data noise that makes it annoyingly difficult to exercise that person's right in a debatably legal manner. The real kicker, though, is the lack of any warning! I've got a couple of CDs that include tracks of shuttle launches and avalanches and such, and they have warnings that playing them at too high a volume could damage my equipment.
This is in some ways similar to beating someone to death after they've broken into your home (which is an analogy I'm sure some industry spokesperson will make), except that what a music fan is doing is not necessarily illegal and it certainly isn't a threat to life and limb. It's also worth pointing out that in many cases the home owner could still be liable in a civil court, even if they didn't do anything criminal.
When they stop losing money on piracy, are they going to make CDs cheaper?
As far as I know, though, there's no legal requirement for them to make it possible for us to do so.
Don't get me wrong, LR and especially Hot Springs have reasonably active, sophisticated artistic communities, but not what you'd find in some places. Add to that the general, nearly universal disdain with which "real" artists and critics regard computer art, and you're in a nearly no-win situation. Not only does CG have a stigma attached to it to begin with, but you're unlikely to find an appreciative crowd in Little Rock, either for really new art forms or for CG, much less the combination of the two.
In short, I wouldn't take it too personally. If you're really serious about exhibiting your work, I'd suggest trying to go through some of the departments at UALR to arrange an exhibit, like the Computer Science and Art departments, and maybe even the Math department. At least in the CSCI and Math departments you might find some who would appreciate the technical sophistication of what you've done, and in the Art department you might find at least a few people who would be forward-thinking enough to give your art a look. Good luck!
"Sure, Thag, it was really hard to paint that stuff on the wall of a cave, by torchlight, using only clays and berry juices...but come on! It doesn't even really look like a buffalo!"
--Unknown Prehistoric Art Critic
Geez, chase him around the yard with a radio-controller car just once, and he's scarred for life....
Another great way to fight this would be to get OEMs to help us! Micro$oft may be a virtual desktop OS monopoly, but they still make lots of money from the likes of Dell and Gateway. If hundreds or thousands of PC shoppers began telling GW and Dell that they would not buy PCs made by companies that did not include a full copy of the OS that would leave those companies with few choices:
a) Pony up the dough for an extra license per PC in order to include a retail copy, or
b) Offer other OSes like Linux or BeOS, or
c) Loose customers.
Faced with these choices, manufacturers could place an enormous amount of pressure on M$. With a full-scale OEM revolt, Gates and Co. would have strong incentive to reverse their policy. At the very least it would be nearly impossible for them to continue claiming it was something OEMs asked for!
Ignoring (for the moment) the fact that technically he isn't transporting anyone anywhere, it seems to me that this would be more analogous to a taxi driver picking up a fare and taking him to a bar that is a known hang-out of drug dealers. The driver doesn't know if his passenger is going to deal drugs, and he probably doesn't want to.
Actually, an even better analogy would be asking someone for directions to said drug bar. If they give you those directions, are they dealing drugs?
NOTE: I do not mean to directly compare DeCSS to drugs, nor am I attempting to make any sort of judgment about either, I just needed a good real-world example of something that is illegal that one has to go to a specific place to acquire. Besides, to listen to the MPAA talk, you'd think DeCSS was worse!
What happened to the DC commercials that claimed "it is thinking?" That kind of implies superb AI to me. Huh. I guess not. Or maybe they were referring to the marketing department....
And the other one:
As opposed to the unlimited number of games the DC will let you play online? Even if online gaming really takes off for the Dreamcast, I really can't imagine there being more online games for any one console than for the PC, at least not for the lifespan of the Dreamcast. I love it when reporters swallow press releases whole without even bothering to pause and chew on them first.
Sega does have an interesting approach to overcoming language barriers, though, by allowing players to choose from a menu of common phrases, which are pre-translated for foreign players. On the other hand, that seems like a pretty limited way to build an interactive online community to me.
I'll think keep my keyboard and PC, and stick to EverQuest and Legend of the Red Dragon for the time being, thank you!
I really do see consequences outweighing benefits on my campus. We have four dining facilities all run by the same monopoly, and as on-campus students we are forced to buy meal plans at the beginning of each semester. The cost of these plans is the same regardless of how much we eat, and we get no refunds. Under this system, there are almost no incentives for the monopoly to provide better services. Imagine the level of service we would be given, though, if the four dining centers were competing for our money!
But back to the real issue at hand here.... I agree with you about the phone service, and I can see other potential for abuse. Consider all of the alternative long-distance services (10-10-yadda-yadda, 1-800-CALL-MOM, credit card calling cards, whatever), and imagine the fit the FCC would throw if a college or university blocked phone access to those numbers!
There's also potential for further abuse by other companies here, as well. Imagine if all of your phone service was provided by a single carrier (either your subscribed long-distance service was provided by your local carrier or vice versa), or if that same carrier was your ISP (either through DSL or AOL after they own everything). Is it at all inconceivable that AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or any other phone company might not try to block access to any other similar service?
In these cases, I could see your ISP/phone company blocking such access on the grounds of bandwidth, too!
It doesn't really matter what kind of institution it is, this looks like a case of a monopoly trying to perpetuate itself by blocking access to similar services.
Does it really seem so unbelievable that a university would want a monopoly? Of course not!
Universities already have forced monopolies in on-campus housing and on-campus food service in most places (although admittedly this isn't universal), and many universities seem to be pretty intent on keeping them.
Monopolies are great business for the institutions that have them, and I'm sure that Clemson (and most other colleges) would love to keep theirs. In this case, online long-distance probably isn't widely used yet, but if they quash it now while there aren't many people to complain, then it'll be easier than trying to stop everyone from using it a few years from now.