I don't want to sound bad, but does it matter if XBox 360 doesn't succeed in Japan? Isn't it okay to do well in certain markets, and not do well in others? Some Mozilla fans are just fine with a 5% marketshare. There are plenty of other examples of foreign companies trying to sell to the Japan market, and failing. Isn't this okay, isn't it something everyone can accept?
Thanks for the helpful comment, ephemeris monkey. I'll say a prayer to the Blue Fairy tonight.
Honestly, the SPICE toolkit looks somewhat overwhelming (toolkits always seem to start with a sheet that says "here, memorize these 400 definitions for words that you thought you knew, but which we've subtly redefined"), so it's good you pointed out its strengths.
Yeah, they like to do this in the electronics industry too, it peeves me off. I understand that there are some companies who are in such an exclusive market that deserve and need to have a custom order that's handled by a specific person in the sales department. But come on, this is the internet. Just paying for the salesperson's time to look at your order probably jacks up the price by $50 right away. (besides the other issues mentioned above)
If something costs as much as a Kia (eg. $10,000), THEN a personal sales contact might be warranted. Otherwise, please stop dicking around, and stop assuming that no hobbyist will ever be interested (or that they're interested in taking time to talk to people).
I changed my pants, but I'd do it all over again if I could figure out a way to easily export the data into formats that other programs understand (eg. Celestia, or even just Blender).
Well, Genesis was pretty unique, no? The interplanetary superhighway *IS* insanely complex, but it's also very slow, so it doens't get used for many missions.
Fortunately, the latest mars launch is nice and simple. Though the launch, correction maneuvers, and mars orbits aren't clear at all. I'd still wet my pants if I could get some data on the precise 3D coordinates/velocities/maneuvers used for the actual orbiter. Does NASA release this kind of data?
MRO made me more interested in orbital mechanics, too.
The best info I've found so far is actually a do-it-yourself exercise... there's a space-travel simulator that you can use to try to figure out how to get to mars, along with some helper apps that do some math for you.
In terms of starting, basic data... you can ignore the effects of the MRO on the two planets, since it's so small. But the positions of the two planets can be gotten from here. To understand the coordinates used, study here.
I'd like to find some decent open-source apps to visualize the orbits in 3D... at least a static diagram, if not an animation.
If you have any links or further information, I'm sure they'd be appreciated if you posted them.
every major patch (client-side) since release has included a server-side economic change. Even moreso than class balance since it's relatively easy to fix.
My point is that economics don't really affect how fun the game is to play, in general. Yeah, people spend a lot of time at the AH. But a screwed-up economy doens't have that many negative effects on the game:
inflation hurts auction brokers (formally, in economics, "inflation is a tax on investment"). But I don't know that Blizzard cares about protecting auction brokers
deflation in the tradeskills makes them less fun (because the game encourages you to spend time on them, but then gives you relatively little reward for that time). If anything, I'd count this as the biggest problem with the economy, but it's not something that Blizzard has (or I think, is able to) address.
a screwed up economy can make it harder to buy your spells and EQ as you progress. But it takes a fair bit of badness in the economy to do this... players can always farm more if they want more of their spells/EQ.
That's it. On the other hand, the majority of the fun in the game comes from leveling up, doing quests, doing instances, working on professions, talking to people in your guild... these things aren't really negatively affected by the economy.
The more frequently developers do code updates in response to the community, the more loudly people will request changes. In most games, you don't have this ongoing-changes dynamic, and so people's complaints don't grow louder over time.
As a result, developers don't really care about common complaints. They care about things that are big enough to cause people to leave the game, but not about common customer-service issues. If the company has good "exit interview" processes in place, then they may get feedback there. Otherwise, it's difficult for developers to separate the wheat from the chaff since so many people like to complain.
Or, a variant on that question... how important do you think the economy is, as it relates to making the game enjoyable?
Level 60 players are allowed pass on their vast sums of gold to their level 10 alts. "Power-leveling" services online require 2.5 weeks to get to level 60, despite having all the gold in the world. If the economy takes a nosedive, players may still be able to have fun. So is economic monitoring a primary concern to you?
I have the same question, though I'd state it very differently...
It's the biggest MMORPG so far because you've improved so much on previous MMORPG's. WoW removed most of the annoyances that other MMORPG's have (eg. dying being a very negative thing). What annoyances still linger that might have made WoW a nearly perfect game?
(the first thing that comes to my mind is that transportation takes a great amount of time in the game, but doesn't seem to contribute to the enjoyment of the game)
The 6% of MSIE users who switched over to Firefox for a while probably aren't "average joes" either. Anybody who's willing to download, install, and learn a new set of keystrokes and behaviors (to try Firefox), is willing to do the same thing over again, except this time with the same keystrokes and behaviors they're used to.
It may look ugly but it's quite simple.
Aren't the two mutually exclusive?
No...
It's simple because it's completely table-driven... it doesn't require the complicated set of if/length/substr/== commands that you'd originally think it would.
More formally, so people don't try to ding me when they don't see the difference... finite state automata are clearly simpler things than turing machines. This clearly explains the "aren't they mutually exclusive?" issue. The first thing you think of when you think of implementing number-matching for human-languages is that it can't be expressed via DFA's. It's a little surprising that it can be. But the fact that you can wedge something that otherwise would more naturally be expressed as a full algorithm into a DFA, means that it's going to be messy as hell.
Well, EULAs are contracts, and in a country that follows the rule of law, following contracts is one of the keys to a stable society.
On the other hand, what manufacturers seem to be doing is clearly somewhat abusive, and even though they're not cooperating with each other, most EULAs will probably contain abusive language, so consumers aren't likely to have a choice about which contract they enter into.
On the other hand, quotes like this give me a little hope that more and more people are seeing the value in openness:
For instance, DiBona pointed out that if Google used Windows, or any other non-open source software program, to make changes to that system he would be required to essentially ask permission from that vendor. "Why should we hand over the control of our software support to another company?"
If people see that openness is a very valuable thing, it's possible that either manufacturers will start releasing more open products, or, eventually, judges might step in and mandate slightly less abusive contracts.
As the page points out, MMORPG's are much more expansive than single-player games. There isn't nearly as linear of a path chosen for you. There are many goals that can be pursued, and you pick the ones that are enjoyable for you. For some, power-leveling to 60 as fast as possible is fun. For others, enjoying every instance along the way is fun. For others, practicing tradeskills is fun.
If you want a more linear game, then maybe single-player games would be more appropriate for you.
Or when designing World of Warcraft. I mean, seriously, what does slaughtering hundreds critters have to do with my ability to tailor clothes, mine minerals or mix potions?
Nothing.
What does earning 1000's of gold standing at the AH all day have to do with running instances at level 60? Not much. What does creating a new character that's a different class have to do with gaining reputation in the battlegrounds? They're all just different ways to play the same game with the same group of friends and the same mechanics that you're used to, without getting intensely bored.
(and as the page so elequently points out, there are many reasons why people will leave... but there WILL be some people who hang on for a while, for various reasons, and giving those people more reasons to hang on is the sign of a well-designed MMORPG)
Ahhhh. Thank you for the clarification. Right, from 1984 to 1996, RBOCs weren't allowed to sell long distance service.
So is such an arrangement possible with DSL or Cable Internet then? Separate companies into A) ones who invest in physical infrastructure and lease individual lines to other companes, and B) companies who compete for a reasonable lease price, and provide internet services to individual end-users? Or are there practical or political reasons why that won't work?
DSL provided by a third party over the local phone monopoly's lines, while the local monopoly itself is selling the same service, is not competition.
So that whole CLEC thing that allows consumers to choose between various local/long-distance providers will never work?
The biggest step is for government to realize that a natural monopoly exists, and that they need to mandate the sharing of lines. To take one step further and mandate maximum lease prices isn't really a big step after that.
Competition among broadband providers will only happen when wireless internet is cheap and readily available.
It's true that markets work more efficiently when a natural monopoly doesn't exist. But it's also true that natural monopolies exist in many other circumstances (gas, power, phone, cable tv, cable modem, dsl), and governments HAVE had success in introducing competition into those markerts, so there's no reason to give up on them, and allow the existing monopolies to continue to exploit the market.
It's worse than that... The FCC seems to have no spine with regards to Cable/DSL competition. Currently, it seems like the only practical way to have competition for home broadband service is for new smaller companies to enter the market, and for them to employ communications that don't require large up-front investments (eg. wireless). But I'm sure that big telco will figure out some way to dominate wireless too, lest their monopolies slip through their fingers...
Your earlier claims of parody appear to have no merit as Mr. Avila's screen shots that we have seen do not mention any social or other commentary regarding FedEx. In fact, his site appears to be a blatant attempt to make money because he asked viewers of the site to send him money and also included a reference to PayPal.
Haha.
Jose Avila: I'm broke! See how broke I am? I'm funny too! Can't you spare just a little change?
Lawyer: See! Right there, I told you so! If you allow Mr. Avila to continue using the FedEx trademark, customers will become confused, and may think they're donating money to the REAL FedEx corporation!
Slashdot Mirror
I don't want to sound bad, but does it matter if XBox 360 doesn't succeed in Japan? Isn't it okay to do well in certain markets, and not do well in others? Some Mozilla fans are just fine with a 5% marketshare. There are plenty of other examples of foreign companies trying to sell to the Japan market, and failing. Isn't this okay, isn't it something everyone can accept?
17+ rated games and .xxx domains are bleeding-edge, it shows you're hip and knowledgable to be involved, right?
Learn to swim, or stay out of the water. Thrashing around on TV just makes you look silly.
Honestly, the SPICE toolkit looks somewhat overwhelming (toolkits always seem to start with a sheet that says "here, memorize these 400 definitions for words that you thought you knew, but which we've subtly redefined"), so it's good you pointed out its strengths.
If something costs as much as a Kia (eg. $10,000), THEN a personal sales contact might be warranted. Otherwise, please stop dicking around, and stop assuming that no hobbyist will ever be interested (or that they're interested in taking time to talk to people).
I changed my pants, but I'd do it all over again if I could figure out a way to easily export the data into formats that other programs understand (eg. Celestia, or even just Blender).
SPICE-formated files are used for the MRO. Some SPICE kernels are/will be available here.
Fortunately, the latest mars launch is nice and simple. Though the launch, correction maneuvers, and mars orbits aren't clear at all. I'd still wet my pants if I could get some data on the precise 3D coordinates/velocities/maneuvers used for the actual orbiter. Does NASA release this kind of data?
The best info I've found so far is actually a do-it-yourself exercise... there's a space-travel simulator that you can use to try to figure out how to get to mars, along with some helper apps that do some math for you.
In terms of starting, basic data... you can ignore the effects of the MRO on the two planets, since it's so small. But the positions of the two planets can be gotten from here. To understand the coordinates used, study here.
I'd like to find some decent open-source apps to visualize the orbits in 3D... at least a static diagram, if not an animation.
My point is that economics don't really affect how fun the game is to play, in general. Yeah, people spend a lot of time at the AH. But a screwed-up economy doens't have that many negative effects on the game:
- inflation hurts auction brokers (formally, in economics, "inflation is a tax on investment"). But I don't know that Blizzard cares about protecting auction brokers
- deflation in the tradeskills makes them less fun (because the game encourages you to spend time on them, but then gives you relatively little reward for that time). If anything, I'd count this as the biggest problem with the economy, but it's not something that Blizzard has (or I think, is able to) address.
- a screwed up economy can make it harder to buy your spells and EQ as you progress. But it takes a fair bit of badness in the economy to do this... players can always farm more if they want more of their spells/EQ.
That's it. On the other hand, the majority of the fun in the game comes from leveling up, doing quests, doing instances, working on professions, talking to people in your guild... these things aren't really negatively affected by the economy.As a result, developers don't really care about common complaints. They care about things that are big enough to cause people to leave the game, but not about common customer-service issues. If the company has good "exit interview" processes in place, then they may get feedback there. Otherwise, it's difficult for developers to separate the wheat from the chaff since so many people like to complain.
Level 60 players are allowed pass on their vast sums of gold to their level 10 alts. "Power-leveling" services online require 2.5 weeks to get to level 60, despite having all the gold in the world. If the economy takes a nosedive, players may still be able to have fun. So is economic monitoring a primary concern to you?
It's the biggest MMORPG so far because you've improved so much on previous MMORPG's. WoW removed most of the annoyances that other MMORPG's have (eg. dying being a very negative thing). What annoyances still linger that might have made WoW a nearly perfect game?
(the first thing that comes to my mind is that transportation takes a great amount of time in the game, but doesn't seem to contribute to the enjoyment of the game)
Which of these are legally actionable?
The first clearly doesn't have any legal problems (even if it's a tiny server on a dial-up server, it's still not done with malicious intent).The second and third ones don't have an easy defense for in court, since they're done with malicious intent.
The 6% of MSIE users who switched over to Firefox for a while probably aren't "average joes" either. Anybody who's willing to download, install, and learn a new set of keystrokes and behaviors (to try Firefox), is willing to do the same thing over again, except this time with the same keystrokes and behaviors they're used to.
Also, with the FCC doing whatever the DSL and Cable incumbents say, longer-distance wireless is possibly the only place we'll get competition.
It's simple because it's completely table-driven... it doesn't require the complicated set of if/length/substr/== commands that you'd originally think it would.
More formally, so people don't try to ding me when they don't see the difference... finite state automata are clearly simpler things than turing machines. This clearly explains the "aren't they mutually exclusive?" issue. The first thing you think of when you think of implementing number-matching for human-languages is that it can't be expressed via DFA's. It's a little surprising that it can be. But the fact that you can wedge something that otherwise would more naturally be expressed as a full algorithm into a DFA, means that it's going to be messy as hell.
On the other hand, what manufacturers seem to be doing is clearly somewhat abusive, and even though they're not cooperating with each other, most EULAs will probably contain abusive language, so consumers aren't likely to have a choice about which contract they enter into.
On the other hand, quotes like this give me a little hope that more and more people are seeing the value in openness:
If people see that openness is a very valuable thing, it's possible that either manufacturers will start releasing more open products, or, eventually, judges might step in and mandate slightly less abusive contracts.And yes, quadruple kudos to the author for taking the time to make all the technical details very accessible for a first-time reader.
If you want a more linear game, then maybe single-player games would be more appropriate for you.
What does earning 1000's of gold standing at the AH all day have to do with running instances at level 60? Not much. What does creating a new character that's a different class have to do with gaining reputation in the battlegrounds? They're all just different ways to play the same game with the same group of friends and the same mechanics that you're used to, without getting intensely bored.
(and as the page so elequently points out, there are many reasons why people will leave... but there WILL be some people who hang on for a while, for various reasons, and giving those people more reasons to hang on is the sign of a well-designed MMORPG)
So is such an arrangement possible with DSL or Cable Internet then? Separate companies into A) ones who invest in physical infrastructure and lease individual lines to other companes, and B) companies who compete for a reasonable lease price, and provide internet services to individual end-users? Or are there practical or political reasons why that won't work?
The biggest step is for government to realize that a natural monopoly exists, and that they need to mandate the sharing of lines. To take one step further and mandate maximum lease prices isn't really a big step after that.
It's true that markets work more efficiently when a natural monopoly doesn't exist. But it's also true that natural monopolies exist in many other circumstances (gas, power, phone, cable tv, cable modem, dsl), and governments HAVE had success in introducing competition into those markerts, so there's no reason to give up on them, and allow the existing monopolies to continue to exploit the market.It's worse than that... The FCC seems to have no spine with regards to Cable/DSL competition. Currently, it seems like the only practical way to have competition for home broadband service is for new smaller companies to enter the market, and for them to employ communications that don't require large up-front investments (eg. wireless). But I'm sure that big telco will figure out some way to dominate wireless too, lest their monopolies slip through their fingers...
In this case, "They" would be the owners of the late Andy Warhol's work, not Campbell Soup Company.