"So you just bought a game twice because you scratched a disk?"
Close. After scratching the disk, I contacted Rockstar and asked about a replacement. It would have been about $20-25 for a replacement. (That includes shipping.) I also bugged a friend of mine to copy his for me. But he couldn't get past the copy restriction on it. I then spent a couple of evenings on the net trying to find it. I had several files called GTA3.zip, and contained within them was a hockey game, an offroad game, and.. well I didn't recognize the name of it. I finally broke down and got a used copy. (On the plus side, had an extra map. That turned out to be nice when the first one didn't survive the move.)
So did I just buy the game twice? Not really. Kinda annoyed at how that turned out, though. If I could have copied it, I would have. Sad thing is, that would have automatically labeled me a pirate despite paying for it. I guess I'm not sure if you're arguing or agreeing with me, heh.
"I disregard costs from PR, packaging and support since they're removed from the actual development."
The problem with doing that is that the expense still exists. They're going to be looking at that. Don't get me wrong, I see your point, but it's still a very important factor.
"Adding the different executables to the media you're already going to distribute anyway isn't an additional cost the way I see it, and if that's too complicated, just release the executable on the internet."
You still need an installer developed for it. You can depend on the 'smartness' of Linux users. However, that would get old REAL fast.
"Testing? Well, I guess if your worldview is that 'thorough testing' as an expense, then yes, you're not getting it:-)"
Well sorry. Testing is an expense. It is part of the development cycle, as is support. You cannot release a product without considering these things. If the cost of testing it >= the profit, then you've got no motivation to do it.
"(I'm simplifying somewhat, but I still stand by my core point; multiplatform development is only more expensive if you're discounting the benefits of the process)"
Actually I'm considering the end result here. They can spend the extra time doing it this way (and yes, it will be extra time. It's about profit, not quality of work. It's a sad truth I'm afraid.) but the result of this time, at the end of the day, has to earn them a greater profit.
"While I applaud any efforts to get more software running natively on Linux, I have to ask: why Flash? I mean as far as most of us are concerned, it's the scourge of the internet, responsible for a slew of poorly designed sites, bad flash movies, and anoying advertisements."
[ Unable to view response, FLASH not installed. [X] ]
"There is also an installed base of some 500 million players. That's why it needs to be ported to Linux."
Additionally, it would be another step towards easing Linux into people's offices. Internet connections are important for a variety of reasons in the work place. Too many "I can't view this site in Linux!" complaints would make for a great deal of Windows cling.
Brush this importance aside if you like, but sales guys often use websites to gather information before talking to potential customers.
"Why to people actually like flash? Hard for me to fathom."
Flash isn't the problem, it's how it's used. The difference? Kill Flash and people who set out to be annoying will use other methods, like huge animated.GIFs etc.
Flash is actually pretty slick. Fortunately it's being used more tastefully these days, though there are some who still need to learn that lesson.
I guess what I'm saying is it'd be far more productive to teach people about using it tastefully than it is to bitch about the existence of it.
" If you write solid portable code from the beginning, there's no additional cost to releasing on multiple platforms, and you get development benefits (better code; less bugs, higher maintainability, better reuse)."
Your view isn't exactly wrong, but it is a little too optimistic.
1.) It has to be tested, THOROUGHLY on Linux. 2.) There's packaging considerations with making a Linux version. 3.) You need tech support staff to help in the Linux world. Sadly, it's not ubiquitous enough to seriously manage this. 4.) How does one justify steps 1-3 if only a handful of people end up playing it?
It's really not that easy. That's why a couple of companies have tried making a business of it and failed.
Don't forget that this exact problem you mention exists in the console world as well. Again, Linux isn't being shunned, it's just not attractive enough.
"Another good reason not to buy Microsoft products... They give your money to try and prevent you from using anything else than Windows. "
Can't say this reasoning is very sound in this context. Seems like a huge waste of money to me. "We'll spend 80 million dollars to slightly dent Linux." Seriously, the absolute worst that would happen is a few Linux users spend $700 per seat, and that's the end of it. It's not like they're going to switch to Windows, and it's not like Linux wouldn't be updated to lose the 'infringing' code.
Microsoft spending money to back SCO here would be a HUGE ineffectual waste. It makes more sense that Microsoft just paid SCO so they don't go after them next. Windows may have infringing code in it, and they have at least 80 million people using it.
Simply put, Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they'd run quickly into the ground if Bill Gates acted like President Skroob.
" Companies who "get it" regarding Linux should be rewarded and pubblically thanked and respected."
It's not that they don't get it. It's that a AAA successful game sells 40,000 copies in the Linux market. The problem isn't lack of respect for Linux, it's that there isn't enough of a base to be reasonably successful in that market.
You want more games for Linux? Start encouraging others to use it. Want a good suggestion for that? Burn a few Knoppix CDs and give it to peeps who run Windows. If they're reluctant, say "Put it in next time Windows shits itself." Sooner or later, they'll get it. In the mean time, learn to live with the fact that the gaming industry isn't going to be interested in Linux until they can associate the word 'Millions' with it.
"sweet now it is gold, i wonder how long it will take for a full copy to be leaked, i give it 2 days."
Can't say that matters a whole lot to me. I tried to download GTA3 after I scratched the disc, ended up getting different games that were just renamed to GTA3. Fortunately for me, I found a used copy for reasonably cheap.
Frankly, I don't see what all the anti-piracy hype is about. If it's easier to just run down the street and buy the game than to wait all day to download and cross your fingers that it's a.) legit b.) works, then I don't see why the "you-cannot-backup-your-game" measures are all that necessary.
"Not the article but not even the Title now? I would have to say RFTT dude. Its Unreal Tournament;)"
Uh.. pardon my naievness, but wasn't the reason it was originally called Unreal was that they excelled graphically in both hardware and software mode? I remember being quite surprised when I first got it. Even without a 3D card, they did some neat stuff that just wasn't being done at the time. It did look 'unreal'. I don't think the original reference was to the practicality of the game. Since this is a continuance of the franchise, I can imagine it's still meant in the same spirit.
But who knows, maybe I'm wrong. There's a couple of sides to this issue. On one hand, it has to be semi-grounded in reality. For example, it would be odd if you ran off a cliff, but didn't fall until you looked down in Yosemite Sam fashion. At the same time, though, how much fun would the game be if it was too realistic? I'd have a heart attack if I tried to run a short distance, heh.
There is a fine line there one must walk when designing a game like that. Afterall, if real life was so exciting, where would the game market be?
"Doesn't that make the CIA and the US regiem terrorists?"
Aren't gov't sponsored terrorists typically called spies? Forgive my naieveness, I just watched True Lies.
My comment is in no way meant to glamourize what spies are, but rather to point out that labelling them terrorists is sort of like labelling script kiddies as hackers.
"How many TVs do we actually need in the house? It isn't enough that we get 100+ channels of absolute garbage but we have to display it in every single room in the house."
You do realize that when you have several people in a house, there are difference of opinion over what a 'good show' is, right? It's one of those lessons you learn when you live in a house with a girlfriend and a kid. If I didn't have a TV in every room of my apartment, I wouldn't ever be able to watch Enterprise. I still haven't developed a taste for Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
As for attention span, kids learn faster via video than they do via teacher. Those 100's of channels and every TV in the room means the lil guy can always watch the eductional stuff instead of having to pre-empt it for the precious hour we each have to enjoy a show.
Slashdot Mirror
"So you just bought a game twice because you scratched a disk?"
Close. After scratching the disk, I contacted Rockstar and asked about a replacement. It would have been about $20-25 for a replacement. (That includes shipping.) I also bugged a friend of mine to copy his for me. But he couldn't get past the copy restriction on it. I then spent a couple of evenings on the net trying to find it. I had several files called GTA3.zip, and contained within them was a hockey game, an offroad game, and.. well I didn't recognize the name of it. I finally broke down and got a used copy. (On the plus side, had an extra map. That turned out to be nice when the first one didn't survive the move.)
So did I just buy the game twice? Not really. Kinda annoyed at how that turned out, though. If I could have copied it, I would have. Sad thing is, that would have automatically labeled me a pirate despite paying for it. I guess I'm not sure if you're arguing or agreeing with me, heh.
"I disregard costs from PR, packaging and support since they're removed from the actual development."
:-)"
The problem with doing that is that the expense still exists. They're going to be looking at that. Don't get me wrong, I see your point, but it's still a very important factor.
"Adding the different executables to the media you're already going to distribute anyway isn't an additional cost the way I see it, and if that's too complicated, just release the executable on the internet."
You still need an installer developed for it. You can depend on the 'smartness' of Linux users. However, that would get old REAL fast.
"Testing? Well, I guess if your worldview is that 'thorough testing' as an expense, then yes, you're not getting it
Well sorry. Testing is an expense. It is part of the development cycle, as is support. You cannot release a product without considering these things. If the cost of testing it >= the profit, then you've got no motivation to do it.
"(I'm simplifying somewhat, but I still stand by my core point; multiplatform development is only more expensive if you're discounting the benefits of the process)"
Actually I'm considering the end result here. They can spend the extra time doing it this way (and yes, it will be extra time. It's about profit, not quality of work. It's a sad truth I'm afraid.) but the result of this time, at the end of the day, has to earn them a greater profit.
"IMHO, there can never be too little Flash."
Funny. People bitch about Flash when it annoys them, but never seem to remember when they don't notice it.
"While I applaud any efforts to get more software running natively on Linux, I have to ask: why Flash? I mean as far as most of us are concerned, it's the scourge of the internet, responsible for a slew of poorly designed sites, bad flash movies, and anoying advertisements."
[ Unable to view response, FLASH not installed. [X] ]
"There is also an installed base of some 500 million players. That's why it needs to be ported to Linux."
Additionally, it would be another step towards easing Linux into people's offices. Internet connections are important for a variety of reasons in the work place. Too many "I can't view this site in Linux!" complaints would make for a great deal of Windows cling.
Brush this importance aside if you like, but sales guys often use websites to gather information before talking to potential customers.
"Why to people actually like flash? Hard for me to fathom."
.GIFs etc.
Flash isn't the problem, it's how it's used. The difference? Kill Flash and people who set out to be annoying will use other methods, like huge animated
Flash is actually pretty slick. Fortunately it's being used more tastefully these days, though there are some who still need to learn that lesson.
I guess what I'm saying is it'd be far more productive to teach people about using it tastefully than it is to bitch about the existence of it.
" If you write solid portable code from the beginning, there's no additional cost to releasing on multiple platforms, and you get development benefits (better code; less bugs, higher maintainability, better reuse)."
Your view isn't exactly wrong, but it is a little too optimistic.
1.) It has to be tested, THOROUGHLY on Linux.
2.) There's packaging considerations with making a Linux version.
3.) You need tech support staff to help in the Linux world. Sadly, it's not ubiquitous enough to seriously manage this.
4.) How does one justify steps 1-3 if only a handful of people end up playing it?
It's really not that easy. That's why a couple of companies have tried making a business of it and failed.
Don't forget that this exact problem you mention exists in the console world as well. Again, Linux isn't being shunned, it's just not attractive enough.
"Another good reason not to buy Microsoft products... They give your money to try and prevent you from using anything else than Windows. "
Can't say this reasoning is very sound in this context. Seems like a huge waste of money to me. "We'll spend 80 million dollars to slightly dent Linux." Seriously, the absolute worst that would happen is a few Linux users spend $700 per seat, and that's the end of it. It's not like they're going to switch to Windows, and it's not like Linux wouldn't be updated to lose the 'infringing' code.
Microsoft spending money to back SCO here would be a HUGE ineffectual waste. It makes more sense that Microsoft just paid SCO so they don't go after them next. Windows may have infringing code in it, and they have at least 80 million people using it.
Simply put, Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they'd run quickly into the ground if Bill Gates acted like President Skroob.
" Companies who "get it" regarding Linux should be rewarded and pubblically thanked and respected."
It's not that they don't get it. It's that a AAA successful game sells 40,000 copies in the Linux market. The problem isn't lack of respect for Linux, it's that there isn't enough of a base to be reasonably successful in that market.
You want more games for Linux? Start encouraging others to use it. Want a good suggestion for that? Burn a few Knoppix CDs and give it to peeps who run Windows. If they're reluctant, say "Put it in next time Windows shits itself." Sooner or later, they'll get it. In the mean time, learn to live with the fact that the gaming industry isn't going to be interested in Linux until they can associate the word 'Millions' with it.
"With a demo already out, it looks like MacSoft will have this out for OS X almost at the same time as the PC version. Sweet."
A small handful of people rejoice!!!
"sweet now it is gold, i wonder how long it will take for a full copy to be leaked, i give it 2 days."
Can't say that matters a whole lot to me. I tried to download GTA3 after I scratched the disc, ended up getting different games that were just renamed to GTA3. Fortunately for me, I found a used copy for reasonably cheap.
Frankly, I don't see what all the anti-piracy hype is about. If it's easier to just run down the street and buy the game than to wait all day to download and cross your fingers that it's a.) legit b.) works, then I don't see why the "you-cannot-backup-your-game" measures are all that necessary.
"Not the article but not even the Title now? I would have to say RFTT dude. Its Unreal Tournament ;)"
Uh.. pardon my naievness, but wasn't the reason it was originally called Unreal was that they excelled graphically in both hardware and software mode? I remember being quite surprised when I first got it. Even without a 3D card, they did some neat stuff that just wasn't being done at the time. It did look 'unreal'. I don't think the original reference was to the practicality of the game. Since this is a continuance of the franchise, I can imagine it's still meant in the same spirit.
But who knows, maybe I'm wrong. There's a couple of sides to this issue. On one hand, it has to be semi-grounded in reality. For example, it would be odd if you ran off a cliff, but didn't fall until you looked down in Yosemite Sam fashion. At the same time, though, how much fun would the game be if it was too realistic? I'd have a heart attack if I tried to run a short distance, heh.
There is a fine line there one must walk when designing a game like that. Afterall, if real life was so exciting, where would the game market be?
"Sorry mom, can't come home now. The NSEA Protector's under attack!" *PShwww CRACK!!*
"Ok, so who exactly is the targeted audience for this?"
Peewee's Playhouse fans? Remember that video phone he had?
"your currently reading /. what are the odds that you will be having sex?"
You cannot honestly tell me that you haven't thought about using your geekiness to pull a Ferris Bueller gag.
I want something like this, only where you make MST3k'esque comments.
"I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... They freak me out."
Am I the only one that found the thought of eating at Quizzno's right after that commercial unappetizing?
"If this doesn't prove the case for open source software, I don't know what will."
So their enemies can freely contribute to their code? Oh I don't think so.
"Doesn't that make the CIA and the US regiem terrorists?"
Aren't gov't sponsored terrorists typically called spies? Forgive my naieveness, I just watched True Lies.
My comment is in no way meant to glamourize what spies are, but rather to point out that labelling them terrorists is sort of like labelling script kiddies as hackers.
That wasn't a typo?
Eh. That's a threshold. The difference? The data isn't deleted, just sortable.
I think your point is valid, but some context needs to be established.
"The real question is, how much of the content is even worth existing? "
Since when do we need to place a value on individual expression?
My crystal ball predicts somebody will make a "one ring to win them all" joke and get modded +5, Funny for it.
"Doesn't Chimera use the Mozilla rendering engine?"
People like UIs, not just rendering engines.
"How many TVs do we actually need in the house? It isn't enough that we get 100+ channels of absolute garbage but we have to display it in every single room in the house."
You do realize that when you have several people in a house, there are difference of opinion over what a 'good show' is, right? It's one of those lessons you learn when you live in a house with a girlfriend and a kid. If I didn't have a TV in every room of my apartment, I wouldn't ever be able to watch Enterprise. I still haven't developed a taste for Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
As for attention span, kids learn faster via video than they do via teacher. Those 100's of channels and every TV in the room means the lil guy can always watch the eductional stuff instead of having to pre-empt it for the precious hour we each have to enjoy a show.
You'll pardon me for not seeing TVs as an evil.