I agree with you, but this isn't as bad as Oblivion, thankfully. Levels only open up new equipment and skills, so you have no reason (or ability) to avoid leveling to try to max your character. You're continually killing things, so you're going to level regardless, and when you level, it's generally a good thing, as you get new skills and can use equipment that had been locked in your inventory.
In addition, the levels themselves don't mean anything, it's the equipment that matters, so you'd have no reason to be able to pound on weak enemies to raise your levels, as you wouldn't find any good loot.
I'll admit, it would be enjoyable to be able to blast through the entire game on a lower difficulty level, but I haven't found the autoscaling to be that much of a problem. There's still a general difficulty progression in the types of enemies you see, even if all the same level. I came in expecting, like Oblivion, to hate autoscaling for destroying an otherwise great game, but it hasn't been that at all.
I'd second the call to download the demo. The game has problems, but I have no idea why reviewers focused entirely on the problems without admitting the fact that the game is still a ton of fun. If you like the demo at all and like Diablo/PSO style loot-collectors, you'll love this game. The combat is enjoyable and surprisingly deep, and the character customization is top-notch.
I've been playing a lot this last week and have loved it for the most part. I think the high expectations and antagonistic relationship SK has had with the press has garnered hyper-critical reviews of what at its core is a good game.
Well, this is just plain old copyright infringement, not copyright circumvention, so I'm guessing no time soon. I'm guessing Nintendo won't sue, but I have no problem recognizing a script for a video game (or for that matter a movie) being under control of the original author.
And all of it is local. Between numerous corruption scandals, the most unpopular governor in the nation and a general anti-incumbent feeling in the country I'm sure all Ohio officials aren't feeling too comfortable. Nothing like some election year tough on sex offenders laws to attempt to gain some approval. Generally, I consider any law passed in an election year to be pandering and this doesn't appear to be any different.
This would effectively give a small number of states control over the electoral system. Looks like your candidate won't be winning the popular vote? Have states that might otherwise support him drop out of the system, either causing the system to collapse or become ineffective. A few states dropping out would then cause a chain reaction of other states dropping out to counteract the problem.
The electoral college is in many ways a bad idea in modern times, but a constitutional amendment is the best way to go about fixing it.
My favorite insanity effect was the game pretending that it reset and went back to the title screen. I almost threw my controller at the wall. Deleting all my save games was also a nice insanity generator.
International Law also exists because our own Constitution. Treaties (e.g. The Geneva Conventions) are treated as the supreme law of the land just like any act of Congress, and possibly supercede most acts of Congress and go beyond the Constitution depending on how you interpret SCOTUS decisions. Our country unilaterally removing themselves from the obligations of treaties is a questionable action, both in how it would impact our relations with other countries, and how it would be treated in our own law.
Also, when European countries were world powers it was pre-WWI. International law changed entirely after WWI, becoming much more powerful. Countries realized that norms against aggresive war and in favor of more cooperation were needed since we could actually destroy each other and war was no longer 'honorable'. Not having despots in control that had Napoleonic complexes helped..
Your view of IL is quite 19th century. Unfortunately, it no longer takes several weeks for another nation to come into contact with us.
This is part of the problem. Everyone tries to make simple analogies to figure out how the internet, or other technology, works, and in turn how it should be regulated. But those analogies quickly break down.
Lets take your transportation example. If I'm driving from state to state, I know I'm subject to the laws of every state I drive through. What if I send an email from Virginia to California? Does that make me subject to the laws of many states? Just the destination and start? The states where I can be proven my email may have had an impact?
Even more so, lets say you set up a website - a stop on your tracks. Typically, an actual train stop would be regulated by national, local and state laws, because it only has effects in those areas. But does it make sense to regulate a website in the same way? If I set up a website on a server in one state, should the laws of other states be able to reach me in connection with the site? Which states?
I'm not saying regulation is impossible, but simple analogies that try to make people understand how technology works and thus how our legal system should work result in some very bad laws.
We completely respect your right to raise ignorant children in correspondence with your beliefs. However, depending on the level of ignorance you desire, you're going to have to put more effort into their education. Parochial schools if you hate evolution, home schooling if you believe the earth is six thousand years young, or whatever level of blinders to the rest of the world you feel is appropriate.
The first amendment right to free exercise of the religion isn't absolute. It's balanced by governmental interests and other private rights. In this instance, the majority's right to have their children be raised scientifically literate has trampled on your indoctrination of your children. It's unfortunate, but I'm sure you've got options.
Oh, and you could sue about it. Though you'd probably get laughed at - by the courts, and by me.
The same argument doesn't work for porn. The Supreme Court has said that porn that is devoid of any redeeming social value is classified as obscenity and not subject to first amendment protection. Also, the first amendment net may be cast wide, but it doesn't extend to guns. Movies, of course they deserve the same protection, and they get it.
This is a straightforward application of first amendment principles. Unless there is imminent violence being prevented, you can't make content-based restrictions on speech. It's a high barrier to overcome, as well it should be. The chilling effects that any content-based restriction has result in them being unconstitutional as a general rule.
According to his original article, he believed that video game makers would be too afraid to make a game where a boy went out killing game industry executives because it would 'train' kids to target them instead of cops. So he was basically baiting them to turn the destructive video game lens upon themselves with a promise of $10k to charity
Yes, it's a very stupid idea, considering the video game industry for the most part doesn't truly believe that they're training kids to kill, so I doubt they'd have any qualms putting the bullseye video games supposedly create on themselves.
Assuming that his 'Modest Proposal' was an offer that could form a legally binding contract (a big assumption in itself) anyone who makes an offer is allowed to rescind that offer at any time up until the point when it is actually accepted.
In this case, acceptance would probably be creating and presenting him with a video game that meets his requirements, so his retraction of the offer is perfectly legal at this point.
RETURN EMPTY CARTRIDGE TO LEXMARK FOR REMANUFACTURING AND RECYCLING Please read before opening. Opening of this package or using the patented cartridge inside confirms your acceptance of the following license agreement. The patented cartridge is sold at a special price subject to a restriction that it may be used only once. Following this initial use, you agree to return the empty cartridge only to Lexmark for remanufacturing and recycling. If you don't accept these terms, return the unopened package to your point of purchase. A regular price cartridge without these terms is available.
That's the OUTSIDE of the package. It also gives you the option of paying a full price for a cartridge without this agreement. If you buy this cartridge, you know, or should know, you're getting a discount in exchange for agreeing to return the cartridge to them. If you're a lawyer (which it appears you might be) then read the actual decision, it's nothing special.
As the man said, your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
Actually, your right ends far before that. Putting someone in reasonable fear that you will injure them is known as assault.
Threatening to injure someone, while satisfying, can get you in court just as easily as actually injuring someone. Luckily most people don't realize that assault != battery and you can have one without the other, so I wouldn't expect to be charged with it. But it's something to keep in mind.
Don't forget http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111301/other classics. I still can't see out of my left eye since Street Fighter, even after they removed the pen from it.
Yes, sequels can very often be creative and different from their predecessors. But lets face it, if I'm looking for strategy RPGs out there, and I see Disgaea and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance - both are great games, both are creative in their own ways, but if I'm looking for a new gameplay experience, I'm going for Disgaea.
Final Fantasy X-2 departed from FFX in many different ways, and is quite impressive in its own right, but you can't deny the fact that just by being a Final Fantasy game, there's already a bunch of preconditions set down for how the game will work. Even without playing the game I could tell you a great number of things about it. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, and doesn't imply the game is a bad one, or that the developers were lazy, but the fact is, that if I'm playing another Final Fantasy, I'm not getting a truly new game experience. I'm getting a good game experience, but not a new one.
If I liked Adobe Photoshop 6.0, it's likely I'll like 7.0 and want to try it. But if I'm looking for something different, I'll try something different - and in the gaming world, I'm often looking for something different.
Easily the most original game I've seen this year (or for quite a while for that matter) has been the MMORPG A Tale in the Desert. Cooperative play, no combat, a player-created society... this game departs from the norm in so many ways that it's crazy - no wonder they independantly released the thing, no publisher would ever support such a complete departure from what MMORPGs really are.
Being one of those oblivious checkout clerks at the local bookstore computer department I can say that the standard educational discount that Apple offers on iPods is 30 dollars off each model, nothing more. So instead of the 299/399/499 pricing, you simply get 269/369/469. Not that big a sale, but it's better than nothing.
Apple does have nice deals occasionally though, this summer for any students purchasing Powerbooks, you got a free HP printer and 200 dollars off any iPod. Good stuff for those who needed to purchase Powerbooks anyway, not so good for someone just wanting to get an iPod.
I believe Teppy has stated that the current telling of the game will end early next year some time, so look to join the game then. They'll basically restart everything, change the code to make everyone have to figure things out again, and then add in new technologies and tests as time goes on. Puts everyone on mostly equal footing, and for those just joining then, it's extremely easy to catch up.
That's why I enjoy the smaller MMORPGs out there. They tend to be cheaper, with devs who are actually interested in making a good game.
I've been into A Tale in the Desert lately, in addition to being without a doubt the most innovative game on the MMORPG market right now (no rat killing in this one!) it also is free to download with a large trial play - no outrageous box fee. Add in devs that respond within the hour if a new tech is bugged or even give out their cell numbers in case the server crashes, and you've got me locked in for quite a while.
Due to life-like violence and intense sexuality, Real Life has been given a rating of M for Mature, and is restricted to only those above 17 to play. We must make every effort to ensure that our children are not playing this horrific game, for who knows what thoughts will enter their mind when they see the actions available to their character, or the actions performed by other characters in game. It's just too horrible to even imagine.
I know I've seen a few stories posted about this game in the past, but I wonder if those who wrote this article had a chance to look at A Tale in the Desert. In this game there are no laws for a reason - players must create the legal system from the ground up. Laws are then implemented by the devs (with some reasonable restrictions of what can be legislated). Examples of important laws passed so far would be laws that allow players to tear down or use the buildings of 'Departed Players', as well as laws that allow people to feed or slaughter starving sheep (sheep unfed can become sick, and this sickness can spread to other player's sheep).
The funny thing is, the laws that try to prevent greifing or solve problems almost always have their own ill-effects, so it makes for a very interesting experiment to watch laws get.
I experience this most often when some friends and I engage in hours of play of The Next Tetris for N64. I'll be able to glance quickly up at the next 3 pieces and instantly recognize the best places to put them down. Once the pieces start coming down to the point where you get about.25 seconds to place them, you better be in the zone or you're screwed. Also, after playing the game for a few hours, I can still close my eyes and see the pieces falling into place, forming the ultimate, holeless tower - it seems the zone never wants to let go of me once I leave.
Though nothing can rip you out of the zone faster than seeing the exact piece you needed finally arrive after just giving up on it ever coming. That takes me out of "The Gaming Zone" and into "The Smash The Controller Into The Wall Zone". DAMN YOU STRAIGHT LINES!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you, but this isn't as bad as Oblivion, thankfully. Levels only open up new equipment and skills, so you have no reason (or ability) to avoid leveling to try to max your character. You're continually killing things, so you're going to level regardless, and when you level, it's generally a good thing, as you get new skills and can use equipment that had been locked in your inventory.
In addition, the levels themselves don't mean anything, it's the equipment that matters, so you'd have no reason to be able to pound on weak enemies to raise your levels, as you wouldn't find any good loot.
I'll admit, it would be enjoyable to be able to blast through the entire game on a lower difficulty level, but I haven't found the autoscaling to be that much of a problem. There's still a general difficulty progression in the types of enemies you see, even if all the same level. I came in expecting, like Oblivion, to hate autoscaling for destroying an otherwise great game, but it hasn't been that at all.
I'd second the call to download the demo. The game has problems, but I have no idea why reviewers focused entirely on the problems without admitting the fact that the game is still a ton of fun. If you like the demo at all and like Diablo/PSO style loot-collectors, you'll love this game. The combat is enjoyable and surprisingly deep, and the character customization is top-notch.
I've been playing a lot this last week and have loved it for the most part. I think the high expectations and antagonistic relationship SK has had with the press has garnered hyper-critical reviews of what at its core is a good game.
Well, this is just plain old copyright infringement, not copyright circumvention, so I'm guessing no time soon. I'm guessing Nintendo won't sue, but I have no problem recognizing a script for a video game (or for that matter a movie) being under control of the original author.
And all of it is local. Between numerous corruption scandals, the most unpopular governor in the nation and a general anti-incumbent feeling in the country I'm sure all Ohio officials aren't feeling too comfortable. Nothing like some election year tough on sex offenders laws to attempt to gain some approval. Generally, I consider any law passed in an election year to be pandering and this doesn't appear to be any different.
This would effectively give a small number of states control over the electoral system. Looks like your candidate won't be winning the popular vote? Have states that might otherwise support him drop out of the system, either causing the system to collapse or become ineffective. A few states dropping out would then cause a chain reaction of other states dropping out to counteract the problem.
The electoral college is in many ways a bad idea in modern times, but a constitutional amendment is the best way to go about fixing it.
My favorite insanity effect was the game pretending that it reset and went back to the title screen. I almost threw my controller at the wall. Deleting all my save games was also a nice insanity generator.
International Law also exists because our own Constitution. Treaties (e.g. The Geneva Conventions) are treated as the supreme law of the land just like any act of Congress, and possibly supercede most acts of Congress and go beyond the Constitution depending on how you interpret SCOTUS decisions. Our country unilaterally removing themselves from the obligations of treaties is a questionable action, both in how it would impact our relations with other countries, and how it would be treated in our own law.
Also, when European countries were world powers it was pre-WWI. International law changed entirely after WWI, becoming much more powerful. Countries realized that norms against aggresive war and in favor of more cooperation were needed since we could actually destroy each other and war was no longer 'honorable'. Not having despots in control that had Napoleonic complexes helped..
Your view of IL is quite 19th century. Unfortunately, it no longer takes several weeks for another nation to come into contact with us.
This is part of the problem. Everyone tries to make simple analogies to figure out how the internet, or other technology, works, and in turn how it should be regulated. But those analogies quickly break down.
Lets take your transportation example. If I'm driving from state to state, I know I'm subject to the laws of every state I drive through. What if I send an email from Virginia to California? Does that make me subject to the laws of many states? Just the destination and start? The states where I can be proven my email may have had an impact?
Even more so, lets say you set up a website - a stop on your tracks. Typically, an actual train stop would be regulated by national, local and state laws, because it only has effects in those areas. But does it make sense to regulate a website in the same way? If I set up a website on a server in one state, should the laws of other states be able to reach me in connection with the site? Which states?
I'm not saying regulation is impossible, but simple analogies that try to make people understand how technology works and thus how our legal system should work result in some very bad laws.
We completely respect your right to raise ignorant children in correspondence with your beliefs. However, depending on the level of ignorance you desire, you're going to have to put more effort into their education. Parochial schools if you hate evolution, home schooling if you believe the earth is six thousand years young, or whatever level of blinders to the rest of the world you feel is appropriate.
The first amendment right to free exercise of the religion isn't absolute. It's balanced by governmental interests and other private rights. In this instance, the majority's right to have their children be raised scientifically literate has trampled on your indoctrination of your children. It's unfortunate, but I'm sure you've got options.
Oh, and you could sue about it. Though you'd probably get laughed at - by the courts, and by me.
The same argument doesn't work for porn. The Supreme Court has said that porn that is devoid of any redeeming social value is classified as obscenity and not subject to first amendment protection. Also, the first amendment net may be cast wide, but it doesn't extend to guns. Movies, of course they deserve the same protection, and they get it.
This is a straightforward application of first amendment principles. Unless there is imminent violence being prevented, you can't make content-based restrictions on speech. It's a high barrier to overcome, as well it should be. The chilling effects that any content-based restriction has result in them being unconstitutional as a general rule.
According to his original article, he believed that video game makers would be too afraid to make a game where a boy went out killing game industry executives because it would 'train' kids to target them instead of cops. So he was basically baiting them to turn the destructive video game lens upon themselves with a promise of $10k to charity
Yes, it's a very stupid idea, considering the video game industry for the most part doesn't truly believe that they're training kids to kill, so I doubt they'd have any qualms putting the bullseye video games supposedly create on themselves.
Assuming that his 'Modest Proposal' was an offer that could form a legally binding contract (a big assumption in itself) anyone who makes an offer is allowed to rescind that offer at any time up until the point when it is actually accepted.
In this case, acceptance would probably be creating and presenting him with a video game that meets his requirements, so his retraction of the offer is perfectly legal at this point.
This isn't a shrinkwrap license.
On the outside of the package it says:
RETURN EMPTY CARTRIDGE TO LEXMARK
FOR REMANUFACTURING AND RECYCLING
Please read before opening. Opening of this package or using the patented cartridge inside confirms your acceptance of the following license agreement. The patented cartridge is sold at a special price subject to a restriction that it may be used only once. Following this initial use, you agree to return the empty cartridge only to Lexmark for remanufacturing and recycling. If you don't accept these terms, return the unopened package to your point of purchase. A regular price cartridge without these terms is available.
That's the OUTSIDE of the package. It also gives you the option of paying a full price for a cartridge without this agreement. If you buy this cartridge, you know, or should know, you're getting a discount in exchange for agreeing to return the cartridge to them. If you're a lawyer (which it appears you might be) then read the actual decision, it's nothing special.
As the man said, your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
Actually, your right ends far before that. Putting someone in reasonable fear that you will injure them is known as assault.
Threatening to injure someone, while satisfying, can get you in court just as easily as actually injuring someone. Luckily most people don't realize that assault != battery and you can have one without the other, so I wouldn't expect to be charged with it. But it's something to keep in mind.
If you meant this to be ironic, I'm laughing.
Otherwise, I'm scared.
You obviously haven't seen the average college student these days.
After some of the emails I've seen sent to professors, the above paragraph looked award-winning.
Don't forget http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111301/other classics. I still can't see out of my left eye since Street Fighter, even after they removed the pen from it.
Yes, sequels can very often be creative and different from their predecessors. But lets face it, if I'm looking for strategy RPGs out there, and I see Disgaea and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance - both are great games, both are creative in their own ways, but if I'm looking for a new gameplay experience, I'm going for Disgaea.
Final Fantasy X-2 departed from FFX in many different ways, and is quite impressive in its own right, but you can't deny the fact that just by being a Final Fantasy game, there's already a bunch of preconditions set down for how the game will work. Even without playing the game I could tell you a great number of things about it. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, and doesn't imply the game is a bad one, or that the developers were lazy, but the fact is, that if I'm playing another Final Fantasy, I'm not getting a truly new game experience. I'm getting a good game experience, but not a new one.
If I liked Adobe Photoshop 6.0, it's likely I'll like 7.0 and want to try it. But if I'm looking for something different, I'll try something different - and in the gaming world, I'm often looking for something different.
Easily the most original game I've seen this year (or for quite a while for that matter) has been the MMORPG A Tale in the Desert. Cooperative play, no combat, a player-created society... this game departs from the norm in so many ways that it's crazy - no wonder they independantly released the thing, no publisher would ever support such a complete departure from what MMORPGs really are.
Being one of those oblivious checkout clerks at the local bookstore computer department I can say that the standard educational discount that Apple offers on iPods is 30 dollars off each model, nothing more. So instead of the 299/399/499 pricing, you simply get 269/369/469. Not that big a sale, but it's better than nothing.
Apple does have nice deals occasionally though, this summer for any students purchasing Powerbooks, you got a free HP printer and 200 dollars off any iPod. Good stuff for those who needed to purchase Powerbooks anyway, not so good for someone just wanting to get an iPod.
I believe Teppy has stated that the current telling of the game will end early next year some time, so look to join the game then. They'll basically restart everything, change the code to make everyone have to figure things out again, and then add in new technologies and tests as time goes on. Puts everyone on mostly equal footing, and for those just joining then, it's extremely easy to catch up.
That's why I enjoy the smaller MMORPGs out there. They tend to be cheaper, with devs who are actually interested in making a good game.
I've been into A Tale in the Desert lately, in addition to being without a doubt the most innovative game on the MMORPG market right now (no rat killing in this one!) it also is free to download with a large trial play - no outrageous box fee. Add in devs that respond within the hour if a new tech is bugged or even give out their cell numbers in case the server crashes, and you've got me locked in for quite a while.
Due to life-like violence and intense sexuality, Real Life has been given a rating of M for Mature, and is restricted to only those above 17 to play. We must make every effort to ensure that our children are not playing this horrific game, for who knows what thoughts will enter their mind when they see the actions available to their character, or the actions performed by other characters in game. It's just too horrible to even imagine.
I know I've seen a few stories posted about this game in the past, but I wonder if those who wrote this article had a chance to look at A Tale in the Desert. In this game there are no laws for a reason - players must create the legal system from the ground up. Laws are then implemented by the devs (with some reasonable restrictions of what can be legislated). Examples of important laws passed so far would be laws that allow players to tear down or use the buildings of 'Departed Players', as well as laws that allow people to feed or slaughter starving sheep (sheep unfed can become sick, and this sickness can spread to other player's sheep). The funny thing is, the laws that try to prevent greifing or solve problems almost always have their own ill-effects, so it makes for a very interesting experiment to watch laws get.
I experience this most often when some friends and I engage in hours of play of The Next Tetris for N64. I'll be able to glance quickly up at the next 3 pieces and instantly recognize the best places to put them down. Once the pieces start coming down to the point where you get about .25 seconds to place them, you better be in the zone or you're screwed. Also, after playing the game for a few hours, I can still close my eyes and see the pieces falling into place, forming the ultimate, holeless tower - it seems the zone never wants to let go of me once I leave.
Though nothing can rip you out of the zone faster than seeing the exact piece you needed finally arrive after just giving up on it ever coming. That takes me out of "The Gaming Zone" and into "The Smash The Controller Into The Wall Zone". DAMN YOU STRAIGHT LINES!