Considering an "M" rating is the equivalent to an "R" rating.. she's on crack.
You do not take a 14 year old to an "R"-rated movie, then sue the filmmaker because some boobies flashed on the screen (while the protagonist is in between druggin', murderin', and all kinds of other wholesome activities).
You can see more explicit sex on Skinimax and I'm pretty sure nobody has gone up in arms over the much-hated "time hack" (in which young rascals stay up past their bed tiem to see terrible softcore 'sex').
Compare something like Trigun or DBZ (as examples of shows in which motion is very important) to Aladdin or Beauty and the Beast and the differences in the way motion is portrayed are just phenomenal, and there's more and smoother motion in American animation, hands down.
Instead of comparing apples to oranges, or in this case two TV series to two Motion Pictures, you should compare projects with similar budget constraints. Obviously, projects with lower budgets (TV shows) will have sigificantly worse animation than their silver-screen counterparts, by and large. This is similar to saying that the Simpsons is terrible in animation compared to Aladdin. If you'd compare things like Miyazaki's feature films, or even non-Miyazaki films (try something like Jin-Roh or the mainstay Akira; even direct to DVD movies sport better animation, on the usual) and you'll find much more comparable animation.
Quite simply, sites that put ads on their page depend on the profit from those ads to support themselves. The page authors chose to put those ads there. If you don't want to see the ads, then you have no right to view the content. If you refuse to see the ads, you should find your content on another website.
No, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If this were true, then I shouldn't be watching UHF television if I walk to the bathroom during each and every five minute commercial break (that comes up every five minutes), and that simly is not the case.
Websites (and TV shows etc) are supported by ad revenue, but they are paid for (and expected to be paid for) by the owner, not the consumer. The ad revenue assists in paying for their website, but is NOT anything that is gauranteed, nor is it expected that a user sit there and start at it (then purchase something to make it work).
People bypassing these are excercising their individual right to not purchase something.
Your argument is like saying we all shouldn't enter a store without purchasing anything we look at, as "browsing" violates the store's social contract to sell us crap.
The second I have to sit in the sanctity of my own home and listen to a door-to-door salesman because it is "his right" to hock is crap at me is the day I purchase a shotgun.
I have no "social contract" to be sold crap I don't want, and moreover, none to be subjected to advertisements I do not wish to see. They can play the goddamned things all they want, but unless they're there prying my eyes open, I sure as hell don't pay any attention to them.
"Don't get no"? I know it's supposed to appeal to some lower common denominator, but that really doesn't make any sense given the context of the article when you parse out the negatives. Truly terrible.
Often in MMO games, the items/etc are considered property of the game company, not the players. Thus, it would be up to the game company to file any such wrongful claims rather than the individuals. Additionally, most of these kinds of games consider trades/etc as "final" transactions, whether a person was duped or not.
Some games have deviated from this path, so I'm not sure if that's the case in this situation.
This is coming from the same company that told users that a faulty button was intentional and that they should deal with it.
Of course, they later recanted that atrocious statement assuring design changes, so I'd expect tehm to stop saying stupid things like this at some point in the future. That is, until the next broken thing about their new portable is found, in which case, there will be no problem with that, either (you fools).
Come to think of it, is their PR person that Iraqi Information Minister now?
If they only used Gaim instead of AIM, they wouldn't have problems with language because it replaces "webspeak" with English.
Spellchecking used to be done by hand. I'm not sure how "good" it is to have a program automatically correct your own errors when you don't even know how to type it properly in the first place.
I suppose that's more or less the norm now, though. People can get away with knowing (and caring) less and simply have the machine do the work they should have looked over themselves. =/
According to the so-called experts, I should have killed three and a half towns by now. If gamers were anywhere near the scope of serial mass-murderers, I'm sure we'd hear plenty more about it (say, every night) on the news at nine.
The "experts" are no more right than the VGCats author, or we'd be eternally in a bitter life and death stuggle to stave off that person who played GTA3 for two hours last week.
WE don't allow them to purchase these types of games. That's what the ESRB system is supposed to do. PARENTS let their kids play these games, not even caring what content is contained within the machine that is raising their kids. PARENTS ignore the ESRB notices and buy these games when retailers say, "No, I'm sorry, you need a parent to buy this for you." THEN, the parents turn around and say, "Oh noes! Jimmy went off and killeded someones! Must be that EVIL game!" He couldn't have possibly been neglected at home, of course, because that would be accepting a lack of parenting skill.
That's been the case in some of these affected areas for years. The companies keep telling the muni's that they'll either deploy (or that it isn't cost-effective to deploy, heh), then obviously do not. Then, they turn around and tell them "No, you can't do that! That would be taking our (non-existant) business (that we dont' want anyhow) away from us!"
The problem comes when those players break game rules by:
a) purposely killing other players repeatedly in order to monoplize those spawn points, in direct contrast to the code of conduct
b) violating the eula by selling virtual content online
c) doing the above repeatedly--all day, every day, in clear violation of the eula permitting only one user per copy of the game.
But even if you join a game for the sole purpose of cybersex -- which I don't recommend -- you will not be able to sustain yourself in the game world long enough to find the good stuff.
Thus, Fan-Subtitled. Very unofficial and often with quirks and discrepancies in translation and quality.
Re:Yeah, like other games completely?
on
Starcraft Ghost Update
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Of course, because problems affecting 138,000 players are a NON ISSUE, right? That's assuming, conservatively, that those 20 servers hold proportionnate amounts of people as working servers, which is false (as the ones not working properly are among the most populous ones).
It's good to know that 138,000 people don't have anything to worry about. The game is working as intended.
The overwhelming success of World of Warcraft has brought hundreds of thousands of people together to adventure in Azeroth, and concurrency numbers are well beyond what we expected or even hoped for. Unfortunately, this high concurrency, especially when concentrated on a small number of realms, initially caused issues with our hardware infrastructure. We were able to streamline our code to increase performance in the weeks following launch. However, the holiday season nearly doubled our player base, and it quickly became apparent that in order to handle not only the current player base, but all future players as well, we needed to make some upgrades to our infrastructure.
Last Thursday we made our first such upgrade. 20 of our 88 realms were moved off of the original hardware and placed on a new hardware configuration. These 20 servers initially performed very well, up until we reached our maximum concurrency Friday evening. The high population numbers uncovered an issue in the new backend shared infrastructure. This issue caused some players to experience severe lag and disconnects on a few of the realms, making them virtually unplayable.
In order to stabilize the affected realms and allow as many players as possible the ability to continue playing, we lowered the population caps by 30%. This stabilized the realms to the point where 70% of the players on the realms in question could play, but it also resulted in large queues.
The problems were attributed to high concurrency numbers on individual realms putting extreme stress on the backend infrastructure. We were able to address this problem by implementing additional hardware into the infrastructure this afternoon. This additional hardware has allowed us to stabilize the affected realms, and thus increase the server caps. We will continue to monitor the performance throughout the evening. If we notice any of the performance issues starting up again we will lower the population cap level enough to stabilize performance.
We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this caused our players this weekend. This process coincides with our constant efforts to improve the current performance of World of Warcraft, and sometimes issues can arise when implementing these improvements. We will do our best to prevent similar situations from happening in the future, and we once again thank you for your patience and understanding.
So yeah, there aren't, weren't, and never will have been any server problems that people are complaining about. Of course, you could verify the link, but their forums are down (again; for the fifth time today)--but there are no problems!
How many peopl share your name? How many want an e-mail address with that name in it? I wouldn't call it identity theft, even if it wasn't his name. If nothing else, the insipid idea that someone using a name identical to yours is stealing your identity is absurd. I know that my wonderfully common name has to have hundreds of others bearing my name and initials and none of them are, in fact, me. Things like SSID attempt to discern among people; names don't.
This is silly. Very silly. If you have problems distinguishing between fantasy and reality, then it really isn't the game at fault; you're just genuinely disturbed.
Seriously. I play a lot of games, and I never once had the urge to go out and frag my friends, roll up automobiles and trees into a Katamari, or otherwise "camp" a grassy knoll in case some rare spawn "pops". I've certainly never had the urge to kill myself by wrecking my car into the side of the nearest building just to see how pretty the glass shards might be. When a normal person puts down the imaginarium, they are perfectly able to discern that they are not, in fact, still in a game.
It's very frightening if what people say is in fact waht they experience; but it isn't the games, because some of us are not deluded into thinking that fantasy is reality or vice versa.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering an "M" rating is the equivalent to an "R" rating.. she's on crack.
You do not take a 14 year old to an "R"-rated movie, then sue the filmmaker because some boobies flashed on the screen (while the protagonist is in between druggin', murderin', and all kinds of other wholesome activities).
You can see more explicit sex on Skinimax and I'm pretty sure nobody has gone up in arms over the much-hated "time hack" (in which young rascals stay up past their bed tiem to see terrible softcore 'sex').
When will idiots come to their senses?
Form BLAZING SWORD!!
This'll be hilarious, regardless of whether or not it is good on merit.
Sun: the new "eggs."
:)
I'll take my doses of baking myself slowly to death in carefully planned dashes to the supermarket, thanks.
Instead of comparing apples to oranges, or in this case two TV series to two Motion Pictures, you should compare projects with similar budget constraints. Obviously, projects with lower budgets (TV shows) will have sigificantly worse animation than their silver-screen counterparts, by and large. This is similar to saying that the Simpsons is terrible in animation compared to Aladdin. If you'd compare things like Miyazaki's feature films, or even non-Miyazaki films (try something like Jin-Roh or the mainstay Akira; even direct to DVD movies sport better animation, on the usual) and you'll find much more comparable animation.
No, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If this were true, then I shouldn't be watching UHF television if I walk to the bathroom during each and every five minute commercial break (that comes up every five minutes), and that simly is not the case.
Websites (and TV shows etc) are supported by ad revenue, but they are paid for (and expected to be paid for) by the owner, not the consumer. The ad revenue assists in paying for their website, but is NOT anything that is gauranteed, nor is it expected that a user sit there and start at it (then purchase something to make it work).
People bypassing these are excercising their individual right to not purchase something.
Your argument is like saying we all shouldn't enter a store without purchasing anything we look at, as "browsing" violates the store's social contract to sell us crap.
The second I have to sit in the sanctity of my own home and listen to a door-to-door salesman because it is "his right" to hock is crap at me is the day I purchase a shotgun.
I have no "social contract" to be sold crap I don't want, and moreover, none to be subjected to advertisements I do not wish to see. They can play the goddamned things all they want, but unless they're there prying my eyes open, I sure as hell don't pay any attention to them.
"Don't get no"? I know it's supposed to appeal to some lower common denominator, but that really doesn't make any sense given the context of the article when you parse out the negatives. Truly terrible.
Often in MMO games, the items/etc are considered property of the game company, not the players. Thus, it would be up to the game company to file any such wrongful claims rather than the individuals. Additionally, most of these kinds of games consider trades/etc as "final" transactions, whether a person was duped or not.
Some games have deviated from this path, so I'm not sure if that's the case in this situation.
This is coming from the same company that told users that a faulty button was intentional and that they should deal with it.
Of course, they later recanted that atrocious statement assuring design changes, so I'd expect tehm to stop saying stupid things like this at some point in the future. That is, until the next broken thing about their new portable is found, in which case, there will be no problem with that, either (you fools).
Come to think of it, is their PR person that Iraqi Information Minister now?
Apparently the T-Rex remembered that joke, too.
Spellchecking used to be done by hand. I'm not sure how "good" it is to have a program automatically correct your own errors when you don't even know how to type it properly in the first place.
I suppose that's more or less the norm now, though. People can get away with knowing (and caring) less and simply have the machine do the work they should have looked over themselves. =/
At least he was honest? I'd much rather have a straight answer than half the crap that's spewed by other people who've been interviewed.
What reason would a person watch TV for 4-5 hours a night for 40 years?
Entertainment/Relaxation.
Rest assured, when a Wookie is enraged (or otherwise), they are a fearsome foe indeed.
According to the so-called experts, I should have killed three and a half towns by now. If gamers were anywhere near the scope of serial mass-murderers, I'm sure we'd hear plenty more about it (say, every night) on the news at nine.
The "experts" are no more right than the VGCats author, or we'd be eternally in a bitter life and death stuggle to stave off that person who played GTA3 for two hours last week.
WE don't allow them to purchase these types of games. That's what the ESRB system is supposed to do. PARENTS let their kids play these games, not even caring what content is contained within the machine that is raising their kids. PARENTS ignore the ESRB notices and buy these games when retailers say, "No, I'm sorry, you need a parent to buy this for you." THEN, the parents turn around and say, "Oh noes! Jimmy went off and killeded someones! Must be that EVIL game!" He couldn't have possibly been neglected at home, of course, because that would be accepting a lack of parenting skill.
It is always someone else's fault.
That's been the case in some of these affected areas for years. The companies keep telling the muni's that they'll either deploy (or that it isn't cost-effective to deploy, heh), then obviously do not. Then, they turn around and tell them "No, you can't do that! That would be taking our (non-existant) business (that we dont' want anyhow) away from us!"
The problem comes when those players break game rules by:
a) purposely killing other players repeatedly in order to monoplize those spawn points, in direct contrast to the code of conduct
b) violating the eula by selling virtual content online
c) doing the above repeatedly--all day, every day, in clear violation of the eula permitting only one user per copy of the game.
If you break it down, fansubber is:
fan: by fans (obvious)
subber: subtitler
Thus, Fan-Subtitled. Very unofficial and often with quirks and discrepancies in translation and quality.
Of course, because problems affecting 138,000 players are a NON ISSUE, right? That's assuming, conservatively, that those 20 servers hold proportionnate amounts of people as working servers, which is false (as the ones not working properly are among the most populous ones).
It's good to know that 138,000 people don't have anything to worry about. The game is working as intended.
Linky
Text:
So yeah, there aren't, weren't, and never will have been any server problems that people are complaining about. Of course, you could verify the link, but their forums are down (again; for the fifth time today)--but there are no problems!
How many peopl share your name? How many want an e-mail address with that name in it? I wouldn't call it identity theft, even if it wasn't his name. If nothing else, the insipid idea that someone using a name identical to yours is stealing your identity is absurd. I know that my wonderfully common name has to have hundreds of others bearing my name and initials and none of them are, in fact, me. Things like SSID attempt to discern among people; names don't.
Is it just me, or is G4 not-so-secretly pretending to be Spike Network?
This is silly. Very silly. If you have problems distinguishing between fantasy and reality, then it really isn't the game at fault; you're just genuinely disturbed.
Seriously. I play a lot of games, and I never once had the urge to go out and frag my friends, roll up automobiles and trees into a Katamari, or otherwise "camp" a grassy knoll in case some rare spawn "pops". I've certainly never had the urge to kill myself by wrecking my car into the side of the nearest building just to see how pretty the glass shards might be. When a normal person puts down the imaginarium, they are perfectly able to discern that they are not, in fact, still in a game.
It's very frightening if what people say is in fact waht they experience; but it isn't the games, because some of us are not deluded into thinking that fantasy is reality or vice versa.