It's a distinction between entertainment and sporting.
Sure, if you just want to enjoy some diversion, don't waste your time on something you don't enjoy. A work of literature or artful film may be worth a bit of work in order to appreciate the beauty and to learn from it, but that's something more than entertainment or gaming.
If you are looking to develop some aptitude, skill, or ability through a game, you're doing something other than simply seeking entertainment. In Go, you need to learn to give up on structures that are doomed. But you don't just forfeit a game as soon as you start losing. If you are going to improve as a player of Go, you must play your hardest to the end, attempting to achieve the best you can, and perhaps even snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Same goes for pretty much any game where skill or ability come into play (athletics and strategy games being the primary examples).
Quitting at the first sign of trouble only encourages low frustration-tolerance.
1 & 2: Defenseless planets bugs me too. Why not just have some cheap satellites with phasers and photon banks? Or maybe it's part of a armament de-escalation treaty?
3: It was a tiny black-hole.:-P
4: If I remember right, the Narada and the Enterprise warped away after the drilling stopped. They might have been light years from Earth.
5: Some sort of back-story involves the Narada being extra-advanced and incorporating Borg tech and the ability to reconfigure and repair itself. They also had two decades to get fixed up.
They only need to use some monofilament to tether the balloons at 40,000 - 60,000 feet. Of course, then we get planes sliced in half as they fly at 500 feet.
Space Data is flying these puppies in what is technically called the "stratosphere." Doing so gives them "400 mile circles" (is that radius, diameter, or area?) of coverage. If you tethered them at 500 feet or lower, I'm betting the coverage would be a little smaller.
They're trying to get more people involved by teaching us how to lay eggs. The thing is, if there are a bunch of us laying cuckoo eggs, all which look just like rotten little pirate eggs, you can never be sure that you're getting the egg you want. You'll only be able to take them from friends, and that cuts down on your sample size considerably.
When I decided to buy Quake III (like that was much of a decision), I went to eToys and bought the tin case version. I had yet to see the box, but I still decided to buy the nicer packaging.
Actually, 'sub-sinks' can be placed within other 'sinks', something like subdirectories. Only one sink is operational at a given time, you click on a sub-sink of your current sink to change to that sink. Alternatively, you can click on your current sink (always in the middle of the display) to move up one sink level.
This UI looks like it could eventually be quite robust. The speed at which the movement takes place is probably the greatest inhibiting factor to the user. On a small-display device, this is a godsend, but on a normal desktop PC it would have to be considerably expanded. Multiple sinks open at a time and so on.
I'm looking forward to trying this UI out on my system, eventually.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a distinction between entertainment and sporting.
Sure, if you just want to enjoy some diversion, don't waste your time on something you don't enjoy. A work of literature or artful film may be worth a bit of work in order to appreciate the beauty and to learn from it, but that's something more than entertainment or gaming.
If you are looking to develop some aptitude, skill, or ability through a game, you're doing something other than simply seeking entertainment. In Go, you need to learn to give up on structures that are doomed. But you don't just forfeit a game as soon as you start losing. If you are going to improve as a player of Go, you must play your hardest to the end, attempting to achieve the best you can, and perhaps even snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Same goes for pretty much any game where skill or ability come into play (athletics and strategy games being the primary examples).
Quitting at the first sign of trouble only encourages low frustration-tolerance.
1 & 2: Defenseless planets bugs me too. Why not just have some cheap satellites with phasers and photon banks? Or maybe it's part of a armament de-escalation treaty?
3: It was a tiny black-hole. :-P
4: If I remember right, the Narada and the Enterprise warped away after the drilling stopped. They might have been light years from Earth.
5: Some sort of back-story involves the Narada being extra-advanced and incorporating Borg tech and the ability to reconfigure and repair itself. They also had two decades to get fixed up.
6: No clue...
http://www.spacedata.net/skysite.html
They only need to use some monofilament to tether the balloons at 40,000 - 60,000 feet. Of course, then we get planes sliced in half as they fly at 500 feet.
Space Data is flying these puppies in what is technically called the "stratosphere." Doing so gives them "400 mile circles" (is that radius, diameter, or area?) of coverage. If you tethered them at 500 feet or lower, I'm betting the coverage would be a little smaller.
Maxume, do you have a link/reference for the spotter plane story? I'd be interested in reading a bit more . . .
Mix a primary with a secondary and you get a primary. Hmm. Interesting. I think I'll meditate on that.
They're trying to get more people involved by teaching us how to lay eggs. The thing is, if there are a bunch of us laying cuckoo eggs, all which look just like rotten little pirate eggs, you can never be sure that you're getting the egg you want. You'll only be able to take them from friends, and that cuts down on your sample size considerably.
When I decided to buy Quake III (like that was much of a decision), I went to eToys and bought the tin case version. I had yet to see the box, but I still decided to buy the nicer packaging.
Can any of you explain this one? I'm stumped.
Dane
(like the dog)
Actually, 'sub-sinks' can be placed within other 'sinks', something like subdirectories. Only one sink is operational at a given time, you click on a sub-sink of your current sink to change to that sink. Alternatively, you can click on your current sink (always in the middle of the display) to move up one sink level.
This UI looks like it could eventually be quite robust. The speed at which the movement takes place is probably the greatest inhibiting factor to the user. On a small-display device, this is a godsend, but on a normal desktop PC it would have to be considerably expanded. Multiple sinks open at a time and so on.
I'm looking forward to trying this UI out on my system, eventually.