Argh, there went my carriage returns. Let me repost that so it's readable...
Yes, it is 2003, and I agree that selling games in a plastic baggy would probably not work anymore, you're right. But the thing that you are incorrect about is that all games must be extremely costly to produce and sell; this is incorrect. Perhaps all of the games that you are thinking of, such as Halo, GTA 3, or Final Fantasy could only be done with massive teams and large amounts of people, but that does not exclude anyone from making smaller, less ambitious games that will still sell a few copies.
Someone mentioned Bungie Software, who before joining Microsoft both developed and published its own games. One of their more successful titles, Myth: The Fallen Lords was produced by a total of seven or eight people on its team. It sold well in respect to Bungie's standards, which was only a few hundred thousand copies, and made them enough money to continue developing games. Many people at Bungie predicted (and accurately, I believe) that Halo would never have become the game that it was, nor would it have sold nearly as many copies, had Bungie continued outside Microsoft and released the game for PC's. It certainly would have been successful in _their_ eyes, but because it lacked the backing of a large publisher, could never have reached the magnitude of the best-selling games on the PC.
So while I think it is possible to develop games independently, it takes lots of talent, knowledge of the markets and your product's niche, and a little luck to have a chance at being successful.
Yes, it is 2003, and I agree that selling games in a plastic baggy would probably not work anymore, you're right. But the thing that you are incorrect about is that all games must be extremely costly to produce and sell; this is incorrect. Perhaps all of the games that you are thinking of, such as Halo, GTA 3, or Final Fantasy could only be done with massive teams and large amounts of people, but that does not exclude anyone from making smaller, less ambitious games that will still sell a few copies.
Someone mentioned Bungie Software, who before joining Microsoft both developed and published its own games. One of their more successful titles, Myth: The Fallen Lords was produced by a total of seven or eight people on its team. It sold well in respect to Bungie's standards, which was only a few hundred thousand copies, and made them enough money to continue developing games. Many people at Bungie predicted (and accurately, I believe) that Halo would never have become the game that it was, nor would it have sold nearly as many copies, had Bungie continued outside Microsoft and released the game for PC's. It certainly would have been successful in _their_ eyes, but because it lacked the backing of a large publisher, could never have reached the magnitude of the best-selling games on the PC.
So while I think it is possible to develop games independently, it takes lots of talent, knowledge of the markets and your product's niche, and a little luck to have a chance at being successful.
You know what you should've done? Instead of posting as an anonymous coward, simply post under your normal account and 'speculate' on what Apple should do. Then you look like some sort of a genius and it's much less dangerous, not to mention the ability to karma whore!
Oh well. Live and learn. Erm, as long as Steve doesn't kill you first...
I believe that this is all a vile plot by Sony to eat into Microsoft's profit margins so that Microsoft must cut its losses on the Xbox and cede victory to Sony!
Thank god for your comment. I was hoping I wasn't the only one whose first instinct was to assume the 'mouse' in the story was talking about a computer input device.
Yeah, so I'm a big dork that just likes to kick ass at FPS games.:O
In the Napster case, we saw the defendants argue for their software as a means to distributed free/independent/other music. I think that's what Lik-Sang has to argue here; the ability to play foreign games.
However, in both cases we see another, huge aspect: the ability to distributed copyrighted music (Napster) and the ability to play pirated games (mod-chips).
Do we really have to wonder how this one will turn out? Yeah, Lik-Sang might have a minor issue here, but when the product is being used by so many people to do much illegality, I don't see how any logical person can permit its existence.
Could you imagine someone using a cell-phone while riding a Segway?
"A woman was brutally run over today by an errant Segway operator. When asked about the incident, the Segway driver claimed that his unit was faulty; it didn't include turn signals and the use of slothenly 'hand-signals' is be entirely out of the question."
I swear someone's gonna get smacked into and we'll have a lawsuit. You watch!
Damn, I'm just gonna come out and say it (and risk major flames):
I'm disgusted with the overabundance of hype with this launch. That's what this launch is. Of course there's no real substance because there's no shipping product!
And maybe it's not just NVIDIA. A lot of companies hype their products when they launch. Gee, even if the launch is three months away. But what really gets me though is the AMOUNT of pure meaningless crap that is spewing from the websites I've seen.
Tell me how it's going to benefit the consumer, by:
1. Comparing the numbers like the "instructions," "constants," and "registers" that this new chip allows. These kinds of numbers mean nothing to the consumer. If nothing else NVIDIA should be pitching this crap to developers.
2. Posting some really pretty pictures of things supposedly rendered with this card. Let me tell you why this is so rediculous.
I did a little test. This is what you were supposed to get with your Geforce 3 (according to the picture on a HardOCP preview). Guess what, no games even LOOK like that yet, let alone if you had one could you play it on a Geforce 3 at acceptable frame rates! Sigh. Things are just getting worse.
3. Real performance. I really can't believe that Anandtech posted frame rate numbers from Doom 3 that were supplied by NVIDIA. Data from an alpha game supplied by the card's manufacturer?. Yet no tests were shown of any other game, be it current or old. That is just rediculous.
Maybe it's not realistic to do this since the card is not even in production yet. Yet NVIDIA chooses to 'announce' their card anyway, in the same fashion they have done in the past (usually when the product is available). Right. It's a very clever game NVIDIA is playing; announce this new product and attempt to hurt sales of their competitor's product in the hope that the consumer waits for this new, overly-hyped and untested product. We've seen this before with the Geforce 3 and we're seeing it again on a larger scale, and I'm sick of it.
ok, so please flame me up the arse for bitching about the current state of deception that's going on in the industry. Yeah, lots of companies do it (while I think NVIDIA is the worst), yet people just eat this shit up! What's the point of going to different web sites when they're all supplied with the same incessant crap that NVIDIA created? I don't want to hear that it's just "the way things are" because I'm saying that they shouldn't be this way.
Thanks for reading.
Yes, while the theoretical rate is much faster than PCI (as you noted), I believe that these cards are designed for 64-bit PCI slots, which you can see by the chart (which only lists fast/wide PCI) is 4x faster. A standard 64-bit slot running at 33 mhz (the speed at which most 32-bit slots run) is twice as fast as standard PCI.
While you have almost have a viable point, I think it's obvious that these people are just a group of crazy, nerdy people whom all happen to own Macs.
The fact that they are all 'Mac users' doesn't say much about Mac users as a whole... though you'd be hard pressed to find a bunch of Microsoft employees doing something like this.:)
Yes, but those of you who like chemicals and working in dark rooms will eventually die out and hence be the last generation. Everyone else will have moved to digital.
You obviously don't get it. The point of the writing is that everything listed is all supposed to be of equal importance, which is, all the utmost important. There are, I don't know, 50 things mentioned there?
That's the point. There's too much stuff to do and no better way of organizing it, which I think is beautifully portrayed by this rant.
Seriously... during exam week my roomate and I bought between the *TWO* of us, three cubes of Code Red Mountain Dew.
I drank a lot of it (2/3's) and he drank the rest in about 4-5 days' time. It was gross. I stayed up all night several nights playing Soldier of Fortune II though instead of studying.:)
But after drinking of few of those, I knew that there was no way in hell I was going to sleep that night!
I was hired this summer by a large corporation (4,000+ employees and will otherwise go nameless) to do software cost analysis on their mainframe software. They hired me precisely for this reason: to analyze each contract and summarize their software license/maintenance costs for the current year and into the future.
Thankfully, my company has been in business since the 1960's and are pros when it comes to language in the contracts. I mostly do work with mainframes, and I've found a few keys to look for:
1. Hardware upgrades - Many companies will charge additional license fees for upgrades to mainframe CPU's (often in MIPS or MSU ratings) 2. Maintenance - It is important to put some kind of "cap" on maintenance. A typical example: "maintenance shall not exceed the lesser of 15% of current license fee or 10% over the previous year." Also, it must be assumed that fees *WILL* increase the maxiumum allowable charge under the contract. 3. Usage - In a large corporate setting, companies often must pay for the use of software on multiple sites or for use of partially owned, divested, or acquired entities.
As you can see, the charges mount quickly. That's why it's essential only to run the software necessary, and nothing more.
Rediculous. As if I needed another reason not to watch TV.
Seriously, I watch less than 2 hours a week (except my man O'Reilly, but I rarely even watch his show).
Internet > TV
brain > pile of mush
Slashdot Mirror
Argh, there went my carriage returns. Let me repost that so it's readable...
Yes, it is 2003, and I agree that selling games in a plastic baggy would probably not work anymore, you're right. But the thing that you are incorrect about is that all games must be extremely costly to produce and sell; this is incorrect. Perhaps all of the games that you are thinking of, such as Halo, GTA 3, or Final Fantasy could only be done with massive teams and large amounts of people, but that does not exclude anyone from making smaller, less ambitious games that will still sell a few copies.
Someone mentioned Bungie Software, who before joining Microsoft both developed and published its own games. One of their more successful titles, Myth: The Fallen Lords was produced by a total of seven or eight people on its team. It sold well in respect to Bungie's standards, which was only a few hundred thousand copies, and made them enough money to continue developing games. Many people at Bungie predicted (and accurately, I believe) that Halo would never have become the game that it was, nor would it have sold nearly as many copies, had Bungie continued outside Microsoft and released the game for PC's. It certainly would have been successful in _their_ eyes, but because it lacked the backing of a large publisher, could never have reached the magnitude of the best-selling games on the PC.
So while I think it is possible to develop games independently, it takes lots of talent, knowledge of the markets and your product's niche, and a little luck to have a chance at being successful.
Yes, it is 2003, and I agree that selling games in a plastic baggy would probably not work anymore, you're right. But the thing that you are incorrect about is that all games must be extremely costly to produce and sell; this is incorrect. Perhaps all of the games that you are thinking of, such as Halo, GTA 3, or Final Fantasy could only be done with massive teams and large amounts of people, but that does not exclude anyone from making smaller, less ambitious games that will still sell a few copies. Someone mentioned Bungie Software, who before joining Microsoft both developed and published its own games. One of their more successful titles, Myth: The Fallen Lords was produced by a total of seven or eight people on its team. It sold well in respect to Bungie's standards, which was only a few hundred thousand copies, and made them enough money to continue developing games. Many people at Bungie predicted (and accurately, I believe) that Halo would never have become the game that it was, nor would it have sold nearly as many copies, had Bungie continued outside Microsoft and released the game for PC's. It certainly would have been successful in _their_ eyes, but because it lacked the backing of a large publisher, could never have reached the magnitude of the best-selling games on the PC. So while I think it is possible to develop games independently, it takes lots of talent, knowledge of the markets and your product's niche, and a little luck to have a chance at being successful.
Yeah, I'd fire you. heh.
You know what you should've done? Instead of posting as an anonymous coward, simply post under your normal account and 'speculate' on what Apple should do. Then you look like some sort of a genius and it's much less dangerous, not to mention the ability to karma whore!
Oh well. Live and learn. Erm, as long as Steve doesn't kill you first...
-Bullseye
I believe that this is all a vile plot by Sony to eat into Microsoft's profit margins so that Microsoft must cut its losses on the Xbox and cede victory to Sony!
Any takers? heheheh.
Thank god for your comment. I was hoping I wasn't the only one whose first instinct was to assume the 'mouse' in the story was talking about a computer input device.
:O
Yeah, so I'm a big dork that just likes to kick ass at FPS games.
-Bullseye
Here's my take...
In the Napster case, we saw the defendants argue for their software as a means to distributed free/independent/other music. I think that's what Lik-Sang has to argue here; the ability to play foreign games.
However, in both cases we see another, huge aspect: the ability to distributed copyrighted music (Napster) and the ability to play pirated games (mod-chips).
Do we really have to wonder how this one will turn out? Yeah, Lik-Sang might have a minor issue here, but when the product is being used by so many people to do much illegality, I don't see how any logical person can permit its existence.
Could you imagine someone using a cell-phone while riding a Segway?
"A woman was brutally run over today by an errant Segway operator. When asked about the incident, the Segway driver claimed that his unit was faulty; it didn't include turn signals and the use of slothenly 'hand-signals' is be entirely out of the question."
I swear someone's gonna get smacked into and we'll have a lawsuit. You watch!
-Bullseye
Damn, I'm just gonna come out and say it (and risk major flames):
I'm disgusted with the overabundance of hype with this launch. That's what this launch is. Of course there's no real substance because there's no shipping product!
And maybe it's not just NVIDIA. A lot of companies hype their products when they launch. Gee, even if the launch is three months away. But what really gets me though is the AMOUNT of pure meaningless crap that is spewing from the websites I've seen.
Tell me how it's going to benefit the consumer, by:
1. Comparing the numbers like the "instructions," "constants," and "registers" that this new chip allows. These kinds of numbers mean nothing to the consumer. If nothing else NVIDIA should be pitching this crap to developers.
2. Posting some really pretty pictures of things supposedly rendered with this card. Let me tell you why this is so rediculous.
I did a little test. This is what you were supposed to get with your Geforce 3 (according to the picture on a HardOCP preview). Guess what, no games even LOOK like that yet, let alone if you had one could you play it on a Geforce 3 at acceptable frame rates! Sigh. Things are just getting worse.
3. Real performance. I really can't believe that Anandtech posted frame rate numbers from Doom 3 that were supplied by NVIDIA. Data from an alpha game supplied by the card's manufacturer?. Yet no tests were shown of any other game, be it current or old. That is just rediculous.
Maybe it's not realistic to do this since the card is not even in production yet. Yet NVIDIA chooses to 'announce' their card anyway, in the same fashion they have done in the past (usually when the product is available). Right. It's a very clever game NVIDIA is playing; announce this new product and attempt to hurt sales of their competitor's product in the hope that the consumer waits for this new, overly-hyped and untested product. We've seen this before with the Geforce 3 and we're seeing it again on a larger scale, and I'm sick of it.
ok, so please flame me up the arse for bitching about the current state of deception that's going on in the industry. Yeah, lots of companies do it (while I think NVIDIA is the worst), yet people just eat this shit up! What's the point of going to different web sites when they're all supplied with the same incessant crap that NVIDIA created? I don't want to hear that it's just "the way things are" because I'm saying that they shouldn't be this way.
Thanks for reading.
Yes, while the theoretical rate is much faster than PCI (as you noted), I believe that these cards are designed for 64-bit PCI slots, which you can see by the chart (which only lists fast/wide PCI) is 4x faster. A standard 64-bit slot running at 33 mhz (the speed at which most 32-bit slots run) is twice as fast as standard PCI.
;)
So actually, Ultra-320 SCSI is the shit.
Yeah, but who wants to drive in a car that smells like a McDonalds? -Bullseye
While you have almost have a viable point, I think it's obvious that these people are just a group of crazy, nerdy people whom all happen to own Macs.
:)
The fact that they are all 'Mac users' doesn't say much about Mac users as a whole... though you'd be hard pressed to find a bunch of Microsoft employees doing something like this.
-Bullseye
Way to talk out your ass! I'm sorry, but there's no way this is true. Good try, though.
Yes, but those of you who like chemicals and working in dark rooms will eventually die out and hence be the last generation. Everyone else will have moved to digital.
You obviously don't get it. The point of the writing is that everything listed is all supposed to be of equal importance, which is, all the utmost important. There are, I don't know, 50 things mentioned there?
That's the point. There's too much stuff to do and no better way of organizing it, which I think is beautifully portrayed by this rant.
Thank you.
Seriously... during exam week my roomate and I bought between the *TWO* of us, three cubes of Code Red Mountain Dew.
:)
I drank a lot of it (2/3's) and he drank the rest in about 4-5 days' time. It was gross. I stayed up all night several nights playing Soldier of Fortune II though instead of studying.
But after drinking of few of those, I knew that there was no way in hell I was going to sleep that night!
-Bullseye
http://www.somethingawful.com/inserts/articlepics/ photoshop/fakegames/Dolex_sim.jpg
Is there anything else to say?
Well, this is interesting.
I was hired this summer by a large corporation (4,000+ employees and will otherwise go nameless) to do software cost analysis on their mainframe software. They hired me precisely for this reason: to analyze each contract and summarize their software license/maintenance costs for the current year and into the future.
Thankfully, my company has been in business since the 1960's and are pros when it comes to language in the contracts. I mostly do work with mainframes, and I've found a few keys to look for:
1. Hardware upgrades - Many companies will charge additional license fees for upgrades to mainframe CPU's (often in MIPS or MSU ratings)
2. Maintenance - It is important to put some kind of "cap" on maintenance. A typical example: "maintenance shall not exceed the lesser of 15% of current license fee or 10% over the previous year." Also, it must be assumed that fees *WILL* increase the maxiumum allowable charge under the contract.
3. Usage - In a large corporate setting, companies often must pay for the use of software on multiple sites or for use of partially owned, divested, or acquired entities.
As you can see, the charges mount quickly. That's why it's essential only to run the software necessary, and nothing more.
-Bullseye
Rediculous. As if I needed another reason not to watch TV. Seriously, I watch less than 2 hours a week (except my man O'Reilly, but I rarely even watch his show). Internet > TV brain > pile of mush