I think permadeath will definitely attract the hardcore -- and I think there are a lot of those to be attracted.
Despite that fact that I agree that permadeath would successfully link skillful play with the level of one's character, I think there could be another way of achieving this.
The notion of permadeath doesn't really exist in warcraft III or chess, but a characters "level" is quite accurately reflected in both of these games (actually, the new rating system in WC3 isn't as good, because it purposefully rewards people that play more even if they don't play well, so I guess the chess rating sytem is the better example). So perhaps game designers could try and construct an mmorpg in which one's avatar level is a function of success percentage on tasks/quests or other, more meaningful metrics -- basically any metric that doesn't reward those who just play a lot.
A good way to think about such metrics is to ask oneself: "Would it be possible for a prodigy to come along and rise to the top of the level heap quickly?" Someone else posted that the game would have to be easy to level in. If he/she meant that the game would have to be fast to level in *if* one was good enough, then I agree.
Sincerely, I hope this fight childhood obesity campaign turns into a genuine ddr craze, because I've been waiting for a 9th mix forever. Unfortunately, I have this looming fear that if and when another mix is finally released, it'll be some kind of sweatin' to the oldies from hell.
Just remember, ddr is a cool game... PERIOD. It's not just a way to lose weight.
So you don't want to live inside somebody else's self-expression. But it's ok for them to have to live inside yours?
Furthermore, you don't own any part of that building. You don't own your house or your car, or even your own body. Culturally we endow you with this property of ownership, but it's just an idea, not some absolute property of things. This is one of the points that grafitti makes -- you only own something so far as you're able and willing to defend it.
Honestly, I think some kind of hybrid between iTMS and Napster will emerge, where, while you're a member, you can download as much as you want and keep it forever; however, discontinuing your subscription means losing access to the archives and also the latest content. I'm sure you all think I'm crazy.
The problem with the music industry for me is that they don't seem to understand that they're selling content. I listen to music *all* the time, but I definitely don't sit there and play the same damn cd over and over again. I need about 5-10 cds worth of new music content a week to feed my hunger. Now, as far as new content (of any kind... not just music) goes, I'm only willing to spend about $50 a month. Clearly me and the RIAA aren't going to be doing much business when I can make my $50 a month go much farther with other kinds of media (books and blogging and video games). Though, if I had to pick, I guess Napster satisfies my criteria better than iTMS.
Miscommunication on the "you". If I had intended "condescendance" (sic), I would have written *you*. My intent with the quotes was to imply I wasn't speaking to everyone in the thread -- only those that think camp spawning is lame.
You're posting on slashdot.org.
Guess what? You fail at life
Can't argue there. I never imagined I'd read so poignant a thought... and on slashdot no less!
Instancing is a neat idea, but kind of lame. So now you have lots of people with the uber item that previously spawned in one place... thus making it not uber, right? The problem with "you" people is that you only want the illusion of uber. Anyway, I could care less if you go on lying to yourselves.
I realized a couple years ago that mmorpg's are fun if you treat them like real life... at which point I realized I could just play real life.
Ah the connections *you* need in life. Not me sir. Want to know how I do it? I bet you do, but you won't admit it. Like I said, the community built around community is exactly the kind I don't want. And I don't fear others so much as find them depressing.
Agreed. new urbanism is just new suburbanism. The proofs of concept are culturally specific gobs of evil. You can't possibly plan a community in the style of new urbanism that I will like because it is exactly what I don't like. But whatever, as long as they build a nice big tower where I can sit and look down on everyone else, where I won't be bothered to join anyone's bbq, then I'll be happy.
I get it now! You see, all of this illogicality is just part of the "system". Wait, I won't speak any more of it, because if you knew what I was talking about, the "system" would collapse.
Thank you for point this out. People don't realize that George Lucas is not a director. I mean he *is*, but why do you think episodes 1 and 2 stink so bad? I think Kevin Smith would be great as the director for the series -- he's a major geek with a penchant for delving into fantastic worlds. He probably won't be writing though, so you don't have to worry about the series being nonstop dialog filled with pedantic sophistry.
Right... but I don't want a healthy relationship... I want a perfect relationship. Not that either of these terms are well defined, but I imagine the former to be "good enough" (in some sense) and the latter to be "optimal" (in some sense). Anyone else feelin' me?
No more than chemistry is about solving the problem of turning base metals into gold.
So since chemistry is in no way about turning base metals into gold, I assume you're implying that economics is in no way concerned with theories governing the distribution of scarce goods?
Scarcity is a factor in economics, like gold is a chemical element, but it isn't by any means the heart of the matter.
I don't even know how to break down this logic... you might as well have said "an apple is an apple, like an orange is an orange." No but seriously... first of all, despite my not being an economist, I really think scarcity is more than just "a factor in economics." In fact, I really do believe its the heart of the matter (give me some references or a better explanation if you really know better). And even if it was just "a factor" (whatever that means), how is a factor in economics similar to an element in chemistry?
Economic theories and systems that focus on scarcity are about as useful as alchemy.
If this is true, then I should probably feel like a big idiot right now. Well... I don't. And I'm not saying I'm right! All I'm asking is that you give me more than a poorly constructed analogy to correct my alleged errors.
I'm not an economist, but, I always thought economics was about solving the problem of distributing scarce "goods". Hardware seems inherently scarce - limited by our production capacity and the scarcity of whatever physical components go into the hardware. Services, such as setting up a network or developing software are scarce - limited by the scarcity of the number of qualified people/things to deliver this service. But scarcity of software (and any kind of information: books, videos, music) AFTER it's been written is limited only by the communication channels through which the information is disseminated. Thanks to the internet, cost of dissemination is rapidly approaching zero.
So what's MY prediction? I predict you won't have to pay for software. I predict you will have to pay for hardware, although the cost of the hardware might be bundled into a service. I predict you will pay for the service of having software developed. So I'll subscribe to Joe's development studio, paying X bucks a month. And for that $X a month, I might get free hardware (or I'll buy my own), the latest version of every project Joe's studio is working on... oh, and 24/7 support. And if I ever decide to stop the service, I still get access to any build of any project that existed before my subscription ended. Yeah... that's how it will be.
I just want to throw it out there that I'm extremely excited about the DS. I mean, the PSP is really awesome, but I'll definitely spend my first $150 (or whatever it ends up being) on the DS.
Also, does anyone else get the feeling that non-portable consoles are going to go by the wayside? I really never thought about it before, but after seeing the PSP and the DS, I really have no interest in a PS3 or an xbox 2.
it's *how* you learn that matters.
First of all, 90% of people commenting here really don't understand math at all. I'm going to sound like a math snob, but trigonometry, geometry, and (American) Algebra are not math at all. As much as you might think they are math, they are in fact just tools. They are tools like your favorite programming languages and operating systems - you can use them accmoplish certain tasks.
"Real" math is concerned with a way of thinking - knowing how to see structure in things where structure is not obvious, then translating that structure into symbols through which others can understand it (whoa... I didn't intend it, but doesn't that description sound a lot like what computer scientists do?). Maybe you think I'm full of crap, but "real" math is often better done by people who have backgrounds in History and Literature. You say, "yeah right," but I guarantee you that actual mathematicians are much more verbally (symbolically) inclined than regular tech-savvy people.
I've really diverged from the argument here of whether or not math is useful for a computer scientist... but here's what I have to say about that. The best computer scientists will be interested in and excel at "real" mathematics - computer science is just a subset of information science which is math.
No, I'm not a mathematician.
The two are remarkably similar. As time goes on, analagous roles to those found in the production of physical machines/structures (such as concept artists, architects, engineers, construction workers) will be defined for digital creation. Actually, this has already happened. Perhaps what's lagging behind is the partitioning of education that leads to these professions?
Slashdot Mirror
This is absolutely insightful, but I don't have mod points.
I think permadeath will definitely attract the hardcore -- and I think there are a lot of those to be attracted.
Despite that fact that I agree that permadeath would successfully link skillful play with the level of one's character, I think there could be another way of achieving this.
The notion of permadeath doesn't really exist in warcraft III or chess, but a characters "level" is quite accurately reflected in both of these games (actually, the new rating system in WC3 isn't as good, because it purposefully rewards people that play more even if they don't play well, so I guess the chess rating sytem is the better example). So perhaps game designers could try and construct an mmorpg in which one's avatar level is a function of success percentage on tasks/quests or other, more meaningful metrics -- basically any metric that doesn't reward those who just play a lot.
A good way to think about such metrics is to ask oneself: "Would it be possible for a prodigy to come along and rise to the top of the level heap quickly?" Someone else posted that the game would have to be easy to level in. If he/she meant that the game would have to be fast to level in *if* one was good enough, then I agree.
Wow, Gamemaker is a WYSIWYG games editor.
Sincerely, I hope this fight childhood obesity campaign turns into a genuine ddr craze, because I've been waiting for a 9th mix forever. Unfortunately, I have this looming fear that if and when another mix is finally released, it'll be some kind of sweatin' to the oldies from hell.
Just remember, ddr is a cool game... PERIOD. It's not just a way to lose weight.
So you don't want to live inside somebody else's self-expression. But it's ok for them to have to live inside yours?
Furthermore, you don't own any part of that building. You don't own your house or your car, or even your own body. Culturally we endow you with this property of ownership, but it's just an idea, not some absolute property of things. This is one of the points that grafitti makes -- you only own something so far as you're able and willing to defend it.
What about allofmp3.com's model?
Honestly, I think some kind of hybrid between iTMS and Napster will emerge, where, while you're a member, you can download as much as you want and keep it forever; however, discontinuing your subscription means losing access to the archives and also the latest content. I'm sure you all think I'm crazy.
The problem with the music industry for me is that they don't seem to understand that they're selling content. I listen to music *all* the time, but I definitely don't sit there and play the same damn cd over and over again. I need about 5-10 cds worth of new music content a week to feed my hunger. Now, as far as new content (of any kind... not just music) goes, I'm only willing to spend about $50 a month. Clearly me and the RIAA aren't going to be doing much business when I can make my $50 a month go much farther with other kinds of media (books and blogging and video games). Though, if I had to pick, I guess Napster satisfies my criteria better than iTMS.
Ah yes... another wannabe pedantic.
"You" people? Extra points for condescendance.
Miscommunication on the "you". If I had intended "condescendance" (sic), I would have written *you*. My intent with the quotes was to imply I wasn't speaking to everyone in the thread -- only those that think camp spawning is lame.
You're posting on slashdot.org.
Guess what? You fail at life
Can't argue there. I never imagined I'd read so poignant a thought... and on slashdot no less!
So what's your excuse?
Instancing is a neat idea, but kind of lame. So now you have lots of people with the uber item that previously spawned in one place... thus making it not uber, right? The problem with "you" people is that you only want the illusion of uber. Anyway, I could care less if you go on lying to yourselves.
I realized a couple years ago that mmorpg's are fun if you treat them like real life... at which point I realized I could just play real life.
You are wrong and I've said too much already.
::sigh::
Ah the connections *you* need in life. Not me sir. Want to know how I do it? I bet you do, but you won't admit it. Like I said, the community built around community is exactly the kind I don't want. And I don't fear others so much as find them depressing.
Agreed. new urbanism is just new suburbanism. The proofs of concept are culturally specific gobs of evil. You can't possibly plan a community in the style of new urbanism that I will like because it is exactly what I don't like. But whatever, as long as they build a nice big tower where I can sit and look down on everyone else, where I won't be bothered to join anyone's bbq, then I'll be happy.
I get it now! You see, all of this illogicality is just part of the "system". Wait, I won't speak any more of it, because if you knew what I was talking about, the "system" would collapse.
Silly Dartmouth... do they think their students have 6 hands each?
Thank you for point this out. People don't realize that George Lucas is not a director. I mean he *is*, but why do you think episodes 1 and 2 stink so bad? I think Kevin Smith would be great as the director for the series -- he's a major geek with a penchant for delving into fantastic worlds. He probably won't be writing though, so you don't have to worry about the series being nonstop dialog filled with pedantic sophistry.
test
Right... but I don't want a healthy relationship... I want a perfect relationship. Not that either of these terms are well defined, but I imagine the former to be "good enough" (in some sense) and the latter to be "optimal" (in some sense). Anyone else feelin' me?
No more than chemistry is about solving the problem of turning base metals into gold.
So since chemistry is in no way about turning base metals into gold, I assume you're implying that economics is in no way concerned with theories governing the distribution of scarce goods?
Scarcity is a factor in economics, like gold is a chemical element, but it isn't by any means the heart of the matter.
I don't even know how to break down this logic... you might as well have said "an apple is an apple, like an orange is an orange." No but seriously... first of all, despite my not being an economist, I really think scarcity is more than just "a factor in economics." In fact, I really do believe its the heart of the matter (give me some references or a better explanation if you really know better). And even if it was just "a factor" (whatever that means), how is a factor in economics similar to an element in chemistry?
Economic theories and systems that focus on scarcity are about as useful as alchemy.
If this is true, then I should probably feel like a big idiot right now. Well... I don't. And I'm not saying I'm right! All I'm asking is that you give me more than a poorly constructed analogy to correct my alleged errors.
I'm not an economist, but, I always thought economics was about solving the problem of distributing scarce "goods". Hardware seems inherently scarce - limited by our production capacity and the scarcity of whatever physical components go into the hardware. Services, such as setting up a network or developing software are scarce - limited by the scarcity of the number of qualified people/things to deliver this service. But scarcity of software (and any kind of information: books, videos, music) AFTER it's been written is limited only by the communication channels through which the information is disseminated. Thanks to the internet, cost of dissemination is rapidly approaching zero.
So what's MY prediction? I predict you won't have to pay for software. I predict you will have to pay for hardware, although the cost of the hardware might be bundled into a service. I predict you will pay for the service of having software developed. So I'll subscribe to Joe's development studio, paying X bucks a month. And for that $X a month, I might get free hardware (or I'll buy my own), the latest version of every project Joe's studio is working on... oh, and 24/7 support. And if I ever decide to stop the service, I still get access to any build of any project that existed before my subscription ended. Yeah... that's how it will be.
I just want to throw it out there that I'm extremely excited about the DS. I mean, the PSP is really awesome, but I'll definitely spend my first $150 (or whatever it ends up being) on the DS.
Also, does anyone else get the feeling that non-portable consoles are going to go by the wayside? I really never thought about it before, but after seeing the PSP and the DS, I really have no interest in a PS3 or an xbox 2.
Umm... does anyone else think "charismatic executive" is not an oxymoron? What leader isn't charismatic? Please, D&D people, back me up on this.
bah... sorry, I forgot to add my line breaks...
it's *how* you learn that matters. First of all, 90% of people commenting here really don't understand math at all. I'm going to sound like a math snob, but trigonometry, geometry, and (American) Algebra are not math at all. As much as you might think they are math, they are in fact just tools. They are tools like your favorite programming languages and operating systems - you can use them accmoplish certain tasks. "Real" math is concerned with a way of thinking - knowing how to see structure in things where structure is not obvious, then translating that structure into symbols through which others can understand it (whoa... I didn't intend it, but doesn't that description sound a lot like what computer scientists do?). Maybe you think I'm full of crap, but "real" math is often better done by people who have backgrounds in History and Literature. You say, "yeah right," but I guarantee you that actual mathematicians are much more verbally (symbolically) inclined than regular tech-savvy people. I've really diverged from the argument here of whether or not math is useful for a computer scientist... but here's what I have to say about that. The best computer scientists will be interested in and excel at "real" mathematics - computer science is just a subset of information science which is math. No, I'm not a mathematician.
Thanks, I was just about to say something about that. Can someone remind me again why we impose scarcity on something that is inherently not scarce??
True, but they'll make the case that you made it available for 493,563,221 downloads for a total intellectual property value of $10,000,000,000 or so.
The two are remarkably similar. As time goes on, analagous roles to those found in the production of physical machines/structures (such as concept artists, architects, engineers, construction workers) will be defined for digital creation. Actually, this has already happened. Perhaps what's lagging behind is the partitioning of education that leads to these professions?