With the DLLs from a no longer installed Cygwin in system32, the grep and tr and mv and whois and whatnot compiled for it seem to work, and not just within bash. Which also works (but wants the Unixoid directory structure Cygwin used to provide). (Sorry if I just said stupid things, I'm a mere GUI luser most of the time.)
I have to agree with other respondents that violent content has been around more or less forever. Today's hardware just doesn't enforce the same level of abstraction - perhaps games like Robotron would have been 'pornographically' violent as well, had it been possible.
(Fortunately, for me, it wasn't; I do prefer computer graphics that look like computer graphics -- not jaggy and monochromatic, necessarily, I just don't need this total immersion into brutal, military-themed ugliness -- no more than I need the happy, shiny popsicle graphics of the "family-friendly" variety.)
I can see that it can be fun to be given a license to "go evil", and I won't even try to untangle the cause-and-effect mess here. It just doesn't turn me on much. There are other things I can't do (or shouldn't, or don't even want to do but still find interesting) that games could address.
But realistically depicted violence and macho guns really excite many gamers, it seems (even if the demographic here might be sort of self-selected rather than "all there is"). Wireframe models or bizarre pixel-clusters, on the other hand, won't impress them. And that turn-on, I presume, will be present in Target: Terror. Does Jarvis think the average gamer will care about the rationale for the violence, the weapons, and whatever "cool" equipment will be available?
Jarvis: You have all these fantasies about how people are going to play your game and all the depth you put in there and your great moral story and everything and it seems like actually what people really do is they just enjoy shooting guys in the nuts [laughs].
Exactly.
Not that I know what that game will be like. But try making a game that deals with the roots of terrorism, a game that isn't boring, and then I'll be impressed with your content. Whether this really is a topic for a game, any kind of game, is questionable, though.
We felt that it's just an insult to the players to have these polygon puppets that everybody knows are fake [laughs]. We wanted to do something that was more interesting and more real. I'm tired of -- and everybody is -- tired of these polygon rag-doll people that just don't seem to have any reality.
This endless quest for the "real" is so absurd, IMO. You've got a computer, an apparatus that hasn't got a clue about what's "real", and instead of using that to your advantage and producing something that does not resemble anything that already exists, all you do is mimick reality. Sure, one day that might give us the holodeck or something like it, but dammit, we've already got a real world which often sucks.
If we do have to copy it, why not deal with things that humans can't experience at all? (Flying, for example. Hm, is there a modern-day game that casts the player as a bird or bat?)
By the way here are very purty-looking remakes of Defender and Robotron (for Windows and Linux) -- beautiful, yet hardly "realistic".
Just to state the blatantly obvious, it understandeth not because it's a Flash thingie parodying Scott-Adams-style 16KB adventures, though probably not in 16KB. Modern-day IF (such as the interviewed authors') typically uses the Inform or TADS parser/world model libraries which will, of course, handle "unlock drawer with key" just fine, as well as "take all keys except the pink one out of the bottom drawer, then put them on the keyring" (well, something similarly pedantic anyway).
Since I have a somewhat cute nick I get the old A/S/L routine as well. Since I tend to answer "30+/about to/right behind you" they usually shut up but I hate to think what would happen so anyone stupid enough to admit they are female.
In my (limited) (IRC) experience, you don't even have to admit or deny anything. Just use polysyllabic words and confuse them by being friendly, and the information will never actually enter their brains. Not even a photo will reach them if it's somewhat androgynous. Instant, unasked-for, probably very desperate admirers who nonetheless don't seem to be listening. It's depressing how irrelevant text and the thoughts it transports seem in a completely text-based medium.
(Uhm, I'm not sure polysyllabic was a word before I used it.)
I guess it's just annoying when somebody you want to spend time *with* goes off into his/her own little (and often rather idiotic-seeming) world of frags, preferring it over you. It soon gets boring to watch, and what's worse is how you just know (or at least think) there simply *is* no such thing as a "quick game of (whatever they're addicted to)". It's like your mommy's talking on the phone for hours when you really, really, really *right now* NEED to ask her why there's no snow this year (assuming you're 5 years old). Not that I *have* a S.O....sigh. So my vote goes to the maximum tolerance toward gamers faction.
I don't think anyone thinks anything's wrong with it (unless they think gaming itself is wrong), and yah, separation on the basis of sex is a little absurd. If competition seems too much for some, wouldn't some kind of beginners league serve the same purpose? To state the blatantly obvious, video games aren't weightlifting. (Even with "physical" sports like running or swimming, being male doesn't necessarily give you an advantage. Why should a naturally overweight boy be judged more harshly in school sports than a naturally "fit" girl? Never quite understood that. Not every girl is weaker than every boy.)
I've just downloaded "There", but my computer is *way* below the minimum system requirements for either it or Second Life so I'm not expecting much. Besides, "There"'s installer doesn't install, and registering was a pain. Sigh.
Does anyone know anything vaguely like these that'll cooperate with a 450 MHz P3 (okay, let's pretend it's 600 MHz. That usually works, too) and doesn't require a credit card just to sign up for a trial period? (Windows or Linux, don't care.)
Maybe I should check out Furcadia again. Or go outside or something.
It's Marvin. http://douglasadams.com/movie/ has the same costume, except being worn.
Feels a lot more Sirius Cybernetics than its TV show counterpart, but still -- I always imagined Marvin was really supposed to be as annoyingly chipper as the Heart of Gold's doors, with the artificial personality having gone horribly wrong. A "plastic pal who's fun to be with" shouldn't have those mournful eyes. It obliterates the contrast, though maybe nobody else thought there was one.
Well, yes, but The Answer was "fourty-two", which is obviously not a base 13 'spelling' for "fifty-four". Then again - according to "Lexx" - the Earth is a "Type 13 planet in its last stages". Enh, that just had nothing to do with anything.
A few of my favourite games took about an hour or three to play through and had very little replay value. Still they left an impression not unlike that of leaving a movie theatre after a particularly impressive film. (Of course, none of thesegames are on the list as they're sort of...under the radar for most.)
(...) but if this is indeed the definitive list of games that will be used in this thing (...)
It's not. According to the blurb on the linked page, the qualifying polls determine about half the games in the tournament. I kinda wonder where the other half is coming from, but I'll try not to care...
(...) but not an RPG outside of Diablo and Final Fantasy?
Well, they have the Ultima and Zelda series. Not Pac Man, though. Not that I consider it an RPG.
Like a poll can determine the "best" game. Even *if* every voter had played every game, there'll still be *many* "best", or rather: favourite, games. Oh, and neither "Zork" nor "Hitchhiker's Guide" are Infocom's best. One is in many ways the most *important*, the other is, well, the Hitchhiker game.
Let's instill global alien invasion paranoia in the populace and redirect all this need for a "military advantage" at securing the *planet* rather than individual nation states. Then maybe blowing each other up will seem as ridiculously counterproductive as it actually is.
Then again, this might not make the Vulcans like us much when they finally come for a visit.
maybe it'll be possible to chemically induce *falling in love*, but (as can be witnessed all the time) that alone doesn't guarantee a healthy relationship... much less, I would assume, if the candidates' heads had to be tampered with to get them to fall in love in the first place. Experiments on voles notwithstanding.
Still, I must say I'm not quite as opposed to the "chemical approach" as I thought I was. If two people already get along very well as "just friends" and wish to...upgrade... their relationship ~ well, why not. (I'm pissed off with all that pointless animal torture involved, though.)
Then again ~ don't you think most people would find the idea that your love for them has been chemically induced rather... disheartening? ("I suck so much he has to inject this stuff in order to love me!")
Your program, I suspect, will not pass the Turing test, ever -- not with you: you will, after all, always know that it's just that - a program that *you* *wrote*. Don't let that stop you, though... it's quite a fascinating idea (I guess it's pretty common among computer-savvy lonely people? I might've tried doing the same had I felt I was up to it, which I'm not. It's easier to fall in love;)
Well... I'm sorry if I overstepped some boundaries here. Just felt like giving some feedback.
Slashdot Mirror
"Everyone had to play this game and they had no choice....PC only."
:)
I bought the Amiga version instead
(Alright, it wasn't ideal.)
With the DLLs from a no longer installed Cygwin in system32, the grep and tr and mv and whois and whatnot compiled for it seem to work, and not just within bash. Which also works (but wants the Unixoid directory structure Cygwin used to provide). (Sorry if I just said stupid things, I'm a mere GUI luser most of the time.)
Thanks, but I'd rather keep brushing my own instead.
Not for me. The post-login areas ("Lobby") are a layout mess.
Wow -- you work for me? Interesting. =)
Well, those are spacecraft, planes, ... -- I was thinking of something organic, something winged.
I liked Descent. Never saw the sequels, though.
(Fortunately, for me, it wasn't; I do prefer computer graphics that look like computer graphics -- not jaggy and monochromatic, necessarily, I just don't need this total immersion into brutal, military-themed ugliness -- no more than I need the happy, shiny popsicle graphics of the "family-friendly" variety.)
I can see that it can be fun to be given a license to "go evil", and I won't even try to untangle the cause-and-effect mess here. It just doesn't turn me on much. There are other things I can't do (or shouldn't, or don't even want to do but still find interesting) that games could address.
But realistically depicted violence and macho guns really excite many gamers, it seems (even if the demographic here might be sort of self-selected rather than "all there is"). Wireframe models or bizarre pixel-clusters, on the other hand, won't impress them. And that turn-on, I presume, will be present in Target: Terror. Does Jarvis think the average gamer will care about the rationale for the violence, the weapons, and whatever "cool" equipment will be available?
Jarvis: You have all these fantasies about how people are going to play your game and all the depth you put in there and your great moral story and everything and it seems like actually what people really do is they just enjoy shooting guys in the nuts [laughs].
Exactly.
Not that I know what that game will be like. But try making a game that deals with the roots of terrorism, a game that isn't boring, and then I'll be impressed with your content. Whether this really is a topic for a game, any kind of game, is questionable, though.
We felt that it's just an insult to the players to have these polygon puppets that everybody knows are fake [laughs]. We wanted to do something that was more interesting and more real. I'm tired of -- and everybody is -- tired of these polygon rag-doll people that just don't seem to have any reality.
This endless quest for the "real" is so absurd, IMO. You've got a computer, an apparatus that hasn't got a clue about what's "real", and instead of using that to your advantage and producing something that does not resemble anything that already exists, all you do is mimick reality. Sure, one day that might give us the holodeck or something like it, but dammit, we've already got a real world which often sucks.
If we do have to copy it, why not deal with things that humans can't experience at all? (Flying, for example. Hm, is there a modern-day game that casts the player as a bird or bat?)
By the way here are very purty-looking remakes of Defender and Robotron (for Windows and Linux) -- beautiful, yet hardly "realistic".
Just to state the blatantly obvious, it understandeth not because it's a Flash thingie parodying Scott-Adams-style 16KB adventures, though probably not in 16KB. Modern-day IF (such as the interviewed authors') typically uses the Inform or TADS parser/world model libraries which will, of course, handle "unlock drawer with key" just fine, as well as "take all keys except the pink one out of the bottom drawer, then put them on the keyring" (well, something similarly pedantic anyway).
I agree.
And I didn't mean to say this is an inherently "gendered" problem (hence my "his/her"), or limited to video games.
Adventure games are of course ideal for playing together. (In fact, many of them I couldn't play any other way because I suck at puzzles.)
In my (limited) (IRC) experience, you don't even have to admit or deny anything. Just use polysyllabic words and confuse them by being friendly, and the information will never actually enter their brains. Not even a photo will reach them if it's somewhat androgynous. Instant, unasked-for, probably very desperate admirers who nonetheless don't seem to be listening. It's depressing how irrelevant text and the thoughts it transports seem in a completely text-based medium.
(Uhm, I'm not sure polysyllabic was a word before I used it.)
I guess it's just annoying when somebody you want to spend time *with* goes off into his/her own little (and often rather idiotic-seeming) world of frags, preferring it over you. It soon gets boring to watch, and what's worse is how you just know (or at least think) there simply *is* no such thing as a "quick game of (whatever they're addicted to)". It's like your mommy's talking on the phone for hours when you really, really, really *right now* NEED to ask her why there's no snow this year (assuming you're 5 years old). Not that I *have* a S.O. ...sigh. So my vote goes to the maximum tolerance toward gamers faction.
I don't think anyone thinks anything's wrong with it (unless they think gaming itself is wrong), and yah, separation on the basis of sex is a little absurd. If competition seems too much for some, wouldn't some kind of beginners league serve the same purpose? To state the blatantly obvious, video games aren't weightlifting. (Even with "physical" sports like running or swimming, being male doesn't necessarily give you an advantage. Why should a naturally overweight boy be judged more harshly in school sports than a naturally "fit" girl? Never quite understood that. Not every girl is weaker than every boy.)
I've just downloaded "There", but my computer is *way* below the minimum system requirements for either it or Second Life so I'm not expecting much. Besides, "There"'s installer doesn't install, and registering was a pain. Sigh.
Does anyone know anything vaguely like these that'll cooperate with a 450 MHz P3 (okay, let's pretend it's 600 MHz. That usually works, too) and doesn't require a credit card just to sign up for a trial period? (Windows or Linux, don't care.)
Maybe I should check out Furcadia again. Or go outside or something.
It's Marvin. http://douglasadams.com/movie/ has the same costume, except being worn.
Feels a lot more Sirius Cybernetics than its TV show counterpart, but still -- I always imagined Marvin was really supposed to be as annoyingly chipper as the Heart of Gold's doors, with the artificial personality having gone horribly wrong. A "plastic pal who's fun to be with" shouldn't have those mournful eyes. It obliterates the contrast, though maybe nobody else thought there was one.
Well, yes, but The Answer was "fourty-two", which is obviously not a base 13 'spelling' for "fifty-four". Then again - according to "Lexx" - the Earth is a "Type 13 planet in its last stages". Enh, that just had nothing to do with anything.
(Sheesh, what a way to spend an afternoon.)
Hm. Is there a way I could use Google to generate random numbers?
How come nobody, not even people who somehow manage to come up with "pretny" or "brither", misspells "Spears"?
If you find out, do me a favour and never, ever tell me. 'kay?
A few of my favourite games took about an hour or three to play through and had very little replay value. Still they left an impression not unlike that of leaving a movie theatre after a particularly impressive film. (Of course, none of these games are on the list as they're sort of ...under the radar for most.)
It's not. According to the blurb on the linked page, the qualifying polls determine about half the games in the tournament. I kinda wonder where the other half is coming from, but I'll try not to care...
(...) but not an RPG outside of Diablo and Final Fantasy?
Well, they have the Ultima and Zelda series. Not Pac Man, though. Not that I consider it an RPG.
Like a poll can determine the "best" game. Even *if* every voter had played every game, there'll still be *many* "best", or rather: favourite, games. Oh, and neither "Zork" nor "Hitchhiker's Guide" are Infocom's best. One is in many ways the most *important*, the other is, well, the Hitchhiker game.
Let's instill global alien invasion paranoia in the populace and redirect all this need for a "military advantage" at securing the *planet* rather than individual nation states. Then maybe blowing each other up will seem as ridiculously counterproductive as it actually is.
Then again, this might not make the Vulcans like us much when they finally come for a visit.
Never mind.
maybe it'll be possible to chemically induce *falling in love*, but (as can be witnessed all the time) that alone doesn't guarantee a healthy relationship... much less, I would assume, if the candidates' heads had to be tampered with to get them to fall in love in the first place. Experiments on voles notwithstanding.
...upgrade... their relationship ~ well, why not. (I'm pissed off with all that pointless animal torture involved, though.)
;)
Still, I must say I'm not quite as opposed to the "chemical approach" as I thought I was. If two people already get along very well as "just friends" and wish to
Then again ~ don't you think most people would find the idea that your love for them has been chemically induced rather... disheartening? ("I suck so much he has to inject this stuff in order to love me!")
Your program, I suspect, will not pass the Turing test, ever -- not with you: you will, after all, always know that it's just that - a program that *you* *wrote*. Don't let that stop you, though... it's quite a fascinating idea (I guess it's pretty common among computer-savvy lonely people? I might've tried doing the same had I felt I was up to it, which I'm not. It's easier to fall in love
Well... I'm sorry if I overstepped some boundaries here. Just felt like giving some feedback.