I really think the solution to that is to have more stats. If central servers just crunch numbers, the bandwidth usage can't be that expensive for the game maker/publisher. If you have stats, people will be less likely to quit out early. And also, the only way to allow a player to quit out early is through a resign command, thus giving victory to the other person....it would still suck that the game was over, but I bet it would lessen it a bit.
I would think they would price it at something high like 10 dollars a month, but then at the same time off a 50 dollars a year deal to. That way they can get long term adopters and give people who want to just try it out a short term solution. I think that would be the best idea.
On a sort of related note, I hope Nintendo decides to launch some sort of online plan at e3. More competition could lead to really sweet (if not free) online prices.
Re:Is AI driving that much harder than walking?
on
New Halo 2 Details
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
AI has to operate by constantly checking the environment, running through a series of checks, then decide what it should do. Sometimes what it should do is continue what it was doing before, other times it should start something completely new. Now picture yourself playing a game with driving and walking. When you walk, you can quickly jerk the stick in the opposite direction, and (with the exception of some slight skidding) change directions. Therefore the ai can make these same quick decisions. Now, when you are driving a car, you can jerk the stick in the opposite direction, but in a realistic driving game, its going to slowly arc in that direction like a real car would. Now, this extends the time it takes for one of these things to actually execute completely. When you as a player are driving a car, you predict where you want the car to be by looking into the future further than you would if you were just walking your character around. Basically, this looking farther into the future is exactly what makes creating a proper reacting ai for a car that much more difficult.
er something... =)
Lets be honest now. Every console has at least one game worth playing. I for one own a PS2 and a Gamecube. To me, both of those half enough games to keep me constantly playing. An X-box has some great games. Halo obviously (though I am getting slightly sick of fps but thats just an honest opinion), Mech Assault, Sega's offerings (Panzer, toe jam, etc.) and X-Box live, which is a damn good concept. My only issue with the X-Box is supporting a company that is trying to use their wallets to be a monopoly in another industry. I mean, I'm sure you all heard the rumors of them shelling out big bucks to ID for Doom III rights. How would you guys like to never be able to play that with a mouse? Anyway, MS offering money to Sega, Capcom, et al. It just gets to me. I personally wouldn't mind sony and nintendo getting in bed together as long as nintendo has a good say in the hardware, cause i think the ps2 has too many issues, but thats a different story, but you KNOW that if MS had control we would start to get told what to play instead of this wealth of options. Based on their imperialist attitude (which I know most big companies have), their bottomless pocket, and their mindless followers, I find it hard to support them in any way. I don't want to be forced to buy overly powerful hardware to play the games I love at high prices. If it weren't for nintendo and sony, you know that the x-box would still be 300 if not more. And we know it makes great servers if hacked, but is it needed for games....not really...
Don't worry about it, if you are in the US, the e reader you got is the updated one. The original japanese one didn't have all the features, so this is just Japan getting those same features. I was just as confused until one of the PlanetGamecube.com staffers straightened me out in the forums.
Slashdot Mirror
I really think the solution to that is to have more stats. If central servers just crunch numbers, the bandwidth usage can't be that expensive for the game maker/publisher. If you have stats, people will be less likely to quit out early. And also, the only way to allow a player to quit out early is through a resign command, thus giving victory to the other person....it would still suck that the game was over, but I bet it would lessen it a bit.
I would think they would price it at something high like 10 dollars a month, but then at the same time off a 50 dollars a year deal to. That way they can get long term adopters and give people who want to just try it out a short term solution. I think that would be the best idea. On a sort of related note, I hope Nintendo decides to launch some sort of online plan at e3. More competition could lead to really sweet (if not free) online prices.
AI has to operate by constantly checking the environment, running through a series of checks, then decide what it should do. Sometimes what it should do is continue what it was doing before, other times it should start something completely new. Now picture yourself playing a game with driving and walking. When you walk, you can quickly jerk the stick in the opposite direction, and (with the exception of some slight skidding) change directions. Therefore the ai can make these same quick decisions. Now, when you are driving a car, you can jerk the stick in the opposite direction, but in a realistic driving game, its going to slowly arc in that direction like a real car would. Now, this extends the time it takes for one of these things to actually execute completely. When you as a player are driving a car, you predict where you want the car to be by looking into the future further than you would if you were just walking your character around. Basically, this looking farther into the future is exactly what makes creating a proper reacting ai for a car that much more difficult. er something... =)
Lets be honest now. Every console has at least one game worth playing. I for one own a PS2 and a Gamecube. To me, both of those half enough games to keep me constantly playing. An X-box has some great games. Halo obviously (though I am getting slightly sick of fps but thats just an honest opinion), Mech Assault, Sega's offerings (Panzer, toe jam, etc.) and X-Box live, which is a damn good concept. My only issue with the X-Box is supporting a company that is trying to use their wallets to be a monopoly in another industry. I mean, I'm sure you all heard the rumors of them shelling out big bucks to ID for Doom III rights. How would you guys like to never be able to play that with a mouse? Anyway, MS offering money to Sega, Capcom, et al. It just gets to me. I personally wouldn't mind sony and nintendo getting in bed together as long as nintendo has a good say in the hardware, cause i think the ps2 has too many issues, but thats a different story, but you KNOW that if MS had control we would start to get told what to play instead of this wealth of options. Based on their imperialist attitude (which I know most big companies have), their bottomless pocket, and their mindless followers, I find it hard to support them in any way. I don't want to be forced to buy overly powerful hardware to play the games I love at high prices. If it weren't for nintendo and sony, you know that the x-box would still be 300 if not more. And we know it makes great servers if hacked, but is it needed for games....not really...
Don't worry about it, if you are in the US, the e reader you got is the updated one. The original japanese one didn't have all the features, so this is just Japan getting those same features. I was just as confused until one of the PlanetGamecube.com staffers straightened me out in the forums.