Umm, so? His point is that you are making a judgement on the product without ever using it. So you have no idea if it does everything great or not. You are saying a product is bad that you have never tried, which is really pathetic.
I just can't see this working. While it does seem like there is a market for it, it is extrememly hard to get people to play the way you want them to. Your idea of a book owner isn't going to appeal to anyone unless he can progress that character to something more interesting. Sure, it can be sort of interesting if he gets a curse, but really, so what? He isn't having any effect on the major story line.
Let's assume that that was just a bad example and that people can have effect on how the world is run and what happens to it. It is extremely hard to find people who are good role players. There will always be people who want to go around and just destroy stuff that others have built up. Also, you are having people pay so much, they are going to feel entitled to do whatever they want. So when a GM isn't paying attention to their every petty little need, or isn't letting them step on cat, they are going to get pissed off and start complaining, ruining for them around them. It is hard even to get 5 people together to role play in a room, and you are talking about a server with over 100.
I know you are targeting more mature audiences by charging so much, but you are still going to get griefers. How do you handle them? Kick them off the server, log their IP, and send a full refund? I just don't see that as being a successful business model.
I think the technological hurdle will be the biggest problem. Trying to have GMs be everywhere at once catering to the whims of all the subscribers will be tough. You will almost need one GM per every couple of players for it to work. Doing strange things in the game isn't going to work either unless the game is already programmed to do it. When someone's head catches on fire, they want to see it burn, so you have to have the graphics and the logic programmed in for that. You can't just have text on the screen "Your head has burst in to flames..oh no, what will you do?" Just your scene to have a guy run in to a woman and get cursed is going to require an insane amount of programming for just that one person to experience.
Finally, the biggest hurdle you will face is find good GMs. Unless these people are paid a ton of money, you are not going to be able to get the real good ones. Bad GMs will kill your game almost instantly.
I am not trying to kill your dreams or something...I may be full of it and you could pull it off. I just don't see it feasible with current technology...it is almost like programming true AI...it sounds great, but it is an extremely difficult problem that won't be solved any time soon.
Re:Separating Linux users from Windows users
on
The Spyware Inferno
·
· Score: 1
Oh give me a break. You make these sweeping statements about what "we" (as in Mac Users) tolerate. It's a load of garbage. You may not tolerate adware along with the grand parent poster, but to make a claim for all users is asinine. The fact of the matter is that Linux and Macs have such a tiny footprint on the market that adware developers don't even care you exist. Another fact is that most people who are less knowledgable about computers run Windows. They are more likely to install whatever they find out there and get adware and not know what to do about it. Macs are such a small percentage that the inexperienced user is relatively safe...for now. Linux users need to be more experienced or it really gets ugly.
So it has nothing to do with what the userbase tolerates, it has to do with where the most profit is for the adware companies and right now that is windows. Does this drive some people to other OS's? Sure...obviously not tons of people, but some. Should MS be accountable for this? Sure, and they address some of this in SP2. But really, why not blame the people who actually make the crappy software that does this? Blame the people who bundle it in with their programs. Blame the users for not paying more attention to what they are doing. I guarantee that any OS that is such a large market force will have these things...I just wish Linux and Macs would gain popularity so I don't have to read posts like this anymore.
Just because you say that you are not trying to "fan flames" or endorse zealotry, doesn't mean you aren't actually doing it. Think a little before you post. Step out of the Slashdot group think and try not to come in to every single MS article with some sort of sense of superiority due to your choice of OS.
I thought your major points were valid, but you state some things that just aren't true about Final Fantasy XI. There is no cap on your tradeskills based on job level. There is no level grinding involved with crafting...so if you like to craft and nothing else, you can avoid leveling. Next thing you say is wrong too. Yes, skill level of a weapon is important, but you will hit harder as a level 50 warrior with the skill of 1 than a level 1 warrior with a skill of 1. You gain skill points faster, not because of your level, but because of the level of the mobs you can take on. You only skill up weapons based on the mob your are fighting's level. So if their level is much higher than your weapon, you will gain skill faster. Finally, beastmaster is capable of soloing all the way to 75...not just above 20. Rangers can also solo off of worms but only until about 70 (but very expensive). The only exception is they need to party up to do their limit break quests. (scary I know this stuff and I don't even play anymore!)
Another person was complaining about not having people to group with because everyone is high level. This is not the case, everyone works on low level character when they are bored. That's the nice thing about FFs job system. It mixes the new characters with the experienced characters. Well, it is good if the new player is willing to learn and the experienced player isn't arrogant. I stopped playing mainly because you get tired of something after playing it for months and want to play all the games you missed like KOTOR...but if you want a good MMORPG to start with, FFXI is an excellent one.
And to the person who said you soloed RDM to 30 (or whatever) you are either a liar or have way too much time on your hands.
Wow, I was going to reply with something similar to what you wrote. But you said it better than I would have anyway.
I wish people could remove the nostalgia glasses and really compare the games. I'm sorry, but just because people play nethack doesn't prove that crappy graphics mean better gameplay. I don't see why the author is complaining. Let's get graphics as real as possible until it hits the "wall" of being absolutely realistic (and I really doubt it will be as quick as they think). Now that we hit that wall, will graphics never change again? Will game play suddenly improve? Of course not. People will take graphics in new UNrealistic directions. Good games will have good gameplay, bad games won't. Why argue against improving graphics? I guess his argument is overfocusing on graphics will cause gameplay to be worse. Well, duh! If they overfocus on marketing, that will hurt gameplay. If they overfocus on their family life, that will hurt gameplay. What a dumb statement. Articles like these make me wonder how these people get hired. There is really no analysis, just a rehash of what other uninformed people like to complain about.
Ummm, where in your quote does it say that "just because you release a platform before a competitor doesn't automatically make it better"? It doesn't, anywhere. It says the console that is released first has a competitive advantage. It doesn't say if you release a shoebox as X-Box 2 that it will destroy the PS3. What strikes me odd about your post is that you have a quote, twist the words around to something different than what it is saying, and then disagree with it.
Is it a valid viewpoint that if 2 products of about the same quality are released at different times, that the one that is released first just might have an advantage? Sounds reasonable to me.
Well, I sort of agree with you, but I found it works a little different. I play FFXI and have found that it prevents me from buying other games just because there is so much to do that I really don't have time to put in to another game. So it is actually saving me money. By the time I am done with the game, all the hot games I would have bought will be 30 dollars cheaper. I don't understand why so many people are resistant to monthly fees. It's not like there isn't a good reason for it. Every month new content is added to the game. Last month a team PvP aspect was introduced. There is always something special going on during holidays. And if there is a problem, there are admins there to set things right.
I think it's fine though if people don't want to pay monthly fees. I just don't think it's as big a deal as they make it out to be. $200 a year really isn't expensive, if that is all you can afford for entertainment, you might be better off using that money to educate yourself and find a better job.
The worm writer, and Microsoft's fraudulant representation of their operating system as stable and secure, are the primary culprits in this fiasco. It is time we stopped blaming their victims, and held the perpetrators responsible instead.
Man...just so much garbage in your post, where to start. We'll start with exploits. Of course there are more exploits on the OS that is on the majority of computers out there. If someone replaces MS, they will have just as many exploits. The problem lies in that if you want a more secure system, you are going to have to convince the users to use it. People (not slashdotters) are not going to log on to a seperate account to install software. It just isn't going to happen. You might say, "but it's so easy". Well, so is running a software firewall and applying patches in a timely manner. As far as your other points, show some credible sources that are independant sources rather that just Linux advocate pages.
I find your idea of blaming the OS company particularly disturbing as well. The patch that could stop this was out there. A firewall would have stopped this. Locking down ports would have stopped this. If you have critical systems running on Windows, then you do these simple measures. An unpatched Linux/Mac/BSD box is just as easily compromised.
I know this isn't a popular opinion around here, and I will take a karma hit, but please, take of your "OMG LINUX is the be0mb" hat and realize that this problem will occur in ANY OS that is left vulnerable. Complaining that they should use a Mac isn't going to solve the problem. Their software probably only runs on Windows. This is the problem: how do we make people with computers on networks more aware of how to protect their machines and data. This will be a problem no matter who is #1 and who gets exploited.
The scum who wrote this is to blame. He should be prosecuted and thrown in jail for a long time. MS should continue to improve their security (as should all OSs). The coast guard should learn how to secure their network. That's all there is to it.
(And as far as the rest of your argument: the fraudulant claims of stability and security garbage. Who cares? It's freaking marketing and absolutely irrelevant on who should be at fault for the damages that occured)
I feel your pain. I got my Paladin flag and had a tough time finding a good party in the Dunes. It is really hit and miss whether you can find an effective party or not. Whenever I had that problem and leveling became a chore, I just did something else. I had a lot of fun trying the crafts out. I got fishing up to level 26 and cooking up to 40. I completed a bunch of quests. That's the nice thing about the game, if one thing gets annoying, there are lots of other things you can do.
Sorry it didn't work out for you. I know how it feels when your friends are way ahead of you. You feel you need to catch up and it isn't fun. The nice thing about this game is that your friend, if he wanted to, could just pick another job and start at level 1 (not losing his old job levels) and go up with you. Too bad he didn't go that route.
I played a few MMORPGs (EQ and SWG) and got sick of those in a few weeks. This is the first one that has me hooked, I highly reccomend as well as the grandparent post.
Wouldnt it be better of improving the old model (fixing issues related to switching games and such) instead of releasing a new version?
I don't understand what is insightful about this. They are doing exactly what you are saying for them to do, improving the old model. Are you saying it won't look the same, or it will be totally redesigned from the ground up? Because that is the only realistic way that this product can be improved. It's just a name, why call it N-Gage 1 when you can call it N-Gage 2...I would imagine people would be afraid to buy it because of all the negative reactions from users and the press. Now with an N-Gage 2, you might make people feel better about buying it because it has that nice 2 on the end there.
Why in God's name would you want to read news and view clips of other people playing games when you could be playing them yourself?
Good point! Let's extend this further! Why would you want to read news and view clip of other people playing football/basketball/baseball when you could be playing them yourselves? That's why shows like ESPN will never catch on.
I am sorry, but you are flat wrong. If Square listened to every post on what they needed to change in the game, it would have to be patched daily and the download files would be so large that the servers could only be up for 1 hour of play time a day.
Ok, but you would say that only the opinions that are a majority count. How do you know it is a majority? These are people who actually use the forum, all the people who don't have a problem are playing the game and aren't voicing their opinion.
The people who are saying "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!" are probably the people who think that the game is fine and doesn't require the petty (and usually game damaging) changes that the forum writers demand. So not playing IS a option if they don't like it so much. But guess what, they are still playing because it is a good game.
I actually play on Square's game and enjoy it. The give updates that do happen to have some of the things fixed/added that people complain about. They selectively choose which things to fix/add. This makes sense and I would say the majority of people in the game (not in the forums) are happy with it.
If you disagree with me, well, I hope you someday have to make a game. And when you read the forums about your game, I hope you make every single majority opinion fix that comes around. I guarantee you it will be the worst game out there.
First off, I'd like to say I agree with some of what you said. I like the idea of having content added (maybe not weekly, I don't want to download an update every time I log on) and contests I can participate in. But, I really don't think classes and races are a problem. It is true that classes are all pretty similar because these games all take root in RPGs. So what? What are different classes that would make a difference? Go think up a class that is unique and it will probably fit in to one of your categories: thief, ranged attack, close attack, damage dealer, enemy charmer, etc etc.
You complain about races, but someone made cat and lizard races, you just dismiss it anyways, so clearly races isn't the problem either.
The only thing MMO games need to be is fun. Period. You can have cookie cutter classes and races, you can borrow all your classes from fiction, you can have unique totally original classes, and none of them matter unless people like playing it.
The problem is a person doesn't know which is fun until you try it out. Most models make you pay up front before you know if you will like it or not. I tried EQ, it bored me to death. I tried AO, again, fun at first but then it just gets boring. I was fortunate to see SWG in beta to avoid that train wreck of a game. The only one that kept my interest is FFXI. Why? It has your cookie cutter classes and race. You level up. You want to get "phat l3wt". But it has quests and mission that make the game fun and interesting.
A lot of the things you complain about are the defintion of what is at the core of these games: being an RPG. RPGs as a genre are very popular and they naturally translate in to these MMO games. The genre isn't the problem, it's just the number of companies that don't know how to make them fun. It's not like CS2 and Quake 4 are going to be original games, right?;) If the company is making money, than it must be doing something right.
I wouldn't say online play is a necessity, but it will be very important. Where would we be now if everyone thought 20 years ago: "No one really has computers with modems, this whole Internet thing is way over hyped. If you look at the numbers, it just doesn't add up. If I need to move data I just put it on a floppy." It'll take off...just wait when until your game console that has IM and the new game "Meet your date" where you can meet local guys/gals in your area:P Or AOL for PS3/Xbox2/Gamensphere...eek, I just scared myself.
You build your own laptops?:P Actually, if you are going high end, then it is almost always cheaper buying through Dell. I used to build my own machines too, which is a lot of fun. It is very worth it if you are building a mid-range PC. But if you try to buy the fastest processor, latest ATI card, etc, you are going to actually spend more on your PC than ordering it through Dell or some other vendor. Building computer != always cheaper.
but I really don't agree with everyone making such a big deal over GTA. I have a lot of respect for Lieberman, but I really don't like how he skews things. He makes it a point to focus on women (like men's lives are worth less somehow?) being beaten for a reward. But, as others have mentioned, other than the small amount of money on the woman, there is also a risk of being caught by police. So there are drawbacks to doing that action.
I have a respectable job and a Masters in CS. I am (hopefully most would say) an intelligent person who enjoys gaming in my free time. I am a moral person who does my best to do unto others as I would have done to myself. That being said, I have no guilt at all in doing horrible things in the game. Heck, my girl friend is worse. When I play, she tells me to go beat up that person, or try to pick up that hooker. Why? Because it is interesting to see the game and what it allows you to do. I agree with the rating, it is a game for adults. And being an adult, I want to be able to choose how I spend my free time. If GTA is what I choose, it is absolutely none of the government's business to tell me what is appropriate. Their job is to 1) educate parents on game ratings 2) enforce laws on vendors who sell these games to minors. The fact that the game is violent has no effect on my external life....at all. And anyone who claims that they were influenced by the game to do bad things and sues the company should probably not be allowed to have children, they are that stupid. I agree kids can be influenced more by this, that is why parents and the government should do a better job to keep it out of their hands. Seriously though, the kids shooting at cars driving by who claim that they were acting out GTA are liars and morons. No one is claiming GTA encouraged their careers as an ambulance driver or pizza delivery boy. The problem with that situation was bad parenting. Why were the kids allowed to play that game, and even more, why did they have access to guns, and why weren't they taught proper gun safety. The kids and the parents should both serve time for that.
I hope I made some sense. I just want to be able to play good games that have adult content. It isn't because GTA is violent that I enjoy the game. It is because GTA is a great game that allows you to do more than any other gaming engine out there ever has. The violence is appropriate to the plot (you are a criminal) and there is plenty of freedom to be as bad as you want to be. Stick all the violence you want in a new game, make it 10 times worse than GTA, I am not going to buy it because it has violence. All that matters is that it is a good game (i.e. it is fun). So please, politicians, rather than neutering adult content in games, educate and enforce. Other than that, try not to screw up the economy and piss off all our allies.
I am not sure if the ISPs log this, but if they log your name, IP, and your MAC address, then they could prove that it was your system. If they don't record MAC address, I suppose the only way to counter that is to prove you don't have a wireless router:P
It sounds like this guy, along with a lot of Slashdotters, are just not very good at playing CS. A lot of people have said any "newb" can pick up an AWP and become an instant killing machine getting incredible kill ratios. This is horribly false. It is not easy to get the hang of the AWP at first. Everyone is strafing around which destroys accuracy and makes you an easy kill. I have played on cal-m teams for CS. My brother still does play on a cal-m and with cal-i teams, so I think I am qualified to talk a little about good and bad players. A good player, like my brother, can take an AWP and really destroy the other team. A regular player with an AWP can take out bad players and maybe get lucky on a few good ones. Why? Because there are strategies to use when you face a guy with an AWP that you don't use when facing a different type of gun. You do not squat down to increase accuracy, you do not stand still and fire. You try to get as close as possible and strafe constantly. If you can get them to shoot once and miss, he's dead. I think the two biggest problems with CS deals with cheating. Cheaters make the game pointless and frustrating. On the other side, people who suck and whine about people cheating is almost worst. I can't count how many servers my brother and I have been banned on by admins who are unable to tell talant from hacks. The whole article is clearly written by one of these people who is unable to play the game well. If sniping was such a problem, then the answer would be for you to snipe since any newb can do it and get an awesome kill ratio. Please, buy the AWP, try to shoot me and I will take you down with my AK. I will then pick up your AWP, drop it for my brother who will kill 4 out of 8 people on your team every round BECAUSE HE IS GOOD. I enjoy CS because of its high learning curve. When you get good at the game, you can make a huge difference for your team. If you want a game more suited for people with bad reflexes and the inability to be patient and learn strategy, then CS isn't the game for you. All that being said, I know how frustrating it can be when your team is being slaughted by a good player. I hate playing against my brother because he is tough to go after. I offer a solution though: get better. It is either dominate or be dominating. And also, nothing beat the feel of taking down their sniper. If you keep em down, they can't afford to buy another:) One final note, a good team can take down any individual...and that is the beauty of CS and is the whole point of a multiplayer experience.
I don't really agree because your analogy misses the mark by a long shot. This doesn't show the negligence of security on the gym's part like in the case. It would be like having gym membership and they give you some "virtual" money good for stuff at their online gym store. You have been going there for years, building up your gym points. But the gym has horrible security on their website and some bastard at the gym steals your points and buys his own personal gym with it. Your time and money earned you virtual stuff, and their crappy security ruined for you. So this virtual stuff has some real world value. So could his equipment if he sold it for cash to another person. Translate the gym points to give you something virtual and you have a more perfect analogy. When you subscribe to a service, you have certain reasonable expectation. Lawyers offer a service, but if they take all the private information about you and release it, or screw up your case due to gross negligence, you are entitled to sue them because of their inability to provide the right level of competance in the service. No one would think their was a problem suing the person who waters your house who leaves your front door open for theives to steal everything. Virtual rights are no differnt than real world rights. Just because the game isn't important to you, it is to many.
So, can a person sue Microsoft to restore all the word processing documents they have lost due to crashes? Can they sue Microsoft for the files lost when a web site is defaced due to an IIS bug?
This is a horrible analogy. If MS was able to restore a document, they would. But they didn't create the document, so if it is lost, how in the world can they bring it back? In an online game, the company creates the objects and therefore is able to restore them.
I think that this is progress. Many years ago, only the very wealthy could enjoy free time. Now a majority of people have free time to do with it what they want. You may not agree with how they use it, but I think you might be a little judgemental in this case. You really don't have the right to tell others what they should do with their free time.
This person chose their free time as being a game. They spend a lot of time getting the character up to a point and they just don't want to lose all that from the negligence of a company or some malicious external party. Just because something is virtual, doesn't mean it it is without value. I didn't think I would need to make that point on Slashdot. So you don't care about video games. You can replace it with anything you value and put a lot of time in to. Let's say you are at work and just finished a program for accounting that took two years. Someone hacks your site and you didn't back it up. The virtual thing with value is lost. I understand that a video game really doesn't effect other people and is not as important as the example above. But to that one person it represents time and money, and that is enough for it to have value. It is unfortunate that this had to go to court, but if it wasn't a valid case, he wouldn't have won (I know that all cases that are won aren't valid, but that is usually when it is someone with money and power, this is just some guy who plays a game).
Way to go with the personal insults...it sure backs up your arguments:) I am impressed that you would go read all my past posts, you must have a lot of time on your hands. I really don't think my posts are "angry (and rather ignorant) young male behavior". Actually, yours comes off much more angry than any of mine (but you are probably old and female?). I apologize for using "who cares" twice...that was excessive, but I didn't really go back and check what I wrote three times because this is Slashdot (I wouldn't have even posted that irregardless isn't a word, just someone trying to say it is a word is rediculous). And seriously, no one does care about redundant prefixes (unless they are grammar nazis like you would describe me). I don't think you need to be an expert to talk about irregardless not being a word. I suppose you must be an expert in English and therefore are more qualified to say what "real" words are. All in all, I would give you a +2 nice rant, but the 8 year old you bribed made multiple errors as pointed out by an AC. I want to help you out though. In the future, if you want to counter an argument, you will be much more effective if you don't get personal and actually counter the points made. One more thing, if you think having mastery of a language makes you more intelligent or important than other people, then I feel very sorry for you.
Anyone who tells people how to spell, or tells people that they shouldn't tell other people to spell like the parent should be modded offtopic (you can extend that to my post as well, but mine at least has humor:P ). In any case, irregardless is not a word. Your points in trying to make it a valid word are poorly thought out. People have been using double negatives for longer than 80 years, that doesn't make it correct. Words like bling-bling are in some dictionaries too...who cares! If it says in the dictionary that irregardless is a common misuse of the word regardless, it would make more sense to take it out and encourage people to use it correctly. Sure language evolves, but let's not evolve it in a stupid way. Should we end all our words in -izzle now that that is becoming popular? I sure as hizzle hope not. So other words use redundant prefixes. Who cares? There are a lot of stupid problems in the English language, that doesn't mean it should be an excuse to create more.
Slashdot Mirror
Because Nintendo treats their developers worse. See Square Enix.
Actually, it's 3 months...but not trying to convince you....it's too much of a time sink as I know first hand:)
Umm, so? His point is that you are making a judgement on the product without ever using it. So you have no idea if it does everything great or not. You are saying a product is bad that you have never tried, which is really pathetic.
I just can't see this working. While it does seem like there is a market for it, it is extrememly hard to get people to play the way you want them to. Your idea of a book owner isn't going to appeal to anyone unless he can progress that character to something more interesting. Sure, it can be sort of interesting if he gets a curse, but really, so what? He isn't having any effect on the major story line.
Let's assume that that was just a bad example and that people can have effect on how the world is run and what happens to it. It is extremely hard to find people who are good role players. There will always be people who want to go around and just destroy stuff that others have built up. Also, you are having people pay so much, they are going to feel entitled to do whatever they want. So when a GM isn't paying attention to their every petty little need, or isn't letting them step on cat, they are going to get pissed off and start complaining, ruining for them around them. It is hard even to get 5 people together to role play in a room, and you are talking about a server with over 100.
I know you are targeting more mature audiences by charging so much, but you are still going to get griefers. How do you handle them? Kick them off the server, log their IP, and send a full refund? I just don't see that as being a successful business model.
I think the technological hurdle will be the biggest problem. Trying to have GMs be everywhere at once catering to the whims of all the subscribers will be tough. You will almost need one GM per every couple of players for it to work. Doing strange things in the game isn't going to work either unless the game is already programmed to do it. When someone's head catches on fire, they want to see it burn, so you have to have the graphics and the logic programmed in for that. You can't just have text on the screen "Your head has burst in to flames..oh no, what will you do?" Just your scene to have a guy run in to a woman and get cursed is going to require an insane amount of programming for just that one person to experience.
Finally, the biggest hurdle you will face is find good GMs. Unless these people are paid a ton of money, you are not going to be able to get the real good ones. Bad GMs will kill your game almost instantly.
I am not trying to kill your dreams or something...I may be full of it and you could pull it off. I just don't see it feasible with current technology...it is almost like programming true AI...it sounds great, but it is an extremely difficult problem that won't be solved any time soon.
Oh give me a break. You make these sweeping statements about what "we" (as in Mac Users) tolerate. It's a load of garbage. You may not tolerate adware along with the grand parent poster, but to make a claim for all users is asinine. The fact of the matter is that Linux and Macs have such a tiny footprint on the market that adware developers don't even care you exist. Another fact is that most people who are less knowledgable about computers run Windows. They are more likely to install whatever they find out there and get adware and not know what to do about it. Macs are such a small percentage that the inexperienced user is relatively safe...for now. Linux users need to be more experienced or it really gets ugly.
So it has nothing to do with what the userbase tolerates, it has to do with where the most profit is for the adware companies and right now that is windows. Does this drive some people to other OS's? Sure...obviously not tons of people, but some. Should MS be accountable for this? Sure, and they address some of this in SP2. But really, why not blame the people who actually make the crappy software that does this? Blame the people who bundle it in with their programs. Blame the users for not paying more attention to what they are doing. I guarantee that any OS that is such a large market force will have these things...I just wish Linux and Macs would gain popularity so I don't have to read posts like this anymore.
Just because you say that you are not trying to "fan flames" or endorse zealotry, doesn't mean you aren't actually doing it. Think a little before you post. Step out of the Slashdot group think and try not to come in to every single MS article with some sort of sense of superiority due to your choice of OS.
I thought your major points were valid, but you state some things that just aren't true about Final Fantasy XI. There is no cap on your tradeskills based on job level. There is no level grinding involved with crafting...so if you like to craft and nothing else, you can avoid leveling. Next thing you say is wrong too. Yes, skill level of a weapon is important, but you will hit harder as a level 50 warrior with the skill of 1 than a level 1 warrior with a skill of 1. You gain skill points faster, not because of your level, but because of the level of the mobs you can take on. You only skill up weapons based on the mob your are fighting's level. So if their level is much higher than your weapon, you will gain skill faster. Finally, beastmaster is capable of soloing all the way to 75...not just above 20. Rangers can also solo off of worms but only until about 70 (but very expensive). The only exception is they need to party up to do their limit break quests. (scary I know this stuff and I don't even play anymore!)
Another person was complaining about not having people to group with because everyone is high level. This is not the case, everyone works on low level character when they are bored. That's the nice thing about FFs job system. It mixes the new characters with the experienced characters. Well, it is good if the new player is willing to learn and the experienced player isn't arrogant. I stopped playing mainly because you get tired of something after playing it for months and want to play all the games you missed like KOTOR...but if you want a good MMORPG to start with, FFXI is an excellent one.
And to the person who said you soloed RDM to 30 (or whatever) you are either a liar or have way too much time on your hands.
Wow, I was going to reply with something similar to what you wrote. But you said it better than I would have anyway.
I wish people could remove the nostalgia glasses and really compare the games. I'm sorry, but just because people play nethack doesn't prove that crappy graphics mean better gameplay. I don't see why the author is complaining. Let's get graphics as real as possible until it hits the "wall" of being absolutely realistic (and I really doubt it will be as quick as they think). Now that we hit that wall, will graphics never change again? Will game play suddenly improve? Of course not. People will take graphics in new UNrealistic directions. Good games will have good gameplay, bad games won't. Why argue against improving graphics? I guess his argument is overfocusing on graphics will cause gameplay to be worse. Well, duh! If they overfocus on marketing, that will hurt gameplay. If they overfocus on their family life, that will hurt gameplay. What a dumb statement. Articles like these make me wonder how these people get hired. There is really no analysis, just a rehash of what other uninformed people like to complain about.
Ummm, where in your quote does it say that "just because you release a platform before a competitor doesn't automatically make it better"? It doesn't, anywhere. It says the console that is released first has a competitive advantage. It doesn't say if you release a shoebox as X-Box 2 that it will destroy the PS3. What strikes me odd about your post is that you have a quote, twist the words around to something different than what it is saying, and then disagree with it.
Is it a valid viewpoint that if 2 products of about the same quality are released at different times, that the one that is released first just might have an advantage? Sounds reasonable to me.
Well, I sort of agree with you, but I found it works a little different. I play FFXI and have found that it prevents me from buying other games just because there is so much to do that I really don't have time to put in to another game. So it is actually saving me money. By the time I am done with the game, all the hot games I would have bought will be 30 dollars cheaper. I don't understand why so many people are resistant to monthly fees. It's not like there isn't a good reason for it. Every month new content is added to the game. Last month a team PvP aspect was introduced. There is always something special going on during holidays. And if there is a problem, there are admins there to set things right.
I think it's fine though if people don't want to pay monthly fees. I just don't think it's as big a deal as they make it out to be. $200 a year really isn't expensive, if that is all you can afford for entertainment, you might be better off using that money to educate yourself and find a better job.
The worm writer, and Microsoft's fraudulant representation of their operating system as stable and secure, are the primary culprits in this fiasco. It is time we stopped blaming their victims, and held the perpetrators responsible instead.
Man...just so much garbage in your post, where to start. We'll start with exploits. Of course there are more exploits on the OS that is on the majority of computers out there. If someone replaces MS, they will have just as many exploits. The problem lies in that if you want a more secure system, you are going to have to convince the users to use it. People (not slashdotters) are not going to log on to a seperate account to install software. It just isn't going to happen. You might say, "but it's so easy". Well, so is running a software firewall and applying patches in a timely manner. As far as your other points, show some credible sources that are independant sources rather that just Linux advocate pages.
I find your idea of blaming the OS company particularly disturbing as well. The patch that could stop this was out there. A firewall would have stopped this. Locking down ports would have stopped this. If you have critical systems running on Windows, then you do these simple measures. An unpatched Linux/Mac/BSD box is just as easily compromised.
I know this isn't a popular opinion around here, and I will take a karma hit, but please, take of your "OMG LINUX is the be0mb" hat and realize that this problem will occur in ANY OS that is left vulnerable. Complaining that they should use a Mac isn't going to solve the problem. Their software probably only runs on Windows. This is the problem: how do we make people with computers on networks more aware of how to protect their machines and data. This will be a problem no matter who is #1 and who gets exploited.
The scum who wrote this is to blame. He should be prosecuted and thrown in jail for a long time. MS should continue to improve their security (as should all OSs). The coast guard should learn how to secure their network. That's all there is to it.
(And as far as the rest of your argument: the fraudulant claims of stability and security garbage. Who cares? It's freaking marketing and absolutely irrelevant on who should be at fault for the damages that occured)
Driving back onto the map didn't change this, so you became a "submarine tank", able to see (and kill) everyone but nobody else could see you.
Holy crap. Why are we wasting money on Iraq and missile defense??? Give me a submarine tank!
I feel your pain. I got my Paladin flag and had a tough time finding a good party in the Dunes. It is really hit and miss whether you can find an effective party or not. Whenever I had that problem and leveling became a chore, I just did something else. I had a lot of fun trying the crafts out. I got fishing up to level 26 and cooking up to 40. I completed a bunch of quests. That's the nice thing about the game, if one thing gets annoying, there are lots of other things you can do.
Sorry it didn't work out for you. I know how it feels when your friends are way ahead of you. You feel you need to catch up and it isn't fun. The nice thing about this game is that your friend, if he wanted to, could just pick another job and start at level 1 (not losing his old job levels) and go up with you. Too bad he didn't go that route.
I played a few MMORPGs (EQ and SWG) and got sick of those in a few weeks. This is the first one that has me hooked, I highly reccomend as well as the grandparent post.
Wouldnt it be better of improving the old model (fixing issues related to switching games and such) instead of releasing a new version?
I don't understand what is insightful about this. They are doing exactly what you are saying for them to do, improving the old model. Are you saying it won't look the same, or it will be totally redesigned from the ground up? Because that is the only realistic way that this product can be improved. It's just a name, why call it N-Gage 1 when you can call it N-Gage 2...I would imagine people would be afraid to buy it because of all the negative reactions from users and the press. Now with an N-Gage 2, you might make people feel better about buying it because it has that nice 2 on the end there.
Why in God's name would you want to read news and view clips of other people playing games when you could be playing them yourself?
Good point! Let's extend this further! Why would you want to read news and view clip of other people playing football/basketball/baseball when you could be playing them yourselves? That's why shows like ESPN will never catch on.
I am sorry, but you are flat wrong. If Square listened to every post on what they needed to change in the game, it would have to be patched daily and the download files would be so large that the servers could only be up for 1 hour of play time a day.
Ok, but you would say that only the opinions that are a majority count. How do you know it is a majority? These are people who actually use the forum, all the people who don't have a problem are playing the game and aren't voicing their opinion.
The people who are saying "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!" are probably the people who think that the game is fine and doesn't require the petty (and usually game damaging) changes that the forum writers demand. So not playing IS a option if they don't like it so much. But guess what, they are still playing because it is a good game.
I actually play on Square's game and enjoy it. The give updates that do happen to have some of the things fixed/added that people complain about. They selectively choose which things to fix/add. This makes sense and I would say the majority of people in the game (not in the forums) are happy with it.
If you disagree with me, well, I hope you someday have to make a game. And when you read the forums about your game, I hope you make every single majority opinion fix that comes around. I guarantee you it will be the worst game out there.
First off, I'd like to say I agree with some of what you said. I like the idea of having content added (maybe not weekly, I don't want to download an update every time I log on) and contests I can participate in. But, I really don't think classes and races are a problem. It is true that classes are all pretty similar because these games all take root in RPGs. So what? What are different classes that would make a difference? Go think up a class that is unique and it will probably fit in to one of your categories: thief, ranged attack, close attack, damage dealer, enemy charmer, etc etc.
;) If the company is making money, than it must be doing something right.
You complain about races, but someone made cat and lizard races, you just dismiss it anyways, so clearly races isn't the problem either.
The only thing MMO games need to be is fun. Period. You can have cookie cutter classes and races, you can borrow all your classes from fiction, you can have unique totally original classes, and none of them matter unless people like playing it.
The problem is a person doesn't know which is fun until you try it out. Most models make you pay up front before you know if you will like it or not. I tried EQ, it bored me to death. I tried AO, again, fun at first but then it just gets boring. I was fortunate to see SWG in beta to avoid that train wreck of a game. The only one that kept my interest is FFXI. Why? It has your cookie cutter classes and race. You level up. You want to get "phat l3wt". But it has quests and mission that make the game fun and interesting.
A lot of the things you complain about are the defintion of what is at the core of these games: being an RPG. RPGs as a genre are very popular and they naturally translate in to these MMO games. The genre isn't the problem, it's just the number of companies that don't know how to make them fun. It's not like CS2 and Quake 4 are going to be original games, right?
I wouldn't say online play is a necessity, but it will be very important. Where would we be now if everyone thought 20 years ago: "No one really has computers with modems, this whole Internet thing is way over hyped. If you look at the numbers, it just doesn't add up. If I need to move data I just put it on a floppy." It'll take off...just wait when until your game console that has IM and the new game "Meet your date" where you can meet local guys/gals in your area:P Or AOL for PS3/Xbox2/Gamensphere...eek, I just scared myself.
You build your own laptops? :P Actually, if you are going high end, then it is almost always cheaper buying through Dell. I used to build my own machines too, which is a lot of fun. It is very worth it if you are building a mid-range PC. But if you try to buy the fastest processor, latest ATI card, etc, you are going to actually spend more on your PC than ordering it through Dell or some other vendor. Building computer != always cheaper.
but I really don't agree with everyone making such a big deal over GTA. I have a lot of respect for Lieberman, but I really don't like how he skews things. He makes it a point to focus on women (like men's lives are worth less somehow?) being beaten for a reward. But, as others have mentioned, other than the small amount of money on the woman, there is also a risk of being caught by police. So there are drawbacks to doing that action.
I have a respectable job and a Masters in CS. I am (hopefully most would say) an intelligent person who enjoys gaming in my free time. I am a moral person who does my best to do unto others as I would have done to myself. That being said, I have no guilt at all in doing horrible things in the game. Heck, my girl friend is worse. When I play, she tells me to go beat up that person, or try to pick up that hooker. Why? Because it is interesting to see the game and what it allows you to do. I agree with the rating, it is a game for adults. And being an adult, I want to be able to choose how I spend my free time. If GTA is what I choose, it is absolutely none of the government's business to tell me what is appropriate. Their job is to 1) educate parents on game ratings 2) enforce laws on vendors who sell these games to minors. The fact that the game is violent has no effect on my external life....at all. And anyone who claims that they were influenced by the game to do bad things and sues the company should probably not be allowed to have children, they are that stupid. I agree kids can be influenced more by this, that is why parents and the government should do a better job to keep it out of their hands. Seriously though, the kids shooting at cars driving by who claim that they were acting out GTA are liars and morons. No one is claiming GTA encouraged their careers as an ambulance driver or pizza delivery boy. The problem with that situation was bad parenting. Why were the kids allowed to play that game, and even more, why did they have access to guns, and why weren't they taught proper gun safety. The kids and the parents should both serve time for that.
I hope I made some sense. I just want to be able to play good games that have adult content. It isn't because GTA is violent that I enjoy the game. It is because GTA is a great game that allows you to do more than any other gaming engine out there ever has. The violence is appropriate to the plot (you are a criminal) and there is plenty of freedom to be as bad as you want to be. Stick all the violence you want in a new game, make it 10 times worse than GTA, I am not going to buy it because it has violence. All that matters is that it is a good game (i.e. it is fun). So please, politicians, rather than neutering adult content in games, educate and enforce. Other than that, try not to screw up the economy and piss off all our allies.
I am not sure if the ISPs log this, but if they log your name, IP, and your MAC address, then they could prove that it was your system. If they don't record MAC address, I suppose the only way to counter that is to prove you don't have a wireless router:P
It sounds like this guy, along with a lot of Slashdotters, are just not very good at playing CS. A lot of people have said any "newb" can pick up an AWP and become an instant killing machine getting incredible kill ratios. This is horribly false. It is not easy to get the hang of the AWP at first. Everyone is strafing around which destroys accuracy and makes you an easy kill. I have played on cal-m teams for CS. My brother still does play on a cal-m and with cal-i teams, so I think I am qualified to talk a little about good and bad players. A good player, like my brother, can take an AWP and really destroy the other team. A regular player with an AWP can take out bad players and maybe get lucky on a few good ones. Why? Because there are strategies to use when you face a guy with an AWP that you don't use when facing a different type of gun. You do not squat down to increase accuracy, you do not stand still and fire. You try to get as close as possible and strafe constantly. If you can get them to shoot once and miss, he's dead. I think the two biggest problems with CS deals with cheating. Cheaters make the game pointless and frustrating. On the other side, people who suck and whine about people cheating is almost worst. I can't count how many servers my brother and I have been banned on by admins who are unable to tell talant from hacks. The whole article is clearly written by one of these people who is unable to play the game well. If sniping was such a problem, then the answer would be for you to snipe since any newb can do it and get an awesome kill ratio. Please, buy the AWP, try to shoot me and I will take you down with my AK. I will then pick up your AWP, drop it for my brother who will kill 4 out of 8 people on your team every round BECAUSE HE IS GOOD. I enjoy CS because of its high learning curve. When you get good at the game, you can make a huge difference for your team. If you want a game more suited for people with bad reflexes and the inability to be patient and learn strategy, then CS isn't the game for you. All that being said, I know how frustrating it can be when your team is being slaughted by a good player. I hate playing against my brother because he is tough to go after. I offer a solution though: get better. It is either dominate or be dominating. And also, nothing beat the feel of taking down their sniper. If you keep em down, they can't afford to buy another:) One final note, a good team can take down any individual...and that is the beauty of CS and is the whole point of a multiplayer experience.
I don't really agree because your analogy misses the mark by a long shot. This doesn't show the negligence of security on the gym's part like in the case. It would be like having gym membership and they give you some "virtual" money good for stuff at their online gym store. You have been going there for years, building up your gym points. But the gym has horrible security on their website and some bastard at the gym steals your points and buys his own personal gym with it. Your time and money earned you virtual stuff, and their crappy security ruined for you. So this virtual stuff has some real world value. So could his equipment if he sold it for cash to another person. Translate the gym points to give you something virtual and you have a more perfect analogy. When you subscribe to a service, you have certain reasonable expectation. Lawyers offer a service, but if they take all the private information about you and release it, or screw up your case due to gross negligence, you are entitled to sue them because of their inability to provide the right level of competance in the service. No one would think their was a problem suing the person who waters your house who leaves your front door open for theives to steal everything. Virtual rights are no differnt than real world rights. Just because the game isn't important to you, it is to many.
Ugh, where to start with this.
So, can a person sue Microsoft to restore all the word processing documents they have lost due to crashes? Can they sue Microsoft for the files lost when a web site is defaced due to an IIS bug?
This is a horrible analogy. If MS was able to restore a document, they would. But they didn't create the document, so if it is lost, how in the world can they bring it back? In an online game, the company creates the objects and therefore is able to restore them.
I think that this is progress. Many years ago, only the very wealthy could enjoy free time. Now a majority of people have free time to do with it what they want. You may not agree with how they use it, but I think you might be a little judgemental in this case. You really don't have the right to tell others what they should do with their free time.
This person chose their free time as being a game. They spend a lot of time getting the character up to a point and they just don't want to lose all that from the negligence of a company or some malicious external party. Just because something is virtual, doesn't mean it it is without value. I didn't think I would need to make that point on Slashdot. So you don't care about video games. You can replace it with anything you value and put a lot of time in to. Let's say you are at work and just finished a program for accounting that took two years. Someone hacks your site and you didn't back it up. The virtual thing with value is lost. I understand that a video game really doesn't effect other people and is not as important as the example above. But to that one person it represents time and money, and that is enough for it to have value. It is unfortunate that this had to go to court, but if it wasn't a valid case, he wouldn't have won (I know that all cases that are won aren't valid, but that is usually when it is someone with money and power, this is just some guy who plays a game).
Hmm, so I take it you are pro-izzle?
Way to go with the personal insults...it sure backs up your arguments:) I am impressed that you would go read all my past posts, you must have a lot of time on your hands. I really don't think my posts are "angry (and rather ignorant) young male behavior". Actually, yours comes off much more angry than any of mine (but you are probably old and female?). I apologize for using "who cares" twice...that was excessive, but I didn't really go back and check what I wrote three times because this is Slashdot (I wouldn't have even posted that irregardless isn't a word, just someone trying to say it is a word is rediculous). And seriously, no one does care about redundant prefixes (unless they are grammar nazis like you would describe me). I don't think you need to be an expert to talk about irregardless not being a word. I suppose you must be an expert in English and therefore are more qualified to say what "real" words are. All in all, I would give you a +2 nice rant, but the 8 year old you bribed made multiple errors as pointed out by an AC. I want to help you out though. In the future, if you want to counter an argument, you will be much more effective if you don't get personal and actually counter the points made. One more thing, if you think having mastery of a language makes you more intelligent or important than other people, then I feel very sorry for you.
Anyone who tells people how to spell, or tells people that they shouldn't tell other people to spell like the parent should be modded offtopic (you can extend that to my post as well, but mine at least has humor :P ). In any case, irregardless is not a word. Your points in trying to make it a valid word are poorly thought out. People have been using double negatives for longer than 80 years, that doesn't make it correct. Words like bling-bling are in some dictionaries too...who cares! If it says in the dictionary that irregardless is a common misuse of the word regardless, it would make more sense to take it out and encourage people to use it correctly. Sure language evolves, but let's not evolve it in a stupid way. Should we end all our words in -izzle now that that is becoming popular? I sure as hizzle hope not. So other words use redundant prefixes. Who cares? There are a lot of stupid problems in the English language, that doesn't mean it should be an excuse to create more.