This is still unacceptable. All the other games can currently do 64 players over the net. And new ones are planning more. This would be like Golden Eye for the N64 only offering 2 players after all the other FPS had 4. It isn't enough. Period.
Here are my issues with this game. If they can address these, they have a lot of potential to make an awesome game. Potentially even a BF1942 killer.
1. From everything I've read on this game, it appears its limited to 32 players per server. BF1942 had 64 when it came out. And some of the newer ones are planned to have 128. You can't take a step backward in the number of players with this kind of game and expect it to succeed.
2. Planetside was a cool concept, but they alienated many gamers by their less than stellar FPS translation. IE. "cone of fire" and no headshots. Aim is relative in Planetside. If they could make this SW game behave like a "true" FPS, AND have the massively multiplayer part of Planetside, it would draw in a HELLUVA lot of gamers.
3. Mods. Every major FPS has them. Hell, CS drove more sales for Halflife than the original game did, and currently there are more DC servers in BF1942 than BF1942 servers. If you let the fans mod it, more people will buy it. PLEASE release an SDK for it and don't force people to make their own like they did for BF1942.
4. Don't use anything like Steam. It complicates things, it breaks, its an inconvenience that ultimately will not stop anybody from pirating your game if its good and just causes issues for paying customers.
If they can address the issues I have listed, I feel they have a good shot at becoming a top game, especially since they have the backing of the Star Wars license. I know I have a blast playing the SW d20 game, sometimes even more than D&D because its the SW universe, and I'm somewhat familiar with it.
If this is true.....then maybe that 68 year old woman the RIAA sued could be true too! And they thought it was the college students doing all the pirating.
" Actually, that would be kind of cool. I'm always losing stuff..."
Except if you lost your car keys, how long do you think it would be before spammers manage to work their pages near the top with things like "Lost your car keys?!?! Buy a new car!!!!!!"
"Kinda like Pogs, but without the chance to win anything. It'll probably die just as fast, though. (If you don't know what Pogs are, that's because they lasted a whole month before disappearing overnight. A fad at it's finest!)"
But that fad was at least creative. The pogs all had cool images on them, you could even make your own, and the slammers showed such variety and design technique it was astounding. Comparing these two games is like comparing apples to oranges.
""The general manager of Microsoft's Windows digital media division David Fester has suggested that iTunes' emerging dominance would be bad for consumers, because it would limit them to the iPod, as opposed to limiting them to Microsoft based products. In a moment of what must have been an attempt at ironic humor he said, 'Windows is about choice - you can mix and match software and music player stuff. We believe you should have the same choice when it comes to music services.'"
Shame on you people who think Timothy is biased.
"because it would limit them to the iPod, as opposed to limiting them to Microsoft based products"
Oh.....well.....he really doesn't try to put spin on things.
"In a moment of what must have been an attempt at ironic humor"
"Bush will have a man on Mars in ten minutes, tops."
Nonsense, if there were oil on Mars Bush would PERSONALLY fly out there in a space shuttle, and land it himself before greeting the Martians in full flight gear.
While my comment was meant humorously, AC troll, I do not measure people by looks. I think seeing people dress up like elves, catpeople, and robots is a very creative thing. I'm mocking them for not really needing much creativity to create their Sims costumes, as opposed to the person at an AnimeCon who made a Transformers cosplay costume for himself that could actually transform from a car to a human.
Wow, finally a group of people dorkier than us anime geeks.
Seriously....at least our costumes are cool to look at.
What the hell does a person wear to be their Sim? Regular clothes? Aaaahhhhh, and one of their big audiences is girls. The same girls who used to mock me and my friends for doing anime cosplay. Revenge is so sweet and just.
"Micropayments are not the silver bullet. You still need to actually have a viable product that you can sell."
Point 1)You missed the.com days didn't you?
Point 2) Although my guess the trend will soon be to take previously free content, and now charge for it, rather than adding additional premium content *cough*IGN*cough*. See, that way you're offering the same product, but now getting paid more for it (usually, see 1)
This is obviously the first step to power-armor suits that we've all fantasized about from SciFi.
I think if they truly catch on and become a widely used consumer item, an academy of sorts could be created to train users in using the suits. Or at least some sort of vehicle training. Trust me, when these things come out in the future, you'll DEFINITELY want someone having to pass a license test if they're gonna be using it on the street. Otherwise, crushed people start appearing.
"On the other hand... you could look at porn -everywhere- you walked.:/"
One can only hope he was smart enough to install that night vision filter for that camera that allowed people to take xray photos. Imagine a live vid feed of that!
"I think this is all I need to say: GO GO GADGET PENIS!"
Kind of off-topic, but I couldn't help remember a Shadowrun character I used to play with my friends. He was a dwarf rigger, who lacked any cybernetics (in a campaign full of cyber-munchkins) whatsoever except for a massive hydraulic um.....cybernetic appendage.
Third leg was an understatement.
It did 12S water damage, and I've never seen an elven prostitute run screaming in fear like that in all my gaming experience.
So the question is then, when do WE get implants. I know there's people on here who want nothing to do with them, but I'm all for wiring myself up.
Are there any available consumer cybernetics available yet? How about a bioluminescent, subdermal watch? Also, when am I going to be able to go out and buy off the shelf parts to put together my own Gargoyle suit?
Geek though I may be, I still don't have the technical knowledge to put this stuff all together by myself, but am very fascinated by it.
Anybody have any info on when consumer wearable computing might become reality?
Maybe I'm wrong here, and please correct me if I am, but wouldn't a low profit margin be irrelevant if they had good sales? I mean.....wouldn't supermarkets be going out of business then? They have ridiculously low margins on many items.
So if you ask me, it was a combination of low sales and low profit margins. But again, please correct me if I am wrong.
Then how about replying to some of these posts? Otherwise, I view this as a PR move. Yes, it is great you are making your software less scummy than it used to be, but if this is anything other than a press release, then lets see some ongoing communication here. Make the effort to respond to comments and show that you truly are interested in what we have to say.
Slashdotters, you need to realize why this press release was posted in the first place. Not only is Slashdot a sizeable audience, it also has members who make very large technical decisions for corporations, which could help/hurt Real.
Real, if you want to make a good product, take a note from Quicktime. I don't want ads when I use your player. Quicktime doesn't have them, why do you need to? I also dont' want to be pestered about registration every time I open it. Asking me once is fine. At the most, you should have an option to be reminded again at a later date, and an option to never be reminded again. Understand that once we have made a decision, we don't want you to keep pestering us and second guessing us. You don't keep people using your software by annoying them.
"I'm so sick of hearing "if you are innocent... why do you care?"
How about another reason. Because its MY privacy. That means I don't owe ANYBODY an explanation of why I care. The fact that I care is reason enough. People are free to value their privacy however they want, but just because I value mine more highly than the next person in no way makes me less innocent.
"Do I think it's a Good Thing? Not really, do I mind? Not really, after all, I'm not a terrorist!"
Why does this sound like the same old argument "if you're not a criminal, then you have nothing to hide"?
In fact, in the article itself (too lazy to find the quote, but it was towards the end)a similar statement was made.
I am not a terrorist, and I am not a criminal. But I DO have something to hide. My privacy. You see, thats the thing about privacy, its yours, and it doesn't really matter if you have anything to hide or not. You see, the decision about what you have to hide should remain up to you. I care about hiding my privacy becauase I simply don't want others invading it, and since it is MY privacy, that is reason enough.
Some people may not value their privacy as highly as others, but that in no way gives them the right to say that others should not value their privacy as highly as they might. And that is my problem with your post. This is exactly what you do by making the statement that its all fine and good as long as you're not a terrorist.
Heh, honestly, I have not a single clue. I just have the phrase in my head from somewhere. Who knows, maybe it IS from Exile III, because I used to play that ages ago. Excellent game btw.
"I'd prefer to see Google sell shares right over the internet through their website, maybe allow you to buy via an online payment service or other immediate means, such as credit card (with a validation period or something like that to prevent fraud.)"
On that note, does anybody know if Google tends to offer some form of DRiP (Divident Reinvestment Plan) or something similar where you can buy shares directly from the company instead of through a broker?
Slashdot Mirror
1. From everything I've read on this game, it appears its limited to 32 players per server. BF1942 had 64 when it came out. And some of the newer ones are planned to have 128. You can't take a step backward in the number of players with this kind of game and expect it to succeed.
2. Planetside was a cool concept, but they alienated many gamers by their less than stellar FPS translation. IE. "cone of fire" and no headshots. Aim is relative in Planetside. If they could make this SW game behave like a "true" FPS, AND have the massively multiplayer part of Planetside, it would draw in a HELLUVA lot of gamers.
3. Mods. Every major FPS has them. Hell, CS drove more sales for Halflife than the original game did, and currently there are more DC servers in BF1942 than BF1942 servers. If you let the fans mod it, more people will buy it. PLEASE release an SDK for it and don't force people to make their own like they did for BF1942.
4. Don't use anything like Steam. It complicates things, it breaks, its an inconvenience that ultimately will not stop anybody from pirating your game if its good and just causes issues for paying customers.
If they can address the issues I have listed, I feel they have a good shot at becoming a top game, especially since they have the backing of the Star Wars license. I know I have a blast playing the SW d20 game, sometimes even more than D&D because its the SW universe, and I'm somewhat familiar with it.
Except if you lost your car keys, how long do you think it would be before spammers manage to work their pages near the top with things like "Lost your car keys?!?! Buy a new car!!!!!!"
Don't worry, once the RIAA takes care of all the music vendors, I'm sure they wouldn't mind hiring their goon squad out to Rolex to do the same thing.
But that fad was at least creative. The pogs all had cool images on them, you could even make your own, and the slammers showed such variety and design technique it was astounding. Comparing these two games is like comparing apples to oranges.
Shame on you people who think Timothy is biased.
"because it would limit them to the iPod, as opposed to limiting them to Microsoft based products"
Oh.....well.....he really doesn't try to put spin on things.
"In a moment of what must have been an attempt at ironic humor"
Well, um....least he's not like the NY Times guy.
Nonsense, if there were oil on Mars Bush would PERSONALLY fly out there in a space shuttle, and land it himself before greeting the Martians in full flight gear.
Yes yes, we all know you bioengies dabble in powders, thats part of the reason we fund your studies.
Seriously....at least our costumes are cool to look at.
What the hell does a person wear to be their Sim? Regular clothes? Aaaahhhhh, and one of their big audiences is girls. The same girls who used to mock me and my friends for doing anime cosplay. Revenge is so sweet and just.
Point 1)You missed the .com days didn't you?
Point 2) Although my guess the trend will soon be to take previously free content, and now charge for it, rather than adding additional premium content *cough*IGN*cough*. See, that way you're offering the same product, but now getting paid more for it (usually, see 1)
I think if they truly catch on and become a widely used consumer item, an academy of sorts could be created to train users in using the suits. Or at least some sort of vehicle training. Trust me, when these things come out in the future, you'll DEFINITELY want someone having to pass a license test if they're gonna be using it on the street. Otherwise, crushed people start appearing.
One can only hope he was smart enough to install that night vision filter for that camera that allowed people to take xray photos. Imagine a live vid feed of that!
Kind of off-topic, but I couldn't help remember a Shadowrun character I used to play with my friends. He was a dwarf rigger, who lacked any cybernetics (in a campaign full of cyber-munchkins) whatsoever except for a massive hydraulic um.....cybernetic appendage.
Third leg was an understatement.
It did 12S water damage, and I've never seen an elven prostitute run screaming in fear like that in all my gaming experience.
Are there any available consumer cybernetics available yet? How about a bioluminescent, subdermal watch? Also, when am I going to be able to go out and buy off the shelf parts to put together my own Gargoyle suit?
Geek though I may be, I still don't have the technical knowledge to put this stuff all together by myself, but am very fascinated by it.
Anybody have any info on when consumer wearable computing might become reality?
Maybe I'm wrong here, and please correct me if I am, but wouldn't a low profit margin be irrelevant if they had good sales? I mean.....wouldn't supermarkets be going out of business then? They have ridiculously low margins on many items.
So if you ask me, it was a combination of low sales and low profit margins. But again, please correct me if I am wrong.
Slashdotters, you need to realize why this press release was posted in the first place. Not only is Slashdot a sizeable audience, it also has members who make very large technical decisions for corporations, which could help/hurt Real.
Real, if you want to make a good product, take a note from Quicktime. I don't want ads when I use your player. Quicktime doesn't have them, why do you need to? I also dont' want to be pestered about registration every time I open it. Asking me once is fine. At the most, you should have an option to be reminded again at a later date, and an option to never be reminded again. Understand that once we have made a decision, we don't want you to keep pestering us and second guessing us. You don't keep people using your software by annoying them.
How about another reason. Because its MY privacy. That means I don't owe ANYBODY an explanation of why I care. The fact that I care is reason enough. People are free to value their privacy however they want, but just because I value mine more highly than the next person in no way makes me less innocent.
That would be pretty cool, just make sure nobody takes a flash photograph of the 'new you'.
If they were tin-foil nanotubes would you feel safer?
Why does this sound like the same old argument "if you're not a criminal, then you have nothing to hide"?
In fact, in the article itself (too lazy to find the quote, but it was towards the end)a similar statement was made.
I am not a terrorist, and I am not a criminal. But I DO have something to hide. My privacy. You see, thats the thing about privacy, its yours, and it doesn't really matter if you have anything to hide or not. You see, the decision about what you have to hide should remain up to you. I care about hiding my privacy becauase I simply don't want others invading it, and since it is MY privacy, that is reason enough.
Some people may not value their privacy as highly as others, but that in no way gives them the right to say that others should not value their privacy as highly as they might. And that is my problem with your post. This is exactly what you do by making the statement that its all fine and good as long as you're not a terrorist.
On that note, does anybody know if Google tends to offer some form of DRiP (Divident Reinvestment Plan) or something similar where you can buy shares directly from the company instead of through a broker?