If it hadn't been called Doom 3 and made by id Software, it would have been bashed for being a lame, dark, monster-closet-using FPS that didn't compare to HL2, and few would have played it.
The only reason it's even remembered today is because it was called Doom 3 and made by id Software.
Those who where disappointed didn't know what Doom is about.
Those who think Doom 3 was at all like Doom don't know what Doom was about. Doom was brightly-lit with open areas packed with monsters. Crazy levels with platforms and switches and fireballs shooting over your head.
Doom 3's graphics weren't "awesome," the level design was not "awesome" (you've got to be kidding me...it was gray, metalallic corridors for seven hours straight), and it was not a blood and guts action blockbuster.
It was "here's another really dark room with one or two because it's all our engine can handle. Here's another really dark room. Ignore those obvious monster closets or that obvious hole in the bottom of the wall where the spider-heads will crawl out."
[blockquote]I absolutely hate getting puzzles in an FPS. When I play an FPS I want action, adrenaline, and mindless carnage. I want to vent, to get rid of my frustrations.[/blockquote]
Doom 3 failed in that aspect as well. Fighting one or two imps at a time in a poorly lit room isn't exciting.
Doom and Doom 2 also came out in the early 90s. And even given that the game was as you describe it, it had a greater variety of monsters, locations, and overall gameplay.
Doom 3 was a miserable six or so hours of near-total darkness in monochrome, gray tunnels. Carmack's insistence on a lack of visual "tricks" in the lighting system meant no ambience, no pre-calculated lighting, and so on which made the visuals suffer, in my opinion.
YOU are the reason game developers have to go to these measures just to ensure that people don't rip them off. It's disgusting how immoral and inethical people can be, grabbing something for free and purposely shoving the thought out of their minds that they're flat-out ripping someone off.
Again, you pro-PirateBay tards on Slashdot are the reason for these measures.
You haven't seen Twitter's infrastructure. You have no idea what the problem is.
According to other informed posts in the know, it has nothing to do with RoR at all and everything to do with how they're using their database. But I get that the Slashdot storyline is that RoR was the overhyped trend a few years ago that is now being "exposed" or something. People love a good storyline in their news.
What you're demanding is a judicial system with absolutely no insight or common sense whatsoever. For crying out loud, he's washing out his car and disposing of the carpet, and you're going to stand there and say, "I need proof that this is suspicious!"
I like OSX, too. However there are so many high-end audio plugins and VSTi that don't yet work on an Intel Mac that I can't fully use it yet. I have other reasons for not making a Mac my main production machine that are admittedly more idiosyncratic. One of them is that I'm really uncomfortable associating with religious zealots. I had a bad experience when a neighbor saw me carrying my old dual G4 into my house and decided that we were somehow "sympatico". He thenafter started sending me environmental flyers and rang my doorbell to show me his new Gen3 iPod. It reminded me of the South Park episode where Kyle's parents buy a hybrid car and move to San Francisco and start hanging around other self-absorbed people and smelling their own farts. *shudder*
No offense, but I don't believe a word of that. It's every anti-Mac user's favorite stereotypes packed into one paragraph. I've never, ever met a Mac user who acted like that. As a matter of fact, most of them I know are either technical users who used to use Linux or IT admins who work with Windows at the office but use a Mac as their personal machine.
Now Windows has ~90% of the market place and Apple has ~6%.
But not in digital editing, where Apple is the majority. Adobe will eventually release a 64-bit version because Apple users are their biggest customers. They did get screwed with Carbon 64-bit, though.
I've heard so many promises from Microsoft over the years that I don't believe Microsoft. I bet little of what we read in this article will even come true when Windows 7 actually goes into beta. We heard all sorts of promises about Vista too.
I just flat-out don't believe Microsoft. Little of what they hype up actually gets released in the form in which it was originally described, if at all.
The article is a bit silly anyway, claiming it was antitrust issues that "forced" Microsoft to make Vista modular which somehow slowed it down due to the "increased number of libraries that comprise the system." The article reminds me of Paul Thurrott, another Windows cheerleader who doesn't really grasp the technical details of what he writes about. For example, it says the next version of Windows will break compatibility by using new APIs, but then it says all the previous APIs will still be provided anyway.
Going through the article, there's not actually anything interesting in the article. It just says Microsoft will provide new APIs...that's all the new info there is.
Apple has the least restrictive DRM on the planet. I've never, ever noticed that it even exists even after making backups and burning my music to CDs. You're whining just to whine, like most Slashdot posters.
The majority of Windows PCs are non-specific about the superiority or inferiority of their screens. Dell doesn't lie about it. No fraud, no suit.
You're an idiot. The majority of Windows PCs advertise displaying millions of colors just like Apple does.
Try telling that to a bespectacled emo-haired skinny starbucks drinking douchebag that knows shit about computers, but somehow thinks he can explain the superiority of Apple's hardware to me?
Ah, so this is the only reason you're taking your anti-Apple position--nerd rage directed at people who are different from you. Again, you're an idiot.
I can see this becoming a trend. Every headline about a band making millions in a matter of days by distributing their music online, is going to attract the attention of the other musicians. Eventually, they will catch on.
That's wishful thinking. He can do this because he's an established artist that's already made millions. Same with Radiohead.
Good point. They did the same for most every new API introduced in new versions of Mac OS X. For example, OS X Tiger was using CoreText, but the APIs were not made public to developers yet.
Whenever someone brings up Slashdot's journalistic integrity, I'm reminded of CmdrTaco's World of Warcraft rant from a few years ago, Blizzard Made Me Change My Name. An entire 12-paragraph article because Blizzard made him change his name for using a title in it (Cmdr), which is against the naming rules. That CmdrTaco thought it was news, or that he felt so slighted that he thought he'd "strike back" at Blizzard by posting an article about it on Slashdot because he's CmdrTaco of Slashdot, gosh-darned it, just really showed me how immature and lame this site is.
The headline "Mac OS X Secretly Cripples Non-Apple Software" will go out on all the feeds. A lot of people won't even read the article. They'll look at it and say "See, typical tyrannical Apple." They may skim the summary and head straight for the comments. And they will be unknowingly misinformed.
Why is the parent comment marked as troll? It was reported a few weeks ago that the next version of Safari, 3.1, would see major JavaScript performance gains due to the latest WebKit builds. This article uses the beta Windows 3.0 version to compare to.
It's been said 1000 times: These things were not downloaded FROM the Pirate Bay - they just provide the reference as to where they could be downloaded from
Their servers provide the trackers which facilitate the illegal exchanged of copyrighted materials.
I hope they come out squeaky clean - as they should as they have not broken their countries law.
Running a piracy site, they're hardly squeaky clean to begin with. I'm always amazed at the level of support for Pirate Bay here at Slashdot and especially at the cesspool that is Digg. Making sure people don't get paid for their work is, frankly, a jackass thing to do. I know a bunch of you reading this have downloaded countless albums and software that you never dreamed of paying a dime for. Real people worked hard to create it so they could make a living.
The company that provides four-architecture fat binaries and a PowerPC translator needlessly breaks backwards compatibility? The reason OS X is so modern and stable is because they abandoned the classic Mac OS. The reason Windows is such a mess is because it's still based on code dating back to 1985.
Oh, you were just trolling and wanted to throw out a baseless "cult" insult.
Slashdot Mirror
No, no, no.
If it hadn't been called Doom 3 and made by id Software, it would have been bashed for being a lame, dark, monster-closet-using FPS that didn't compare to HL2, and few would have played it.
The only reason it's even remembered today is because it was called Doom 3 and made by id Software.
Those who think Doom 3 was at all like Doom don't know what Doom was about. Doom was brightly-lit with open areas packed with monsters. Crazy levels with platforms and switches and fireballs shooting over your head.
Doom 3's graphics weren't "awesome," the level design was not "awesome" (you've got to be kidding me...it was gray, metalallic corridors for seven hours straight), and it was not a blood and guts action blockbuster.
It was "here's another really dark room with one or two because it's all our engine can handle. Here's another really dark room. Ignore those obvious monster closets or that obvious hole in the bottom of the wall where the spider-heads will crawl out."
[blockquote]I absolutely hate getting puzzles in an FPS. When I play an FPS I want action, adrenaline, and mindless carnage. I want to vent, to get rid of my frustrations.[/blockquote]
Doom 3 failed in that aspect as well. Fighting one or two imps at a time in a poorly lit room isn't exciting.
Oh, look, another fanboy who disregards all criticism and standards of quality because Carmack provides him with technical nerd porn.
Doom and Doom 2 also came out in the early 90s. And even given that the game was as you describe it, it had a greater variety of monsters, locations, and overall gameplay.
Doom 3 was a miserable six or so hours of near-total darkness in monochrome, gray tunnels. Carmack's insistence on a lack of visual "tricks" in the lighting system meant no ambience, no pre-calculated lighting, and so on which made the visuals suffer, in my opinion.
YOU are the reason game developers have to go to these measures just to ensure that people don't rip them off. It's disgusting how immoral and inethical people can be, grabbing something for free and purposely shoving the thought out of their minds that they're flat-out ripping someone off.
Again, you pro-PirateBay tards on Slashdot are the reason for these measures.
You haven't seen Twitter's infrastructure. You have no idea what the problem is.
According to other informed posts in the know, it has nothing to do with RoR at all and everything to do with how they're using their database. But I get that the Slashdot storyline is that RoR was the overhyped trend a few years ago that is now being "exposed" or something. People love a good storyline in their news.
Seems to be working fine for YellowPages.com.
What is it that's causing the scaling problems? A slow framework? Ruby?
Uh, if your friend disappears, yeah, you DO have to explain all those behaviors.
What you're demanding is a judicial system with absolutely no insight or common sense whatsoever. For crying out loud, he's washing out his car and disposing of the carpet, and you're going to stand there and say, "I need proof that this is suspicious!"
No offense, but I don't believe a word of that. It's every anti-Mac user's favorite stereotypes packed into one paragraph. I've never, ever met a Mac user who acted like that. As a matter of fact, most of them I know are either technical users who used to use Linux or IT admins who work with Windows at the office but use a Mac as their personal machine.
But not in digital editing, where Apple is the majority. Adobe will eventually release a 64-bit version because Apple users are their biggest customers. They did get screwed with Carbon 64-bit, though.
I've heard so many promises from Microsoft over the years that I don't believe Microsoft. I bet little of what we read in this article will even come true when Windows 7 actually goes into beta. We heard all sorts of promises about Vista too.
I just flat-out don't believe Microsoft. Little of what they hype up actually gets released in the form in which it was originally described, if at all.
The article is a bit silly anyway, claiming it was antitrust issues that "forced" Microsoft to make Vista modular which somehow slowed it down due to the "increased number of libraries that comprise the system." The article reminds me of Paul Thurrott, another Windows cheerleader who doesn't really grasp the technical details of what he writes about. For example, it says the next version of Windows will break compatibility by using new APIs, but then it says all the previous APIs will still be provided anyway.
Going through the article, there's not actually anything interesting in the article. It just says Microsoft will provide new APIs...that's all the new info there is.
Apple has the least restrictive DRM on the planet. I've never, ever noticed that it even exists even after making backups and burning my music to CDs. You're whining just to whine, like most Slashdot posters.
You're an idiot. The majority of Windows PCs advertise displaying millions of colors just like Apple does.
Ah, so this is the only reason you're taking your anti-Apple position--nerd rage directed at people who are different from you. Again, you're an idiot.
That's wishful thinking. He can do this because he's an established artist that's already made millions. Same with Radiohead.
Good point. They did the same for most every new API introduced in new versions of Mac OS X. For example, OS X Tiger was using CoreText, but the APIs were not made public to developers yet.
Whenever someone brings up Slashdot's journalistic integrity, I'm reminded of CmdrTaco's World of Warcraft rant from a few years ago, Blizzard Made Me Change My Name. An entire 12-paragraph article because Blizzard made him change his name for using a title in it (Cmdr), which is against the naming rules. That CmdrTaco thought it was news, or that he felt so slighted that he thought he'd "strike back" at Blizzard by posting an article about it on Slashdot because he's CmdrTaco of Slashdot, gosh-darned it, just really showed me how immature and lame this site is.
The headline "Mac OS X Secretly Cripples Non-Apple Software" will go out on all the feeds. A lot of people won't even read the article. They'll look at it and say "See, typical tyrannical Apple." They may skim the summary and head straight for the comments. And they will be unknowingly misinformed.
Why is the parent comment marked as troll? It was reported a few weeks ago that the next version of Safari, 3.1, would see major JavaScript performance gains due to the latest WebKit builds. This article uses the beta Windows 3.0 version to compare to.
Until Safari 3.1 comes out and beats it back. The latest versions of WebKit have
By the way, these performance tests against Safari were performed against the beta Windows version.
Whoops. Guess he underestimated the hyper-drama of Slashdot submitters.
What the fuck? How are they a monopoly because they modified an open source tool? What a lame troll.
The company that provides four-architecture fat binaries and a PowerPC translator needlessly breaks backwards compatibility? The reason OS X is so modern and stable is because they abandoned the classic Mac OS. The reason Windows is such a mess is because it's still based on code dating back to 1985.
Oh, you were just trolling and wanted to throw out a baseless "cult" insult.