I think the key word is "majority", though I disagree with that. I do acknowledge that for many, it is pretty much a negative experience, and for a majority, it is not nearly as rewarding as it could be.
I personally like getting out for a nice walk down to the library every now and then. However, if every time I went out to make this walk I ended up taking wrong turn after wrong turn, ended up getting completely lost to the point I couldn't find my way home again, and just as I'm about to give up and call someone to drive me home I broke my leg, then I might stop trying to walk to the library.
For those who can get to the library with no trouble, it's a great resource - but to those who can't get to it, it's of no use at all.
Golly gee, I hope my analogy isn't too obscure or subtle...
Anyways, that is sort of an extreme example. Most of the public just takes one or two wrong turns on their way to the library. They eventually get there, but it takes them about a half hour longer than it should. Sure it's good exercise, but it's still annoying as hell.
Does that mean we need to redo our entire network of roads, sidewalks and paths? Of course not. But, there are a lot of people who could benefit from a few more maps and lessons in how to read and use them.
Here's a similar issue - let's say you make a Half-Life mod, and distribute it for free on the Internet. Not only is this condoned, it makes Valve smile - this is what made HL the endlessly replayable hit it became, after all. Now, let's say that you start selling your mod, without permission from Valve. As a no-brainer, this is clearly verbotten.
Really, that's all that's going on here - Engage has made a mod that fills the game with advertising, and is being paid for it (though by advertisers as opposed to by gamers) without Valve's permission. Oddly enough, they could have filled CS with unpaid ads, and gotten away with it (though that would be a piss poor business model...)
Why is it that so rarely, and with US shows almost never, Sci-Fi can contain humour as well as the fantastic?
I don't find it too rare. Consider Farscape and the Stargate series. Both seemed to strike a balance adding humor to an otherwise dramatic series. They key is adding it when it's appropriate...
But it would be nice to see a quality science fiction comedy about now, along the lines of Red Dwarf. Perhaps we could get the Sci Fi channel and the Henson company to co-produce a series based on the remaining HHGTG books...
Your post implied that you approve of the action of grammar trolls. You did this by making a sarcastic remark about grammar trolls are recieved (directed more at Slashdot in general than me I think). I don't recall anything in your post about my odds of success in getting the troll to reveal himself.
I feel I've already wasted enough time on this, so I'll try and be brief here and just make a few points.
If that's what you got from my post, then I'm afraid I just made the post too subtle.
Just because someone disagrees with you, that does not make them a Troll, just someone who disagrees with you.
I have no problem with those who offer assistance in improving one's understanding of the English language. It's a nice goal, and if we all understood how to communicate better, then *surprise*, there will be fewer misunderstandings. That is what I originally understood you to be trying to do with your.sig, and the AC with a non-confrontational reply.
I too am annoyed by "Grammar Trolls" as you put it. With your confrontational reply to the AC, you had moved from being "Helpful Grammar Person" to being a "Grammar Troll". Hence, why my reply was perhaps a bit more sarcastic than it should have been. Oh friggen well.
Anyways, that's how it stands. If it makes you feel better, mark me as whatever - I've exerted enough energy on this topic.
How amusing... looks like you need to relax a bit, and quit taking/. so seriously. Aside from that, your trap is seriously flawed.
1) I don't go around correcting others grammar. You might have missed it, but my post's point was to point out that your post was not likely to get the AC to reveal him or herself.
2) As a rule, I don't post AC.
3) If I'm not mistaken, even if you got the AC to reveal themself for you to add to your list, I don't think it will effect whether or not you see their AC posts.
See, here I am trying to be nice and friendly, and you end up being a dick back. Such is life anymore, it seems.
Actually, part of the Sorrows Furnace update was a result of the fact that they developed some new content-development tools near their release date, and felt they never really had a chance to fully utilize them. That update included some nifty things they couldn't do during their initial development.
That, and part of it is just a free update. They have also been adding content specific to two holiday events (Halloween and Christmas), as well as adding random content alongside bug fixes and balance updates. I fully expect to see more such free updates come around every now and then - maybe not on the same scale as Sorrow's Furnace, but I wouldn't be surprised to see another free content update similar to it. No idea if it would be chapter specific though.
To mark him as a friend out of respect for showing you the error of your ways, right? Yeah, I didn't think so; this is Slashdot, after all. He is right, though. And to make matters worse, affect can also be used as a noun.
Still I can appreciate your attempt to improve others usage of the English language in your.sig, it's just that you might want to try a different "rule" to champion.
Aside from this site, I think I have visited all of 5 blogs and paid them any attention. Upon brief inspection, all 5 involved bitching about another blog at some point or another.
It's not being hypocritical - it seems to be a requirement of being a blog.
Yes, but you'd be in possession of a mint condition 200 year old spaceship (only used once!) Just think what that might go for on eBay... Especially if it's disappearance 200 years ago created an interstellar Bermuda Triangle superstition.
You are confusing "people", referring to 2 people in this thread, and "people", meaning everyone else who bought the game. A few people in this thread found that the game was not fun for them. This does not equate to "this game is not fun for anyone". So the gp used improper/confusing English grammer. It's not at all hard to figure out what he was attempting to say. If you get confused by discrepency that simple, good luck with the rest of the Internet.
The fact that at least half the players of the game didn't enjoy it
Though I couldn't find the exact sales figures in the limitted time I was willing to devote to this task, I do remember seeing that the original Kingdom Hearts outsold FFX and FFX-2. Where do you find that half of that many people didn't enjoy it? My own experience has been that the vast majority of those who played it really liked it, despite a few flaws (I think I've seen 1 person who liked the gummi ship portions...), and those who didn't like it were few and far between (and apparently all on/.).
In other words, in order to be able to hack this e-paper, you would have to have all the tools and facilities required to make e-paper available to you. And if you have all the tools available, it will be easier and probably take less time and cost less to just make new e-paper to your own specs.
You, as well, make some good points (we better watch how long we continue this civilised, intelligent discourse - they may revoke our/. memberships). I do agree that, right now, games are, for the most part, geared towards males. Also, comics (books and strips) tend to do this as well with female forms.
However, grouping males in video games as merely competent and fit, in my eyes, is not really accurate. Even though that describes Gordon Freemen, you have to admit that character is not indicative of the majority. An awful lot of the males in games are buffed up to a point that is utterly impossible for your average male to reach without abusing anabolic steroids. And no, for most of us, just pumping a lot of weight won't get you there.
Really, I only have two points that I want to make on this issue.
1) Catering to female gamers would not result in a dramatic change in character portrayal. The two games I am playing now are Age of Empires III and GuildWars. Now, AoE3 does not have a lot of objectification, as everyone is an inch tall. GuildWars, however, is different - females tend to wear skimpier outfits than their male counterparts, and body proportions are idealized for both genders. Now, during one of the beta events I got my girlfriend playing this game, and lo and behold she made a few appearance choices I had not guesed she would, making the character look more "girly" than I expected. She simply said she liked that look better. Admittedly they don't offer a lot of customization on proportions or the like, but still.
I also have seen the characters that other female friends of mine create and play online, and when given the option, they tend to go for the "sexy" avatar as opposed to the "practical" or "realistic" one.
I guess I'm just saying is that we are doing females as much of a disservice as a service by going on about this. We as a society have certain ideas on what constitutes an attractive male and an attractive female, and for the most part males and females agree on both - it's just a difference of a desire to "be" or "be with". This trancends video games to just about all media, and really, there's no reason that games should be held to different standards than TV, Movies, Comics, etc.
2) Is this hurting anyone? I'm going to break from what appears to be mainstream thought drastically on this. Media is flooded with images of "perfect" idealised female bodies which the average woman has little to no hope of attaining for herself. Unfortunately, many women end up hurting their bodies trying to make themselves look like this, and it is sad. However, consider that we are also inundated with equally unattainable male stereotypes. Yet, men are much happier with their appearance than women are, even thoug women on average tend to be closer to their ideal than men are (no solid evidence, just tons of observation through a history of medical study, artistic study, and just life in general). I feel it boils down to confidence. Men seem to have a level of confidence about themselves that too many women lack. I'm not sure why this is, but I feelthat this is the real problem e need to address, and I don't think it is caused by how media presents ourselves to us. Perhaps it is because we still tend to identify a female's value based partially on the type of male she can attract, instead of on her own merits. Who knows.
basically, I feel that just changing how females are represented physically in media is just like putting new paint on an old rusted car - it doesn't resolve the real issue. If females had the same amount of confidence that males had, then the size of Lara Croft's bust wouldn't matter the least bit.
I actualy have more I would like to say, but real life issues force me to cut this short, I'm afraid.... I may revisit this later, if the topic is still active.
I will grant you that the majority of females in games have been designed to attract male gamers, but I'm not sure that catering to female gamers would drastically change the product.
Very very few of the male gamers out there actually look like Duke Nukem or any of the male characters in todays video games. Even Gordon Freemen, an engineer with glasses who should, by that description alone, be at the top of the geek stereotype, is a buff, cut good-looking individual. Do these unrealistic characters drive away the male populace? Not at all. Part of playing a game is escaping from your ordinary life, and this is enhanced by role-playing as a good-looking, visually appealing character. When given the choice, not many choose an ugly avatar for themselves in the game world.
Now, if every game was designed to attract females as well as males, what would female characters look like? There may be some change, but most, especially those that serve as player representations, wouldn't change much, because females like to roleplay too. They like to imagine they are the incredibly fit and attractive heroine, as opposed to an average-looking everyday character. Bust sizes may be a little less top heavy and closer to the realm of believability, but they will still be on the higher end of the scale. Why shouldn't females be allowed to indulge in as much role-pplay and fantasy as the guys?
But what about male characters in games that aren't handsome or fit? Rare, but when used, are often playing a stereotype or primarily comic role. The fat man isn't the hero, he's either a hapless shmoe in need of rescue, or a bungling foe that is easily dispatched. Now, female counterparts to these stereotypes exist in the real world, but we never see them in games. Why? Is it because females are objectified? I argue that this is at least in part because developers have too much respect and/or fear of females in general to throw them into a game. White males, being the "majority" and the de facto "ruling class" are fare game for satire and ridicule, but females are still viewed as the injured "minority", and as such are beyond such blatant stereotyping, one of several Sacred Cows if you will.
I'm not trying to pass any moral judgements here on how people in games shoud be represented (for the most part anyways), just trying to type out my own observations. That's just how I see it so far.
Was a software update downloaded by them, or with their knowledge, between those two dates? If the aswer is no, then perhaps it is set up to update without your permission... or, maybe the testers did something wrong.
I want my download to count. I am going to download it from the release page.
I'm with you there... though I'm already using 1.5 as we speak. I'll just be sure to download it again from the release page.
However, how do we know that the downloads from the ftp site automagically get computed in, including those of us who download it ahead of the "official" release?
Unfortunately, past experience has shown that great games are frequently 1-off flukes.
So far, the group of Blizzard vets that went off to form ArenaNet have done pretty damn well with their game GuildWars. We can hope that lightning will strike twi... er, thrice.
I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. It seems like this could make the online capabilities of the PS2 more robust, and doesn't tie any developer down to a specific framework for online gaming. Really, it just all boils down to specific implementation, and all the speculation at this point just boils down to a bunch of whistling in the dark.
If you are referring to these pits, snakes that have them have 2, between the nostril and te eye, on either side of their head. This should allow for some stereoscopic like interpretation, making the data directional.
If I recall correctly, the complex eyes of a snake see close to the same visible light range that we humans do. The pits "see" the infrared range. For a cold-blooded animal, this is far from useless - this specialization helps them find the warm rock to bring up their body temperature, or pick out the extremely warm-blooded mouse hiding in the cold shadows under a rock.
We honestly don't understand all of the uses for these pits yet, but the above are just some of the possible uses we have observed evidence towards. Other hitherfore undocumented uses may well exist.
Such genes were never selected against when expected lifetimes were 35 years or less.
Seeing as how I'm posting this 7 days afterwards, I'm not expecting a lot of eyeballs on this comment, but I'll make it anyways...
Another thing that keeps those genes from being selected against is that most of the gene selection occurs during breeding age, based primarily on the characteristics of a person at that age. There aren't a lot of people who, in choosing a mate, use the health status of their grandparents as a major factor. The only way this might change is if viable breeding age extends significantly with any new age-lengthening technologies...
This, of course, only goes to further your idea, that major life-extending procedures will have to involve understanding and perhaps modification of these harmful genes.
If so, I'd like an example-- because I've never heard of a creature with a deep, light-sensitive pit in its body.
The example that comes immediately to mind are the heat-sensitive "pits" found on pit-vipers and pythons. They detect infra-red light in almost this exact way.
Re:What's the point of these Q&A sessions?
on
Sid Meier Responds
·
· Score: 1
man, i'm NEVER coming back!
Right on, brother! Preach it! I'm with you, 100%, and I'm not coming back to this free content again either!
Slashdot Mirror
I personally like getting out for a nice walk down to the library every now and then. However, if every time I went out to make this walk I ended up taking wrong turn after wrong turn, ended up getting completely lost to the point I couldn't find my way home again, and just as I'm about to give up and call someone to drive me home I broke my leg, then I might stop trying to walk to the library.
For those who can get to the library with no trouble, it's a great resource - but to those who can't get to it, it's of no use at all.
Golly gee, I hope my analogy isn't too obscure or subtle...
Anyways, that is sort of an extreme example. Most of the public just takes one or two wrong turns on their way to the library. They eventually get there, but it takes them about a half hour longer than it should. Sure it's good exercise, but it's still annoying as hell.
Does that mean we need to redo our entire network of roads, sidewalks and paths? Of course not. But, there are a lot of people who could benefit from a few more maps and lessons in how to read and use them.
Really, that's all that's going on here - Engage has made a mod that fills the game with advertising, and is being paid for it (though by advertisers as opposed to by gamers) without Valve's permission. Oddly enough, they could have filled CS with unpaid ads, and gotten away with it (though that would be a piss poor business model...)
I don't find it too rare. Consider Farscape and the Stargate series. Both seemed to strike a balance adding humor to an otherwise dramatic series. They key is adding it when it's appropriate...
But it would be nice to see a quality science fiction comedy about now, along the lines of Red Dwarf. Perhaps we could get the Sci Fi channel and the Henson company to co-produce a series based on the remaining HHGTG books...
I feel I've already wasted enough time on this, so I'll try and be brief here and just make a few points.
Anyways, that's how it stands. If it makes you feel better, mark me as whatever - I've exerted enough energy on this topic.
1) I don't go around correcting others grammar. You might have missed it, but my post's point was to point out that your post was not likely to get the AC to reveal him or herself.
2) As a rule, I don't post AC.
3) If I'm not mistaken, even if you got the AC to reveal themself for you to add to your list, I don't think it will effect whether or not you see their AC posts.
See, here I am trying to be nice and friendly, and you end up being a dick back. Such is life anymore, it seems.
That, and part of it is just a free update. They have also been adding content specific to two holiday events (Halloween and Christmas), as well as adding random content alongside bug fixes and balance updates. I fully expect to see more such free updates come around every now and then - maybe not on the same scale as Sorrow's Furnace, but I wouldn't be surprised to see another free content update similar to it. No idea if it would be chapter specific though.
Still I can appreciate your attempt to improve others usage of the English language in your .sig, it's just that you might want to try a different "rule" to champion.
It's not being hypocritical - it seems to be a requirement of being a blog.
Really, I'm looking forward to the Opterons with magnifying windows so you can see all the circuits clicking away....
Yes, but you'd be in possession of a mint condition 200 year old spaceship (only used once!) Just think what that might go for on eBay... Especially if it's disappearance 200 years ago created an interstellar Bermuda Triangle superstition.
The fact that at least half the players of the game didn't enjoy it
Though I couldn't find the exact sales figures in the limitted time I was willing to devote to this task, I do remember seeing that the original Kingdom Hearts outsold FFX and FFX-2. Where do you find that half of that many people didn't enjoy it? My own experience has been that the vast majority of those who played it really liked it, despite a few flaws (I think I've seen 1 person who liked the gummi ship portions...), and those who didn't like it were few and far between (and apparently all on /.).
Depends. Has that little crystal embedded into your hand started blinking/turned black yet?
In other words, in order to be able to hack this e-paper, you would have to have all the tools and facilities required to make e-paper available to you. And if you have all the tools available, it will be easier and probably take less time and cost less to just make new e-paper to your own specs.
However, grouping males in video games as merely competent and fit, in my eyes, is not really accurate. Even though that describes Gordon Freemen, you have to admit that character is not indicative of the majority. An awful lot of the males in games are buffed up to a point that is utterly impossible for your average male to reach without abusing anabolic steroids. And no, for most of us, just pumping a lot of weight won't get you there.
Really, I only have two points that I want to make on this issue.
1) Catering to female gamers would not result in a dramatic change in character portrayal. The two games I am playing now are Age of Empires III and GuildWars. Now, AoE3 does not have a lot of objectification, as everyone is an inch tall. GuildWars, however, is different - females tend to wear skimpier outfits than their male counterparts, and body proportions are idealized for both genders. Now, during one of the beta events I got my girlfriend playing this game, and lo and behold she made a few appearance choices I had not guesed she would, making the character look more "girly" than I expected. She simply said she liked that look better. Admittedly they don't offer a lot of customization on proportions or the like, but still.
I also have seen the characters that other female friends of mine create and play online, and when given the option, they tend to go for the "sexy" avatar as opposed to the "practical" or "realistic" one.
I guess I'm just saying is that we are doing females as much of a disservice as a service by going on about this. We as a society have certain ideas on what constitutes an attractive male and an attractive female, and for the most part males and females agree on both - it's just a difference of a desire to "be" or "be with". This trancends video games to just about all media, and really, there's no reason that games should be held to different standards than TV, Movies, Comics, etc.
2) Is this hurting anyone? I'm going to break from what appears to be mainstream thought drastically on this. Media is flooded with images of "perfect" idealised female bodies which the average woman has little to no hope of attaining for herself. Unfortunately, many women end up hurting their bodies trying to make themselves look like this, and it is sad. However, consider that we are also inundated with equally unattainable male stereotypes. Yet, men are much happier with their appearance than women are, even thoug women on average tend to be closer to their ideal than men are (no solid evidence, just tons of observation through a history of medical study, artistic study, and just life in general). I feel it boils down to confidence. Men seem to have a level of confidence about themselves that too many women lack. I'm not sure why this is, but I feelthat this is the real problem e need to address, and I don't think it is caused by how media presents ourselves to us. Perhaps it is because we still tend to identify a female's value based partially on the type of male she can attract, instead of on her own merits. Who knows.
basically, I feel that just changing how females are represented physically in media is just like putting new paint on an old rusted car - it doesn't resolve the real issue. If females had the same amount of confidence that males had, then the size of Lara Croft's bust wouldn't matter the least bit.
I actualy have more I would like to say, but real life issues force me to cut this short, I'm afraid.... I may revisit this later, if the topic is still active.
Very very few of the male gamers out there actually look like Duke Nukem or any of the male characters in todays video games. Even Gordon Freemen, an engineer with glasses who should, by that description alone, be at the top of the geek stereotype, is a buff, cut good-looking individual. Do these unrealistic characters drive away the male populace? Not at all. Part of playing a game is escaping from your ordinary life, and this is enhanced by role-playing as a good-looking, visually appealing character. When given the choice, not many choose an ugly avatar for themselves in the game world.
Now, if every game was designed to attract females as well as males, what would female characters look like? There may be some change, but most, especially those that serve as player representations, wouldn't change much, because females like to roleplay too. They like to imagine they are the incredibly fit and attractive heroine, as opposed to an average-looking everyday character. Bust sizes may be a little less top heavy and closer to the realm of believability, but they will still be on the higher end of the scale. Why shouldn't females be allowed to indulge in as much role-pplay and fantasy as the guys?
But what about male characters in games that aren't handsome or fit? Rare, but when used, are often playing a stereotype or primarily comic role. The fat man isn't the hero, he's either a hapless shmoe in need of rescue, or a bungling foe that is easily dispatched. Now, female counterparts to these stereotypes exist in the real world, but we never see them in games. Why? Is it because females are objectified? I argue that this is at least in part because developers have too much respect and/or fear of females in general to throw them into a game. White males, being the "majority" and the de facto "ruling class" are fare game for satire and ridicule, but females are still viewed as the injured "minority", and as such are beyond such blatant stereotyping, one of several Sacred Cows if you will.
I'm not trying to pass any moral judgements here on how people in games shoud be represented (for the most part anyways), just trying to type out my own observations. That's just how I see it so far.
Since other comments in this thread have made me reminicent of my own VMS days, I'll use that command set. In that OS, you can always issue:
$ DIR /DATE
Pick one from before 10:00. Run with it. Lord knows the versioning on VMS has saved my ass more than a few times...
Was a software update downloaded by them, or with their knowledge, between those two dates? If the aswer is no, then perhaps it is set up to update without your permission... or, maybe the testers did something wrong.
As one of the poor unfortunates who has sat all the way through Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls, I respectfully disagree on this point.
I'm with you there... though I'm already using 1.5 as we speak. I'll just be sure to download it again from the release page.
However, how do we know that the downloads from the ftp site automagically get computed in, including those of us who download it ahead of the "official" release?
So far, the group of Blizzard vets that went off to form ArenaNet have done pretty damn well with their game GuildWars. We can hope that lightning will strike twi... er, thrice.
I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. It seems like this could make the online capabilities of the PS2 more robust, and doesn't tie any developer down to a specific framework for online gaming. Really, it just all boils down to specific implementation, and all the speculation at this point just boils down to a bunch of whistling in the dark.
If I recall correctly, the complex eyes of a snake see close to the same visible light range that we humans do. The pits "see" the infrared range. For a cold-blooded animal, this is far from useless - this specialization helps them find the warm rock to bring up their body temperature, or pick out the extremely warm-blooded mouse hiding in the cold shadows under a rock.
We honestly don't understand all of the uses for these pits yet, but the above are just some of the possible uses we have observed evidence towards. Other hitherfore undocumented uses may well exist.
Seeing as how I'm posting this 7 days afterwards, I'm not expecting a lot of eyeballs on this comment, but I'll make it anyways...
Another thing that keeps those genes from being selected against is that most of the gene selection occurs during breeding age, based primarily on the characteristics of a person at that age. There aren't a lot of people who, in choosing a mate, use the health status of their grandparents as a major factor. The only way this might change is if viable breeding age extends significantly with any new age-lengthening technologies...
This, of course, only goes to further your idea, that major life-extending procedures will have to involve understanding and perhaps modification of these harmful genes.
The example that comes immediately to mind are the heat-sensitive "pits" found on pit-vipers and pythons. They detect infra-red light in almost this exact way.
Right on, brother! Preach it! I'm with you, 100%, and I'm not coming back to this free content again either!
See ya tomorrow...