And here I thought that CounterStrike would only train terrorists to lay on the ground, half-dead, shouting "OMG WTF AWP CAMPING FAG!1!1!!". Advanced CounterStrike classes involve running around vandalizing walls with pr0n.
On the one hand, I desparately want to say things like "Woohoo! Jumpman, here I come!". On the other hand, I'm totally sure that Nintendo is lurking around internet forums looking for which games to port. I can just imagine the conversation:
Nintendo Secret Ops Agent Alpha: "Oh! Some random person on the internet just said that Jumpman must be ported!" Nintendo Project Lead: "That's great! We'll get right on it!" Nintendo Secret Ops Agent Alpha: "...oh, wait. Someone else on the internet says that game sucks." Nintendo Project Lead: "Nevermind, then. Cancel the programming team."
For me and those I encounter, we call the effect "pixie dust." Computer-savvy people tend to have it, floating about them like a cloud, while nobody else does. (This also explains the whole "computer geeks + bathing = bad" phenomena... none of them want to lose the dust!) It probably just wears off on you from the magic smoke that comes out the first time that you're mucking about in the insides... hard to say for sure, though.
You can tell that it's really pixie dust, though, because the more you (a computer-savvy person) tinker with the box, the more pixie dust shakes off onto the device, and the longer the magical effect lasts.
By the way, if you've never had to bear the pain of being required to read this book for a class, consider yourself lucky. If this book looks like interesting reading to you, might I recommend grinding your foot off with a dremmel instead? It will be less painful, and you'll sustain less permanent damage.
The members of the community this is affecting need to call or write their legislative critters and politely request the following:
* There is no reason that violent games should be singled out. Violent books, movies, tv shows, plays, and actions should also be outlawed for access to children.
* Then, list out specific examples of violent items you think should be limited. Cartoons, chess, checkers, Parcheesi, football, basketball, rough playing by other children, and temper tantrums. Be sure to make an exhaustive list of everything that might potentially be considered violent and/or entertainment. If you can, sneak in "state congressional meetings" to the list.
The more of these that can be added to the law, the bigger the article in the newspapers that will result about the stupidity of the lawmakers in the area, and the more likely that:
a) the law will be immediately struck down or simply fail on the amendments, and
b) the morons responsible for passing it will be ejected in the next election.
If the law eventually passes anyway, get together with your local retailers and have them grab a single copy of every single game, every single movie, and every single book they sell, and drive the truck up to the capitol steps. Ask them in person if they could just go ahead and suss out which ones can and can't be sold to children, and then every time they pick one that's "OK for the kids", list out specific instances of violence present in the media. Be sure to act like they're the devil for suggesting that children be allowed to view such filth. The more ridiculous, the better.
Oh, and invite the press. They love showboating like this. The more embarassment you can heap on the lawmakers, the better.
It's cute, it's simple, it's colorful, and it has a handicap system to help even out players of differing skill levels. (May be known as "Bust-a-Move" in your locale). Other good puzzle games include Super Puzzle Fighter 2, and even good ol' fashioned Tetris. Gauntlet 2 can also be good as an old-school choice, as it encourages working together for the best effect... even if you've got it on free-play.
There are also some party games that do automatic leveling of the playing field. Mario Kart, Mario Double Dash, any of the Mario Party series, and (for a non-Mario game) an obscure board game title for the PS2 called "Top Shop". (Top Shop is sort of like Monopoly, only fun.) In any of these games, you're subtly (and sometimes not-so-subtly) punished for being too far in the lead, so things can even out.
As far as specifically co-op games, they can be difficult to find. That said, the Baldur's Gate series for the PS2 worked well for me and my girlfriend. I saw WoW mentioned above, but there's an easy solution to not inching ahead of your partner's character: each of you create a character that you only use when adventuring together. My girlfriend and I do this with Guild Wars - each of us have multi's that go do their own thing, but we've also got two characters that work together exclusively. Other co-op options include RTS's, so long as you're both playing on the same team (Age of Empires 2 comes immediately to mind) and work together. Also, some of the alternate, team-based modes for UT work well if she'd like to get into FPS's. (I recommend Invasion in UT2k4.)
If it's just a matter of easing her into gaming, I heartily recommend The Sims. It'll get her more comfortable with using her computer (your computer?... not for long if she gets hooked) for gaming, and will make it easier for her to want to seek out other video games later.
Also, finding an RPG to play together can be a lot like reading a book together. If the story is interesting, then it may not even matter that one player doesn't have the controller - just make sure you don't kibbutz too much, and if you're playing in parallel, don't get crazy with the spoilers.
And, of course, there's a lot of crossover between playing computer/console games and playing traditional card/board games. In anything vaguely strategy-related, there's a lot of knowledge that carries over, and if either of you starts to win excessively, it's considerably easier to make some house rules for them than it is for computer/console games. Go to your local small gaming shop together, pick out something that catches both of your fancy, and try it out. [insert blatant plug for my sig here.;) ]
So, there you go. All kinds of options for all kinds of tastes. If one of them doesn't work, try another!
The ingredients list reminds me of one of my more favorite Looney Toons, featuring Porky Pig. He'd been instructed by his mother to go to the store and buy "a loaf of bread, a container of milk, a stick of butter, come straight home." Which he repeats to himself over and over again (surprisingly stutter-free, for the most part, I might add) until he reads the sign on a movie theater. Of course, this changes his repeated mantra to include the title of the film (which escapes me), and he ends up spending the shopping money on the movie ticket.
Nevertheless, when making a trip to the grocery store or composing a shopping list for someone else, I'll often find myself using that same line.
I want to make sure that I understand you properly here. Are you suggesting that the proper solution to a monopoly abusing its power is to do nothing and simply wait it out?
That, during that time period in which the monopolistic company is running amuck (22 to 33 years in our example of Standard Oil), if one is being unfairly hurt by monopolistic anticompetitive measures (such as oil producers were during this period, specifically in that they were denied even the possibility of selling their oil to another vendor at a higher price [see also the incident wherein SO blocked their competitor's ability to move oil by physically blocking its transport]), the proper course of action is to just suck it up?
I want to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding your post, so please clarify, if you would. Also, thank you for taking the time to put thought into a series of considerate posts defending your position. Intelligent political debate on the internet is terribly difficult to find, and our discussion has been a delight to me.
Out of curiosity, I cannot help but wonder what your solution to the problem is, if you do not consider 'specific actions taken by a government when an egregious offender makes itself apparent, based on the situation' to be an acceptable solution.
If we are both agreed that companies have a tendency to abuse their positions of power (just as government will), and that - when a company achieves significant monopolistic power and abuses that power - it is fantastic for that company but poor for anyone else who wishes to compete (and, as a result, the consumers [unless you care to assert that less competition is generally better for consumers?] ), what is your solution for minimizing the overall damage?
I mean, it's all fine and well to say that the "invisible hand of the market" corrected for Standard Oil eventually, but it took from before 1878 (when SO gained 90% market share and, ostensibly, monopoly status) to 1911 (when the breakup was finalized) in order to do this. During that 33 year period, oil producers were forced to take the price that SO dictated, regardless of whether that price was fair or not.
A "free market" should have provided a wealth of options for oil producers, such that they could have bartered for a price that matched the quality of their oil (and whatever other factors might normally influence price, such as speed of delivery, quality of service, etc.), but SO's monopolistic practices prohibited that free barter over a span of 33 years. (If we wish to nitpick, I'll be willing to concede the marketshare decline over the last 11 years of that reduces the impact of their practices somewhat, and we can talk about a complete lack of a free market for those first 22 years instead if you like.)
Oh, and on the last point, there won't be any successors. As long as we're using magic to install me as absolute potentate, we're also using magic to make me invincible, omniscient, omnipotent and immortal. See? There are easy solutions to everything!;)
Slashdot Mirror
It's all pretty fucking pointless actually.
No, no... you've got it mixed up. It's actually all pointless pretty fucking.
I suspect that once this is released under that open-source license, a lively round of Perl Golf will follow.
"I can write that script in 70 characters or less, George!"
Old Beetle or new?
And here I thought that CounterStrike would only train terrorists to lay on the ground, half-dead, shouting "OMG WTF AWP CAMPING FAG!1!1!!". Advanced CounterStrike classes involve running around vandalizing walls with pr0n.
On the one hand, I desparately want to say things like "Woohoo! Jumpman, here I come!". On the other hand, I'm totally sure that Nintendo is lurking around internet forums looking for which games to port. I can just imagine the conversation:
Nintendo Secret Ops Agent Alpha: "Oh! Some random person on the internet just said that Jumpman must be ported!"
Nintendo Project Lead: "That's great! We'll get right on it!"
Nintendo Secret Ops Agent Alpha: "...oh, wait. Someone else on the internet says that game sucks."
Nintendo Project Lead: "Nevermind, then. Cancel the programming team."
Well if they're so smart, then why are they all dead? Noodle THAT one for a while!
Deja Food... the feeling that you've had this meal before.
For me and those I encounter, we call the effect "pixie dust." Computer-savvy people tend to have it, floating about them like a cloud, while nobody else does. (This also explains the whole "computer geeks + bathing = bad" phenomena... none of them want to lose the dust!) It probably just wears off on you from the magic smoke that comes out the first time that you're mucking about in the insides... hard to say for sure, though.
You can tell that it's really pixie dust, though, because the more you (a computer-savvy person) tinker with the box, the more pixie dust shakes off onto the device, and the longer the magical effect lasts.
It can't be! It's impossible!!!
[Obligitory Star Wars]
They're just giving the FF cosplayers an excuse to go out and stand in line in full pseudo-FF regalia.
So you've got Perl in your PHP, is there a way to do PHP in your Perl?
Sure!
</joke>
I'm sorry, but the success of the Nintendo Wii's Virtual Console? Has /. suddenly turned time in reverse, and is now duping stories from the future?
Did anyone else immediately think of this?
By the way, if you've never had to bear the pain of being required to read this book for a class, consider yourself lucky. If this book looks like interesting reading to you, might I recommend grinding your foot off with a dremmel instead? It will be less painful, and you'll sustain less permanent damage.
The UK isn't part of the USA. There's like some water between them.
In your face, Hawaii!
The members of the community this is affecting need to call or write their legislative critters and politely request the following:
* There is no reason that violent games should be singled out. Violent books, movies, tv shows, plays, and actions should also be outlawed for access to children.
* Then, list out specific examples of violent items you think should be limited. Cartoons, chess, checkers, Parcheesi, football, basketball, rough playing by other children, and temper tantrums. Be sure to make an exhaustive list of everything that might potentially be considered violent and/or entertainment. If you can, sneak in "state congressional meetings" to the list.
The more of these that can be added to the law, the bigger the article in the newspapers that will result about the stupidity of the lawmakers in the area, and the more likely that:
a) the law will be immediately struck down or simply fail on the amendments, and
b) the morons responsible for passing it will be ejected in the next election.
If the law eventually passes anyway, get together with your local retailers and have them grab a single copy of every single game, every single movie, and every single book they sell, and drive the truck up to the capitol steps. Ask them in person if they could just go ahead and suss out which ones can and can't be sold to children, and then every time they pick one that's "OK for the kids", list out specific instances of violence present in the media. Be sure to act like they're the devil for suggesting that children be allowed to view such filth. The more ridiculous, the better.
Oh, and invite the press. They love showboating like this. The more embarassment you can heap on the lawmakers, the better.
Enjoy!
"Sardonic."
No fair bringing context into the discussion! ;)
It's cute, it's simple, it's colorful, and it has a handicap system to help even out players of differing skill levels. (May be known as "Bust-a-Move" in your locale). Other good puzzle games include Super Puzzle Fighter 2, and even good ol' fashioned Tetris. Gauntlet 2 can also be good as an old-school choice, as it encourages working together for the best effect... even if you've got it on free-play.
;) ]
There are also some party games that do automatic leveling of the playing field. Mario Kart, Mario Double Dash, any of the Mario Party series, and (for a non-Mario game) an obscure board game title for the PS2 called "Top Shop". (Top Shop is sort of like Monopoly, only fun.) In any of these games, you're subtly (and sometimes not-so-subtly) punished for being too far in the lead, so things can even out.
As far as specifically co-op games, they can be difficult to find. That said, the Baldur's Gate series for the PS2 worked well for me and my girlfriend. I saw WoW mentioned above, but there's an easy solution to not inching ahead of your partner's character: each of you create a character that you only use when adventuring together. My girlfriend and I do this with Guild Wars - each of us have multi's that go do their own thing, but we've also got two characters that work together exclusively. Other co-op options include RTS's, so long as you're both playing on the same team (Age of Empires 2 comes immediately to mind) and work together. Also, some of the alternate, team-based modes for UT work well if she'd like to get into FPS's. (I recommend Invasion in UT2k4.)
If it's just a matter of easing her into gaming, I heartily recommend The Sims. It'll get her more comfortable with using her computer (your computer?... not for long if she gets hooked) for gaming, and will make it easier for her to want to seek out other video games later.
Also, finding an RPG to play together can be a lot like reading a book together. If the story is interesting, then it may not even matter that one player doesn't have the controller - just make sure you don't kibbutz too much, and if you're playing in parallel, don't get crazy with the spoilers.
And, of course, there's a lot of crossover between playing computer/console games and playing traditional card/board games. In anything vaguely strategy-related, there's a lot of knowledge that carries over, and if either of you starts to win excessively, it's considerably easier to make some house rules for them than it is for computer/console games. Go to your local small gaming shop together, pick out something that catches both of your fancy, and try it out. [insert blatant plug for my sig here.
So, there you go. All kinds of options for all kinds of tastes. If one of them doesn't work, try another!
Personally, I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Bah. By "early next century", I plan to already be dead.
The only real downside for everyone else is that they won't be able to bring Bruce Willis out of retirement to save the planet.
Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Apache/1.3.34 Server at www.lemis.com Port 80
---
Hope that helps!
The ingredients list reminds me of one of my more favorite Looney Toons, featuring Porky Pig. He'd been instructed by his mother to go to the store and buy "a loaf of bread, a container of milk, a stick of butter, come straight home." Which he repeats to himself over and over again (surprisingly stutter-free, for the most part, I might add) until he reads the sign on a movie theater. Of course, this changes his repeated mantra to include the title of the film (which escapes me), and he ends up spending the shopping money on the movie ticket.
Nevertheless, when making a trip to the grocery store or composing a shopping list for someone else, I'll often find myself using that same line.
...they would be looking at acquiring technology or IP from smaller companies, playing corporate PacMan.
;)
I'm sure they'd rather play Corporati Damacy instead. Why just eat ghosts when you could aim to be the next King of the Cosmos?
I want to make sure that I understand you properly here. Are you suggesting that the proper solution to a monopoly abusing its power is to do nothing and simply wait it out?
That, during that time period in which the monopolistic company is running amuck (22 to 33 years in our example of Standard Oil), if one is being unfairly hurt by monopolistic anticompetitive measures (such as oil producers were during this period, specifically in that they were denied even the possibility of selling their oil to another vendor at a higher price [see also the incident wherein SO blocked their competitor's ability to move oil by physically blocking its transport]), the proper course of action is to just suck it up?
I want to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding your post, so please clarify, if you would. Also, thank you for taking the time to put thought into a series of considerate posts defending your position. Intelligent political debate on the internet is terribly difficult to find, and our discussion has been a delight to me.
Out of curiosity, I cannot help but wonder what your solution to the problem is, if you do not consider 'specific actions taken by a government when an egregious offender makes itself apparent, based on the situation' to be an acceptable solution.
;)
If we are both agreed that companies have a tendency to abuse their positions of power (just as government will), and that - when a company achieves significant monopolistic power and abuses that power - it is fantastic for that company but poor for anyone else who wishes to compete (and, as a result, the consumers [unless you care to assert that less competition is generally better for consumers?] ), what is your solution for minimizing the overall damage?
I mean, it's all fine and well to say that the "invisible hand of the market" corrected for Standard Oil eventually, but it took from before 1878 (when SO gained 90% market share and, ostensibly, monopoly status) to 1911 (when the breakup was finalized) in order to do this. During that 33 year period, oil producers were forced to take the price that SO dictated, regardless of whether that price was fair or not.
A "free market" should have provided a wealth of options for oil producers, such that they could have bartered for a price that matched the quality of their oil (and whatever other factors might normally influence price, such as speed of delivery, quality of service, etc.), but SO's monopolistic practices prohibited that free barter over a span of 33 years. (If we wish to nitpick, I'll be willing to concede the marketshare decline over the last 11 years of that reduces the impact of their practices somewhat, and we can talk about a complete lack of a free market for those first 22 years instead if you like.)
Oh, and on the last point, there won't be any successors. As long as we're using magic to install me as absolute potentate, we're also using magic to make me invincible, omniscient, omnipotent and immortal. See? There are easy solutions to everything!