> I assume that 'consent' is only relevant when dealing with something that's actually sentient and therefore capable of giving or denying consent. Mountains et al don't qualify.
That's a logical fallacy. You have a _very_ narrow definition of what sentient even is. Of all the millions of sentient beings & things in the universe, you are basing your definition on what? One planet? And a few living species? Are animals sentient? Are plants sentient?
i.e. Amobea's don't give deny or give consent, but clearly they are alive.
God doesn't give his/her consent, so therefore (s)he must not be sentient.
Bzzt. Thx for playing. You don't prove a negative with a negative. Lack of evidence is NOT proof of a negative.
> I'll be happy to revise my opinion the very instant you introduce me to an ocean that can converse with me. Get back to me when you've got one, I'll be fascinated.
Its not the universe's fault that you are unable to communicate with it. If you would actually take the time, you could learn all sorts of interesting things. You would learn that "life" exists in many places that people only dream of.
You're not even willing to spend the _lifetimes_ it takes to be able to communicate with it, yet you have the gall to make a broad statement that mountains, oceans, are not sentient.
You're like a child wanting to understand advanced calculus when you don't even understand basic math. What are you willing to DO to earn this ability?
I am saying you have every right to believe what you do, but I am ALSO saying your definitions of what sentient and consciousness are, are _severly_ limited.
Learn to think outside the box, and you'll be reward.
As a developer, I have to agree with you, and hope your post gets modded up. (Surprised you forgot to mentions Baldur's Gate on the PS2!) The constant hyper-sexualizing and titillation is becoming more and more obnoxious and obscene. Sadly, far too many games (and other medium such as movies) glorify violence and sex. Its a product of the culture.
Unfortunately sex sells. I guess the real question is, Who is behind this constant juvenile behaviour? Is it the publishers? The developers (Design? Art?) It probably doesn't help that 99% of the people involved in the games industry are male, and less then 30.
I wouldn't say your post is a rant. It's a wake-up call that games are more then just eye-candy.
Unfortunately, it will probably fall on deaf ears...
> I get amused by the people that claim WoW is "inferior" because of its friendly environment and no-penalty PvP.
Wow is inferior because it has: * designers remaining completely _clueless_ about dead-time * static story (where are all the GM events??) * no guild banks, homes, or towns * limited world interaction (blacksmith can't repair his armor, boats on "rails", almost nothing to interact with in the world -- everything is "locked" down.) * limited crafting (no lumberjacking, you can't make furniture and other house-hold odds and ends, etc.) * using kludges such as BoP and BoE to try to control an broken economy * invisible walls (still in 2007!)
The rest of the things it gets right, are the _basics_. It is not revolutionary, but evolutionary.
It is almost impossible to run into "griefers" (aside from occasionaly miners ninja-looting the ore nodes)
THAT is why it is popular. But popularity is no indicator of "quality" -- TV and Drugs are perfect examples of that.
Interesting that MS users tend to be short-term orientated (won't put up with apps not working from one version of windows to the next), while OSX users tend to be long-term orientated (put up with the short term problems because they realize in the end, the better design is the right thing to do.)
>> Just because the ps2 was the most successful, don't think it was graphical power that got them there. > Yes.
IAAGD. (I am a Game Developer.) Having shipped a few games on various platforms (include the PS2), I would also agree it wasn't graphical power that made the PS2 successful. (Morrowind and Halo put the original XBox shaders to good use -- few other games did at the time.) No one really complained about the low polygon budget (or small texture sizes) in GTA. Everyone was having too much fun playing it.
My list would be:
0. Price Drop. When the PS2 dropped down to $299, that was the magic price point. 1. Games. Couple of simultaneous "hit" titles like GTA, GT3, Final Fantasy, Devil May Cry, MGS2, Kingdom Hearts, ICO all helped cement its lead. 2. DVD -- The ability to also play DVD's without needing to spend any extra money (looking at you Microsoft) was also a factor, in addition to being able to play your games was a _huge_ draw. It was for me, until I could figure out which DVD was worth buying. 3. Backwards compatibility. You could still fire up your PS1 favorites.
It was a winning combination, that together made it (and still) very appealing.
> (in fairness, I haven't gotten to see a Wii dev kit, but I heard nothing but complaints from the people using PS/3 kits)
The Wii dev kits, aside from needing 3 USB cables, are not bad. Not great, but not bad (still not sure where to find a keyboard & mouse to hook up to it), but other then that, the hardware is small, and doesn't have the CD/DVD issues like the PS2 dev kits (due to lack of one;-). Host mode is a little funky (can't have open files in the host dir, and the total dir size must be less then 4 gigs) but it works. The connection issues between the devkit and PC seems to be fixed with the later firmware versions.
The Wii literally is a GameCube 1.5. With more memory. Still no stencils, pixel, or vertex shaders, but hey -- forces developers to focus on gameplay for once. Nintendo has always had fun, original titles.
Source for some of the SDK is included (sadly, not the GX*() lib.) Thankfully that includes the matrix library, so one can get up to speed on the paired single assembly for your skinning code.
Codewarrior for the Wii is still, how can I put this politely, still a Beta product. It has a SUPER aggressive dead-stripper -- even removing code that is USED. Debugging can literaly take up _2 minutes_ to startup if you have a lot of include paths. Fortunately most issues can be worked around, even if the dam thing crashes once a day. (Latest debugging patch fixed a LOT of instability.)
I haven't heard _one good thing_ about the PS/3 kits either. Server-mounted rack style size. It just goes down hill from there...
There is no love lost here for the PS2 either -- the 40 Megs on the PS2 just isn't enough. (I actually _like_ the funky PS2 hardware design, so I'm the exception, but then I enjoy reading VU code:-)
The content creation pipeline for XBox 360 & PS3 is getting insane. What's ticked a lot of developers off is that Sony has dropped the PS2 development like a sack of hot potatoes DESPITE the fact that PS2 games are still selling strong! Not EVERYONE is doing next-gen content!
You're right about Sony crashing & burning. They have become extremely arrogant and will be eating humble pie this gen. Its funny to see "old-gen" Wii outselling "next-gen" PS3 at least 6 to 1. Sony has enough "cash reserves" to last the PS3 debacle, but they will survive. A co-worker and I noted the _exact same_ thing happened to Nintendo with it's N64 a few years back (75-80% market dominance), and along came the PSX. (Original PlayStation for the whipper-snappers.) Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. Now Nintendo is reaping the benefits of being able to use same GPU for 8 years!
I did manage to see the original XBox dev kit and tools a few years back -- it was a dream compared to how difficult Sony and Nintendo making development. So I can certainly imagine how much better the 360 dev kits are. Microsoft has always focused on dev tools more so then the others. Edit-and-Continue is a god-send for debugging and fixing those silly logic errors.
XBox Live has saved the XBox. Aside from that fact that you can't have free downloads for your game, it has some pretty neat content. HOW long did it take Sony to get their act together and provide a unified online system for developers and consumers?
I really need to finish writing up my "Implementing OpenGL on the Wii" paper...
Having implemented (a working subset of) OpenGL on the Wii, there is no way I'd want to interface it with Java anytime soon. There is a reason _doubles_ are banned in our game engine. One PS2 they are emulated in software, and provide no extra benefit aside from taking up more space, and being slower. If you can guarantee that no doubles will be used throughout Java, then maybe I would agree with you.
Does your Java implementation let you align your data types (such as vector3f) to 16 byte alignment?
Does your Java implementation provide an assembly or fast version of Vector, Matrix, Quaternions types?
> our Java code is not only faster than competitors written in C or C++
1. A better algorithm written in a slower language can beat a poor algorithm in a faster language, so unless you know what algorithms they are using, its an apples to oranges comparison.
2. Let me guess, you're not running on consoles. Even something as simple as virtual functions will kill your CPU cache on these machines. On PC boxes, you have faster CPUs, and far more memory to take advantage of.
> our scene graph APIs are more than twice as fast as Java3D for the same content and typically 10+% faster than native-code based scenegraphs like OpenSceneGraph.
Scene Graphs are over rated, and demonstrates someone hasn't thought the rendering problem through. (i.e. Tell me, how does your scene graph handle objects with transparency?) Stuffing everything into one big generic container is one way to kill performance, instead of using specialized containers.
> Java is more than fast enough for full graphics.
It depends on your platform. Let me know when you have a fast Java platform for PS2 or Wii, let alone enough memory left over, and your frame rate isn't killed by the garbage collector.
Since the native sce*() or GX*() calls on the PS2 and Wii, respectively, are C only, you're going to have a hard time calling them from Java. Java has it's place, but not on consoles. If you got time & money to burn getting this to work, feel free to go ahead. For better or worse, we're stuck with C++ development on consoles.
If I was developing strictly on PCs, then yeah, Java has a lot of advantages -- one that I can throw more hardware at the problem. But soon as one hits the "embedded" market, its disadvantages demand serious consideration.
-- How long do we have to wait before C/C++ gets rids of this short, long, double crap? (Is it really that hard to have a stardard pragma that disables up-casting, standardized syntax for alignment?)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the bastards should of used the 256 Hz Scientific Scale
> I assume that 'consent' is only relevant when dealing with something that's actually sentient and therefore capable of giving or denying consent. Mountains et al don't qualify.
That's a logical fallacy. You have a _very_ narrow definition of what sentient even is. Of all the millions of sentient beings & things in the universe, you are basing your definition on what? One planet? And a few living species? Are animals sentient? Are plants sentient?
i.e.
Amobea's don't give deny or give consent, but clearly they are alive.
God doesn't give his/her consent, so therefore (s)he must not be sentient.
Bzzt. Thx for playing. You don't prove a negative with a negative. Lack of evidence is NOT proof of a negative.
> I'll be happy to revise my opinion the very instant you introduce me to an ocean that can converse with me. Get back to me when you've got one, I'll be fascinated.
Its not the universe's fault that you are unable to communicate with it. If you would actually take the time, you could learn all sorts of interesting things. You would learn that "life" exists in many places that people only dream of.
You're not even willing to spend the _lifetimes_ it takes to be able to communicate with it, yet you have the gall to make a broad statement that mountains, oceans, are not sentient.
You're like a child wanting to understand advanced calculus when you don't even understand basic math. What are you willing to DO to earn this ability?
I am saying you have every right to believe what you do, but I am ALSO saying your definitions of what sentient and consciousness are, are _severly_ limited.
Learn to think outside the box, and you'll be reward.
Peace
> 'consent' is only relevant when dealing with something that's actually sentient
And your definition of sentient is... ?
You do you assume lack of consent is the same as tacit consent?
So gave you the authority to speak for the sun, stars, mountains, and oceans?
> but the Gospels of Mark and Matthew don't agree, even though they tell the same story.
Which parts?
(Looking to expand my list of inconsistencies)
Cheers
Surprised Lemmings isn't on the list.
"Lode Runner" wasn't difficult -- just time consuming. "Championship Lode Runner" was tough -- had to have exact timing.
Beat it on the Apple ][ as well. Not sure what makes it so difficult -- just time consuming.
Now Championship Lode Runner, that was difficult.
--
"I like my tea how I like my women: warm and sweet"
-- Michaelangelo
> How do you reconcile the inherent illogic of religion with the rest of your life?
Such as?
Does anyone know how git handles compared to alienbrain?
i.e. Can it store large binary files? (~64M+)
How well does it integrate into Dev Studio?
Are there any plug-ins for previewing binary files (pictures/movies/audio)?
Mod parent up -- informative.
Was just looking for this info too.
As a developer, I have to agree with you, and hope your post gets modded up. (Surprised you forgot to mentions Baldur's Gate on the PS2!) The constant hyper-sexualizing and titillation is becoming more and more obnoxious and obscene. Sadly, far too many games (and other medium such as movies) glorify violence and sex. Its a product of the culture.
Unfortunately sex sells. I guess the real question is, Who is behind this constant juvenile behaviour? Is it the publishers? The developers (Design? Art?) It probably doesn't help that 99% of the people involved in the games industry are male, and less then 30.
I wouldn't say your post is a rant. It's a wake-up call that games are more then just eye-candy.
Unfortunately, it will probably fall on deaf ears...
Cheers
> I get amused by the people that claim WoW is "inferior" because of its friendly environment and no-penalty PvP.
Wow is inferior because it has:
* designers remaining completely _clueless_ about dead-time
* static story (where are all the GM events??)
* no guild banks, homes, or towns
* limited world interaction (blacksmith can't repair his armor, boats on "rails", almost nothing to interact with in the world -- everything is "locked" down.)
* limited crafting (no lumberjacking, you can't make furniture and other house-hold odds and ends, etc.)
* using kludges such as BoP and BoE to try to control an broken economy
* invisible walls (still in 2007!)
The rest of the things it gets right, are the _basics_. It is not revolutionary, but evolutionary.
It is almost impossible to run into "griefers" (aside from occasionaly miners ninja-looting the ore nodes)
THAT is why it is popular. But popularity is no indicator of "quality" -- TV and Drugs are perfect examples of that.
Interesting that MS users tend to be short-term orientated (won't put up with apps not working from one version of windows to the next), while OSX users tend to be long-term orientated (put up with the short term problems because they realize in the end, the better design is the right thing to do.)
Hey, thx guys for the correction.
:-)
I got mine with the Logitech Racing Wheel & GT3 so I always seem to remember 299 instead of 199.
>> Just because the ps2 was the most successful, don't think it was graphical power that got them there.
> Yes.
IAAGD. (I am a Game Developer.) Having shipped a few games on various platforms (include the PS2), I would also agree it wasn't graphical power that made the PS2 successful. (Morrowind and Halo put the original XBox shaders to good use -- few other games did at the time.) No one really complained about the low polygon budget (or small texture sizes) in GTA. Everyone was having too much fun playing it.
My list would be:
0. Price Drop. When the PS2 dropped down to $299, that was the magic price point.
1. Games. Couple of simultaneous "hit" titles like GTA, GT3, Final Fantasy, Devil May Cry, MGS2, Kingdom Hearts, ICO all helped cement its lead.
2. DVD -- The ability to also play DVD's without needing to spend any extra money (looking at you Microsoft) was also a factor, in addition to being able to play your games was a _huge_ draw. It was for me, until I could figure out which DVD was worth buying.
3. Backwards compatibility. You could still fire up your PS1 favorites.
It was a winning combination, that together made it (and still) very appealing.
Cheers
Where can one get a valid XP license now-a-days?
I'm sort of in the same boat.
lol.
;-)
I write code, not novels.
So what games have you worked on?
> (in fairness, I haven't gotten to see a Wii dev kit, but I heard nothing but complaints from the people using PS/3 kits)
;-). Host mode is a little funky (can't have open files in the host dir, and the total dir size must be less then 4 gigs) but it works. The connection issues between the devkit and PC seems to be fixed with the later firmware versions.
:-)
The Wii dev kits, aside from needing 3 USB cables, are not bad. Not great, but not bad (still not sure where to find a keyboard & mouse to hook up to it), but other then that, the hardware is small, and doesn't have the CD/DVD issues like the PS2 dev kits (due to lack of one
The Wii literally is a GameCube 1.5. With more memory. Still no stencils, pixel, or vertex shaders, but hey -- forces developers to focus on gameplay for once. Nintendo has always had fun, original titles.
Source for some of the SDK is included (sadly, not the GX*() lib.) Thankfully that includes the matrix library, so one can get up to speed on the paired single assembly for your skinning code.
Codewarrior for the Wii is still, how can I put this politely, still a Beta product. It has a SUPER aggressive dead-stripper -- even removing code that is USED. Debugging can literaly take up _2 minutes_ to startup if you have a lot of include paths. Fortunately most issues can be worked around, even if the dam thing crashes once a day. (Latest debugging patch fixed a LOT of instability.)
I haven't heard _one good thing_ about the PS/3 kits either. Server-mounted rack style size. It just goes down hill from there...
There is no love lost here for the PS2 either -- the 40 Megs on the PS2 just isn't enough. (I actually _like_ the funky PS2 hardware design, so I'm the exception, but then I enjoy reading VU code
The content creation pipeline for XBox 360 & PS3 is getting insane. What's ticked a lot of developers off is that Sony has dropped the PS2 development like a sack of hot potatoes DESPITE the fact that PS2 games are still selling strong! Not EVERYONE is doing next-gen content!
You're right about Sony crashing & burning. They have become extremely arrogant and will be eating humble pie this gen. Its funny to see "old-gen" Wii outselling "next-gen" PS3 at least 6 to 1. Sony has enough "cash reserves" to last the PS3 debacle, but they will survive. A co-worker and I noted the _exact same_ thing happened to Nintendo with it's N64 a few years back (75-80% market dominance), and along came the PSX. (Original PlayStation for the whipper-snappers.) Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. Now Nintendo is reaping the benefits of being able to use same GPU for 8 years!
I did manage to see the original XBox dev kit and tools a few years back -- it was a dream compared to how difficult Sony and Nintendo making development. So I can certainly imagine how much better the 360 dev kits are. Microsoft has always focused on dev tools more so then the others. Edit-and-Continue is a god-send for debugging and fixing those silly logic errors.
XBox Live has saved the XBox. Aside from that fact that you can't have free downloads for your game, it has some pretty neat content. HOW long did it take Sony to get their act together and provide a unified online system for developers and consumers?
I really need to finish writing up my "Implementing OpenGL on the Wii" paper...
Why would you waste time creating a demo when you are trying to get the game done?
Anyone who believes in talking snakes probably is a little crazy... ;-)
> Please provide proof of your assertions.
Having implemented (a working subset of) OpenGL on the Wii, there is no way I'd want to interface it with Java anytime soon. There is a reason _doubles_ are banned in our game engine. One PS2 they are emulated in software, and provide no extra benefit aside from taking up more space, and being slower. If you can guarantee that no doubles will be used throughout Java, then maybe I would agree with you.
Does your Java implementation let you align your data types (such as vector3f) to 16 byte alignment?
Does your Java implementation provide an assembly or fast version of Vector, Matrix, Quaternions types?
> our Java code is not only faster than competitors written in C or C++
1. A better algorithm written in a slower language can beat a poor algorithm in a faster language, so unless you know what algorithms they are using, its an apples to oranges comparison.
2. Let me guess, you're not running on consoles. Even something as simple as virtual functions will kill your CPU cache on these machines. On PC boxes, you have faster CPUs, and far more memory to take advantage of.
> our scene graph APIs are more than twice as fast as Java3D for the same content and typically 10+% faster than native-code based scenegraphs like OpenSceneGraph.
Scene Graphs are over rated, and demonstrates someone hasn't thought the rendering problem through. (i.e. Tell me, how does your scene graph handle objects with transparency?) Stuffing everything into one big generic container is one way to kill performance, instead of using specialized containers.
> Java is more than fast enough for full graphics.
It depends on your platform. Let me know when you have a fast Java platform for PS2 or Wii, let alone enough memory left over, and your frame rate isn't killed by the garbage collector.
Since the native sce*() or GX*() calls on the PS2 and Wii, respectively, are C only, you're going to have a hard time calling them from Java. Java has it's place, but not on consoles. If you got time & money to burn getting this to work, feel free to go ahead. For better or worse, we're stuck with C++ development on consoles.
If I was developing strictly on PCs, then yeah, Java has a lot of advantages -- one that I can throw more hardware at the problem. But soon as one hits the "embedded" market, its disadvantages demand serious consideration.
--
How long do we have to wait before C/C++ gets rids of this short, long, double crap? (Is it really that hard to have a stardard pragma that disables up-casting, standardized syntax for alignment?)
Isn't there a firefox plugin that color-codes known "fake" sites?
More like glad how NOT to do things, you mean.
I don't understand how Microsoft can consistently take a simple idea, and obsfucate it.