If a game doesn't have that, it doesn't matter what philosophical, political, biological, cultural viewpoints it presents.
-- Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator, not a game.
They are not. Time is a necessary condition for money. That is, without time, you don't have money. Money is a sufficient condition of Time. That is, if you have time, you may, or may not, have money.
What confuses the issue is that we use money to represent time (and/or experience/knowledge.) and as an equal value of things. i.e. When you work, you exchange your time & skills, for money. Then later, you are able to reverse the process, and exchange money for time (services) or things (goods).
> Games and art serve two different cultural purposes. Art is about self-expression and developing critical thinking skills.
Oh please. Go play classics such as Loom, Monkey Island, Ico, Ultima 7, and tell me there is no self-expression or critical thinking skills there.
Art is anything that creates an response , either emotionaly or intellectually, over it.
Since games _contain_ art (audio, video, etc) that makes them art. QED.
-- Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator.
> Most people wants to find a local maxima of ease to power.
I concur. People playing MMORPGs are like water flowing downhill finding the most efficient route -- they find the balance of risk-to-reward. Where Risk may mean time, effort spent, etc, and reward includes phat loot, levels, etc.
Cheers
-- Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator moreso then a game.
> so where is the arbitrary cut-off for "sub-$200" then? 10% (or even 5%) works fine.
Re:Just like there will never be another Doom
on
Can Anyone Beat WoW?
·
· Score: 1
> Would you rather have a game that had all of the depth as WoW,
WoW has depth?! LOL. Sorry, play something like Ultima 7, then talk about depth in a (mmo)RPG. The only real place you find depth in a game is single player games. That's not a complaint, just an observation. Writing a story for 1 person is HARD. Writing a good story for hundreds of people -- I don't think we even have the tools to figure out how to even begin to do this.
> perhaps even more story, but didn't have the singular character advancement? RPGs are _all_ about character advancement. Is it possible to not have it? Yes, but stat-less RPGs are WAY less popular. The lack of popularity of Second Life, or A Tale In the Desert, show that most people favor character advancement over anything else. Even in First Person Shooters (FPSers), most people don't care about the story. (Half-Life was an exception.)
> One more focused on the progression of the story and environment of the world, and not the player? This is the _next big thing_ in RPGs: Dynamic Environments.
The disneyland scripted world events get boring, once you go throught the content, because whatever outcome you choose, has no lasting effect on the world. Here's an example. Let's say players have been "farming" the local mobs, say rogues. A month later, the rogues decide to fight back, and storm the local town/city. i.e. In WoW, this could be the Defias Brotherhood in Elwynn Forest decides to (make an attempt) on assualting Northshire, GoldShire, or even StormWind!
I remember when these "non-scripted" events happened in UO. Everyone went ballistic with joy! "What was going on?", "What is my part in this?", "Ok, we're getting attacked", "Hey, we can make a difference by putting up a defense here!" Etc.
>A game such as that might be doomed to failure since the user has less to identify with in the game, so there is nothing that actually ties the user to the game. I don't know which way is better, I'm just curious as to your opinion. It seems by your port that you'd be more likely to part with it.
Actually it would be the reverse. Movies are a great example of this. 100% story driven, with 0% character advancement. You still get "sucked" into a good story, right?;-)
> but I might play a game that doesn't make me build up mountains of a character's skills and attributes.
FPS'ers have attempted to address this. Instead of "virtual skill" you take "out of" a game with character attributes, you have "physical" skill you bring "into" the game.
Are you looking for a cross between the two?
Cheers -- Games are NOT about the red herring of realism! They are about convenience, consistency, and fun. If you favor realism over the others, you have a simulator.
> a television is more interesting than a brick wall > this is a completely objective point of view
No, it's subjective.
Once you're able to communicate with rocks, plants, etc, that have thousands of years of history, you'll realize that you are being subjective, because you are assuming that lack of communication implies non-interesting, and thus filtering reality thru your perceptions.
Reality is not just the physical senses, but much more.
> know the GameCube uses OpenGL (not sure about the Playstation 2).
While there is a port of PS2GL, no one in their right mind would ever use it for an actual shipping title, due to some operations will _never_ be supported in hardware. i.e. Stencils. The only way to get performance out of the PS2 is to write to the bare metal, because you know your render data better then anyone.
> Apple computers are more expensive by Dell every time that I compare them
You're forgetting the _software_ that actually makes the machine usefull...
1. How much would you have to pay for iLife equivalents on Windows though? GarageBand? iDVD? iMovie? iPhoto? Disk Utility?
2. I'd take Finder's ability to drag any folder onto the Toolbar _any day_ insead of the stupid hard-coded locations in a Windows Dialog Box: Recent Docs, Desktop, My Docs, My Comp. I'd take having ONE menu bar at the top with "infinite" height, then wasted screen estate for _each_ application wasting space for a menu bar. I'd rather have Expose that moves all windows out the way to show the desktop, then stupid Explorer Its touches like this, that need to be factored in, and how much _time_ you save using the machine.
3. It's about the integration... Mail.app, iCal, AddressBook, iChat, etc.
-- ]PR#6 ]CATALOG
DISK VOLUME 254 APPLE ][ FOREVER
*T 001 STUPID FILE/OPERATING SYSTEM DESIGNS
T 001 MS-DOS: NO SPACES, 8.3 CHARACTERS
T 001 WIN XP: NO COLON, CANT END WITH PERIOD.
T 001 *NIX: hello.c != hello.C (WTF??)
T 001 ALL: ' ' not interchangeable '_'
It explores this question from different angles to see how people answered it for themselves.
The short answer: You're never too old to start living your dream.
-- When Hiliary was president in 2012, it sounded like a good idea at the time, but unfortunately she was not prepared to handle the 1st wave of the collapse of America via the Civil War.
I really love C++, but for some things, it really sucks.// 1. Cant' overload funcs with different array lengths, and/or pointers void foo( int a3 [3] ); void foo( int a4 [ 4 ] ); void foo( int * p );// 2. no native / built in null type// can't tell the difference between null pointer and int void foo( int n ); void foo( char * p );
*T 001 STUPID FILE/OPERATING SYSTEM DESIGNS
T 001 MS-DOS: NO SPACES, 8.3 CHARACTERS
T 001 WIN XP: NO COLON, CANT END WITH PERIOD.
T 001 *NIX: hello.c != hello.C (WTF??)
T 001 ALL: ' ' not interchangeable '_'
> I think they would've rapidly emptied as "sheep" flocked to the safe haven of other shards.
Oh please...
Trammel was popular for a reason, not because people were "sheep."
I don't find it _fun_ getting PK'd. (If I wanted to be f--ing PK'd I'd play a FPS -- where I would actually have some fun, since the game was designed for it.) I have lost friends who quite UO over this exact same issue. If it wasn't for Trammel, I would of quite much sooner too.
The camped dungeons were bad enough, but when you had PK guilds do their killing spree wrecking the weekend guild dungeon crawl, screw that. I had better designed & more fun games to play with my friends & family then to wasting my time dealing with some immature punks.
WoW is popular, because it gives people a _choice_ of dealing with this shit. And the majority of people would agree with me. They like PvE, and couldn't care about PvP. Hell, go play Diablo 2 some time -- most people want to work together, and don't want the hassle of dealing with other people. Life provides enough of that already.
Now I will admit, that once Trammel was in, the game did lose a bit of it's edge. PK'ers provided an adreline rush. The problem was that you couldn't track those bastards down. i.e. There were no tools the community could use to police themselves. In EQ, at least you tell people about griefers by zone yells. If some guy murders you in UO, you should of been able to track him down, no matter where. This would of provided some accountability, and let players take their revenge.
Origin could of have also easily tripled the loot in Feluca, to provide a better risk/reward for being in a PvP zone, but they didn't. For the majority of players, there was simply _no_ reason to stay in Fel.
-- Games are about being a balanced challenge. Too hard, and you wonder why you are spending so much effort. Too easy, and you also lose interest. Which is _real reason_ why Cheating in a single player game is usually not desired: The player is no longer challenged.
U7 is pretty dam close. (Much brighter "palette" then Fallout.)
They should of listed "classics" contender's list as well: - Age of Empires II - Diablo II - Grim Fandago - King's Quest - Loom - Majesty - Master of Orion 2 - Monkey Island (I still remember the EGA to VGA update:-)
The real problem is that it's _impossible_ for a game to determine intent, and as such, is impossible to eliminate griefing in a multi-player game where players can influence the environment.
Sometimes players make mistakes, and their actions would be considered griefing, even though they don't know any better.
i.e. Youre playing a Space Sim, and are dog fighting another pilot. You shot, miss your target, and hit an innocent 3rd party bystander, say like the space station above the planet. Are you delibrating attacking it? (A truely immersive game would allow players to take control over bases, planets, etc.)
i.e. In WoW your mining some ore, some jerk comes up and starts mining your same ore, not realizing he was lagging, and your character didn't display on his computer, and keeps the loot box open due to lag. Same thing happens 5 mins later, (you're lucky day) but this time the guy is intentionaly keeping the loot box open. How do you tell the difference?
The solution would be to either tag the ore for a limited duration that it "belongs" to a player, or to spawn a "local" copy for each player. You really can't do that with mobs, since that would lead to 1) a huge disconnect of immersion, 2) not to mention over-loading the server. There is no good, general, solution to griefing. The only proper solution to griefers to either ignore them (since they crave attention in some sort), or give the community a means to "black-list" players (although this later option can cause the griefers to band together.)
Cheers -- Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Realism, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism.
Slashdot Mirror
What? No timecube? ;-)
... is, is it FUN?
If a game doesn't have that, it doesn't matter what philosophical, political, biological, cultural viewpoints it presents.
--
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience
Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator, not a game.
They are not. Time is a necessary condition for money. That is, without time, you don't have money.
Money is a sufficient condition of Time. That is, if you have time, you may, or may not, have money.
What confuses the issue is that we use money to represent time (and/or experience/knowledge.) and as an equal value of things. i.e. When you work, you exchange your time & skills, for money. Then later, you are able to reverse the process, and exchange money for time (services) or things (goods).
--
Teacher: "Question Authority!"
Student: "Says Who!?"
> Games and art serve two different cultural purposes. Art is about self-expression and developing critical thinking skills.
Oh please. Go play classics such as Loom, Monkey Island, Ico, Ultima 7, and tell me there is no self-expression or critical thinking skills there.
Art is anything that creates an response , either emotionaly or intellectually, over it.
Since games _contain_ art (audio, video, etc) that makes them art. QED.
--
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience
Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator.
> Most people wants to find a local maxima of ease to power.
I concur. People playing MMORPGs are like water flowing downhill finding the most efficient route -- they find the balance of risk-to-reward. Where Risk may mean time, effort spent, etc, and reward includes phat loot, levels, etc.
Cheers
--
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Abstraction, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience
Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism. If you favor realism over abstraction, you have a simulator moreso then a game.
> so where is the arbitrary cut-off for "sub-$200" then?
10% (or even 5%) works fine.
> Would you rather have a game that had all of the depth as WoW,
;-)
WoW has depth?! LOL. Sorry, play something like Ultima 7, then talk about depth in a (mmo)RPG. The only real place you find depth in a game is single player games. That's not a complaint, just an observation. Writing a story for 1 person is HARD. Writing a good story for hundreds of people -- I don't think we even have the tools to figure out how to even begin to do this.
> perhaps even more story, but didn't have the singular character advancement?
RPGs are _all_ about character advancement. Is it possible to not have it? Yes, but stat-less RPGs are WAY less popular. The lack of popularity of Second Life, or A Tale In the Desert, show that most people favor character advancement over anything else. Even in First Person Shooters (FPSers), most people don't care about the story. (Half-Life was an exception.)
> One more focused on the progression of the story and environment of the world, and not the player?
This is the _next big thing_ in RPGs: Dynamic Environments.
The disneyland scripted world events get boring, once you go throught the content, because whatever outcome you choose, has no lasting effect on the world. Here's an example. Let's say players have been "farming" the local mobs, say rogues. A month later, the rogues decide to fight back, and storm the local town/city.
i.e. In WoW, this could be the Defias Brotherhood in Elwynn Forest decides to (make an attempt) on assualting Northshire, GoldShire, or even StormWind!
I remember when these "non-scripted" events happened in UO. Everyone went ballistic with joy! "What was going on?", "What is my part in this?", "Ok, we're getting attacked", "Hey, we can make a difference by putting up a defense here!" Etc.
>A game such as that might be doomed to failure since the user has less to identify with in the game, so there is nothing that actually ties the user to the game. I don't know which way is better, I'm just curious as to your opinion. It seems by your port that you'd be more likely to part with it.
Actually it would be the reverse. Movies are a great example of this. 100% story driven, with 0% character advancement. You still get "sucked" into a good story, right?
> but I might play a game that doesn't make me build up mountains of a character's skills and attributes.
FPS'ers have attempted to address this. Instead of "virtual skill" you take "out of" a game with character attributes, you have "physical" skill you bring "into" the game.
Are you looking for a cross between the two?
Cheers
--
Games are NOT about the red herring of realism! They are about convenience, consistency, and fun. If you favor realism over the others, you have a simulator.
> a television is more interesting than a brick wall
> this is a completely objective point of view
No, it's subjective.
Once you're able to communicate with rocks, plants, etc, that have thousands of years of history, you'll realize that you are being subjective, because you are assuming that lack of communication implies non-interesting, and thus filtering reality thru your perceptions.
Reality is not just the physical senses, but much more.
> I've always thought of Plasma as the ISDN of TV technology -- it's an 'in-between' solution that is less than ideal and expensive,
Have you even spent any time comparing LCDs and Plasmas?
The PQ on LCDs is a joke compared to Plasma's. Namely, truer blacks, and richer colors. Lastly, the viewing angle is better.
I grew up on WordStar on the Apple, before switching over the PC. It's easier to shift the pinky down, then up.
Different strokes for different folks.
Now if only OSX would support the insert toggle in native editors...
Completely agree!
Ctrl on the bottom is easier.
> Pure pacifism pisses me off...
Right, because we know all those pacifists are causing all the problems! [sarcasm]
> but if it came down to starvation for you and your child vs eating Bambi, Bambi'd be on a stick.
Any theology taken to an absolute is absurd.
At least your recognize that your right to live, is more important then the animal's right to life in this special circumstance.
The interesting question comes when what kind of karma are you creating when you kill when there is no need to?
> know the GameCube uses OpenGL (not sure about the Playstation 2).
While there is a port of PS2GL, no one in their right mind would ever use it for an actual shipping title, due to some operations will _never_ be supported in hardware. i.e. Stencils. The only way to get performance out of the PS2 is to write to the bare metal, because you know your render data better then anyone.
> Apple computers are more expensive by Dell every time that I compare them
You're forgetting the _software_ that actually makes the machine usefull...
1. How much would you have to pay for iLife equivalents on Windows though? GarageBand? iDVD? iMovie? iPhoto? Disk Utility?
2. I'd take Finder's ability to drag any folder onto the Toolbar _any day_ insead of the stupid hard-coded locations in a Windows Dialog Box: Recent Docs, Desktop, My Docs, My Comp. I'd take having ONE menu bar at the top with "infinite" height, then wasted screen estate for _each_ application wasting space for a menu bar. I'd rather have Expose that moves all windows out the way to show the desktop, then stupid Explorer Its touches like this, that need to be factored in, and how much _time_ you save using the machine.
3. It's about the integration... Mail.app, iCal, AddressBook, iChat, etc.
--
]PR#6
]CATALOG
DISK VOLUME 254
APPLE ][ FOREVER
*T 001 STUPID FILE/OPERATING SYSTEM DESIGNS
T 001 MS-DOS: NO SPACES, 8.3 CHARACTERS
T 001 WIN XP: NO COLON, CANT END WITH PERIOD.
T 001 *NIX: hello.c != hello.C (WTF??)
T 001 ALL: ' ' not interchangeable '_'
TMPGEnc 2.524 has been free for a while.
There's a book that has tons of interviews with people about how they answered this very question...
What Should I Do with My Life? (Hardcover)
It explores this question from different angles to see how people answered it for themselves.
The short answer: You're never too old to start living your dream.
--
When Hiliary was president in 2012, it sounded like a good idea at the time, but unfortunately she was not prepared to handle the 1st wave of the collapse of America via the Civil War.
The classic...
... God's Electric Fence
Van Allan Belts
Looks like others agreee...
Wow Video Internet is for Porn
I really love C++, but for some things, it really sucks. // 1. Cant' overload funcs with different array lengths, and/or pointers // 2. no native / built in null type // can't tell the difference between null pointer and int
void foo( int a3 [3] );
void foo( int a4 [ 4 ] );
void foo( int * p );
void foo( int n );
void foo( char * p );
vood bar()
{
foo( NULL );
}
CATALOG
DISK VOLUME 254
APPLE ][ FOREVER
*T 001 STUPID FILE/OPERATING SYSTEM DESIGNS
T 001 MS-DOS: NO SPACES, 8.3 CHARACTERS
T 001 WIN XP: NO COLON, CANT END WITH PERIOD.
T 001 *NIX: hello.c != hello.C (WTF??)
T 001 ALL: ' ' not interchangeable '_'
> I think they would've rapidly emptied as "sheep" flocked to the safe haven of other shards.
Oh please...
Trammel was popular for a reason, not because people were "sheep."
I don't find it _fun_ getting PK'd. (If I wanted to be f--ing PK'd I'd play a FPS -- where I would actually have some fun, since the game was designed for it.) I have lost friends who quite UO over this exact same issue. If it wasn't for Trammel, I would of quite much sooner too.
The camped dungeons were bad enough, but when you had PK guilds do their killing spree wrecking the weekend guild dungeon crawl, screw that. I had better designed & more fun games to play with my friends & family then to wasting my time dealing with some immature punks.
WoW is popular, because it gives people a _choice_ of dealing with this shit. And the majority of people would agree with me. They like PvE, and couldn't care about PvP. Hell, go play Diablo 2 some time -- most people want to work together, and don't want the hassle of dealing with other people. Life provides enough of that already.
Now I will admit, that once Trammel was in, the game did lose a bit of it's edge. PK'ers provided an adreline rush. The problem was that you couldn't track those bastards down. i.e. There were no tools the community could use to police themselves. In EQ, at least you tell people about griefers by zone yells. If some guy murders you in UO, you should of been able to track him down, no matter where. This would of provided some accountability, and let players take their revenge.
Origin could of have also easily tripled the loot in Feluca, to provide a better risk/reward for being in a PvP zone, but they didn't. For the majority of players, there was simply _no_ reason to stay in Fel.
--
Games are about being a balanced challenge. Too hard, and you wonder why you are spending so much effort. Too easy, and you also lose interest. Which is _real reason_ why Cheating in a single player game is usually not desired: The player is no longer challenged.
Looks like an updated / inspired "Rescue Raiders" -- pretty cool !!
U7 is pretty dam close. (Much brighter "palette" then Fallout.)
:-)
They should of listed "classics" contender's list as well:
- Age of Empires II
- Diablo II
- Grim Fandago
- King's Quest
- Loom
- Majesty
- Master of Orion 2
- Monkey Island (I still remember the EGA to VGA update
The real problem is that it's _impossible_ for a game to determine intent, and as such, is impossible to eliminate griefing in a multi-player game where players can influence the environment.
Sometimes players make mistakes, and their actions would be considered griefing, even though they don't know any better.
i.e.
Youre playing a Space Sim, and are dog fighting another pilot. You shot, miss your target, and hit an innocent 3rd party bystander, say like the space station above the planet. Are you delibrating attacking it? (A truely immersive game would allow players to take control over bases, planets, etc.)
i.e.
In WoW your mining some ore, some jerk comes up and starts mining your same ore, not realizing he was lagging, and your character didn't display on his computer, and keeps the loot box open due to lag. Same thing happens 5 mins later, (you're lucky day) but this time the guy is intentionaly keeping the loot box open. How do you tell the difference?
The solution would be to either tag the ore for a limited duration that it "belongs" to a player, or to spawn a "local" copy for each player.
You really can't do that with mobs, since that would lead to 1) a huge disconnect of immersion, 2) not to mention over-loading the server. There is no good, general, solution to griefing. The only proper solution to griefers to either ignore them (since they crave attention in some sort), or give the community a means to "black-list" players (although this later option can cause the griefers to band together.)
Cheers
--
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Realism, Logicalness/Consistency, Convenience
Unfortunately, far too mamy players are argueing about the wrong thing, usually the red herring of realism.