Designers do NOT have the right to tell players how to play the game, when players are abiding by the rules.
But you'll say, "Yes, BUT but these players were _abusing_ the rules, therefore they were cheating (by violating the spirit of the game), even though they weren't technically."
To which I say: _Why_ were they motivated to do that in the first place?
Any economy based on an infinite supply of gold, is flawed. It is _impossible_ not to have deflation, because given enough time, players will accumulate enough wealth to afford the gear they want. This is a _natural_ effect of a broken system!! Gold-Sinks are just stop-gap hacks. HOW many more _years_ of MMORPGS do we need to go through, before we see this pattern is the cause of the gold farming? Designers really need to get over the fact that "People getting more wealthy over time, causing deflation is unwanted."
The game allow trading. Who the F--K are you, as a designer, to say how much time I can spend playing the game, and how fast I can "farm resources", when I'm _paying_ for the privilege to play it!! And now you want say I'm not allowed to trade the items/gold I collected because I simply put too MUCH of MY time into collecting them?? WTF?? Because your broken economy can't handle what you set out to do -- namely have people enjoy playing your game?! So they go hard-core, and play it extreme?
Some games ban trading for items/gear "outside" the game?! How is that effect ANY different from trading "inside" the game??
Instead of banning the gold farmers which is only the symptom (people are like water flowing downhill, they WILL find the most efficient path, no matter what you do; the mind loves "optimizing", a problem no matter how small of an increase on the ROI), how about fixing the cause - working on a model that isn't broken? i.e. 1. Make everything bind-on-pickup, or 2. Get rid of loot. You want something, make it yourself! (WHERE do those turtles carry that breastplate? And who keeps GIVING them these uber gear;-)
That's not fun? Then farming is a _fact_ of life. Deal with it.
Camping for 4 hrs for _one_ item is a waste of my time. I didn't play EQ because of that crap. Now WoW has it, and is wondering why player are turning to gold farming?? Um, hello!
-- MMORPGS, as fun as they are, still _suck_ due to lack of "Rich Immersion." * Quests don't influence the world in any way. There is no battles over territory. No cities get ransacked. There is no conflict (war) that actually _means_ something. * Why do I get XP _only_ for killing? How bout XP for crafting items, and for how famous my wares become? * Classes are backwards training wheels. My _skills_ determine what my character is, not my character determines what skills I have. * Why don't monsters level up? How come they aren't smart enough to put a bounty on your head for genocide of their race? Why can't I play as a monster? * If I can take a boat in the game, why can't I build my own? * And let me walk up that dam mountain, even though you flagged the slope as 'unwalkable' simply because you don't want people exploring what's past that mountain top.
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Realism, Logical / Consistency, Convenience
You don't understand what Religion / Spirituality is even about.
Religion is way to prove your philosophy, because it is about putting your beliefs into practise. If you never do anything with your beliefs, they are just that, _beliefs_ and/or Philosophy. Religion is about the letter, to help you understand the spirit / spirituality (the principles.) By your subjective experiences, you will eventually come to learn Truth.
Martial Arts is a religion / spiritual way. (On the Warrior's Path is an awesome book describing the spirituality in MA.)
Atheism is a religion, because its dogma is "We're not religious!"
Science is a religion too, because it worships at the the opposite altar -- the altar of objective Truth. It is equally incomplete, because there is no experiment you can do that will answer the question, "Why Do I exist? Why does the Universe exist?"
-- "Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world. All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it."
- Albert Einstein
I used to hate schedules, until I learned to respect both sides of the _real_ issues:
1. Schedules tell me that you care more about the product then the people building it. That's one way to kill the company -- let people know that they are only being used, and they will give back the same medicine by refusing to work there. "Hey Joe, tell your friends that company X doesn't give a shit about us dev's having a personal life." It's fatal for a company to lose loyalty of its employees, because you can't motivate people, you can only stop from de-motivating them (E.A. knows that it can burn thru people; there are always more talent to "recruit" -- you think people that left are going to tell everyone what a great company they are to work for?)
2. But if we toss out the schedule, nothing will ever get shipped, because a program without a deadline is never "good enough" to ship -- there are always more interesting features to add. It will always be in a state of R & D. This is one reason why the majority of OSS sucks. It's someone pet project that is no longer being maintained. It's a hack job with no real thought towards maintaining the next version. Fortunately we have counter-examples like the Linux Kernal, Mame, Firefox, etc, showing us the right way to do things.
Unfortunately both extremes / views are flawed. The weakness is the other's strength, and vice versa. A schedule is a necessary evil. It's _supposed_ to be a way to balance theory + application -- to balance the goal, of making money by shipping a product, and by giving the creators (devs) enough time to build something cool that others will find useful.
> Yet WoW has passed 6 million users, > If this is failure, what's success?
1. There is more then one definition of success. Success = Popular, is only one definition. 2. Popularity != Quality. TV (Reality Shows), Fast-Food (McDonalds), etc, all prove that.
WoW isn't a great game -- it is "good enough" and better then most other MMORPGs. Is is fun game? Yes. While it's yet-another-mmorpg that streamlines most of the annoying problems others still have, it still lacks "rich game design." i.e. Character types are restricted to classes. The only real thing to do at level is 60 is waste ridiculous amounts of time farming for "phat loot." The world is static and boring because quests have absolutely no influence in the world. Crafting is limited. Combat is the only way to level up. It's designers have no clue on gaming dead-time. World interaction is almost non-existent. i.e. no rock climbing, treasure hunting, sailing, etc. I could go on, but I'm tired of playing another boring MMORPG. I want the diversity of Ultima 7 / UO in a modern engine, with WoW's streamlined interface.
> If we're exhaling now (and I'm not convinced we are), relax. The industry will inhale soon enough. I'm glad you mentioned this -- far too many people forget about the life cycles, especially how gaming goes through it's 11-yr life cycle. i.e. Down cycles in ~83, ~94, ~05. See Video Game Timeline (Word Doc) Video Game Timeline (Google HTML cache)
-- Why is Windows Explorer so bone-headed? Try renaming a file/directory to start with - a period. i.e. ".config" - a space, so it shows up first when sorted. i.e. " Shortcuts"
As much as I love C/C++, I have to agree with you on certain points, and disagree on others.
I agree that arrays == pointers is a PITA. i.e. void foo( int n ); void foo( int *p );
foo( 0 );// user want to call the int version -- doesn't happen. foo( NULL );// guess what this calls? (Part of the problem is that the language has no real 'null' type.)
But the _real_ issue is that there are times: 1) when you want arrays and pointers to be the same thing, and 2) when you don't
The problem is that C/C++ always forces them to be the same, and Java never lets you. The solution would be to divorce the two, and add an 'array cast' i.e. array int s;// type-safe array. int a[];// native, fast, "unsafe" array int * p = array( &a );// C++ doesn't let you cast pointer to array
The binding order needs to be fixed in C/C++ so it is always left to right, instead of the mostly-left-to-right-but-sometimes-right-to-left. i.e. int * ap[ 10 ];// array of pointers// int (*p) [ 10 ];// pointer to arrays int [10] *p;// point to array -- consistent, and easy to read/parse by both humans and compilers.
I disagree that static sizes are the end-all-cure-all you're assuming, because the tradeoff is performance. Let's say we have some built in string type for the language. What is the biggest size it can be? A dumb, but fast compiler would use int64. A smart compiler would use various types, int16, int32, int64, etc, and upgrade the to the correct base struct. i.e. native_struct string_fast_nonflexible {
int32 _nSize;
char *_pData; }
You optimize for the common case, so that it has zero (or next to it) overhead, else you'll never get the C/C++ efficiency diehards to adopt it. You do, and everyone else will follow.
The problems is that some user will ALWAYS allocate the maximum possible size, and overflow it. How do you handle this case efficiently?
The other big problem with C/C++ is that Unicode chars are an absolute mess. i.e. There is no good way of doing... char08 s08 = "ASCII" char16 s16 = "16-bit Unicode"16 char24 s24 = "24-bit Unicode"24 char32 s32 = "32-bit Unicode"32
I disagree that Garbage Collections is a solution. There are embedded cpus/consoles where it _not_ allowed. Why do you think "embedded C++" is an issue?? Modern CPU's should do the _right_ thing, but not all computing environments can afford the overhead of safety.
Anyone working on consoles, knows that the first thing you do in optimizing is write a custom heap allocator. You know your data [usage] better then the compiler!
> You just can't fix those problems in C++ without breaking backwards compatibility. Agreed. This is why I started working on C^2. i.e. Fix the "include" hack by doing proper modules, fix arrays and pointers, add proper macros that are typesafe, etc. Unfortunately my language work is still in the design phase.
I'm a programmer, not a writer. I could care less about someone being anal-rentantive about an bastardized and inconsistent language, just because some so called 'authority' says it should be a certain way.
I agree. When they cut out the source for their utilties, Dvorak was the only thing really left reading. (Which isn't saying a lot.)
The thing is, he wrote stuff that "sounded" like it could be "real" -- It was to enjoyable to speculate, on what _might_ happen, for us geeks, when the industry could of gone any number of directions.
The paper is symbolic of "the pen is mightier then the sword"
-- Why I hate Windows Explorer... try renaming a file/directory to start with - a period. i.e. ".config" - a space, so it shows up first when sorted. i.e. " Shortcuts"
If you wanted to GM a skill, say like woodworking, or blacksmithing, you'd buy 50,000 boards, or ignots, and crank out whatever gave you the best gains in skills ups. For smithing, it was plate (breastplate). You didn't care how much you failed, you just wanted the dam "Your skill in Blacksmithing has increased to XX.X" message. Everyone I knew was unavailable their first hour of logging, trying to jam their skill during their power hour.
The thing was, the cost per ignot and board shot up dramatically as well (duh!) once more people started doing this, due to the high demand. It was kind of cool to even see when the miners unofficially banded together and demanded more for their ore, because they could. It made the game seem more real, to see how the economy fluctated, based on supply and demand. Of course I had a miner and a smith, so I didn't mind charging slightly less then the "going rate" in order to get a little more sales.
Aside, housing was always a problem, since when you placed a house, even a stupid twig would stop you from bein able to place it. Plus it didn't help that the land had to be "flat"
I didn't realize Runescape was so popular, until seeing the MMORPG charts updated just a little while ago. I suspect one of the reasons is because it has that "old-skool" UO feel to it. (Witness the slow adaption of the 3D client when it first came out. Heck, I knew people, myself included, who played it on laptops too.)
My brother pointed out that Guildwars wasn't included in the MMORPG charts, but that's because it's nigh impossible to get an accurate 'subscriber' count, when it doesn't technically have subscribers.
Ah the good 'ol days of where "Cor Por" was the standard dungeon greetz.:-)
-- 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.
Exactly, you don't need a plot to have a great movie / game, but it usually helps.
i.e. Baraka Tetris
-- 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.
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.
> Even reading the articles about how great Vista will be (and we've all seen tons of those) just make me feel better about jumping ship to OS X.
I'm glad I did too. I started small: just email, web browsing, & xcode. One of the benefits is that I've been forced to look for applications that are cross platform, like FileZilla, OpenOffice, Gimp, Scribus, etc.
It's all the little touches on OSX that remind me the biggest problem with Windows is Explorer and how you interact with the brain dead file system. i.e. In the common File Save box, why can't I drag my favorite folders to it? Why is browsing network shares on a P2P networks dog slow?
Cheers ~~ ]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 agree. I'm switching over to OS (when I can) because I refuse to have my data held hostage.
Are there open source versions of InDesign / FrameMaker? This is one of the main reasons Windows is still around for me, because I don't see it on the list
The other MS/Adobe products are covered:
* Photoshop -> Gimp. Yeah GIMP still sucks for PS users, but at least it is functional, and extendable. (i.e. It _badly_ needs a default PhotoShop keyboard theme/config and better CYMK support, before it replaces PS.)
* Illustrator -> Inkscape or Sodipodi
* OpenOffice -- Toss up if excel / calc is better, but at least we have functional choices.
Hey, Enderandrew, thx for your comments. I appreciate your honesty.
I had come to mostly the same conclusion as you, so it's nice to see I'm not the only one who favors the 'modern' approach over the 'traditional' approach.
Technically, an investment is "Property or another possession acquired for future financial return or benefit" - one of the benefits is that you get to enjoy it.
Now whether it is a good or poor investment, is a different kettle of fish. ROI is _not_ simply about money!
Even though someone took the DX5 Win2K beta drives, and got them working on NT4, Microsoft refused to support DX5 on NT4 simply because they wanted to sell (gamers included) a new OS.
Slashdot Mirror
A _lot_ of people complained about zombies. They removed them in Theif 2.
I _highly_ recommend you to play Thief 1 and 2 through the end. You will be well rewarded.
Cool -- been looking for a color coded system for software. Thx for the idea.
You're forgetting one thing:
;-)
Designers do NOT have the right to tell players how to play the game, when players are abiding by the rules.
But you'll say, "Yes, BUT but these players were _abusing_ the rules, therefore they were cheating (by violating the spirit of the game), even though they weren't technically."
To which I say: _Why_ were they motivated to do that in the first place?
Any economy based on an infinite supply of gold, is flawed. It is _impossible_ not to have deflation, because given enough time, players will accumulate enough wealth to afford the gear they want. This is a _natural_ effect of a broken system!! Gold-Sinks are just stop-gap hacks. HOW many more _years_ of MMORPGS do we need to go through, before we see this pattern is the cause of the gold farming? Designers really need to get over the fact that "People getting more wealthy over time, causing deflation is unwanted."
The game allow trading. Who the F--K are you, as a designer, to say how much time I can spend playing the game, and how fast I can "farm resources", when I'm _paying_ for the privilege to play it!! And now you want say I'm not allowed to trade the items/gold I collected because I simply put too MUCH of MY time into collecting them?? WTF?? Because your broken economy can't handle what you set out to do -- namely have people enjoy playing your game?! So they go hard-core, and play it extreme?
Some games ban trading for items/gear "outside" the game?! How is that effect ANY different from trading "inside" the game??
Instead of banning the gold farmers which is only the symptom (people are like water flowing downhill, they WILL find the most efficient path, no matter what you do; the mind loves "optimizing", a problem no matter how small of an increase on the ROI), how about fixing the cause - working on a model that isn't broken?
i.e.
1. Make everything bind-on-pickup, or
2. Get rid of loot. You want something, make it yourself! (WHERE do those turtles carry that breastplate? And who keeps GIVING them these uber gear
That's not fun? Then farming is a _fact_ of life. Deal with it.
Camping for 4 hrs for _one_ item is a waste of my time. I didn't play EQ because of that crap. Now WoW has it, and is wondering why player are turning to gold farming?? Um, hello!
--
MMORPGS, as fun as they are, still _suck_ due to lack of "Rich Immersion."
* Quests don't influence the world in any way. There is no battles over territory. No cities get ransacked. There is no conflict (war) that actually _means_ something.
* Why do I get XP _only_ for killing? How bout XP for crafting items, and for how famous my wares become?
* Classes are backwards training wheels. My _skills_ determine what my character is, not my character determines what skills I have.
* Why don't monsters level up? How come they aren't smart enough to put a bounty on your head for genocide of their race? Why can't I play as a monster?
* If I can take a boat in the game, why can't I build my own?
* And let me walk up that dam mountain, even though you flagged the slope as 'unwalkable' simply because you don't want people exploring what's past that mountain top.
Game Design is about the unholy trinity: Realism, Logical / Consistency, Convenience
You don't understand what Religion / Spirituality is even about.
Religion is way to prove your philosophy, because it is about putting your beliefs into practise. If you never do anything with your beliefs, they are just that, _beliefs_ and/or Philosophy. Religion is about the letter, to help you understand the spirit / spirituality (the principles.) By your subjective experiences, you will eventually come to learn Truth.
Martial Arts is a religion / spiritual way. (On the Warrior's Path is an awesome book describing the spirituality in MA.)
Atheism is a religion, because its dogma is "We're not religious!"
Science is a religion too, because it worships at the the opposite altar -- the altar of objective Truth. It is equally incomplete, because there is no experiment you can do that will answer the question, "Why Do I exist? Why does the Universe exist?"
--
"Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world. All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it."
- Albert Einstein
I do this for my movies...
Red = Action (blood)
Orange = Drama
Green = Sci-Fi (matrix)
Blue = Anime / Cartoons
Purple = Comedy
Black = Everything else
Because it's easier to pick a movie based on what mood I'm in.
I used to hate schedules, until I learned to respect both sides of the _real_ issues:
1. Schedules tell me that you care more about the product then the people building it. That's one way to kill the company -- let people know that they are only being used, and they will give back the same medicine by refusing to work there. "Hey Joe, tell your friends that company X doesn't give a shit about us dev's having a personal life." It's fatal for a company to lose loyalty of its employees, because you can't motivate people, you can only stop from de-motivating them (E.A. knows that it can burn thru people; there are always more talent to "recruit" -- you think people that left are going to tell everyone what a great company they are to work for?)
2. But if we toss out the schedule, nothing will ever get shipped, because a program without a deadline is never "good enough" to ship -- there are always more interesting features to add. It will always be in a state of R & D. This is one reason why the majority of OSS sucks. It's someone pet project that is no longer being maintained. It's a hack job with no real thought towards maintaining the next version. Fortunately we have counter-examples like the Linux Kernal, Mame, Firefox, etc, showing us the right way to do things.
Unfortunately both extremes / views are flawed. The weakness is the other's strength, and vice versa. A schedule is a necessary evil. It's _supposed_ to be a way to balance theory + application -- to balance the goal, of making money by shipping a product, and by giving the creators (devs) enough time to build something cool that others will find useful.
Cheers
> Yet WoW has passed 6 million users,
> If this is failure, what's success?
1. There is more then one definition of success. Success = Popular, is only one definition.
2. Popularity != Quality.
TV (Reality Shows), Fast-Food (McDonalds), etc, all prove that.
WoW isn't a great game -- it is "good enough" and better then most other MMORPGs. Is is fun game? Yes. While it's yet-another-mmorpg that streamlines most of the annoying problems others still have, it still lacks "rich game design."
i.e.
Character types are restricted to classes. The only real thing to do at level is 60 is waste ridiculous amounts of time farming for "phat loot." The world is static and boring because quests have absolutely no influence in the world. Crafting is limited. Combat is the only way to level up. It's designers have no clue on gaming dead-time. World interaction is almost non-existent. i.e. no rock climbing, treasure hunting, sailing, etc. I could go on, but I'm tired of playing another boring MMORPG. I want the diversity of Ultima 7 / UO in a modern engine, with WoW's streamlined interface.
> If we're exhaling now (and I'm not convinced we are), relax. The industry will inhale soon enough.
I'm glad you mentioned this -- far too many people forget about the life cycles, especially how gaming goes through it's 11-yr life cycle. i.e. Down cycles in ~83, ~94, ~05.
See Video Game Timeline (Word Doc)
Video Game Timeline (Google HTML cache)
--
Why is Windows Explorer so bone-headed? Try renaming a file/directory to start with
- a period. i.e. ".config"
- a space, so it shows up first when sorted. i.e. " Shortcuts"
As much as I love C/C++, I have to agree with you on certain points, and disagree on others.
// user want to call the int version -- doesn't happen. // guess what this calls?
// type-safe array. // native, fast, "unsafe" array // C++ doesn't let you cast pointer to array
// array of pointers // int (*p) [ 10 ]; // pointer to arrays // point to array -- consistent, and easy to read/parse by both humans and compilers.
I agree that arrays == pointers is a PITA.
i.e.
void foo( int n );
void foo( int *p );
foo( 0 );
foo( NULL );
(Part of the problem is that the language has no real 'null' type.)
But the _real_ issue is that there are times:
1) when you want arrays and pointers to be the same thing, and
2) when you don't
The problem is that C/C++ always forces them to be the same, and Java never lets you.
The solution would be to divorce the two, and add an 'array cast'
i.e.
array int s;
int a[];
int * p = array( &a );
The binding order needs to be fixed in C/C++ so it is always left to right, instead of the mostly-left-to-right-but-sometimes-right-to-left.
i.e.
int * ap[ 10 ];
int [10] *p;
I disagree that static sizes are the end-all-cure-all you're assuming, because the tradeoff is performance.
Let's say we have some built in string type for the language. What is the biggest size it can be?
A dumb, but fast compiler would use int64. A smart compiler would use various types, int16, int32, int64, etc, and upgrade the to the correct base struct.
i.e.
native_struct string_fast_nonflexible
{
int32 _nSize;
char *_pData;
}
native_struct string_flexible_64K
{
int16 _nSize;
char *_pData
}
native_struct string_flexible_4G
{
int32 _nSize;
char *_pData
}
You optimize for the common case, so that it has zero (or next to it) overhead, else you'll never get the C/C++ efficiency diehards to adopt it. You do, and everyone else will follow.
The problems is that some user will ALWAYS allocate the maximum possible size, and overflow it. How do you handle this case efficiently?
The other big problem with C/C++ is that Unicode chars are an absolute mess.
i.e.
There is no good way of doing...
char08 s08 = "ASCII"
char16 s16 = "16-bit Unicode"16
char24 s24 = "24-bit Unicode"24
char32 s32 = "32-bit Unicode"32
I disagree that Garbage Collections is a solution. There are embedded cpus/consoles where it _not_ allowed.
Why do you think "embedded C++" is an issue?? Modern CPU's should do the _right_ thing, but not all computing environments can afford the overhead of safety.
Anyone working on consoles, knows that the first thing you do in optimizing is write a custom heap allocator. You know your data [usage] better then the compiler!
> You just can't fix those problems in C++ without breaking backwards compatibility.
Agreed. This is why I started working on C^2. i.e. Fix the "include" hack by doing proper modules, fix arrays and pointers, add proper macros that are typesafe, etc. Unfortunately my language work is still in the design phase.
Cheers
I'm a programmer, not a writer. I could care less about someone being anal-rentantive about an bastardized and inconsistent language, just because some so called 'authority' says it should be a certain way.
I agree. When they cut out the source for their utilties, Dvorak was the only thing really left reading. (Which isn't saying a lot.)
The thing is, he wrote stuff that "sounded" like it could be "real" -- It was to enjoyable to speculate, on what _might_ happen, for us geeks, when the industry could of gone any number of directions.
At least back then, it didn't sound too crazy.
Cheers
At least the pizza restaurant would of been better then the game....
badda-boomph.
The paper is symbolic of "the pen is mightier then the sword"
--
Why I hate Windows Explorer... try renaming a file/directory to start with
- a period. i.e. ".config"
- a space, so it shows up first when sorted. i.e. " Shortcuts"
> How much did you make from your game subscription engine last year? How much did Valve? Why should we listen to you, exactly?
Right, because we all know money, determines quality
If you wanted to GM a skill, say like woodworking, or blacksmithing, you'd buy 50,000 boards, or ignots, and crank out whatever gave you the best gains in skills ups. For smithing, it was plate (breastplate). You didn't care how much you failed, you just wanted the dam "Your skill in Blacksmithing has increased to XX.X" message. Everyone I knew was unavailable their first hour of logging, trying to jam their skill during their power hour.
:-)
The thing was, the cost per ignot and board shot up dramatically as well (duh!) once more people started doing this, due to the high demand. It was kind of cool to even see when the miners unofficially banded together and demanded more for their ore, because they could. It made the game seem more real, to see how the economy fluctated, based on supply and demand. Of course I had a miner and a smith, so I didn't mind charging slightly less then the "going rate" in order to get a little more sales.
Aside, housing was always a problem, since when you placed a house, even a stupid twig would stop you from bein able to place it. Plus it didn't help that the land had to be "flat"
I didn't realize Runescape was so popular, until seeing the MMORPG charts updated just a little while ago. I suspect one of the reasons is because it has that "old-skool" UO feel to it. (Witness the slow adaption of the 3D client when it first came out. Heck, I knew people, myself included, who played it on laptops too.)
My brother pointed out that Guildwars wasn't included in the MMORPG charts, but that's because it's nigh impossible to get an accurate 'subscriber' count, when it doesn't technically have subscribers.
Ah the good 'ol days of where "Cor Por" was the standard dungeon greetz.
--
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.
Mandatory chipping is just a matter of time.
Exactly, you don't need a plot to have a great movie / game, but it usually helps.
i.e.
Baraka
Tetris
--
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.
One word: iPodDisk
My .sig already summarizes this...
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.
> Even reading the articles about how great Vista will be (and we've all seen tons of those) just make me feel better about jumping ship to OS X.
I'm glad I did too. I started small: just email, web browsing, & xcode. One of the benefits is that I've been forced to look for applications that are cross platform, like FileZilla, OpenOffice, Gimp, Scribus, etc.
It's all the little touches on OSX that remind me the biggest problem with Windows is Explorer and how you interact with the brain dead file system. i.e. In the common File Save box, why can't I drag my favorite folders to it? Why is browsing network shares on a P2P networks dog slow?
Cheers
~~
]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 '_'
Sorry for the bad netiquitte
Hey Blue, we might be in luck...
Anyone tried Scribus ?
I agree. I'm switching over to OS (when I can) because I refuse to have my data held hostage.
Are there open source versions of InDesign / FrameMaker? This is one of the main reasons Windows is still around for me, because I don't see it on the list
The other MS/Adobe products are covered:
* Photoshop -> Gimp. Yeah GIMP still sucks for PS users, but at least it is functional, and extendable. (i.e. It _badly_ needs a default PhotoShop keyboard theme/config and better CYMK support, before it replaces PS.)
* Illustrator -> Inkscape or Sodipodi
* OpenOffice -- Toss up if excel / calc is better, but at least we have functional choices.
Cheers
Hey, Enderandrew, thx for your comments. I appreciate your honesty.
I had come to mostly the same conclusion as you, so it's nice to see I'm not the only one who favors the 'modern' approach over the 'traditional' approach.
Cheers
Technically, an investment is "Property or another possession acquired for future financial return or benefit" - one of the benefits is that you get to enjoy it.
Now whether it is a good or poor investment, is a different kettle of fish. ROI is _not_ simply about money!
Is anyone actually surprised by this??
MS pulled this stunt with DX5 and NT 4/2K.
Even though someone took the DX5 Win2K beta drives, and got them working on NT4, Microsoft refused to support DX5 on NT4 simply because they wanted to sell (gamers included) a new OS.
What's wrong with Ubuntu?
Please post as AC so you don't get modded down into oblivion.