Asking if indie games are going to die is like asking if fat girls are going to stop getting attention. As long as she has something unique to offer (suck suck suck!), someone is going to be willing to give her a whirl and spin that tea-cup. Likewise, as long as indie games have something to offer that the other guys don't, they will thrive. Things such as gameplay, community, affordability, portability, etc.
As long as the big publishers ignore OSX, there will be a market for indie games.
Come on Firaxes - release Civilization IV for the mac already!
Anyway, how can anyone ask this question? It's silly. Go take a look at a few of the big indie games review/listing/sales sites and tell me they seem to be slowly dying. They're more popular than ever.
The "video" aspect of the new ipods definitely is pretty lame and reasonably underplayed. If you could easily put your own video of any type on it (and, if necessary, copy over whatever codecs you need to play them), then that'd be pretty cool. Even if they come out with a service that makes it possible for me to get some sort of an unlimited $15/mo subscription to download and play any content that I can find on television and cable and DVD releases, it won't mean much if I'm locked into subscribing to content and doing it the "Apple Way". That would be like locking the mp3 player into the iTunes Music Store only.
The really neat thing about the new iPod is that it's so small, but still 60gb. Now that is sweet. And people would be more interested in it if Apple hadn't already saturated the market in the last 18 months with minis, nanos, ipods, ipod videos, iPod U2 editions, shuffles and all these other stupid things. If you just bought a nano in the last few months, you're probably not going to rush out to buy the newest line just because they're thinner.
The iPod is a really good, durable product. People with first and second generation iPods are still happy with them. You have to really up the ante to make people who are very happy with what they have want to "upgrade".
That said, as soon as Apple comes out with a 300gb ipod (or maybe even a 120gb) that's the physical size of the one they released this week - I'm all over it.
I would love to see some sort of documented evidence or explanation for this. Not that I necessarily doubt you - but I have never been able to find anything that suggests any general threadcount scams.
Nevertheless, if you can't tell the difference between the typical 150tc and something closer to 1,000 - your skin must be made out of sandpaper or rock or something like the guys in Martian Chronicles.
I never saw the point in high threadcount until I had bedding with high threadcount. I notice a big difference, but being a guy, I'm a bit rough around the edges to start with. Girls notice a HUGE difference though. I think 1500tc is maybe overkill even with good material, but I got a great deal on my bedding. I got like $6,000 worth for $2,000 (comforter, duvet, sheets, pillows). I went from sleeping on a $100 futon mattress tossed on the floor my whole life to sleeping on satin sheets and $400 italian goose down checked pillows. I've never slept so soundly and comfortably. I wish I had spent the money and time investing in high quality bedding (and bed) many years ago. I could have avoided a lot of groggy mornings and painful aching days.
Anyway, I don't care if there's bed bugs in my bed. I figure my pubic lice have to be strong enough to kill them all while I sleep.
I sleep on 1500 threadcount sheets. Not a chance in hell I'd trust those babies in a vat of bleach. Honestly, I'd rather suffer some terrible fungal infection than give up my bedding. It's like sleeping in a Fabricland womb.
But you know, people have been sleeping in beds and worse for a very long time. Somehow, I think they'll continue to survive. Granted, there are some exceptions like yagu, but in general . . .
I never said anyone was fat. I just said what the medical indexes state. *shrug*
But that's the typical resort of a day-dreaming sap who believes in all that good-hearted crap. "Oh, yeah? well.. well... you must be single so neener!"
As fucked up as 90% of people's relationships are, the fact that you're in one doesn't make you more knowledgable or wise about them. In fact, a lot of the stupidest people who make the stupidest decisions and risks in relationships are... obviously... in relationships.
A lot of people, like myself, have had more than enough relationshihs to know not to jump into things with that day-dreamer's hopeful all-is-good mentality and avoid fucked up situations. I never have any drama in my life. When was the last time you could say that?
And I forgot to add a qualifier. 150lbs isn't overweight if you're 6'... *or* also if you have 50lbs of tits. seriously, 150lbs is about the weight that a medium framed MAN should be at 5'10". I ain't saying a chick can't be cute and attractive if she's 5'8" and 150lbs... but don't be acting like she's frigging Ashanti or something.
Imagine working in a big global corporation where everyone uses their local standard (like in America, using MMDDYY). God, I hate it. I don't care if it's anti-american - this is one american that would give his left nut and a good chunk of the right one to see everyone here learn to use YYYYMMDD.
If you were grabbing asses on national talk like a pirate day, I think you completely missed the purpose of national talk like a pirate day.
Re:Okay, here's a standard I'd like to see:
on
World Standards Day 2005
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What I don't understand is why, in all countries, drivers face each other head-on. If you drive on the right side of the road and left side of the car or right side of the car and left side of the road, when driving toward each other, the drivers are always facing each other - so that in a head-on collision, the most possible damage would be done to the drivers. Why? Wouldn't it be safer to have them drive on the right side of the car and the right side of the road or left side of car and road so that you put the most distance between you? If you hit more or less headon in such a situation, the empty side of one car would collide with the empty side of the other car... right?
[Disclaimer: although I am a guy, I don't claim to speak for "guys", because to paint 3 billion people with one brush would make me a fool.]
No, it would mean you were generalizing. Kind of like I was generalizing, becuase what I said is GENERALLY true. Of course there are fucking exceptions, but I'm not going to run down every possible combination of alterations in the entire face of the earth.
Also, marrying your best friend is a bad idea. Again, if you want someone you can go bowling with or share a book with, make some friends. Marry the person that can take care of you and your kids, that you can take care of in turn and that attracts you.
Seriously, people who talk about marrying their best friends sound a lot like people who say you should be your child's best friend. Friends are decidedly different relationships with different purposes than a parent-child or man-woman-romantic relationship.
People grow old, get wrinkly, saggy and less attractive. However, it seems old couples don't divorce each other as soon as they start spotting grey hair in their spouse.
That's because after a certain age, you know you're not going to have many options out there. Why do you think women start going nuts about racing to find the right guy by a certain age? Because they know that their expiration date is approaching. You're not going to find the same dream guy at 35 or 40 that you could have gotten when you were 20 or 25. And unless you're Roy Firestone, you're not going to have the wealth to attract a hot young girl when you're in your 60s.
Plus, after a certain age, your weiner doesn't function so well anyway and you just want someone who will clean up when you miss the toilet and steer you away from crashing forehead-first into pillars while mall-walking.
The depressing thing that people don't seem willing to confront is that there isn't any such thing as love. It's not a permenant thing. That's why people 'fall out of love' and start cheating. Your woman may be really into you, but after a few months, it won't be exciting and new anymore because that initial chemical reaction has died off. That psychotic buzz (scientists have reported that the chemical aspect of love puts your brain in a state similar to the insane) will wear off and then you're looking for it again somewhere. That's why you have people who think that if you aren't in that constant state of wanting to mount your significant other in every private moment you can get, then things "aren't working".
As for common-interests.. I don't think so.
If I want someont to go bowling or fishing with, I've got buddies. If you want someone to go shoe-shopping with and watch Orlando Bloom releases with, you've got your girlfriends.
Geeks are no more or less physically attractive than anyone else. They are predisposed to being anti-social and growing up in situations where they do not have an instilled and experienced confidence in social interaction.
On the other hand, I was both a jock and a very good student, so while I didn't care to participate in cliques or anything, I never felt awkard around anyone, including women.
It really does have a lot to do with how you grew up and how your personality was formed based on previous experiences. If you can't talk to a chick without stammering, you're sure going to have a hard time asking her out and slipping your hand over a thigh in the movie theater as a teenager.
I've always had great success with women (usually a few years older than me) since I turned sixteen. But I'm just an average geek and unless I become a millionaire, there will always be a cieling that limits how hot the chicks I'll get are. And that's okay with me. Those chicks have a physical limit that won't attract the millionaires anyway.;)
You don't need scientific studies to know what attracts people and what love is. Love is the word we apply to describe the chemically induced state that occurs when two people who are attracted to one another.
And what attracts people is symmetrical beauty (people with more symetrical faces are always rated as more beautiful than asymetrical people). And people who are skinny. If you're overweight, you're automatically judged as lazy, unintelligent, insecure and lacking self-control.
Women throughout history have been attracted to wealth and social status. Men have bene attracted to youth and beauty. It's necessary for the propegation of the species. You're not going to change a million years of biology and physiology with a few self-affirming plattitudes about how you just want a sassy little emo boy. If you do, that's the exception; not the rule.
Here's the formula for love and relationships:
A man will attract the hottest woman he can afford. A woman will get the wealthiest, most successful male she can attract.
You're going to have a lot more choices in women when you become wealthy, stable and successful than when you're flipping burgers at McDonalds and you're going to have a lot more choices in men when you're younger and more attractive.
Again, nobody is saying that we want it to be that way. But that's the way it is and that's life. *shrug*
Why do you think it is that men work so fucking hard to build their education and establish their careers? Because we know what attracts women and we want hot young women and you're not going to get hot young women driving a saab and living in a studio apartment in the bad part of town. If women were predispositioned to be insanely attracted to men who shaved their heads and danced in giant vats of mayo, we'd spend all of our time doing that. The reason we do almost everything in our existance is somehow related to getting the hottest chicks we can. Maybe the frizzy little emo boys you hook up with don't realize that or they just say whatever they think they have to say to score with you, but everything they do is based around wanting to score, too.
Next thing you know, you're going to tell me that chicks don't like bad boys and that jerks don't get all the action. (If that's true, why does every woman bitch to me about her ex husband and ex boyfriends being such JERKS... ).
Oh and I suppose 150 pounds is a butter-troll fat-fuck in this contemporary age?
Not if she's at least six feet tall.
Check out a height/weight/age charge for women on a medical site somewhere.
And what planet are you from if you don't realize that women are attracted to money, power and status and men are attracted to youth and beauty? When was the last time you heard a man describe his date based first on her career? When was the last time you heard a woman describe a man baed on something other than his career and income as the first item in that description? When was the last time you saw a wealthy man crusing the bars for a fat, ugly 45 year old woman?
Nobody's saying it's ideal. It's just reality. Then again, maybe you grew up without an involved father, so you believe all the "women want a sensitive metrosexual man who cries at movies and highlights his hair" thing that they've fed you throughout your youth?
As an average AMERICAN citizen . . . 66% of us are going to die in our 30s while walking our pork-asses to the kitchen to get more nachos during the ball-game.
Really though, I'm not going to lose sleep over it. People were talking about the end of the world because of environmental problems or nuclear power plants or any number of things for decades and we've always managed to finish the decade out without being consumed by evil green zombificating gasses.
The problem I have isn't with whether or not global warming is real and based on human actions. My problem is that people are busy debating about that and acting as if we shouldn't bother pursuing further government regulation and standards until we know for sure... by which time it might be too late. And even if it isn't, isn't not dumping shit into our waterways and being able to breath without developing asthma from the LA smog at the age of ten a good thing anyway?
But hey... corporate progress is more important than.. like... breathing. It's up to you and I to just be good little americans and consume and consume and consume.
You're an insensitive twat. Humor causes you to laugh, releasing more naseaus environmentally damaging biological product (or maybe it's just me... I had a roach-coach lunch). I, for one, care enough about mother earth to refrain from enjoying this "humor" that you so frivolously speak of. I bet you're one of those bastards who take aerasol spray cans and lighters and make mini blow-torches out of them (presuming you can still buy aerasol cans...?)
Speaking of which . . . I just saw a car in front of us at a drive-through today. It had all sorts of anti-gun, anti-hunting, anti-oil, pro-environment, pro-abortion, pro-education, pro-vegetarian bumper stickers plastered all over the back.
Do you know what kind of car this woman was driving? A big SUV.
Well, that and the tremendous amount of corporate welfare (the airlines whine more than a two year old every 18 months) and all of the politically motivated Katrina-related costs to make everyone feel good.
As far as the change from robotic to human based space exploration - that's probably a smart move. I'm sure it is reasonably more affordable to train a human and send them into space and then lose them than it is to design, build and maintain a robot for the same purpose and lose it.
Slashdot Mirror
Like CSS. :D
Asking if indie games are going to die is like asking if fat girls are going to stop getting attention. As long as she has something unique to offer (suck suck suck!), someone is going to be willing to give her a whirl and spin that tea-cup. Likewise, as long as indie games have something to offer that the other guys don't, they will thrive. Things such as gameplay, community, affordability, portability, etc.
As long as the big publishers ignore OSX, there will be a market for indie games.
Come on Firaxes - release Civilization IV for the mac already!
Anyway, how can anyone ask this question? It's silly. Go take a look at a few of the big indie games review/listing/sales sites and tell me they seem to be slowly dying. They're more popular than ever.
The "video" aspect of the new ipods definitely is pretty lame and reasonably underplayed. If you could easily put your own video of any type on it (and, if necessary, copy over whatever codecs you need to play them), then that'd be pretty cool. Even if they come out with a service that makes it possible for me to get some sort of an unlimited $15/mo subscription to download and play any content that I can find on television and cable and DVD releases, it won't mean much if I'm locked into subscribing to content and doing it the "Apple Way". That would be like locking the mp3 player into the iTunes Music Store only.
The really neat thing about the new iPod is that it's so small, but still 60gb. Now that is sweet. And people would be more interested in it if Apple hadn't already saturated the market in the last 18 months with minis, nanos, ipods, ipod videos, iPod U2 editions, shuffles and all these other stupid things. If you just bought a nano in the last few months, you're probably not going to rush out to buy the newest line just because they're thinner.
The iPod is a really good, durable product. People with first and second generation iPods are still happy with them. You have to really up the ante to make people who are very happy with what they have want to "upgrade".
That said, as soon as Apple comes out with a 300gb ipod (or maybe even a 120gb) that's the physical size of the one they released this week - I'm all over it.
I would love to see some sort of documented evidence or explanation for this. Not that I necessarily doubt you - but I have never been able to find anything that suggests any general threadcount scams.
Nevertheless, if you can't tell the difference between the typical 150tc and something closer to 1,000 - your skin must be made out of sandpaper or rock or something like the guys in Martian Chronicles.
I never saw the point in high threadcount until I had bedding with high threadcount. I notice a big difference, but being a guy, I'm a bit rough around the edges to start with. Girls notice a HUGE difference though. I think 1500tc is maybe overkill even with good material, but I got a great deal on my bedding. I got like $6,000 worth for $2,000 (comforter, duvet, sheets, pillows). I went from sleeping on a $100 futon mattress tossed on the floor my whole life to sleeping on satin sheets and $400 italian goose down checked pillows. I've never slept so soundly and comfortably. I wish I had spent the money and time investing in high quality bedding (and bed) many years ago. I could have avoided a lot of groggy mornings and painful aching days.
Anyway, I don't care if there's bed bugs in my bed. I figure my pubic lice have to be strong enough to kill them all while I sleep.
I sleep on 1500 threadcount sheets. Not a chance in hell I'd trust those babies in a vat of bleach. Honestly, I'd rather suffer some terrible fungal infection than give up my bedding. It's like sleeping in a Fabricland womb.
But you know, people have been sleeping in beds and worse for a very long time. Somehow, I think they'll continue to survive. Granted, there are some exceptions like yagu, but in general . . .
What recent food security scares? I'm pretty sure I'd see something sensational about it on FOX if there were any and I have not.
Dr. Edwards is clearly just a karma whore.
I never said anyone was fat. I just said what the medical indexes state. *shrug*
But that's the typical resort of a day-dreaming sap who believes in all that good-hearted crap. "Oh, yeah? well.. well... you must be single so neener!"
As fucked up as 90% of people's relationships are, the fact that you're in one doesn't make you more knowledgable or wise about them. In fact, a lot of the stupidest people who make the stupidest decisions and risks in relationships are... obviously... in relationships.
A lot of people, like myself, have had more than enough relationshihs to know not to jump into things with that day-dreamer's hopeful all-is-good mentality and avoid fucked up situations. I never have any drama in my life. When was the last time you could say that?
And I forgot to add a qualifier. 150lbs isn't overweight if you're 6'... *or* also if you have 50lbs of tits. seriously, 150lbs is about the weight that a medium framed MAN should be at 5'10". I ain't saying a chick can't be cute and attractive if she's 5'8" and 150lbs... but don't be acting like she's frigging Ashanti or something.
Imagine working in a big global corporation where everyone uses their local standard (like in America, using MMDDYY). God, I hate it. I don't care if it's anti-american - this is one american that would give his left nut and a good chunk of the right one to see everyone here learn to use YYYYMMDD.
Oh, yeah. I guess that does make a lot of sense. :)
If you were grabbing asses on national talk like a pirate day, I think you completely missed the purpose of national talk like a pirate day.
What I don't understand is why, in all countries, drivers face each other head-on. If you drive on the right side of the road and left side of the car or right side of the car and left side of the road, when driving toward each other, the drivers are always facing each other - so that in a head-on collision, the most possible damage would be done to the drivers. Why? Wouldn't it be safer to have them drive on the right side of the car and the right side of the road or left side of car and road so that you put the most distance between you? If you hit more or less headon in such a situation, the empty side of one car would collide with the empty side of the other car... right?
Nobody uses it. When was the last time you booked a flight at 18:00 UTC?
It's still the 14th in my timezone. You must be in one of the other 23 timezones.
Thank god for standards.
You'll never be a good manager without a solid understanding of what you are managing
Have you been in the workforce long (or at all)?
I just ask, because I've never heard of any manager having a solid clue about what the people he manages actually do.
[Disclaimer: although I am a guy, I don't claim to speak for "guys", because to paint 3 billion people with one brush would make me a fool.]
No, it would mean you were generalizing. Kind of like I was generalizing, becuase what I said is GENERALLY true. Of course there are fucking exceptions, but I'm not going to run down every possible combination of alterations in the entire face of the earth.
Also, marrying your best friend is a bad idea. Again, if you want someone you can go bowling with or share a book with, make some friends. Marry the person that can take care of you and your kids, that you can take care of in turn and that attracts you.
Seriously, people who talk about marrying their best friends sound a lot like people who say you should be your child's best friend. Friends are decidedly different relationships with different purposes than a parent-child or man-woman-romantic relationship.
People grow old, get wrinkly, saggy and less attractive. However, it seems old couples don't divorce each other as soon as they start spotting grey hair in their spouse.
That's because after a certain age, you know you're not going to have many options out there. Why do you think women start going nuts about racing to find the right guy by a certain age? Because they know that their expiration date is approaching. You're not going to find the same dream guy at 35 or 40 that you could have gotten when you were 20 or 25. And unless you're Roy Firestone, you're not going to have the wealth to attract a hot young girl when you're in your 60s.
Plus, after a certain age, your weiner doesn't function so well anyway and you just want someone who will clean up when you miss the toilet and steer you away from crashing forehead-first into pillars while mall-walking.
The depressing thing that people don't seem willing to confront is that there isn't any such thing as love. It's not a permenant thing. That's why people 'fall out of love' and start cheating. Your woman may be really into you, but after a few months, it won't be exciting and new anymore because that initial chemical reaction has died off. That psychotic buzz (scientists have reported that the chemical aspect of love puts your brain in a state similar to the insane) will wear off and then you're looking for it again somewhere. That's why you have people who think that if you aren't in that constant state of wanting to mount your significant other in every private moment you can get, then things "aren't working".
As for common-interests.. I don't think so.
If I want someont to go bowling or fishing with, I've got buddies. If you want someone to go shoe-shopping with and watch Orlando Bloom releases with, you've got your girlfriends.
Geeks are no more or less physically attractive than anyone else. They are predisposed to being anti-social and growing up in situations where they do not have an instilled and experienced confidence in social interaction.
;)
On the other hand, I was both a jock and a very good student, so while I didn't care to participate in cliques or anything, I never felt awkard around anyone, including women.
It really does have a lot to do with how you grew up and how your personality was formed based on previous experiences. If you can't talk to a chick without stammering, you're sure going to have a hard time asking her out and slipping your hand over a thigh in the movie theater as a teenager.
I've always had great success with women (usually a few years older than me) since I turned sixteen. But I'm just an average geek and unless I become a millionaire, there will always be a cieling that limits how hot the chicks I'll get are. And that's okay with me. Those chicks have a physical limit that won't attract the millionaires anyway.
You don't need scientific studies to know what attracts people and what love is. Love is the word we apply to describe the chemically induced state that occurs when two people who are attracted to one another.
And what attracts people is symmetrical beauty (people with more symetrical faces are always rated as more beautiful than asymetrical people). And people who are skinny. If you're overweight, you're automatically judged as lazy, unintelligent, insecure and lacking self-control.
Women throughout history have been attracted to wealth and social status. Men have bene attracted to youth and beauty. It's necessary for the propegation of the species. You're not going to change a million years of biology and physiology with a few self-affirming plattitudes about how you just want a sassy little emo boy. If you do, that's the exception; not the rule.
Here's the formula for love and relationships:
A man will attract the hottest woman he can afford.
A woman will get the wealthiest, most successful male she can attract.
You're going to have a lot more choices in women when you become wealthy, stable and successful than when you're flipping burgers at McDonalds and you're going to have a lot more choices in men when you're younger and more attractive.
Again, nobody is saying that we want it to be that way. But that's the way it is and that's life. *shrug*
Why do you think it is that men work so fucking hard to build their education and establish their careers? Because we know what attracts women and we want hot young women and you're not going to get hot young women driving a saab and living in a studio apartment in the bad part of town. If women were predispositioned to be insanely attracted to men who shaved their heads and danced in giant vats of mayo, we'd spend all of our time doing that. The reason we do almost everything in our existance is somehow related to getting the hottest chicks we can. Maybe the frizzy little emo boys you hook up with don't realize that or they just say whatever they think they have to say to score with you, but everything they do is based around wanting to score, too.
Next thing you know, you're going to tell me that chicks don't like bad boys and that jerks don't get all the action. (If that's true, why does every woman bitch to me about her ex husband and ex boyfriends being such JERKS... ).
Oh and I suppose 150 pounds is a butter-troll fat-fuck in this contemporary age?
Not if she's at least six feet tall.
Check out a height/weight/age charge for women on a medical site somewhere.
And what planet are you from if you don't realize that women are attracted to money, power and status and men are attracted to youth and beauty? When was the last time you heard a man describe his date based first on her career? When was the last time you heard a woman describe a man baed on something other than his career and income as the first item in that description? When was the last time you saw a wealthy man crusing the bars for a fat, ugly 45 year old woman?
Nobody's saying it's ideal. It's just reality. Then again, maybe you grew up without an involved father, so you believe all the "women want a sensitive metrosexual man who cries at movies and highlights his hair" thing that they've fed you throughout your youth?
As an average AMERICAN citizen . . . 66% of us are going to die in our 30s while walking our pork-asses to the kitchen to get more nachos during the ball-game.
Really though, I'm not going to lose sleep over it. People were talking about the end of the world because of environmental problems or nuclear power plants or any number of things for decades and we've always managed to finish the decade out without being consumed by evil green zombificating gasses.
The problem I have isn't with whether or not global warming is real and based on human actions. My problem is that people are busy debating about that and acting as if we shouldn't bother pursuing further government regulation and standards until we know for sure... by which time it might be too late. And even if it isn't, isn't not dumping shit into our waterways and being able to breath without developing asthma from the LA smog at the age of ten a good thing anyway?
But hey... corporate progress is more important than.. like... breathing. It's up to you and I to just be good little americans and consume and consume and consume.
You're an insensitive twat. Humor causes you to laugh, releasing more naseaus environmentally damaging biological product (or maybe it's just me... I had a roach-coach lunch). I, for one, care enough about mother earth to refrain from enjoying this "humor" that you so frivolously speak of. I bet you're one of those bastards who take aerasol spray cans and lighters and make mini blow-torches out of them (presuming you can still buy aerasol cans...?)
Speaking of which . . . I just saw a car in front of us at a drive-through today. It had all sorts of anti-gun, anti-hunting, anti-oil, pro-environment, pro-abortion, pro-education, pro-vegetarian bumper stickers plastered all over the back.
Do you know what kind of car this woman was driving? A big SUV.
sigh
Well, that and the tremendous amount of corporate welfare (the airlines whine more than a two year old every 18 months) and all of the politically motivated Katrina-related costs to make everyone feel good.
As far as the change from robotic to human based space exploration - that's probably a smart move. I'm sure it is reasonably more affordable to train a human and send them into space and then lose them than it is to design, build and maintain a robot for the same purpose and lose it.