Exactly. I dug out Masters of Orion 2 (Circa 1995) not too long ago and got it to work on my current Vista system. It is still lots of fun!
Having an updated online option would be nice though... Considering the original option is to connect to the now defunct TEN (The Entertainment Network) it gave me a few laughs.
Players that think this isn't a big idea should think about what if MOO2 required authentication from TEN to even function? Ridiculous! How a modern gaming company thinks this is in any way acceptable to anyone is somewhat amusing.
I notice the quote is for "Stopped" not "Crippled"...
Customer Support: "Why yes the server is up and running. It is currently being hosted by a 286 on a 2400baud modem in Russia. It just has the max 4 players on it right now, just keep trying to connect..."
A) Most gamers don't own 1000$ worth of video cards. If a software company regulated themselves to that market, it would shrink to something like 1%.
B) If you are arguing against the premise of Pirates being cheap, well if they are, they won't be buying 1000$ worth of video card anyway, let alone some game, and finally
C) I just bought an iPhone, and it costs about 700$, most lap tops are cheaper these days, so no they are not "cheap". I ONLY paid 250$ up front, but by the time you add in all the costs of signing up for a 3 year contract, etc... Believe me, nothing is "free" you are paying for it somewhere. They just don't care if that's because the phone is over priced or the data plan, or whatever, so long as they get paid.
Also Subscriptions are A) Free money, and B) Stable money.
However, unless your name rhymes with "POW", ensuring DRM and $$$ like that will just make me go "no thanks, I'll pass".
I can understand WHY they would do it, however if they do it across the board they run a very large risk of alienating their client base and doing a really good job of putting themselves out of business.
If you don't like Rogers, your only other option is Bell, and they are just as bad.
Neither compete, nor have any inclination to improve service.
Government will not do anything about it, because of lobby power. In fact have done Canadians a disservice by allowing the corporate amalgamations of all the rest of the telecommunication corporations, like Fido, Telus, etc... into either Bell or Rogers. The CRTC (regulators, supposedly) even hobbled any independent ISP trying to use either lines and to compete.
The ONLY hope that remains right now, is the new telecommunication corporation being started up right now. However this was not done for our benefit, it was merely a spin off when the Government sold the spectrum as a cash grab.
I fully expect Bell and Rogers to join forces to crush the newcomer, and then resume their reign of evil. Hopefully they survive, and change the market for the better, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Considering the start up and infrastructure costs, currently I believe it will only be available in select metro areas, and slowly expanded over a period of years. In other words, change, if it even happens, will be slow.
I bet they are also responsible for the USA health care system which is what has crippled the auto industry with aging pensioners.
Clearly it is the fault of the unions that health insurance in the States is crazy and that they have the most expensive health care and drugs in the world.
I would think that they would look at what is commonly settled for out of court as part of determining "reasonable" or "actual" damages.
If a company commonly settles for several thousand dollars (say 2400$-6500$) out of court for approximately the same offense then how is it reasonable to expect 2$ Million or even 54,000$ dollars award is fair? Obviously if the company settles for this amount over and over to ovoid court, it must be what they feel is the right amount.
I am not sure if courts are about to take this into account, but they really should.
Some awards are just stupid. If I got sued for 2$ million they might as well make it for 2$ Billion, or 2$ Quadrillion, as either way A) I can't pay it, and B) I will declare myself bankrupt and never pay it. Which is likely the real reason for the change. Hell 7 years of bad credit due to being bankrupt is hardly a big deal now that everyone is doing it, banks ain't lending much anyway, etc... If ever there was a good time to do it, it is now really.
My father who is a lawyer did tell me some sage advice (common sense really). Basically the gist of it was that you can't sue someone for money they don't have. If they do not have have money, have no assets for the court to go after, have no credit anyway, etc... you are just wasting your own time and even more money. You are better off to swallow the loss and move on with your life as you will only compound the problem, and ultimately be disappointed in the end.
In many cases groups will compromise or negotiate a lesser settlement to at least get something, knowing they will never get the full amount, particular if the debtor threatens to file chapter 7 (or whatever it is). I hear the IRS do this all the time for large amounts of back taxes. Someone might owe 500,000 bucks, but a lawyer will come in and say, well my client, can't pay that, nor will he ever be able to pay that, however, if we promise to pay 100k, and 10k a year for ten years can we call the debt paid? Many times if the options are 0$ or 200,000$ rather than 500,000$, they will take the 200k rather than nothing.
I always thought that phase was stupid. I work in Government, and in IT, and it is a phrase I would hear a lot. We should run like a business, like that was some kind of god damn holy grail or something. I would bet most of the vaunted higher ups that would spout this nonsense never worked a day in the private sector, and likely picked up the phrase at some exorbitantly expensive training conference put on by a private consultant company just ripping off the government like all the rest.
It is complete and utter BS for one, and secondly, as I used to say, there is a significant difference between government and private business which would require them to be run differently! Mostly the fact that you are funded by public money, are accountable to the general population, have political masters, and must maintain a degree of service far above and beyond that of the private sector, particularly in areas that would be totally unprofitable to any private business enterprise, yet is essential part of our system of governance.
I understand for the most part this is trying to instill efficiency, and lower costs, but it A) doesn't work, and B) doesn't make any sense.
My response these days, is look at the previous "leaders" of business, AIG, GM, etc... and all the rest, they certainly were run like a "business" and that turned out well. Who will bail out government, should the same thing happen? Its citizens, if they can, or nobody if they can't, and you don't want to even consider if they can't.
I'm at work you insensitive clod and cannot check that link!
Though I wouldn't be totally surprised. Be interesting to see how many times it was downloaded.
I just figured A) it was a horrible game, and B) most 8 year old girls lack the DRM hacking skills
Though I guess some frugal IT savvy parents might. I would also guess many hard up parents would also have empathy and share the title... though it is only a 20$ game as opposed to the 70$ ones out there.
Not to mention that by promoting illiteracy, (by pretty much saying Libraries are a bad thing) you are not thinking very long term.
Your user penetration is like 99% right now, be happy.
You are not going to sell too many books to the illiterate (well perhaps picture books).
Sometimes I just want to slap stupid people. Sometimes with a hardcover edition of one of Steven Erikson's books. That aught to do the trick, although bludgeon might be a better word.
You forgot about Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory! Not only was it perhaps my favorite FPS of all time, it was free!
Counter-Strike was kinda interesting if only because so many freaking people played it at any one time. Never really played Battlefield 2.
Anyway I think the difference is on focus. The old school games the developer wanted to blow your freaking ass out of the water with every new game is how awesome it was usually graphic centric, with some game play additions. They wanted to actively TOP their old game, or show how much better their game was to all others.
Now as games are more expensive and require massive financial backing, more seem to be developed by committee, and are more beholden to parent companies and the like. Many are produced in large conglomerates that produce many games, not just a single title or series (or a few). These do not want to compete against other games. They also do not want to compete against their old games. They are not trying to make a game that will WOW their customers, or be especially fun. They are trying to sell the most games they can possibly sell, while spending the least amount of money, while trying to sell all their other games, etc... Just a company trying to maximize profit. Clearly anyone that knows anything knows that this is done through MASSIVE advertising campaigns. You don't actually have to make a good game anymore, you only have to convince people that it is. This isn't new by any means, and it doesn't hurt if you also happen to make a quality game also. I just see this becoming more and more prevalent, particularly with the rise in console penetration, and the continued amalgamation of game developers into megacorps. I see no reason why this trend will not continue either. There are always sweet exceptions to the rule, but the are more and more rare now I think.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Do they have women there?
and (possibly or)
2) Do they have high speed internet access (Sat up-links do NOT count)?
I love the only reason I know wtf "Yakutsk" is from RISK. :)
HA!
Exactly. I dug out Masters of Orion 2 (Circa 1995) not too long ago and got it to work on my current Vista system. It is still lots of fun!
Having an updated online option would be nice though... Considering the original option is to connect to the now defunct TEN (The Entertainment Network) it gave me a few laughs.
Players that think this isn't a big idea should think about what if MOO2 required authentication from TEN to even function? Ridiculous! How a modern gaming company thinks this is in any way acceptable to anyone is somewhat amusing.
Heh...
Its all a conspiracy by Blizzard to soften the blow when the Starcraft 2 comes out without LAN support.
I notice the quote is for "Stopped" not "Crippled"...
Customer Support: "Why yes the server is up and running. It is currently being hosted by a 286 on a 2400baud modem in Russia. It just has the max 4 players on it right now, just keep trying to connect..."
Um no.
A) Most gamers don't own 1000$ worth of video cards. If a software company regulated themselves to that market, it would shrink to something like 1%.
B) If you are arguing against the premise of Pirates being cheap, well if they are, they won't be buying 1000$ worth of video card anyway, let alone some game, and finally
C) I just bought an iPhone, and it costs about 700$, most lap tops are cheaper these days, so no they are not "cheap". I ONLY paid 250$ up front, but by the time you add in all the costs of signing up for a 3 year contract, etc... Believe me, nothing is "free" you are paying for it somewhere. They just don't care if that's because the phone is over priced or the data plan, or whatever, so long as they get paid.
Also Subscriptions are A) Free money, and B) Stable money.
However, unless your name rhymes with "POW", ensuring DRM and $$$ like that will just make me go "no thanks, I'll pass".
I can understand WHY they would do it, however if they do it across the board they run a very large risk of alienating their client base and doing a really good job of putting themselves out of business.
"Rogers reserves the right to suspend access to The Services under ANY circumstances..."
There fixed that for ya.
-Rogers Support
It's called not having a choice.
If you don't like Rogers, your only other option is Bell, and they are just as bad.
Neither compete, nor have any inclination to improve service.
Government will not do anything about it, because of lobby power. In fact have done Canadians a disservice by allowing the corporate amalgamations of all the rest of the telecommunication corporations, like Fido, Telus, etc... into either Bell or Rogers. The CRTC (regulators, supposedly) even hobbled any independent ISP trying to use either lines and to compete.
The ONLY hope that remains right now, is the new telecommunication corporation being started up right now. However this was not done for our benefit, it was merely a spin off when the Government sold the spectrum as a cash grab.
I fully expect Bell and Rogers to join forces to crush the newcomer, and then resume their reign of evil. Hopefully they survive, and change the market for the better, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Considering the start up and infrastructure costs, currently I believe it will only be available in select metro areas, and slowly expanded over a period of years. In other words, change, if it even happens, will be slow.
...we have enough idiots on the internet.
I bet they are also responsible for the USA health care system which is what has crippled the auto industry with aging pensioners.
Clearly it is the fault of the unions that health insurance in the States is crazy and that they have the most expensive health care and drugs in the world.
The unions were just the canary in the coal mine.
heh, I said ovoid. Something in my brain must be broken.
I would think that they would look at what is commonly settled for out of court as part of determining "reasonable" or "actual" damages.
If a company commonly settles for several thousand dollars (say 2400$-6500$) out of court for approximately the same offense then how is it reasonable to expect 2$ Million or even 54,000$ dollars award is fair? Obviously if the company settles for this amount over and over to ovoid court, it must be what they feel is the right amount.
I am not sure if courts are about to take this into account, but they really should.
Some awards are just stupid. If I got sued for 2$ million they might as well make it for 2$ Billion, or 2$ Quadrillion, as either way A) I can't pay it, and B) I will declare myself bankrupt and never pay it. Which is likely the real reason for the change. Hell 7 years of bad credit due to being bankrupt is hardly a big deal now that everyone is doing it, banks ain't lending much anyway, etc... If ever there was a good time to do it, it is now really.
My father who is a lawyer did tell me some sage advice (common sense really). Basically the gist of it was that you can't sue someone for money they don't have. If they do not have have money, have no assets for the court to go after, have no credit anyway, etc... you are just wasting your own time and even more money. You are better off to swallow the loss and move on with your life as you will only compound the problem, and ultimately be disappointed in the end.
In many cases groups will compromise or negotiate a lesser settlement to at least get something, knowing they will never get the full amount, particular if the debtor threatens to file chapter 7 (or whatever it is). I hear the IRS do this all the time for large amounts of back taxes. Someone might owe 500,000 bucks, but a lawyer will come in and say, well my client, can't pay that, nor will he ever be able to pay that, however, if we promise to pay 100k, and 10k a year for ten years can we call the debt paid? Many times if the options are 0$ or 200,000$ rather than 500,000$, they will take the 200k rather than nothing.
They better watch what they post, otherwise Huston might find out... What goes on in the ISS, stays on the ISS, unless you post it on facebook.
I wonder if their connection is being monitored closely?
Space madness OK now. Snarf wants in airlock, sec...
I really hate Sergei. He really pisses me off.
iPhone has a free navigator? Pray do tell!
I just got a new iPhone, and the tomtom, etc.. navigation apps seems to cost about 60-80$ or am I missing something.
I believe the last term was run by the Haliburton Corporation if I am not mistaken... a figurehead is just that.
Here here, I would like to vote for President Sony! He is American right?
I always thought that phase was stupid. I work in Government, and in IT, and it is a phrase I would hear a lot. We should run like a business, like that was some kind of god damn holy grail or something. I would bet most of the vaunted higher ups that would spout this nonsense never worked a day in the private sector, and likely picked up the phrase at some exorbitantly expensive training conference put on by a private consultant company just ripping off the government like all the rest.
It is complete and utter BS for one, and secondly, as I used to say, there is a significant difference between government and private business which would require them to be run differently! Mostly the fact that you are funded by public money, are accountable to the general population, have political masters, and must maintain a degree of service far above and beyond that of the private sector, particularly in areas that would be totally unprofitable to any private business enterprise, yet is essential part of our system of governance.
I understand for the most part this is trying to instill efficiency, and lower costs, but it A) doesn't work, and B) doesn't make any sense.
My response these days, is look at the previous "leaders" of business, AIG, GM, etc... and all the rest, they certainly were run like a "business" and that turned out well. Who will bail out government, should the same thing happen? Its citizens, if they can, or nobody if they can't, and you don't want to even consider if they can't.
I'm at work you insensitive clod and cannot check that link!
Though I wouldn't be totally surprised. Be interesting to see how many times it was downloaded.
I just figured A) it was a horrible game, and B) most 8 year old girls lack the DRM hacking skills
Though I guess some frugal IT savvy parents might. I would also guess many hard up parents would also have empathy and share the title... though it is only a 20$ game as opposed to the 70$ ones out there.
Ahhh spite. What isn't it good for?
Not to mention that by promoting illiteracy, (by pretty much saying Libraries are a bad thing) you are not thinking very long term.
Your user penetration is like 99% right now, be happy.
You are not going to sell too many books to the illiterate (well perhaps picture books).
Sometimes I just want to slap stupid people. Sometimes with a hardcover edition of one of Steven Erikson's books. That aught to do the trick, although bludgeon might be a better word.
I am pretty sure no one has pirated this one yet:
http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Horse-Adventures-Riding-Nintendo-Wii/dp/B001AZ7RMS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1263932887&sr=1-1
You forgot about Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory! Not only was it perhaps my favorite FPS of all time, it was free!
Counter-Strike was kinda interesting if only because so many freaking people played it at any one time. Never really played Battlefield 2.
Anyway I think the difference is on focus. The old school games the developer wanted to blow your freaking ass out of the water with every new game is how awesome it was usually graphic centric, with some game play additions. They wanted to actively TOP their old game, or show how much better their game was to all others.
Now as games are more expensive and require massive financial backing, more seem to be developed by committee, and are more beholden to parent companies and the like. Many are produced in large conglomerates that produce many games, not just a single title or series (or a few). These do not want to compete against other games. They also do not want to compete against their old games. They are not trying to make a game that will WOW their customers, or be especially fun. They are trying to sell the most games they can possibly sell, while spending the least amount of money, while trying to sell all their other games, etc... Just a company trying to maximize profit. Clearly anyone that knows anything knows that this is done through MASSIVE advertising campaigns. You don't actually have to make a good game anymore, you only have to convince people that it is. This isn't new by any means, and it doesn't hurt if you also happen to make a quality game also. I just see this becoming more and more prevalent, particularly with the rise in console penetration, and the continued amalgamation of game developers into megacorps. I see no reason why this trend will not continue either. There are always sweet exceptions to the rule, but the are more and more rare now I think.