That's a very well written article that links to a number of great AvP resources out there. Of course, it fails to go where this subject has already been delved:
Comic Books.
Aliens versus Predator was originally (IIRC) a short in Dark Horse Presents, that was spun off into its own comic. The first series was great - it was about a group of humans who colonized a Predator 'Hunt' planet unbeknownst to the Predators, so when the Predators seeded the planet with Alien eggs they got more than they bargained for (of course, it's more complex than that). There have been a number of other comics (and books) in the same vein, all of them with their good points and bad points.
But one can't speak of comic crossovers without speaking of Batman v. Predator, Aliens v. Predator v. Terminator, Superman v. Aliens - not to mention the various Marvel and DC comics that are about pitting one superhero against another (X-Men and Batman are just versus of the week). The list is virtually endless. It's a lot cheaper to make a comic than a movie, but I think most of these ideas have real merit.
I really, really hope AvP is made into a movie - it's already had two great and successful video games. Of course, we'd have to wait until it came out on DVD to see it;)
The post implies "Right" has something to do with a bug-free launch. Which Dark Age of Camelot did - it was playable from Day 1. No framerate issues, no server issues - they were the *first MMOG in HISTORY* to get this right. UO had server issues, EQ had server issuses, not sure about AC - but I bet it had server issues, and let's not even get into AO or WWIIO (ie, massive problems that rendered the games unplayable for months).
The other MMOGs had stuff going for them, but DAoC has been the only one with a good launch.
I'm a bit of a classical musician. I picked up the cello at 10 and switched to the bass at 16. The orchestra I was in for four years played in Russia, Austria, and the Czech Republic.
To be blunt, the music of John Williams deeply inspires me. I saw TPM twice in the theaters, but have listened to the CD (except for the last track - ick) countless times. The "music video" struck a chord within me; if there is nothing else redeemable about AotC, the music will continue to be nothing short of moving.
Isn't the other possibility that it would discourage them, especially if we show that terrorism will not be tolerated?
And, isn't it possible that if we do nothing, otherwise only mildly-violent people will become terrorists - because they see we will take no action against it?
The problem with attempting to brainwash would-be terrorists is that we have no access to them. The oppressed peoples of Iraq are fed nothing but propaganda - they are told the world is out to get Saddam Hussein and Iraq (and may believe it). The people of Afghanistan are only slightly better off - they know the truth, but the Taliban (their current government) overthrew the legitimit government seven years ago. They're fighting for independence, and terrified the US will bomb them in retaliation for the terrorist attacks.
As for other country's would-be terrorists, they may have their own reasons for hating the US - religion or propaganda. How do you overwrite years and years of being told it is good and right to kill US citizens?
I'm afraid I don't understand - how does cutting off their funding from countries, taking away their safe havens, and making them outlaws in the world "accelerating" terrorism?
Jesus preached Love and Forgiveness. Ghandi (and others) preached non-violence. The arguments against pacifism are simple, but off topic. If you're interested, I'll prove to you why pacifism doesn't work.
This evil action killed *thousands* of people.
So you tell me what's more monstrous - letting this happen, again, and again, and again, killing thousands (if not *hundreds of thousands*, they could use biological weapons next time) more people?
Or, with a world-wide effort, putting enough political (and possibly military) pressure on the countries harboring these aberrations, to cut off terrorism at its roots - thereby slowing (if not stopping) these heinous acts.
Please, tell me why wanting to stop the murder of innocents is monstrous.
Don't assume that I'm baying for blood when I point out that doing nothing will only bring more bloodshed.
Ok, before I fully respond to your post, I want to know if you're serious. Do you really believe that *doing nothing* is the right course of action? Or, perhaps, that by ignoring terrorism that it will go away?
Should we, as a nation, shrug our shoulders at the murder of 5,250+ of her citizens, and continue life as "normal"?
And, even if you think it's the "right" thing to do, is it even reasonable? If your Spouse/Partner, Children/Parents, Friends/Relatives, were murdered in such a fashion - would you not want Justice (or perhaps Vengence)?
Perhaps you should consider how these people feel before speaking in such a cold hearted manner. For speaking in such a way, I won't label you terrorist or terrorist sympathiser. I'll label you monster.
A few paragraphs down, you say what's really important - that you're making a generalization on an improper conjecture.
Katz isn't saying that people who only play games are going to be the next world leaders - he's saying that people who play games are probably more likely to succeed.
i agree that successful people are likely to be gamers, but i don't think that specifically means you have to be a gamer to succeed. the successful people i know - a fair number of people - play games in some form or another. sometimes it's just solitaire, pinball, or pac-man... sometimes it Quake3 or UT... sometimes its Final Fantasy or Everquest. but these are people who can manage their time, and manage to relax. maybe they learn 'crucial, real-world problem-solving' - or maybe they play games because they're good at these things anyway. you'll find that the games people play relate to the type of person they are.
it seems to me you're biased against gamers. just providing an alternate viewpoint.
>It's not murder when I amputate a gangrene foot from my body
So a fetus (child, bundle of cells) is part of your body, but a diseased part of your body.
>it's not murder when I extricate a tapeworm from my body
Or is a fetus (child, bundle of cells) an invading organism, a parasite?
A fetus (child, bundle of cells), if left on its own inside your body, will not cause you to decay, or speed up the spread of disease.
A fetus (child, bundle of cells), does not exist off your body as a parasite does. A better analogy would be "There's a tapeworm in this hamberger. If you eat this hamberger, the tapeworm will enter your system, where it will stay for 9 months, make you fat, and eventually exit your system as a new creature." You chose to eat that hamberger, you chose to ingest the tapeworm.
So why is it the tapeworm's fault? You knew this was going to happen. You did it of your own free will. You chose to put it inside of you.
Riddle me this: if left on its own, what will happen to the fetus (child, bundle of cells)?
It will become a new human being.
And what do we call it when someone ends the life of a human being?
Murder.
But, since you're willing to murder a fetus (child, bundle of cells) - a thing that YOU CHOSE to have inside of you, a side effect that YOU KNEW was going to happen - I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you'd be willing to KILL for your right to MURDER.
Fascinating - you attack major news carriers for being derogative towards the adult industry, and then turn around and do the same thing.
Why can they not be derogative, and you can?
Or is "standing in the middle of a shopping center shouting stuff like this with a megaphone (probably whilst waving a bible with the other hand)" not derogative, but merely what you (falsely) believe is representative of anti-porn, vocal, or Christian peoples?
Yes, porn exists - like anything else - because there is a demand for it. But Freedom of Speech is a double edged sword; we're allowed to look at porn, and we're also allowed to speak out against it - specifically, said journalist is allowed to say "smut merchant", and explain why they feel this way. That's Free Speech, too.
Good post until you fell back to another insulting sterotype.
It's a babelfish.altavista.com translation of exactly what you wrote (the last word is "Llamawafflen", which is what babelfish said "Llamawaffle" was in German). I was in a pretty insane mood one night, and a friend and I were throwing around strange phrases in different languages... and this was the nearly obscene result.
How it ended up as my slashdot sig, i have no idea.
But... if you happen to know how to say "I may have sex with my own army of the Llamawafflen" in German, I'd be very appreciative:)
I don't really know if there were drivers for the 3D hardware that existed three years ago under Linux; but I'm willing to bet there was. Linux is, after all, open source; there's a 90% chance that if you've got a problem, someone else has had it too, and they're either working on a solution or know someone who is.
3D has been around for more than three years. Ever heard of Symbolics? In case you haven't, they produced some pretty outstanding 3D graphics for their time on LISP boxes. No, it was "3D accelerated"; the hardware was specifically written for LISP.
I did some simple 3D development on a system three years ago; it wasn't mine, and I don't remember the specs; I don't remember if it was Unix or a flavor of Linux. With OpenGL, it was easy to create a window, give it the focus, and draw objects in that window. User input was a snap. It's a little more difficult under Windows; but nothing near the Horror that was DX.
You seem to be missing the point; it's not simple or easy to use; it's very difficult, and I felt the creators went out of their way to make it so.
If it isn't easy to use for Above Average Developer A, let alone 75% of the authors of the resources I've found (books + web), it isn't inherently easier for "professional game programmers".
>Hardware isn't 'written' for a platform
WinModems.
That said, for the most part, hardware isn't neccessarily designed for use under one platform; it's the software drivers that tell it how to interface with the platform. I don't know what IHVs are (I<something> Hardware Vendors?), let alone much about the development of DX, beyond the code and version notes that are available.
DirectX sure does take advantage of features of your video hardware; I can't recall the exact functions, but the first DX program I wrote was enumerated the specifics of the video card you were using (VRAM, features, etc). When I get home, I'll go to my favorite reference book and post the info. It's been a while since I used DX, but I seem to recall a function or nine that were developed to use <insert hardware feature> if your card supported it, or do it in software if it did not.
The hardware has to be specifically made to support features like Env.Bump Mapping; else, every card would claim support. It isn't an issue of "support" (software, etc).
MSDN is a funny thing. I personally didn't find it all that helpful, for OpenGL or DX. That's why I turned to books and guides on the web.
Abstraction must be carefully done to be a great thing; taken to extremes, or on odd benders, it gets in the way. The idea behind DX is great; I just don't think they did a good job implementing it. Abstraction is the basis for object oriented programming; programming in the language of the problem, not the language of the machine. The idea of abstracting the hardware layer was right, but the way they did it was wrong; it's confusing the issue instead of making it simpler.
It's not important, but my Linux box does have different hardware. I don't know if you've used Fire GL/PRO, but it doesn't work properly with DX; now, is that DX's fault for not supporting Fire GL properly, or Fire GL's fault for not supporting DX properly? I guess you'd say Fire GL's.
Really? You've used DX for years? Which games? Would you mind telling me/us what games you've worked on? Which features do you like/dislike about DX? Would you feel comfortable writing a guide to DX? Have you used any other graphic API's other than DX? Are you a Microsoft Employee? How long have you been in the gaming industry? I'm not a game programmer, I'm a software engineer that works on contracts. I don't know if we've had any comprable professional experiences, but I doubt it. Seems like two different worlds.
I understand the concepts very well; does making verbal attacks make you feel better about yourself? I wouldn't mind you explaining to me the Insider's Guide to DirectX. I've already been through it once with Oracle 8i, and I just don't think it would be worth it to go through it again with DX.
Okay, since I am in contact with you, would you mind answer the questions I have about Direct X / your work experience? Maybe over e-mail would be better. Would you provide the names/e-mails of any of the other DX Developers you know? I curious to see if they understand how I feel / if they have any tips to offer.
SGI? SGI is dead because it has become waaay cheaper to produce (and maintain) clusters of PC's than one (or more) supercomputers. SGI might be able to pull out, but I doubt it. I certainly have no idea what my roommate is going to do with his O2. At least OpenGL still lives on - if Quake3 (which, incidentally, was released for Linux) is any indicator.
>Any further issues you need clarification on? Thanks.
Yeah, did I do something to offend you, or are you naturally this arrogant?
Personal attacks aside, I hope you reply to this. It'd be interesting to see your answers.
>Good flamebait.
One man's Flamebait is another man's 2, Interesting.
>I'm sure 3D programming on Linux was great fun 3 years ago. (Oh, oops, there wasn't even a single 3d driver out yet:)
uh... you're joking... right? please don't tell me you actually think there's never been a 3D accelerator before VooDoo2.
Damn, it *was* three years ago that I started 3D programming in Linux. It was one (two?) years ago I started DirectX stuff. So it was DX5/DX6 I was working with. And just because a guide is in version 0.46 doesn't mean it's old, or bad, etc... just that's it's new (or not maintained).
>DirectX isn't intended to be for your average programmer who wants to do games.
No, it's intended for *every* programmer that wants to do Windows games. Name three recent games, for Windows9x+, that don't use DX.
>It's intended as an extremely powerful hardware abstraction layer, to be used by profesionals to get the most out of the gamers hardware.
More, it's a Microsoft product written for a Microsoft platform. Of course it's going to get the most out of hardware written to use that platform. It's developed in-house.
>This is why DirectX exposes a lot of functionality that is close to the hardware, and can be directly supported by the hardware, or not supported.
I think you mean that it allows DirectX to take advantage of certain Hardware functionality (Env.Bump Mapping, Alpha Texturing, etc), and certain Hardware vendors (NVidia) to take advantage of DirectX.
Just because something is powerful, doesn't mean it needs to be poorly documented, error prone, and *badly* abstracted. Just because it's an abstraction layer, doesn't mean it's a good one.
"Best on all different hardware."
You do, of course, mean only hardware officially supported by Microsoft, only on a Microsoft Windows9x platform. I'd argue that it doesn't work at all on my Linux box; that's different hardware.
"Do you want to work to get this performance?"
Yes. Of course I do. I wouldn't be a programmer if I didn't care about performance (or code, for that matter). But, as a programmer (and of many different languages), I am subjected to many different kinds of code, written by many different people. The code can roughly be thrown into two categories. "Well written, well documented, performs excellently", and "Bad". There are good points to it; mainly, it's The Thing To Use Because Microsoft Said So(tm). You try DirectX, then tell me what you think.
"Not smart enough to understand all the issues at play?"
Hey buddy-boy, you want me to explain all the ins and outs of DirectX (and 3D) programming to you? I understand them; I can use them; I have used them. Not liking a thing doesn't mean you don't understand it. IMHO, you should at least make an effort before judging.
"Most professional game programmers have been happy with this approach for a long time now, and adopted DirectX years ago."
Talk to me about "professional game programmers [who are] happy [with Direct X]." Put me in contact with one of them so I can talk to them about it. As for "...and adopted DirectX years ago.", ask yourself a question; The industry is begining to use a Technology. Why doesn't matter; It Just Is. Do you A) balk the Industry, and adopt a competing Technology, or B) Embrace the Technology, going with the Industry?
I bet you jump on the bandwagon, too. If only so you don't get left behind; or, God be Merciful, pick the wrong Technology and become Obsolete.
A lot of proffession game programmers use DirectX for one simple reason - it's the current industry standard for Windows games. Why? Microsoft is the platform. Microsoft can develop software that interfaces with the Platform and the Game, and more or less force everyone to use it. There are alternatives; but why learn something new when you can stand on someone else's shoulders?
Yup, Direct X is a Hardware Abstraction Layer. It has its high points (it exists), and its low points (just about everything else). It takes the rather large goatscrew of managing all of Window's possibilities, and turns it into a smaller goatscrew.
But it's still a goatscrew.
-lw
btw, don't insult me with "if you were smart enough", and "if you worked hard enough". you're not me, don't judge me.
you've got a really well written post; but i question the amount of time you've spent programming DirectX. you seem to know a lot about it... but when you say "...DirectX is a little complex to program...", that's much like saying "the sun is a little bigger than the earth".
DirectX is a nightmare. I've only been programming for seven years, so maybe I'm too young/new to really be experienced enough to program it - but I doubt it. The brief/important list of languages I know include C, C++, Perl, Java, and LISP. I've done work with OpenGL on Linux stations, and DirectX on Windows95. By FAR the easiest to use was OpenGL. DirectX wasn't what you'd call an easy-to-use environment; frankly, I'm amazed that any programmer can get through the MS BS and get anything accomplished.
Don't want to take my word for it?
Ask David Joffe - "However, DirectX is (in my opinion) the most horribly designed API I've ever seen, and I would hate for any newbie game programmers, whose first API might be DirectX,to walk away thinking that it is in any way an example of how a games API should look. DirectX is bulky, poorly documented, unnecessarily overcomplicated, proprietary, and there was never any technical for the existence of large portions of it, such as Direct3D (Microsoft ignored the existing industry standard OpenGL simply because it wasn't theirs and it wasn't tied to the Windows platform, not because they thought they could offer a better solution.)"
Check out his Game programming with DirectX guide.
But he's not the only one; Brian Hook (of wksoftware.com) litterally thinks DirectX is Hell. From the introduction to his Guide: "Microsoft designed and released game development library called DirectX. Part of this library is a 3D graphics immediate mode rendering API called Direct3D. Everyone said it was going to be The Standard for 3D Graphics. I decided to learn it. It sucked. It was difficult. It was poorly documented. It was error prone. Since I've subjected myself to this pain, I figure that others may want to learn a bit from my own experiences, so I'm writing this document." Read the rest of his Guide if you want to know more about DirectX and pain.
Of course, not everyone agrees with me; there's a couple other resources on the web that gives DirectX a better-than-average glance, and (appears) to like it. Check out Andre' LaMothe's DirectX-tasy guide at loriak.com. His conclusion? "...DirectX isn't as bad as we thought it was, and it really does work and allows accelerators and other hardware to be supported very easily."
So I guess it depends on who you talk to, but in my opinion, DirectX is pure pain. If you're only going to read one, look at Brian Hook's; it is by far the most complete.
But we all knew it was better to be programming on Linux, anyway, right?
The state of Linux gaming comes right down to the big companies not wanting to write modular code; look at Terminus. Terminus was released at the same time for Win, Mac, and Linux. This proves accomodating Linux gamers can be done. Most just don't want to bother with it; which is sad. But if Linux continues this upward trend it's on... I'm willing to bet Blizzard will start porting its newest hit games over, like they did with the Mac. I believe Linux gaming will catch on, if only because of the hordes of people that Microsoft continues to alienate.
And, as i've noted before, you only get out of any game what you put into it. if you expect to be wowed and amazed sitting around - get real.
as for the quests, many of them are incredibly done, especially the long Kunark ones. "little or no information"? they tell you what they want - do you really expect the quest to be a shopping list, detailed down to letter? how would that be any fun, if you didn't need to *quest* for a thing?
as for game bugs, they are few and far between. i've been playing for nearly a year now, and i've never had any experiences like the first you detailed above. zone crashes don't cause loss of equipment - you probably died when the zone crashed, and you corpse had all of your equipment. GMs can't do anything about "general loss of equipment", because once it leaves your person, they have no idea wether you sold it, dropped it, or destroyed it. and yeah, they could go by your world - but then they'd have to go by everyone's word, and most people just aren't that honest.
yeah, EQ has some bugs. no game is perfect. if you get hung up on the small stuff, you'll never enjoy yourself.
As for Episode I, after being a hardcore star wars fan since I saw the original trillogy, i am greatly saddened by the fact that episode I was aimed at 6 year olds.
And, like other MUDs, you only get out of it what you put into it. if you spend all your time sitting around, complaining about this MOB not spawning, do you really think you're going to enjoy yourself? or, on the other hand, you can attempt to meet people - go adventuring - and explore the game that was created for you. just like MUDs, you only get to see what the programmers thought was really cool by spending some time at exploring. and just like MUDs, they can quickly get boring if you don't interact (or don't enjoy interacting) with other human beings.
out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a "very good MUD"?
If you read the other posts, you might have noticed the wise person stating Lucas Arts' deal with Verant was to create a MMORPG - like Everquest. This deal is with BioWare - the folks who produced Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale.
Um... I'm sorry you don't like EQ, and you had bad experiences with their Guides / GMs. I've had nothing but good interaction between them. And frankly, I think EQ is one of the best games out there. Lucas Arts - and probably George Lucas - agrees with me enough that they are allowing Verant to develop under the rather closely guarded Star Wars liscense.
As for 'ruining his good name', I guess you don't remember Episode I, or the tens of thousands dissapointed Star Wars fans.
I understand that there are alternative fuel sources available; but they're not widespred. Yet. When they do become widespred, I'll be the first one to own them; but I don't enjoy the idea of limiting my driving radius based on location of fuel. But there's alternatives AVAILABLE TODAY - mainly, gas/electric hybrids.
They still burn gas - but they can get about three times the milage. The average milage of the Honda Insight is 65mpg (61city/70hwy)- and can get up to 90+ under the right conditions. Can you imagine going 650 miles on a tank of gas?
I'm not real sure how many other hybrids are available, but they few I've seen look pretty bad. You can get a paint job for about $100, but... and they only seem to come in two-door varieties. The MSRP w/ AC is ~US$20K, which is a little pricey. But considering gas prices around here ($1.65/gal for regular, greater D.C. area), and the current rising trend, I think it's worth it.
Exactly. Q3 wasn't written as some definative "Quake" vision (ie, Richard Garriot's Ultima), or even as a really cool idea (ie, Valve's Half-Life) - it was written only to make money. Do I have a problem with that? Yeah, it's kind of cheesy to write a game that's 90% done material. Except for the new people coming into the genre - you're not going to catch new customers with yesterday's games (usually).
I guess my point is that I didn't buy Q3. I wasn't trying to make a statement by not buying it - I didn't buy it because it didn't interest me. It's the same tried, tired arena-based gameplay... hell, the weapons are 90% the same. I like new features and whatnot - I like new ways to play the game. That's why I bought Opposing Forces, and that's why I bought UT.
Now, I'm not sure where you thought I was bashing engine-licensing - I was stating the good points of ID. The atmosphere of Doom, their technical expertise, and the fact that they more or less created the popular gaming culture. They also produce really kick-ass engines which folks can use to make really kick-ass games. There's nothing *wrong* with making money - but your actions quickly slip into the grey area when you're only doing a thing for money.
Have you been living under a rock for the past two years?
You imply the entire gaming industry is ID software... which is so blindly stupid, I'm honestly amazed.
In the last three years, we've seen MAJOR hits from Baldur's Gate, Planescape:Torment, and Fallout (from Interplay)... Warcraft II, Starcraft, and Diablo 2 (from Blizzard)... Ultima Online, Everquest, Asheron's Call... I can go on for quite some time.
You want story? Check out any of the titles. Interplay holds the RPG crown without a doubt. You want quality? Check out *ANYTHING* by Blizzard. There is a reason their last three titles (War2, Diablo, Starcraft) were "Games of the Year", and their latest (Diablo2) is getting rave reviews. As for quality, story, AND multiplayer - check out UO, EQ, or AC.
But maybe RPG's/RTS aren't your thing. Check out Half-Life, then, and its expansion Opposing Forces. Great story, awesome graphics... sometimes you forget you're playing a game. Maybe you want thick, dark atmosphere? Look at System Shock 2!!! Conspiracy theories, involving gameplay, great storyline? Deus Ex.
As for the immediate future of gaming, Icewind Dale has just been released by Interplay. Deus Ex and Diablo 2 recently hit shelves. In the next couple months, look for Baldur's Gate 2.
Yeah, story has never been IDs strong point. But the atmosphere and gameplay of the first Doom makes the game live in my mind. However, their technical expertise is beyond a doubt. And them being "one trick ponies" and "engine whores" has paved the way for Half-Life (which ran on the Q2 engine), and the *SUCCESS OF GAMING IN GENERAL*.
ID will continue to churn out eye candy, and make great sales and lots of money. They'll get even more when companies liscense their engines. But just because the night is dark, don't ignore the stars.
No, if you were fired, you've been ejected from the company. You didn't voluntarily leave your job; you were forced out. Quitting is voluntary. If you're talking about walking out the door, then if no one escorted you, you'd be leaving voluntarily. If you were escorted, you'd be complying. If they dragged you kicking and screaming, you'd be resisting.
>In conclusion, Sony remains evil, but at least the forces of evil have been held at bay... for now.
I love some of the anti-corporate spew you see at Slashdot. The "slightly misleading article" article will sound as it was written, and as the reader intends it. The written word (unless very artfully done) is always open to interpretation.
After reading the articles again, I'm sure you'll notice: "Sony executives were not immediately available for comment." - This doesn't mean Sony refused to comment; it means that C|Net didn't want to wait around for their replies before the posted the article.
And who held the "forces of evil" at bay? Certainly not Connectix, or the Federal Courts - Sony *chose* to drop the case. So who, praytell, stopped the Evil Sony in its tracks?
Why is Sony evil? Because they want to protect the market for a product they make? Because they want to make sure people aren't ripping off products they own?
Slashdot Mirror
That's a very well written article that links to a number of great AvP resources out there. Of course, it fails to go where this subject has already been delved:
;)
Comic Books.
Aliens versus Predator was originally (IIRC) a short in Dark Horse Presents, that was spun off into its own comic. The first series was great - it was about a group of humans who colonized a Predator 'Hunt' planet unbeknownst to the Predators, so when the Predators seeded the planet with Alien eggs they got more than they bargained for (of course, it's more complex than that). There have been a number of other comics (and books) in the same vein, all of them with their good points and bad points.
But one can't speak of comic crossovers without speaking of Batman v. Predator, Aliens v. Predator v. Terminator, Superman v. Aliens - not to mention the various Marvel and DC comics that are about pitting one superhero against another (X-Men and Batman are just versus of the week). The list is virtually endless. It's a lot cheaper to make a comic than a movie, but I think most of these ideas have real merit.
I really, really hope AvP is made into a movie - it's already had two great and successful video games. Of course, we'd have to wait until it came out on DVD to see it
-lw
The post implies "Right" has something to do with a bug-free launch. Which Dark Age of Camelot did - it was playable from Day 1. No framerate issues, no server issues - they were the *first MMOG in HISTORY* to get this right. UO had server issues, EQ had server issuses, not sure about AC - but I bet it had server issues, and let's not even get into AO or WWIIO (ie, massive problems that rendered the games unplayable for months).
The other MMOGs had stuff going for them, but DAoC has been the only one with a good launch.
-lw
I'm a bit of a classical musician. I picked up the cello at 10 and switched to the bass at 16. The orchestra I was in for four years played in Russia, Austria, and the Czech Republic.
To be blunt, the music of John Williams deeply inspires me. I saw TPM twice in the theaters, but have listened to the CD (except for the last track - ick) countless times. The "music video" struck a chord within me; if there is nothing else redeemable about AotC, the music will continue to be nothing short of moving.
-lw
You say it may enrage other would-be terrorists.
Isn't the other possibility that it would discourage them, especially if we show that terrorism will not be tolerated?
And, isn't it possible that if we do nothing, otherwise only mildly-violent people will become terrorists - because they see we will take no action against it?
The problem with attempting to brainwash would-be terrorists is that we have no access to them. The oppressed peoples of Iraq are fed nothing but propaganda - they are told the world is out to get Saddam Hussein and Iraq (and may believe it). The people of Afghanistan are only slightly better off - they know the truth, but the Taliban (their current government) overthrew the legitimit government seven years ago. They're fighting for independence, and terrified the US will bomb them in retaliation for the terrorist attacks.
As for other country's would-be terrorists, they may have their own reasons for hating the US - religion or propaganda. How do you overwrite years and years of being told it is good and right to kill US citizens?
-lw
I'm afraid I don't understand - how does cutting off their funding from countries, taking away their safe havens, and making them outlaws in the world "accelerating" terrorism?
-lw
Jesus preached Love and Forgiveness. Ghandi (and others) preached non-violence. The arguments against pacifism are simple, but off topic. If you're interested, I'll prove to you why pacifism doesn't work.
This evil action killed *thousands* of people.
So you tell me what's more monstrous - letting this happen, again, and again, and again, killing thousands (if not *hundreds of thousands*, they could use biological weapons next time) more people?
Or, with a world-wide effort, putting enough political (and possibly military) pressure on the countries harboring these aberrations, to cut off terrorism at its roots - thereby slowing (if not stopping) these heinous acts.
Please, tell me why wanting to stop the murder of innocents is monstrous.
Don't assume that I'm baying for blood when I point out that doing nothing will only bring more bloodshed.
-lw
Ok, before I fully respond to your post, I want to know if you're serious. Do you really believe that *doing nothing* is the right course of action? Or, perhaps, that by ignoring terrorism that it will go away?
Should we, as a nation, shrug our shoulders at the murder of 5,250+ of her citizens, and continue life as "normal"?
And, even if you think it's the "right" thing to do, is it even reasonable? If your Spouse/Partner, Children/Parents, Friends/Relatives, were murdered in such a fashion - would you not want Justice (or perhaps Vengence)?
Perhaps you should consider how these people feel before speaking in such a cold hearted manner. For speaking in such a way, I won't label you terrorist or terrorist sympathiser. I'll label you monster.
-lw
A few paragraphs down, you say what's really important - that you're making a generalization on an improper conjecture.
Katz isn't saying that people who only play games are going to be the next world leaders - he's saying that people who play games are probably more likely to succeed.
i agree that successful people are likely to be gamers, but i don't think that specifically means you have to be a gamer to succeed. the successful people i know - a fair number of people - play games in some form or another. sometimes it's just solitaire, pinball, or pac-man... sometimes it Quake3 or UT... sometimes its Final Fantasy or Everquest. but these are people who can manage their time, and manage to relax. maybe they learn 'crucial, real-world problem-solving' - or maybe they play games because they're good at these things anyway. you'll find that the games people play relate to the type of person they are.
it seems to me you're biased against gamers. just providing an alternate viewpoint.
-lw
>It's not murder when I amputate a gangrene foot from my body
So a fetus (child, bundle of cells) is part of your body, but a diseased part of your body.
>it's not murder when I extricate a tapeworm from my body
Or is a fetus (child, bundle of cells) an invading organism, a parasite?
A fetus (child, bundle of cells), if left on its own inside your body, will not cause you to decay, or speed up the spread of disease.
A fetus (child, bundle of cells), does not exist off your body as a parasite does. A better analogy would be "There's a tapeworm in this hamberger. If you eat this hamberger, the tapeworm will enter your system, where it will stay for 9 months, make you fat, and eventually exit your system as a new creature." You chose to eat that hamberger, you chose to ingest the tapeworm.
So why is it the tapeworm's fault? You knew this was going to happen. You did it of your own free will. You chose to put it inside of you.
Riddle me this: if left on its own, what will happen to the fetus (child, bundle of cells)?
It will become a new human being.
And what do we call it when someone ends the life of a human being?
Murder.
But, since you're willing to murder a fetus (child, bundle of cells) - a thing that YOU CHOSE to have inside of you, a side effect that YOU KNEW was going to happen - I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you'd be willing to KILL for your right to MURDER.
-lw
Fascinating - you attack major news carriers for being derogative towards the adult industry, and then turn around and do the same thing.
Why can they not be derogative, and you can?
Or is "standing in the middle of a shopping center shouting stuff like this with a megaphone (probably whilst waving a bible with the other hand)" not derogative, but merely what you (falsely) believe is representative of anti-porn, vocal, or Christian peoples?
Yes, porn exists - like anything else - because there is a demand for it. But Freedom of Speech is a double edged sword; we're allowed to look at porn, and we're also allowed to speak out against it - specifically, said journalist is allowed to say "smut merchant", and explain why they feel this way. That's Free Speech, too.
Good post until you fell back to another insulting sterotype.
-lw
Why, you hit the nail square on the head...
:)
It's a babelfish.altavista.com translation of exactly what you wrote (the last word is "Llamawafflen", which is what babelfish said "Llamawaffle" was in German). I was in a pretty insane mood one night, and a friend and I were throwing around strange phrases in different languages... and this was the nearly obscene result.
How it ended up as my slashdot sig, i have no idea.
But... if you happen to know how to say "I may have sex with my own army of the Llamawafflen" in German, I'd be very appreciative
-lw
That's funny; The Madison Project is an a capella group from James Madison University. Odd coincidence.
-lw
I don't really know if there were drivers for the 3D hardware that existed three years ago under Linux; but I'm willing to bet there was. Linux is, after all, open source; there's a 90% chance that if you've got a problem, someone else has had it too, and they're either working on a solution or know someone who is.
3D has been around for more than three years. Ever heard of Symbolics? In case you haven't, they produced some pretty outstanding 3D graphics for their time on LISP boxes. No, it was "3D accelerated"; the hardware was specifically written for LISP.
I did some simple 3D development on a system three years ago; it wasn't mine, and I don't remember the specs; I don't remember if it was Unix or a flavor of Linux. With OpenGL, it was easy to create a window, give it the focus, and draw objects in that window. User input was a snap. It's a little more difficult under Windows; but nothing near the Horror that was DX.
You seem to be missing the point; it's not simple or easy to use; it's very difficult, and I felt the creators went out of their way to make it so.
If it isn't easy to use for Above Average Developer A, let alone 75% of the authors of the resources I've found (books + web), it isn't inherently easier for "professional game programmers".
>Hardware isn't 'written' for a platform
WinModems.
That said, for the most part, hardware isn't neccessarily designed for use under one platform; it's the software drivers that tell it how to interface with the platform. I don't know what IHVs are (I<something> Hardware Vendors?), let alone much about the development of DX, beyond the code and version notes that are available.
DirectX sure does take advantage of features of your video hardware; I can't recall the exact functions, but the first DX program I wrote was enumerated the specifics of the video card you were using (VRAM, features, etc). When I get home, I'll go to my favorite reference book and post the info. It's been a while since I used DX, but I seem to recall a function or nine that were developed to use <insert hardware feature> if your card supported it, or do it in software if it did not.
The hardware has to be specifically made to support features like Env.Bump Mapping; else, every card would claim support. It isn't an issue of "support" (software, etc).
MSDN is a funny thing. I personally didn't find it all that helpful, for OpenGL or DX. That's why I turned to books and guides on the web.
Abstraction must be carefully done to be a great thing; taken to extremes, or on odd benders, it gets in the way. The idea behind DX is great; I just don't think they did a good job implementing it. Abstraction is the basis for object oriented programming; programming in the language of the problem, not the language of the machine. The idea of abstracting the hardware layer was right, but the way they did it was wrong; it's confusing the issue instead of making it simpler.
It's not important, but my Linux box does have different hardware. I don't know if you've used Fire GL/PRO, but it doesn't work properly with DX; now, is that DX's fault for not supporting Fire GL properly, or Fire GL's fault for not supporting DX properly? I guess you'd say Fire GL's.
Really? You've used DX for years? Which games? Would you mind telling me/us what games you've worked on? Which features do you like/dislike about DX? Would you feel comfortable writing a guide to DX? Have you used any other graphic API's other than DX? Are you a Microsoft Employee? How long have you been in the gaming industry? I'm not a game programmer, I'm a software engineer that works on contracts. I don't know if we've had any comprable professional experiences, but I doubt it. Seems like two different worlds.
I understand the concepts very well; does making verbal attacks make you feel better about yourself? I wouldn't mind you explaining to me the Insider's Guide to DirectX. I've already been through it once with Oracle 8i, and I just don't think it would be worth it to go through it again with DX.
Okay, since I am in contact with you, would you mind answer the questions I have about Direct X / your work experience? Maybe over e-mail would be better. Would you provide the names/e-mails of any of the other DX Developers you know? I curious to see if they understand how I feel / if they have any tips to offer.
SGI? SGI is dead because it has become waaay cheaper to produce (and maintain) clusters of PC's than one (or more) supercomputers. SGI might be able to pull out, but I doubt it. I certainly have no idea what my roommate is going to do with his O2. At least OpenGL still lives on - if Quake3 (which, incidentally, was released for Linux) is any indicator.
>Any further issues you need clarification on? Thanks.
Yeah, did I do something to offend you, or are you naturally this arrogant?
Personal attacks aside, I hope you reply to this. It'd be interesting to see your answers.
-lw
>Good flamebait.
:)
One man's Flamebait is another man's 2, Interesting.
>I'm sure 3D programming on Linux was great fun 3 years ago. (Oh, oops, there wasn't even a single 3d driver out yet
uh... you're joking... right? please don't tell me you actually think there's never been a 3D accelerator before VooDoo2.
Damn, it *was* three years ago that I started 3D programming in Linux. It was one (two?) years ago I started DirectX stuff. So it was DX5/DX6 I was working with. And just because a guide is in version 0.46 doesn't mean it's old, or bad, etc... just that's it's new (or not maintained).
>DirectX isn't intended to be for your average programmer who wants to do games.
No, it's intended for *every* programmer that wants to do Windows games. Name three recent games, for Windows9x+, that don't use DX.
>It's intended as an extremely powerful hardware abstraction layer, to be used by profesionals to get the most out of the gamers hardware.
More, it's a Microsoft product written for a Microsoft platform. Of course it's going to get the most out of hardware written to use that platform. It's developed in-house.
>This is why DirectX exposes a lot of functionality that is close to the hardware, and can be directly supported by the hardware, or not supported.
I think you mean that it allows DirectX to take advantage of certain Hardware functionality (Env.Bump Mapping, Alpha Texturing, etc), and certain Hardware vendors (NVidia) to take advantage of DirectX.
Just because something is powerful, doesn't mean it needs to be poorly documented, error prone, and *badly* abstracted. Just because it's an abstraction layer, doesn't mean it's a good one.
"Best on all different hardware."
You do, of course, mean only hardware officially supported by Microsoft, only on a Microsoft Windows9x platform. I'd argue that it doesn't work at all on my Linux box; that's different hardware.
"Do you want to work to get this performance?"
Yes. Of course I do. I wouldn't be a programmer if I didn't care about performance (or code, for that matter). But, as a programmer (and of many different languages), I am subjected to many different kinds of code, written by many different people. The code can roughly be thrown into two categories. "Well written, well documented, performs excellently", and "Bad". There are good points to it; mainly, it's The Thing To Use Because Microsoft Said So(tm). You try DirectX, then tell me what you think.
"Not smart enough to understand all the issues at play?"
Hey buddy-boy, you want me to explain all the ins and outs of DirectX (and 3D) programming to you? I understand them; I can use them; I have used them. Not liking a thing doesn't mean you don't understand it. IMHO, you should at least make an effort before judging.
"Most professional game programmers have been happy with this approach for a long time now, and adopted DirectX years ago."
Talk to me about "professional game programmers [who are] happy [with Direct X]." Put me in contact with one of them so I can talk to them about it. As for "...and adopted DirectX years ago.", ask yourself a question; The industry is begining to use a Technology. Why doesn't matter; It Just Is. Do you A) balk the Industry, and adopt a competing Technology, or B) Embrace the Technology, going with the Industry?
I bet you jump on the bandwagon, too. If only so you don't get left behind; or, God be Merciful, pick the wrong Technology and become Obsolete.
A lot of proffession game programmers use DirectX for one simple reason - it's the current industry standard for Windows games. Why? Microsoft is the platform. Microsoft can develop software that interfaces with the Platform and the Game, and more or less force everyone to use it. There are alternatives; but why learn something new when you can stand on someone else's shoulders?
Yup, Direct X is a Hardware Abstraction Layer. It has its high points (it exists), and its low points (just about everything else). It takes the rather large goatscrew of managing all of Window's possibilities, and turns it into a smaller goatscrew.
But it's still a goatscrew.
-lw
btw, don't insult me with "if you were smart enough", and "if you worked hard enough". you're not me, don't judge me.
you've got a really well written post; but i question the amount of time you've spent programming DirectX. you seem to know a lot about it... but when you say "...DirectX is a little complex to program...", that's much like saying "the sun is a little bigger than the earth".
DirectX is a nightmare. I've only been programming for seven years, so maybe I'm too young/new to really be experienced enough to program it - but I doubt it. The brief/important list of languages I know include C, C++, Perl, Java, and LISP. I've done work with OpenGL on Linux stations, and DirectX on Windows95. By FAR the easiest to use was OpenGL. DirectX wasn't what you'd call an easy-to-use environment; frankly, I'm amazed that any programmer can get through the MS BS and get anything accomplished.
Don't want to take my word for it? Ask David Joffe - "However, DirectX is (in my opinion) the most horribly designed API I've ever seen, and I would hate for any newbie game programmers, whose first API might be DirectX,to walk away thinking that it is in any way an example of how a games API should look. DirectX is bulky, poorly documented, unnecessarily overcomplicated, proprietary, and there was never any technical for the existence of large portions of it, such as Direct3D (Microsoft ignored the existing industry standard OpenGL simply because it wasn't theirs and it wasn't tied to the Windows platform, not because they thought they could offer a better solution.)"
Check out his Game programming with DirectX guide.
But he's not the only one; Brian Hook (of wksoftware.com) litterally thinks DirectX is Hell. From the introduction to his Guide: "Microsoft designed and released game development library called DirectX. Part of this library is a 3D graphics immediate mode rendering API called Direct3D. Everyone said it was going to be The Standard for 3D Graphics. I decided to learn it. It sucked. It was difficult. It was poorly documented. It was error prone. Since I've subjected myself to this pain, I figure that others may want to learn a bit from my own experiences, so I'm writing this document."
Read the rest of his Guide if you want to know more about DirectX and pain.
Of course, not everyone agrees with me; there's a couple other resources on the web that gives DirectX a better-than-average glance, and (appears) to like it. Check out Andre' LaMothe's DirectX-tasy guide at loriak.com. His conclusion? "...DirectX isn't as bad as we thought it was, and it really does work and allows accelerators and other hardware to be supported very easily."
So I guess it depends on who you talk to, but in my opinion, DirectX is pure pain. If you're only going to read one, look at Brian Hook's; it is by far the most complete.
But we all knew it was better to be programming on Linux, anyway, right?
The state of Linux gaming comes right down to the big companies not wanting to write modular code; look at Terminus. Terminus was released at the same time for Win, Mac, and Linux. This proves accomodating Linux gamers can be done. Most just don't want to bother with it; which is sad. But if Linux continues this upward trend it's on... I'm willing to bet Blizzard will start porting its newest hit games over, like they did with the Mac. I believe Linux gaming will catch on, if only because of the hordes of people that Microsoft continues to alienate.
just my thoughts.
-lw
And, as i've noted before, you only get out of any game what you put into it. if you expect to be wowed and amazed sitting around - get real.
as for the quests, many of them are incredibly done, especially the long Kunark ones. "little or no information"? they tell you what they want - do you really expect the quest to be a shopping list, detailed down to letter? how would that be any fun, if you didn't need to *quest* for a thing?
as for game bugs, they are few and far between. i've been playing for nearly a year now, and i've never had any experiences like the first you detailed above. zone crashes don't cause loss of equipment - you probably died when the zone crashed, and you corpse had all of your equipment. GMs can't do anything about "general loss of equipment", because once it leaves your person, they have no idea wether you sold it, dropped it, or destroyed it. and yeah, they could go by your world - but then they'd have to go by everyone's word, and most people just aren't that honest.
yeah, EQ has some bugs. no game is perfect. if you get hung up on the small stuff, you'll never enjoy yourself.
As for Episode I, after being a hardcore star wars fan since I saw the original trillogy, i am greatly saddened by the fact that episode I was aimed at 6 year olds.
-mike
And, like other MUDs, you only get out of it what you put into it. if you spend all your time sitting around, complaining about this MOB not spawning, do you really think you're going to enjoy yourself?
or, on the other hand, you can attempt to meet people - go adventuring - and explore the game that was created for you. just like MUDs, you only get to see what the programmers thought was really cool by spending some time at exploring. and just like MUDs, they can quickly get boring if you don't interact (or don't enjoy interacting) with other human beings.
out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a "very good MUD"?
-lw
If you read the other posts, you might have noticed the wise person stating Lucas Arts' deal with Verant was to create a MMORPG - like Everquest. This deal is with BioWare - the folks who produced Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale.
Um... I'm sorry you don't like EQ, and you had bad experiences with their Guides / GMs. I've had nothing but good interaction between them. And frankly, I think EQ is one of the best games out there. Lucas Arts - and probably George Lucas - agrees with me enough that they are allowing Verant to develop under the rather closely guarded Star Wars liscense.
As for 'ruining his good name', I guess you don't remember Episode I, or the tens of thousands dissapointed Star Wars fans.
-lw
Warning: this may sound like an ad.
I understand that there are alternative fuel sources available; but they're not widespred. Yet. When they do become widespred, I'll be the first one to own them; but I don't enjoy the idea of limiting my driving radius based on location of fuel. But there's alternatives AVAILABLE TODAY - mainly, gas/electric hybrids.
They still burn gas - but they can get about three times the milage. The average milage of the Honda Insight is 65mpg (61city/70hwy)- and can get up to 90+ under the right conditions. Can you imagine going 650 miles on a tank of gas?
I'm not real sure how many other hybrids are available, but they few I've seen look pretty bad. You can get a paint job for about $100, but... and they only seem to come in two-door varieties. The MSRP w/ AC is ~US$20K, which is a little pricey. But considering gas prices around here ($1.65/gal for regular, greater D.C. area), and the current rising trend, I think it's worth it.
more about the Insight
-lw
"Q3 was written for money..."
Exactly.
Q3 wasn't written as some definative "Quake" vision (ie, Richard Garriot's Ultima), or even as a really cool idea (ie, Valve's Half-Life) - it was written only to make money. Do I have a problem with that? Yeah, it's kind of cheesy to write a game that's 90% done material. Except for the new people coming into the genre - you're not going to catch new customers with yesterday's games (usually).
I guess my point is that I didn't buy Q3. I wasn't trying to make a statement by not buying it - I didn't buy it because it didn't interest me. It's the same tried, tired arena-based gameplay... hell, the weapons are 90% the same. I like new features and whatnot - I like new ways to play the game. That's why I bought Opposing Forces, and that's why I bought UT.
Now, I'm not sure where you thought I was bashing engine-licensing - I was stating the good points of ID. The atmosphere of Doom, their technical expertise, and the fact that they more or less created the popular gaming culture. They also produce really kick-ass engines which folks can use to make really kick-ass games. There's nothing *wrong* with making money - but your actions quickly slip into the grey area when you're only doing a thing for money.
-lw
I stand corrected, abashed, and amazed . (2.1.10)
-lw
Have you been living under a rock for the past two years?
You imply the entire gaming industry is ID software... which is so blindly stupid, I'm honestly amazed.
In the last three years, we've seen MAJOR hits from Baldur's Gate, Planescape:Torment, and Fallout (from Interplay)... Warcraft II, Starcraft, and Diablo 2 (from Blizzard)... Ultima Online, Everquest, Asheron's Call... I can go on for quite some time.
You want story? Check out any of the titles. Interplay holds the RPG crown without a doubt. You want quality? Check out *ANYTHING* by Blizzard. There is a reason their last three titles (War2, Diablo, Starcraft) were "Games of the Year", and their latest (Diablo2) is getting rave reviews. As for quality, story, AND multiplayer - check out UO, EQ, or AC.
But maybe RPG's/RTS aren't your thing. Check out Half-Life, then, and its expansion Opposing Forces. Great story, awesome graphics... sometimes you forget you're playing a game. Maybe you want thick, dark atmosphere? Look at System Shock 2!!! Conspiracy theories, involving gameplay, great storyline? Deus Ex.
As for the immediate future of gaming, Icewind Dale has just been released by Interplay. Deus Ex and Diablo 2 recently hit shelves. In the next couple months, look for Baldur's Gate 2.
Yeah, story has never been IDs strong point. But the atmosphere and gameplay of the first Doom makes the game live in my mind. However, their technical expertise is beyond a doubt. And them being "one trick ponies" and "engine whores" has paved the way for Half-Life (which ran on the Q2 engine), and the *SUCCESS OF GAMING IN GENERAL*.
ID will continue to churn out eye candy, and make great sales and lots of money. They'll get even more when companies liscense their engines. But just because the night is dark, don't ignore the stars.
-lw
No, if you were fired, you've been ejected from the company. You didn't voluntarily leave your job; you were forced out. Quitting is voluntary.
If you're talking about walking out the door, then if no one escorted you, you'd be leaving voluntarily. If you were escorted, you'd be complying. If they dragged you kicking and screaming, you'd be resisting.
-lw
>In conclusion, Sony remains evil, but at least the forces of evil have been held at bay... for now.
I love some of the anti-corporate spew you see at Slashdot. The "slightly misleading article" article will sound as it was written, and as the reader intends it. The written word (unless very artfully done) is always open to interpretation.
After reading the articles again, I'm sure you'll notice:
"Sony executives were not immediately available for comment."
- This doesn't mean Sony refused to comment; it means that C|Net didn't want to wait around for their replies before the posted the article.
And who held the "forces of evil" at bay? Certainly not Connectix, or the Federal Courts - Sony *chose* to drop the case. So who, praytell, stopped the Evil Sony in its tracks?
Why is Sony evil? Because they want to protect the market for a product they make? Because they want to make sure people aren't ripping off products they own?
-lw
heh, ignore my drunken post before... i thought this was a reply to mine. guess i need to learn how to use the slashdot interface better.
-lw, moron