Can't argue that. It was a blast being in beta and seeing these things for the first time "all over again". But it was ruined alot by the server stability.
I'd rather wait a few months to see bugs hammered out on some of the major issues and experience those things for the first time the way they were intended, then to rush to see them in a half-ass manner.
You are 100% right Upaut. The game can not support the players coming. It couldn't support us beta testers. I say Ho's will be off within 5 minutes.
Lagtonica down in 2 hours (people gotta find their way there)
Commonlands in about 1 hour.
Client/Server patch in 3.2 hours that will take about 4 hours to download... (if you are VERY lucky)
seriously... what are they thinking? they wanted to beat blizzard to market to capture market share, but this is going to hurt them getting there before blizzard with an unplayable game in its current state.
I hope the live players have as much fun in the chat rooms as we did... constantly.
No it doesn't.
I had to install a windows machine just to beta test it... and tried frantically to get it working under cedega. the directx 9c req. kills it currently.
Re:as one of the beta testers...
on
Everquest 2 Launches
·
· Score: 2, Informative
oh its not different... I just expected more from em after all this time...
They actually did a good job with the Omens of war (eq1) release, I was hoping it was a sign. Instead they went for the "must_beat_blizzard_omg_wtf_bbq" direction.
eq1 has been a 4 year paid beta for me. but it was at least playable.
Let me warn most of you who were not in the Beta that this game is far from ready. They rushed it to market to beat out WoW.
I've been telling most people to wait till the beginning of next year to play it after a few patches...
This live launch will basically be like a "paid beta". Expect to see alot of server downtime for a few months as they fix the things they didn't get to in time to beat WoW.
On the other hand I just shutdown my EQ1 account after the announcement that despite Beta tester's please they decided to rush it out the door. And decided to not follow through with my preorder of EQ2.
4 years... time to go see what the outside world looks like I guess.
No he is looking to keep his machines in this environment as secure as possible and running IE is not going to accomplish that.
This part of the conversation was started to add to his awareness of what he needs to do in order to accomplish his goal in addition to the steps he has taken.
I couldn't agree with you more Forge. As a Floridian down here hit by three hurricanes this year, it has still shocked me how little attention has been paid to the devastation caused byt these same hurricanes to our neighbors to the south.
And I can't even imagine how these countries are going to handle with the coming years.:(
which I suspect as well.. can't check right now. But Firefox has issues with checking security permissions on windows clients anyway.
Here in this network, users are not allowed to install apps and most things are blocked. The installers that are not blocked properly can't get write access onto the drive based on user permissions. Mozilla/Firefox however appears to ignore all of this and write to the local drive and install just fine. Now I am not 100% sure if this is Mozilla or Windows causing this behavior to occur as I have not tested it enough, but it happens.
On the side of the items in the user profile. Items can be installed into it, but are wiped upon machine reboot anyway. This doesn't stop the user sitting there from doing things they shouldn't but it does keep it from propagating too much.
Back to the chatzilla issue. I know its been said that using your firewall is a bad method, but what about using a SuperScout type thing to block out the offending installers from coming into your network from the internet? Anything falling into an.exe/.zip/.rar/etc/etc extension could be automatically filtered out. This eliminates users from being able to open from location. Combine this with 0 write access to anything on the drive and you have locked out all but the most determined of users. (assuming you have local removable drives locked down)
There are plenty of ways to stop unwanted things from being installed to the machine and to stop IE from being accessed on the system. Security through obscurity is not one of them.
Well I guess it's just me. I have never thought of it as a learned behavior. I have always thought of it as an instinct. Small children display a need for revenge. Animals display it as well. It seems a perfectly natural thing. If you poke something, it pokes back.
I wonder where people got it in their heads that this was learned behavior to begin with?
Slashdot Mirror
Can't argue that. It was a blast being in beta and seeing these things for the first time "all over again". But it was ruined alot by the server stability.
I'd rather wait a few months to see bugs hammered out on some of the major issues and experience those things for the first time the way they were intended, then to rush to see them in a half-ass manner.
EQ2 on the following:
Geforce 5500 256
AMD 2500+
512 RAM
Windows XP Pro
In order to make EQ2 playable I had to turn most options down or off. The game in turn didn't look all that spectacular.
Take your own specs and scale from there. This game is a HUGE resource hog.
Sony themselves will warn you in game if you try to max out the graphics that only about 3% of all computers can handle the full settings.
You are 100% right Upaut. The game can not support the players coming. It couldn't support us beta testers. I say Ho's will be off within 5 minutes. Lagtonica down in 2 hours (people gotta find their way there) Commonlands in about 1 hour. Client/Server patch in 3.2 hours that will take about 4 hours to download... (if you are VERY lucky) seriously... what are they thinking? they wanted to beat blizzard to market to capture market share, but this is going to hurt them getting there before blizzard with an unplayable game in its current state. I hope the live players have as much fun in the chat rooms as we did... constantly.
No it doesn't. I had to install a windows machine just to beta test it... and tried frantically to get it working under cedega. the directx 9c req. kills it currently.
oh its not different... I just expected more from em after all this time... They actually did a good job with the Omens of war (eq1) release, I was hoping it was a sign. Instead they went for the "must_beat_blizzard_omg_wtf_bbq" direction. eq1 has been a 4 year paid beta for me. but it was at least playable.
Let me warn most of you who were not in the Beta that this game is far from ready. They rushed it to market to beat out WoW.
I've been telling most people to wait till the beginning of next year to play it after a few patches...
This live launch will basically be like a "paid beta". Expect to see alot of server downtime for a few months as they fix the things they didn't get to in time to beat WoW.
On the other hand I just shutdown my EQ1 account after the announcement that despite Beta tester's please they decided to rush it out the door. And decided to not follow through with my preorder of EQ2.
4 years... time to go see what the outside world looks like I guess.
here's on I stream to my GeexBox:
:)
http://www.maniatv.com/
I watch it quite a bit actually
good stuff
go out register like 400 domains and just put up an image of myself naked with just a caption that says "Hi my name is Robert and I like Zelda!"
oh wait my GF just volunteered to pose for the pic, so ummm forget the part about me naked.
Oh wait.
bah still too much real life in that.
1. Social Life: MMORPG
2. Family: Guild in online MMORPG or get married in MMORPG
3. Sex: Cyber in MMORPG
Really its all so logical.
I did.. when it came back up the other day. Just to see what would happen. Of course, all he got was my email address, the rest of the info is bogus.
I've been a supporter of PearPC and will continue to be... I'm just waiting to watch this guy fry.
Sadly, he probaly won't.
"Well we actually didn't shoot them before we shot them with cayenne pepper balls."
No what I am seeing is that it actually installs into the Program Files directory, which the user running the installer has no write access too.
No he is looking to keep his machines in this environment as secure as possible and running IE is not going to accomplish that.
This part of the conversation was started to add to his awareness of what he needs to do in order to accomplish his goal in addition to the steps he has taken.
Nice troll... work for MS much?
I couldn't agree with you more Forge. As a Floridian down here hit by three hurricanes this year, it has still shocked me how little attention has been paid to the devastation caused byt these same hurricanes to our neighbors to the south.
:(
And I can't even imagine how these countries are going to handle with the coming years.
I'm replying to this post...
oops...
checks in the mail.
which I suspect as well.. can't check right now. But Firefox has issues with checking security permissions on windows clients anyway.
.exe/.zip/.rar/etc/etc extension could be automatically filtered out. This eliminates users from being able to open from location. Combine this with 0 write access to anything on the drive and you have locked out all but the most determined of users. (assuming you have local removable drives locked down)
Here in this network, users are not allowed to install apps and most things are blocked. The installers that are not blocked properly can't get write access onto the drive based on user permissions. Mozilla/Firefox however appears to ignore all of this and write to the local drive and install just fine. Now I am not 100% sure if this is Mozilla or Windows causing this behavior to occur as I have not tested it enough, but it happens.
On the side of the items in the user profile. Items can be installed into it, but are wiped upon machine reboot anyway. This doesn't stop the user sitting there from doing things they shouldn't but it does keep it from propagating too much.
Back to the chatzilla issue. I know its been said that using your firewall is a bad method, but what about using a SuperScout type thing to block out the offending installers from coming into your network from the internet? Anything falling into an
There are plenty of ways to stop unwanted things from being installed to the machine and to stop IE from being accessed on the system. Security through obscurity is not one of them.
I would hope if he wants to actually stop IE usage and what not that he would be locking down opening of Explorer windows as well.
"I know that a minority of savvy people can still access IE via the command line"
Why are you leaving the command line open as an option to them? Why not kill that [cmd, run] from being accessed as well?
all I keep seeing in that post is "pagina"tions
Ok I know this is a story from yesterday, but I can't resist... I live in Florida, you insensitive clod! (and I actually do)
All I could think of was purple stuff that grew on the ground as the zerg expanded their base. Hmmm I'd make an overlord joke here... but I'll pass.
With all these people buying new PStwos come Nov... think It's time to start the "Donate your old PS2 to Rogabean" Campaign....
Man am I ever sick of hearing /.'ers dog Emacs... I still swear by Emacs on a daily basis.
I'm gonna give a nomination to Stallman for Emacs which luckily does not suffer from being vim.
and no this is not a troll or flamebait. It's my honest opinion.
I tried reading the EULA once... I got lost somewhere around "...first born child..."
Well I guess it's just me. I have never thought of it as a learned behavior. I have always thought of it as an instinct. Small children display a need for revenge. Animals display it as well. It seems a perfectly natural thing. If you poke something, it pokes back.
I wonder where people got it in their heads that this was learned behavior to begin with?