As if it weren't annoying enough to go to a theater and have people shine their laser pointers on the screen, now they'll be sitting down front and showing You Tube, p0rn, their MySpace or other crap during the movie to annoy us.
Likewise cell phones, MP3 players and personal video players seem to be rampantly used in public by jerks who wish to annoy others with their conversation, music or video. Now we'll get to put up with projections. Of course, when you ask them to stop due to decency or courtesy, they'll start shouting about it being a free country and they have the right to show their crap wherever they want.
At least one part of the article was prophetic: we'll definitely start seeing "No projectors allowed" in public places. Nice idea for business; new annoyance tool for consumers.
Most areas around Dallas, TX have both Comcast (or Time Warner now) and Verizon service. I left Comcast due to unreliability (50% off for a month) for DirecTV in 1995. I left DirecTV for FiOS TV in 2006 mainly because it includes HD, never has an outage (none to date) and is cheaper for more channels.
My mother-in-law has Comcast digital. The menu is confusing, her rates keep going up without any increase or improvement in service and she still experiences outages like we had in 1995.
Plain and simple to me. If you can get FiOS, get it. If you can't get FiOS, get one of the satellite services (I recommend DirecTV). Anything but Comcast.
It's no surprise to me that Comcast is choosing quantity over quality; after all they can charge more if they give more, right? It is surprising to me that with as much negative publicity that they are getting right now that they would blatantly choose to take further negative actions towards their customers. They need to be building as much goodwill as possible. They're pushing their customers out the door.
I would wager that if you tried it, you would find soemthing that appeals to you.
I barely classify WoW as a RPG; I put it in the same category as Diablo - psuedo RPG. Yes, you play a character and by taking the available actions for that character you fulfill its role, but you are not really putting yourself into the character and you don't have much of a connection to that character's motives. You, the player, are more of a puppet master for the avatar on the screen.
The social aspect in WoW further eliminates the RPG title. When we chat in game or talk over VoIP for raiding, we're the players talking, not our characters. It's slightly different on RP realms. I think because WoW's population is made up from so many different pools of people, it makes the gathering of all this diversity interesting. Anyone who played Warcraft, Starcraft or Diablo came to WoW because it's a high quality Blizzard product. Anyone who played previous MMOs came to WoW because it was the next evolutionary step in the genre. Players wanting a virtual life (similar to Sims or Second Life) came to WoW because all their friends were already here. The curious come to WoW, find some aspect they like and they stay.
If you like FPS, you'd like WoW. If you like achievement (levels, skills, money or items) you'd like WoW. If you like exploration of new areas, you'd like WoW. If you like team work and strategy, you'd definitely like WoW. If you like head to head competition (PvP), you'd like WoW.
I'd suggest you at least give it a try to find out that you really don't like it.:-)
Since 1997 I've seen (and sometimes posted) those comments of X is better than Y and Y will die soon. It's interesting to note that I haven't seen that as much with WoW.
A year after WoW released a few titles (D&DO and TR) were touted as "WoW killers." Some fans tried to lift LotRO up to that title, but the developers of LotRO (some who came from Blizzard I understand) quickly denounced that and stated it was more of a WoW-alternative. I agree. I thought LotRO was good enough to purchase the founder pricing and I play it once a month. I keep expecting to get bored with WoW and go play LotRO for a long time, but it hasn't happened yet.:-)
I think the nay-sayers have all but given up because it is obvious that nothing will hinder WoW except the next step in MMO evolution. The only negative comments I see about WoW are disgruntled players who ran a single character through and they were "done," or current players who want to see improvements. That huge voice of community wanting changes demonstrates how engrossed players are.
WoW will absolutely be the benchmark likely for the next 10 years. UO just passed 10 years. I think WoW has better longevity than it.
I just think it's overrated by people who haven't played anything else.
I can only speak for myself, but I do know of a significant popluation of people who have followed the same path as me.
I've played computer games since 1980 (by "computer," I don't mean arcade or consoles) on IBM PCs, TI 99 4/A, Apple's and Commodores. I've been playing RPGs since 1984 starting with Ultima IV. I've played MMOs since 1997 starting with Ultima Online. I have beta tested dozens of MMOs, but I've only ever subscribed to four: UO(7.5 years), DAoC (briefly), LotRO (founder) and WoW(since beta).
From my experience, from my wife's continued play and comments, from our daughters' play and comments, from the dozens of people I know at work and social events and from the couple of hundred people I know online, WoW is hands-down the all around best MMO experience to date.
Best artwork? I think so because I feel Blizzard was smart to go with their animated style that will stay fresh with new technology and not look outdated as the "realistic" games do within a year.
Best interface? Yes, because it was extremely intuitive to get started at first, easy to modify as I progressed and now easy to customize to fit how I play.
Best music and sound? From what I've heard in beta testing other MMOs, yes, in style, variety and quality. In game voice needs major improvement, but I prefer the third party products anyway.
Best graphics? I think so. There are still some glitches and clipping, but I see those in all the other games, too. I think WoW has more variety of animations than others I've played.
Best PvP? Apparently so. I don't PvP because of my principles, but WoW's PvP is so inexpensive (time, no repairs, no loss of gear) I've even been tempted to try it in some way (battleground or on a PvP server).
Best economy? I think every game ever has lost this battle. There is always a group of people that farm rares, a group of people who grind for money and a group of people that buy at ridiculous prices. These combine with other factors to skew the economy after a few months or years of play. Still it's predictable and survivable. The games with more reasonable economies have low populations.
Best quality? Hands-down WoW still carries the tradition of Blizzard quality forward. Are there bugs and problems? Sure, but when you consider how large and complicated WoW is, sometimes it's amazing it works at all. I can live with a quest being broken for a week or two due to a patch because there are plenty of other things to do besides that one thing. I can tolerate login queues on my server at times because that tells me my game is successful and will be around to play for a long, long time.
I think the fact that there are players who never played any other MMO before WoW speaks volumes as well. This tells me that people with no knowledge of previous interfaces, systems or any of the pioneering games that lead to WoW decided to take the plunge and are staying. Plus I get a kick when I talk to these people and they ask me how long I've played. Saying "since beta" makes their eyes go wide, but saying "MMOs since 1997" makes their jaw drop.:-) Yeah, I'm an old gamer, and in my opinion, it will take a serious evolution of game to dethrone WoW. I fully expect that Blizzard will be the ones to take that next step, too.
Let me guess. You played one character, a single race and class, you worked your way to 70 as quickly as possible, saw a few instances and maybe raided a few times so now you're "Done," right?
Yeah, you and the hundreds of others that respond to WoW in this manner really explored the depth and breadth that WoW has to offer.
I've been playing since beta, I have ~20 characters across five realms, three of which I play actively and another four which I play a few hours a month. I've been 70 since March of last year on my primary character who has been in most of the instances. I raid three nights a week for 2-3 hours. I craft and/or gather something on all of my characters. I make transactions on the AH every day to make gold.
I still have not seen all the different locations. I haven't been in all of the instances and definitely have not defeated all of them. My gear is a long, long way from being maxed out. I just recently had enough money to comfortably buy my epic flying mount without leaving myself copperless. There are still hundreds of quests I have yet to do but would like to do. I still have maximum levels and items to reach on some of my crafting. I play 2-4 hours every night and about twice that on weekends. There is still so much more to do, to see and experience that I know I'll never be "done" and I'll still be catching up when WotLK comes out. I don't even participate in PvP which would add another 10% of content and activity.
How is it we're talking about the same game?
Oh, yeah. Because Blizzard developers are such skilled game designers that they designed WoW to appeal to a broader base of player styles than any other MMO to date. More and more people are buying and logging on to WoW each day because it is extremely appealing, easy to get started, difficult to master and all around fun to play.
Just because a small percentage of narrow-minded achievers such as your comment suggests raced to the top and didn't bother to look around at everything they missed are now bored because there is "nothing new" does not mean the rest of the players feel this way. Blizzard is obviously satisfying millions of customers. I certainly feel I'm getting my money's worth.
No workaround, but I do have some suggestions for you.
We have two accounts for our family, primarily for my wife and myself. Our girls have their own characters as well on our accounts. They have one each on our primary realm, so my wife and I play the other nine (crafters, resource gatherers, variety of playstyles, etc.). Most often we switch out accounts and characters for one of us to play with one of the girls. Sometimes the girls play by themselves as a pair of hunters or druids. They have the majority of their characters on an alternate server. My wife and I started a character each there to get startup money and provide basic resources (potions and bags).
You actually have a limit of 50 characters across all realms, 10 on each realm. Why so many? In the early days your realm might be full or down, so you'd go to another realm so you could play. If you play PvP then once you create a Horde char on one realm, you cannot create an Alliance char there, so to play Alliance you go to another realm. On PvE servers (like ours) you can have chars of both races, but they cannot interact and help each other so there's not much point except to experience the other faction which you might as well do on another realm.
So I'd suggest you buy one more account and let the kids create their characters there. Use it as a reward system for who gets to play and a team work teaching system if you let them make chars on your account. I strongly suggest picking a realm different from your main characters even though that means a little work for you to get startup money to help them out. Eventually when they have allowances or part time jobs, let them take over paying for the account. If the eldest wants his/her own account, have him/her pay for it AND the character transfer from the previous family account.
I also strongly suggest you use the 6 month payment plan to save you a little money, and by all means get the WoW credit card to earn a few free months.
We're no longer procreating, but my wife and I are actually more active since we started playing WoW together. Spending time together, helping each other, talking about the game as part of our daily conversation and accomplishing tasks together was an important spark that rekindled our relationship.
Our girls play WoW as well and it is turning out to be a decent teaching tool for reading, math, responsibility, teamwork and reward.
If you have any tendancies towards addictive behavior, by all means stay away. For those without discipline or responsibilities that limit their play time, it can be consuming. Having gone through the addiction of Ultima Online (staying up too late too many nights, forgoing social events for play,etc.) I finally became aware of my addiction and took control of it. I still play WoW heavily when I can, but other duties and the desire for sleep win out. RL > WoW is a common saying.
If you can discipline yourself, you'll find WoW a very enjoyable experience. It replaced TV watching for me. I have several online friends and I keep up with old friends who live far away through the game. Be forewarned, you may find more jerks than you find friends, but that's in every online community. If you're interested, download the free trial, reply to this and I'll let you know where I play to help you get started.
Bring back the buggy, unforseen, wild, insulting, violent mess that was Ultima Online back in the early years.
Hell, no. Having been there from launch I think I can speak for the majority of players who suffered the countlees jerks who felt that anonymity of an internet game gave them the right to be complete and utter assholes, to ignore *playing* the game and instead concentrate on ruining the game for others. 80% of the playerbase breathed a huge sigh of relief when Trammel was created because it was obvious that the lack of a PvP control meant a miserable game of predator and prey that would eventually consume itself into extinction. UO would have had (and still would have) subscriptions in the millions if they would have tamed the wild west early on.
But once you're done leveling, the game is over.
I don't think you're playing the same WoW that I and the other 10 million are playing.
It completely baffles me how someone can play a single character (one gender, one race, one class) from 1 to 70, hit a few instances and they're "done." We had a person like this in our guild. As much as we tried to get him to try a different class, try crafting, try running an instance with us, all he did was quest and grind. When he hit 60 (pre-BC), he quit. This is equivalent to someone going to a Chinese buffet and eating nothing but a plateful of steamed rice. When they're full of rice, they leave and tell the world "Chinese food is dull." How would you know? You only experienced 2% of it?!?!
Did you know there are eight distinct sets of quests from 1-20? (dwarf/gnome, orc/troll, human, night elf, tauren, undead, draenei and blood elf) Even the quests from 20 to 60 have multiple paths and you can easily choose to do different quest lines and instances than you did with another character. When WoW launched there were 2500 quests per faction. I'd wager with BC that's now 5000 per faction.
Did you know that each class has some quests specific to them? Did you ever try any crafting quests? Do you know how each class plays well enough to understand how to interact with them as a team member in a raid? Did you know that once you're done leveling, the game really begins?
Believe the "hype." The occasional login queue on my server indicates how the population has grown... again. I've been here since beta and I don't see an end any time in the future. Blizzard learned from the mistakes of the numerous MMORPGs before WoW and they are capitalizing on it. Obviously millions of players are enjoying the hell out of it, too.
Go enjoy your steamed rice. I'll enjoy the buffet.
Funny comments, but it makes me wonder. Isn't this really deserving of a world record for the smallest, mechanical device flying under its own power (as in thrust, not the external power source).
Exactly. From the description of the more complicated systems they still have to develop, I think they'd be better off working on micro cameras that a fly can carry and developing a way to control the fly's behavior (where to fly, when to land,etc.). Something more like the cockroach in "Fifth Element."
4) design a mall which can compel customers to shop to the point of bankruptcy, to walk obliviously for miles and miles and miles, endlessly to the point of physical exhaustion and even death;
For the love of humanity, DO NOT let Neiman Marcus get hold of this information! They're already quite advanced on the bankruptcy part.
Am I the only one suspecting that when Martin declared an investigation of Comcast's practices that someone at Comcast immediately called their pocket senator?
That would explain Comcast's rate hikes - congressmen salaries and demands go up every six months, too.
In India that means the car can hold 10 people... okay, 9 if you get really picky about the driver being able to see. The hatch will allow for another 2-3 people to hang out the back and at least 4 can sit on the roof.
I think Tata is just giving them a bigger bicycle.
Forget the Nano. In America we prefer our Tatas Giga-size. They just use more plastic and come from California.
Add to this congestion at gas stations where gas will likely be at a premium and what happens when the car breaks down? Are these impoverished people who are looking forward to a $2500 car aware that they're really starting a $5000/year vicious cycle?
Perhaps these cars are meant to be disposable and not repaired. Then you'll start having the equivalent of cars on blocks that many impoverished Americans have. From the films I've seen of India, I'd wager people will be buying these to *live* in them and not drive them. Better protection than a lean-to against a condemned building. It at least gives them a place to lock up what valuables they have. Regardless I expect these cars will introduce a new crime streak and underground economy as well.
Just like bringing in western economy, jobs and un-necessities (McDonald's, Starbucks), I don't think the government and businesses are responsibly bringing India into the world economy levels.
See me and my kind have super-sensitive awareness for those likely to cause trouble. I can spot a terrorist from 100yds. Make it so people can only get into the airport through a single security checkpoint (nearly there now) and they walk through the metal detectors. Give me a chair on an elevated platform, like a deer stand, about 50 ft. from the checkpoint exit. I'll look each person over with the scope on my.370 deer rifle. If any of them flinch, I'll already have them sited and can take them down.
If guns make you nervous, which I guess they do since I've never seen a TSA agent with one, then just give me a CB and I'll notify you of anyone that looks suspicious. You take them down however you want. If I see any busty redheads, though, we might need a full body cavity search.
Let me know when me and my boys can start. Looks like our jobs with the border patrol are getting canned thanks to GW's fence.
$195,000 per affected subscriber? Wow! Comcast won't be able to afford that 160mbps network upgrade if that occurs.
This should be an interesting story to watch unfold. Let's see how Comcast denies and hides it. Too bad this isn't a class action suit that would return some of that money to the victims... I mean customers. Maybe a class action suit will follow if or when the FCC finds Comcast guilty.
1. Safety. With an ideal system as promised, computers controlling all the cars on the highway is much safer than the road-rage/inconsiderant jerks out there now. Plus, if a driver is incapacitated (drunk, allergic reaction, injury) the car can get them home or to the emergency room.
2. Efficiency. Ever notice how you get slightly better gas mileage on cruise control than you do with your foot? Imagine putting that little bit of efficiency into play every day for every car on the road. That would significantly reduce our dependency on oil by itself. Plus closer adherence to the speed limit saves fuel as well (on current engine technology).
3. Traffic. Per the article posted a few days ago about the mathematical reason for traffic jams, if the cars are autosensing the conditions and not performing erractic maneuvers then traffic will flow much better.
4. Speed. With newer technology cars will be able to go much faster more efficiently. Humans can only react so quickly. (I know the idiots driving 90 around Dallas have horrible reaction times and poor distance judgment.) Computers will allow for faster transit while still keeping a safety margin.
5. Freedom. Young, elderly and handicapped people will no longer have limitations on when and where they can drive. Operating a computer-controlled car will be as easy as talking on a phone. I wouldn't be surprised that computer-controlled cars would lower the driving age to 12 or so (parents' consent). Still in an emergency, anyone could operate it or you contact a service like OnStar for remote operation.
Yeah, no reason for this nonsense at all, I guess.:-)
1. Yes, but that's what they'll offer to new customers to compete with Verizon regardless of what current customers are paying.
2. Not really. When you hit a connection to a domain you're most likely hitting a network load balancing switch and taking a slice of one of multiple servers. I simply prefer having the dedicated connection TO the internet like DSL and FiOS as opposed to being on a "hub" (not even a switch) with my neighbors.
3. Had it for over 3 years and had a problem at least every month, sometimes off for 3-5 days at a time. My neighbors experienced the same downtimes, so we know it was upstream.
4. I mean the base price, not a special startup offer. When I had their TV service and later their internet service, they increased their fees by 6-10% every six months. I've been with Verizon for two years now and I've only seen one 4% increase.
5. Oh heck yes they do. If you call in a problem, go through the time and hassle of working through everything with the multiple levels of support, reboot your computer about eight times while doing so and they finally agree to send out a technician, if he can prove that it's not their network or equipment, you get the $75/hr bill. It's amazing how well-behaved the Comcast network is when there's a technician in your house, and apparently the modem having a faulty power connection is my problem.
6. No, not at all. I have never dealt with the ineptitude that Comcast puts on the phone with ANY other company, not even my credit card banks, Microsoft or a pizza delivery shop.
7. Sure it is. As soon as the movie stuido makes the movie available for on demand, many "gotta have it now" customers pay the price for VOD. Once it's out of pay per view, then the provider attracts customers and builds customer loyalty by having a large library available. I really enjoy and get a great deal of use from my Starz on demand through Verizon.
8. Given.
No. I sure as heck would never work for them and I pity any poor soul that does. If any former Comcast employees posted here, I think we'd hear more horrible stories of the truth behind the lines as opposed to the customer experience. I'm one of the growing millions of former Comcast customers.
You, on the other hand, sound like someone who has no TV/internet option other than Comcast, so you make the best of what you have. Good luck to you.
Given the company's history, I don't trust a single word the article says.
-"Up to" 160 mbps likely means "We'll sell you 20Mb for $50/mth to barely squeeze out our competition, but real speed will cost ya $$$$."
-Is it still a shared network? So if my neighbors are all downloading Batman Begins, is my internet download going to slow to 1mbps? I bet it will.
-Will the service be reliable, as in always on, 24x7x365, you know, like the phone companies and my FiOS connection are? I completely and totally doubt it.
-Will the charge per month keep increasing every six months? I think it will.
-Will you still charge customers for house calls even when the fault lies in your network and your equipment? I'm sure you will.
-Will you replace your unskilled, rude and generally ignorant customer service with talented, considerate and intelligent people? Only if Comcast decides to pay a decent wage, so I guess not.
-Will the VoD carry the latest movies as soon as they're legally available? If the CEO is using Batman Begins (2005) as an example, probably not.
-Will Comcast ever apologize or make amends for all the anguish, pain, suffering and overbilling they have caused their customers since Comcast came into existence? I'm not holding my breath.
My only wish is that Comcast executives, where ever they go will receive the same kind of service they themselves deliver.
2x dual DVI graphics cards that can drive (nVidia 8800 w/ 320Mb) this @ ~$250 each = $500
4x 19" 2-5ms LCD monitors for equivalent screen space @ $220 each = $880
I already have the cards and two monitors, so I'd only need to spend $440 to reach an equivalent. Those starting from scratch would need to spend $1400+ to do this.
Not sure a seamless (as they promise) display that wide is really worth however much more than $880 it will cost. Knowing Alienware's high prices, I'm sure it will likely be 3-5x that.
Nice proof of concept or toy for those that have everything, but I don't see it being that popular amongst regular consumers. Besides how many games/applications are going to support four wide? Granted the way I play WoW now with one screen to play and one screen for browser/VoIP/reference, I could definitely do a widescreen format in the middle and "support" screens on both sides. Limited application.
1) If you could run XP on your current system, I think you would notice the speed difference.
2) Have you tried to run a Windows backup?
3) Have you tried to copy/move a directory with several sub-folders and files to a network share or another hard drive? Try to do anything else while this is running.
4) Have you tried to run any older applications/games that you had previously?
5) If you have wireless, have you tried to change from one access point to another?
6) Have you tried running on a dual monitor setup?
7) Have you tried running any music/video files that you had previously ripped or downloaded, purchased or not?
8) Have you tried running a Quicktime stream when QT pops up for an update?
9) Have you downloaded a 50Mb+ file and compare it to the download time under XP? (20 mins. in Vista/IE7 changed to less than 2 mins. in XP/Firefox on my 15Mb fiber downloading a 67Mb driver file from nVidia.com)
Those are the problems I encountered in three hours of trying Vista out. I didn't even mention the annoyance of the UAC which should never happen if I'm running as local administrator. I'm sure others here could list many, many more.
Tonight, in fact, I set up a new computer for my wife who is using XP on a brand-new Dell laptop......Then, after all was finally said and done, using the thing was an amazingly frustrating experience, with seemingly endless offers/popups, some masquerading as os-level services, some more obvious overtures to purchase 3rd party software.
What you're seeing is Dell's horrendous load with all of their partners' software/trialware/crapware. I've seen these, too, and I immediately shut it down and load a clean version of XP which is really quite straightforward. The only annoyance I have with a XP install is the amount of patching. Not a big issue with a good internet connection. Takes me less than an hour to have XP installed and fully patched at home.
Being an IT professional, I'd have to say this is not how things work.
Businesses for the most part move slowly, cautiously and only when it is profitable/advantageous. Vista offers no advantages and causes more issues than it solves. In every company where I know an IT professional, they are staying clear of Vista. If individuals want it, IT is deploying it and doing their best to support it. It's usually not long, though (one month) that the individual is back for a XP re-image. Even where I work now a handful of the IT team are using Vista and claiming they are "having no problems." Yet everyday I hear them complain about speed, some compatibility issue or a random reboot. I'm holding onto XP until I'm absolutely forced to upgrade.
My wife and I have both worked for banks in the past. I know her company was on Windows NT server and 95/98 workstations until 2005. I can almost guarntee they'll never see Vista. Previous bank I was at had a mix of NT, 95/98, 2000, XP and 2003. Due to many legacy applications, I'd wager a great deal of money they won't use Vista until they hear major company success stories which won't be happening with the current reaction.
Businesses may take risks, but it's not usually with the infrastructure. If people can't work, they can't make the company money. Let the little guys (or the competition) take those risks.
Slashdot Mirror
Likewise cell phones, MP3 players and personal video players seem to be rampantly used in public by jerks who wish to annoy others with their conversation, music or video. Now we'll get to put up with projections. Of course, when you ask them to stop due to decency or courtesy, they'll start shouting about it being a free country and they have the right to show their crap wherever they want.
At least one part of the article was prophetic: we'll definitely start seeing "No projectors allowed" in public places. Nice idea for business; new annoyance tool for consumers.
My mother-in-law has Comcast digital. The menu is confusing, her rates keep going up without any increase or improvement in service and she still experiences outages like we had in 1995.
Plain and simple to me. If you can get FiOS, get it. If you can't get FiOS, get one of the satellite services (I recommend DirecTV). Anything but Comcast.
It's no surprise to me that Comcast is choosing quantity over quality; after all they can charge more if they give more, right? It is surprising to me that with as much negative publicity that they are getting right now that they would blatantly choose to take further negative actions towards their customers. They need to be building as much goodwill as possible. They're pushing their customers out the door.
I barely classify WoW as a RPG; I put it in the same category as Diablo - psuedo RPG. Yes, you play a character and by taking the available actions for that character you fulfill its role, but you are not really putting yourself into the character and you don't have much of a connection to that character's motives. You, the player, are more of a puppet master for the avatar on the screen.
The social aspect in WoW further eliminates the RPG title. When we chat in game or talk over VoIP for raiding, we're the players talking, not our characters. It's slightly different on RP realms. I think because WoW's population is made up from so many different pools of people, it makes the gathering of all this diversity interesting. Anyone who played Warcraft, Starcraft or Diablo came to WoW because it's a high quality Blizzard product. Anyone who played previous MMOs came to WoW because it was the next evolutionary step in the genre. Players wanting a virtual life (similar to Sims or Second Life) came to WoW because all their friends were already here. The curious come to WoW, find some aspect they like and they stay.
If you like FPS, you'd like WoW. If you like achievement (levels, skills, money or items) you'd like WoW. If you like exploration of new areas, you'd like WoW. If you like team work and strategy, you'd definitely like WoW. If you like head to head competition (PvP), you'd like WoW.
I'd suggest you at least give it a try to find out that you really don't like it. :-)
A year after WoW released a few titles (D&DO and TR) were touted as "WoW killers." Some fans tried to lift LotRO up to that title, but the developers of LotRO (some who came from Blizzard I understand) quickly denounced that and stated it was more of a WoW-alternative. I agree. I thought LotRO was good enough to purchase the founder pricing and I play it once a month. I keep expecting to get bored with WoW and go play LotRO for a long time, but it hasn't happened yet.
I think the nay-sayers have all but given up because it is obvious that nothing will hinder WoW except the next step in MMO evolution. The only negative comments I see about WoW are disgruntled players who ran a single character through and they were "done," or current players who want to see improvements. That huge voice of community wanting changes demonstrates how engrossed players are.
WoW will absolutely be the benchmark likely for the next 10 years. UO just passed 10 years. I think WoW has better longevity than it.
I've played computer games since 1980 (by "computer," I don't mean arcade or consoles) on IBM PCs, TI 99 4/A, Apple's and Commodores. I've been playing RPGs since 1984 starting with Ultima IV. I've played MMOs since 1997 starting with Ultima Online. I have beta tested dozens of MMOs, but I've only ever subscribed to four: UO(7.5 years), DAoC (briefly), LotRO (founder) and WoW(since beta).
From my experience, from my wife's continued play and comments, from our daughters' play and comments, from the dozens of people I know at work and social events and from the couple of hundred people I know online, WoW is hands-down the all around best MMO experience to date.
Best artwork? I think so because I feel Blizzard was smart to go with their animated style that will stay fresh with new technology and not look outdated as the "realistic" games do within a year.
Best interface? Yes, because it was extremely intuitive to get started at first, easy to modify as I progressed and now easy to customize to fit how I play.
Best music and sound? From what I've heard in beta testing other MMOs, yes, in style, variety and quality. In game voice needs major improvement, but I prefer the third party products anyway.
Best graphics? I think so. There are still some glitches and clipping, but I see those in all the other games, too. I think WoW has more variety of animations than others I've played.
Best PvP? Apparently so. I don't PvP because of my principles, but WoW's PvP is so inexpensive (time, no repairs, no loss of gear) I've even been tempted to try it in some way (battleground or on a PvP server).
Best economy? I think every game ever has lost this battle. There is always a group of people that farm rares, a group of people who grind for money and a group of people that buy at ridiculous prices. These combine with other factors to skew the economy after a few months or years of play. Still it's predictable and survivable. The games with more reasonable economies have low populations.
Best quality? Hands-down WoW still carries the tradition of Blizzard quality forward. Are there bugs and problems? Sure, but when you consider how large and complicated WoW is, sometimes it's amazing it works at all. I can live with a quest being broken for a week or two due to a patch because there are plenty of other things to do besides that one thing. I can tolerate login queues on my server at times because that tells me my game is successful and will be around to play for a long, long time.
I think the fact that there are players who never played any other MMO before WoW speaks volumes as well. This tells me that people with no knowledge of previous interfaces, systems or any of the pioneering games that lead to WoW decided to take the plunge and are staying. Plus I get a kick when I talk to these people and they ask me how long I've played. Saying "since beta" makes their eyes go wide, but saying "MMOs since 1997" makes their jaw drop. :-) Yeah, I'm an old gamer, and in my opinion, it will take a serious evolution of game to dethrone WoW. I fully expect that Blizzard will be the ones to take that next step, too.
Yeah, you and the hundreds of others that respond to WoW in this manner really explored the depth and breadth that WoW has to offer.
I've been playing since beta, I have ~20 characters across five realms, three of which I play actively and another four which I play a few hours a month. I've been 70 since March of last year on my primary character who has been in most of the instances. I raid three nights a week for 2-3 hours. I craft and/or gather something on all of my characters. I make transactions on the AH every day to make gold.
I still have not seen all the different locations. I haven't been in all of the instances and definitely have not defeated all of them. My gear is a long, long way from being maxed out. I just recently had enough money to comfortably buy my epic flying mount without leaving myself copperless. There are still hundreds of quests I have yet to do but would like to do. I still have maximum levels and items to reach on some of my crafting. I play 2-4 hours every night and about twice that on weekends. There is still so much more to do, to see and experience that I know I'll never be "done" and I'll still be catching up when WotLK comes out. I don't even participate in PvP which would add another 10% of content and activity.
How is it we're talking about the same game?
Oh, yeah. Because Blizzard developers are such skilled game designers that they designed WoW to appeal to a broader base of player styles than any other MMO to date. More and more people are buying and logging on to WoW each day because it is extremely appealing, easy to get started, difficult to master and all around fun to play.
Just because a small percentage of narrow-minded achievers such as your comment suggests raced to the top and didn't bother to look around at everything they missed are now bored because there is "nothing new" does not mean the rest of the players feel this way. Blizzard is obviously satisfying millions of customers. I certainly feel I'm getting my money's worth.
We have two accounts for our family, primarily for my wife and myself. Our girls have their own characters as well on our accounts. They have one each on our primary realm, so my wife and I play the other nine (crafters, resource gatherers, variety of playstyles, etc.). Most often we switch out accounts and characters for one of us to play with one of the girls. Sometimes the girls play by themselves as a pair of hunters or druids. They have the majority of their characters on an alternate server. My wife and I started a character each there to get startup money and provide basic resources (potions and bags).
You actually have a limit of 50 characters across all realms, 10 on each realm. Why so many? In the early days your realm might be full or down, so you'd go to another realm so you could play. If you play PvP then once you create a Horde char on one realm, you cannot create an Alliance char there, so to play Alliance you go to another realm. On PvE servers (like ours) you can have chars of both races, but they cannot interact and help each other so there's not much point except to experience the other faction which you might as well do on another realm.
So I'd suggest you buy one more account and let the kids create their characters there. Use it as a reward system for who gets to play and a team work teaching system if you let them make chars on your account. I strongly suggest picking a realm different from your main characters even though that means a little work for you to get startup money to help them out. Eventually when they have allowances or part time jobs, let them take over paying for the account. If the eldest wants his/her own account, have him/her pay for it AND the character transfer from the previous family account.
I also strongly suggest you use the 6 month payment plan to save you a little money, and by all means get the WoW credit card to earn a few free months.
Good luck.
Our girls play WoW as well and it is turning out to be a decent teaching tool for reading, math, responsibility, teamwork and reward.
If you have any tendancies towards addictive behavior, by all means stay away. For those without discipline or responsibilities that limit their play time, it can be consuming. Having gone through the addiction of Ultima Online (staying up too late too many nights, forgoing social events for play,etc.) I finally became aware of my addiction and took control of it. I still play WoW heavily when I can, but other duties and the desire for sleep win out. RL > WoW is a common saying.
If you can discipline yourself, you'll find WoW a very enjoyable experience. It replaced TV watching for me. I have several online friends and I keep up with old friends who live far away through the game. Be forewarned, you may find more jerks than you find friends, but that's in every online community. If you're interested, download the free trial, reply to this and I'll let you know where I play to help you get started.
I don't think you're playing the same WoW that I and the other 10 million are playing.It completely baffles me how someone can play a single character (one gender, one race, one class) from 1 to 70, hit a few instances and they're "done." We had a person like this in our guild. As much as we tried to get him to try a different class, try crafting, try running an instance with us, all he did was quest and grind. When he hit 60 (pre-BC), he quit. This is equivalent to someone going to a Chinese buffet and eating nothing but a plateful of steamed rice. When they're full of rice, they leave and tell the world "Chinese food is dull." How would you know? You only experienced 2% of it?!?!
Did you know there are eight distinct sets of quests from 1-20? (dwarf/gnome, orc/troll, human, night elf, tauren, undead, draenei and blood elf) Even the quests from 20 to 60 have multiple paths and you can easily choose to do different quest lines and instances than you did with another character. When WoW launched there were 2500 quests per faction. I'd wager with BC that's now 5000 per faction.
Did you know that each class has some quests specific to them? Did you ever try any crafting quests? Do you know how each class plays well enough to understand how to interact with them as a team member in a raid? Did you know that once you're done leveling, the game really begins?
Believe the "hype." The occasional login queue on my server indicates how the population has grown... again. I've been here since beta and I don't see an end any time in the future. Blizzard learned from the mistakes of the numerous MMORPGs before WoW and they are capitalizing on it. Obviously millions of players are enjoying the hell out of it, too.
Go enjoy your steamed rice. I'll enjoy the buffet.
Funny comments, but it makes me wonder. Isn't this really deserving of a world record for the smallest, mechanical device flying under its own power (as in thrust, not the external power source).
Exactly. From the description of the more complicated systems they still have to develop, I think they'd be better off working on micro cameras that a fly can carry and developing a way to control the fly's behavior (where to fly, when to land,etc.). Something more like the cockroach in "Fifth Element."
That would explain Comcast's rate hikes - congressmen salaries and demands go up every six months, too.
I think Tata is just giving them a bigger bicycle.
Forget the Nano. In America we prefer our Tatas Giga-size. They just use more plastic and come from California.
Perhaps these cars are meant to be disposable and not repaired. Then you'll start having the equivalent of cars on blocks that many impoverished Americans have. From the films I've seen of India, I'd wager people will be buying these to *live* in them and not drive them. Better protection than a lean-to against a condemned building. It at least gives them a place to lock up what valuables they have. Regardless I expect these cars will introduce a new crime streak and underground economy as well.
Just like bringing in western economy, jobs and un-necessities (McDonald's, Starbucks), I don't think the government and businesses are responsibly bringing India into the world economy levels.
See me and my kind have super-sensitive awareness for those likely to cause trouble. I can spot a terrorist from 100yds. Make it so people can only get into the airport through a single security checkpoint (nearly there now) and they walk through the metal detectors. Give me a chair on an elevated platform, like a deer stand, about 50 ft. from the checkpoint exit. I'll look each person over with the scope on my
If guns make you nervous, which I guess they do since I've never seen a TSA agent with one, then just give me a CB and I'll notify you of anyone that looks suspicious. You take them down however you want. If I see any busty redheads, though, we might need a full body cavity search.
Let me know when me and my boys can start. Looks like our jobs with the border patrol are getting canned thanks to GW's fence.
$195,000 per affected subscriber? Wow! Comcast won't be able to afford that 160mbps network upgrade if that occurs.
This should be an interesting story to watch unfold. Let's see how Comcast denies and hides it. Too bad this isn't a class action suit that would return some of that money to the victims... I mean customers. Maybe a class action suit will follow if or when the FCC finds Comcast guilty.
2. Efficiency. Ever notice how you get slightly better gas mileage on cruise control than you do with your foot? Imagine putting that little bit of efficiency into play every day for every car on the road. That would significantly reduce our dependency on oil by itself. Plus closer adherence to the speed limit saves fuel as well (on current engine technology).
3. Traffic. Per the article posted a few days ago about the mathematical reason for traffic jams, if the cars are autosensing the conditions and not performing erractic maneuvers then traffic will flow much better.
4. Speed. With newer technology cars will be able to go much faster more efficiently. Humans can only react so quickly. (I know the idiots driving 90 around Dallas have horrible reaction times and poor distance judgment.) Computers will allow for faster transit while still keeping a safety margin.
5. Freedom. Young, elderly and handicapped people will no longer have limitations on when and where they can drive. Operating a computer-controlled car will be as easy as talking on a phone. I wouldn't be surprised that computer-controlled cars would lower the driving age to 12 or so (parents' consent). Still in an emergency, anyone could operate it or you contact a service like OnStar for remote operation.
Yeah, no reason for this nonsense at all, I guess. :-)
2. Not really. When you hit a connection to a domain you're most likely hitting a network load balancing switch and taking a slice of one of multiple servers. I simply prefer having the dedicated connection TO the internet like DSL and FiOS as opposed to being on a "hub" (not even a switch) with my neighbors.
3. Had it for over 3 years and had a problem at least every month, sometimes off for 3-5 days at a time. My neighbors experienced the same downtimes, so we know it was upstream.
4. I mean the base price, not a special startup offer. When I had their TV service and later their internet service, they increased their fees by 6-10% every six months. I've been with Verizon for two years now and I've only seen one 4% increase.
5. Oh heck yes they do. If you call in a problem, go through the time and hassle of working through everything with the multiple levels of support, reboot your computer about eight times while doing so and they finally agree to send out a technician, if he can prove that it's not their network or equipment, you get the $75/hr bill. It's amazing how well-behaved the Comcast network is when there's a technician in your house, and apparently the modem having a faulty power connection is my problem.
6. No, not at all. I have never dealt with the ineptitude that Comcast puts on the phone with ANY other company, not even my credit card banks, Microsoft or a pizza delivery shop.
7. Sure it is. As soon as the movie stuido makes the movie available for on demand, many "gotta have it now" customers pay the price for VOD. Once it's out of pay per view, then the provider attracts customers and builds customer loyalty by having a large library available. I really enjoy and get a great deal of use from my Starz on demand through Verizon.
8. Given.
No. I sure as heck would never work for them and I pity any poor soul that does. If any former Comcast employees posted here, I think we'd hear more horrible stories of the truth behind the lines as opposed to the customer experience. I'm one of the growing millions of former Comcast customers.
You, on the other hand, sound like someone who has no TV/internet option other than Comcast, so you make the best of what you have. Good luck to you.
-"Up to" 160 mbps likely means "We'll sell you 20Mb for $50/mth to barely squeeze out our competition, but real speed will cost ya $$$$."
-Is it still a shared network? So if my neighbors are all downloading Batman Begins, is my internet download going to slow to 1mbps? I bet it will.
-Will the service be reliable, as in always on, 24x7x365, you know, like the phone companies and my FiOS connection are? I completely and totally doubt it.
-Will the charge per month keep increasing every six months? I think it will.
-Will you still charge customers for house calls even when the fault lies in your network and your equipment? I'm sure you will.
-Will you replace your unskilled, rude and generally ignorant customer service with talented, considerate and intelligent people? Only if Comcast decides to pay a decent wage, so I guess not.
-Will the VoD carry the latest movies as soon as they're legally available? If the CEO is using Batman Begins (2005) as an example, probably not.
-Will Comcast ever apologize or make amends for all the anguish, pain, suffering and overbilling they have caused their customers since Comcast came into existence? I'm not holding my breath.
My only wish is that Comcast executives, where ever they go will receive the same kind of service they themselves deliver.
4x 19" 2-5ms LCD monitors for equivalent screen space @ $220 each = $880
I already have the cards and two monitors, so I'd only need to spend $440 to reach an equivalent. Those starting from scratch would need to spend $1400+ to do this.
Not sure a seamless (as they promise) display that wide is really worth however much more than $880 it will cost. Knowing Alienware's high prices, I'm sure it will likely be 3-5x that.
Nice proof of concept or toy for those that have everything, but I don't see it being that popular amongst regular consumers. Besides how many games/applications are going to support four wide? Granted the way I play WoW now with one screen to play and one screen for browser/VoIP/reference, I could definitely do a widescreen format in the middle and "support" screens on both sides. Limited application.
2) Have you tried to run a Windows backup?
3) Have you tried to copy/move a directory with several sub-folders and files to a network share or another hard drive? Try to do anything else while this is running.
4) Have you tried to run any older applications/games that you had previously?
5) If you have wireless, have you tried to change from one access point to another?
6) Have you tried running on a dual monitor setup?
7) Have you tried running any music/video files that you had previously ripped or downloaded, purchased or not?
8) Have you tried running a Quicktime stream when QT pops up for an update?
9) Have you downloaded a 50Mb+ file and compare it to the download time under XP? (20 mins. in Vista/IE7 changed to less than 2 mins. in XP/Firefox on my 15Mb fiber downloading a 67Mb driver file from nVidia.com)
Those are the problems I encountered in three hours of trying Vista out. I didn't even mention the annoyance of the UAC which should never happen if I'm running as local administrator. I'm sure others here could list many, many more.
What you're seeing is Dell's horrendous load with all of their partners' software/trialware/crapware. I've seen these, too, and I immediately shut it down and load a clean version of XP which is really quite straightforward. The only annoyance I have with a XP install is the amount of patching. Not a big issue with a good internet connection. Takes me less than an hour to have XP installed and fully patched at home.
Businesses for the most part move slowly, cautiously and only when it is profitable/advantageous. Vista offers no advantages and causes more issues than it solves. In every company where I know an IT professional, they are staying clear of Vista. If individuals want it, IT is deploying it and doing their best to support it. It's usually not long, though (one month) that the individual is back for a XP re-image. Even where I work now a handful of the IT team are using Vista and claiming they are "having no problems." Yet everyday I hear them complain about speed, some compatibility issue or a random reboot. I'm holding onto XP until I'm absolutely forced to upgrade.
My wife and I have both worked for banks in the past. I know her company was on Windows NT server and 95/98 workstations until 2005. I can almost guarntee they'll never see Vista. Previous bank I was at had a mix of NT, 95/98, 2000, XP and 2003. Due to many legacy applications, I'd wager a great deal of money they won't use Vista until they hear major company success stories which won't be happening with the current reaction.
Businesses may take risks, but it's not usually with the infrastructure. If people can't work, they can't make the company money. Let the little guys (or the competition) take those risks.