"Kids today, including my generation and even moreso my children's generation, have never had it so good."
I wouldn't say that this is true of every kid, many kids are raised by the state because both of their parents are work-a-holics, and if you're in the lower economic bracket it's just as bad as living the "simple life" in the past.
There are positive and negative trade-offs you must take into account. For instance some children need more intensive parenting then others, you can't make broad brush generalizations that kids today "have it so good", when I was growing up I didn't think I had it "good" being forced to go to school everyday for the next 13 years, and then to finally get out and be only able to earn a little above minimum wage at most jobs unless one takes on a more difficult and demanding job in terms of physical labor that's harder for companies to pay people less for.
Next the amount of stress on kids today is probably just as comparable to if not worse in some cases then the past due to peer pressure to compete in schools to finally compete in the market. All ones time is absorbed working just preparing to work in the world. Despite how good kids "have it" they still work most of their waking hours, even despite what some people might consider "gross" waste of their time.
People have instincts yes, but we also hold them responsible for their actions. People behave in ways that are psychologically rewarding to them, or if punishing, they will behave out ot necessity to perform tasks they hate because the alternative is worse, unless something is wrong.
I'm saying that while evolution has 'fine tuned' instincts, urges and whatnot, they can certainly be overcome through our own conscious effort and also subdued/eliminated by 'genetic engineering' and/or related technologies, if you don't see that that's where the future of humanity lies, in shedding our backward nature in order for a more peaceful world, you're not exactly on the up and up.
The world is in the state it is in because most humans are weak and are driven by irrational systems. Designer children are coming whether we like it or not.
"Unless we also have a way to suppress millions of years of mammalian (in general) and advanced primate (specifically) evolution, some kid born three or four generations from now that still has his pointy eye-teeth, predator's senses and sensibilities, and pack-protecting urges - but who has no outlet for any of that - is going to do exactly what I think a lot of them are doing today: go slightly crazy."
I'm sorry but the above is utter bullshit. People have rational minds that can subdue their natural urges, in fact the future will be one of technologies that enhance one's discipline and removal of backward and feral evolutionary baggage that holds humanity back from living in near utopian societies.
"Rather, it's a example of parents responsibly asking themselves if they are meeting the needs of their children."
Try doing that when you're on the lower half the economic food chain. The problem is the economy. Economic forces are one of the #1 drivers of social ills.
"Successful fan projects like the Star Trek films begin by reaching an understanding with the copyright owner"
Copyright owners don't want fan projects, they want money. Do you really think if fan's walked up to the company to ask for their blessing they would? It's ridiculous 99% of the people out there in control DO NOT GIVE A FUCK about the fan's, they only care about the bottom line.
Similar things have happened with other projects... Chrono Trigger Fan remake and BnetD come to mind, where people wanted an OPEN altenrative to battle.net's rather orwellian/closed nature, and Chrono Trigger remake with updated graphics because chrono trigger was one of the greatest video games ever made.
The truth is Corporate asshats worry that a fan project might take away customers from a (possible) future game, or even worse, that a fan project might outshine the commercial product. Most companies are simply protecting their IP. This is the darkside if intellectual property, where ideas become owned and beholden to some corporate entity or IP owner / asshat for the sake of ringing out (or potentially ringing out) every dollar.
This doesn't really matter your IP address gives you away, it's not hard to correlate who is who on the internet using analysis, if you were really serious, you can use anonymizers or relays but does joe user even know that?
For the average user... there is no privacy, welcome to the 21st century!
I agree, and the fact is the gaming industry has done it to themselves. So let's not feel sorry for them.
I think they forgot why gaming became so successful in the first place: They need to be able to afford and release games that "fail" (do not sell a lot) to seed and grow new properties. While searching for 'the next great gameplay innovation'. That's part of the reason the NES, SNES and Genesis took off in the late 80's and early 90's. Development costs were much lower yet they were still charging $50-60 a game if not more since games have ALWAYS been high priced even in the good old 8-bit days. But there was a lot more diversity.
1) Too many games, game dev's are flooding the market with too many games, there is simply no way you can support so many $50-60 a shot games, especially when they are all essentially the same game with new coats of paint.
2) Time, there is too many games and not enough time to play them in, at least for the average working Adult.
3) Console and PC gamer crossover -- MMO's are designed to be timesinks, which again eat peoples time and give them no need to buy new games.
I'm not proposing a solution of any kind to this state of affairs, I'm just posing the following rhetorical question: if I *have* to maintain an entire separate gaming system to play the games I buy, why not just buy a console and completely avoid the compatibility headaches, additional power and space requirements, extra cost, and so on?
Because ironically enough piracy amortizes the cost of owning a PC. Also with a PC, a lot of your old games play better and look better when you upgrade your PC. Next you can patch and download updates for your game that enhance the game. As much as people complain about patches or buggy games, at least adding enhancements and user content on the PC are possible.
The same cannot be said for console games, they are permanently frozen in time. Next you can Modify PC games and do all sorts of stuff with them on the PC that you cannot do on the console. You can see games revived like "Dead games" through open source. PC games have their own niche in being able to modify the games themselves and have lots of user generated content.
This provides the added benefit of being more survivable, i.e. you can still pick up a working PSOne, Sega Genesis or NEC TurboGrafx on eBay for not that much money. Good luck having such an easy time assembling a working ca. 1992 PC for a game that will only work with EGA, Pro Audio Spectrum 16 sound, and a 1.2MB floppy drive, much less finding the drivers to make all of the obsolete hardware work again.
These points are totally baseless. Emulation on the PC takes care a lot, if not all of these issues. You can play the entire library of the NES, SNES, genesis, Gameboy, Gameboy advance, etc on the PC. Not only that enterprising programmers have made playing some of these games over the net multiplayer possible.
Witness the BnetD fiasco, people wanted an open source battle.net and were shut down by blizzard/vivendi using the DMCA. This is the negative side of capitalism and -exclusively-for-profit game making, lots of amazing projects get killed by the "profit enforcers".
I really think many of the "high brow" moments in games are deep within the games themselves.
I wouldn't say NO highbrow games have been made:
Planescape torment (what changes the nature of a man?)
Also some games while not highbrow certainly get one thinking. Even if they appear cute and stupid on the outside. For instance Tales of Symphonia for the gamecube has a philosophical bits abou war and peace the closer you get to the end of the game. I'm sure other games have 'hidden gems' and hit some important themes that get us to think a bit even if briefly.
"Interesting how the church is given credit for maintaining education and preserving knowledge through the middle ages. And in spite of the Christians burning the Royal Library of Alexandria."
Not all christians can be lumped together, not only that, before modern times the only histories of the world WAS religion, you can't blame humans for the times and ages and lack of knowledge of the age in which they were born.
Next people have motivations beyond their christianity, because one labels one 'christian' simply doesn't mean they are. Religion was often times used by people who didn't believe in it to accomplish their aims (controlling the population). I destruction of knowledge is a tool of nefariou rich people to keep their sheep in line, and crazy people.
It certainly is not commanded anywhere in the christian bible to destroy libraries, in fact such things are sinning, since a christian is not supposed to break the laws of the land as commanded by christ in the new testament. Any true christian would be following those commandments.
The fact is if you are going to have a sci-fi based MMO, it either has to be about the technology (vehicles, buildings, weapons, etc) and/or about the individuals (soldiers, etc), it seems to me the best way to do a technology based MMO is planet-side, eve seems to be doing ok over-time but it's boring as hell. Earth and beyond IMHO had a lot of potential, but not enough interest apparently. That was one of the sci-fi MMO's I actually liked to some extent, though it did suffer from the boredom factor.
I still think sci-fi MMO has not been done correctly yet, I see a real sci-fi MMO as mixing and merging different gameplay from RTS, FPS, and 3rd person i.e. Descent freespace, Eve-online. It'll probably take a while to materialize though given the constraints of technology currently.
Sci-fi demands some exercise in explanation. Fantasy does not. This means fantasy is easier.
Oh come on! Take a look at star-trek for example, why use phasers when you could just tag and beam the invaders to outer space? Or take guys being shot by phasers, why is it some of them get blown back 6 feet being impacted by a weapon who's discharge is energy and not matter? Watch any sci-fi, there is tonnes of it that makes no sense at all even if there were explanations for them, it would just make the thing seem even more ridiculous. Let's face it entertainment is about a symphony of audio/visual motion of action, character, emotion and storytelling we find interesting. It doesn't have to make sense, all it does is have to capture our minds attention and perhaps our hearts and once in a while cause us to think. Most entertainment is simply mind candy, it tastes sweet but has little value.
Almost all science fiction is just as silly as any fantasy novel. There are completely 'magical' (i.e. supernatural/unexplained) elements in all sci-fi. Personally Sci-fi can be done well, it's just that most people are simply not interested in stories based around modern or futuristic science and technology, unless there is some sort of element the can relate to (i.e. starwars for example).
I do not agree, credit cards are necessary for online purchases and emergencies. They are the only times they should be used. If you dont have the willpower to use credit cards then perhaps cutting them up is a good idea, but the fact is, if you don't have the willpower not to use them to spend. What makes anyone think you'll still have it when you have cash in your pocket instead of a credit card?
It's more ethical than downloading music from the internet without paying for it, which most people here on slashdot seem to think is ok.
Look trying to apply ethics to capitalist markets is a contradiction of terms, in fact you can even argue that beyond a certain profit level, it is UNETHICAL to overcharge or underpay someone. If you really want to get into ethics, ask yourself why you most probably buy items made by people who make crappy wages and live in horrid conditions.
It's stupid to outlaw the will of the people, if people download music for free, there's nothing you can do to stop them. If they want to support artists, they will choose to do so. There is no law written thusly: Because I want to be a horse and buggy driver, rather then buy a car and be a taxi driver, therefore people should want to pay for my slow low value services at the price I am charging.
It's democracy in action -- i.e. the will of the people. If a device came along tomorrow that could replicate or generate matter out of a near infinite source of energy, do you not think many industries would collapse overnight for becoming superfluous? All intellectual property that can be digitized has infinite supply, so some intellectual properties are in fact DANGEROUS to democracy at large simply because it gives businesses and corporations unprecedented economic power to charge money for an IP over and over and over again with a single one time investment, you now have a liscence to print money, decade after decade. In my opinion the internet and modern technology is the balance to near Infinite profit potential of some properties that markets need to balance out.
If I buy music X and make a copy of it, anyone in my family generations down the line should not have to rebuy the liscence to view X, but thats exactly what industry does. VHS, DVD's, Music if we are to take copyright seriously, industry should not be able to make profit again on a liscence you already paid for since by definition it would be unethical to charge someone again for a liscence they already bought.
Since if you are really only buying a liscence to view it, then that liscence should exist for as long as the copyright for the work. So if I buy a liscence to view starwars, my ability to view it again, on any medium into the future should be free for the duration of the copyright.
In modern capitalist markets, making profit is king. No one is doing us any favors when they sell us something. Your boss is not doing you any favors, he's paying you the wage he can get away with for how much supply of the people with the skills you have, he would gladly pay you survival wages if he could. They want to make the most money for the least. Also, any kind of theft or infringment of something that has infinite supply has no consequences other then loss of POTENTIAL profits for the authors/business, etc.
IMHO this is the way socialism/communism can work with goods that have infinite supply and cost nothing to duplicate and do not really put authors out of house and home. The fact is, if the business model isn't working, you either change it or the industry collapses due to market forces (people unwilling to pay for music), a real capitalist would acknowledge the fact that copyright infringement is a sign that the market is inefficient or in fact broken since the items have unlimited supply and near zero cost of replication and distribution.
But I dont ever see the music industry collapsing, do you? So lets save the the "shoulds" and "musts". In the real world you do what you can to survive, and you be ethical towards those that are ethical, and unethical towards those that are unethical. Eye for an eye. Trust is earned. Value of any intellectual property is relative to the person buying it, if I make $15,000 a year, and I think something is not worth $50 and I pirate it, or download it, thats the profit motive in action. If I can get the most for the least, am I going to do it? Yes.
Look at wal-mart, insane profits, yet their workers do not reap the rewards. Would you call that unethical? hmmm. I wonder.
People do something that makes them feel good. They do it often and begin to notice other things don't feel good anymore, then they notice they need to do this new thing more and more to keep the good feeling coming. Just because our brain makes a chemical doesn't mean it won't acquire a tolerance to it.
Some people do not have this tolerance, there are people out there who never get bored with certain depth of repetition.
Boredom is survival function, but in some people it simply does not work in the same way or it is completely broken, or overcome by the chemical stimulation the mind provides. Think about sex for a minute, is there anyone who would truly give it up? I doubt most sane people would.
" If the gameplay makes up for the poor story, then fine, but I'd rather have a good story."
I have to take issue with this, GAMEPLAY is the primary reason most people play games. In fact, the march towards watching games rather then playing them, being in control and interacting is rather disheartening. Halo's story was far from good or original, it was the gameplay, experience and immersion in that world that did it for most people. The only things I remember from halo are master cheif, some aliens who's names I can't remember, and the flood. I remember halo for the fun and experiences I had, I simply do not remember it for the story. Some games are about story (Planescape torment) but most games are about gameplay. Fire emblem wouldn't be the same game without both its gameplay an story, I still think gameplay takes precedence, if a game is no fun when you rip out the story you have a serious problem.
I may be "hardcore" for saying this, but a game like mario, or tetris is pure gameplay, it is the reason gaming took off in the firstplace. Without any kind of control and things for your character to do and interact with, with the avatars abilities, there's little reason to play most games. Take the guns out of Any first person shooter and just walk around, would the gameplay still be the same? I doubt it.
You're the parents, you make the rules. Pull the plug, take the computer away, do something, anything. You'd probably hit the roof if you caught your kid with a joint, but when he wants to wrap himself up in computer games you just fucking sit there and let it happen. That shit pisses me off. I hope this clinic is working with parents too to make sure they can control their child's behavior.
It's not that simple for some parents, some parents are simply never around, that and there are other factors. Many teens/young adults who have addictions have other problems as well, depression, suicidality and other problems at school. You might want to ask WHY someone is binging on gaming, it goes beyond simple addiction, there's reasons why people spend inordinate amounts of time doing drugs, getting drunk, or gaming, or what have you. It's a sign of a deeper problem usually not so easily fixed by simply kicking someone out.
i.e. many children threaten suicide if they are kicked out, what are you to do if you're the parent?
I think the real problem is that too many people accept information without being critical about it.
I think the real problem is simply there is not enough time to be critical about everything you read, there is simply too much information and human beings do not possess enough brain processing power to be able to assess critically everything one reads and still have time to perform the functions of daily living. It would simply take too much time for many people who have other things to do within their own lives.
"I always found it curious that such a smart man could also have such a lousy private life."
Being smart does not have much to do with ones ability to handle relationships, "smart" or "intelligence" is not a global capacity that applies to all domains of functioning.
There are many people who think he most likely had aspergers syndrome.
"Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem is one of the best games for the Gamecube, putting it squarely among the top games of this ending generation."
While I agree Eternal darkness was good, it certainly wasn't anything revolutionary. Many surival horror games before it were just as good as ED. Take RE4 for instance, a game that just oozes amazingness.
Eternal darkness for me, while it was good, lacked in some instances in overall experience. Not to mention the sales were not exactly mindboggling if my mind serves me correctly.
I will admit though that ED's ending and bosses felt like creative oldschool video games, which was a good thing. Too many modern video games feel less and less creative.
Slashdot Mirror
"Kids today, including my generation and even moreso my children's generation, have never had it so good."
I wouldn't say that this is true of every kid, many kids are raised by the state because both of their parents are work-a-holics, and if you're in the lower economic bracket it's just as bad as living the "simple life" in the past.
There are positive and negative trade-offs you must take into account. For instance some children need more intensive parenting then others, you can't make broad brush generalizations that kids today "have it so good", when I was growing up I didn't think I had it "good" being forced to go to school everyday for the next 13 years, and then to finally get out and be only able to earn a little above minimum wage at most jobs unless one takes on a more difficult and demanding job in terms of physical labor that's harder for companies to pay people less for.
Next the amount of stress on kids today is probably just as comparable to if not worse in some cases then the past due to peer pressure to compete in schools to finally compete in the market. All ones time is absorbed working just preparing to work in the world. Despite how good kids "have it" they still work most of their waking hours, even despite what some people might consider "gross" waste of their time.
People have instincts yes, but we also hold them responsible for their actions. People behave in ways that are psychologically rewarding to them, or if punishing, they will behave out ot necessity to perform tasks they hate because the alternative is worse, unless something is wrong.
I'm saying that while evolution has 'fine tuned' instincts, urges and whatnot, they can certainly be overcome through our own conscious effort and also subdued/eliminated by 'genetic engineering' and/or related technologies, if you don't see that that's where the future of humanity lies, in shedding our backward nature in order for a more peaceful world, you're not exactly on the up and up.
The world is in the state it is in because most humans are weak and are driven by irrational systems.
Designer children are coming whether we like it or not.
"Unless we also have a way to suppress millions of years of mammalian (in general) and advanced primate (specifically) evolution, some kid born three or four generations from now that still has his pointy eye-teeth, predator's senses and sensibilities, and pack-protecting urges - but who has no outlet for any of that - is going to do exactly what I think a lot of them are doing today: go slightly crazy."
I'm sorry but the above is utter bullshit. People have rational minds that can subdue their natural urges, in fact the future will be one of technologies that enhance one's discipline and removal of backward and feral evolutionary baggage that holds humanity back from living in near utopian societies.
"Rather, it's a example of parents responsibly asking themselves if they are meeting the needs of their children."
Try doing that when you're on the lower half the economic food chain. The problem is the economy. Economic forces are one of the #1 drivers of social ills.
"Successful fan projects like the Star Trek films begin by reaching an understanding with the copyright owner"
Copyright owners don't want fan projects, they want money. Do you really think if fan's walked up to the company to ask for their blessing they would? It's ridiculous 99% of the people out there in control DO NOT GIVE A FUCK about the fan's, they only care about the bottom line.
Similar things have happened with other projects... Chrono Trigger Fan remake and BnetD come to mind, where people wanted an OPEN altenrative to battle.net's rather orwellian/closed nature, and Chrono Trigger remake with updated graphics because chrono trigger was one of the greatest video games ever made.
The truth is Corporate asshats worry that a fan project might take away customers from a (possible) future game, or even worse, that a fan project might outshine the commercial product. Most companies are simply protecting their IP. This is the darkside if intellectual property, where ideas become owned and beholden to some corporate entity or IP owner / asshat for the sake of ringing out (or potentially ringing out) every dollar.
IMHO the fact that theft is so widespread is a sign people aren't being paid enough and prices for many items are too high.
This doesn't really matter your IP address gives you away, it's not hard to correlate who is who on the internet using analysis, if you were really serious, you can use anonymizers or relays but does joe user even know that?
For the average user... there is no privacy, welcome to the 21st century!
"Make a good game, and people will buy it."
I agree, and the fact is the gaming industry has done it to themselves. So let's not feel sorry for them.
I think they forgot why gaming became so successful in the first place: They need to be able to afford and release games that "fail" (do not sell a lot) to seed and grow new properties. While searching for 'the next great gameplay innovation'. That's part of the reason the NES, SNES and Genesis took off in the late 80's and early 90's. Development costs were much lower yet they were still charging $50-60 a game if not more since games have ALWAYS been high priced even in the good old 8-bit days. But there was a lot more diversity.
1) Too many games, game dev's are flooding the market with too many games, there is simply no way you can support so many $50-60 a shot games, especially when they are all essentially the same game with new coats of paint.
2) Time, there is too many games and not enough time to play them in, at least for the average working Adult.
3) Console and PC gamer crossover -- MMO's are designed to be timesinks, which again eat peoples time and give them no need to buy new games.
I'm not proposing a solution of any kind to this state of affairs, I'm just posing the following rhetorical question: if I *have* to maintain an entire separate gaming system to play the games I buy, why not just buy a console and completely avoid the compatibility headaches, additional power and space requirements, extra cost, and so on?
Because ironically enough piracy amortizes the cost of owning a PC. Also with a PC, a lot of your old games play better and look better when you upgrade your PC. Next you can patch and download updates for your game that enhance the game. As much as people complain about patches or buggy games, at least adding enhancements and user content on the PC are possible.
The same cannot be said for console games, they are permanently frozen in time. Next you can Modify PC games and do all sorts of stuff with them on the PC that you cannot do on the console. You can see games revived like "Dead games" through open source. PC games have their own niche in being able to modify the games themselves and have lots of user generated content.
This provides the added benefit of being more survivable, i.e. you can still pick up a working PSOne, Sega Genesis or NEC TurboGrafx on eBay for not that much money. Good luck having such an easy time assembling a working ca. 1992 PC for a game that will only work with EGA, Pro Audio Spectrum 16 sound, and a 1.2MB floppy drive, much less finding the drivers to make all of the obsolete hardware work again.
These points are totally baseless. Emulation on the PC takes care a lot, if not all of these issues. You can play the entire library of the NES, SNES, genesis, Gameboy, Gameboy advance, etc on the PC. Not only that enterprising programmers have made playing some of these games over the net multiplayer possible.
Witness the BnetD fiasco, people wanted an open source battle.net and were shut down by blizzard/vivendi using the DMCA. This is the negative side of capitalism and -exclusively-for-profit game making, lots of amazing projects get killed by the "profit enforcers".
I really think many of the "high brow" moments in games are deep within the games themselves.
I wouldn't say NO highbrow games have been made:
Planescape torment (what changes the nature of a man?)
Also some games while not highbrow certainly get one thinking. Even if they appear cute and stupid on the outside. For instance Tales of Symphonia for the gamecube has a philosophical bits abou war and peace the closer you get to the end of the game. I'm sure other games have 'hidden gems' and hit some important themes that get us to think a bit even if briefly.
"Interesting how the church is given credit for maintaining education and preserving knowledge through the middle ages. And in spite of the Christians burning the Royal Library of Alexandria."
Not all christians can be lumped together, not only that, before modern times the only histories of the world WAS religion, you can't blame humans for the times and ages and lack of knowledge of the age in which they were born.
Next people have motivations beyond their christianity, because one labels one 'christian' simply doesn't mean they are. Religion was often times used by people who didn't believe in it to accomplish their aims (controlling the population). I destruction of knowledge is a tool of nefariou rich people to keep their sheep in line, and crazy people.
It certainly is not commanded anywhere in the christian bible to destroy libraries, in fact such things are sinning, since a christian is not supposed to break the laws of the land as commanded by christ in the new testament. Any true christian would be following those commandments.
Guns don't work in current MMORPG gameplay.
One word: Planet side.
The fact is if you are going to have a sci-fi based MMO, it either has to be about the technology (vehicles, buildings, weapons, etc) and/or about the individuals (soldiers, etc), it seems to me the best way to do a technology based MMO is planet-side, eve seems to be doing ok over-time but it's boring as hell. Earth and beyond IMHO had a lot of potential, but not enough interest apparently. That was one of the sci-fi MMO's I actually liked to some extent, though it did suffer from the boredom factor.
I still think sci-fi MMO has not been done correctly yet, I see a real sci-fi MMO as mixing and merging different gameplay from RTS, FPS, and 3rd person i.e. Descent freespace, Eve-online. It'll probably take a while to materialize though given the constraints of technology currently.
Sci-fi demands some exercise in explanation. Fantasy does not. This means fantasy is easier.
Oh come on! Take a look at star-trek for example, why use phasers when you could just tag and beam the invaders to outer space? Or take guys being shot by phasers, why is it some of them get blown back 6 feet being impacted by a weapon who's discharge is energy and not matter? Watch any sci-fi, there is tonnes of it that makes no sense at all even if there were explanations for them, it would just make the thing seem even more ridiculous. Let's face it entertainment is about a symphony of audio/visual motion of action, character, emotion and storytelling we find interesting. It doesn't have to make sense, all it does is have to capture our minds attention and perhaps our hearts and once in a while cause us to think. Most entertainment is simply mind candy, it tastes sweet but has little value.
Almost all science fiction is just as silly as any fantasy novel. There are completely 'magical' (i.e. supernatural/unexplained) elements in all sci-fi. Personally Sci-fi can be done well, it's just that most people are simply not interested in stories based around modern or futuristic science and technology, unless there is some sort of element the can relate to (i.e. starwars for example).
Celes!
"Cut up the credit cards!"
I do not agree, credit cards are necessary for online purchases and emergencies. They are the only times they should be used. If you dont have the willpower to use credit cards then perhaps cutting them up is a good idea, but the fact is, if you don't have the willpower not to use them to spend. What makes anyone think you'll still have it when you have cash in your pocket instead of a credit card?
It's more ethical than downloading music from the internet without paying for it, which most people here on slashdot seem to think is ok.
Look trying to apply ethics to capitalist markets is a contradiction of terms, in fact you can even argue that beyond a certain profit level, it is UNETHICAL to overcharge or underpay someone. If you really want to get into ethics, ask yourself why you most probably buy items made by people who make crappy wages and live in horrid conditions.
It's stupid to outlaw the will of the people, if people download music for free, there's nothing you can do to stop them. If they want to support artists, they will choose to do so. There is no law written thusly: Because I want to be a horse and buggy driver, rather then buy a car and be a taxi driver, therefore people should want to pay for my slow low value services at the price I am charging.
It's democracy in action -- i.e. the will of the people. If a device came along tomorrow that could replicate or generate matter out of a near infinite source of energy, do you not think many industries would collapse overnight for becoming superfluous? All intellectual property that can be digitized has infinite supply, so some intellectual properties are in fact DANGEROUS to democracy at large simply because it gives businesses and corporations unprecedented economic power to charge money for an IP over and over and over again with a single one time investment, you now have a liscence to print money, decade after decade. In my opinion the internet and modern technology is the balance to near Infinite profit potential of some properties that markets need to balance out.
If I buy music X and make a copy of it, anyone in my family generations down the line should not have to rebuy the liscence to view X, but thats exactly what industry does. VHS, DVD's, Music if we are to take copyright seriously, industry should not be able to make profit again on a liscence you already paid for since by definition it would be unethical to charge someone again for a liscence they already bought.
Since if you are really only buying a liscence to view it, then that liscence should exist for as long as the copyright for the work. So if I buy a liscence to view starwars, my ability to view it again, on any medium into the future should be free for the duration of the copyright.
In modern capitalist markets, making profit is king. No one is doing us any favors when they sell us something. Your boss is not doing you any favors, he's paying you the wage he can get away with for how much supply of the people with the skills you have, he would gladly pay you survival wages if he could. They want to make the most money for the least. Also, any kind of theft or infringment of something that has infinite supply has no consequences other then loss of POTENTIAL profits for the authors/business, etc.
IMHO this is the way socialism/communism can work with goods that have infinite supply and cost nothing to duplicate and do not really put authors out of house and home. The fact is, if the business model isn't working, you either change it or the industry collapses due to market forces (people unwilling to pay for music), a real capitalist would acknowledge the fact that copyright infringement is a sign that the market is inefficient or in fact broken since the items have unlimited supply and near zero cost of replication and distribution.
But I dont ever see the music industry collapsing, do you? So lets save the the "shoulds" and "musts". In the real world you do what you can to survive, and you be ethical towards those that are ethical, and unethical towards those that are unethical. Eye for an eye. Trust is earned. Value of any intellectual property is relative to the person buying it, if I make $15,000 a year, and I think something is not worth $50 and I pirate it, or download it, thats the profit motive in action. If I can get the most for the least, am I going to do it? Yes.
Look at wal-mart, insane profits, yet their workers do not reap the rewards. Would you call that unethical? hmmm. I wonder.
People do something that makes them feel good. They do it often and begin to notice other things don't feel good anymore, then they notice they need to do this new thing more and more to keep the good feeling coming. Just because our brain makes a chemical doesn't mean it won't acquire a tolerance to it.
Some people do not have this tolerance, there are people out there who never get bored with certain depth of repetition.
Boredom is survival function, but in some people it simply does not work in the same way or it is completely broken, or overcome by the chemical stimulation the mind provides. Think about sex for a minute, is there anyone who would truly give it up? I doubt most sane people would.
" If the gameplay makes up for the poor story, then fine, but I'd rather have a good story."
I have to take issue with this, GAMEPLAY is the primary reason most people play games. In fact, the march towards watching games rather then playing them, being in control and interacting is rather disheartening. Halo's story was far from good or original, it was the gameplay, experience and immersion in that world that did it for most people. The only things I remember from halo are master cheif, some aliens who's names I can't remember, and the flood. I remember halo for the fun and experiences I had, I simply do not remember it for the story. Some games are about story (Planescape torment) but most games are about gameplay. Fire emblem wouldn't be the same game without both its gameplay an story, I still think gameplay takes precedence, if a game is no fun when you rip out the story you have a serious problem.
I may be "hardcore" for saying this, but a game like mario, or tetris is pure gameplay, it is the reason gaming took off in the firstplace. Without any kind of control and things for your character to do and interact with, with the avatars abilities, there's little reason to play most games. Take the guns out of Any first person shooter and just walk around, would the gameplay still be the same? I doubt it.
You're the parents, you make the rules. Pull the plug, take the computer away, do something, anything. You'd probably hit the roof if you caught your kid with a joint, but when he wants to wrap himself up in computer games you just fucking sit there and let it happen. That shit pisses me off. I hope this clinic is working with parents too to make sure they can control their child's behavior.
It's not that simple for some parents, some parents are simply never around, that and there are other factors. Many teens/young adults who have addictions have other problems as well, depression, suicidality and other problems at school. You might want to ask WHY someone is binging on gaming, it goes beyond simple addiction, there's reasons why people spend inordinate amounts of time doing drugs, getting drunk, or gaming, or what have you. It's a sign of a deeper problem usually not so easily fixed by simply kicking someone out.
i.e. many children threaten suicide if they are kicked out, what are you to do if you're the parent?
With pictures you need one hand on the mouse to click through the pictures.
Obviously, or you would have known of the slideshow feature that allows you to be hands free!Not that I know.
And here I thought it was 15 turns 105 silly me!
I think the real problem is that too many people accept information without being critical about it.
I think the real problem is simply there is not enough time to be critical about everything you read, there is simply too much information and human beings do not possess enough brain processing power to be able to assess critically everything one reads and still have time to perform the functions of daily living. It would simply take too much time for many people who have other things to do within their own lives.
"I always found it curious that such a smart man could also have such a lousy private life."
Being smart does not have much to do with ones ability to handle relationships, "smart" or "intelligence" is not a global capacity that applies to all domains of functioning.
There are many people who think he most likely had aspergers syndrome.
"Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem is one of the best games for the Gamecube, putting it squarely among the top games of this ending generation."
While I agree Eternal darkness was good, it certainly wasn't anything revolutionary. Many surival horror games before it were just as good as ED. Take RE4 for instance, a game that just oozes amazingness.
Eternal darkness for me, while it was good, lacked in some instances in overall experience. Not to mention the sales were not exactly mindboggling if my mind serves me correctly.
I will admit though that ED's ending and bosses felt like creative oldschool video games, which was a good thing. Too many modern video games feel less and less creative.
Yeah and I wasn't talking about warren only, emphasis mine.