"Besides, one person's "optimum" is another's "not"—maybe I need more accuracy with my assault rifle, where you need better cooling."
We're talking console tards here, they would not do this - the inventory manangement criticism came from
1) artifical 150 item limit 2) No "reduce all selected items in this list to omnigel"
fuck windows explorer and ancient file managers had a better UI (allowing multi selection) then ME1. It's just that developers skimp or hire guys that just blow chunks thats the real issue. When a game from 1992 can run rings around a game in 2007+ that is a tragedy.
No I'm not confused at all, the point was the item system was badly designed, why have an arbitrary 150 item limit AT ALL on 360 or PC? It makes no sense what-so-ever.
The diablo stash was mentioned just BECAUSE they could have had a place on your the normandy to store everything you found, there's really no excuse why you shouldn't have near infinite inventory. It's a friggin game for christ sakes, putting a limit on the inveotry was just idiotic poorly copied relic of whoever programmed it.
Everyone complained about inventory management in ME1, but notice ME1 never had "Select all and reduce to omni gel" button that's all it frigg'n needed half the time, and also an "optimum equip" button, which has been around since pre final fantasy 4 for fuck sakes, the developers are just lazy/incompetent bastards - this is the truth.
Mass effect 1 had horrible inventory management on the PC (i.e. still had the 150 item limit, when it should have had effectively infinite) A small adjustment to the amount of items you could carry would have fixed that, oh and a stash/chest ala Diablo 2 (a 10 year old game almost now I think) could have at least gone a long way to prevent inventory hell.
Let's not also forget the convoluted shop interfaces when compared even against console many supremely old RPG's (we're talking 20 years here). It's sad when a game from 1992 (FF4) has better inventory then a game in 2007'ish (mass effect 1).
ME2 did also suffer from console-itis by REMOVING instead of fixing the item system from mass effect 1, they turned ME2 into gears of war now in teh mass effect universe, lets face this fact please.
It was so obvious the game was gears of war reskinned/w slight modifications. There ar etonnes of issues with ports, Mass effect 2 made up for their lack of deeper game options with a comitment to story, cinematics and simple shooter action because they weren't up to the job of a full RPG, and they wanted to hit the mass market of drooling first person/third person shooter fanboys.
Don't forget requiring games for windows live and that weird savegame shit, that was just more of a sign of epic treating it's customers like criminals.
"but there was a certain charm that just isn't present on today's Internet.::sigh::"
The charm came from the fact that nerds mostly populated the early web since most people were not savvy enough to use the internet beyond it's most basic level for email, chat and games.
I think the really important thing glossed over is that MOST people can't really fully grasp the reality of complex topics for which they have no direct background in the field. Even educated people that like technology often time's have naive and magical views because they have no firsthand experience with the complexities, costs and downsides. Especially with regards to the limits of technology and the complexity involved.
With all due respect to Ray kurzweil... most people underestimate how difficult many problems in science and technology are. Like Kurzweil's forcast of life extension tech/immortality and things like artificial intelligence are likely at least 80-100 years away at best, since no one ever really talks about the _COST_. Think of how long it takes to make certain software projects _today_ in say like the game/software industry (4-6 years for some game designs like Total war)
For example - we've had the ability to go into space for a long time but the COSTS associated with such are prohibitive.
No you just like slower paced passive entertainment, in which you are not required to partake in the action or engage the world beyond a minimum.
I'm sure you love the adventure genre, I can take adventure games in moderate doses. But as a gamer I play games for the interactivity. Games can tell stories but they can't be a passive experience, but I don't play a game for the story. Mass effect 2 would not be the same experience without the action sequences and that was a game with a decent story in it. My point is a game will suffer enormously if the game spends too much emphasis on passive interactivity moving from cut-scene to cut-scene. The thing that separates games from movies is your *participation* if you want a story to be told movies or adventure games are up your ally. Why you'd want to experience stories through games in a passive manner when you can experience the same thing in other mediums is what I'd ask you.
... I don't believe there is such a thing. I've seen grown men in their 40's+ rushing out to get the latest Call of duty or Mass effect 2. Games are NOT movies this call for emotionalism or "emotional depth" in a game is nonsense. What does final fantasy's story have anything to do with being a grown up? It's probably one of the most graphics heavy and story laden game series and yet their stories have nothing in common with anything one might consider "grown up".
I don't play games for emotional storytelling, I can get that in movies. I play games to be a participant in the world, kill stuff, shoot stuff, solve puzzles and indulge my imagination. I want games to be FUN, what does a plumber stomping on a bunch of mushroom people have anything to do with being grown up? Yet many millions of grown ups certainly enjoyed playing mario, I can vouch for the fact that my own mother got into playing mario kart series from 64 onwards.
"Cheating is a social problem, not a technical problem."
I always wondered why they didn't do a statistical analysis of human input by looking and comparing demos. Maybe uploading demos to a central server for analysis would be a good thing, then you can ban the cheaters accounts.
The problem is too much babying kids instead of expecting more maturity and treating them that way earlier in their lives. In earlier times you could be married by 13. There are kids that old today fighting wars.
I think the best search engine is the one that can tailor it's algorithms to the specific users tastes. I'm certain that custom-algorithms would be the way to go for instance.
When some people search for stuff they usually have a good idea and class of information they are looking for. Either way it would be an interesting project/
In my opinion they deserve it, with places always trying to sell you "extended warranties" and computer companies not telling the truth about their computer parts real warranties. Why should they expect anything less from their customers?
"Choose freedom first and interested parties will take care of attributes like security, ease-of-use, and compatibility over time."
I think another problem is that more eyes on a project means that you can come up with alternative designs. It's one thing to track bugs through statistics and process, it's quite another to see that the design itself is the problem.
He meant to be able to film it from varying camera angles in the real world, I'm sure he already has scenes in mind from the books that would be impossible to shoot in real life.
One is truth the other is outright lies. Guess which one does not belong in a schoolbook?
FTFY
Religion has so many logical fallacies in it, lets stop pretending to defend the indefensible, religious people are for all intents and purposes would be legally considered crazy if it was not for the fact that historically humanity has been crazy in large numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
"Besides, one person's "optimum" is another's "not"—maybe I need more accuracy with my assault rifle, where you need better cooling."
We're talking console tards here, they would not do this - the inventory manangement criticism came from
1) artifical 150 item limit
2) No "reduce all selected items in this list to omnigel"
fuck windows explorer and ancient file managers had a better UI (allowing multi selection) then ME1. It's just that developers skimp or hire guys that just blow chunks thats the real issue. When a game from 1992 can run rings around a game in 2007+ that is a tragedy.
No I'm not confused at all, the point was the item system was badly designed, why have an arbitrary 150 item limit AT ALL on 360 or PC? It makes no sense what-so-ever.
The diablo stash was mentioned just BECAUSE they could have had a place on your the normandy to store everything you found, there's really no excuse why you shouldn't have near infinite inventory. It's a friggin game for christ sakes, putting a limit on the inveotry was just idiotic poorly copied relic of whoever programmed it.
Everyone complained about inventory management in ME1, but notice ME1 never had "Select all and reduce to omni gel" button that's all it frigg'n needed half the time, and also an "optimum equip" button, which has been around since pre final fantasy 4 for fuck sakes, the developers are just lazy/incompetent bastards - this is the truth.
Wrong.
Mass effect 1 had horrible inventory management on the PC (i.e. still had the 150 item limit, when it should have had effectively infinite) A small adjustment to the amount of items you could carry would have fixed that, oh and a stash/chest ala Diablo 2 (a 10 year old game almost now I think) could have at least gone a long way to prevent inventory hell.
Let's not also forget the convoluted shop interfaces when compared even against console many supremely old RPG's (we're talking 20 years here). It's sad when a game from 1992 (FF4) has better inventory then a game in 2007'ish (mass effect 1).
ME2 did also suffer from console-itis by REMOVING instead of fixing the item system from mass effect 1, they turned ME2 into gears of war now in teh mass effect universe, lets face this fact please.
It was so obvious the game was gears of war reskinned /w slight modifications. There ar etonnes of issues with ports, Mass effect 2 made up for their lack of deeper game options with a comitment to story, cinematics and simple shooter action because they weren't up to the job of a full RPG, and they wanted to hit the mass market of drooling first person/third person shooter fanboys.
Don't forget requiring games for windows live and that weird savegame shit, that was just more of a sign of epic treating it's customers like criminals.
... do we really need "space ethics", "when the planets people are fucked?" (paraphrased)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
"but there was a certain charm that just isn't present on today's Internet. ::sigh::"
The charm came from the fact that nerds mostly populated the early web since most people were not savvy enough to use the internet beyond it's most basic level for email, chat and games.
"This is surprising?"
I think the really important thing glossed over is that MOST people can't really fully grasp the reality of complex topics for which they have no direct background in the field. Even educated people that like technology often time's have naive and magical views because they have no firsthand experience with the complexities, costs and downsides. Especially with regards to the limits of technology and the complexity involved.
With all due respect to Ray kurzweil... most people underestimate how difficult many problems in science and technology are. Like Kurzweil's forcast of life extension tech/immortality and things like artificial intelligence are likely at least 80-100 years away at best, since no one ever really talks about the _COST_. Think of how long it takes to make certain software projects _today_ in say like the game/software industry (4-6 years for some game designs like Total war)
For example - we've had the ability to go into space for a long time but the COSTS associated with such are prohibitive.
I'm waiting to see sales, while people might SAY the y want "adult" games, the true test is - is the paying market big enough to support such games?
"Games don't have to lack a story to be fun."
But no amount of story can really make up for a bad game, that's the problem.
"You and I must be exact opposites."
No you just like slower paced passive entertainment, in which you are not required to partake in the action or engage the world beyond a minimum.
I'm sure you love the adventure genre, I can take adventure games in moderate doses. But as a gamer I play games for the interactivity. Games can tell stories but they can't be a passive experience, but I don't play a game for the story. Mass effect 2 would not be the same experience without the action sequences and that was a game with a decent story in it. My point is a game will suffer enormously if the game spends too much emphasis on passive interactivity moving from cut-scene to cut-scene. The thing that separates games from movies is your *participation* if you want a story to be told movies or adventure games are up your ally. Why you'd want to experience stories through games in a passive manner when you can experience the same thing in other mediums is what I'd ask you.
... I don't believe there is such a thing. I've seen grown men in their 40's+ rushing out to get the latest Call of duty or Mass effect 2. Games are NOT movies this call for emotionalism or "emotional depth" in a game is nonsense. What does final fantasy's story have anything to do with being a grown up? It's probably one of the most graphics heavy and story laden game series and yet their stories have nothing in common with anything one might consider "grown up".
I don't play games for emotional storytelling, I can get that in movies. I play games to be a participant in the world, kill stuff, shoot stuff, solve puzzles and indulge my imagination. I want games to be FUN, what does a plumber stomping on a bunch of mushroom people have anything to do with being grown up? Yet many millions of grown ups certainly enjoyed playing mario, I can vouch for the fact that my own mother got into playing mario kart series from 64 onwards.
"Cheating is a social problem, not a technical problem."
I always wondered why they didn't do a statistical analysis of human input by looking and comparing demos. Maybe uploading demos to a central server for analysis would be a good thing, then you can ban the cheaters accounts.
For some reason Sci-fi 4x games don't sell as well.
The problem is too much babying kids instead of expecting more maturity and treating them that way earlier in their lives. In earlier times you could be married by 13. There are kids that old today fighting wars.
I think the best search engine is the one that can tailor it's algorithms to the specific users tastes. I'm certain that custom-algorithms would be the way to go for instance.
When some people search for stuff they usually have a good idea and class of information they are looking for. Either way it would be an interesting project/
In my opinion they deserve it, with places always trying to sell you "extended warranties" and computer companies not telling the truth about their computer parts real warranties. Why should they expect anything less from their customers?
"Choose freedom first and interested parties will take care of attributes like security, ease-of-use, and compatibility over time."
I think another problem is that more eyes on a project means that you can come up with alternative designs. It's one thing to track bugs through statistics and process, it's quite another to see that the design itself is the problem.
... the reason flash became so popular was because there was nothing better.
I think anyone who thinks HTML5 video is going to displace flash has to look to how MP3 was not displaced by better formats like AAC, OGG, etc, etc.
If you buy enough drives you'll eventually come across failures.
I did the same thing, the early years of western digital were quite awful. The heat typical WD drives put out were a big contributor to their failure.
So far my record of drive failure is 2 seagate within 5 years, vs 7+ western digital in 5 years.
"What Californians are pissed about is that we also have some of the highest taxes in the nation, and we have no idea where that money is all going."
That's because Californians and Californian companies are some of the greediest mofo's on the planet.
"if you're so smart, why not reason with them and fight the good fight "
Because reasoning doesn't work, there's abundant neuroscience data to back this up by the way.
He meant to be able to film it from varying camera angles in the real world, I'm sure he already has scenes in mind from the books that would be impossible to shoot in real life.
Let is remember also that information is non-rivalrous, thank god no one can copyright all frequencies of sound, light, etc.
Everything in the end is just remixed bits of the natural world which no one created.
... predator drones for mosquitoes! We must bring the war to the scourge of humanity.
One is truth the other is outright lies. Guess which one does not belong in a schoolbook?
FTFY
Religion has so many logical fallacies in it, lets stop pretending to defend the indefensible, religious people are for all intents and purposes would be legally considered crazy if it was not for the fact that historically humanity has been crazy in large numbers.