I agree. It's a good job, and a noble one, and one that gives great job satisfaction and security. So it really irks me when I see the local schoolteachers on strike for more money, again, just like last year and the year before and so on. Teachers are always crying poverty, but they have it pretty good. They should stop crying poverty and admit that they are enjoying their dream job and are more than fairly compensated for it.
What I said about the link between cell phones and Star Trek is pretty well common knowledge for the past decade. That you are arguing so much to the contrary is pretty silly. Why don't you google it if you won't take my word for it?
Just like how people's love of Star Trek led geeky engineers to develop the real cell phones we have today, some researchers must be working on development of a real zombie virus to use as a military weapon. We've seen this theme in movies several times. If it's at all possible, it will happen sooner or later.
I would like to have one of these devices, but not until they stop charging such ridiculous prices. E-book readers will never go mainstream until they cost less than $50. Eventually they should just give these things away.
I think he's trying to show that you don't have to feel bad for not working in your off-hours, as many people seem to think they should, and also speaking out against companies that encourage and possibly mandate this odd behavior through their hiring practices.
It seems to me that the problem then is built-in. Instead of dividing up the load among individual computers, it should be spread evenly across a vast network of processors. That way you wouldn't need to divide the world into zones, and even if everyone in-game all gathered in the same place it would have no effect, because it's still processing the same number of players in the world regardless of individual locations.
You don't get it. They could have 10 commercials for $1 each, or 2 commercials for $5 each (scale up accordingly). We don't need more commercials, just higher advert rates.
Yes, we've all heard that argument before. Minute for minute versus a movie ticket. It doesn't matter. $60 is still too much for them to continue charging as they lower costs through direct downloads and other means. Yes, it costs a lot to produce the original, but then you see, they make virtually limitless copies of that original for pennies each. They could sell these games for $20 and still reap huge profits.
But you see they didn't do good enough because those zombies aren't really zombies, they are humans who are still alive but infected. Had valve actually gone all the way and made them real zombies, they probably wouldn't have this legal censorship issue to deal with now.
The concept of Dead Space had me very much looking forward to playing it. Once I did though, I had a very hard time continuing for any amount of time because some idiot put the camera behind the main character's back, so roughly 1/3 of the screen is me staring at someone's back and trying to see around him because, you know, I'm leading this expedition. Let me get up front please. Anyway, with the obstructed view and bad control scheme (not fully remappable) I wasn't able to play it any more past the first level, though I would have liked to see how it ended, I could not stand playing it another minute. Then recently I was looking forward to playing the ghostbusters game and found out it has the exact same perspective. "you can always see if your proton pack is overheating by looking at the glowing gauge on your back." Because you know, looking at a guage on the back of your backpack is so easy with the eyes that sprout from the back of your head. I wrangled one ghost in the basement and that was more than enough for me. I uninstalled it and hope someday someone does a better job with a remake or something. I have little tolerance for bad game design. 3rd person is okay when done right. All of the Grand Theft Auto games for example get it perfectly right. Mercinaries 2, and most recently 'Prototype' (excellent game btw) do 3rd person well. Dead Space, Ghostbusters, Gears of War... do 3rd person terribly.
Directly to the topic...a bad choice in graphics style can ruin a game just as easily as bad graphics, bad gameplay, or bad story. The graphics on the bad games I mentioned were really good, but the way those graphics were implemented actually ruined my enjoyment of the game.
That's all. Just as much work goes into an xbox game, and you probably get much more enjoyment from the game. Windows is and has always been too expensive for people not to pirate.
Okay then this will blow your mind... We could also power the entire planet using nothing but solar power! 100%! Better still, that's only scratching the surface of whats possible with solar energy. We can fully power any number of space colonies, moonbases, spacewheel hubs etc, ALL FROM THE SUN! 100% Even more mind blowing is that we've had the tech to do this for decades and we don't care enough to do it because nobody can figure out how to make ongoing profits from it!
If they could fire all these cinematic guys, the money spent on them could be better spent on game designers and programmers. We'd get better games and the cinematic guys can go get jobs in hollywood like they should have done to start. I play video games for good gameplay, and go to the movies for good cinematics. They actually don't mix very well as one is completely passive and the other an active activity.
Previous post is FLAMEBAIT. Metamoderation needed.
People loved this show because it was a great show, and was unexpectedly highbrow when people expected more explosions. Most people who say it sucked never saw it, or only saw an episode or two. Some moron said he refused to watch it because the actress who played Sarah Connor was pretty. I bet he would say the show sucked also. Was that you?
I agree about Questron. At the time it was the most satisfying game ending I'd ever seen, and still ranks up there with some of the best. But as a general rule I don't like cutscenes mixed into my games, and the latest fad of gamestopping quicktime events is truly obnoxious.
It sounds like the last time you played a game was in 1994, because I haven't seen anything like that since making the big switch to Windows 95. I don't think video game articles are for you, and you don't RTFA anyway, so why bother?
Seriously, I see articles about 'bendable displays' about once per week for the past couple years, as if people were desperate to get their hands on this technology. For what purpose really? We're never going to have moving pictures on newspapers unless you want to pay $100 or more for a paper, and that's never going to happen. What sort of mass hysteria is going on here were companies think we're all desperate for them to invent bendable displays? Does anyone really want to use one? Does anyone really have any practical use for this technology sinkhole?
What if you could send it to a 3rd party to get it working again, like one of those data-recovery specialists? What if it costs $800 to do that? Is it considered bricked then because it's 'totaled' like a car? See it's a slippery slope that easily avoided by simply accepting the current accepted meaning of something being bricked. It's not working right now. It's not good for anything but a paperweight. It's like a brick. It's bricked. Get it fixed tomorrow and it's un-bricked. See that's easy. If you want to talk about something being broken beyond repair, I'm sure there's some other word for that.
I was in the Auto Assault beta test. It was a fun game but it's problems were many, starting with the beta system itself. They only had the servers up for a few hours at a time, a couple days a week. Something like 6pm-11pm on tuesdays and thursdays. I had a hard time matching my schedule with theirs, so didn't get to play much. When I did I was frustrated by way the game handled vehicle upgrades. Killing things in the field caused many many items to drop and almost all of them were useless, either outright useless, or useless because it's something that too high level or too low level for my car. Even if I found something that was in my level range and would fit on my car, I couldn't install it without having high levels of crafter skill. So I spent a good deal of the little time I was in there sorting through useless crap in my inventory and selling it to a junk vendor. I also didn't like the disconnect between player characters and cars. You were either outside playing a car, or inside a walled no-combat possible city playing a buffed out avatar wandering around looking for quest NPCs with exclamation points over their heads. There was also no good reason to group up with other players. Still, once you got out in the wasteland with your vehicle it was fun to explore and shoot things. They got that part right pretty much. It was everything else that was wrong.
By brand new drivers, do you mean the beta drivers? Just curious because a lot of people do that and don't get why they don't work 100%. They're beta, that's why. Still being tested to iron out the bugs.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. It's a good job, and a noble one, and one that gives great job satisfaction and security. So it really irks me when I see the local schoolteachers on strike for more money, again, just like last year and the year before and so on. Teachers are always crying poverty, but they have it pretty good. They should stop crying poverty and admit that they are enjoying their dream job and are more than fairly compensated for it.
Not really funny at all, since it's all BS.
What I said about the link between cell phones and Star Trek is pretty well common knowledge for the past decade. That you are arguing so much to the contrary is pretty silly. Why don't you google it if you won't take my word for it?
Just like how people's love of Star Trek led geeky engineers to develop the real cell phones we have today, some researchers must be working on development of a real zombie virus to use as a military weapon. We've seen this theme in movies several times. If it's at all possible, it will happen sooner or later.
I would like to have one of these devices, but not until they stop charging such ridiculous prices. E-book readers will never go mainstream until they cost less than $50. Eventually they should just give these things away.
I think he's trying to show that you don't have to feel bad for not working in your off-hours, as many people seem to think they should, and also speaking out against companies that encourage and possibly mandate this odd behavior through their hiring practices.
It seems to me that the problem then is built-in. Instead of dividing up the load among individual computers, it should be spread evenly across a vast network of processors. That way you wouldn't need to divide the world into zones, and even if everyone in-game all gathered in the same place it would have no effect, because it's still processing the same number of players in the world regardless of individual locations.
You don't get it. They could have 10 commercials for $1 each, or 2 commercials for $5 each (scale up accordingly). We don't need more commercials, just higher advert rates.
Yes, we've all heard that argument before. Minute for minute versus a movie ticket. It doesn't matter. $60 is still too much for them to continue charging as they lower costs through direct downloads and other means. Yes, it costs a lot to produce the original, but then you see, they make virtually limitless copies of that original for pennies each. They could sell these games for $20 and still reap huge profits.
But you see they didn't do good enough because those zombies aren't really zombies, they are humans who are still alive but infected. Had valve actually gone all the way and made them real zombies, they probably wouldn't have this legal censorship issue to deal with now.
I liked this game a lot. One of the first real 3d games.
The concept of Dead Space had me very much looking forward to playing it. Once I did though, I had a very hard time continuing for any amount of time because some idiot put the camera behind the main character's back, so roughly 1/3 of the screen is me staring at someone's back and trying to see around him because, you know, I'm leading this expedition. Let me get up front please. Anyway, with the obstructed view and bad control scheme (not fully remappable) I wasn't able to play it any more past the first level, though I would have liked to see how it ended, I could not stand playing it another minute. Then recently I was looking forward to playing the ghostbusters game and found out it has the exact same perspective. "you can always see if your proton pack is overheating by looking at the glowing gauge on your back." Because you know, looking at a guage on the back of your backpack is so easy with the eyes that sprout from the back of your head. I wrangled one ghost in the basement and that was more than enough for me. I uninstalled it and hope someday someone does a better job with a remake or something. I have little tolerance for bad game design. 3rd person is okay when done right. All of the Grand Theft Auto games for example get it perfectly right. Mercinaries 2, and most recently 'Prototype' (excellent game btw) do 3rd person well. Dead Space, Ghostbusters, Gears of War... do 3rd person terribly. Directly to the topic...a bad choice in graphics style can ruin a game just as easily as bad graphics, bad gameplay, or bad story. The graphics on the bad games I mentioned were really good, but the way those graphics were implemented actually ruined my enjoyment of the game.
That's all. Just as much work goes into an xbox game, and you probably get much more enjoyment from the game. Windows is and has always been too expensive for people not to pirate.
Okay then this will blow your mind... We could also power the entire planet using nothing but solar power! 100%! Better still, that's only scratching the surface of whats possible with solar energy. We can fully power any number of space colonies, moonbases, spacewheel hubs etc, ALL FROM THE SUN! 100% Even more mind blowing is that we've had the tech to do this for decades and we don't care enough to do it because nobody can figure out how to make ongoing profits from it!
If they could fire all these cinematic guys, the money spent on them could be better spent on game designers and programmers. We'd get better games and the cinematic guys can go get jobs in hollywood like they should have done to start. I play video games for good gameplay, and go to the movies for good cinematics. They actually don't mix very well as one is completely passive and the other an active activity.
Previous post is FLAMEBAIT. Metamoderation needed. People loved this show because it was a great show, and was unexpectedly highbrow when people expected more explosions. Most people who say it sucked never saw it, or only saw an episode or two. Some moron said he refused to watch it because the actress who played Sarah Connor was pretty. I bet he would say the show sucked also. Was that you?
I agree about Questron. At the time it was the most satisfying game ending I'd ever seen, and still ranks up there with some of the best. But as a general rule I don't like cutscenes mixed into my games, and the latest fad of gamestopping quicktime events is truly obnoxious.
It sounds like the last time you played a game was in 1994, because I haven't seen anything like that since making the big switch to Windows 95. I don't think video game articles are for you, and you don't RTFA anyway, so why bother?
Best off-topic post I've seen today.
If portability was really the problem, shouldn't we be looking at micro projectors instead, or even better, imax glasses?
Seriously, I see articles about 'bendable displays' about once per week for the past couple years, as if people were desperate to get their hands on this technology. For what purpose really? We're never going to have moving pictures on newspapers unless you want to pay $100 or more for a paper, and that's never going to happen. What sort of mass hysteria is going on here were companies think we're all desperate for them to invent bendable displays? Does anyone really want to use one? Does anyone really have any practical use for this technology sinkhole?
That's on cable, not broadcast TV.
What if you could send it to a 3rd party to get it working again, like one of those data-recovery specialists? What if it costs $800 to do that? Is it considered bricked then because it's 'totaled' like a car? See it's a slippery slope that easily avoided by simply accepting the current accepted meaning of something being bricked. It's not working right now. It's not good for anything but a paperweight. It's like a brick. It's bricked. Get it fixed tomorrow and it's un-bricked. See that's easy. If you want to talk about something being broken beyond repair, I'm sure there's some other word for that.
I was in the Auto Assault beta test. It was a fun game but it's problems were many, starting with the beta system itself. They only had the servers up for a few hours at a time, a couple days a week. Something like 6pm-11pm on tuesdays and thursdays. I had a hard time matching my schedule with theirs, so didn't get to play much. When I did I was frustrated by way the game handled vehicle upgrades. Killing things in the field caused many many items to drop and almost all of them were useless, either outright useless, or useless because it's something that too high level or too low level for my car. Even if I found something that was in my level range and would fit on my car, I couldn't install it without having high levels of crafter skill. So I spent a good deal of the little time I was in there sorting through useless crap in my inventory and selling it to a junk vendor. I also didn't like the disconnect between player characters and cars. You were either outside playing a car, or inside a walled no-combat possible city playing a buffed out avatar wandering around looking for quest NPCs with exclamation points over their heads. There was also no good reason to group up with other players. Still, once you got out in the wasteland with your vehicle it was fun to explore and shoot things. They got that part right pretty much. It was everything else that was wrong.
By brand new drivers, do you mean the beta drivers? Just curious because a lot of people do that and don't get why they don't work 100%. They're beta, that's why. Still being tested to iron out the bugs.