While the sole criteria for the MTV Movie Awards is entertainment & marketing hype (most certainly not content), I honestly think this award is something NOBODY cares about. Does anyone remember the train wreck that was the SpikeTV Video Game Awards? With categories like: Most addictive game fueled by Dew" presented by Virgin Mobile and Moutain Dew.
Yeah, nobody cared about that show either...
I don't think it's a revelation to point out that this "award" is simply an advertisement hitting MTV's target demographic of 15 - 25; however, I'm simply wondering who is paying to have this award included in the show? My money is on Microsoft, but I could be wrong...
Let's face it, this kind of marketing is not meant to address the sort of gamers who read/. and Penny Arcade. This is crap meant to get into the face of the masses so EA can ship more copies of their latest re-hashed piece of crap.
Congrats, you levelled up, you're allowed a bigger stick and... you get bigger rats to beat with it. In fact, you _have_ to go for bigger rats to have any chance to level up again.
Let's take this vapid generalization and apply it to other multiplayer games in different genres, shall we?
Counter-Strike: Take a player who started playing the game on public servers designated as "amateur" (low level) with admins who kept very skilled players (high level) off the server so the amateur players could frag each other and learn how to play the game without CAL players arriving on the server every once in a while to dominate the game.
Eventually, this player is going to get better (level up) and in order to have fun and become more skilled (level up further) they're going to need to find rats (whoops, I mean players) who are more skilled than they are (higher level MOBs).
Yes, Counter-Strike is based upon skill (or OMG HAX! depending on your perspective); however, as an avid player of CS and WoW, I see little difference between playing de_dust and running MC one more time. You know the map, you know the angles, and you pretty much know how the enemy is going to behave.
Dawn Of War: There is little I can do to differentiate the experence between playing an RTS and a FPS. The maps are continually the same, the strategies are continually the same.
Most interestingly in RTSes, is that the whole bigger sticks, bigger rats theory that can be applied. After all, what is the point of teching (leveling?) up? To deal more damage against your opponent (better armor / better sword / bow / dagger, etc.). All the while, your enemy is attempting to do the same thing, so, in the end, you end up using your bigger stick to fight their bigger rats.
So, in both cases (Counter-Strike and Dawn of War), you're still doing the same thing, and it still didn't get any easier (that sounded familiar, didn't it?).
What was the point of that exercise? Did it at least bring you another piece of the story or anything? Well, no, because there was no story to start with. Did you make any real difference in that world? Well, no, because all those rats must respawn for the next in line.
Granted, MMORPGs are not known for their stories; however, if I wanted a very good story, I would probably read a book or go to a movie.
Interestingly enough, in CS and DoW, you didn't make any REAL difference in the world either. Everything resets and it's, well, off to the rat races again.
I suppose I will come off in this post as a MMORPG fan boy; however, I suppose I have a bone to pick with people who constantly slam the genre for having "nothing to do". When you start breaking games down into their most basic forms, I suggest that they all look the same...
...but we do not play these games because of basic concepts. If this were the case, we would simply enjoy just pointing and clicking things on our desktop.
Just to be picky:
So the point of all those mind-numbing hours of clicking on some variant of "attack rat" solved... what? All that work was to actually _restrict_ your social interaction?
Do you know how much easier it is to find people to run high level instances than it is to find some random person to help you do low level quests? I honestly do not think you do, as your dislike for MMORPGs is evident in your post, and therefore, I can assume that you do not even play one.
...to see how this will affect Horde / Alliance relations.
I play on Sargeras, which is a PvP server. Considering that it is a PvP server, there are a lot of clashes between the Horde and Alliance. Raids are constantly led against Horde and Alliance towns alike and in contested areas, "ganking" is a popular activity.
Though the interesting thing to note is when Alliance and Horde play nice. In certain areas, Horde and Alliance co-exist (to a reasonable degree) as they are BOTH attempting to complete quests.
For example, I was in Felwood last night working on a quest and a couple of Horde were right next to me killing MOBs and we pretty much go into a rhythm were I would kill one, then they would kill one, so on and so forth. At the end, we completed our objective (fill the vial with corrupted water), saluted each other, and went on our merry way.
In this example, we played nice with each, because it was mutually beneficial for us to do so, after all, we both needed to complete the quest......however, with the new patch, it will be just as beneficial, if not MORE for us to simply kill each other, as that will give us honor points which will eventually translate in p|-|47 l00t.
While the honor system MIGHT curb the rampant "problem" that is ganking (I don't see it as a problem, it's a pvp server, I deal with it) I think it will definitely escalate the desire for Horde and Alliance to kill each other, and make it more difficult to complete quests in contested areas.
According to TFA, the main task of JFCCNW is to bring down websites that don't portray America in good light.
Actually, that's your paranoid, Orwellian interpretation of the article. Here is some actual text from TFA:
(Regarding the public execution of Nick Berg)
"The debate focused on whether the United States should shut down a website as soon as it posts such brutality.
"There are some tremendous questions being raised about this," said Dietz. "On whether they (JFCCNW) have the legal mandate or the authority to shut these sites down with a defacement or a denial-of-service attack."
So, it sounds like this is an issue that is being treated with some sensitivity; however, you would rather portray the group as a censorship brute squad.
In terms of social acceptance, I think representing Paris Hilton as popular and the 300 lb. guy on the train as an outcast is a fallacy. After all, celebrity status is simply a result of marketing. The throngs of proles who worship these people are doing so simply because of their status. They have no actual connection to these people, other than the marketed status that they have wholly swallowed.
As a result, their "popularity" is somewhat false. People care about the CELEBRITY, not the person. I would also like to note that it is attitudes such as your own, that perpetuate this status.
In addition, popularity is a relative condition. After all, that 300 lb. man on the train could be the leader of a successful gaming group or a coven of wiccans. If this were the case, he could certainly be labeled "popular"; however, we automatically assume he's not, because he's overweight and plays a PSP on the train.
I think it's silly to make "celebrity" comparisons like Linus Torvalds vs. Lebron James. After all, one is a BUSINESSMAN whereas the other is an ENTERTAINER.
I agree with you on your point regarding people are going to hang out with who they are comfortable with; however, from the way you are speaking in regards to popular people vs. outcasts, I am lead to believe that you are still in high school.
I understand that there are people who are well known in a "scene" (Gabe & Tycho?); however, does anyone really believe in the whole "popular vs. unpopular" struggle post high-school? When I went to college, sure there were people who were well known; however, I did not see the sort of bullshit that went on in high school. No one was getting crammed into lockers or pantsed. I found everyone to be rather tolerant of everyone else, no matter what their scene was.
As an adult, I find that pretty much to be true. Most people are polite to each other and tolerant of what everyone else does. Yes, there are those people who are complete assholes, but, I can't think of anything that doesn't have its fair share of assholes.
I don't understand why it is such a revelation that people play video games. Honestly, I don't think this is earth-shattering news.
Growing up, my father was a heavy proponent of the "get your ass outside, play sports, and break a limb" philosophy. As a result I am a very athletic. I go to the gym regularly and I play basketball / softball in leagues.
However, my father also enjoyed taking me to arcades. He too, liked picking up the occasional video game. We played Parsec and Blast-o on our Texas Instruments game console. As a result, I am involved in a gaming group and I play CS:Source and World of Warcraft.
My father comes over my place frequently and we watch sports together. One day, I fired up the PS2 and showed him Madden 2005. He could not believe how far video games have progressed and what is capable now with the technology that is out there. He certainly wasn't any good at the game, but we had FUN playing the game together....isn't that what it's all about? Having fun?
Why do gamers hate the activity they love? Why, in the article, did we feel the need to stereotype a gamer as the "300 lb. man sitting on the train". You know folks, there are gamers out there who are probably MORE attractive than Paris Hilton....oh yeah, I forgot, attractive female gamers are a myth. My bad.
I understand there are people who sit in front of their computers and play EQ / WoW all day. Hell, I have a friend who is five years out of college, doesn't have a job, but has plenty of time to beat Ocarina of Time for the nth time.
Why are these people (along with the 300lb. man) the community-appointed representatives of the hobby we adore?
I imagine that sometime in the (near?) future, athletes using steroids will have been considered the cavemen of artifical performance enhancing measures.
Imagine nano-tech that will be able to act as red-blood cells, fueling muscles with oxygen in order to perform better. Or, on a a more basic level, able to replenish the body with nutrients in order to keep an athlete's biochemistry in check so they can perform at an inhuman level.
Granted, this sort of scenario is down a distant road; however, with labs already asking questions about GENE doping, it's not completely proposterous to start addressing these specific situations in order stop the abuses before they start.
Many MMOs are slowly addressing the issue of selling in-game items for real money. There are companies that have set up shop in countries with poor economies and hire people to play MMOs all day in order to "farm" items and sell them through online retailers (E-Bay, IGN, etc.). In addition, individual players engage in these practices as well.
There are some who argue that these practices completely defile the "in-game economy" and attempt to apply real-world economic concepts in order to prove their point. People have made strong arguments, pro and con, regarding selling in-game items. Honestly, I think that issue is neither here nor there concerning this particular event; however, I felt I needed to mention the issue in order to preface my points.
If this event proves anything, it is that these in-game items have worth and are valuable to people. So, like any personal property, I think that people should be able to sell them to other people and make some money, as long as it is allowed "in the rules". Square / Enix (Final Fantasy XI) and Blizzard (World of Warcraft) have taken a staunch (*snicker*) posture on this behavior, banning many players from their games; however, they have EXPLICITLY told players (through announcements and EULAs) that such behavior will get them banned.
The bottom line: This is not about videogames and violence. This about theft of personal property.
I'm sure people will laugh and say: "What a fucking loser, he killed somebody over a videogame. It's JUST a videogame". The fact is, people kill for material posessions all the time (money, cars, drugs, and sneakers).
I don't think this instance is any different; however, I'm sure this will turn into a whole: "Videogames are teaching people that killing other people is a trivial thing, vidoegames are a moral vacuum, blah blah blah".
That's my girlfriend's last name you insensitive clod!
Seriously....it is.
The Real Problem
on
Girls Got Game
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm not a girl, so I could be completely off the mark, but here goes.
One of the largest problems facing female gamers is not the misogyny of the games, but the misogyny of the male gamers.
I am involved with a small, close-knit gaming group that runs a public CS:Source server.
The group has three female members who play and the amount of bullshit they have to put up with is completely unreasonable. When players realize that they are female, they either a.) attempt to flirt with them (positive attention) or b.) harass them sexually or otherwise (negative attention). We (the admins) are CONSTANTLY punishing players for this behavior.
I am by no means an extreme feminist; however, that sort of muppetry is just inexcusable. I'm inclined to make a comment about how geeks simply can't handle being around women; however, this sort of vapid generalization is simply not true. We joke about how geeks are not socially adept and cannot get a date to save their lives; however, I think at the lowest common denominator, most geeks know that it's not appropriate to sexually harass women.
So why is it acceptable on a CS:Source server to "haze" women?
Yeah, I know. CS:Source is not exactly a collection of fine, upstanding gamers; however, to counter that argument, which game *IS*? Every game has its share of asshats, griefers, and complete fucktards of different ages. My point is that this behavior is not limited to CS:Source. I see it in ET, WoW, and Dawn of War as well.
Most mornings, I wake up early and play basketball at a local high school with an assorted collection of individuals. Among our numbers is one female player. Never ONCE has she been sexually harassed or hazed simply because she is a woman. As a matter of fact, she played hoop at a Division I school. To play her is a challenge and everyone respects her talent.
Why are these two scenarios so different, when essentially, it's the same thing?
Does the gaming industry need to grow up in order to suit the needs of female gamers? Honestly, I don't know. I'm not a female gamer.
I think male gamers need to grow up and respect that video games are not a male-oriented arena and that female gamers are not some sort of mythical creature that should be harassed, positively or negatively.
>sorry that was your Irish experience.
Well, I was a little worried, considering that was my first weekend in the country, but the rest of the time I was in / around Maynooth and Dublin. So, I quickly learned that wasn't the standard for living conditions.
Overall, it was the best six months of my life. Hopefully I'll get back there someday.
When I studied aboard in Ireland (Spring, 02') I was absolutely amazed at how mobile phones kept people connected and governed most young peoples' social lives.
Personally, I was very anti-mobile phone when I arrived there, but I was told that you really needed to have one if you wanted to be at all socially active. My first weekend there was a home stay with a family in rural Limerick (rural meaning they lived on a farm, had cattle, but no shower). The entire family had mobile phones, even their 10 year-old daughter.
The flat I stayed in (with 6 other Irish students) didn't even have a land line, (ironically enough, it was wired for LAN; however, I was the only person with a laptop) everyone used mobile phones. The crazy thing was, they rarely actually TALKED to each other, they simply sent text messages back and forth. Most of their plans were pre-paid, so, to get the most use out of their Euros, they would simply text each other.
The funny thing is, now that I'm back home and with a phone, despite my x amount of minutes a month for free and free "in calling", I still text message all of my friends.
I guess I'm just proud of my l337 phone typing skillz I accrued while abroad.
>Anyone who won't be 60 by then should move to a PvE server, because leveling from 50 - 60 will be pretty much impossible
This really doesn't make much sense, as I have found, the higher you go, the more you need other party members to complete quests. I suppose you *COULD* solo, but that's not a lot of fun and it takes a lot of work to complete high level quests solo.
I've been questing for the last couple of weeks in Stranglethorn Vale (for those of you who don't play, it's basically PvP Anarchy). I usually travel in a group of three, and we romp most of the Horde in that area. We even fight groups with a higher level average than ours and defeat them handidly (thank you Teamspeak).
The fact is, leveling from 50 - 60 will not be impossible when the honor system is implemented. Especially if you're smart and quest as a group.
Let's also point out that the people who complain about ganking the most, give as good as they get.
>Sony's stuff will come in soon. Besides, if the first entries were Metal Gear's Snake and Final Fantasy, it would look like they were just patting themselves on the back instead of being true to gaming
What...what....whaaaaaat? Sony's stuff?
Not to pick nits, but Metal Gear and Final Fantasy were originally NINTENDO titles....
While I believe Nokia should keep trying, if they continue to release models that fail, they will completely tarnish any sort of name for themselves in the gaming / mobile phone hybrid market.
They MIGHT get it right with the NGage "X" (insert any integer / letter combination), but if all of the others flopped before it, who is really going to pay attention?
The article does not indicate whether or not the N-Gage is going back to R&D or they are planning on releasing another model. IMHO, N-Gage should be in R&D until they get several stamps of approval from the gaming industry and gamers at large.
You know, the people who predicted that it would never work in the first place....
>Except that it was neither. It was kitschy space opera by a hack who was most famous for a series adapation of a movie spit out by a hollywood script machine.
Wait, so Whedon's a hack because he creates a extremely successful series based upon a Movie that was the pinnacle of manufactured Hollywood crap?
I did not pre-order this game as I had been completely put off by other MMORPG experiences, specifically DAoC, SWG, FFXI, and a free trial of AO. These games amounted (to me anyway) mindless grinds and felt more like work than anything else.
I was HEARING great things about WoW, but I was convincend that playing these other MMORPGs that I will feel the same way: suckered that I spent $50 on a game I hated after a week or two of playing.
So, I stayed away from WoW. I was hearing great things and was starting to cave in to the temptation of buying a copy. I was on the fence when I hear about the server issues due to player volume. When I finally decided I wanted to get the game, there were no copies to be found anywhere; however, a week later, a couple of copies appeared at Target, and I snapped them up.
For anyone who has played a MMORPG and liked the concept, but hated the gameplay, try WoW. You will love it. The only time I have felt like the game was a grind was because I actually was grinding my skills. The second I was tired of it, I just stopped, did a quest, and I was adventuring again.
This game is so good, it convinced two of my friends who are stalwart enemies of the pay-to-play MMORPG to start paying to play this game. If I was a movie producer, I would call the game a "MMORPG Morrowind", but even better than that.
I have experienced MINOR server outage problems; however, I do have a 9-5 job and have other hobbies besides gaming, so it's possible I don't experience the issues as much as "hardcore" players.
I cannot say enough good things about this game. It is the best RPG I have played since Baldur's Gate II. I never thought the MMORPG could be done this well.
The idea is a very good one; however, how might it be implemented? Is it truly feasible?
The first problem you'll have is people arguing over who gets to be the commander. You can't necessarily just give it to the person with the highest level, as they don't necessarily make the best generals. I suppose the easiest resolution would be to institute a voting system; however, guilds could easily favor their leader instead of someone who is better qualified.
Honestly, the only way I see this working is creating a complex karma system. Allow people to be leaders on a very small scale (parties) first and have them directing the actions of the party. After all, many people do this already, but they are not necessarily rewarded beyond that they can effectively pull, kill, and loot high-level MOBs.
If the party believes the leader is competent, they can give them some sort of karma point that will increase their status and lead larger parties, eventually leading whole battleground armies (people with the highest rank get to lead).
It's not perfect, and you have to consider some of the abuses (I don't have time to flesh out the system completely). The only problem is that it would be VERY difficult to deploy this system......and let's face it, Blizzard needs to focus on some of the other issues before it can go crazy with something like this.
Like I said, it's a great idea, but from my perspective, at this point, I don't think it's possible. Hopefully Blizzard can get their shit together and truly revolutionize the MMORPG.
One of the noteworthy things about this series is the CGI. Watching the mini-series run, I felt the CGI was very well done, considering it was sci-fi original programming. The team did some very interesting shots, such as the camera being "late" (that is, a tracking shot were the object is unfocused, then comes into focus) and also "rattle" effects, where the camera is seated near an engine and the shot shakes, as if you were on the fuselage of the starfighter. I felt these techniques were very effective and drew me further into the action.
Interestingly enough, I felt the same way when I was watching the Firefly series. Lo and behold, the same did that worked on Galactica worked on Firely, and is also doing post-production on Serenity.
= fantastic way to break up level grinding. For example:
EQ Player: Die MOB! *Click**Click**Click**Click*
MOB: That's the 1,000,000,000th time today! YARGH! *Dies*
EQ Player: w00t! I got the Carbuncle of Doom! I can complete my quest now!!!!!1111one *Zones to City*
Heather Graham NPC: You have found the carbuncle of Doom for me! You are such a brave....strong....handsome adventurer. I will reward you in my own special way...
Slashdot Mirror
...XBOX 360??.
/. and Penny Arcade. This is crap meant to get into the face of the masses so EA can ship more copies of their latest re-hashed piece of crap.
While the sole criteria for the MTV Movie Awards is entertainment & marketing hype (most certainly not content), I honestly think this award is something NOBODY cares about. Does anyone remember the train wreck that was the SpikeTV Video Game Awards? With categories like: Most addictive game fueled by Dew" presented by Virgin Mobile and Moutain Dew.
Yeah, nobody cared about that show either...
I don't think it's a revelation to point out that this "award" is simply an advertisement hitting MTV's target demographic of 15 - 25; however, I'm simply wondering who is paying to have this award included in the show? My money is on Microsoft, but I could be wrong...
Let's face it, this kind of marketing is not meant to address the sort of gamers who read
Congrats, you levelled up, you're allowed a bigger stick and... you get bigger rats to beat with it. In fact, you _have_ to go for bigger rats to have any chance to level up again.
...but we do not play these games because of basic concepts. If this were the case, we would simply enjoy just pointing and clicking things on our desktop.
Let's take this vapid generalization and apply it to other multiplayer games in different genres, shall we?
Counter-Strike: Take a player who started playing the game on public servers designated as "amateur" (low level) with admins who kept very skilled players (high level) off the server so the amateur players could frag each other and learn how to play the game without CAL players arriving on the server every once in a while to dominate the game.
Eventually, this player is going to get better (level up) and in order to have fun and become more skilled (level up further) they're going to need to find rats (whoops, I mean players) who are more skilled than they are (higher level MOBs).
Yes, Counter-Strike is based upon skill (or OMG HAX! depending on your perspective); however, as an avid player of CS and WoW, I see little difference between playing de_dust and running MC one more time. You know the map, you know the angles, and you pretty much know how the enemy is going to behave.
Dawn Of War: There is little I can do to differentiate the experence between playing an RTS and a FPS. The maps are continually the same, the strategies are continually the same.
Most interestingly in RTSes, is that the whole bigger sticks, bigger rats theory that can be applied. After all, what is the point of teching (leveling?) up? To deal more damage against your opponent (better armor / better sword / bow / dagger, etc.). All the while, your enemy is attempting to do the same thing, so, in the end, you end up using your bigger stick to fight their bigger rats.
So, in both cases (Counter-Strike and Dawn of War), you're still doing the same thing, and it still didn't get any easier (that sounded familiar, didn't it?). What was the point of that exercise? Did it at least bring you another piece of the story or anything? Well, no, because there was no story to start with. Did you make any real difference in that world? Well, no, because all those rats must respawn for the next in line. Granted, MMORPGs are not known for their stories; however, if I wanted a very good story, I would probably read a book or go to a movie.
Interestingly enough, in CS and DoW, you didn't make any REAL difference in the world either. Everything resets and it's, well, off to the rat races again.
I suppose I will come off in this post as a MMORPG fan boy; however, I suppose I have a bone to pick with people who constantly slam the genre for having "nothing to do". When you start breaking games down into their most basic forms, I suggest that they all look the same...
Just to be picky:
So the point of all those mind-numbing hours of clicking on some variant of "attack rat" solved... what? All that work was to actually _restrict_ your social interaction?
Do you know how much easier it is to find people to run high level instances than it is to find some random person to help you do low level quests? I honestly do not think you do, as your dislike for MMORPGs is evident in your post, and therefore, I can assume that you do not even play one.
...to see how this will affect Horde / Alliance relations.
...however, with the new patch, it will be just as beneficial, if not MORE for us to simply kill each other, as that will give us honor points which will eventually translate in p|-|47 l00t.
I play on Sargeras, which is a PvP server. Considering that it is a PvP server, there are a lot of clashes between the Horde and Alliance. Raids are constantly led against Horde and Alliance towns alike and in contested areas, "ganking" is a popular activity.
Though the interesting thing to note is when Alliance and Horde play nice. In certain areas, Horde and Alliance co-exist (to a reasonable degree) as they are BOTH attempting to complete quests.
For example, I was in Felwood last night working on a quest and a couple of Horde were right next to me killing MOBs and we pretty much go into a rhythm were I would kill one, then they would kill one, so on and so forth. At the end, we completed our objective (fill the vial with corrupted water), saluted each other, and went on our merry way.
In this example, we played nice with each, because it was mutually beneficial for us to do so, after all, we both needed to complete the quest...
While the honor system MIGHT curb the rampant "problem" that is ganking (I don't see it as a problem, it's a pvp server, I deal with it) I think it will definitely escalate the desire for Horde and Alliance to kill each other, and make it more difficult to complete quests in contested areas.
According to TFA, the main task of JFCCNW is to bring down websites that don't portray America in good light.
Actually, that's your paranoid, Orwellian interpretation of the article. Here is some actual text from TFA:
(Regarding the public execution of Nick Berg)
"The debate focused on whether the United States should shut down a website as soon as it posts such brutality.
"There are some tremendous questions being raised about this," said Dietz. "On whether they (JFCCNW) have the legal mandate or the authority to shut these sites down with a defacement or a denial-of-service attack."
So, it sounds like this is an issue that is being treated with some sensitivity; however, you would rather portray the group as a censorship brute squad.
In terms of social acceptance, I think representing Paris Hilton as popular and the 300 lb. guy on the train as an outcast is a fallacy. After all, celebrity status is simply a result of marketing. The throngs of proles who worship these people are doing so simply because of their status. They have no actual connection to these people, other than the marketed status that they have wholly swallowed. As a result, their "popularity" is somewhat false. People care about the CELEBRITY, not the person. I would also like to note that it is attitudes such as your own, that perpetuate this status. In addition, popularity is a relative condition. After all, that 300 lb. man on the train could be the leader of a successful gaming group or a coven of wiccans. If this were the case, he could certainly be labeled "popular"; however, we automatically assume he's not, because he's overweight and plays a PSP on the train. I think it's silly to make "celebrity" comparisons like Linus Torvalds vs. Lebron James. After all, one is a BUSINESSMAN whereas the other is an ENTERTAINER.
I agree with you on your point regarding people are going to hang out with who they are comfortable with; however, from the way you are speaking in regards to popular people vs. outcasts, I am lead to believe that you are still in high school.
I understand that there are people who are well known in a "scene" (Gabe & Tycho?); however, does anyone really believe in the whole "popular vs. unpopular" struggle post high-school? When I went to college, sure there were people who were well known; however, I did not see the sort of bullshit that went on in high school. No one was getting crammed into lockers or pantsed. I found everyone to be rather tolerant of everyone else, no matter what their scene was.
As an adult, I find that pretty much to be true. Most people are polite to each other and tolerant of what everyone else does. Yes, there are those people who are complete assholes, but, I can't think of anything that doesn't have its fair share of assholes.
I don't understand why it is such a revelation that people play video games. Honestly, I don't think this is earth-shattering news. Growing up, my father was a heavy proponent of the "get your ass outside, play sports, and break a limb" philosophy. As a result I am a very athletic. I go to the gym regularly and I play basketball / softball in leagues. However, my father also enjoyed taking me to arcades. He too, liked picking up the occasional video game. We played Parsec and Blast-o on our Texas Instruments game console. As a result, I am involved in a gaming group and I play CS:Source and World of Warcraft. My father comes over my place frequently and we watch sports together. One day, I fired up the PS2 and showed him Madden 2005. He could not believe how far video games have progressed and what is capable now with the technology that is out there. He certainly wasn't any good at the game, but we had FUN playing the game together. ...isn't that what it's all about? Having fun?
Why do gamers hate the activity they love? Why, in the article, did we feel the need to stereotype a gamer as the "300 lb. man sitting on the train". You know folks, there are gamers out there who are probably MORE attractive than Paris Hilton. ...oh yeah, I forgot, attractive female gamers are a myth. My bad.
I understand there are people who sit in front of their computers and play EQ / WoW all day. Hell, I have a friend who is five years out of college, doesn't have a job, but has plenty of time to beat Ocarina of Time for the nth time.
Why are these people (along with the 300lb. man) the community-appointed representatives of the hobby we adore?
From the Mac Website:
...wait a minute.
Xgrid takes advantage of the power of distributed computing with Xgrid, Apple's easy-to-use tool that turns a group of Macs into a supercomputer.
Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these...
I imagine that sometime in the (near?) future, athletes using steroids will have been considered the cavemen of artifical performance enhancing measures.
Imagine nano-tech that will be able to act as red-blood cells, fueling muscles with oxygen in order to perform better. Or, on a a more basic level, able to replenish the body with nutrients in order to keep an athlete's biochemistry in check so they can perform at an inhuman level.
Granted, this sort of scenario is down a distant road; however, with labs already asking questions about GENE doping, it's not completely proposterous to start addressing these specific situations in order stop the abuses before they start.
Many MMOs are slowly addressing the issue of selling in-game items for real money. There are companies that have set up shop in countries with poor economies and hire people to play MMOs all day in order to "farm" items and sell them through online retailers (E-Bay, IGN, etc.). In addition, individual players engage in these practices as well.
There are some who argue that these practices completely defile the "in-game economy" and attempt to apply real-world economic concepts in order to prove their point. People have made strong arguments, pro and con, regarding selling in-game items. Honestly, I think that issue is neither here nor there concerning this particular event; however, I felt I needed to mention the issue in order to preface my points.
If this event proves anything, it is that these in-game items have worth and are valuable to people. So, like any personal property, I think that people should be able to sell them to other people and make some money, as long as it is allowed "in the rules". Square / Enix (Final Fantasy XI) and Blizzard (World of Warcraft) have taken a staunch (*snicker*) posture on this behavior, banning many players from their games; however, they have EXPLICITLY told players (through announcements and EULAs) that such behavior will get them banned.
The bottom line: This is not about videogames and violence. This about theft of personal property.
I'm sure people will laugh and say: "What a fucking loser, he killed somebody over a videogame. It's JUST a videogame". The fact is, people kill for material posessions all the time (money, cars, drugs, and sneakers).
I don't think this instance is any different; however, I'm sure this will turn into a whole: "Videogames are teaching people that killing other people is a trivial thing, vidoegames are a moral vacuum, blah blah blah".
That's my girlfriend's last name you insensitive clod! Seriously....it is.
I'm not a girl, so I could be completely off the mark, but here goes.
One of the largest problems facing female gamers is not the misogyny of the games, but the misogyny of the male gamers.
I am involved with a small, close-knit gaming group that runs a public CS:Source server.
The group has three female members who play and the amount of bullshit they have to put up with is completely unreasonable. When players realize that they are female, they either a.) attempt to flirt with them (positive attention) or b.) harass them sexually or otherwise (negative attention). We (the admins) are CONSTANTLY punishing players for this behavior.
I am by no means an extreme feminist; however, that sort of muppetry is just inexcusable. I'm inclined to make a comment about how geeks simply can't handle being around women; however, this sort of vapid generalization is simply not true. We joke about how geeks are not socially adept and cannot get a date to save their lives; however, I think at the lowest common denominator, most geeks know that it's not appropriate to sexually harass women.
So why is it acceptable on a CS:Source server to "haze" women?
Yeah, I know. CS:Source is not exactly a collection of fine, upstanding gamers; however, to counter that argument, which game *IS*? Every game has its share of asshats, griefers, and complete fucktards of different ages. My point is that this behavior is not limited to CS:Source. I see it in ET, WoW, and Dawn of War as well.
Most mornings, I wake up early and play basketball at a local high school with an assorted collection of individuals. Among our numbers is one female player. Never ONCE has she been sexually harassed or hazed simply because she is a woman. As a matter of fact, she played hoop at a Division I school. To play her is a challenge and everyone respects her talent.
Why are these two scenarios so different, when essentially, it's the same thing?
Does the gaming industry need to grow up in order to suit the needs of female gamers? Honestly, I don't know. I'm not a female gamer.
I think male gamers need to grow up and respect that video games are not a male-oriented arena and that female gamers are not some sort of mythical creature that should be harassed, positively or negatively.
Could you possibly send me an e-mail? I would be interested in talking to you about the sort of opportunities over there. Let me know. Thanks.
>sorry that was your Irish experience. Well, I was a little worried, considering that was my first weekend in the country, but the rest of the time I was in / around Maynooth and Dublin. So, I quickly learned that wasn't the standard for living conditions. Overall, it was the best six months of my life. Hopefully I'll get back there someday.
When I studied aboard in Ireland (Spring, 02') I was absolutely amazed at how mobile phones kept people connected and governed most young peoples' social lives.
Personally, I was very anti-mobile phone when I arrived there, but I was told that you really needed to have one if you wanted to be at all socially active. My first weekend there was a home stay with a family in rural Limerick (rural meaning they lived on a farm, had cattle, but no shower). The entire family had mobile phones, even their 10 year-old daughter.
The flat I stayed in (with 6 other Irish students) didn't even have a land line, (ironically enough, it was wired for LAN; however, I was the only person with a laptop) everyone used mobile phones. The crazy thing was, they rarely actually TALKED to each other, they simply sent text messages back and forth. Most of their plans were pre-paid, so, to get the most use out of their Euros, they would simply text each other.
The funny thing is, now that I'm back home and with a phone, despite my x amount of minutes a month for free and free "in calling", I still text message all of my friends.
I guess I'm just proud of my l337 phone typing skillz I accrued while abroad.
>Anyone who won't be 60 by then should move to a PvE server, because leveling from 50 - 60 will be pretty much impossible
This really doesn't make much sense, as I have found, the higher you go, the more you need other party members to complete quests. I suppose you *COULD* solo, but that's not a lot of fun and it takes a lot of work to complete high level quests solo.
I've been questing for the last couple of weeks in Stranglethorn Vale (for those of you who don't play, it's basically PvP Anarchy). I usually travel in a group of three, and we romp most of the Horde in that area. We even fight groups with a higher level average than ours and defeat them handidly (thank you Teamspeak).
The fact is, leveling from 50 - 60 will not be impossible when the honor system is implemented. Especially if you're smart and quest as a group.
Let's also point out that the people who complain about ganking the most, give as good as they get.
>Sony's stuff will come in soon. Besides, if the first entries were Metal Gear's Snake and Final Fantasy, it would look like they were just patting themselves on the back instead of being true to gaming
What...what....whaaaaaat? Sony's stuff?
Not to pick nits, but Metal Gear and Final Fantasy were originally NINTENDO titles....
I agree with you, to a certain a degree.
While I believe Nokia should keep trying, if they continue to release models that fail, they will completely tarnish any sort of name for themselves in the gaming / mobile phone hybrid market.
They MIGHT get it right with the NGage "X" (insert any integer / letter combination), but if all of the others flopped before it, who is really going to pay attention?
The article does not indicate whether or not the N-Gage is going back to R&D or they are planning on releasing another model. IMHO, N-Gage should be in R&D until they get several stamps of approval from the gaming industry and gamers at large.
You know, the people who predicted that it would never work in the first place....
>their reaction time and mental abilities are worse off than if they had a 1.1 blood-alcohol content.
.40 BAC.
I disagree.
Most people are comatose / dead when they have anything near a
>Except that it was neither. It was kitschy space opera by a hack who was most famous for a series adapation of a movie spit out by a hollywood script machine.
Wait, so Whedon's a hack because he creates a extremely successful series based upon a Movie that was the pinnacle of manufactured Hollywood crap?
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
I did not pre-order this game as I had been completely put off by other MMORPG experiences, specifically DAoC, SWG, FFXI, and a free trial of AO. These games amounted (to me anyway) mindless grinds and felt more like work than anything else.
I was HEARING great things about WoW, but I was convincend that playing these other MMORPGs that I will feel the same way: suckered that I spent $50 on a game I hated after a week or two of playing.
So, I stayed away from WoW. I was hearing great things and was starting to cave in to the temptation of buying a copy. I was on the fence when I hear about the server issues due to player volume. When I finally decided I wanted to get the game, there were no copies to be found anywhere; however, a week later, a couple of copies appeared at Target, and I snapped them up.
For anyone who has played a MMORPG and liked the concept, but hated the gameplay, try WoW. You will love it. The only time I have felt like the game was a grind was because I actually was grinding my skills. The second I was tired of it, I just stopped, did a quest, and I was adventuring again.
This game is so good, it convinced two of my friends who are stalwart enemies of the pay-to-play MMORPG to start paying to play this game. If I was a movie producer, I would call the game a "MMORPG Morrowind", but even better than that.
I have experienced MINOR server outage problems; however, I do have a 9-5 job and have other hobbies besides gaming, so it's possible I don't experience the issues as much as "hardcore" players.
I cannot say enough good things about this game. It is the best RPG I have played since Baldur's Gate II. I never thought the MMORPG could be done this well.
The idea is a very good one; however, how might it be implemented? Is it truly feasible?
...and let's face it, Blizzard needs to focus on some of the other issues before it can go crazy with something like this.
The first problem you'll have is people arguing over who gets to be the commander. You can't necessarily just give it to the person with the highest level, as they don't necessarily make the best generals. I suppose the easiest resolution would be to institute a voting system; however, guilds could easily favor their leader instead of someone who is better qualified.
Honestly, the only way I see this working is creating a complex karma system. Allow people to be leaders on a very small scale (parties) first and have them directing the actions of the party. After all, many people do this already, but they are not necessarily rewarded beyond that they can effectively pull, kill, and loot high-level MOBs.
If the party believes the leader is competent, they can give them some sort of karma point that will increase their status and lead larger parties, eventually leading whole battleground armies (people with the highest rank get to lead).
It's not perfect, and you have to consider some of the abuses (I don't have time to flesh out the system completely). The only problem is that it would be VERY difficult to deploy this system...
Like I said, it's a great idea, but from my perspective, at this point, I don't think it's possible. Hopefully Blizzard can get their shit together and truly revolutionize the MMORPG.
One of the noteworthy things about this series is the CGI. Watching the mini-series run, I felt the CGI was very well done, considering it was sci-fi original programming. The team did some very interesting shots, such as the camera being "late" (that is, a tracking shot were the object is unfocused, then comes into focus) and also "rattle" effects, where the camera is seated near an engine and the shot shakes, as if you were on the fuselage of the starfighter. I felt these techniques were very effective and drew me further into the action.
Interestingly enough, I felt the same way when I was watching the Firefly series. Lo and behold, the same did that worked on Galactica worked on Firely, and is also doing post-production on Serenity.
> Jacqueline Helfgott said: "They're not afraid to engage in violence, unlike the nerd sitting in front of his computer."
Funny, because I'm a nerd, and I have sudden urge to bitchslap someone.
= fantastic way to break up level grinding. For example:
EQ Player: Die MOB! *Click**Click**Click**Click*
MOB: That's the 1,000,000,000th time today! YARGH! *Dies*
EQ Player: w00t! I got the Carbuncle of Doom! I can complete my quest now!!!!!1111one *Zones to City*
Heather Graham NPC: You have found the carbuncle of Doom for me! You are such a brave....strong....handsome adventurer. I will reward you in my own special way...
EQ Player: *Fap* *Fap* *Fap* *Fap* *Fap* *Fap*