When you buy a PC, you normally buy a box that happens to have Windows on it. You can also buy a box with no operating system, or with a version of Linux.
When you buy a Macintosh, you're buying a proprietary computer with a proprietary operating system and proprietary hardware, all by the same company.
"If you spent years of your life working on something, how would you feel if someone just took your work without compensating you for it? You would be upset...and if you are trying to say you would be cool with it, you are being intellectually dishonest."
I can read any book I want for free, if I get it from a library. Would you prefer that they be illegal? Should the author be angry?
I can watch any movie my friend owns, if I want to borrow it or watch it at her house. Is that morally wrong? Should the director be upset?
I can enjoy viewing paintings for free if I go to a museum. Should I have to pay each artist whose painting I witness? Should the artist be unhappy about this?
It seems that the immoral "taking work without compensating for it" is prevalent in most every other artform throughout society, and that it leads to a more culturally diffuse population. I have yet to see a society in which controlling declassified information has had a positive effect.
In a modern society, the most feasible way to regulate morality is to criminalize those things which affect other people. You don't want me regulating what you do in the privacy of your own home. However, if I punch you, which negatively impacts you, I am imposing my values upon you. While you may feel that pirating software is wrong, because it does not directly harm someone, as I have demonstrated, it should be beyond the confines of legality. If you could demonstrate your beliefs, it would be different.
Nonsense. You are gaining utility without compensating the creators, and that's not right."
Elaborate on why that is "not right". If you cannot demonstrate your point, then that is simply your personal ethical opinion. I see no reason why your imposing moral visions should effect my actions when they harm no one, as I've already demonstrated.
I'm certainly not harming the creators in any way. I'm not stealing their bandwidth, packaging, or money any more than I would by simply ignoring the product. The only thing wrong with software piracy is it decreases sales of a product. That's only my concern if I want the product, or the publisher, to succeed. While that might convince me to put my $50 vote in on a product from a different company, it is simply not a motivating factor for me here.
In this case, I'm rather hoping the product fails, and I'm certainly hoping the company fails, so that argument does not apply to this situation.
Why? If I play it without buying it, the effect is the same as if I had simply ignored it.
Pirating can also have a positive effect for the consumer. In the case of games like Spore, pirating it, whether you play it or not, is beneficial, because it tells EA Games that when the repressiveness of their DRM goes up, their bought/pirated ratio goes down. I'm considering pirating all new DRM-heavy games for just that reason.
I'm sorry that you haven't been fully informed about the release of the new Command and Conquer: Red Alert game. While there is, indeed, a version with restrictive Digital Rights Management(DRM), there is also going to be another version completely free of DRM. I'll run you through a quick comparison of the features of both versions, so that you, the consumer, may make an informed decision regarding how to spend your money.
Version 1. -Can only be installed 5 times. -Installs spyware on your computer. -Comes with box and manual. -$49.95
Version 2. -Can be installed any number of times. -Does not install spyware on your computer. -Will likely be released several days before Version 1. -Available for download from the comfort of your own home. -$0.00
Darkwatch is an FPS that uses a similar system. When you get low on health, you have to stop shooting the big enemies to pop a few skeletons and replenish your health with their blood clouds, which also refill your vampire powers. It works well.
Whatever system they use, I think Blizzard, of all companies, can be trusted to balance the game and shape it to -usually remarkably- work.
That's exactly what this protest is about. They're saying that they don't want to be a part of a crooked contest, so they're pulling out of an important competition with ever-increasing odds of winning. They're putting their money where their mouths are, and it's admirable that they're taking a stand against censorship, whether or not you think Super Columbine Massacre RPG is a mockery or a brilliant political satire.
Maybe it's because the character has flaws that millions of people identify with him? If you look at Bilbo, Frodo (as you pointed out), or, actually, most contemporary (low- or high-brow) fantasy, you're going to find bumbling characters who make mistakes and only pull through because of Deus Ex Machina, luck of the draw, or some moral accomplishment.
I think it's the fact that we all recognize our own faults and inner issues, and can see them portrayed in these characters, that makes us, as readers, identify with the heroes of these stories. We fuck up. We make mistakes. Sometimes, we're jerks to our friends, we don't put enough time into our relationships, and we make the wrong moral decisions. Superman doesn't have those problems. Harry Potter has those problems.
Remember the success of Spider-Man? From the Wikipedia article: The Spider-Man series broke ground by featuring a hero who himself was an adolescent, to whose "self-obsessions with rejection, inadequacy, and loneliness" young readers could relate.
I think you guys are missing the point of Fallout's combat. I love Fallout. It's great. I fail to see it working in a current MMO mold, though, because of the combat. In Fallout, most of the time you go down in 1-4 hits. What that means is that you have to effectively use cover, distance, sharpshooting skill, explosives, manage your action points, and make sure you have the correct weapons on- and off-hand. Fallout combat is brutal and unforgiving. For Fallout to work in MMO format, they're probably going to have to force it into a grind-based mold. Otherwise, you'd simply die too often. Aiming would make it more twitch-based and susceptible to lag, a system involving targetting and letting it plink away like in Anarchy Online doesn't make for a fun game, and forcing skill-use like WoW requires a different type of strategy.
Fallout is one of the only franchises I would consider paying a monthly fee for. If they can retain the turn-based (or similar style) combat, and keep the missions and storyline interesting, then I'd try paying for it. As a WoW or AO rip-off.... no.
A lot of Christians follow and quote the Old Testament, so I think it's only fair to do the same. As we all know, the Old Testament says it's okay to stone lazy children, non-believers, anyone who tries to convert you, and homosexuals. That's pretty well understood. Christianity and Jesus's teachings are two different things. Christianity is a cruel, violent, unfair religion. Jesus was a nice, pleasant, wise person, who was trying to do right by his fellow man, and spread peace and love. I hold him in the utmost regard. But if you want to quote the New Testament, and actually try to live life in Jesus's image, you should eliminate the Old Testament. And I'm not saying you yourself are following it, but most Christians do. So by calling yourself a Christian, you're grouping yourself with them, the people who want to kill us. I think that's why we athiests and agnostics look down upon your religion.
I thought there was a certain format email messages had to have, and a certain way they were sent and recieve among servers. Isn't that how you define them?
Note: I clearly do not know what I'm talking about.
If you were working for Nintendo, do you really think it's a good idea to have pornography branded with your system? It would get all over the news that Ninendo is licensing games sold in adult stores, or selling pornography in their own online shop. It would be brand-name suicide.
My favorite SNES multiplayer game is probably Secret of Mana. It's got three-player multiplayer, it reminds me of a cross between Zelda and Chrono Trigger, and it actually involves some strategy. I think there are also prequels and sequels, but they're... Japanese.
I really like RBI Baseball. I've always thought it was great, and I don't even like baseball. I don't know why, but those chubby little people just never get old!
Diddy Kong Racing was good. So is any Mario Kart game. DKR had a neat single-player mode that could be played in multiplayer, several different vehicles, and a plethora of interesting tracks and game modes, and MK is just full of multiplayer goodness.
Worms has always been great. There's some controversey as to the best version: Worms World Party or Worms Armageddon. I have both, but I'm not sure which is better. They're so similar it's like comparing Street Fighter 2 versions. Anyone have any input on this one?
Speaking of Street Fighter... if you've got a Dreamcast (the only version I can vouch for), you should check out Street Fighter Alpha 3. To me, it's the epitome of fast-paced, highly technical fighters. But stay away from Marvel Vs. Capcom. It's ridiculously dumbed down.
Micro Machines and Micro Machines 2 for the NES. Say what you will. Those games were great fun. There are actually a lot of really good multiplayer games for the SNES. The definition of fun is a lazy afternoon spent surfing NES and SNES emulation sites with a buddy.
Gauntlet Legends. That was probably only fun because I was younger and dumber, but I remember quite a bit of fun with it. If you're into more complicated hack'n'slashers, check out the original Diablo. I like it a lot more than Diablo 2, but I seem to be the only person in the world who feels that way. You might also try Dungeon Siege, but it's kind of dumbed down.
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater. I recommend starting with the first one, and working your way up. The first one has several downhill courses where you race down a hill to the end, and I thought those were great fun. After THPS2, they start to get dumbed down, and filled with sophmoric dick and fart jokes.
A list of multiplayer games I do not like:
Any MMO. Most of them just feature nothing more complicated than slowly grinding your way up to the top. Yuck. I've started playing Second Life, but I don't like their modelling tools, and there just doesn't seem to be much interesting content. Land is expensive, it's hard to make good things with their tools (all in-game, and therefore laggy, and no multiple viewpoints or grids. Modelling tools have spoiled me), and a whole lot of annoying, naked people. I do like the C++/Java syntactically-based scripting system, though.
My "brilliant" idea: an MMO with a built in scripting language. See, it'd be all about coming up with algorithms and scripts to maximize lewt/experience levels.
I think MMOs, most Racing Games (with the right track design and markers), and most RTSs could be played fairly easily (and extremely well) by a computer with the right program on it. Action games that require a lot of planning (like navigating the newer Prince of Persia landscapes), any Zelda title, or certain adventure games, not so much. They would take way too much time and processing power to effectively write AI (at least AI that could beat the game) for.
I think the GP just wants games that require thought, instead of monotony.
To me, the Plasma Pistol is the worst weapon in the game (well, besides the laser thingies and the Battle Rifle). It takes a long time to charge, it moves slow, and it doesn't pack a punch. It can take shields down, but if your shot doesn't hit, you have to recharge. Plus, the Plasma Pistol/Battle Rifle combination makes you switch weapons in combat, which is never a good idea. Maybe you guys use different tactics than me, but I always have better results with the Rocket Launcher, Sword, Sniper Rifle, Shotgun, SMG/Pistol combination, Needler/Needler combination, or even just a Plasma Grenade.
No electric guitar in the soundtrack. It makes me laugh.
No Plasma Pistols. They're worthless. They're just under the original Halo's assault rifle.
No cliffhanger endings, please.
Make big weapons spawn more. If you're going to have a small map with a Rocket Launcher and Sword, at least make more than one, so that one player/team doesn't get both and dominate.
Actually, how about balancing all the weapons? Besides the Plasma Pistol (cough) Halo had a pretty balanced selection of weapons. The starting pistol actually ruled. In Halo 2, it's mostly just sniper rifles, rocket launchers, and swords.
More maps! If people can't make their own, then the burden is upon you to make a bunch of really cool ones. It's gonna be played more than almost any FPS out there, isn't it? So come up with a bunch of good ones!
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say that Apple's worse.
When you buy a PC, you normally buy a box that happens to have Windows on it. You can also buy a box with no operating system, or with a version of Linux.
When you buy a Macintosh, you're buying a proprietary computer with a proprietary operating system and proprietary hardware, all by the same company.
With one button.
"If you spent years of your life working on something, how would you feel if someone just took your work without compensating you for it? You would be upset...and if you are trying to say you would be cool with it, you are being intellectually dishonest."
I can read any book I want for free, if I get it from a library. Would you prefer that they be illegal? Should the author be angry?
I can watch any movie my friend owns, if I want to borrow it or watch it at her house. Is that morally wrong? Should the director be upset?
I can enjoy viewing paintings for free if I go to a museum. Should I have to pay each artist whose painting I witness? Should the artist be unhappy about this?
It seems that the immoral "taking work without compensating for it" is prevalent in most every other artform throughout society, and that it leads to a more culturally diffuse population.
I have yet to see a society in which controlling declassified information has had a positive effect.
In a modern society, the most feasible way to regulate morality is to criminalize those things which affect other people. You don't want me regulating what you do in the privacy of your own home. However, if I punch you, which negatively impacts you, I am imposing my values upon you.
While you may feel that pirating software is wrong, because it does not directly harm someone, as I have demonstrated, it should be beyond the confines of legality.
If you could demonstrate your beliefs, it would be different.
I refer you to this post, and look forward to your reply.
Nonsense. You are gaining utility without compensating the creators, and that's not right."
Elaborate on why that is "not right".
If you cannot demonstrate your point, then that is simply your personal ethical opinion. I see no reason why your imposing moral visions should effect my actions when they harm no one, as I've already demonstrated.
I'm certainly not harming the creators in any way. I'm not stealing their bandwidth, packaging, or money any more than I would by simply ignoring the product.
The only thing wrong with software piracy is it decreases sales of a product. That's only my concern if I want the product, or the publisher, to succeed. While that might convince me to put my $50 vote in on a product from a different company, it is simply not a motivating factor for me here.
In this case, I'm rather hoping the product fails, and I'm certainly hoping the company fails, so that argument does not apply to this situation.
Why? If I play it without buying it, the effect is the same as if I had simply ignored it.
Pirating can also have a positive effect for the consumer. In the case of games like Spore, pirating it, whether you play it or not, is beneficial, because it tells EA Games that when the repressiveness of their DRM goes up, their bought/pirated ratio goes down. I'm considering pirating all new DRM-heavy games for just that reason.
Pirating software is only morally wrong if not buying software is morally wrong. They both have the same effect for the publisher.
I'm sorry that you haven't been fully informed about the release of the new Command and Conquer: Red Alert game.
While there is, indeed, a version with restrictive Digital Rights Management(DRM), there is also going to be another version completely free of DRM. I'll run you through a quick comparison of the features of both versions, so that you, the consumer, may make an informed decision regarding how to spend your money.
Version 1.
-Can only be installed 5 times.
-Installs spyware on your computer.
-Comes with box and manual.
-$49.95
Version 2.
-Can be installed any number of times.
-Does not install spyware on your computer.
-Will likely be released several days before Version 1.
-Available for download from the comfort of your own home.
-$0.00
Have a consumptive day.
Darkwatch is an FPS that uses a similar system. When you get low on health, you have to stop shooting the big enemies to pop a few skeletons and replenish your health with their blood clouds, which also refill your vampire powers. It works well.
Whatever system they use, I think Blizzard, of all companies, can be trusted to balance the game and shape it to -usually remarkably- work.
That's exactly what this protest is about. They're saying that they don't want to be a part of a crooked contest, so they're pulling out of an important competition with ever-increasing odds of winning.
They're putting their money where their mouths are, and it's admirable that they're taking a stand against censorship, whether or not you think Super Columbine Massacre RPG is a mockery or a brilliant political satire.
Maybe it's because the character has flaws that millions of people identify with him?
If you look at Bilbo, Frodo (as you pointed out), or, actually, most contemporary (low- or high-brow) fantasy, you're going to find bumbling characters who make mistakes and only pull through because of Deus Ex Machina, luck of the draw, or some moral accomplishment.
I think it's the fact that we all recognize our own faults and inner issues, and can see them portrayed in these characters, that makes us, as readers, identify with the heroes of these stories.
We fuck up. We make mistakes. Sometimes, we're jerks to our friends, we don't put enough time into our relationships, and we make the wrong moral decisions.
Superman doesn't have those problems.
Harry Potter has those problems.
Remember the success of Spider-Man? From the Wikipedia article: The Spider-Man series broke ground by featuring a hero who himself was an adolescent, to whose "self-obsessions with rejection, inadequacy, and loneliness" young readers could relate.
I think you guys are missing the point of Fallout's combat.
I love Fallout. It's great. I fail to see it working in a current MMO mold, though, because of the combat. In Fallout, most of the time you go down in 1-4 hits. What that means is that you have to effectively use cover, distance, sharpshooting skill, explosives, manage your action points, and make sure you have the correct weapons on- and off-hand. Fallout combat is brutal and unforgiving. For Fallout to work in MMO format, they're probably going to have to force it into a grind-based mold. Otherwise, you'd simply die too often. Aiming would make it more twitch-based and susceptible to lag, a system involving targetting and letting it plink away like in Anarchy Online doesn't make for a fun game, and forcing skill-use like WoW requires a different type of strategy.
Fallout is one of the only franchises I would consider paying a monthly fee for. If they can retain the turn-based (or similar style) combat, and keep the missions and storyline interesting, then I'd try paying for it. As a WoW or AO rip-off.... no.
A lot of Christians follow and quote the Old Testament, so I think it's only fair to do the same.
As we all know, the Old Testament says it's okay to stone lazy children, non-believers, anyone who tries to convert you, and homosexuals. That's pretty well understood.
Christianity and Jesus's teachings are two different things. Christianity is a cruel, violent, unfair religion. Jesus was a nice, pleasant, wise person, who was trying to do right by his fellow man, and spread peace and love. I hold him in the utmost regard. But if you want to quote the New Testament, and actually try to live life in Jesus's image, you should eliminate the Old Testament. And I'm not saying you yourself are following it, but most Christians do. So by calling yourself a Christian, you're grouping yourself with them, the people who want to kill us.
I think that's why we athiests and agnostics look down upon your religion.
I'll patent the buttons themselves.
You guys are going to have to come up with new input devices that don't involve small entities with two toggleable states.
I thought there was a certain format email messages had to have, and a certain way they were sent and recieve among servers. Isn't that how you define them?
Note: I clearly do not know what I'm talking about.
If you were working for Nintendo, do you really think it's a good idea to have pornography branded with your system? It would get all over the news that Ninendo is licensing games sold in adult stores, or selling pornography in their own online shop.
It would be brand-name suicide.
Microsoft has proven, time and again, that it is out for your best interests.
Why would you even question them?
A list of multiplayer games I do not like:
FF5 4eva.
Why pick sides, just buy both systems and call it a day.
I'm a college student, you insensitive clod!!
I don't know if this is the same video, but it's definitely an interesting watch. It goes through the early Halo builds. Part 1 and Part 2.
How is This better than this?
My "brilliant" idea: an MMO with a built in scripting language. See, it'd be all about coming up with algorithms and scripts to maximize lewt/experience levels.
I think MMOs, most Racing Games (with the right track design and markers), and most RTSs could be played fairly easily (and extremely well) by a computer with the right program on it. Action games that require a lot of planning (like navigating the newer Prince of Persia landscapes), any Zelda title, or certain adventure games, not so much. They would take way too much time and processing power to effectively write AI (at least AI that could beat the game) for.
I think the GP just wants games that require thought, instead of monotony.
To me, the Plasma Pistol is the worst weapon in the game (well, besides the laser thingies and the Battle Rifle). It takes a long time to charge, it moves slow, and it doesn't pack a punch. It can take shields down, but if your shot doesn't hit, you have to recharge. Plus, the Plasma Pistol/Battle Rifle combination makes you switch weapons in combat, which is never a good idea. Maybe you guys use different tactics than me, but I always have better results with the Rocket Launcher, Sword, Sniper Rifle, Shotgun, SMG/Pistol combination, Needler/Needler combination, or even just a Plasma Grenade.