If this life is all you have, and there is no afterlife, it should motivate you to make the most of your short time. Immortality is in the hearts and minds of others. If you do worthwhile things with your life, then your memory will live far longer than you do.
Because it's mean, and being mean isn't nice. People should be nice, not mean. You know, this is the most important lesson you could get out of a religion.
Some rules do and some don't. The match behind most combat calculations has been published by devs. (They have fancy flash tutorials explaining it now)
When you have access to developer knowledge when there are no manuals explaining the mechanics of the game, you'd better be pretty good. The equations governing capacitor recharge, shield recharge, to-hit by turrets, etc. have all been derived/approximated by logging and analysis by players, for example. Of course, for developers, they can just look at the code and tell their alliance. The same thing goes for how/when player owned stations go into and out of reinforcement and such. The things you gave as examples are either common knowlege to anyone with a little education and a calculator (Mechanics and calculations) or documented. (POS timers) Any serious PvPer knows these things without developer assistance.
The bigger issue of Dev involvement is free stuff like blueprints, intel on game events before they are public, and intel on adversaries not available to normal players.
Meanwhile, the people who buy the gold spend it, generally on the more expensive and difficult-to-acquire items, which drives the prices for them up. So it's harder to make money in the first place, and harder to buy stuff with the gold you do get. And guess who is most likely selling those expensive items...
It's funny. Considering how the US is such a service based economy, you would expect people working in service to get more respect. CM's shouldn't respond in kind to the customer base, but the customer base shouldn't treat service people like utter trash either.
Zooming shouldn't be an issue as long as the units scale in complexity properly, by switching to simpler models and smaller textures as you zoom out. I think the bigger issue is the tactical advantage having a larger field of view brings. I can understand the desire to keep that consistent for all players.
You know, a seamless transition from closest zoom out to the full map would be kickass. Just have it transition to the 2d map with simple icons to represent units somewhere along the way. (Civ III does this I think...)
A Starcraft MMO would simply cannibalize a big chunk of the WoW playerbase. Blizzard is paying for one MMO and has 8 million subscribers to show for that investment. If they added a Starcraft MMO they would double their costs, but it is highly unlikely they would double their subscriber base.
Ah, but if you have the light on, then you can't use the keyboard. So even though you can now see what you're doing, you can't do it without putting the light away.
I think the difference is: Cars have been in general use longer than CRM software. Even though things might not be in the same place, when you get in a car you know you will have the following: Steering wheel, gas/brake pedal, parking brake, gearshift, signals/lights, climate control. They have doors with locks. They all have a gas tank. While some of details and presentation are different, there are not any fundamental changes to the system.
A driver knows what he's looking for when he sits in a car. The tool is established enough for that to be common knowledge.
Computers are newer tools. There are still people out there that spent a majority of their lives devoid of computers. Modern software even more so. Look at the differences between CLI's and GUI's. Going from one to the other carries a learning curve if you don't have prior experience. Basically, even if there is a standard user interface, it hasn't been around long enough to become as common knowledge as a car. Most people didn't grow up with the Windows enviroment, and don't know the design conventions we assume to be common knowledge.
In 50 years, using a piece of software will be akin to driving a car. But right now it's not a fair comparison.
Our world continues to become more and more complex, and our collective knowledge has extended far beyond what a single person can master. Basically we've reached a point where we can't learn everything, so we specialize. There are brain surgeons who can't configure a home network. Programmers who don't know anything about a car engine.
Now I'm not saying anything about work ethic here. But if someone needed to be a mechanic to drive a car, then we'd have too many mechanics, or not enough people driving cars. Either would negatively impact efficiency across the board. Tools are made to make some task easier. A tool that is simple and effective is a well designed tool, and has nothing to do with the relative merit of the user.
Why is profanity profane? Still waiting for an answer on this one. Never going to get one that isn't a tautology We're not talking about logic here. We're talking about emotional responses to language. It's not logical, and don't expect it to be. People find it offensive. It doesn't really matter why. Because a majority of people find it offensive, it's considered an 'offensive' word.
If I say the word 'sandwich' is offensive to me, it's not an offensive word. Why? Because noone agrees with me. However, if 50 million english speakers all decided 'sandwich' was offensive, you'd see a lot of menus change.
Besides, context is everything. Looking at the word on it's own just isn't looking at the whole picture.
I hate the suggestion (that I see often, not from you) to "Just turn on the filter, or ignore the rude people". It implies that requiring respect is irrational or unrealistic. Players shouldn't have to opt out of rudeness and disprespect, online gaming culture should include courtesy by default.
Exactly. And Penny Arcade was quite accurate on the subject. The anonymity of the internet, especially in virtual worlds where your character can be completely recreated as an entirely new identity, removes responsibility. It doesn't matter if I'm disrespectful, I can always change my handle/create a new avatar. With no persistent identity, people can absolve themselves of personal responsibility. Lack of persistent identity, and the accountability that comes with, is a primary issue.
Why empower the words so much? So that we have a wider dynamic of expression? Perhaps there is a situation where you DO want to convey extreme disrespect to someone. The word fits that purpose. Take away the word, or take away the meaning, and you either lose the ability to convey that, or another word/phrase evolves to fill that role.
Slashdot Mirror
Jehova's Witnesses (a form of christianity) have the same restriction. Personally, I'm glad I never needed a blood transfusion as a child...
If this life is all you have, and there is no afterlife, it should motivate you to make the most of your short time. Immortality is in the hearts and minds of others. If you do worthwhile things with your life, then your memory will live far longer than you do.
I guess it's time to dust off the 'Sravr0s for Amarrian Emperor' banners.
Some rules do and some don't. The match behind most combat calculations has been published by devs. (They have fancy flash tutorials explaining it now)
The things you gave as examples are either common knowlege to anyone with a little education and a calculator (Mechanics and calculations) or documented. (POS timers) Any serious PvPer knows these things without developer assistance. The bigger issue of Dev involvement is free stuff like blueprints, intel on game events before they are public, and intel on adversaries not available to normal players.
It's funny. Considering how the US is such a service based economy, you would expect people working in service to get more respect. CM's shouldn't respond in kind to the customer base, but the customer base shouldn't treat service people like utter trash either.
Probably about as familiar as people who watch action movies.
Yeah, but the fungi wouldn't survive in close proximity to Keith Richards.
The majority of the computer using populace doesn't realize they paid for an OS. It came with the box. This is true of both Windows and Macs.
Zooming shouldn't be an issue as long as the units scale in complexity properly, by switching to simpler models and smaller textures as you zoom out. I think the bigger issue is the tactical advantage having a larger field of view brings. I can understand the desire to keep that consistent for all players.
The Windows version is DX9/10. The Mac version is OpenGL.
Why would Linux pose any more threat to Windows dominance than Apple does now?
You know, a seamless transition from closest zoom out to the full map would be kickass. Just have it transition to the 2d map with simple icons to represent units somewhere along the way. (Civ III does this I think...)
A Starcraft MMO would simply cannibalize a big chunk of the WoW playerbase. Blizzard is paying for one MMO and has 8 million subscribers to show for that investment. If they added a Starcraft MMO they would double their costs, but it is highly unlikely they would double their subscriber base.
Ah, but if you have the light on, then you can't use the keyboard. So even though you can now see what you're doing, you can't do it without putting the light away.
I think the difference is: Cars have been in general use longer than CRM software. Even though things might not be in the same place, when you get in a car you know you will have the following: Steering wheel, gas/brake pedal, parking brake, gearshift, signals/lights, climate control. They have doors with locks. They all have a gas tank. While some of details and presentation are different, there are not any fundamental changes to the system.
A driver knows what he's looking for when he sits in a car. The tool is established enough for that to be common knowledge.
Computers are newer tools. There are still people out there that spent a majority of their lives devoid of computers. Modern software even more so. Look at the differences between CLI's and GUI's. Going from one to the other carries a learning curve if you don't have prior experience. Basically, even if there is a standard user interface, it hasn't been around long enough to become as common knowledge as a car. Most people didn't grow up with the Windows enviroment, and don't know the design conventions we assume to be common knowledge.
In 50 years, using a piece of software will be akin to driving a car. But right now it's not a fair comparison.
Our world continues to become more and more complex, and our collective knowledge has extended far beyond what a single person can master. Basically we've reached a point where we can't learn everything, so we specialize. There are brain surgeons who can't configure a home network. Programmers who don't know anything about a car engine.
Now I'm not saying anything about work ethic here. But if someone needed to be a mechanic to drive a car, then we'd have too many mechanics, or not enough people driving cars. Either would negatively impact efficiency across the board. Tools are made to make some task easier. A tool that is simple and effective is a well designed tool, and has nothing to do with the relative merit of the user.
You do know that Blizzard games have always been released for PC/Mac, don't you?
So if I buy one copy of chess, all other copies of chess are free for me? I better go tell the people at Franklin Mint where to ship stuff...
If I say the word 'sandwich' is offensive to me, it's not an offensive word. Why? Because noone agrees with me. However, if 50 million english speakers all decided 'sandwich' was offensive, you'd see a lot of menus change.
Besides, context is everything. Looking at the word on it's own just isn't looking at the whole picture.
Exactly. And Penny Arcade was quite accurate on the subject. The anonymity of the internet, especially in virtual worlds where your character can be completely recreated as an entirely new identity, removes responsibility. It doesn't matter if I'm disrespectful, I can always change my handle/create a new avatar. With no persistent identity, people can absolve themselves of personal responsibility. Lack of persistent identity, and the accountability that comes with, is a primary issue.