I recall a similar shot from the first episode (or pilot) of Battlestar Galactica. I didn't even notice the first time I watched it, but on repeated viewing it impressed the hell out of me.
You are approaching this as an engineer. An actual performer would disagree with you completely.
If the source of the output matters, then the original performer is what is valuable. If person A can perform better than person B, then person A will get more work, for higher pay. It is a competitive market, and the only thing that sets you apart is your ability.
If a sound engineer can make person B sound as good as person A, then person A is now out of work, or must lower their rates to be competitive with person B.
Looking at pop music nowadays, people do not get the contracts they do because they are musicians or performers. It's all about the image they can portray. The studio can clean up their recordings, and the engineers can make the concert sound good. If this is the case, why are we paying them millions of dollars?
Give me a band that is willing to perform live, unplugged, and I'll respect them. Otherwise all the credit goes to the behind-the-scenes guys that make them not suck.
It all depends on if other forms of life consider 'a few hundred years' as a long time or not. If a being lives for 2000 years, then a couple hundred isn't that much.
I find it ironic that people who want their gameplay to be work look down on those who want their gameplay to be fun.
Regarding the original topic: I think the 'next big thing' will have to change the game significantly. Anyone trying to make a new WoW, or WoW in Space, or anything remotely like WoW is shooting themselves in the foot. They need to figure out WHY WoW works so damn well, and apply that to something different enough that people would want to play it instead.
It is going to be VERY difficult to make a EQ-style MMO without it being completely overshadowed by the 800 lb gorilla that is WoW.
Personally, I don't like being teamed up with total strangers. I like being grouped with my friends. I don't generally have 20 friends available at the same time to game. Having 4 is a common occurance. So Halo 2 multiplayer is very accomodating. Basically, having 40-player matches is not an incentive to me, if anything it's another reason to avoid the game. Thats just the possibility for even more asshats ruining the game at once.
The point is: Your personal preferences don't mean shit, and don't determine the superiority of one thing over another.
Limitations WERE placed on what developers can do with their personal characters. The issue here is that devs broke those rules, and it had a significant impact on the games playerbase. Your arguments have nothing to do with TFA.
This isn't about players taking the rules farther than the game makers expected, this is about the referees working to help their favorite team.
CCP has absolutely no control, nor authority over what their players do outside the realm of their game. If people communicate via forums or voice chat, they are free to do so. If someone decides to spy on those things, and publish the info contained within, it has nothing to do with CCP.
If a player wants to keep CCP involved in their gameplay, they need to keep it in the game. The developers stance on the cutthroat nature of the game strictly refers to ingame freedoms. They have no power if it's not on their servers.
I know this is off-topic to the article, but I felt the need to clarify to the parent.
Slashdot Mirror
I recall a similar shot from the first episode (or pilot) of Battlestar Galactica. I didn't even notice the first time I watched it, but on repeated viewing it impressed the hell out of me.
You are approaching this as an engineer. An actual performer would disagree with you completely.
If the source of the output matters, then the original performer is what is valuable. If person A can perform better than person B, then person A will get more work, for higher pay. It is a competitive market, and the only thing that sets you apart is your ability.
If a sound engineer can make person B sound as good as person A, then person A is now out of work, or must lower their rates to be competitive with person B.
Looking at pop music nowadays, people do not get the contracts they do because they are musicians or performers. It's all about the image they can portray. The studio can clean up their recordings, and the engineers can make the concert sound good. If this is the case, why are we paying them millions of dollars?
Give me a band that is willing to perform live, unplugged, and I'll respect them. Otherwise all the credit goes to the behind-the-scenes guys that make them not suck.
It all depends on if other forms of life consider 'a few hundred years' as a long time or not. If a being lives for 2000 years, then a couple hundred isn't that much.
I don't think it's the same concept as what the article is referring to: You don't have to lose to Rag to advance the plot. You lose becase you lose.
Although it's really exciting to finally beat that bastard, and look back on how he used to wipe your party in 30 seconds when you first got there.
What're you talking about? His post was rock solid.
Here is your copy of "Barbie: Pink Pony Adventures"
Please make sure to check all content, including mini-games, and all 200 unlockables.
If it's a government agency, nothing to the developer. But we will all pay for it...
Yeah! I remember when EQ hit 8 million subs.
I find it ironic that people who want their gameplay to be work look down on those who want their gameplay to be fun.
Regarding the original topic: I think the 'next big thing' will have to change the game significantly. Anyone trying to make a new WoW, or WoW in Space, or anything remotely like WoW is shooting themselves in the foot. They need to figure out WHY WoW works so damn well, and apply that to something different enough that people would want to play it instead.
It is going to be VERY difficult to make a EQ-style MMO without it being completely overshadowed by the 800 lb gorilla that is WoW.
It's a helluva way to ruin a date. I mean, noone wants to kiss a guy who's been infinitely diminished.
Bah, I was still thinking of the parent. Thats what I get for being distracted by work.
Thank you for reminding me of a game I loved for some odd reason. Uniracers. Now I gotta dig out my SNES. (Mebbe it'll end up on Virtual Console?)
Personally, I don't like being teamed up with total strangers. I like being grouped with my friends. I don't generally have 20 friends available at the same time to game. Having 4 is a common occurance. So Halo 2 multiplayer is very accomodating. Basically, having 40-player matches is not an incentive to me, if anything it's another reason to avoid the game. Thats just the possibility for even more asshats ruining the game at once.
The point is: Your personal preferences don't mean shit, and don't determine the superiority of one thing over another.
why is a 40-player match a requirement of 'fun'?
I'm suprised anyone actually tried to do that AD token turnin crap. I know I ignored it.
XxLegolasxX
We will never forget...
Our Orange goes to 11.
Limitations WERE placed on what developers can do with their personal characters. The issue here is that devs broke those rules, and it had a significant impact on the games playerbase. Your arguments have nothing to do with TFA.
This isn't about players taking the rules farther than the game makers expected, this is about the referees working to help their favorite team.
Anyone else hear that whooshing sound?
I clicked on that guys user URL and ended up getting a keylogger. Slashdot really needs to do something about this.
CCP has absolutely no control, nor authority over what their players do outside the realm of their game. If people communicate via forums or voice chat, they are free to do so. If someone decides to spy on those things, and publish the info contained within, it has nothing to do with CCP.
If a player wants to keep CCP involved in their gameplay, they need to keep it in the game. The developers stance on the cutthroat nature of the game strictly refers to ingame freedoms. They have no power if it's not on their servers.
I know this is off-topic to the article, but I felt the need to clarify to the parent.
Better word for it. Thank you. And I agree, until it is challenged, we have little to argue about.
Currently, if Microsoft decides you violated their EULA, they can revoke your key and potentially kill your install.