No, I simply read a head to head article on Eurogamer which showed that the PS3 games tended to use less anti-aliasing and instead ended up with some stupid blur filter. Doesn't matter how much better the PS3 is when they can't show the RESULTS for it. Of course it matters even less what kind of fringe PS3 vs 360 dickwagging people pull off when both platforms are completely crapped on by the Wii in the marketplace. Oh, wow, Killzone 2 looks good, just a shame it's being completely dominated by a game about weighting yourself. Somehow the gaming media swallowed the PS3 vs 360 red herring hook, line and sinker.
Hell, you don't even need to be an actual console engineer to see how little Microsoft's 'hundreds of millions into DirectX' has kept the Xbox 360 from getting humiliated by the PS3's graphics this gen.
Everybody knows the PS3 has better hardware however the tendency is for PS3 games to be graphically worse than 360 games. Oh, right, you're just going to pull a No True Scotsman and claim anyone who makes his game work better on the 360 than the PS3 is not a real console developer.
They applied so much (fiscal) brute force to get there anyone else trying it would have been eliminated by the end of that generation. IIRC they lost one billion US dollars per year on the XBox 1. That approach is not sane fiscally. Compare that to the fast starts Atari, Nintendo, Sega and Sony had.
That's the reason I want to keep my cellphone on a different battery instead of sharing one with my gaming or music device. Run out of battery on entertainment, you might get bored a bit. Run out of battery on the cellphone and it can get very hard to coordinate pickups and such.
I guess Settlers can be considered an RTS since it's really about building up a war economy and crushing the opposition, never mind the more recent derailings the franchise got... Maybe many people just don't know about games like Settlers? The genre hasn't seen much attention lately.
Indie is a really undefined term that orginally meant "not published by the major publishers" but nowadays noone's really sure what's indie and what's not. Is it indie to get published by Valve? Does indie just require funding your own development (again Valve or maybe The Conduit could apply here)?
However this is just about the games released in April, The Maw got released in January or so on XBLA.
It seems they did follow the standard documents though and that's probably enough to get them off the hook, noone said they're required to account for shortcomings in competing products or even that ODF is some sort of OOo-specific format so it doesn't matter that they implemented it differently from everyone else (hell, they can't even be expected to look at the OOo code to figure out the undocumented specifics because companies don't let their coders read code that could "taint" them and give anyone else a copyright claim over the output). While the end result is a tainted format I don't think a judge would rule against MS here because any ambiguity is the fault of the standard.
Some people were still in the learning process when their mod started and feel like they could do much better with their more developed grasp on the tools and everything...
There are hundreds of different jurisdictions on Earth, many having laws that conflict with those of others. If you could be tried in all of those for anything you did on the internet you'd easily end up pronounced guilty (and if just by default) in several every time you do anything on the internet, no matter how legal it is in your country. It makes sense to restrict the ability to sue someone to at least the jurisdictions he acted in. Sony once filed tons of nonsensical lawsuits against an exporter in many different jurisdictions, relying on the inability of the defendant to bring that many lawyers to the battle and getting default judgements in most of the jurisdictions involved (the exporter then shut down completely). Situations like that should not be permitted.
Just don't blame the government or the population for the acts of a private corporation. It'd be worse if the govt made laws to force everyone to offer free speech on their websites.
That's why almost no country implements a direct democracy and you usually see representative democracies where people elect those who they consider sufficiently knowledgeable about the issues and let them decide the details. If it's too complex for the masses to understand the hope is that at least the representative (or someone he picks) can understand it and get it done.
The Stasi comparisons are less about account deletion and more about their data mining processes and abuse by employers to dig up dirty secrets about people (and even if you don't upload them yourself it takes only one idiot in your circle of friends to upload something bad and potential employers will forever see how you got drunk and fucked a pig).
Not thought, speech intended to undermine the democracy or direct harm towards certain groups. When someone gives a big talk about exterminating group X they are potentially dangerous and likely to incite other people to act that violence out.
Free speech has never applied to private forums, the only thing it covers is government action. Facebook is not a part of the government and as such not required to offer freedom of expression to anyone.
Probably be on you because in a civil case preponderance of evidence is sufficient and if the button got pressed it's most likely been done by you or an agent of yours. It's very unlikely that you never saw the EULA (and even then a court may find that you're reasonably expected to know that there is an EULA on practically every piece of software) unless someone else installed the software and then you'll get asked who it was.
You are trying to rationalize it. The law says you have to obtain the copy in certain ways, you don't, you run afoul of the law. No law is natural, all law exists merely because a bunch of people came together and agreed to follow it while giving some people sticks to enforce it. It takes a lot of work to get a game made and you act like it's an assault on your human rights to tell you to pay for it.
They develop the games for a living so I suppose they want to get the money to live from it. They could have done all that work for free but they didn't (presumably because spending that much time on developing makes it hard to get money from other sources and at some point any human will want to have a decent life for himself).
Should also remember the fun density. It's not as easy as saying "this game has 80 hours so it's 5x as much fun as this other one that has 16 hours", often the amount of actual content in a game is equal and the time depends more on how it's spread out. Spread it thin and you get many hours but little fun in each of these, make a high intensity game that's a ton of fun to play and you'll probably run out of time quickly.
To me 5 hours of MMORPGing are about as fun as staring at a wall for 5 hours and paying the same for one hour of a game that's more fun is a LOT better.
Windows was designed for user friendliness and such, it's much easier to secure the system when it doesn't provide much driver support (just enough to deal with the hardware it's meant for rather than generalized support for all kinds of configurations and purposes), much UI, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I simply read a head to head article on Eurogamer which showed that the PS3 games tended to use less anti-aliasing and instead ended up with some stupid blur filter. Doesn't matter how much better the PS3 is when they can't show the RESULTS for it. Of course it matters even less what kind of fringe PS3 vs 360 dickwagging people pull off when both platforms are completely crapped on by the Wii in the marketplace. Oh, wow, Killzone 2 looks good, just a shame it's being completely dominated by a game about weighting yourself. Somehow the gaming media swallowed the PS3 vs 360 red herring hook, line and sinker.
Hell, you don't even need to be an actual console engineer to see how little Microsoft's 'hundreds of millions into DirectX' has kept the Xbox 360 from getting humiliated by the PS3's graphics this gen.
Everybody knows the PS3 has better hardware however the tendency is for PS3 games to be graphically worse than 360 games. Oh, right, you're just going to pull a No True Scotsman and claim anyone who makes his game work better on the 360 than the PS3 is not a real console developer.
They applied so much (fiscal) brute force to get there anyone else trying it would have been eliminated by the end of that generation. IIRC they lost one billion US dollars per year on the XBox 1. That approach is not sane fiscally. Compare that to the fast starts Atari, Nintendo, Sega and Sony had.
That's the reason I want to keep my cellphone on a different battery instead of sharing one with my gaming or music device. Run out of battery on entertainment, you might get bored a bit. Run out of battery on the cellphone and it can get very hard to coordinate pickups and such.
Maybe that was the reason the Game Boy had a black-and-green unlit display?
I guess Settlers can be considered an RTS since it's really about building up a war economy and crushing the opposition, never mind the more recent derailings the franchise got... Maybe many people just don't know about games like Settlers? The genre hasn't seen much attention lately.
Indie is a really undefined term that orginally meant "not published by the major publishers" but nowadays noone's really sure what's indie and what's not. Is it indie to get published by Valve? Does indie just require funding your own development (again Valve or maybe The Conduit could apply here)?
However this is just about the games released in April, The Maw got released in January or so on XBLA.
It seems they did follow the standard documents though and that's probably enough to get them off the hook, noone said they're required to account for shortcomings in competing products or even that ODF is some sort of OOo-specific format so it doesn't matter that they implemented it differently from everyone else (hell, they can't even be expected to look at the OOo code to figure out the undocumented specifics because companies don't let their coders read code that could "taint" them and give anyone else a copyright claim over the output). While the end result is a tainted format I don't think a judge would rule against MS here because any ambiguity is the fault of the standard.
Tech support?
Dead parrots?
Some people were still in the learning process when their mod started and feel like they could do much better with their more developed grasp on the tools and everything...
I've always thought that that would make for an interesting scenario in a tower defense game... "kill the lawyers before they can get to your door"
There are hundreds of different jurisdictions on Earth, many having laws that conflict with those of others. If you could be tried in all of those for anything you did on the internet you'd easily end up pronounced guilty (and if just by default) in several every time you do anything on the internet, no matter how legal it is in your country. It makes sense to restrict the ability to sue someone to at least the jurisdictions he acted in. Sony once filed tons of nonsensical lawsuits against an exporter in many different jurisdictions, relying on the inability of the defendant to bring that many lawyers to the battle and getting default judgements in most of the jurisdictions involved (the exporter then shut down completely). Situations like that should not be permitted.
Just don't blame the government or the population for the acts of a private corporation. It'd be worse if the govt made laws to force everyone to offer free speech on their websites.
That's why almost no country implements a direct democracy and you usually see representative democracies where people elect those who they consider sufficiently knowledgeable about the issues and let them decide the details. If it's too complex for the masses to understand the hope is that at least the representative (or someone he picks) can understand it and get it done.
The Stasi comparisons are less about account deletion and more about their data mining processes and abuse by employers to dig up dirty secrets about people (and even if you don't upload them yourself it takes only one idiot in your circle of friends to upload something bad and potential employers will forever see how you got drunk and fucked a pig).
Not thought, speech intended to undermine the democracy or direct harm towards certain groups. When someone gives a big talk about exterminating group X they are potentially dangerous and likely to incite other people to act that violence out.
Free speech has never applied to private forums, the only thing it covers is government action. Facebook is not a part of the government and as such not required to offer freedom of expression to anyone.
Probably be on you because in a civil case preponderance of evidence is sufficient and if the button got pressed it's most likely been done by you or an agent of yours. It's very unlikely that you never saw the EULA (and even then a court may find that you're reasonably expected to know that there is an EULA on practically every piece of software) unless someone else installed the software and then you'll get asked who it was.
You are trying to rationalize it. The law says you have to obtain the copy in certain ways, you don't, you run afoul of the law. No law is natural, all law exists merely because a bunch of people came together and agreed to follow it while giving some people sticks to enforce it. It takes a lot of work to get a game made and you act like it's an assault on your human rights to tell you to pay for it.
I'm pretty damn sure Quake 3 anfd Half-Life at least had a CD key check when you tried to connect to the server.
Is this a court of law or a regular internet forum?
They develop the games for a living so I suppose they want to get the money to live from it. They could have done all that work for free but they didn't (presumably because spending that much time on developing makes it hard to get money from other sources and at some point any human will want to have a decent life for himself).
Should also remember the fun density. It's not as easy as saying "this game has 80 hours so it's 5x as much fun as this other one that has 16 hours", often the amount of actual content in a game is equal and the time depends more on how it's spread out. Spread it thin and you get many hours but little fun in each of these, make a high intensity game that's a ton of fun to play and you'll probably run out of time quickly.
To me 5 hours of MMORPGing are about as fun as staring at a wall for 5 hours and paying the same for one hour of a game that's more fun is a LOT better.
Windows was designed for user friendliness and such, it's much easier to secure the system when it doesn't provide much driver support (just enough to deal with the hardware it's meant for rather than generalized support for all kinds of configurations and purposes), much UI, etc.