When you want to demonstrate futility you don't make a game that's winnable, you make a game that will prevent any attempt of the player to avoid the fate (and you better do it in a way that seems natural, like the world wants to stop the player character, not just invisible walls and stopping the game script until the player does whatever stupid thing is expected!). You control all parameters of the simulation, put them to use! This probably works better with less blatant forcing, e.g. a friend of mine had an edutainment game about energy saving that would instantly kill the player with global warming if he turns up the heat before closing the window and things like that. Too many people lack the subtlety required to make a work that has a message without being so blatant about it that the user gets annoyed and with simulations you need even more subtlety.
Of course you can fuck up and leave a bug in that destroys your message but enough people fail at that with static media too, they simply forget that action X contradicts supposed aesop Y.
Also a game has the advantage over a rulebook that it does not reveal everything to the user, rules can remain hidden to surprise him. That comparison is as stupis as complaining about movies and plays because you could just as well publish the script.
Of course IMO art must not fail at the primary purpose of the chosen medium if it wants to be worthy of the title and for games that's interactive entertainment. For most other media it's various forms of static entertainment, for paintings it's being placed in the living room so the owner can use it as a status symbol... Too many people argue a work is art because of secondary qualities (e.g. the graphic style or story on a videogame) when its weakness is the primary quality of the medium (e.g. weak gameplay that feels like they just added it because they were contracted for a game instead of a movie or gameplay that's disconnected from the rest as if they had an idea for a work of art and an idea for a cool game and wanted to make both at the same time) and IMO that does not deserve to be called good art. Choose the right medium for what you want to do, don't add cookie-cutter gameplay that railroads the player just so you can show your pretty FMV cutscenes, make a movie right off the bat! Oh, wait, most of these praised "games" would be considered B grade or worse if they were put into the proper medium and compared with the other works in that area.
Don't worry, the law will require them to attach a big warning label with all the important things like "do not eat", "not for internal use" and "do not taunt" on both sides of the cell so the thing is safely covered in label paper and noone could accidentally see the surface of the actual cell.
The DS Lite is supposedly way better in battery life. At the darkest screen setting (equivalent to the regular DS's screen) it lasts more than twice as long AFAIK.
The expected reply. Many companies have a policy to never support or deny rumors except with official product announcements so noone can fill in the gaps (e.g. if they were to deny all or most false rumors a refusal to comment will mean it's more likely the rumor is true).
What people say and what they do are different things. EA probably thinks that those who complain about DRM and pirate are the kind that want to play the game, DRM or not and if you remove the option to pirate they're left with no choice but to buy it and THEN complain (alternatively, that they're the kind who will just complain and would still pirate even if the DRM is weaker but complaining helps their conscience rationalize it). If he wasn't pirating EA might listen since they see that he doesn't want to play the game bad enough to overlook the DRM and thus the DRM needs to be weaker to regain the customer (provided they think he would have bought it in the absense of DRM).
An economy is strong because of the money flow, it doesn't matter that much how much money is actually in the country. Besides, the US already imports so many things (and then exports other things to get money back into the country) that a few legalized drugs won't make a difference anyway.
There's not much money in going black market for legal things, most people prefer the safety of dealing with a merchant that will still be in the same place tomorrow. Sure, some might buy black market to avoid the taxes but most of the ones who jump aboard with the legalization will remain legal. Besides, tax evasion is perceived as grave, with illegal goods you don't really have a choice since paying the taxes gets you caught but with legal goods the evasion is too much risk to be worth it.
Do you plan on making changes to the antiquated voting system, especially its tendency to give minority voters (whether third party or just the unfavoured party in their state) no ability to influence the outcome of an election? Do you think the voting system does or does not have an influence on the feeling of disenfranchisement among voters and the low voter turnouts?
Or, you know, you could skip the verification step and just do testing like everybody else. Or restrict yourself to one platform or whatever. Nobody's forcing you to write two versions and prove that they are identical, you're free (and probably required by budget constraints) to skip some steps so focus on the ones that are important to getting something out of the door (i.e. getting one good version done so you have something to sell).
And then the cracked versions won't even include an EULA and what then? Or what if it happens in an area where the courts do not just blindly accept every EULA term (and accepting willful damage is pretty damn hard)? Then you're fucked because you're liable for damages and that even in cases where the user didn't even buy the game.
I figured the point was to induce users into making false bug reports so you could flame them but usually the plans backfire as false positives lead to alienated customers (I refer to it as an iron pigs debacle since that was an effect in one prominent game using it, the iron smelter in Settlers 3 produced pigs instead of iron).
And that will still be cracked by someone recording the traffic and creating an offline version of it, then you just end up with losing all non-broadband users, annoying legitimate buyers with wasted bandwidth and delays and the pirates happily playing their offline version. Requiring online only works when the online part is something the player wants, e.g. multiplayer. You can lock the player out of that. It fails when the online part is merely a hassle used for some trickery because then a smart cracker can strip it out. A single player game without online? No problem, the online didn't add anything. A multiplayer game without online? Big deal, the online was the main selling point.
Do they really still sell? The series seems more like an also-ran these days, a desperate grasp for its glory days that ended along with the PSX era. Same goes for the Spyro games. Another mascot platformer in the long list of has-beens. Weren't these series done by a different team back in the day anyway?
It's not really a debate between life and death, it's "do we put its remains to good use or do we just throw them in the trash" because the cells are taken from surplus embryos during an artificial insemination which are going to die anyway (in the process lots of embryos are created because it's likely that the injection will fail to some degree and they want to make sure they get a healthy embryo to implant). Kinda like arguing that involuntary organ donations (not the Monty Python kind) kill people when the organs are only taken from bodies that are dead anyway but still have usable parts.
But then again they didn't have to invent industrialization first, they could buy industrial stuff from many suppliers. It's a bit like flying from Spain to the US and saying you're better than the discoverers because it was faster.
Is it completely free now? I was avoiding Universe At War because it has archievements that grant advantages in multiplayer mode so goldmembers could get stat boosts and such which normal players had no access to. If that's no longer pay-only I might pick the game up for a tenner from the bargain bin.
Slashdot Mirror
When you want to demonstrate futility you don't make a game that's winnable, you make a game that will prevent any attempt of the player to avoid the fate (and you better do it in a way that seems natural, like the world wants to stop the player character, not just invisible walls and stopping the game script until the player does whatever stupid thing is expected!). You control all parameters of the simulation, put them to use! This probably works better with less blatant forcing, e.g. a friend of mine had an edutainment game about energy saving that would instantly kill the player with global warming if he turns up the heat before closing the window and things like that. Too many people lack the subtlety required to make a work that has a message without being so blatant about it that the user gets annoyed and with simulations you need even more subtlety.
Of course you can fuck up and leave a bug in that destroys your message but enough people fail at that with static media too, they simply forget that action X contradicts supposed aesop Y.
Also a game has the advantage over a rulebook that it does not reveal everything to the user, rules can remain hidden to surprise him. That comparison is as stupis as complaining about movies and plays because you could just as well publish the script.
Of course IMO art must not fail at the primary purpose of the chosen medium if it wants to be worthy of the title and for games that's interactive entertainment. For most other media it's various forms of static entertainment, for paintings it's being placed in the living room so the owner can use it as a status symbol... Too many people argue a work is art because of secondary qualities (e.g. the graphic style or story on a videogame) when its weakness is the primary quality of the medium (e.g. weak gameplay that feels like they just added it because they were contracted for a game instead of a movie or gameplay that's disconnected from the rest as if they had an idea for a work of art and an idea for a cool game and wanted to make both at the same time) and IMO that does not deserve to be called good art. Choose the right medium for what you want to do, don't add cookie-cutter gameplay that railroads the player just so you can show your pretty FMV cutscenes, make a movie right off the bat! Oh, wait, most of these praised "games" would be considered B grade or worse if they were put into the proper medium and compared with the other works in that area.
Don't worry, the law will require them to attach a big warning label with all the important things like "do not eat", "not for internal use" and "do not taunt" on both sides of the cell so the thing is safely covered in label paper and noone could accidentally see the surface of the actual cell.
The DS Lite is supposedly way better in battery life. At the darkest screen setting (equivalent to the regular DS's screen) it lasts more than twice as long AFAIK.
No, business strategy.
Get a Wii, it's designed around appealing to those who find modern gaming too complicated.
There's an official Nintendo MP3 player cart for the GBA, that works in the DS too.
The expected reply. Many companies have a policy to never support or deny rumors except with official product announcements so noone can fill in the gaps (e.g. if they were to deny all or most false rumors a refusal to comment will mean it's more likely the rumor is true).
Apparently fits into their business strategy though.
What people say and what they do are different things. EA probably thinks that those who complain about DRM and pirate are the kind that want to play the game, DRM or not and if you remove the option to pirate they're left with no choice but to buy it and THEN complain (alternatively, that they're the kind who will just complain and would still pirate even if the DRM is weaker but complaining helps their conscience rationalize it). If he wasn't pirating EA might listen since they see that he doesn't want to play the game bad enough to overlook the DRM and thus the DRM needs to be weaker to regain the customer (provided they think he would have bought it in the absense of DRM).
What genre of music do they play?
We don't have that term in my native language.
An economy is strong because of the money flow, it doesn't matter that much how much money is actually in the country. Besides, the US already imports so many things (and then exports other things to get money back into the country) that a few legalized drugs won't make a difference anyway.
There's not much money in going black market for legal things, most people prefer the safety of dealing with a merchant that will still be in the same place tomorrow. Sure, some might buy black market to avoid the taxes but most of the ones who jump aboard with the legalization will remain legal. Besides, tax evasion is perceived as grave, with illegal goods you don't really have a choice since paying the taxes gets you caught but with legal goods the evasion is too much risk to be worth it.
Do you plan on making changes to the antiquated voting system, especially its tendency to give minority voters (whether third party or just the unfavoured party in their state) no ability to influence the outcome of an election? Do you think the voting system does or does not have an influence on the feeling of disenfranchisement among voters and the low voter turnouts?
This is not a question as to whether we should, and it is addressed to both candidates.
Don't bother clarifying the question, politicians don't answer the question they were asked but the question they want to answer.
Have fun.
Or, you know, you could skip the verification step and just do testing like everybody else. Or restrict yourself to one platform or whatever. Nobody's forcing you to write two versions and prove that they are identical, you're free (and probably required by budget constraints) to skip some steps so focus on the ones that are important to getting something out of the door (i.e. getting one good version done so you have something to sell).
And then the cracked versions won't even include an EULA and what then? Or what if it happens in an area where the courts do not just blindly accept every EULA term (and accepting willful damage is pretty damn hard)? Then you're fucked because you're liable for damages and that even in cases where the user didn't even buy the game.
I figured the point was to induce users into making false bug reports so you could flame them but usually the plans backfire as false positives lead to alienated customers (I refer to it as an iron pigs debacle since that was an effect in one prominent game using it, the iron smelter in Settlers 3 produced pigs instead of iron).
And that will still be cracked by someone recording the traffic and creating an offline version of it, then you just end up with losing all non-broadband users, annoying legitimate buyers with wasted bandwidth and delays and the pirates happily playing their offline version. Requiring online only works when the online part is something the player wants, e.g. multiplayer. You can lock the player out of that. It fails when the online part is merely a hassle used for some trickery because then a smart cracker can strip it out. A single player game without online? No problem, the online didn't add anything. A multiplayer game without online? Big deal, the online was the main selling point.
IOW, he sent them the message that they need better DRM so he has no choice but to pay in order to play.
Square-Enix, maybe?
Do they really still sell? The series seems more like an also-ran these days, a desperate grasp for its glory days that ended along with the PSX era. Same goes for the Spyro games. Another mascot platformer in the long list of has-beens. Weren't these series done by a different team back in the day anyway?
It's not really a debate between life and death, it's "do we put its remains to good use or do we just throw them in the trash" because the cells are taken from surplus embryos during an artificial insemination which are going to die anyway (in the process lots of embryos are created because it's likely that the injection will fail to some degree and they want to make sure they get a healthy embryo to implant). Kinda like arguing that involuntary organ donations (not the Monty Python kind) kill people when the organs are only taken from bodies that are dead anyway but still have usable parts.
But then again they didn't have to invent industrialization first, they could buy industrial stuff from many suppliers. It's a bit like flying from Spain to the US and saying you're better than the discoverers because it was faster.
Is it completely free now? I was avoiding Universe At War because it has archievements that grant advantages in multiplayer mode so goldmembers could get stat boosts and such which normal players had no access to. If that's no longer pay-only I might pick the game up for a tenner from the bargain bin.