Increasing accuracy on mathematical shapes like that is pointless as you rarely if ever want a perfect mathematical shape. Even NURBS are usually just an approximation of a real shape so it doesn't really matter if they're perfectly round or not, the surface they depict isn't either.
Personally, after countless bad experience, I'm to a point where I'm very worry with good graphics. I almost automatically associate good graphics with poor gameplay and I tend to simply overlook those games.
In my experience games with bad graphics tend to be shitty in other ways too since it's usually a sign of lacking effort, not a sign of focussing on something else. Good graphics require effort and usually the game underneath tends to be at least passable (as opposed to total crap where you're lucky if touching a wall does not make your character drop through the floor).
I'm not sure but I think the Gothic games (except 3) didn't have bad graphics for their time. If you sample games from the past and judge their graphics by modern standards you'll of course find a lot of games that are ugly but good but that's mostly because the graphics have aged, not because they had bad graphics to begin with.
The Wii is not for gamers. Instead it appeals to those who are into fads.
Yeah and that fad will die any minute now. Aaaaaaany minute. Hey, we've been predicting it for almost two years now, it should come true soon. Oh and that DS fad should be over any day too.
So a settlement is a contract and it doesn't matter that the deliberation happens under the threat of a lawsuit (which is harmful even to those who have nothing to hide)?
Depending on which court you ask the volatile copies in your RAM don't count, only non-volatile does (though if you started devising storage schemes exploiting that you'd quickly be stopped).
You know, you can just make free content for the internet and ignore the copyrighted kind (if you're so uncreative that you cannot make stuff without copying other works maybe you are unfit to be a content maker), that way you get your world and we get ours.
I'm trying to remember what, if any obligation the recipient has if, e.g., the sender also sends a self addressed, postage paid return envelope.
Probably not much or it would be possible to DoS a company (or person) by bombarding them with "return this or get sued" mail and putting so much workload on them that they fail to keep up.
It's not easy to judge the result of such a thing. Maybe the ability can maintain a permanent stun, how do you check if it does? Repeat just it? Repeat a sequence of moves? Brute force all possible chains of action (grows exponentially)? How do you consider potential counter moves or strategies? Who could properly read the resulting graph? What exactly do you graph anyway, damage dealt vs damage received? Damage per second (wouldn't catch combos that reduce the enemys damage a lot)? Who dies first (have fun with all the level, item and skill combinations along with the problem of deciding who SHOULD win)? It gets worse the more factors the game has (e.g. is there a specific movement pattern that makes the seemingly OP weapon useless in real play?).
It can violate hatespeech laws or whathaveyou. Maybe it's a thinly veiled piece of Nazi propaganda (concentration camp simulator 2008?) or maybe it's just a horribly brutal game that makes unnecessary brutality a desirable thing? Maybe it's a DVD game consisting of child pornography?
There are two interesting things here: first, I'd bet that for 99.9% of all programs in real life, it is not only possible to determine if it will halt or not, but it is in fact trivial.
I think it's not quite that easy or we would be able to catch almost all crashbugs automatically. We can catch some but the tricky ones don't get caught automatically.
A ghost is usually just a projection of the other racer as he's driving with no way to interact with it, you can just see where the other guy gains speed on you or loses it. Of course that's pointless if you ghost drivers out of a multi-car race where the ghosts interact with cars that aren't there for you while you interact with cars that aren't there for him...
I have a feeling that being touted as a killer for some other game automatically means failure. Most games just try to stand for themselves, just some try to directly grab the userbase of a big game and realize too late that the target has a huge userbase because it is an exceptional game and realistically the chance of beating it are very low.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you have nothing to hide, why do you wear pants?"
It's implied in "A is a member of Al-Qaeda" that "A is helping terrorists or even plans to be one himself".
I think the simple fact that spam campaigns still exist are proof positive that (unfortunately) plenty of people still read spam.
Or at least that spammers can convince their clients that people do.
Avoid? There's plenty of laws that let you get big money out of him!
Which is why you should just anonymously report him to the police or something.
I've had it explained that the real benefit ray tracing allows is that render time does not increase with geometry.
I think it makes the growth from geometry mostly neglible but it's not zero and if you add too much you will see an effect.
Increasing accuracy on mathematical shapes like that is pointless as you rarely if ever want a perfect mathematical shape. Even NURBS are usually just an approximation of a real shape so it doesn't really matter if they're perfectly round or not, the surface they depict isn't either.
Personally, after countless bad experience, I'm to a point where I'm very worry with good graphics. I almost automatically associate good graphics with poor gameplay and I tend to simply overlook those games.
In my experience games with bad graphics tend to be shitty in other ways too since it's usually a sign of lacking effort, not a sign of focussing on something else. Good graphics require effort and usually the game underneath tends to be at least passable (as opposed to total crap where you're lucky if touching a wall does not make your character drop through the floor).
I'm not sure but I think the Gothic games (except 3) didn't have bad graphics for their time. If you sample games from the past and judge their graphics by modern standards you'll of course find a lot of games that are ugly but good but that's mostly because the graphics have aged, not because they had bad graphics to begin with.
The Wii is not for gamers. Instead it appeals to those who are into fads.
Yeah and that fad will die any minute now. Aaaaaaany minute. Hey, we've been predicting it for almost two years now, it should come true soon. Oh and that DS fad should be over any day too.
So a settlement is a contract and it doesn't matter that the deliberation happens under the threat of a lawsuit (which is harmful even to those who have nothing to hide)?
Depending on which court you ask the volatile copies in your RAM don't count, only non-volatile does (though if you started devising storage schemes exploiting that you'd quickly be stopped).
You know, you can just make free content for the internet and ignore the copyrighted kind (if you're so uncreative that you cannot make stuff without copying other works maybe you are unfit to be a content maker), that way you get your world and we get ours.
Only if you get the court costs back and maybe fronted. Huge companies are very good at making trials last forever.
I think he just read that off the edge of one of his own CDs, I doubt the "no public performance" bit is found on CDs meant for radio stations.
The return of Topper?
The equivalent to that here in Germany is Bertelsmann. You know, the parent company to BMG.
I'm trying to remember what, if any obligation the recipient has if, e.g., the sender also sends a self addressed, postage paid return envelope.
Probably not much or it would be possible to DoS a company (or person) by bombarding them with "return this or get sued" mail and putting so much workload on them that they fail to keep up.
It's not easy to judge the result of such a thing. Maybe the ability can maintain a permanent stun, how do you check if it does? Repeat just it? Repeat a sequence of moves? Brute force all possible chains of action (grows exponentially)? How do you consider potential counter moves or strategies? Who could properly read the resulting graph? What exactly do you graph anyway, damage dealt vs damage received? Damage per second (wouldn't catch combos that reduce the enemys damage a lot)? Who dies first (have fun with all the level, item and skill combinations along with the problem of deciding who SHOULD win)? It gets worse the more factors the game has (e.g. is there a specific movement pattern that makes the seemingly OP weapon useless in real play?).
So if you look hard enough you'll find goatse, tubgirl and 2girls1cup in the game?
It can violate hatespeech laws or whathaveyou. Maybe it's a thinly veiled piece of Nazi propaganda (concentration camp simulator 2008?) or maybe it's just a horribly brutal game that makes unnecessary brutality a desirable thing? Maybe it's a DVD game consisting of child pornography?
There are two interesting things here: first, I'd bet that for 99.9% of all programs in real life, it is not only possible to determine if it will halt or not, but it is in fact trivial.
I think it's not quite that easy or we would be able to catch almost all crashbugs automatically. We can catch some but the tricky ones don't get caught automatically.
A ghost is usually just a projection of the other racer as he's driving with no way to interact with it, you can just see where the other guy gains speed on you or loses it. Of course that's pointless if you ghost drivers out of a multi-car race where the ghosts interact with cars that aren't there for you while you interact with cars that aren't there for him...
Don't racers have at least one spare car?
They don't sell the 80GB anymore. Yes, I just checked, the MGS4 package includes a 40GB PS3, not an 80GB (at least in Europe).
I have a feeling that being touted as a killer for some other game automatically means failure. Most games just try to stand for themselves, just some try to directly grab the userbase of a big game and realize too late that the target has a huge userbase because it is an exceptional game and realistically the chance of beating it are very low.