That sounds like a horrible idea. Isn't it kinda pointless to play that game when it has a definite progression that leads to your victory and is not influenced by any action you take? Sure, you can see the world, meet exciting creatures and kill them but then it makes no sense for your accessible areas to be tied to some storyline. What kind of roleplaying is that supposed to be? "Oh, hey, I can't do anything to further the story so I'll just mash some orcs until the ring is officially dropped into Mount Doom". Isn't the only sane reason for a story that unfolds in real time to make it react to player actions? E.g. noone defended Helm's Deep so that area is controlled by Mordor now, some player army overwhelmed Saruman's forces before reinforcements arrived or the Ring fell into the hands of... uh... evil dude again?
If it was possible to do such things just by knowing how it works the developer is really, REALLY dumb and deserves the resulting fiasco. That's like being able to gain root on a box just because you know how the password hashing works. The mechanism isn't supposed to be the secret, the data it is fed is.
If you do something for a while it shows up in your dreams. I've often had elements of games or movies I watched/played before sleeping in my dreams. Nowadays I get nightmares about my daily commute. Your brain just reviews the happenings of the day in some way.
I have this hunch that videogames make people hesistate less in firefights because they have learned that being shot at is dangerous whereas our normal instincts don't think that something flashing up across the room can kill us. Somehow I doubt the hesistation seen with guns was present with melee weapons as well since a soldier could see his enemy and his weapon and his instincts knew that it's kill or be killed. In videogames you die from being shot at and thus learn to instinctively equate shots with danger. From what I heard videogamers tend to have their "first kill shock" after the battle is over whereas untrained people have it immediately after their first kill, often leaving them vulnerable to enemy fire. I think it's less about the reality of the situation and more about the knowledge that the battle is still ongoing.
The sales charts I see (mostly Japanese stuff) do include quite a few third party games for the DS. Not so sure about the Wii but that thing isn't in the charts very often anyway.
Actually I think it's more of a marketing issue. Nintendo has a reputation, characters that are well known and now even a competent marketing department. When Nintendo makes a game the press talks about it. Nintendo has everyone's attention and that's why their games sell better than everyone else's. The error some third parties make is to put out a game and think it'll sell just as well as the games of this marketing behemoth. You have to compete with Nintendo not only on quality but also on marketing and it's going to be fucking difficult to get a similar marketing force out of nowhere. Nintendo is a familiar brand for people without a clue (i.e. those who don't read gaming publications to know what's good and buy stuff on a whim based on what their friends and the box say), your game can be the best thing since sliced bread, if you don't make sure people know about that people will pick a game over it that they know something about.
By the way, if you want to knock companies for uninspired Wii ports EA should be the last company to take that blame, they've put more effort into their Wii ports than any other company.
Where are you getting THAT from?
on
Soldat 1.4 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Do you see ANYONE on Slashdot complaining about the graphics? This isn't Gamefaqs, many Slashdotters have found the Amulet of Yendor and insist that there haven't been any good games since Asteroids. If you want to complain about graphics whores try a website where people actually complain about bad graphics, as you can see the complaints here are about the lack of Linux support and the lack of opensourciness with a dash of "Why is this news?".
It's more like someone crossed Counterstrike with Abuse. Heh, I remember playing Abuse over LAN in the school CS lab way back when. I don't think those computers would even have run Doom.
A license that has no terms allowing revoking cannot be revoked. If someone granted you a license you have a license, he can't just say "I don't like that license anymore", you have the reasonable expectation that when he said the license is valid forever that it's valid forever.
High speed trains usually have loads of detectors for anything blocking the rail and might actually be harder to hit than, say, a regional train doing 180 km/h during rush hour. It's not like maglevs are any more vulnerable than regular trains. Their speed doesn't really matter since you won't be able to direct it at any target and all you get done is kill the passengers which you can do just fine on today's trains already.
In space combat you could catapult a missile out of your ship and ignite it much later to make the shot come from a different position (I think that can be done by submarines already). You could also catapult other weapons as remote-operated (wire if need to be) drones but with those it's a bigger loss if they are destroyed. Not that it matters if you can kill fast enough. As for emissions, you don't need zero, you just need to have them below the noise level and possibly scattered by some means (e.g. smokescreen, these days they include substances that emit huge amounts of IR noise, having all other spectra the enemy may be scanning in there wouldn't be impossible). Of course you probably only need stealth until you've spotted your enemy and readied your weapons, noone's complaining that stealth fighters are unstealthed when they open their missile/bomb bays.
Not really, the brain can remain operational with some damage (some people lose a hemisphere and while crippled they still live and in combat that could be enough to get more shots off than you want him to), you want to destroy as much as possible to make sure it dies.
Depends on where it is aimed. Stomach wounds are often fatal, not because a vital organ is destroyed but because of the resulting blood loss. Also depending on the shape of the hole it might do too little damage to kill (even vital organs can take some damage and the less volume you damage the less likely you are to get a kill).
Not really. Making your armor reflective will bounce a lot of energy off but not all of it so most likely the armor would still heat up, although slower. Bright, reflective armor makes you highly visible so you get shot down in no time with conventional weapons. Of course it's doubtful that these laser guns would get used against armor, even without any reflection you'd have to burn through the armor and hit something, if the target moves you'll have a hard time keeping the laser on the same spot and your "drill" will be at the wrong angle so you lose most of the penetration you have already archieved. And even then you still have the molten material in the way that blocks your beam for a while making the whole process take much longer than simply firing a rocket at the target.
This seems to be intended for anti-personell use though, you probably don't need to burn as far in to kill a person.
Daisycutter refers to the tube attached to the tip of a bomb that allows the bomb to detonate before the main body has touched the ground and have less of the blast absorbed by the ground. These days we have so many electronics in bombs I'd expect there's some kind of sensor that detonates the bomb at an optimal height without adding any long tubes to the thing.
I'd like to think every single one except China. But since I can't say that with 100% confidence, let's just say: The vast majority.
Don't forget that there's more to the world than the west and I'd wager by numbers the unfree (military dictatorship, monarchy, theocracy, one party "democracy", etc) outnumber the free.
Slashdot Mirror
int(rand($member_count * 0.9)) you mean.
But it would have effects on the cars that the drivers don't expect. Could cause some accidents when a truck driver is surprised by the sudden wind.
No, Microsoft is about to open the gates of hell and unleash demons upon everyone! Grab your BFG and see if those demons can cancel THIS!
That sounds like a horrible idea. Isn't it kinda pointless to play that game when it has a definite progression that leads to your victory and is not influenced by any action you take? Sure, you can see the world, meet exciting creatures and kill them but then it makes no sense for your accessible areas to be tied to some storyline. What kind of roleplaying is that supposed to be? "Oh, hey, I can't do anything to further the story so I'll just mash some orcs until the ring is officially dropped into Mount Doom". Isn't the only sane reason for a story that unfolds in real time to make it react to player actions? E.g. noone defended Helm's Deep so that area is controlled by Mordor now, some player army overwhelmed Saruman's forces before reinforcements arrived or the Ring fell into the hands of... uh... evil dude again?
If it was possible to do such things just by knowing how it works the developer is really, REALLY dumb and deserves the resulting fiasco. That's like being able to gain root on a box just because you know how the password hashing works. The mechanism isn't supposed to be the secret, the data it is fed is.
How about "espionage"?
Actually the **AA is secretly plotting to throw the world into a new ice age and then demand one million dollars to reverse it.
If you do something for a while it shows up in your dreams. I've often had elements of games or movies I watched/played before sleeping in my dreams. Nowadays I get nightmares about my daily commute. Your brain just reviews the happenings of the day in some way.
I have this hunch that videogames make people hesistate less in firefights because they have learned that being shot at is dangerous whereas our normal instincts don't think that something flashing up across the room can kill us. Somehow I doubt the hesistation seen with guns was present with melee weapons as well since a soldier could see his enemy and his weapon and his instincts knew that it's kill or be killed. In videogames you die from being shot at and thus learn to instinctively equate shots with danger. From what I heard videogamers tend to have their "first kill shock" after the battle is over whereas untrained people have it immediately after their first kill, often leaving them vulnerable to enemy fire. I think it's less about the reality of the situation and more about the knowledge that the battle is still ongoing.
The sales charts I see (mostly Japanese stuff) do include quite a few third party games for the DS. Not so sure about the Wii but that thing isn't in the charts very often anyway.
Actually I think it's more of a marketing issue. Nintendo has a reputation, characters that are well known and now even a competent marketing department. When Nintendo makes a game the press talks about it. Nintendo has everyone's attention and that's why their games sell better than everyone else's. The error some third parties make is to put out a game and think it'll sell just as well as the games of this marketing behemoth. You have to compete with Nintendo not only on quality but also on marketing and it's going to be fucking difficult to get a similar marketing force out of nowhere. Nintendo is a familiar brand for people without a clue (i.e. those who don't read gaming publications to know what's good and buy stuff on a whim based on what their friends and the box say), your game can be the best thing since sliced bread, if you don't make sure people know about that people will pick a game over it that they know something about.
By the way, if you want to knock companies for uninspired Wii ports EA should be the last company to take that blame, they've put more effort into their Wii ports than any other company.
Do you see ANYONE on Slashdot complaining about the graphics? This isn't Gamefaqs, many Slashdotters have found the Amulet of Yendor and insist that there haven't been any good games since Asteroids. If you want to complain about graphics whores try a website where people actually complain about bad graphics, as you can see the complaints here are about the lack of Linux support and the lack of opensourciness with a dash of "Why is this news?".
It's more like someone crossed Counterstrike with Abuse. Heh, I remember playing Abuse over LAN in the school CS lab way back when. I don't think those computers would even have run Doom.
Why do you think the Japanese eat their fish raw?
A license that has no terms allowing revoking cannot be revoked. If someone granted you a license you have a license, he can't just say "I don't like that license anymore", you have the reasonable expectation that when he said the license is valid forever that it's valid forever.
High speed trains usually have loads of detectors for anything blocking the rail and might actually be harder to hit than, say, a regional train doing 180 km/h during rush hour. It's not like maglevs are any more vulnerable than regular trains. Their speed doesn't really matter since you won't be able to direct it at any target and all you get done is kill the passengers which you can do just fine on today's trains already.
Then you just leave at the next station and take the train in the opposite direction.
Considering thunder is also generated by ionizing air like that I don't think it's necessarily limited to a fizz.
In space combat you could catapult a missile out of your ship and ignite it much later to make the shot come from a different position (I think that can be done by submarines already). You could also catapult other weapons as remote-operated (wire if need to be) drones but with those it's a bigger loss if they are destroyed. Not that it matters if you can kill fast enough. As for emissions, you don't need zero, you just need to have them below the noise level and possibly scattered by some means (e.g. smokescreen, these days they include substances that emit huge amounts of IR noise, having all other spectra the enemy may be scanning in there wouldn't be impossible). Of course you probably only need stealth until you've spotted your enemy and readied your weapons, noone's complaining that stealth fighters are unstealthed when they open their missile/bomb bays.
Why not just mount the whole weapon on the remote-operated gizmo? Set a few of these up and one sniper can cover many more angles than before.
Not really, the brain can remain operational with some damage (some people lose a hemisphere and while crippled they still live and in combat that could be enough to get more shots off than you want him to), you want to destroy as much as possible to make sure it dies.
Depends on where it is aimed. Stomach wounds are often fatal, not because a vital organ is destroyed but because of the resulting blood loss. Also depending on the shape of the hole it might do too little damage to kill (even vital organs can take some damage and the less volume you damage the less likely you are to get a kill).
Not really. Making your armor reflective will bounce a lot of energy off but not all of it so most likely the armor would still heat up, although slower. Bright, reflective armor makes you highly visible so you get shot down in no time with conventional weapons. Of course it's doubtful that these laser guns would get used against armor, even without any reflection you'd have to burn through the armor and hit something, if the target moves you'll have a hard time keeping the laser on the same spot and your "drill" will be at the wrong angle so you lose most of the penetration you have already archieved. And even then you still have the molten material in the way that blocks your beam for a while making the whole process take much longer than simply firing a rocket at the target.
This seems to be intended for anti-personell use though, you probably don't need to burn as far in to kill a person.
Daisycutter refers to the tube attached to the tip of a bomb that allows the bomb to detonate before the main body has touched the ground and have less of the blast absorbed by the ground. These days we have so many electronics in bombs I'd expect there's some kind of sensor that detonates the bomb at an optimal height without adding any long tubes to the thing.
Depending on the crime that can be considered conspiracy so yes.
I'd like to think every single one except China. But since I can't say that with 100% confidence, let's just say: The vast majority.
Don't forget that there's more to the world than the west and I'd wager by numbers the unfree (military dictatorship, monarchy, theocracy, one party "democracy", etc) outnumber the free.