> You'd need the source code to make that kind of statement with any certainty.
Yeah, also I could play games and clearly see computer opponents behave in ways that can only be due to 'cheating'. The harder the setting, the more obvious it become. Take Civ3 i.e.. You just developed a new, exciting technology that really would give you an edge. Count on it that any Civ that has more units than you (oops, how would a real player know that?) will chat you up this very round and blackmail you in order to get it. What are the chances?
Really, I don't need to look at the source code.
> Not really. If you were writing a game where you're fighting robots from the future then presumably > you'd want them to emulate how a robot from the future would think. It's a bit of a moot point with > todays games/computers, of course...
Well, before you get to this point you might wanna start them off with emulating thinking per se. That has not happend, yet. Whats that you say? We only have one model of thinking available to us at this point? Couldn't believe it. I guess we are back at "AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play"
> Why would I (or the OP) want to say that? It's not true.
Well, show me a strategy game that is 100% (computer-) cheat free and I'll believe you.
> You'd need the source code to make that kind of statement with any certainty.
Yeah, also I could play games and clearly see Computer opponents behave in ways that can only be due to 'cheating'. The harder the setting, the more obvious it become. Take Civ3 i.e.. You just developed a new, exciting technology that really would give you an edge. Count on it that any Civ that has more units than you (oops, how would a real player know that?) will chat you up this very round and blackmail you in order to get it. What are the chances?
Really, I don't need to look at the source code.
> Not really. If you were writing a game where you're fighting robots from the future then presumably > you'd want them to emulate how a robot from the future would think. It's a bit of a moot point with > todays games/computers, of course...
Well, before you get to this point you might wanna start them off with emulating thinking per se. That has not happend, yet. Whats that you say? We only have one model of thinking available to us at this point? Couldn't believe it. I guess we are back at "AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play"
> Why would I (or the OP) want to say that? It's not true.
Well, show me a strategy game that is 100% (computer-) cheat free an I'll believe you.
I've heard that before. Now, are you really telling me you could do an rts AI that could kick my ass by 'thinking' instead of:-knowing the map beforehand -having an increased production rate -having fights tweaked to the AI's favor -starting with more units -always being aware of all movement on the map, regardless if it'd be visible to that player -controlling everything at once
-receiving all relevant information at once
I really don't think so. It's driving me nuts in all games that harder settings *always* means 'AI can cheat more'. This is the reason I don't like RTSs and hardly can stand to play CiV. Omnipotence and Omnipresence is not AI. AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play (advanced planning, patteren recog. etc) with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with that. A good AI in that sense would hardly overwhelm the player seeing how sucessful multiplay games are.
Just face it, technology and AI research is just not capabable of pulling it of. Just say that instead of 'well, you really wouldn't want it'.
I think this is due to the players lack of power, or utility. If you have a wow-like setting where you absolutly need NPCs to repair your stuff, give you quests and buy thrash off you, sure player housing wouldn't add much. What would it be like if everything you found would be useful for someone, somewhere (no vendor thrash), if everything you needed could be provided by players (blacksmiths could repair stuff i.e), and quests could be created by players as well? Now consider a ressource model that works more like the real-world. You could have player run-mining camps that needed defense against the other faction i.e. The possibilities...
finished != perfect. I can't imagine who that those two where somehow synonyms when it comes to software. WoW is polished, can entertain you for at least 3 month and has a failure rate that is very acceptable. Uptime has been good for quite a while now, too. So yeah, I'd consider it done.
you can't see that, can you? How could an alien tell that this was actually only designed to cross the atlantic and carry a huge punch instead of lifting a peaceful craft into space?
I wonder what people think ICBMs are. What *do* you imagine? It's just a rocket. The payload is what matters. There is nothing inherently evil in a device that can be mounted with a nuclear warhead. The warhead is pretty evil though.
1.999.000 are too busy playing and enjoying the game to post on forums. The thousand that aren't saturate the most popular boards with their crap. Vocal minority for you.
Paladins don't have an invul aura. Its a shield that can be cast every 5 minutes and lasts for 12 seconds. They do have an instant full heal, with a CD of 1 hour (whooho). They don't have a regular instant heal or even a heal-over time (this is why they need the shield, as every class has at least one way to interrupt spells).
The paladin class is not fine. Awesomeness once every hour sucks absolutely because it pisses opponents off enough that they write flame post while making the player feel cheap for winning only by using a 1h CD (same with warrios shieldwall and retaliation). A class should by viable *all* the time. To see what I mean look at the rogue class. They got timered abilities that, while useful and good, aren't absolutly fight turning on reasonable cooldowns.
A paladin also isn't a healer class. Its a fighter class with some healing thrown in (rewording of blizzards description).
Thing is, Rogues being uber in PvP and useless in PvE hurts everyone. Why not make the rogue lose their share of PvP encounters and make them useful in PVE at the same time?
(Not a rogue, but a paladin)
A couple of nights ago I joined an MC raid in WoW (very difficult dungeon, takes 40 people to beat) that was using teamspeak. Only group leaders got to talk in TS (otherwise it would've been total caos) and suprisingly two of those were female. Nobody had issues with it, no statement even refering to the fact. That got me wondering, how many girls actually do play the game (and hardcore at that) and secondly, are gamers as a whole actually growing up in respect to accepting that. I still have dreadful memories of my CS days where someone that only claimed to be a girl would have to endure the imature attention of the crowd for the whole night:).
The rating standards of the youth-protection agency are somewhat mysterious. WoW is rated for teenagers in germany for these reasons, I think:
- you are nor actually doing (or seeing) the act of seperating a body part
- total lack of gore
- killing actual humans is not strictly the only way to play the game
Technically they probably took it out to not get an 'indexed' rating which doesn't mean that the game is illegal. Games that are 'indexed' just can't be adverised or displayed in stores (nor sold to minors, obviously). The consequence of course being that the game will sell like crap because they couldn't make the customers aware it even exits.
To be fair one should only include examples of acutal cars that actually are drivable under real world conditions. Ferraris can go in curves and last longer than 10K KMs. When thinking of cars, that counts.
yeah, definatly going strong in the tinfoil department. You know, it's not as if an engine that generates as much torgue wouldn't be a huge competitve advantage to a car producer...
Well, the thing is, players with a 10 lvl difference seldomly quest in the same areas (STV is a notable exception, and possibly a problem for the honor system), so the romaing squads would be better of roaming in an area suited for their level and killing people they simply outnumber. The solution for that of course is for the soloers to get together in groups and there you have PVP without much griefing.
you forget, the low levels give crap CPs. The effort is not worth it, especially considering that a lone lvl 60 is an attractive target for any group of 50+. Those roving bands will get it, eventually, if a whole week of heavy pvping only nets them lower ranks
Well, thats 20 contribution points (cps) between the 5 of them. 5 Each. If they keep this up a whole week they might be able to gain slightly more than the cut-off at 200 cps, meaning they'll have a whooping 'scout' ranking or the equivalent of me and a friend (both 52) killing just 2 60s (200 cps/ 2 * 2 = 200) in a whole week. I don't even have to suit up for this, it just happens anyways.
In summary, I fail to see the problem, except that those 5 are really wasting their time. Once people actually read up on the honor sytem (maybe after they get crap CPs for their über number of kills often enough) that will stop.
With my low-lvl rogue I had a duell with a paladin (my main is one) just to show him he is not as über as he thinks. I prepared for a tough match, went stealth and just waited for him to come in range for a nice ambush. So, he is doing his thing, jumping around back and forth, sideways all over the place. He jumps backwards a while and finally over the edge of a huge cliff. Naturally: "Group: See, told you palas suck. I can beat you with my mind". Actually, that made me contemplate rolling a priest ^^.
The issue with cornering the market is that your upbidding your buys and downbidding your sells everytime. I.E I know that the market rate for mithril is 5G on my server usually. If the AH is empty I'll just put it up for 6G because obviously supply doesn't meet demand at 5G. Also, eventhough its not too easy to get into the mithril selling market for total outsiders you have to consider the existing miners and blacksmiths. A guy with a blacksmith/mining combo has ever more incentive to sell his mithril instead of using it up when the price explodes, posibly lowering demand AND increasing supply during the process. Resource farmers (like myself, I do mining and skinning) will strongly consider doing dedicated mithril mining if the price hits a certain level, too.
The problem is exaclty that there is a Greenspan in WoW. Okay, I conceit, Greenspan on crack, possibly also filled up on booze and fooling around with a couple of hookers. There is a constant inflation from the money the monsters drop, money rewards for quests and that it is possible to sell every piece of crap that monsters drop to vendors. The anti inflations messures like bind on pickup/equip items, costs for repairing, learning a skill etc. can't keep inflation in check if gold farmers come into play as they usually don't use those facillities at all. A level 60, if he won't buy an epic mount, just doesn't need to 'destroy' any money by giving it to NPCs (except repair costs, but those are minimal).
Slashdot Mirror
> You'd need the source code to make that kind of statement with any certainty.
Yeah, also I could play games and clearly see computer opponents behave in ways that can only be due to 'cheating'. The harder the setting, the more obvious it become. Take Civ3 i.e.. You just developed a new, exciting technology that really would give you an edge. Count on it that any Civ that has more units than you (oops, how would a real player know that?) will chat you up this very round and blackmail you in order to get it. What are the chances?
Really, I don't need to look at the source code.
> Not really. If you were writing a game where you're fighting robots from the future then presumably > you'd want them to emulate how a robot from the future would think. It's a bit of a moot point with > todays games/computers, of course...
Well, before you get to this point you might wanna start them off with emulating thinking per se. That has not happend, yet. Whats that you say? We only have one model of thinking available to us at this point? Couldn't believe it. I guess we are back at "AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play"
> Why would I (or the OP) want to say that? It's not true.
Well, show me a strategy game that is 100% (computer-) cheat free and I'll believe you.
> You'd need the source code to make that kind of statement with any certainty. Yeah, also I could play games and clearly see Computer opponents behave in ways that can only be due to 'cheating'. The harder the setting, the more obvious it become. Take Civ3 i.e.. You just developed a new, exciting technology that really would give you an edge. Count on it that any Civ that has more units than you (oops, how would a real player know that?) will chat you up this very round and blackmail you in order to get it. What are the chances? Really, I don't need to look at the source code. > Not really. If you were writing a game where you're fighting robots from the future then presumably > you'd want them to emulate how a robot from the future would think. It's a bit of a moot point with > todays games/computers, of course... Well, before you get to this point you might wanna start them off with emulating thinking per se. That has not happend, yet. Whats that you say? We only have one model of thinking available to us at this point? Couldn't believe it. I guess we are back at "AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play" > Why would I (or the OP) want to say that? It's not true. Well, show me a strategy game that is 100% (computer-) cheat free an I'll believe you.
I've heard that before. Now, are you really telling me you could do an rts AI that could kick my ass by 'thinking' instead of:-knowing the map beforehand
-having an increased production rate
-having fights tweaked to the AI's favor
-starting with more units
-always being aware of all movement on the map, regardless if it'd be visible to that player
-controlling everything at once
-receiving all relevant information at once
I really don't think so. It's driving me nuts in all games that harder settings *always* means 'AI can cheat more'. This is the reason I don't like RTSs and hardly can stand to play CiV. Omnipotence and Omnipresence is not AI. AI (in games) should emulate how a human would play (advanced planning, patteren recog. etc) with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with that. A good AI in that sense would hardly overwhelm the player seeing how sucessful multiplay games are. Just face it, technology and AI research is just not capabable of pulling it of. Just say that instead of 'well, you really wouldn't want it'.
I think this is due to the players lack of power, or utility. If you have a wow-like setting where you absolutly need NPCs to repair your stuff, give you quests and buy thrash off you, sure player housing wouldn't add much. What would it be like if everything you found would be useful for someone, somewhere (no vendor thrash), if everything you needed could be provided by players (blacksmiths could repair stuff i.e), and quests could be created by players as well? Now consider a ressource model that works more like the real-world. You could have player run-mining camps that needed defense against the other faction i.e. The possibilities ...
finished != perfect. I can't imagine who that those two where somehow synonyms when it comes to software. WoW is polished, can entertain you for at least 3 month and has a failure rate that is very acceptable. Uptime has been good for quite a while now, too. So yeah, I'd consider it done.
oh it does? Goram, the aliens are just gonna waste us then ... or maybe they like the 'swords to plows ' theme ;)
you can't see that, can you? How could an alien tell that this was actually only designed to cross the atlantic and carry a huge punch instead of lifting a peaceful craft into space?
I wonder what people think ICBMs are. What *do* you imagine? It's just a rocket. The payload is what matters. There is nothing inherently evil in a device that can be mounted with a nuclear warhead. The warhead is pretty evil though.
1.999.000 are too busy playing and enjoying the game to post on forums. The thousand that aren't saturate the most popular boards with their crap. Vocal minority for you.
Paladins don't have an invul aura. Its a shield that can be cast every 5 minutes and lasts for 12 seconds. They do have an instant full heal, with a CD of 1 hour (whooho). They don't have a regular instant heal or even a heal-over time (this is why they need the shield, as every class has at least one way to interrupt spells). The paladin class is not fine. Awesomeness once every hour sucks absolutely because it pisses opponents off enough that they write flame post while making the player feel cheap for winning only by using a 1h CD (same with warrios shieldwall and retaliation). A class should by viable *all* the time. To see what I mean look at the rogue class. They got timered abilities that, while useful and good, aren't absolutly fight turning on reasonable cooldowns. A paladin also isn't a healer class. Its a fighter class with some healing thrown in (rewording of blizzards description).
Thing is, Rogues being uber in PvP and useless in PvE hurts everyone. Why not make the rogue lose their share of PvP encounters and make them useful in PVE at the same time? (Not a rogue, but a paladin)
A couple of nights ago I joined an MC raid in WoW (very difficult dungeon, takes 40 people to beat) that was using teamspeak. Only group leaders got to talk in TS (otherwise it would've been total caos) and suprisingly two of those were female. Nobody had issues with it, no statement even refering to the fact. That got me wondering, how many girls actually do play the game (and hardcore at that) and secondly, are gamers as a whole actually growing up in respect to accepting that. I still have dreadful memories of my CS days where someone that only claimed to be a girl would have to endure the imature attention of the crowd for the whole night :).
The rating standards of the youth-protection agency are somewhat mysterious. WoW is rated for teenagers in germany for these reasons, I think:
- you are nor actually doing (or seeing) the act of seperating a body part
- total lack of gore
- killing actual humans is not strictly the only way to play the game
Technically they probably took it out to not get an 'indexed' rating which doesn't mean that the game is illegal. Games that are 'indexed' just can't be adverised or displayed in stores (nor sold to minors, obviously). The consequence of course being that the game will sell like crap because they couldn't make the customers aware it even exits.
To be fair one should only include examples of acutal cars that actually are drivable under real world conditions. Ferraris can go in curves and last longer than 10K KMs. When thinking of cars, that counts.
You have no idea how difficult and expensive it is to make (develop and produce) a V12 or V16 engine. Yes, going as fast as a ferrari is hard.
yeah, definatly going strong in the tinfoil department. You know, it's not as if an engine that generates as much torgue wouldn't be a huge competitve advantage to a car producer ...
Well, the thing is, players with a 10 lvl difference seldomly quest in the same areas (STV is a notable exception, and possibly a problem for the honor system), so the romaing squads would be better of roaming in an area suited for their level and killing people they simply outnumber. The solution for that of course is for the soloers to get together in groups and there you have PVP without much griefing.
Jesus, 4 CPs each. Sorry, I'm sick and not thinking straight.
you forget, the low levels give crap CPs. The effort is not worth it, especially considering that a lone lvl 60 is an attractive target for any group of 50+. Those roving bands will get it, eventually, if a whole week of heavy pvping only nets them lower ranks
Well, thats 20 contribution points (cps) between the 5 of them. 5 Each. If they keep this up a whole week they might be able to gain slightly more than the cut-off at 200 cps, meaning they'll have a whooping 'scout' ranking or the equivalent of me and a friend (both 52) killing just 2 60s (200 cps/ 2 * 2 = 200) in a whole week. I don't even have to suit up for this, it just happens anyways.
In summary, I fail to see the problem, except that those 5 are really wasting their time. Once people actually read up on the honor sytem (maybe after they get crap CPs for their über number of kills often enough) that will stop.
With my low-lvl rogue I had a duell with a paladin (my main is one) just to show him he is not as über as he thinks. I prepared for a tough match, went stealth and just waited for him to come in range for a nice ambush. So, he is doing his thing, jumping around back and forth, sideways all over the place. He jumps backwards a while and finally over the edge of a huge cliff. Naturally: "Group: See, told you palas suck. I can beat you with my mind". Actually, that made me contemplate rolling a priest ^^.
The issue with cornering the market is that your upbidding your buys and downbidding your sells everytime. I.E I know that the market rate for mithril is 5G on my server usually. If the AH is empty I'll just put it up for 6G because obviously supply doesn't meet demand at 5G. Also, eventhough its not too easy to get into the mithril selling market for total outsiders you have to consider the existing miners and blacksmiths. A guy with a blacksmith/mining combo has ever more incentive to sell his mithril instead of using it up when the price explodes, posibly lowering demand AND increasing supply during the process. Resource farmers (like myself, I do mining and skinning) will strongly consider doing dedicated mithril mining if the price hits a certain level, too.
yeah, it happens faster than that too. I'd bet lots of money that every OPEC country is currently producing more than what was agreed on.
The problem is exaclty that there is a Greenspan in WoW. Okay, I conceit, Greenspan on crack, possibly also filled up on booze and fooling around with a couple of hookers. There is a constant inflation from the money the monsters drop, money rewards for quests and that it is possible to sell every piece of crap that monsters drop to vendors. The anti inflations messures like bind on pickup/equip items, costs for repairing, learning a skill etc. can't keep inflation in check if gold farmers come into play as they usually don't use those facillities at all. A level 60, if he won't buy an epic mount, just doesn't need to 'destroy' any money by giving it to NPCs (except repair costs, but those are minimal).