The idea being that once a piece of art has been created the author has his/her name attached to it, and thus any treatments of the work done later that do not fit the artist's vision taints the artist's reputation.
Except that this idea doesn't even work with traditional art. Once an artist sells me their artwork, be it a sculpture, painting, whatever, the artist has no standing in telling me that i can't spray paint it any way i choose.
Now, if they push the issue of not owning the movie at all, but just having a very limited license to view it, then the argument has some standing. Although fair use, as eroded as its getting, should still let me modify it for my personal use.
The movie should have ended at the dive, clearly having reached a point where a nice happy ending was not readily available. It didn't.
But even ending it there would not have changed the fact that the movie spent a lot of time setting up moral dilemmas and sociological issues, but then refused to address them. They even spent the time in the first few minutes of the movie asking the question of whether it is moral to create a machine that can love but will not be loved back. But all that is completely ignored past the point of the dive and it just comes down to a bad re-telling of an old fairy tale, going as far as killing off the entire human race rather than having to face the orga/mecha conflicts so wonderfully built up in the first two acts.
While taking itself a lot less serious, Millenium Man, IMHO, did a much better job of facing most of these issues.
While Mac flight simulators have had the three screen setups back in the early 90s, we're now dealing with games that really require hardware 3D acceleration to function properly. Especially if you want to drive 2 or more screens.
Problem for Windows is that the DirectX 3D component is currently designed to recognize only one card as accelerated. Wonderfully shortsighted. But i suppose it was just centered around "3D will come from an AGP card and there's only one AGP slot."
OpenGL could probably handle it under Windows, but i doubt there's drivers for multi-head support of hardware acceleration out there now.
Best hope is some people doing work on getting MesaGL working with multi-head under XFree86. I've been running two TNT2's for my X setup for a while now and that works great. So i'd guess it's a matter of getting the GL libs up to speed for working with 2 or more cards at the same time. Probably tricky for dealing with which card does the triangle transforms for triangles that span across screen boundaries.
Just a few months ago, Tim Sweeney got into a big.plan/news page battle with Jason Hall from Monolith about Unreal's place in the Engine licensing space. In those discussions, Tim kept pointing out that Epic licensees got a source tree that worked for PC, Linux, Mac and PS 2. This was supposed to be a great advantage.
So it surprises me that there is all that talk about dropping other platform support, especially after just committing to PS 2, as i doubt that it's going to have a port of Direct X.
Both Tim and Brandon's comments taken together look a little strange and may support rumors of dropping cross-platform support. But it's far from a clear cut statement that they will. BluesNews only reported that Brandon claimed it would be more difficult to port to Mac and Linux, not that it wouldn't be done. After all porting to PS 2 won't be any easier and it's definitely going forward.
Let's hope those platforms don't become victims of insignificant revenues, just after the Unreal engine is gaining respect in a market where only John Carmack stood out as a programmer more interested in better technology than revenues.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea being that once a piece of art has been created the author has his/her name attached to it, and thus any treatments of the work done later that do not fit the artist's vision taints the artist's reputation.
Except that this idea doesn't even work with traditional art. Once an artist sells me their artwork, be it a sculpture, painting, whatever, the artist has no standing in telling me that i can't spray paint it any way i choose.
Now, if they push the issue of not owning the movie at all, but just having a very limited license to view it, then the argument has some standing. Although fair use, as eroded as its getting, should still let me modify it for my personal use.
The movie should have ended at the dive, clearly having reached a point where a nice happy ending was not readily available. It didn't.
But even ending it there would not have changed the fact that the movie spent a lot of time setting up moral dilemmas and sociological issues, but then refused to address them. They even spent the time in the first few minutes of the movie asking the question of whether it is moral to create a machine that can love but will not be loved back. But all that is completely ignored past the point of the dive and it just comes down to a bad re-telling of an old fairy tale, going as far as killing off the entire human race rather than having to face the orga/mecha conflicts so wonderfully built up in the first two acts.
While taking itself a lot less serious, Millenium Man, IMHO, did a much better job of facing most of these issues.
Problem for Windows is that the DirectX 3D component is currently designed to recognize only one card as accelerated. Wonderfully shortsighted. But i suppose it was just centered around "3D will come from an AGP card and there's only one AGP slot." OpenGL could probably handle it under Windows, but i doubt there's drivers for multi-head support of hardware acceleration out there now.
Best hope is some people doing work on getting MesaGL working with multi-head under XFree86. I've been running two TNT2's for my X setup for a while now and that works great. So i'd guess it's a matter of getting the GL libs up to speed for working with 2 or more cards at the same time. Probably tricky for dealing with which card does the triangle transforms for triangles that span across screen boundaries.
Love to have that peripheral vision, though..
So it surprises me that there is all that talk about dropping other platform support, especially after just committing to PS 2, as i doubt that it's going to have a port of Direct X.
Both Tim and Brandon's comments taken together look a little strange and may support rumors of dropping cross-platform support. But it's far from a clear cut statement that they will. BluesNews only reported that Brandon claimed it would be more difficult to port to Mac and Linux, not that it wouldn't be done. After all porting to PS 2 won't be any easier and it's definitely going forward.
Let's hope those platforms don't become victims of insignificant revenues, just after the Unreal engine is gaining respect in a market where only John Carmack stood out as a programmer more interested in better technology than revenues.
Ok, does that mean if i work more than 4 hours a day, i'm an addict as well?