Mod parent insightful. That's exactly how it would have went had MS not aquired Bungie. They were definitly a Mac-centric company in their pre-Xbox days.
I liked it too. But the fact of the matter is it's terrible. The networking was inefficent. The server-side hit detection was so bad that it led to such a cludge as making it beep when a hit was successful. Can you think of another game that required such a rediculous measure? The game lagged on LAN. CPL matches were won and lost because of rockets not exploding where they should have.
It was Halo, on PC, and thus fun. But the fact of the matter is that geabox screwed it up in about every way possible. Apparently bad enough that Bungie is not willing to trust anyone to do the port this time around.
It would be safe to assume that it's a headline in the games section because, despite your disparaging assertions about the Halo 2 audience, it's quite large. A lot of people are indeed curious about things related to Bungie, particularly an in-house port, as the article describes. I imagine not a few people perusing the games section might even like to work at Bungie.
This is also news to the fairly large group of people that unfortunatly purchased Gearbox's incredibly horrible port of Halo 1. Most of those people would likely breath a large sigh of relife to know that Bungie will do Halo 2 PC in house.
So, given your inability to parse the relevant information out of that headline and assosiated blurb, I have to wonder why you even care. If gaming news does not interest you, simply block it, don't come in here and troll around as AC.
He very clearly stated that he does not like, and is not committed to his (formerly) current project. He also clearly stated that he dislikes the platform he's working on, as well as stating that he thinks the competitor's platform is better.
I would have let this guy go even for stating these opinions privatly. He obviously really does not want to work for Sony. This guy didn't get fired, he quit.
That's what I always assumed as well. Makes particular sense given that the statement came from the gungans, who aren't particularly scientificaly, or geologicaly savvy. To a gungan deep cave == planet core.
That's easy. A Jedi would easily be able to resist the effects of the stun setting. There are numerous Jedi tricks (both Cannon and EU) that can be used to maintain conciousness under adverse conditions.
I think we can all agree that the demo disc business was only a tenative first step by the hackers, and not in a very productive direction. Just something to get them going as it were.
Despite MS's efforts, I feel safe saying it's still only a matter of time before a modded 360 becomes a reality.
Developers want it because they get to make better games (by listening to their fans suggestions every 6 months and incorporating it directly into the next chapter)
This actualy worries me. If listening to their fans suggestions turns out to be letting the game's forum drive development. It is my opinion that the forum is the single worst thing to happen to the MMO genrea, and I'd rather it not squeeze it's way into more traditional games.
The problem is that most forum-posters are not game designers, they don't really know what makes a game fun to play, they know what makes a game easy. This is why people make and use "trainers" and other cheat programs, even though they will almost certainly and instantly wreak gameplay. They know what they think they want, but they are rarely right, and even when they are, they generaly don't represent the greater community.
My fear is that too much user feedback will lead to stagnation. The people most vocal in feedback channels are generaly concerned with making a game more like their last favorite game. Developers should be concerned with making it more like your next favorite game. It's the difference between looking backward and looking forward.
Only 80 deaths. That is not statisticaly signifigant in any size population.
Not only do we not need an Avian Flu specific fund, the money already dedicated to the purpose was too much. There are litteraly thousands of more deadly illnesses out there, currently active, and currently transmitible between humans. Why should we spend billions on this one virus that has thus for only shown the potential for danger?
The first world nations don't need to pledge to do anything on this yet. There is nothing to do yet, Avian influenza is not a threat, it only has potential to become a threat. It would be almost criminal to spend so much on a thus-far fairly begnine virus. First world nations need to have a little perspective before dedicating billions to the media's current favorite "crisis".
No, I think the normal reaserch budgets will be more than sufficent to look into Avian Flu for the moment. Those extra billions would be much better spent in a miriad of other places.
Seriously, why are we talking about this as if it's dangerous to humans? The blurb states that this virus has killed 80 people so far. Regular old influeza kills 250,000 to 500,000 per year. I know there is the risk of it spreading and mutating and causing a pandemic. But is that really so likely that all this attention is justified?
It reminds me of the West Nile Virus hype. We heard about West Nile for months and months as if it was the black death or some such thing. For the record West Nile produces mild flu-like symptoms. You might catch it, have it run it's cycle, and be healthy again and just think you had a bad day. It only ever killed people who probably would have been done in by a stiff breeze. Yet this was newsworthy material.
I don't understand this facination in the media with obscure exotic desises that don't have any real impact on world heath. Lets get some perspective before we claim the sky is falling.
I belive the whole idea is not to favor eather one. Just find out which one is true.
Now if you want to talk about something like Occam's Razor making a non-dark matter theory more likely true than one that requires dark matter, then that's a different story.
I think you've hit on the point that publishers, marketers, and analysts are missing. It doesn't matter if they're female gamers, old gamers, casual gamers, or any other distinction you care to make, the point is they are gamers. That means they like good games. Quit trying to "target" one group or another, just make a good game, and gamers will like it, and buy it. That's why we are gamers in the first place: We like good games.
In many, if not most, game contexts, realistic people people are just not compelling. This shouldn't be surprising though, as you'd be hard pressed to find any entertainment media that regularly shows realistic people. It would seem that most consumers, male and female alike, just don't want to see realistic people.
You do realise it still has to be a game, don't you? Things like leveling, loot, and equipment purchase are valid game mechanics, it would not be compelling to play without them.
In essence, your list there has discribed a multiplayer version of Starship Creator. Just hop in the pretty ship you clicked up, and watch if fly around and do some stuff. We're all Captains of Sovergn class ships, because why pick anything but the best?
I agree with you on the tech specs of the ships though, it's not like they have to make it up from scratch. Things like leveling, loot and economics keep you playing though, pretty ships aren't enough.
This approach somewhat mirrors the ESRB's actual ratings procedure, in which raters unaffiliated with the gaming industry are shown footage of "the most extreme content" from games and then asked to assign descriptors and a rating to the product.
So, yes I would say that they probably showed CJ getting his groove on, the little bit that actualy occured in the game, and beating cops and hookers galore.
This article is showing exactly the opposite. Parents are involving themselves in their kids' lives by monitoring the ESRB rating.
That's exactly his point. Despite the fact that involved parents generaly agree with ESRB ratings and find them usefull, we still generaly only hear about the minority of kid/parent combos that get themselves in trouble and blame anyone and anything they can.
The spawn killing you describe does happen, but it's nowhere near as pervasive as you make it out to be. More importantly it only happens if your team is disorganized enough to be forced back into a single spawn point. You may have had a few bad experiences, but for the most part the BF2 system does in fact encourage teamwork. It's hard to get a disorganized team to work together, but when you do, you win. Most people figure this out pretty quickly, and thus are willing to work with others.
You'll always have the odd asshat around, but they don't dominate the game. The Choppers powerful, but not invincible. A coordinated attack will deal with them as well. Get on a squad and use that VOIP.
Seriously, there are so many good reasons to get these things for these kids. For example a study was done, and linked to here on/. (tho I can't find the link at the moment) that showed gameboys are more effective at relieving pre-surgury stress in children than seditives, and are obviously much safer. The fact that some maintenace person might stoop to the vile act of stealing from sick children is no reason not to give.
As I recall a few of the levels had some vertical scrolling involved. The swimming levels in particular come to mind. I could be wrong though, it's been quite a while.
The dictionary definition of skill states that a skill is a Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience.
Hand-eye coordination is most definitly a dexterity that can be developed through training. Proficiency at twitching the mouse faster and more accurately than the other fellow can certainly be developed through training and experience.
True that these are not skill traditionaly assosiated with MMO's, but I do have to disagree with you and say that Twitch != Skill evaluates as false.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod parent insightful. That's exactly how it would have went had MS not aquired Bungie. They were definitly a Mac-centric company in their pre-Xbox days.
It was Halo, on PC, and thus fun. But the fact of the matter is that geabox screwed it up in about every way possible. Apparently bad enough that Bungie is not willing to trust anyone to do the port this time around.
This is also news to the fairly large group of people that unfortunatly purchased Gearbox's incredibly horrible port of Halo 1. Most of those people would likely breath a large sigh of relife to know that Bungie will do Halo 2 PC in house.
So, given your inability to parse the relevant information out of that headline and assosiated blurb, I have to wonder why you even care. If gaming news does not interest you, simply block it, don't come in here and troll around as AC.
I would have let this guy go even for stating these opinions privatly. He obviously really does not want to work for Sony. This guy didn't get fired, he quit.
That's what I always assumed as well. Makes particular sense given that the statement came from the gungans, who aren't particularly scientificaly, or geologicaly savvy. To a gungan deep cave == planet core.
That's easy. A Jedi would easily be able to resist the effects of the stun setting. There are numerous Jedi tricks (both Cannon and EU) that can be used to maintain conciousness under adverse conditions.
Man is my inner SW geek coming out in this topic...
Despite MS's efforts, I feel safe saying it's still only a matter of time before a modded 360 becomes a reality.
This actualy worries me. If listening to their fans suggestions turns out to be letting the game's forum drive development. It is my opinion that the forum is the single worst thing to happen to the MMO genrea, and I'd rather it not squeeze it's way into more traditional games.
The problem is that most forum-posters are not game designers, they don't really know what makes a game fun to play, they know what makes a game easy. This is why people make and use "trainers" and other cheat programs, even though they will almost certainly and instantly wreak gameplay. They know what they think they want, but they are rarely right, and even when they are, they generaly don't represent the greater community.
My fear is that too much user feedback will lead to stagnation. The people most vocal in feedback channels are generaly concerned with making a game more like their last favorite game. Developers should be concerned with making it more like your next favorite game. It's the difference between looking backward and looking forward.
Not only do we not need an Avian Flu specific fund, the money already dedicated to the purpose was too much. There are litteraly thousands of more deadly illnesses out there, currently active, and currently transmitible between humans. Why should we spend billions on this one virus that has thus for only shown the potential for danger?
The first world nations don't need to pledge to do anything on this yet. There is nothing to do yet, Avian influenza is not a threat, it only has potential to become a threat. It would be almost criminal to spend so much on a thus-far fairly begnine virus. First world nations need to have a little perspective before dedicating billions to the media's current favorite "crisis".
No, I think the normal reaserch budgets will be more than sufficent to look into Avian Flu for the moment. Those extra billions would be much better spent in a miriad of other places.
It reminds me of the West Nile Virus hype. We heard about West Nile for months and months as if it was the black death or some such thing. For the record West Nile produces mild flu-like symptoms. You might catch it, have it run it's cycle, and be healthy again and just think you had a bad day. It only ever killed people who probably would have been done in by a stiff breeze. Yet this was newsworthy material.
I don't understand this facination in the media with obscure exotic desises that don't have any real impact on world heath. Lets get some perspective before we claim the sky is falling.
Now if you want to talk about something like Occam's Razor making a non-dark matter theory more likely true than one that requires dark matter, then that's a different story.
I think you've hit on the point that publishers, marketers, and analysts are missing. It doesn't matter if they're female gamers, old gamers, casual gamers, or any other distinction you care to make, the point is they are gamers. That means they like good games. Quit trying to "target" one group or another, just make a good game, and gamers will like it, and buy it. That's why we are gamers in the first place: We like good games.
... So what is it?
well, if it's not worth $15 to you, I wouldn't say you're exactly dying to try one. More like mildly interested.
In many, if not most, game contexts, realistic people people are just not compelling. This shouldn't be surprising though, as you'd be hard pressed to find any entertainment media that regularly shows realistic people. It would seem that most consumers, male and female alike, just don't want to see realistic people.
In essence, your list there has discribed a multiplayer version of Starship Creator. Just hop in the pretty ship you clicked up, and watch if fly around and do some stuff. We're all Captains of Sovergn class ships, because why pick anything but the best?
I agree with you on the tech specs of the ships though, it's not like they have to make it up from scratch. Things like leveling, loot and economics keep you playing though, pretty ships aren't enough.
You do know that none of that is particularly secret or covered by an NDA...
This approach somewhat mirrors the ESRB's actual ratings procedure, in which raters unaffiliated with the gaming industry are shown footage of "the most extreme content" from games and then asked to assign descriptors and a rating to the product.
So, yes I would say that they probably showed CJ getting his groove on, the little bit that actualy occured in the game, and beating cops and hookers galore.
That's exactly his point. Despite the fact that involved parents generaly agree with ESRB ratings and find them usefull, we still generaly only hear about the minority of kid/parent combos that get themselves in trouble and blame anyone and anything they can.
You'll always have the odd asshat around, but they don't dominate the game. The Choppers powerful, but not invincible. A coordinated attack will deal with them as well. Get on a squad and use that VOIP.
Seriously, there are so many good reasons to get these things for these kids. For example a study was done, and linked to here on /. (tho I can't find the link at the moment) that showed gameboys are more effective at relieving pre-surgury stress in children than seditives, and are obviously much safer. The fact that some maintenace person might stoop to the vile act of stealing from sick children is no reason not to give.
As I recall a few of the levels had some vertical scrolling involved. The swimming levels in particular come to mind. I could be wrong though, it's been quite a while.
Hand-eye coordination is most definitly a dexterity that can be developed through training. Proficiency at twitching the mouse faster and more accurately than the other fellow can certainly be developed through training and experience.
True that these are not skill traditionaly assosiated with MMO's, but I do have to disagree with you and say that Twitch != Skill evaluates as false.