Why copy the original and have the hassle of dealing with copyright in the first place?
Instead: Create Your Own IP.
Radical idea I know..but bear with me. Create your own IP that is similar to the original, and then even make some improvements based on current technology trends. Have similar though not identical storylines, change the names of places and persons up etc.
People that care and played the game 18 years ago will remember and recognise it for what it is. People that never did can still enjoy it regardless.You lose nothing.
There is much less risk to you and your team of no one ever seeing your hard work.
How many times have we heard of this happening, why do groups of talented people persist?
NEVER donate your time, especially not 8 years, to someone else's IP.
Had they put 8 years into making adventure stories for say Neverwinter Nights 2 or something they probably would have been able to strike a deal for paid expansions (Like Mysteries of Westgate).
Or had they put 8 years into their own IP. All it would have taken was to change the names, places...move the story around a bit. They could even have said that it was Inspired by Kings Quest etc. etc. (Torchlight inspired by Diablo).
This is really very sad.But the corporate beast has no feelings and no loyalty.
All the popular Piracy statistics relating to loss of profit are lies. It is only because Corporations ensure laws in their favor that organisations such as the RIAA and the MPAA can make the sort of claims for damages that they do. When a youth in India downloads Call of Duty and then leaves uTorrent running, that isn't a loss worth 500,000USD. There are many places and many individuals both within and outside the US and the developed world who literally cannot afford these games.
Becoming involved in electronic entertainment can lead to an interest in computing, a career and innovation for the industry as a whole. If not by Piracy how else would someone living in a third world nation gain the necessary skills to advance and gain employment, if they are never exposed to Windows 7 or Microsoft Office for example? Would they even be interested in computers at all if they are never captivated by Dragon Age? You have developers in Poland, and Russia who create amazing games for us all to enjoy. Anyone ever did a poll to see how many of them purchased every bit of development software that they used through their youth?
I have quite a few friends who's introduction to Computers, Programming and Development came through an interest in playing games. Has anyone ever done a survey to track someone who claimed to Pirate games in their youth, and whether they become paying customers as they get older and can afford it? Do they buy a Game Console...do they buy two?
We have a new Digital Divide being perpetuated by the top First World Nations through Copyright law and Trade Treaties. An insidious and growing division which keeps the latest advances in hardware, software and content within the territories of the First World and the United States in particular.For example take The iPhone which is thought to be one of the more innovative gadgets of our time.It almost single handedly brought the media connected touch screen smartphone to the market, and made multitouch the wow feature that it is today. Can you say that you are in the Tech industry if you've never seen one or used one? iPhone Application Development is a new field, and if you can't get access to an iPhone...you really can't be a part of that market. Yet the iPhone was locked to the United States and a few other choice providers for at least a year. The only way to access this hardware was by breaking the law....through Piracy. And yet through that Piracy you had developers worldwide starting to write applications, starting to learn about developing for the new and burgeoning mobile marketplace. In the little island of Trinidad a blog started up that followed the iPhone, linked to the latest applications etc. and it was very well followed. The blog owner even developed his own themes etc. which other iPhone users took advantage of. Should Apple pay him for that service,give him the cost of the iPhone back? Where is the Loss of Profit?
Does anyone remember Shareware? One of the quickest ways to get your games in the hands of potential customers. Would ID have been as big if it hadn't been for shareware? What went wrong? Now we have a BitTorrent network that can provide the ultimate shareware distribution platform, yet Publishers and Developers do not take advantage of it. Instead they spend Millions adding DRM, then fielding the Tech Support calls;legitimate customers have to fight with horridly slow download speeds through Direct2Drive, Steam and others during big releases. And all so that the money keeps revolving through the hands that, of course, truly deserve it.The customer gets left out in the cold, pulling wads of money from his pockets just for entertainment with more problems and frustrations. Loss of Profit?
When a Publisher decides to release a game Digitally only in the United States and ignores the Rest of the World...is it a Loss of Profit when someone in New Zealand downloads the game to play it? The Publisher has already made a decision that they don't want that sale, is it a loss of profit in that circumstance? Does that
Apple locked the phone to AT&T and locked it internationally as well.
This created the conditions for a large black market to flourish both within the US and Internationally.
You will find iPhones in every country of the world, whether they have agreements with Apple or not.
Within this black market, you have the Pirating of games and other content. Of course, if people have the phones but cannot purchase the content, they're going to pirate it. One can argue till blue in the face about the legality and morality of it, that's what people are going to do.
There need to be numbers released as to the demographics of the users of these Pirated applications. Do they all have legitimate iPhones in countries that support the iPhones application store?
Can they purchase these products if they wanted to at equal cost?
I don't see why they could not add Co-Op multiplayer of the same type that we have in Neverwinter Nights, and Neverwinter Nights 2. Or for that matter the type found in Fable II, or Borderlands.
It is accepted that one person is the Leader of the group who clicks the relevant dialog choices. What happens is that the players may discuss what they want to do , and come to a decision and one person clicks. Simple.
The combat will work just as well for an additional Human character,or an additional human controlling the characters. Again, this is nothing new or ground breaking. It has been done successfully before in several games.
The comments presented make me wonder if any of the posters have ever played an RPG in co-op mode?
I think the reason Dragon Age has no co-op are economic, and the fact that the game also appears on the Xbox 360. The time investment for co-op multiplayer would have been doubled because they would need to accommodate both the whole Xbox Live platform, and the Windows platform. If the argument is Economic then no one can argue, it is cheaper to produce a Singleplayer game without Co-Op Multiplayer.
It is 2009 though, and from Bioware, I expected more. The ability to play an RPG, Action or otherwise with 2 or more people greatly enhances the gameplay. I do not agree that the second, third , or fourth players need to be somehow specially accommodated in terms of Story, things to do etc. etc. It would be nice, but it is by no means necessary.I can imagine Dragon Age perfectly with someone else being able to control the characters, and nothing else changing. It is a lot better than two people sitting side by side while one plays.
You know for the folks who have significant others that game, close friends who chat etc. online...the advantages and benefits of the Option for Co-Op play are obvious. It's just a lot more fun.
You know, if in a year or two they announce Dragon Age: Parties Edition , or Dragon Age 2 Now with Multiplayer I'll be a bit pissed.:-|
How about advancing Voice recognition in games, so giving commands in RTS is second nature?
Or the Wii controllers for First Person Shooters is very good.
Combine this with Head Tracking peripherals and the keyboard and WASD stops being such a necessity.
The problem in my view is that few publishers are willing to take chances, and neither Microsoft nor Sony are willing to push these head tracking/head mounted displays and alternate controllers as a Standard for their consoles. Therefore there will always be a great financial hump to get over for any third party developer that want to push these types of control schemes forward. Because there is no first party support, refining and advancing these controls becomes difficult.
The Keyboard can't be beat because the cost of innovation and the general inertia on the part of first party developers is too high.
Natal and other body tracking/motion tracking devices aren't going to replace a button press.
Why does it matter the number of people that pirated the game?
That's irrelevant.
The question is, what effect does that have on Sales of the game? To date, no one can answer that question, and no publishers have been intelligent enough to do the research that answers that question.
Will the Sims 3 be available for digital download worldwide on release day? Will it cost 200% more outside the US to download the game if it is available?
Publishers are either disingenuous about DRM and Piracy or they are run by stupid and shortsighted people. It's probably actually a combination of the two.
And now the media, ever the bastions of Independent,intelligent and responsible reporting have begun to parrot statistics on how many copies are pirated. It's easier to find out the number of copies that are pirated than to find out how many copies were actually sold, if that number ever gets reported.
And that too is indicative of the underlying problems which never get addressed.
That's the real deal breaker for me and the other 5.5 billion people in the rest of the world.
The Kindle is locked to the United States. You need a Credit Card drawn on a US bank to even purchase it.
I can't find a reason for this, except to further the notion that DRM is less about copyright and more about legislating anti-consumer business practices and furthering price fixing and monopolies through technology.
I expect to see this released 'internationally' with the same books costing two or three dollars more.
I believe that Microtransactions are the way forward for MMORPGs.I am looking forward to Knights of the Old Republic Online,not just because of the merits of the game, but because of this pricing model.
Subscription pricing encourages developers to use several annoying and non user friendly methods to keep the player in the game world including long travel times, Spawn camping, Itemisation as a prerequisite for advancement,Grinding and other non customer friendly game mechanics.
Microtransactions on the other hand encourages Development of new content as a priority, and no requirement for any of the issues listed above. A Microtransaction based system also levels the playing field between Rich and Poor allowing people who could not afford a steady 15US a month subscription to still enjoy the game and to pay as they are able. I believe those seemingly arguing on behalf of the poor are actually arguing against the potential loss of their in-game Status Symbol items.
City of Heroes/Villains has shown that a MMORPG developer can go beyond itemisation and present characters that are directly derived from player creativity and imagination, while still maintaining a sense of Achievement through the display of Badges and Titles to represent Achievements on the character.
Players have sadly been conditioned to accept these masochistic game mechanics in MMORPGs and have unfortunately accepted them as the only possible solution. I am very pleased that developers are moving away from those Machiavellian methods of turning a profit and are expanding into a more holistic relationship with their customers and their time investments in their game worlds.
That is that once 'money' remains virtual it is fine, but once it is Cashed Out into real currency then shouldn't it be taxed as would any other income? For example, if you sell an idea on Ebay for 10,000.00 and this money gets deposited in your bank account, shouldn't you declare this as income?
Unless I am misunderstanding the intent of this law (it surely can't mean that if I sell a piece of armor to someone in WoW for 10Gold I need to pay 2USD in tax),I don't see why it is a big deal. Or how companies making 500 million were not paying taxes on it. Were certain classes of income 'Tax Free' in China previously?
In my view the question shouldn't be how to browse frugally within the confines of ISPs limits, limits set to boost their bottom line.
These are companies that earn hundreds of millions from oversubscribing their circuits and not spending money improving their infrastructure, who then turn around and say because of [insert convenient excuse here] they have to put bandwidth caps on the public's connections.
There should not be any limits. We are moving backward if bandwidth limits and caps are now re-introduced in the US, or extended and perpetuated in other areas.
Innovation is being stifled, New Technologies and New Ideas are being limited.
And it has nothing to do with the cost of providing bandwidth, it has much more to do with supporting, legitimizing and securing the business practices and the content monopolies which currently exist.
There has never been a greater equaliser between the wealthy monopolistic elite and everyman than the Internet.
Why does the economic system require an institute of learning to limit and charge students to use the most pervasive source of knowledge the world has ever known?
The question should not be how to browse more frugally so as to stick within the box, it should be why don't we have freely available bandwidth for public use.
Why are they wasting their time with this? What we really want is ubiquitous Head Tracking for games on the PC and Consoles. An HMD that links where your character looks to your own head movements. Many manufacturers have tried this, but either the games need to be specially patched to support the devices (http://www.3dvisor.com/), or the resolutions are too low.
If Nvidia pushes something like that, it could become a standard for gaming.They can add their 3D technology to those display units as well.
I can't understand why this hasn't become a goal for Consoles and PC game platforms for gaming, it seems so obvious.
The problem isn't 'university scientific' P2P traffic. The problem is everything else that is flowing on the network. Therefore by thumbing their noses at the 'rest' of what is downloaded, Network Companies have assured that they won't solve any problem of network traffic. Their business is not what flows across their network, their business is to keep *everything* running through those networks as smoothly as possible. Were I a shareholder in these firms I'd be quite annoyed that management seems to be eager to take on the liabilities of being a policeman and a priest, rather than on maximimising profits by actually focussing on the company's business!
No matter, the public will research and produce it's own protocol no doubt, and CISCO will make billions selling equipment to counter it. And so the silly, costly game will continue to be played without any real solution being found. Clearly solving the actual issue of bandwidth use isn't in anyone's corporate interest.
I thought the game was excellent! The story brought some interesting philosphy to the gamer, and explored a relevant viewpoint of a purely capitalist and elitist society.
I didn't find the game too easy, there is a difficulty setting if you do.
Being able to respawn nearby wasn't a bad thing in my books either. I absolutely hate having to backtrack through an entire level, or past a long sequence of enemies everytime I die in a game. i don't find it fun and I don't have the time for it. I want to get to the next area while still being challenged. i.e. I want to finish the game, whether I suck or not. I paid the same 50 bucks as everyone else for my SINGLE player experience.
I thought Bioshock was a great game,a game the player could play as he wished, and a game which I think players of all skill levels can complete. I have no idea why that would be a bad thing.
? No one aims for a niche market? On the contrary *many* successful business aim to fill a niche market and are highly profitable providing for that niche market.You might say that the entire Super Luxury Car line is based on this premise.
The changes could simply indicate a flexible company that is willing to adapt to what it sees the market wants. Which is not an easy thing to figure out to begin with:what people want. If you listen to people they all say they want something different than WoW, something different to the Grind. But yet WoW's subscriber base continues to grow and they aren't losing subscribers who are being replaced either. Then you look at Sony bringing out a game like Tabula Rasa which is truly trying to break the mold.
I say go for it Sony, do the whole CCG thing and let's see where it ends up.I for one am very interested in that concept, as it is a concept that I myself have held and theoretically explored and wondered,"Wow, why doesn't one of these MMORPGs do this".
Anyways, I just found a few things that you said perhaps needed further explanation.
Being Number 1 would be great for any company in any market, that was never in dispute.
And one would expect Sony to attempt to maximise their subscriber base and their marketshare, sure. However that doesn't mean that if they don't have 9 million subscribers as WoW does that they have failed.
I'd like to know exactly which MMORPG *has* released their subscriber numbers lately beside WoW? I haven't seen City Of Heroes do it, or EVE, or Vanguard, or Lineage II recently. In fact that old mmorpgcharts site had to painstakingly compile statistics from a variety of pieced together information.
EQ2 does not need 11 million subscribers to be termed a success at all. And maybe it's because they aren't number one that they are thinking of things like the Sony Station Exchange, and this new CCG idea which, to me, add to the game and actually help innovate the genre (never thought I'd be saying that about Sony actually) which is something that the 9 million player guy isn't about to do.
Err, why does EQ2 *need* 9 or 10 million players?
What it needs is a steady player base that brings in enough revenue to maintain the world servers, fund additional development, and turn a decent profit.
As long as it is doing that then it makes a lot of sense continuing and means it's performing quite well.
Why fixate on competing with WoW?
If you don't want to, then don't.
There's nothing Egalitarian about gains made in an MMORPG. Those with the most time, make the most gains. Those with jobs and families end up left behind.
What's so 'fair' and 'equal' about that?
Why would a skeleton not be carrying the exact weapon it is using at the time? Where does it fit a shield that it never had? Are there hidden bone pockets?
come come..are you truly attempting to foist 'reality' on a Fantasy Game where a little halfling creature can carry 400 pounds of items in a backpack?
The Card represents just another piece of loot.
With all that you have said, i am certain if you come across a rare card that someone would pay 1000 gold for you would certainly trade it!
I wonder why other games haven't already done this!
it's great to have 'sub-games' to play within the larger RPG context. For example why not add Chess and other games as well in Taverns etc. across the world?
I was wondering when a company would decide to merge the highly profitable and engaging Trading Card type of game with a MMORPG, and here Sony's gone and done it! Sony of all companies! I was thinking it would have been Blizzard or some new startup! This will start a whole new economy going within Everquest and yet another reason to play.
The issue of 'cash for items' is really old school. There's nothing wrong with setting up an economy which allows players to purchase items other than jealousy. Sony has already made the move to support real world trading on certain servers!
I am actually downloading the Trial of The Isle right now, I note that gameplay in EQ has changed drastically and it actually seems to be quite interesting from what I am reading!
Don't play US based MMORPGs. There are several in other parts of the world, if Blizzard et al were smart they would simply move their business operations offshore.
That this is even being argued when there are more than enough existing laws to cover real world money transactions is utterly ridiculous. Once someone pays money and it's deposited into a bank account the IRS can tax that already, and that should be reported under current laws.
Definitely someone thinks that the Internet is an untapped source of money to be squeezed out of the public.
Take games and gaming offshore, if the US then passes a law that its citizens cannot play MMORPGs that exist offshore and decide to break even more Free Trade laws (As is the case with Online Gambling sites) then screw em. The market in the rest of the world is big enough to be profitable for an MMORPG. It will open the market and cause a shift to other world players and developers out there, which will probably be a good thing.
These are the same Telecoms who are pushing for the right to decide what sites get accessed faster and what applications and traffic gets priority on their network based on which companies have paid them more? Now they are worried about States prioritizing their own traffic?
It's utterly hypocritical and shows that this has nothing to do with the consumer, consumer rights, or even votes (since the US public in general appears to be apathetic): It's ALL about the money, and who pays the most of that money to Senators to get their laws passed...or 'lobbying' whatever you want to call it.
There seems to be an annoying trend since we have online acheivements that a lot of games come minus any included single player cheats.On the PC it is fine, someone will always make a trainer, but on the consoles it can be extremely frustrating if you purchase a game and cannot complete it. This has happened a few times to me, and yes you might be very right in saying "Well you just don't have the skill"..but I don't care. I want to be able to beat that last boss, or get past that stuck level and move on with the game. Cheat Codes enable players to do that, and face it you don't use them if you don't want to.
Multiplayer should be the only venue where the player isn't given a choice to get unlimited ammo, or to play with no traffic etc. etc. since that is competition. Codes can also disable Achievements when activated, for example, as that too could possibly be termed player vs player 'competition'. Some people just want to play the game, and get onto the next fun area and finish it, not spend days trying to get past a particular point. Some gamers enjoy saying that they had to try for hours and hours to beat a particular point in a game, or they replayed a level 8 times before finally beating it. But a lot of gamers don't. That's why cheats were created and why they are so popular in the first place. It's really not possible to scale gameplay to every skill level, but it is possible to allow the player to choose to play in 'God' mode for a while if they want to.
Slashdot Mirror
Or you'll get your product sued off the shelves like Nintendo did with Giana Sisters way-back-when.
That's far less likely to happen when you modify the original IP and add your own unique elements than if you make a wholesale copy.
Why copy the original and have the hassle of dealing with copyright in the first place?
Instead: Create Your Own IP.
Radical idea I know..but bear with me.
Create your own IP that is similar to the original, and then even make some improvements based on current technology trends. Have similar though not identical storylines, change the names of places and persons up etc.
People that care and played the game 18 years ago will remember and recognise it for what it is. People that never did can still enjoy it regardless.You lose nothing.
There is much less risk to you and your team of no one ever seeing your hard work.
How many times have we heard of this happening, why do groups of talented people persist?
NEVER donate your time, especially not 8 years, to someone else's IP.
Had they put 8 years into making adventure stories for say Neverwinter Nights 2 or something they probably would have been able to strike a deal for paid expansions (Like Mysteries of Westgate).
Or had they put 8 years into their own IP. All it would have taken was to change the names, places...move the story around a bit. They could even have said that it was Inspired by Kings Quest etc. etc. (Torchlight inspired by Diablo).
This is really very sad.But the corporate beast has no feelings and no loyalty.
All the popular Piracy statistics relating to loss of profit are lies. It is only because Corporations ensure laws in their favor that organisations such as the RIAA and the MPAA can make the sort of claims for damages that they do. When a youth in India downloads Call of Duty and then leaves uTorrent running, that isn't a loss worth 500,000USD. There are many places and many individuals both within and outside the US and the developed world who literally cannot afford these games.
Becoming involved in electronic entertainment can lead to an interest in computing, a career and innovation for the industry as a whole. If not by Piracy how else would someone living in a third world nation gain the necessary skills to advance and gain employment, if they are never exposed to Windows 7 or Microsoft Office for example? Would they even be interested in computers at all if they are never captivated by Dragon Age? You have developers in Poland, and Russia who create amazing games for us all to enjoy. Anyone ever did a poll to see how many of them purchased every bit of development software that they used through their youth?
I have quite a few friends who's introduction to Computers, Programming and Development came through an interest in playing games. Has anyone ever done a survey to track someone who claimed to Pirate games in their youth, and whether they become paying customers as they get older and can afford it? Do they buy a Game Console...do they buy two?
We have a new Digital Divide being perpetuated by the top First World Nations through Copyright law and Trade Treaties. An insidious and growing division which keeps the latest advances in hardware, software and content within the territories of the First World and the United States in particular.For example take The iPhone which is thought to be one of the more innovative gadgets of our time.It almost single handedly brought the media connected touch screen smartphone to the market, and made multitouch the wow feature that it is today. Can you say that you are in the Tech industry if you've never seen one or used one? iPhone Application Development is a new field, and if you can't get access to an iPhone...you really can't be a part of that market. Yet the iPhone was locked to the United States and a few other choice providers for at least a year. The only way to access this hardware was by breaking the law....through Piracy. And yet through that Piracy you had developers worldwide starting to write applications, starting to learn about developing for the new and burgeoning mobile marketplace. In the little island of Trinidad a blog started up that followed the iPhone, linked to the latest applications etc. and it was very well followed. The blog owner even developed his own themes etc. which other iPhone users took advantage of. Should Apple pay him for that service,give him the cost of the iPhone back? Where is the Loss of Profit?
Does anyone remember Shareware? One of the quickest ways to get your games in the hands of potential customers. Would ID have been as big if it hadn't been for shareware? What went wrong? Now we have a BitTorrent network that can provide the ultimate shareware distribution platform, yet Publishers and Developers do not take advantage of it. Instead they spend Millions adding DRM, then fielding the Tech Support calls;legitimate customers have to fight with horridly slow download speeds through Direct2Drive, Steam and others during big releases. And all so that the money keeps revolving through the hands that, of course, truly deserve it.The customer gets left out in the cold, pulling wads of money from his pockets just for entertainment with more problems and frustrations. Loss of Profit?
When a Publisher decides to release a game Digitally only in the United States and ignores the Rest of the World...is it a Loss of Profit when someone in New Zealand downloads the game to play it? The Publisher has already made a decision that they don't want that sale, is it a loss of profit in that circumstance? Does that
Apple locked the phone to AT&T and locked it internationally as well.
This created the conditions for a large black market to flourish both within the US and Internationally.
You will find iPhones in every country of the world, whether they have agreements with Apple or not.
Within this black market, you have the Pirating of games and other content. Of course, if people have the phones but cannot purchase the content, they're going to pirate it. One can argue till blue in the face about the legality and morality of it, that's what people are going to do.
There need to be numbers released as to the demographics of the users of these Pirated applications. Do they all have legitimate iPhones in countries that support the iPhones application store?
Can they purchase these products if they wanted to at equal cost?
I don't see why they could not add Co-Op multiplayer of the same type that we have in Neverwinter Nights, and Neverwinter Nights 2. Or for that matter the type found in Fable II, or Borderlands.
It is accepted that one person is the Leader of the group who clicks the relevant dialog choices. What happens is that the players may discuss what they want to do , and come to a decision and one person clicks. Simple.
The combat will work just as well for an additional Human character,or an additional human controlling the characters. Again, this is nothing new or ground breaking. It has been done successfully before in several games.
The comments presented make me wonder if any of the posters have ever played an RPG in co-op mode?
I think the reason Dragon Age has no co-op are economic, and the fact that the game also appears on the Xbox 360. The time investment for co-op multiplayer would have been doubled because they would need to accommodate both the whole Xbox Live platform, and the Windows platform. If the argument is Economic then no one can argue, it is cheaper to produce a Singleplayer game without Co-Op Multiplayer.
It is 2009 though, and from Bioware, I expected more. The ability to play an RPG, Action or otherwise with 2 or more people greatly enhances the gameplay. I do not agree that the second, third , or fourth players need to be somehow specially accommodated in terms of Story, things to do etc. etc. It would be nice, but it is by no means necessary.I can imagine Dragon Age perfectly with someone else being able to control the characters, and nothing else changing. It is a lot better than two people sitting side by side while one plays.
You know for the folks who have significant others that game, close friends who chat etc. online...the advantages and benefits of the Option for Co-Op play are obvious. It's just a lot more fun.
You know, if in a year or two they announce Dragon Age: Parties Edition , or Dragon Age 2 Now with Multiplayer I'll be a bit pissed. :-|
but i would probably buy it :-)
How about advancing Voice recognition in games, so giving commands in RTS is second nature?
Or the Wii controllers for First Person Shooters is very good.
Combine this with Head Tracking peripherals and the keyboard and WASD stops being such a necessity.
The problem in my view is that few publishers are willing to take chances, and neither Microsoft nor Sony are willing to push these head tracking/head mounted displays and alternate controllers as a Standard for their consoles. Therefore there will always be a great financial hump to get over for any third party developer that want to push these types of control schemes forward. Because there is no first party support, refining and advancing these controls becomes difficult.
The Keyboard can't be beat because the cost of innovation and the general inertia on the part of first party developers is too high.
Natal and other body tracking/motion tracking devices aren't going to replace a button press.
Isn't this exactly what Intel did and part of the reason they were charged for anti-trust and anti-monopoly violations?
The cooler internally has the same basic construction as the reference cooler, it uses a single leaf-blower.
huh? How hot will this thing run..80c under load on average?
Isn't it time we start getting more efficient designs instead of simply trying to brute force our way to better performance?
Why does it matter the number of people that pirated the game?
That's irrelevant.
The question is, what effect does that have on Sales of the game? To date, no one can answer that question, and no publishers have been intelligent enough to do the research that answers that question.
Will the Sims 3 be available for digital download worldwide on release day? Will it cost 200% more outside the US to download the game if it is available?
Publishers are either disingenuous about DRM and Piracy or they are run by stupid and shortsighted people. It's probably actually a combination of the two.
And now the media, ever the bastions of Independent,intelligent and responsible reporting have begun to parrot statistics on how many copies are pirated. It's easier to find out the number of copies that are pirated than to find out how many copies were actually sold, if that number ever gets reported.
And that too is indicative of the underlying problems which never get addressed.
That's the real deal breaker for me and the other 5.5 billion people in the rest of the world.
The Kindle is locked to the United States. You need a Credit Card drawn on a US bank to even purchase it.
I can't find a reason for this, except to further the notion that DRM is less about copyright and more about legislating anti-consumer business practices and furthering price fixing and monopolies through technology.
I expect to see this released 'internationally' with the same books costing two or three dollars more.
I believe that Microtransactions are the way forward for MMORPGs.I am looking forward to Knights of the Old Republic Online,not just because of the merits of the game, but because of this
pricing model.
Subscription pricing encourages developers to use several annoying and non user friendly methods to keep the player in the game world including long travel times, Spawn camping, Itemisation as a prerequisite for advancement,Grinding and other non customer friendly game mechanics.
Microtransactions on the other hand encourages Development of new content as a priority, and no requirement for any of the issues listed above. A Microtransaction based system also levels the playing field between Rich and Poor allowing people who could not afford a steady 15US a month subscription to still enjoy the game and to pay as they are able. I believe those seemingly arguing on behalf of the poor are actually arguing against the potential loss of their in-game Status Symbol items.
City of Heroes/Villains has shown that a MMORPG developer can go beyond itemisation and present characters that are directly derived from player creativity and imagination, while still maintaining a sense of Achievement through the display of Badges and Titles to represent Achievements on the character.
Players have sadly been conditioned to accept these masochistic game mechanics in MMORPGs and have unfortunately accepted them as the only possible solution. I am very pleased that developers are moving away from those Machiavellian methods of turning a profit and are expanding into a more holistic relationship with their customers and their time investments in their game worlds.
That is that once 'money' remains virtual it is fine, but once it is Cashed Out into real currency then shouldn't it be taxed as would any other income? For example, if you sell an idea on Ebay for 10,000.00 and this money gets deposited in your bank account, shouldn't you declare this as income?
Unless I am misunderstanding the intent of this law (it surely can't mean that if I sell a piece of armor to someone in WoW for 10Gold I need to pay 2USD in tax),I don't see why it is a big deal. Or how companies making 500 million were not paying taxes on it. Were certain classes of income 'Tax Free' in China previously?
-Confuzzled :)
In my view the question shouldn't be how to browse frugally within the confines of ISPs limits, limits set to boost their bottom line.
These are companies that earn hundreds of millions from oversubscribing their circuits and not spending money improving their infrastructure, who then turn around and say because of [insert convenient excuse here] they have to put bandwidth caps on the public's connections.
There should not be any limits. We are moving backward if bandwidth limits and caps are now re-introduced in the US, or extended and perpetuated in other areas.
Innovation is being stifled, New Technologies and New Ideas are being limited.
And it has nothing to do with the cost of providing bandwidth, it has much more to do with supporting, legitimizing and securing the business practices and the content monopolies which currently exist.
There has never been a greater equaliser between the wealthy monopolistic elite and everyman than the Internet.
Why does the economic system require an institute of learning to limit and charge students to use the most pervasive source of knowledge the world has ever known?
The question should not be how to browse more frugally so as to stick within the box, it should be why don't we have freely available bandwidth for public use.
Do we pay for GPS?
Why are they wasting their time with this? What we really want is ubiquitous Head Tracking for games on the PC and Consoles. An HMD that links where your character looks to your own head movements. Many manufacturers have tried this, but either the games need to be specially patched to support the devices (http://www.3dvisor.com/), or the resolutions are too low. If Nvidia pushes something like that, it could become a standard for gaming.They can add their 3D technology to those display units as well. I can't understand why this hasn't become a goal for Consoles and PC game platforms for gaming, it seems so obvious.
The problem isn't 'university scientific' P2P traffic. The problem is everything else that is flowing on the network. Therefore by thumbing their noses at the 'rest' of what is downloaded, Network Companies have assured that they won't solve any problem of network traffic. Their business is not what flows across their network, their business is to keep *everything* running through those networks as smoothly as possible. Were I a shareholder in these firms I'd be quite annoyed that management seems to be eager to take on the liabilities of being a policeman and a priest, rather than on maximimising profits by actually focussing on the company's business!
No matter, the public will research and produce it's own protocol no doubt, and CISCO will make billions selling equipment to counter it. And so the silly, costly game will continue to be played without any real solution being found.
Clearly solving the actual issue of bandwidth use isn't in anyone's corporate interest.
I thought the game was excellent! The story brought some interesting philosphy to the gamer, and explored a relevant viewpoint of a purely capitalist and elitist society. I didn't find the game too easy, there is a difficulty setting if you do. Being able to respawn nearby wasn't a bad thing in my books either. I absolutely hate having to backtrack through an entire level, or past a long sequence of enemies everytime I die in a game. i don't find it fun and I don't have the time for it. I want to get to the next area while still being challenged. i.e. I want to finish the game, whether I suck or not. I paid the same 50 bucks as everyone else for my SINGLE player experience. I thought Bioshock was a great game,a game the player could play as he wished, and a game which I think players of all skill levels can complete. I have no idea why that would be a bad thing.
? No one aims for a niche market?
On the contrary *many* successful business aim to fill a niche market and are highly profitable providing for that niche market.You might say that the entire Super Luxury Car line is based on this premise.
The changes could simply indicate a flexible company that is willing to adapt to what it sees the market wants. Which is not an easy thing to figure out to begin with:what people want. If you listen to people they all say they want something different than WoW, something different to the Grind. But yet WoW's subscriber base continues to grow and they aren't losing subscribers who are being replaced either. Then you look at Sony bringing out a game like Tabula Rasa which is truly trying to break the mold.
I say go for it Sony, do the whole CCG thing and let's see where it ends up.I for one am very interested in that concept, as it is a concept that I myself have held and theoretically explored and wondered,"Wow, why doesn't one of these MMORPGs do this".
Anyways, I just found a few things that you said perhaps needed further explanation.
Being Number 1 would be great for any company in any market, that was never in dispute. And one would expect Sony to attempt to maximise their subscriber base and their marketshare, sure. However that doesn't mean that if they don't have 9 million subscribers as WoW does that they have failed. I'd like to know exactly which MMORPG *has* released their subscriber numbers lately beside WoW? I haven't seen City Of Heroes do it, or EVE, or Vanguard, or Lineage II recently. In fact that old mmorpgcharts site had to painstakingly compile statistics from a variety of pieced together information. EQ2 does not need 11 million subscribers to be termed a success at all. And maybe it's because they aren't number one that they are thinking of things like the Sony Station Exchange, and this new CCG idea which, to me, add to the game and actually help innovate the genre (never thought I'd be saying that about Sony actually) which is something that the 9 million player guy isn't about to do.
Err, why does EQ2 *need* 9 or 10 million players? What it needs is a steady player base that brings in enough revenue to maintain the world servers, fund additional development, and turn a decent profit. As long as it is doing that then it makes a lot of sense continuing and means it's performing quite well. Why fixate on competing with WoW?
If you don't want to, then don't. There's nothing Egalitarian about gains made in an MMORPG. Those with the most time, make the most gains. Those with jobs and families end up left behind. What's so 'fair' and 'equal' about that? Why would a skeleton not be carrying the exact weapon it is using at the time? Where does it fit a shield that it never had? Are there hidden bone pockets? come come..are you truly attempting to foist 'reality' on a Fantasy Game where a little halfling creature can carry 400 pounds of items in a backpack? The Card represents just another piece of loot. With all that you have said, i am certain if you come across a rare card that someone would pay 1000 gold for you would certainly trade it!
I wonder why other games haven't already done this! it's great to have 'sub-games' to play within the larger RPG context. For example why not add Chess and other games as well in Taverns etc. across the world? I was wondering when a company would decide to merge the highly profitable and engaging Trading Card type of game with a MMORPG, and here Sony's gone and done it! Sony of all companies! I was thinking it would have been Blizzard or some new startup! This will start a whole new economy going within Everquest and yet another reason to play. The issue of 'cash for items' is really old school. There's nothing wrong with setting up an economy which allows players to purchase items other than jealousy. Sony has already made the move to support real world trading on certain servers! I am actually downloading the Trial of The Isle right now, I note that gameplay in EQ has changed drastically and it actually seems to be quite interesting from what I am reading!
Don't play US based MMORPGs. There are several in other parts of the world, if Blizzard et al were smart they would simply move their business operations offshore. That this is even being argued when there are more than enough existing laws to cover real world money transactions is utterly ridiculous. Once someone pays money and it's deposited into a bank account the IRS can tax that already, and that should be reported under current laws. Definitely someone thinks that the Internet is an untapped source of money to be squeezed out of the public. Take games and gaming offshore, if the US then passes a law that its citizens cannot play MMORPGs that exist offshore and decide to break even more Free Trade laws (As is the case with Online Gambling sites) then screw em. The market in the rest of the world is big enough to be profitable for an MMORPG. It will open the market and cause a shift to other world players and developers out there, which will probably be a good thing.
Amazing.
These are the same Telecoms who are pushing for the right to decide what sites get accessed faster and what applications and traffic gets priority on their network based on which companies have paid them more?
Now they are worried about States prioritizing their own traffic?
It's utterly hypocritical and shows that this has nothing to do with the consumer, consumer rights, or even votes (since the US public in general appears to be apathetic): It's ALL about the money, and who pays the most of that money to Senators to get their laws passed...or 'lobbying' whatever you want to call it.
There seems to be an annoying trend since we have online acheivements that a lot of games come minus any included single player cheats.On the PC it is fine, someone will always make a trainer, but on the consoles it can be extremely frustrating if you purchase a game and cannot complete it. This has happened a few times to me, and yes you might be very right in saying "Well you just don't have the skill"..but I don't care. I want to be able to beat that last boss, or get past that stuck level and move on with the game. Cheat Codes enable players to do that, and face it you don't use them if you don't want to.
Multiplayer should be the only venue where the player isn't given a choice to get unlimited ammo, or to play with no traffic etc. etc. since that is competition. Codes can also disable Achievements when activated, for example, as that too could possibly be termed player vs player 'competition'. Some people just want to play the game, and get onto the next fun area and finish it, not spend days trying to get past a particular point. Some gamers enjoy saying that they had to try for hours and hours to beat a particular point in a game, or they replayed a level 8 times before finally beating it. But a lot of gamers don't. That's why cheats were created and why they are so popular in the first place. It's really not possible to scale gameplay to every skill level, but it is possible to allow the player to choose to play in 'God' mode for a while if they want to.