With the Burning Crusade, Blizzard has taken the approach that effectively all the new features are available to everyone, with the exception of the actual expansion content - the new zones, and the stuff found in them. The game mechanics, UI changes, class changes, talent changes - all of it is consistent between expansion and non-expansion owners.
Having BC means that you can level further and get better gear in zones and instances that non-BC folks don't have access to, but really, that's not terribly unexpected from an expansion.
Blizzard has also explicitly stated that their expansions are going to be major content injections; if BC is any indicator, they're serious about that. They're providing patches to everyone that do the "minor" and common updates, and are saving the big content upgrades for expansions. Makes plenty of sense to me.
I'm not sure what you mean by interpreters - are you talking about states?
Python, when embedded, runs in a single global state, IIRC. With Lua, you can create any number of separate Lua states which are effectively their own sandboxes, and then run scripts in them as you choose.
Python's really clunky compared to Lua. It -can- be embedded, but it's more trouble than it's worth, IMHO. For what Lua does, it's the better langauge, I think. It's more designed for security, too - when you embed Lua, you choose which of the standard libraries to load, including string handling, table handling, and IO. For something like WoW, you just turn off (don't load) the dangerous libraries and disable the ability to load them from Lua, and bam, you have a reasonably safe script execution environment ready to go.
How do you figure? I've actually been extremely pleased with Lua, and I avoid VB and Perl whenever humanly possible. "if...then...end" statements don't really make it VB-like, thank goodness.
It isn't a langauge for applications by any means, but for writing one-off scripts, it's remarkably well-suited to the job.
CSS2 has some flaws, but it's a far cry better than anything IE currently offers. Writing cross-browser CSS can be an exercise in frustration unless you resort to browser-specific stylesheets. I just want IE to support, you know, the standard.
Strangethorn Vale is easily the most ganktastic zone in the game, in my opinion, with Hillsbrad following a close second.
As far as the questing stuff goes, it's possible to solo most everything but the instances. I just hit 53, and I've easily soloed 98% of the non-instance game.
That said, my roommate and I play the HELL out of Soul Calibur 2 with Wavebirds, and it seems like we change the batteries only every 8-10 months. The longevity on them is amazing.
The reason they don't allow this, of course, is that allowing the return of software would obliterate all profit in the retail arena.
My girlfriend worked in clothing retail at a fairly upscale store, and the number of people that would buy something, wear it, and return it was staggering. With software, though, I could buy it, copy it, and return it, so I have my money AND the product.
Allowing the return of copyable goods just doesn't make business sense.
Personally, I'd like to see Fall of Reach movie-ized. It was really a pretty decent story, and there is a lot more character interaction to work with than there is in the game or in First Strike. You'd have to find a way to make the ending a little more concrete (since the book ending is just a setup for the game), but I think it could be done.
This is exactly correct - I've personally implemented a data generation algorithm that generates highly shapable terrain heightmaps, and the datafiles are something on the order of 60 bytes per patch. A player would only need 800 bytes or so of terrain data at any given time. A patch's size is insignificant, since you can add as much detail as you like fractally. In my calcluations, I could model a terrain the size of Earth's surface at something like a 3m resolution in approximately 260GB. Large terrains mean nothing, unfortunately. The thing that makes a game is what you can do out in those terrains. Without content, they're just space.
If you want proof that large terrains without content suck ass, just look at Star Wars: Galaxies. Very large terrains with very little content, and it was boring.
The only gripe I have about PvP is that if it's anywhere near a town or graveyard, it's pretty much "who can kill the other side until their equipment runs out"
Actually, I'm pretty sure that PvP deaths don't result in equipment deterioration, so PvP battles can go on forever. It's senseless to use a spirit healer if you want to get back into the fight (which is the only way to lose equipment durability to a PvP death), as the 10 minute res sickness will make you an easy target.
It sounds as though EQ2 and WoW both have "forced" grouping in later levels. Definitely not the games for me.
Really, WoW is very solo friendly. Some classes are better at soloing than others, but they can all do it well enough. It's possible to solo up to 60 (max level) - with very little, if any grinding.
I currently have a level 40 paladin on Frostwolf, and I've soloed a good 60% of that, and duo'd with a friend of mine for another 35%. The duo matchup is by no means required - we just enjoy playing together. I had a paladin up to level 46 in beta, and easily soloed a good 95% of that character. The only times you really -have- to group are for dungeons or "elite" monsters.
Elites are basically bigger, tougher versions of the equally-leveled counterparts. For example, a level 35 elite troll might have 4x the HP and hit twice as hard as a non-elite level 35 troll, though his armor/resists/difficulty to hit are calculated as though he's a regular level 35. However, they also tend to reward much greater experience and drop better loot than non-elite mobs. Generally, you only see elites in dungeons (hence the grouping requirement), and as the end targets of certain quest lines.
For what it is worth, WoW combat is very interactive. You will use your basic melee attack automatically, but you really have to pay attention to your skills and such to win battles. They've intentionally made it very interactive so that it's hard to create bots.
I can't speak for EQ2, but levelling in WoW is pretty fast. There are people who have made it to 60 in 2 weeks real-world time (hardest of the hardcore, obviously) - the first 10 levels can be done in an evening. Blizzard has designed it so that even casual gamers can get to 60, and can experience the high-end content.
Slashdot Mirror
For the most part, I wouldn't worry about that.
With the Burning Crusade, Blizzard has taken the approach that effectively all the new features are available to everyone, with the exception of the actual expansion content - the new zones, and the stuff found in them. The game mechanics, UI changes, class changes, talent changes - all of it is consistent between expansion and non-expansion owners.
Having BC means that you can level further and get better gear in zones and instances that non-BC folks don't have access to, but really, that's not terribly unexpected from an expansion.
Blizzard has also explicitly stated that their expansions are going to be major content injections; if BC is any indicator, they're serious about that. They're providing patches to everyone that do the "minor" and common updates, and are saving the big content upgrades for expansions. Makes plenty of sense to me.
Seconded. What they had was solid, but it wasn't complete in November.
I'm glad they waited a bit longer to polish it up. It absolutely shines.
If the initial bombing runs are fun, you're going to have an utter blast once you get to Halaa.
Absolutely phenomenal fun, provided they fixed the evading guard bug.
I'm not sure what you mean by interpreters - are you talking about states?
Python, when embedded, runs in a single global state, IIRC. With Lua, you can create any number of separate Lua states which are effectively their own sandboxes, and then run scripts in them as you choose.
Python's really clunky compared to Lua. It -can- be embedded, but it's more trouble than it's worth, IMHO. For what Lua does, it's the better langauge, I think. It's more designed for security, too - when you embed Lua, you choose which of the standard libraries to load, including string handling, table handling, and IO. For something like WoW, you just turn off (don't load) the dangerous libraries and disable the ability to load them from Lua, and bam, you have a reasonably safe script execution environment ready to go.
How do you figure? I've actually been extremely pleased with Lua, and I avoid VB and Perl whenever humanly possible. "if...then...end" statements don't really make it VB-like, thank goodness. It isn't a langauge for applications by any means, but for writing one-off scripts, it's remarkably well-suited to the job.
You mean "grammar", right? Of course you do.
:)
Spelling Nazi troll.
CSS2 has some flaws, but it's a far cry better than anything IE currently offers. Writing cross-browser CSS can be an exercise in frustration unless you resort to browser-specific stylesheets. I just want IE to support, you know, the standard.
Strangethorn Vale is easily the most ganktastic zone in the game, in my opinion, with Hillsbrad following a close second.
As far as the questing stuff goes, it's possible to solo most everything but the instances. I just hit 53, and I've easily soloed 98% of the non-instance game.
The wavebird has rumble support.
Funny, my two wavebirds don't.
Maybe you mean third-party wireless controllers?
That said, my roommate and I play the HELL out of Soul Calibur 2 with Wavebirds, and it seems like we change the batteries only every 8-10 months. The longevity on them is amazing.
The reason they don't allow this, of course, is that allowing the return of software would obliterate all profit in the retail arena. My girlfriend worked in clothing retail at a fairly upscale store, and the number of people that would buy something, wear it, and return it was staggering. With software, though, I could buy it, copy it, and return it, so I have my money AND the product. Allowing the return of copyable goods just doesn't make business sense.
There's a Halo book titled 'Fall of Reach'. Its story was the richest of the three books, IMO.
Personally, I'd like to see Fall of Reach movie-ized. It was really a pretty decent story, and there is a lot more character interaction to work with than there is in the game or in First Strike. You'd have to find a way to make the ending a little more concrete (since the book ending is just a setup for the game), but I think it could be done.
If you want proof that large terrains without content suck ass, just look at Star Wars: Galaxies. Very large terrains with very little content, and it was boring.
Installed eXeem, ran SS&D, nuked Cydoor, and all is happy again. :)
Tag is done in a lot of games. For example, in Unreal Tournament 2004, you have the "Mutant" game type, which is basically just tag with guns.
You also have the "Bombing Run" gametype, which is essentially rugby with guns.
The only gripe I have about PvP is that if it's anywhere near a town or graveyard, it's pretty much "who can kill the other side until their equipment runs out"
Actually, I'm pretty sure that PvP deaths don't result in equipment deterioration, so PvP battles can go on forever. It's senseless to use a spirit healer if you want to get back into the fight (which is the only way to lose equipment durability to a PvP death), as the 10 minute res sickness will make you an easy target.
It sounds as though EQ2 and WoW both have "forced" grouping in later levels. Definitely not the games for me.
Really, WoW is very solo friendly. Some classes are better at soloing than others, but they can all do it well enough. It's possible to solo up to 60 (max level) - with very little, if any grinding.
I currently have a level 40 paladin on Frostwolf, and I've soloed a good 60% of that, and duo'd with a friend of mine for another 35%. The duo matchup is by no means required - we just enjoy playing together. I had a paladin up to level 46 in beta, and easily soloed a good 95% of that character. The only times you really -have- to group are for dungeons or "elite" monsters.
Elites are basically bigger, tougher versions of the equally-leveled counterparts. For example, a level 35 elite troll might have 4x the HP and hit twice as hard as a non-elite level 35 troll, though his armor/resists/difficulty to hit are calculated as though he's a regular level 35. However, they also tend to reward much greater experience and drop better loot than non-elite mobs. Generally, you only see elites in dungeons (hence the grouping requirement), and as the end targets of certain quest lines.
For what it is worth, WoW combat is very interactive. You will use your basic melee attack automatically, but you really have to pay attention to your skills and such to win battles. They've intentionally made it very interactive so that it's hard to create bots.
Paladin use Divine Protection and laugh at you while healing! :D
Have a gander at the Halo novels. There's more than enough material there to make a summer blockbuster.
As far as I'm concerned, the only woman that'd ever be woman enough for the Chief is Samus.
Hot cyborg-on-cyborg action, baby.
Half Life 2 came out at 1 AM Arizona time this morning.
Also this morning, I noticed my roommate snoring loudly as I left for work. He normally leaves an hour before me.
I woke him up, asked if he were going to work today. He replied that he was not feeling well.
I do not believe these two facts to be a coincidence.
I can't speak for EQ2, but levelling in WoW is pretty fast. There are people who have made it to 60 in 2 weeks real-world time (hardest of the hardcore, obviously) - the first 10 levels can be done in an evening. Blizzard has designed it so that even casual gamers can get to 60, and can experience the high-end content.
Never underestimate the power of 13 year-olds off their Ritalin. I mean, they're naturally on speed. It's like they're in perpetual bullet time. :)