Some Independent Game festival winners can go on to publication, but if they are not with the majors then distibution can be a problem. King of Dragon Pass (http://www.a-sharp.com/kodp/) is a great strategy and story creating game. It is innovative, different and delivered with passion. Yet its very differences made it hard for magazines to understand when reviewing and for distributors to comprehend when being asked to take it.
It is a shame, because games like King of Dragon Pass deserve far more recognition than they get. I expect that most people here have never heard of it let alone played it (even some slashdotters who may by ex-RPG players and remember Runequest and Glorantha fondly).
Re:Nostalgia and Evolution
on
FASA Dies
·
· Score: 1
Good game properties do seem to be surviving depsite the financial troubles of the companies producing them.
Those game properties that evolve do seem to find new homes or leases of life, by whatever means.
Consider for example the excellent fantasy world of Glorantha written by Greg Stafford. Once it was supported by Runequest, after troubles with Avalaon Hill it now survives in a new game system: Hero Wars. The funding for the company to write the game system and producenew background material was paritally from donations by the fans, who gave Greg the money, because they wanted to see Glorantha in print again.
Check out http://www.herowars.com.
And the game has evolved, a simpler system means that those of us who have aged in years (33) and have less time to write and run games, can concentrate on the narritive elements instead of the numbers.
Gaming is not dying, it is evolving with us.
Its biggest problem remians that its fanbase is aging. Who will carry the torch, when we are gone?
of all the world creations from Fantasy role-playing games, I feel that Dungeons & Dragons were plauged by some of the weakest. IMHO only Dragonlance setting showed what could be done to make an interesting setting to D&D gamers. Far better are the worlds of less well-selling games such as Greg staford's Glorantha www.glorantha.com (now supported by a new game system Hero Wars) and M.A.R Barker's Tekumel www.tekumel.com. D&D gamers could find much to inspire them here, and both are far more worthy of literary or screen treatment.
I think it was John Locke who once said that most arguments were actually arguments about the meanings of words.
Over time many people have tried to control meaning, usually conservative or authoritarian groups who see changes in or slippage of meaning as undermining their powerbase or traditional values.
OS ultimately means what people need it to mean. Because people need a term that encompasses not only the kernel, but applications that allow users tointeract with the kernel such as the shell its meaning will change. OIS is in the public domain.
Eventually the word will become too generalised to be of use to experts. We will just havet o get used to using terms like kernel, shell and stop using OS unless we want a term that is generalised.
Language does not belong to you, it belongs to all its speakers.
I saw this program (or another on the same topic on the BBC). It was I believe part of a documentary series about the collapse of the Eastern Block. Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle were interviewed (playing computer games - memory escapes me, but I do not think it was Missile Command), claiming that their plan had brought about the downfall of the "Evil Empire". That was what worried me, they kept calling it the "Evil Empire". But you're friend is not making it up, I saw this myself.
I am not a legal expert, but I am under the impression that the DoJ needs to prove 3 things:
1) That Microsoft holds a monopoly (not in itself seen to be wrong). 2) That Microsofts used this position to prevent competition (you can defend your market share, but not by barring the competitor access to that market share). 3) That consumers were harmed as a result of the lack of competition.
Judge Jackon's FoF find so strongly against Microsoft on the first two points that there is nothing here for Microsoft to argue over in any future legal finding against them (and let's face it everyone has been telling this particular story for such a long time there is little sense of revelation in Jackson's comments on how the industry works).
But 408 gives them the possibility of arguing that consumers were not sufficiently harmed by their actions for the courts to deliver a draconian punishment (splitting up the company, multiple 'baby bills'). I assume that is why they are focusing on it. Of course in doing so they are ignoring the criticism that they have undermined the middleware market and stifled innovation, but this is their only bargaining chip in the whole FoF.
Slashdot Mirror
Some Independent Game festival winners can go on to publication, but if they are not with the majors then distibution can be a problem. King of Dragon Pass (http://www.a-sharp.com/kodp/) is a great strategy and story creating game. It is innovative, different and delivered with passion. Yet its very differences made it hard for magazines to understand when reviewing and for distributors to comprehend when being asked to take it.
It is a shame, because games like King of Dragon Pass deserve far more recognition than they get. I expect that most people here have never heard of it let alone played it (even some slashdotters who may by ex-RPG players and remember Runequest and Glorantha fondly).
Good game properties do seem to be surviving depsite the financial troubles of the companies producing them.
Those game properties that evolve do seem to find new homes or leases of life, by whatever means.
Consider for example the excellent fantasy world of Glorantha written by Greg Stafford. Once it was supported by Runequest, after troubles with Avalaon Hill it now survives in a new game system: Hero Wars. The funding for the company to write the game system and producenew background material was paritally from donations by the fans, who gave Greg the money, because they wanted to see Glorantha in print again.
Check out http://www.herowars.com.
And the game has evolved, a simpler system means that those of us who have aged in years (33) and have less time to write and run games, can concentrate on the narritive elements instead of the numbers.
Gaming is not dying, it is evolving with us.
Its biggest problem remians that its fanbase is aging. Who will carry the torch, when we are gone?
of all the world creations from Fantasy role-playing games, I feel that Dungeons & Dragons were plauged by some of the weakest. IMHO only Dragonlance setting showed what could be done to make an interesting setting to D&D gamers. Far better are the worlds of less well-selling games such as Greg staford's Glorantha www.glorantha.com (now supported by a new game system Hero Wars) and M.A.R Barker's Tekumel www.tekumel.com. D&D gamers could find much to inspire them here, and both are far more worthy of literary or screen treatment.
I think it was John Locke who once said that most arguments were actually arguments about the meanings of words.
Over time many people have tried to control meaning, usually conservative or authoritarian groups who see changes in or slippage of meaning as undermining their powerbase or traditional values.
OS ultimately means what people need it to mean. Because people need a term that encompasses not only the kernel, but applications that allow users tointeract with the kernel such as the shell its meaning will change. OIS is in the public domain.
Eventually the word will become too generalised to be of use to experts. We will just havet o get used to using terms like kernel, shell and stop using OS unless we want a term that is generalised.
Language does not belong to you, it belongs to all its speakers.
I saw this program (or another on the same topic on the BBC). It was I believe part of a documentary series about the collapse of the Eastern Block. Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle were interviewed (playing computer games - memory escapes me, but I do not think it was Missile Command), claiming that their plan had brought about the downfall of the "Evil Empire". That was what worried me, they kept calling it the "Evil Empire". But you're friend is not making it up, I saw this myself.
I am not a legal expert, but I am under the impression that the DoJ needs to prove 3 things:
1) That Microsoft holds a monopoly (not in itself seen to be wrong).
2) That Microsofts used this position to prevent competition (you can defend your market share, but not by barring the competitor access to that market share).
3) That consumers were harmed as a result of the lack of competition.
Judge Jackon's FoF find so strongly against Microsoft on the first two points that there is nothing here for Microsoft to argue over in any future legal finding against them (and let's face it everyone has been telling this particular story for such a long time there is little sense of revelation in Jackson's comments on how the industry works).
But 408 gives them the possibility of arguing that consumers were not sufficiently harmed by their actions for the courts to deliver a draconian punishment (splitting up the company, multiple 'baby bills'). I assume that is why they are focusing on it. Of course in doing so they are ignoring the criticism that they have undermined the middleware market and stifled innovation, but this is their only bargaining chip in the whole FoF.