I'm far from young in knowlege of games -- I've been gaming since getting my C64, and haven't quit yet. I just don't see the need to chase the almighty frame rate -- mostly because I'm not a twitch gamer. My gaming interests have evolved past the need to just randomly blow things up and kill virtual things. I view most player vs player environments as the equivalent of elementary-school "I can pee farther than you" dick wagging.
I'll take a decent combat flight simulator over ANY first person shooter. And I do mean SIMULULATOR, not "arcade" type combat, which often falls back into "twitch gamer" status. Give me something like any of the Falcon line -- where the book is 400+ pages, and dropping a bomb is more involved than "pressing button B on the joystick". Something with realistic flight models. Something where death is permanant and you have to start over.
So while I'm aware of the "advantages", the simple fact is that 30 frames/sec is about all that is really needed for actions to be smooth. Pulling 60 frames/sec 90% of the time should still keep your frame rate above 30 frames/sec in "intense" moments. The biggest reason to chase 100+ frames/sec rates is for bragging rights amongst the hardcore gamer crowd.
But hey, its your money, and your time. Do with it as you like, don't let me stop you. Just keep in mind that because we don't worship at the almighty temple of the frame rate, doesn't mean that we're not gamers.
Graphics aren't everything in a game. I don't NEED "oooh-shiney" graphics to have FUN. When I want FUN, I play games. When I want to be awed by computer graphics, I go watch a movie.
The part that confuses me is that many of the same people that insist on having $LATEST_AND_GREATEST graphics cards so they can run their games at 3zillion frames/sec and complain when the graphics in $GAME look even slightly outdated.....are the same ones that go absolutely crazy over $ANIME_GAME_OF_THE_WEEK which to me, look like badly drawn cartoons. I know Anime is considered an art form -- but how the heck do these "oooh-shiney" gamers consider flat-shaded, 2D character "good"?
Holy lack of line breaks batman! Here's how it was SUPPOSED to appear:
The counter argument is that levels 1-59 don't need new content, since the whole world is new to them. Personally I think that argument is complete crap -- you create a new character in a different class. 99% of the quests don't change, you just swap the Hunter quests for the Druid quests -- and there's only a handfull of those. The world doesn't change.
If you want to use that arguement that levels 1-59 don't NEED content, then let users create characters that start at the level of their highest existing character. If you've made it to level X, great. You should be able to create other characters that start at level up to X. It cuts down on the "grind" yet enhances replay for casual players.
I'll grant that it means I could create a level 60 mage without knowing anything about playing a mage character. But you know what? I'm not going to be "polluting" your precious raid groups because I'm a casual player and don't have TIME to raid.
I won't claim that I'm in the majority of WoW players. But I know I'm not the only one who feels this way, and given the current situation, when my character gets to level 60, I'll probably quit playing, as there is absolutely NO reason for me to keep playing at level 60 (don't have time for the raids, or the pvp grind), and nothing new to see starting another character.
The counter argument is that levels 1-59 don't need new content, since the whole world is new to them. Personally I think that argument is complete crap -- you create a new character in a different class. 99% of the quests don't change, you just swap the Hunter quests for the Druid quests -- and there's only a handfull of those. The world doesn't change.
If you want to use that arguement that levels 1-59 don't NEED content, then let users create characters that start at the level of their highest existing character. If you've made it to level X, great. You should be able to create other characters that start at level up to X. It cuts down on the "grind" yet enhances replay for casual players.
I'll grant that it means I could create a level 60 mage without knowing anything about playing a mage character. But you know what? I'm not going to be "polluting" your precious raid groups because I'm a casual player and don't have TIME to raid.
I won't claim that I'm in the majority of WoW players. But I know I'm not the only one who feels this way, and given the current situation, when my character gets to level 60, I'll probably quit playing, as there is absolutely NO reason for me to keep playing at level 60 (don't have time for the raids, or the pvp grind), and nothing new to see starting another character.
Re:which means you have to build off a franchise
on
Can Anyone Beat WoW?
·
· Score: 1
Sweet.....a giant, online, gang war.
Actually, that would be kind of amusing, wouldn't it. And Jack Whats-his-name will get to sue, again, and we can laugh at him some more.
Re:Just like there will never be another Doom
on
Can Anyone Beat WoW?
·
· Score: 1
Last good FPS was Half Life.
NOT HL2. Since the original HalfLife, the FPS market has sucked.
For valve's games, GTA, graphics, processing power, and FPSs I have a PC. Why would I pay for a 2nd, overpriced PC to attach to a low-res monitor and play with substandard controls?
I'll probably get a Wii, mostly for the virtual console so I can play all my old favorites without needing multiple boxes attached, without using PC emulators and having to find roms. But I lost interest in most consoles after the SNES & Genesis
Re:Wasn't firefox designed as the simple mozilla?
on
Marketing Mozilla
·
· Score: 1
Hey now....the firefox logo turned into a bowling ball would look pretty cool.
Maybe someone should go after the nerds-on-choppers crowd and do a blue motorcycle helmet with an orange fox wrapped around it. Sadly, I'm not talented enough with an airbrush to do it.:)
Dependencies are bad for non-geek users
on
Marketing Mozilla
·
· Score: 1
Your suggestion will confuse non-geeks who will inevitably download the wrong version, then complain that it doesn't work, and then go back to using IE, dismissing firefox as "broken".
Re:Wasn't firefox designed as the simple mozilla?
on
Marketing Mozilla
·
· Score: 1
Or, in the case of your cellphone/camera example, you end up with something a lot of people can't stand, and given the choice between doing without or using one, they'll pick doing without.
If firefox bloats up with crap I don't want (bittorrent, delicious tagging, rss readers, etc) built in, I'll find a browser that doesn't have all the bloat. Keep all the extras in extensions where they belong.
Fair enough. But when somewhat large projects can't be bothered to put together documentation other than a wiki, it doesn't fly well with some people who are used to having an admin guide or user guide (even if its PDF), which, in turn, hinders the adoption of open source.
We understand what you're saying. It fails on paper, if not in real life.
The fact that they were allegedly told to stop further testing is the part that bothers me.
Also, did it occur to you that specifications in the automotive industry might, just maybe, be a little more flexible than the specifications and standards for the military? Not to mention he doesn't say how it failed. It may, as you say, have failed on paper but still worked. But it might not. It might have quit working, temporarily or otherwise. We simply don't have all the details.
Slightly off-topic semi-rant: Why does it seem like most open-source projects have abandoned the idea of documentation for a wiki? Is it just because we developers are lazy and figure if we put up a wiki, we won't have to do any documentation because we think users will write the documentation for us? Or did I miss some great open-source revelation that thou shalt use wiki? Maybe I just misplaced that memo.
I don't care one bit abut Mark Karr. I certaintly don't have any embarrassment about anything in regards to him, or anything or anyone else that *I* personally am not involved in or with.
But as to who built up the belief that he might be the perpetrator.....Maybe, just MAYBE, it was Mark Karr, through his confession, that started the whole media mess.
1) I've had issues with Dell's customer support being rather crappy.
2) I think most of their cheap stuff (the $300 complete computer deals, etc) is junk and their good stuff is somewhat overpriced because of the Dell name. Based on experiences with various relatives' machines.
3) Alienware always seemed like a joke to me. Overpriced for the hardware. Ugly cases*
4) Dell bought Alienware.
Combine Dell's slightly overpricing with Alienware's ugly-cases and even worse overpricing, and you have the reasoning for my comment.
*I have no use for ANY casemodding. I *LIKE* the simple beige or black box. Windows, lights, etc are all useless when the machine is under a desk or in a closet.
I've got a Dual PIII 1ghz setup that will run everything I've thrown at it exept FEAR (which kills everything, regardless of CPU specs from what I've read) at 1600x1200 with few problems as long as I lock all the windows stuff to the 2nd processor, and let the game have the first all to itself.
I've got a 2nd machine set up similar to Grym's except with a 2.2Ghz P4 that will also run everything I've thrown at it.
Contrary to AMD & Intel's propaganda, you usually do not need $LATEST_AND_GREATEST to play $GAME unless you absolutely insist on seeing refresh rates 3 or 4 times what the human eye can distinguish. In which case, you're simply chasing higher numbers for the sake of chasing higher numbers -- not that there's anything wrong with that, I won't tell you how to spend your money.
I don't think he's talking the blinking lights on the pedestrian crossing sign, but instead the big marquee type sign showing upcoming sports games, parent-teacher-conferences, etc etc that schools are using. The kind that look like they belong in Las Vegas on the strip, not sitting in front of a school. If those are the signs he's complaining about, then I understand -- they can be annoyingly bright.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm far from young in knowlege of games -- I've been gaming since getting my C64, and haven't quit yet. I just don't see the need to chase the almighty frame rate -- mostly because I'm not a twitch gamer. My gaming interests have evolved past the need to just randomly blow things up and kill virtual things. I view most player vs player environments as the equivalent of elementary-school "I can pee farther than you" dick wagging.
I'll take a decent combat flight simulator over ANY first person shooter. And I do mean SIMULULATOR, not "arcade" type combat, which often falls back into "twitch gamer" status. Give me something like any of the Falcon line -- where the book is 400+ pages, and dropping a bomb is more involved than "pressing button B on the joystick". Something with realistic flight models. Something where death is permanant and you have to start over.
So while I'm aware of the "advantages", the simple fact is that 30 frames/sec is about all that is really needed for actions to be smooth. Pulling 60 frames/sec 90% of the time should still keep your frame rate above 30 frames/sec in "intense" moments. The biggest reason to chase 100+ frames/sec rates is for bragging rights amongst the hardcore gamer crowd.
But hey, its your money, and your time. Do with it as you like, don't let me stop you. Just keep in mind that because we don't worship at the almighty temple of the frame rate, doesn't mean that we're not gamers.
Well said.
Graphics aren't everything in a game. I don't NEED "oooh-shiney" graphics to have FUN. When I want FUN, I play games. When I want to be awed by computer graphics, I go watch a movie.
The part that confuses me is that many of the same people that insist on having $LATEST_AND_GREATEST graphics cards so they can run their games at 3zillion frames/sec and complain when the graphics in $GAME look even slightly outdated.....are the same ones that go absolutely crazy over $ANIME_GAME_OF_THE_WEEK which to me, look like badly drawn cartoons. I know Anime is considered an art form -- but how the heck do these "oooh-shiney" gamers consider flat-shaded, 2D character "good"?
Holy lack of line breaks batman! Here's how it was SUPPOSED to appear:
The counter argument is that levels 1-59 don't need new content, since the whole world is new to them. Personally I think that argument is complete crap -- you create a new character in a different class. 99% of the quests don't change, you just swap the Hunter quests for the Druid quests -- and there's only a handfull of those. The world doesn't change.
If you want to use that arguement that levels 1-59 don't NEED content, then let users create characters that start at the level of their highest existing character. If you've made it to level X, great. You should be able to create other characters that start at level up to X. It cuts down on the "grind" yet enhances replay for casual players.
I'll grant that it means I could create a level 60 mage without knowing anything about playing a mage character. But you know what? I'm not going to be "polluting" your precious raid groups because I'm a casual player and don't have TIME to raid.
I won't claim that I'm in the majority of WoW players. But I know I'm not the only one who feels this way, and given the current situation, when my character gets to level 60, I'll probably quit playing, as there is absolutely NO reason for me to keep playing at level 60 (don't have time for the raids, or the pvp grind), and nothing new to see starting another character.
The counter argument is that levels 1-59 don't need new content, since the whole world is new to them. Personally I think that argument is complete crap -- you create a new character in a different class. 99% of the quests don't change, you just swap the Hunter quests for the Druid quests -- and there's only a handfull of those. The world doesn't change. If you want to use that arguement that levels 1-59 don't NEED content, then let users create characters that start at the level of their highest existing character. If you've made it to level X, great. You should be able to create other characters that start at level up to X. It cuts down on the "grind" yet enhances replay for casual players. I'll grant that it means I could create a level 60 mage without knowing anything about playing a mage character. But you know what? I'm not going to be "polluting" your precious raid groups because I'm a casual player and don't have TIME to raid. I won't claim that I'm in the majority of WoW players. But I know I'm not the only one who feels this way, and given the current situation, when my character gets to level 60, I'll probably quit playing, as there is absolutely NO reason for me to keep playing at level 60 (don't have time for the raids, or the pvp grind), and nothing new to see starting another character.
Sweet.....a giant, online, gang war.
Actually, that would be kind of amusing, wouldn't it. And Jack Whats-his-name will get to sue, again, and we can laugh at him some more.
Last good FPS was Half Life.
NOT HL2. Since the original HalfLife, the FPS market has sucked.
I dunno....look at how DDR did.
r , maybe. "Most" video game people? Don't think so.
Your typical lives-on-mcdonalds-takeout-200lb-10-year-old-game
Assuming there's an english version, that game just move the Wii from "likely purchase" to "will be buying as soon as that game is available".
Thanks.
Well said.
Reading comprehension is key.
He doesn't use comcast as his ISP. His mail doesn't go through comcast.
*some* gamers
For valve's games, GTA, graphics, processing power, and FPSs I have a PC. Why would I pay for a 2nd, overpriced PC to attach to a low-res monitor and play with substandard controls?
I'll probably get a Wii, mostly for the virtual console so I can play all my old favorites without needing multiple boxes attached, without using PC emulators and having to find roms. But I lost interest in most consoles after the SNES & Genesis
Hey now....the firefox logo turned into a bowling ball would look pretty cool.
:)
Maybe someone should go after the nerds-on-choppers crowd and do a blue motorcycle helmet with an orange fox wrapped around it. Sadly, I'm not talented enough with an airbrush to do it.
Your suggestion will confuse non-geeks who will inevitably download the wrong version, then complain that it doesn't work, and then go back to using IE, dismissing firefox as "broken".
Or, in the case of your cellphone/camera example, you end up with something a lot of people can't stand, and given the choice between doing without or using one, they'll pick doing without.
If firefox bloats up with crap I don't want (bittorrent, delicious tagging, rss readers, etc) built in, I'll find a browser that doesn't have all the bloat. Keep all the extras in extensions where they belong.
Fair enough. But when somewhat large projects can't be bothered to put together documentation other than a wiki, it doesn't fly well with some people who are used to having an admin guide or user guide (even if its PDF), which, in turn, hinders the adoption of open source.
We understand what you're saying. It fails on paper, if not in real life.
The fact that they were allegedly told to stop further testing is the part that bothers me.
Also, did it occur to you that specifications in the automotive industry might, just maybe, be a little more flexible than the specifications and standards for the military? Not to mention he doesn't say how it failed. It may, as you say, have failed on paper but still worked. But it might not. It might have quit working, temporarily or otherwise. We simply don't have all the details.
Not everyone likes wikis.
Slightly off-topic semi-rant: Why does it seem like most open-source projects have abandoned the idea of documentation for a wiki? Is it just because we developers are lazy and figure if we put up a wiki, we won't have to do any documentation because we think users will write the documentation for us? Or did I miss some great open-source revelation that thou shalt use wiki? Maybe I just misplaced that memo.
As a US citizen....
I don't care one bit abut Mark Karr. I certaintly don't have any embarrassment about anything in regards to him, or anything or anyone else that *I* personally am not involved in or with.
But as to who built up the belief that he might be the perpetrator.....Maybe, just MAYBE, it was Mark Karr, through his confession, that started the whole media mess.
So you use the CPU to do the raytracing, and push the physics off onto the GPU. That might free up enough CPU time to do AI.
He DID volunteer to review papers. They told him to shove it.
1) I've had issues with Dell's customer support being rather crappy.
2) I think most of their cheap stuff (the $300 complete computer deals, etc) is junk and their good stuff is somewhat overpriced because of the Dell name. Based on experiences with various relatives' machines.
3) Alienware always seemed like a joke to me. Overpriced for the hardware. Ugly cases*
4) Dell bought Alienware.
Combine Dell's slightly overpricing with Alienware's ugly-cases and even worse overpricing, and you have the reasoning for my comment.
*I have no use for ANY casemodding. I *LIKE* the simple beige or black box. Windows, lights, etc are all useless when the machine is under a desk or in a closet.
I've got a Dual PIII 1ghz setup that will run everything I've thrown at it exept FEAR (which kills everything, regardless of CPU specs from what I've read) at 1600x1200 with few problems as long as I lock all the windows stuff to the 2nd processor, and let the game have the first all to itself.
I've got a 2nd machine set up similar to Grym's except with a 2.2Ghz P4 that will also run everything I've thrown at it.
Contrary to AMD & Intel's propaganda, you usually do not need $LATEST_AND_GREATEST to play $GAME unless you absolutely insist on seeing refresh rates 3 or 4 times what the human eye can distinguish. In which case, you're simply chasing higher numbers for the sake of chasing higher numbers -- not that there's anything wrong with that, I won't tell you how to spend your money.
Its a Dell.
Ok, he IS talking about the signs on the pedestrian crossing. Its too early to think.
The other signs are annoying though.
I don't think he's talking the blinking lights on the pedestrian crossing sign, but instead the big marquee type sign showing upcoming sports games, parent-teacher-conferences, etc etc that schools are using. The kind that look like they belong in Las Vegas on the strip, not sitting in front of a school. If those are the signs he's complaining about, then I understand -- they can be annoyingly bright.