If you are interested in trying GW, I recommend you try Silk Road Online first (quite similar to GW, but it's entirely free - they make their money at the "item mall").
SRO is not a technically or visually advanced game, but GW isn't any better and in some ways GW is actually worse.
But I'm biased, after having spent $50 to try out GW and then found it was not only similar to a free game I had played for months and grew bored of, but GW is actually clearly inferior in several aspects. I quit GW after about an hour of play. Never going back to it.
Last time I checked, big companies didn't care about me. That's my #1 complaint. So often they just concern themselves with appeasing the mob and protecting themselves by oppressive means.
Last time I bought a $50 game, I was so disappointed in the product I quit playing after 1 hour. I can't return the game (open box policy, only applies to PC software) and I can't resell it (according to the EULA). I almost swore off buying new computer games after that. For someone who buys a new game only around once a year, that's a pretty big deal.
And hell yeah, make games compatible with Linux! When my XP machine bites the dust in a few years I am NOT going to Vista. I absolutely REFUSE to let Microsoft continue to dictate my computing experience.
I agree with every point except #5. I do prefer fantasy. But I already have a wide selection of fantasy games to play (well, I would if they fit the other criteria). There aren't so many SF MMORP games.
Yes, "me, me, me"! Haven't you noticed that "the customer is always right" is becoming an obsolete expression? Some of us are quite unhappy with that!
Just had to say "you (and millions of right-wing conservatives)", didn't ya?
Last I time I checked, Hillary Clinton (NOT a right-wing conservative, in case you didn't know) shared the most similarities with Jack Thompson when it comes to violence in video games.
Thanks for the refreshing scent of partisan bullshit.
You spend $50 on a title you end up disliking? Too bad. You can't return it or resell it. You can if it's a console game, however.
If I want to play an old SNES game, not only is my system still running (outliving 2 generations of computers), but I can buy another one for a handful of change if my old one breaks down.
If I want to play any of my old DOS (or even some old Windows games) they often won't run on my current version of Windows (XP) and almost DEFINITELY won't run on Vista. You can't buy a new computer with anything other than Vista, and Microsoft is going to stop selling XP by the end of 2007 (older versions are already locked away in the MS vault). When my current computer dies I likely won't be able to run ANY of my current computer games. Oh, and lose your CD key? Your game CD is worthless now.
This is also true not only with games, but the majority of computer software.
I'm losing faith in the future of computers. This is one of the few industries that actually oppresses its customers, giving us fewer and fewer choices rather than more and more.
I never claimed you claimed that. (Rinse, repeat.)
This is fun, isn't it?
Now, since you didn't claim that I said that, and I didn't claim that you claimed I said that (although your flaming has been of nothing more than that), where exactly are we at?
Owned? What does that mean? Is that where you jump up and down, screaming and throwing your own shit all over like an uncivilized fucktard until you slip, fall and crack your head open? Man, you really pwned me. And it's totally righteous.
Or were you trying to split hairs between "sick" and "infected"? Yeah. I get it now. You are SO right. I'm such an imbecile. Even though the original message I replied to had to do with having a "soar throat", which is a sickness, not necessarily an infection.
I did say that clean water wouldn't help you if you're already sick.
Drugs have improved. Maybe you should find one that makes you less of an ignorant, moronic asshole WHO CAN'T READ A FUCKING POST.
STFU AND DIE. This fits you quite well then, doesn't it? I'm glad you suggested it.
What does that have to do with the point that clean water and indoor plumbing have larger effect on the general health of the population than do drugs?
I think there was one thing I was vaccinated against.
Such serious cases of strep throat are quite rare. And as you said, "the plural of anecdote is not data".
Sure. Clean water and indoor plumbing probably wouldn't have cured you, but how much worse off would you have been if not for clean water? And would you not be getting infections more often?
Have you ever heard that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? You think that pharmaceutical companies have done more for curing disease (in most cases, drugs treat symptoms not the source, hence not a cure) than clean water and indoor plumbing have done for disease prevention?
Yes, I don't have to worry so much that my soar throat is a severe infection. Because my drinking water does not carry viruses like drinking water sometimes used to. And superficial wounds do not often become gangrenous as they used to because they can be washed with clean water. It has far less to do with drugs than it does with clean water!
Funny, I've never taken drugs or gone to the doctor for any of those things. And after fifty bicycle wrecks, dozens of soar throats and ear infections, I'm still alive. What a miracle?
In all seriousness, clean water and indoor plumbing have done far more for us in that regard.
I call that an eager consumer base. I still bought the damn game when it came out. Do they count that as 1 sale and 1 loss due to piracy? That doesn't really add up. I'm sorry, but I really wasn't going to buy it twice.
Are you suggesting that 100,000 is a big dent in sales? Must have been a shit product.
Yes, they were pre-1991 stocks (that Saddam was not supposed to have after 1991) and they were weapons of mass destruction. The DoD quote from your thinkprogressive.org link says that these were "not the WMD's for which this country went to war." Notice how that implies that they were, yet, WMD's? Not the ones we were looking for, but WMD's none-the-less.
We haven't failed in Iraq. Our current offensive is failing but we have not yet failed. But the way things are going, with the majority of Americans complaining about the war instead of supporting it, we aren't far from failure.
There's nothing unique in a world power being beaten by a "weaker" but more motivated force.
We live in a different world than England did then. The capacity with which wars may be waged across continents and oceans adds the danger that enemies, keen on our apparent weakness, will be able to swiftly and effectively attack us. And we have an enemy that has no desire but to kill us all. Not to defend or to dominate, but destroy. They are encouraged and their ranks surge with every victory.
And calling the US has or is an empire is nonsense. But we could use to stop being the world's police.
As it turned out there WERE WMD's. Granted, the news about WMD's came across as a joke and almost everyone shrugged it off as nothing, but THERE WERE WMD's.
Although reporters made light of the "weapons of minor dicomfort", there remains the fact that Saddam had these weapons all along. They were in his possession since the time they were deadly.
Now tell me what technology we have that can identify the difference between a weapon of mass destruction and a "weapon of minor discomfort" at range (not to mention without knowing where they're at) and I'll hop on board calling Bush a liar and a murderer like the morally superior left does.
I was against the invasion of Iraq from the start. But not because I did not think there were WMDs, or because the UN was against it, or because I thought Saddam was an ok guy, or any of the other reasons mentioned. But now that we're there I am against just pulling out. Because a failure in Iraq would be (will be) devistating to the US. We will be visibly weak to our enemies and our words will be empty and without power, unable to enforce threats we make against those who threaten us.
My comment was not off-topic. The original post suggests that, by coincidence, the numbers of todays date add up to 13 in both US and European notation, which happens to be just a difference of order.
I was astonished that people actually grasp that gem of mathematical truth.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't recommend Guild Wars to anyone.
If you are interested in trying GW, I recommend you try Silk Road Online first (quite similar to GW, but it's entirely free - they make their money at the "item mall").
SRO is not a technically or visually advanced game, but GW isn't any better and in some ways GW is actually worse.
But I'm biased, after having spent $50 to try out GW and then found it was not only similar to a free game I had played for months and grew bored of, but GW is actually clearly inferior in several aspects. I quit GW after about an hour of play. Never going back to it.
Damn straight!
Last time I checked, big companies didn't care about me. That's my #1 complaint. So often they just concern themselves with appeasing the mob and protecting themselves by oppressive means.
Last time I bought a $50 game, I was so disappointed in the product I quit playing after 1 hour. I can't return the game (open box policy, only applies to PC software) and I can't resell it (according to the EULA). I almost swore off buying new computer games after that. For someone who buys a new game only around once a year, that's a pretty big deal.
And hell yeah, make games compatible with Linux! When my XP machine bites the dust in a few years I am NOT going to Vista. I absolutely REFUSE to let Microsoft continue to dictate my computing experience.
I agree with every point except #5. I do prefer fantasy. But I already have a wide selection of fantasy games to play (well, I would if they fit the other criteria). There aren't so many SF MMORP games.
Yes, "me, me, me"! Haven't you noticed that "the customer is always right" is becoming an obsolete expression? Some of us are quite unhappy with that!
Mrs. Clinton is an icon of cultural liberalism. How many millions of conservatives do you know?
Traditionally, Republicans are for LESS government control and Democrats for MORE government control.
Liberalism has to do with things like like being pro-choice, against the death penalty, and combating the evil discrimination of a Christian bookstore owner who refuses to employ a transvestite in drag. Conservatism is pretty much the opposite.
So you're pretty much backwards where you're not inside-out.
Nonsense, coward.
It's a common mistake, gendered by use, and does not make someone an idiot to repeat it.
Just had to say "you (and millions of right-wing conservatives)", didn't ya?
Last I time I checked, Hillary Clinton (NOT a right-wing conservative, in case you didn't know) shared the most similarities with Jack Thompson when it comes to violence in video games.
Thanks for the refreshing scent of partisan bullshit.
There's nothing wrong with using the term "tubes". It's a fine word to use for describing the function of the internet if you don't know any better.
We're just scared when such uneducated people try to write laws about these "tubes".
I'm about to give up on computer gaming.
You spend $50 on a title you end up disliking? Too bad. You can't return it or resell it. You can if it's a console game, however.
If I want to play an old SNES game, not only is my system still running (outliving 2 generations of computers), but I can buy another one for a handful of change if my old one breaks down.
If I want to play any of my old DOS (or even some old Windows games) they often won't run on my current version of Windows (XP) and almost DEFINITELY won't run on Vista. You can't buy a new computer with anything other than Vista, and Microsoft is going to stop selling XP by the end of 2007 (older versions are already locked away in the MS vault). When my current computer dies I likely won't be able to run ANY of my current computer games. Oh, and lose your CD key? Your game CD is worthless now.
This is also true not only with games, but the majority of computer software.
I'm losing faith in the future of computers. This is one of the few industries that actually oppresses its customers, giving us fewer and fewer choices rather than more and more.
I never claimed you claimed that. (Rinse, repeat.)
This is fun, isn't it?
Now, since you didn't claim that I said that, and I didn't claim that you claimed I said that (although your flaming has been of nothing more than that), where exactly are we at?
Owned? What does that mean? Is that where you jump up and down, screaming and throwing your own shit all over like an uncivilized fucktard until you slip, fall and crack your head open? Man, you really pwned me. And it's totally righteous.
Or were you trying to split hairs between "sick" and "infected"? Yeah. I get it now. You are SO right. I'm such an imbecile. Even though the original message I replied to had to do with having a "soar throat", which is a sickness, not necessarily an infection.
Go another round?
[Y/N] >
I did say that clean water wouldn't help you if you're already sick. Drugs have improved. Maybe you should find one that makes you less of an ignorant, moronic asshole WHO CAN'T READ A FUCKING POST.
STFU AND DIE. This fits you quite well then, doesn't it? I'm glad you suggested it.
What does that have to do with the point that clean water and indoor plumbing have larger effect on the general health of the population than do drugs?
I think there was one thing I was vaccinated against.
Such serious cases of strep throat are quite rare. And as you said, "the plural of anecdote is not data".
Sure. Clean water and indoor plumbing probably wouldn't have cured you, but how much worse off would you have been if not for clean water? And would you not be getting infections more often?
Have you ever heard that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? You think that pharmaceutical companies have done more for curing disease (in most cases, drugs treat symptoms not the source, hence not a cure) than clean water and indoor plumbing have done for disease prevention?
Yes, I don't have to worry so much that my soar throat is a severe infection. Because my drinking water does not carry viruses like drinking water sometimes used to. And superficial wounds do not often become gangrenous as they used to because they can be washed with clean water. It has far less to do with drugs than it does with clean water!
Funny, I've never taken drugs or gone to the doctor for any of those things. And after fifty bicycle wrecks, dozens of soar throats and ear infections, I'm still alive. What a miracle?
In all seriousness, clean water and indoor plumbing have done far more for us in that regard.
Isn't that kind of the inspiration behind Wii?
I have bad knees, does that mean I might injure myself by trying to play sports games?
Suddenly, modeling agencies (RL models) have a VR talent. They'll license their body scan to you for an annual fee.
I call that an eager consumer base. I still bought the damn game when it came out. Do they count that as 1 sale and 1 loss due to piracy? That doesn't really add up. I'm sorry, but I really wasn't going to buy it twice.
Are you suggesting that 100,000 is a big dent in sales? Must have been a shit product.
Well let's drop religion then, shall we?
Instead, let's engage in the civilized game of politics, where members of one band are calling for the death of the leaders of an opposing band.
Hey, it's all the same, isn't it?
When you read it, do you read that he turned on a light, or that he actually INVENTED light?
Since light is fundamental to both time and matter, it makes sense that the creation of light has to come first.
Fortunately, they're not talking about US naval ships, but British naval ships.
HMS Reboot.
Fortunately, your opinion doesn't count for squat.
We come in peace.
It's life, sir.
No. But Hillary might get [re-]elected.
Yes, they were pre-1991 stocks (that Saddam was not supposed to have after 1991) and they were weapons of mass destruction. The DoD quote from your thinkprogressive.org link says that these were "not the WMD's for which this country went to war." Notice how that implies that they were, yet, WMD's? Not the ones we were looking for, but WMD's none-the-less.
We haven't failed in Iraq. Our current offensive is failing but we have not yet failed. But the way things are going, with the majority of Americans complaining about the war instead of supporting it, we aren't far from failure.
There's nothing unique in a world power being beaten by a "weaker" but more motivated force.
We live in a different world than England did then. The capacity with which wars may be waged across continents and oceans adds the danger that enemies, keen on our apparent weakness, will be able to swiftly and effectively attack us. And we have an enemy that has no desire but to kill us all. Not to defend or to dominate, but destroy. They are encouraged and their ranks surge with every victory.
And calling the US has or is an empire is nonsense. But we could use to stop being the world's police.
As it turned out there WERE WMD's. Granted, the news about WMD's came across as a joke and almost everyone shrugged it off as nothing, but THERE WERE WMD's.
Although reporters made light of the "weapons of minor dicomfort", there remains the fact that Saddam had these weapons all along. They were in his possession since the time they were deadly.
Now tell me what technology we have that can identify the difference between a weapon of mass destruction and a "weapon of minor discomfort" at range (not to mention without knowing where they're at) and I'll hop on board calling Bush a liar and a murderer like the morally superior left does.
I was against the invasion of Iraq from the start. But not because I did not think there were WMDs, or because the UN was against it, or because I thought Saddam was an ok guy, or any of the other reasons mentioned. But now that we're there I am against just pulling out. Because a failure in Iraq would be (will be) devistating to the US. We will be visibly weak to our enemies and our words will be empty and without power, unable to enforce threats we make against those who threaten us.
US beaten by little old Iraq. Think of it.
My comment was not off-topic. The original post suggests that, by coincidence, the numbers of todays date add up to 13 in both US and European notation, which happens to be just a difference of order.
I was astonished that people actually grasp that gem of mathematical truth.