If you're playing Super Mario Bros. for the story, then you're playing it for the wrong reasons.
Ok, some Mario games have had decent story lines. In fact, I actually enjoyed Super Mario World, Mario 64 and Sunshine Mario. *braces himself for the flames*
But what I meant was that even games like Dragon Warrior or Legend of Zelda have the same basic plotline. For example,
Zelda's in trouble
Ganon bad
Need triforce
Does that sound familiar? It should if you've played any of the games in the franchise.
Let me further explain my friend to you. He once gave me the game Vagrant Story. I didn't have a playstation. He then borrowed me his playstation (!) and waited as I worked through the story. What was he trying to do? Show me that story lines can be complex and the game can be really enjoyable. It doesn't have to be the same predictable goals and twists for me to enjoy it.
When I asked for the subscription number for DDO, I was being rhetorical. But thank you for illustrating my point. It is intended to be an MMO but if I log on and I'm the only avatar standing there, is it really an MMO?
Thanks for wasting my time in both having to reply to and reading your post.
No problem, man, anytime! The pleasure was mine.
Hey, uh anytime you want to study economics, let me know. Interesting things happen within specialized markets like MMO's, I was just asking a question about these trends.
Jesus, I am one stupid idiot. Call me Sherlock because my post is re-tar-ded.
A catchy saying but it isn't true for me. When I played Star Wars Galaxies, I held on to it for a long time. Not to the bitter end (some of my friends lasted longer than I) but close.
And I loved that game.
Wait, scratch that last statement, I loved the people I played with. Once they were gone, then the only thing keeping me at SWG was myself. There are still people who play WoW that keep me in WoW. DDO does not have these individuals to interact with... yet.
If WoW is your life you probably arent "deep" enough to get into a true D&D MMO.
You sound rather aloof. What made you an expert on evaluating how "deep" a game is? What makes one so sage in this respect?
I've played many MMOs and I would ask that you tell me how DDO mechanics are "deeper" than WoWs. Please. That's why I wrote the initial post, forgive me if I don't "see the light."
Its not possibly a MMO, it is a MMO...
I think that one of those Ms stands for "massive" which refers to the number of people playing it. Tell me what the subscription rate is for DDO and then we can talk as to whether it is "massive" yet.
However, I don't know how DDO differs from WoW. Until you try it, you won't know either. So maybe a reason to try DDO is that it could be much more fun. A few hours trying it out would be worth the chance, right?
That's precisely what I hope to evaluate upon my return home from the daily grind. Thanks for the suggestion!
I'm curious as to what slashdotters really think about this subject.
Here we have a possible new MMO and, trust me, I'd love to try it and
be a paying customer. However, I'm deeply involved in another major
MMO right now (WoW to be exact). I know many people who also will not
try other MMOs because their current one is too infatuating.
Furthermore, if the most popular MMO has most of the population of
gamers (like WoW does), doesn't this hurt the industry?
Yes, I know this has probably been covered in another thread but I was
hoping someone could give me good reasons to stop trying to get to
level 60 with my priest and spend my valuable free time trying to get
into DDO. After browsing the site, I'm definitely going to go home and give this one a shot but what about all the MMOs that aren't slashdotted?
I'm reminded of an old friend from high school
who hated the game franchises on the older consoles (like Mario Bros)
because he was certain that their high pricing and continuous rehashing
of the same story line not only stifled creativity but turned off
gamers looking for something fresh. What do you think?
Whereas a chimpanzee may be considered an adult by age three, humans may not even reach (emotional) adulthood until well into their 30s.
Ok, there's a fairly large difference between emotional and logical (cause and effect) maturity so I believe this study to be ingenuous.
What gives us the edge on the chimps? Ask yourself and look into it. I once read a book by Carl Sagan called Broca's Brain which mentions that on the surface we have a larger Broca's Region than chimps. Sagan speculated that this region (believed to affect speech) is what gives us an advantage to chimps.
Think about it, what would you value more? Knowledge of cause and effect or the ability to assign words and values to objects and communicate thousands of predefined signs with neighboring organisms?
Personally, I'd take the ability to share information more efficiently than have solid logical reasoning.
Former soviet launchers have an exceptionally good flight record and I guess they don't employ bleeding edge technology; it's the design that's so much better.
I'm with you 100% of the way here.
However, I noticed you had many criticisms of the overall design and had the gall to call a shuttle that had made so many safe flights a "lame duck."
I (by no means) am trying to give people false reassurance in the shuttle. But normally when I criticize things, I list solutions. Can you provide solutions?
I hate to break it to you, but the vehicle has to be strapped to the "firework" in some manner otherwise they might not make it into space. And if you provide an ejection mechanism, I don't think the astronauts will opt to use it in the depths of space or the upper atmosphere, would you?
I'm not familiar with your explanation of Apollo's fuselage being covered. What was it covered with? Is it possible that this covering is just as delicate as the tile fuselage? If it's more robust than the tile, why not leave it on upon re-entry? Hell, it can't hurt, it'll burn off if it can't take the heat. I'm not a rocket scientist, am I missing something here?
Why don't you take a piece of metal or anything you can create (even an osmium/iridium composite of some sort) and apply 3588 K to it.
Now why don't you take the same material and apply 6273.15 K to it. Notice a difference? I didn't think so. The reason I said almost is because for our purposes, it differs only in numbers and radiation emission.
Well, if you're going to swear about it, how about you fucking realize what caused the loss of those two space shuttles? One was a fucking O-ring failure at low temperatures (more a compliance failure than anything) and the other was a fucking foam fucking panel failing. Now what the fuck does that have to do with core memory? What the fuck does that have to do with computing advances?
My god, the foam panelling that failed was new! Here's something for you to fucking read. Pay close attention to where it says:
One suspected reason for the change in damage, according to reports by Katnik and outside organizations that helped Kennedy Space Center study the issue, is NASA changed the way it "foamed" the external tank sometime shortly before that mission in an effort to be more environmentally friendly by reducing the use of ozone-depleting materials. "Freon was used in the production of the previous foam," he reported. "This method was eliminated in favor of foam that did not require freon for its production. MSFC is investigating the consideration that some characteristics of the new foam may not be known for the ascent environment."
Now, tell me again (this time with a straight face) that what caused this was an old spacecraft. Seems like a new material to me.
I'll use vulgar language if it makes this language more comprehendable.
People died because of these failures, DO NOT MAKE LIGHT OF WHAT NASA DOES. It is a difficult task.
In my defense, I said almost--I know it's not a fusion rocket.
But seriously, what temperatures does it hit? Something high probably. You know even commercial airliners have engines with combustions inside that are so hot that if they touched the sides of the engine, it would melt right through it. That's why there are crazy restrictive replacement rules on jet engines.
A flawed analogy doesn't convince me, sorry, you'll have to try harder than that.
Just because something is old doesn't mean it's obsolete. Nose cone fuselage shapes have remained the same.
*sigh* I guess I'll fight bad analogy with bad analogy.
Why are we still using the same electic engine design (thank you, Tesla) for all these years? It's akin to using the steam engine to power cars in 1960.
Why don't you close your analogy and tell me what advances we have made in shuttle protection that are as serious as the contrast between a freaking jet engine and a tiny motor?
Historically, there have been many space flights with very few fatal malfunctions (Challenger and Columbia). There were even more test flights of the shuttle craft. Out of curiosity, has it always been a possibility that an "explosion could happen during flight" but with probability on their side, it didn't?
What I'm trying to say is that you're trying to put a rocket into space with (almost) a piece of the sun on its backside. Aren't there always possibilities of explosions when what's powering you is, essentially, a controlled explosion?
Read the post I linked. It suggests that the people on the show are all actors and are faking their innocence. Sounds like a hoax on the viewers not the participants.
Re:Don't Flame Me Because I'm Beautiful ...
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Sage comment.
I also like your sig, it brought stitches to my sides. But I guess I would prefer if you replaced "make out" with "play with gasoline and matches."
Don't Flame Me Because I'm Beautiful ...
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The second sentence from the original article posted on/. Started as: "Not to start another PHP vs. Java flame war..."
And now begins the second flame war started by said article.
Gentlemen and nerds, prepare your flamethrowers and ectopacks (respectively)...
Begin!
When will I see a constructive article comparing and contrasting the two and inviting a civil conversation and an acknowledgement that there are fans on both sides?
Come on, it's not like this is a religious argument or (possibly worse) a Star Wars vrs. Star Trek argument.
II think I should point out that sometimes low IQ comes about by free choices people have made in their life.
Go ahead and laugh at them, I'll admit to laughing at them.
But I would never point and laugh at people who have honestly tried or have been mentally inhibited through either deseases, defects or someone else's choices.
So they're setting these people up to be made idiots in front of entire nations of television watchers.
At first I was disgusted from the initial appearance of this show, and unfortunately after a few quotes from the profiles such as these:
Andrew is also scared of moths.
Astrid's had a boyfriend for the last 6 months and claims she has lots of friends. She's an adventurous girl who dreams of riding in a Formula 1 car.
He believes in reincarnation and wants to return as a golden eagle. Billy does not believe in ghosts but claims to have seen an alien.
Keri's strangest job was dressing up as a human eyeball to promote Specsavers. Other unusual achievements include being able to put her fist in her mouth.
Ryan is happiest when he has no responsibility, but he has big plans for the future - so watch out world!
I realize that this will probably be an instant success. It appears to be on a UK channel but I'm guessing it will be picked up and aired in the states.
I guess when you put people like this together, you have a formula for an instant TV hit (like every reality show before it). Am I allowed to hate this show if it's making light of the people I dislike the most in this world?
If you disagree that it's going to be a hit, check out the 9 pages of posts on its bulletin boards.
Also to note, there are posts on the bulletin that this may be a hoax on the viewing public. Just relaying that speculation.
It upsets me that you pass judgement on people just by hearing their age. I've seen five year old children more mature than forty year old grown "adults."
I don't know when the hell I said I couldn't "stomache C.S." For Christ's sake (pun intended), I've read nearly everything by him. Does that sound like I can't "stomache" him?
I started my life out castrating pigs and shovelling manure on a farm. Sound enticing? Not to me. I'm 23 and I now have a desk job and in a large city earning lucrative amounts of money. Maybe that doesn't matter to you, but I'm just trying to let you know that I consider myself well informed when it comes to the game of life. I've had many jobs, I've experienced many things and I'm not going to sit here and listen to you tell me that just because I'm young, I can't voice my opinion about C.S. Lewis.
All I said in the original post was that I can't come to terms with someone who takes a religious story and masks it into a fictitious book with the appearant motive of spreading Christianity.
Growing disenchanted with the people you looked up to while growing up is just one of the begining stages of learning to think critically for yourself.
The next is learning not to blame them and realizing that you now have the opportunity to view their works from a different perpsective.
If you could have said this a little less demeaningly, we might have gotten somewhere.:)
I'm 23 years old. I read a ton of material, very little of it I agree with. Your assumptions that I'm just starting to realize how the world works are wrong.
Your assumptions that everyone develops the same rules of life as you are equally wrong... oh, and they're also narrow minded.
As it is now, they're almost impossible to find already.
This is very true. However, it seems to be because the demand is so high. Why would they halt production with a demand like that unless they're preparing another card with equal stats or possibly easier to manufacture?
Ok, I see what the original headline author meant but just because a card is discontinued doesn't mean it's out of the picture.
You know the iPod mini was discontinued but I know people who still use those.
I realized that quote was for Doom 3. What I was trying to say is that using "stand alone" to describe a card is dangerous. Different games, different settings, yeah, you're right. But having to say "well, it's the greatest for this game at this setting" doesn't mean it has no competition.
It's an amazing card, I recognize that. But I just find it hard to believe it crushes even the 256MB 7800 GTX in all respects.
Further, if the latest rumors about the 7800GTX 512MB are true, it would mean that this CrossFire graphics subsystem would arguably stand alone at the top of the graphics benchmarking mountain.
"Stand alone"? That's odd, when I read the article, I noticed this:
ATI's recent driver optimizations for OpenGL are enough to vault the single Radeon X1800 XT ahead of the GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB, but the Radeon X1800 XT in CrossFire can't quite sustain that lead. The Radeon X1800 XL-based CrossFire rig can't catch the dual GeForce 7800 GTs, either. Still, the Radeon X1800 XT CrossFire system cranks out over 85 frames per second at 2048x1536. Like I said, it's a monster. Unfortunately for ATI, the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 is practically otherworldly.
Notice how the author acknowledges that "the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 is practically otherworldly." Doesn't really sound like there's any argument to be had.
Slashdot Mirror
But what I meant was that even games like Dragon Warrior or Legend of Zelda have the same basic plotline. For example,
Does that sound familiar? It should if you've played any of the games in the franchise.
Let me further explain my friend to you. He once gave me the game Vagrant Story. I didn't have a playstation. He then borrowed me his playstation (!) and waited as I worked through the story. What was he trying to do? Show me that story lines can be complex and the game can be really enjoyable. It doesn't have to be the same predictable goals and twists for me to enjoy it.
Hey, uh anytime you want to study economics, let me know. Interesting things happen within specialized markets like MMO's, I was just asking a question about these trends.
Jesus, I am one stupid idiot. Call me Sherlock because my post is re-tar-ded.
Yeah, it's currently modded at:
Moderation +4
70% Insightful
30% Interesting
Oh man, am I embarrassed!
And I loved that game.
Wait, scratch that last statement, I loved the people I played with. Once they were gone, then the only thing keeping me at SWG was myself. There are still people who play WoW that keep me in WoW. DDO does not have these individuals to interact with
I've played many MMOs and I would ask that you tell me how DDO mechanics are "deeper" than WoWs. Please. That's why I wrote the initial post, forgive me if I don't "see the light."
I think that one of those Ms stands for "massive" which refers to the number of people playing it. Tell me what the subscription rate is for DDO and then we can talk as to whether it is "massive" yet.
I'm curious as to what slashdotters really think about this subject.
Here we have a possible new MMO and, trust me, I'd love to try it and be a paying customer. However, I'm deeply involved in another major MMO right now (WoW to be exact). I know many people who also will not try other MMOs because their current one is too infatuating.
Furthermore, if the most popular MMO has most of the population of gamers (like WoW does), doesn't this hurt the industry?
Yes, I know this has probably been covered in another thread but I was hoping someone could give me good reasons to stop trying to get to level 60 with my priest and spend my valuable free time trying to get into DDO. After browsing the site, I'm definitely going to go home and give this one a shot but what about all the MMOs that aren't slashdotted?
I'm reminded of an old friend from high school who hated the game franchises on the older consoles (like Mario Bros) because he was certain that their high pricing and continuous rehashing of the same story line not only stifled creativity but turned off gamers looking for something fresh. What do you think?
When you're stupid rich, sometimes going home and sticking thousand dollar bills in your ears or posing for Teen Beat magazine just isn't enough
What gives us the edge on the chimps? Ask yourself and look into it. I once read a book by Carl Sagan called Broca's Brain which mentions that on the surface we have a larger Broca's Region than chimps. Sagan speculated that this region (believed to affect speech) is what gives us an advantage to chimps.
Think about it, what would you value more? Knowledge of cause and effect or the ability to assign words and values to objects and communicate thousands of predefined signs with neighboring organisms?
Personally, I'd take the ability to share information more efficiently than have solid logical reasoning.
However, I noticed you had many criticisms of the overall design and had the gall to call a shuttle that had made so many safe flights a "lame duck."
I (by no means) am trying to give people false reassurance in the shuttle. But normally when I criticize things, I list solutions. Can you provide solutions?
I hate to break it to you, but the vehicle has to be strapped to the "firework" in some manner otherwise they might not make it into space. And if you provide an ejection mechanism, I don't think the astronauts will opt to use it in the depths of space or the upper atmosphere, would you?
I'm not familiar with your explanation of Apollo's fuselage being covered. What was it covered with? Is it possible that this covering is just as delicate as the tile fuselage? If it's more robust than the tile, why not leave it on upon re-entry? Hell, it can't hurt, it'll burn off if it can't take the heat. I'm not a rocket scientist, am I missing something here?
Why don't you take a piece of metal or anything you can create (even an osmium/iridium composite of some sort) and apply 3588 K to it.
Now why don't you take the same material and apply 6273.15 K to it. Notice a difference? I didn't think so. The reason I said almost is because for our purposes, it differs only in numbers and radiation emission.
My god, the foam panelling that failed was new! Here's something for you to fucking read. Pay close attention to where it says: Now, tell me again (this time with a straight face) that what caused this was an old spacecraft. Seems like a new material to me.
I'll use vulgar language if it makes this language more comprehendable.
People died because of these failures, DO NOT MAKE LIGHT OF WHAT NASA DOES. It is a difficult task.
In my defense, I said almost--I know it's not a fusion rocket.
But seriously, what temperatures does it hit? Something high probably. You know even commercial airliners have engines with combustions inside that are so hot that if they touched the sides of the engine, it would melt right through it. That's why there are crazy restrictive replacement rules on jet engines.
A flawed analogy doesn't convince me, sorry, you'll have to try harder than that.
Just because something is old doesn't mean it's obsolete. Nose cone fuselage shapes have remained the same.
*sigh* I guess I'll fight bad analogy with bad analogy.
Why are we still using the same electic engine design (thank you, Tesla) for all these years? It's akin to using the steam engine to power cars in 1960.
Why don't you close your analogy and tell me what advances we have made in shuttle protection that are as serious as the contrast between a freaking jet engine and a tiny motor?
Historically, there have been many space flights with very few fatal malfunctions (Challenger and Columbia). There were even more test flights of the shuttle craft. Out of curiosity, has it always been a possibility that an "explosion could happen during flight" but with probability on their side, it didn't?
What I'm trying to say is that you're trying to put a rocket into space with (almost) a piece of the sun on its backside. Aren't there always possibilities of explosions when what's powering you is, essentially, a controlled explosion?
Read the post I linked. It suggests that the people on the show are all actors and are faking their innocence. Sounds like a hoax on the viewers not the participants.
Sage comment.
I also like your sig, it brought stitches to my sides. But I guess I would prefer if you replaced "make out" with "play with gasoline and matches."
The second sentence from the original article posted on /. Started as: "Not to start another PHP vs. Java flame war..."
And now begins the second flame war started by said article.
Gentlemen and nerds, prepare your flamethrowers and ectopacks (respectively)...
Begin!
When will I see a constructive article comparing and contrasting the two and inviting a civil conversation and an acknowledgement that there are fans on both sides?
Come on, it's not like this is a religious argument or (possibly worse) a Star Wars vrs. Star Trek argument.
II think I should point out that sometimes low IQ comes about by free choices people have made in their life.
Go ahead and laugh at them, I'll admit to laughing at them.
But I would never point and laugh at people who have honestly tried or have been mentally inhibited through either deseases, defects or someone else's choices.
At first I was disgusted from the initial appearance of this show, and unfortunately after a few quotes from the profiles such as these: I realize that this will probably be an instant success. It appears to be on a UK channel but I'm guessing it will be picked up and aired in the states.
I guess when you put people like this together, you have a formula for an instant TV hit (like every reality show before it). Am I allowed to hate this show if it's making light of the people I dislike the most in this world?
If you disagree that it's going to be a hit, check out the 9 pages of posts on its bulletin boards.
Also to note, there are posts on the bulletin that this may be a hoax on the viewing public. Just relaying that speculation.
It upsets me that you pass judgement on people just by hearing their age. I've seen five year old children more mature than forty year old grown "adults."
I don't know when the hell I said I couldn't "stomache C.S." For Christ's sake (pun intended), I've read nearly everything by him. Does that sound like I can't "stomache" him?
I started my life out castrating pigs and shovelling manure on a farm. Sound enticing? Not to me. I'm 23 and I now have a desk job and in a large city earning lucrative amounts of money. Maybe that doesn't matter to you, but I'm just trying to let you know that I consider myself well informed when it comes to the game of life. I've had many jobs, I've experienced many things and I'm not going to sit here and listen to you tell me that just because I'm young, I can't voice my opinion about C.S. Lewis.
All I said in the original post was that I can't come to terms with someone who takes a religious story and masks it into a fictitious book with the appearant motive of spreading Christianity.
I'm 23 years old. I read a ton of material, very little of it I agree with. Your assumptions that I'm just starting to realize how the world works are wrong.
Your assumptions that everyone develops the same rules of life as you are equally wrong
Ok, I see what the original headline author meant but just because a card is discontinued doesn't mean it's out of the picture.
You know the iPod mini was discontinued but I know people who still use those.
I realized that quote was for Doom 3. What I was trying to say is that using "stand alone" to describe a card is dangerous. Different games, different settings, yeah, you're right. But having to say "well, it's the greatest for this game at this setting" doesn't mean it has no competition.
It's an amazing card, I recognize that. But I just find it hard to believe it crushes even the 256MB 7800 GTX in all respects.
Notice how the author acknowledges that "the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 is practically otherworldly." Doesn't really sound like there's any argument to be had.