Also, dear Ms. Le Guin, Mr. Doctorow makes his books available online for free and as a result I've read most of them. You don't, and I had never, *ever* heard of you before this day.
Now, guess which author will get my hard earned cash next time I go to the bookstore?
Better support for languages which are not C++. Much, much, *much* better. Last time I tried it, PyQT felt like a whitespace-aware version of C++ rather than the Python I know and love, and is there even a QT#?
And frankly, I believe you'd be nuts to use C++ for any new project and that makes QT kinda sorta useless;) you may disagree with me, hell you probably do and like that poor SOB of a language, but those are my reasons and are as valid as anyone's.
Why? it's a wonderful platform, and an excellent language. Yes, it has some potential problems with patents, but so does half of Linux' multimedia apps and nobody cares much.
If your country has backwards patent laws it's your problem after all, not ours.
People who have actually sat down and compared both libraries, and went with GTK.
Seriously, comments along the lines of that AC get posted in *every* single story concerning GNOME, GTK, KDE or QT, and while that may have been a reasonable question when QT changed its license to GPL, and later to LGPL anyone who actually believes GNOME would change toolkits merely because QT opened up their repositories is a bloody moron. Therefore, the only reason such a comment could get posted is if it was a poor troll, trying to incite the GTK fans to a flamefest and deserves to be modded as such.
You say "hedonism", I say "philosophy". You say "because it makes you feel good" I say "in the pursuit of knowledge itself".
And honestly, if you believe there's something "horribly wrong" with the idea, you've neither met many PhDs and seen how incredibly common it is, nor given enough time to consider the alternative and its terrible implications.
Seriously, am I the only one who could care less about the DN franchise?
I'd say the opposite, pretty much *everyone* here could care less about the DN franchise. For instance, they could care so little about it they didn't even click on the story.
the games didn't push the envelope or really add much to the genre yet it seems like there are a ton of people that are like "OMG Duke Nukem!"
I can't remember who said it, it certainly wasn't in a discussion about games, but it applies well enough to The Duke: "there's a time to push the envelope, and there's a time to sit back and polish what you already have". And Duke Nukem 3D is the single most polished 2.5D FPS there is, and believe me I played a lot back in the day.
Just my.02 as I can't figure out what the draw is and why so many people care.
Play Duke 3D, then you'll understand. If you can get past the "OMG ugly!" reaction, of course, most kids these days can't.
I honestly can't blame consumers from returning netbooks loaded with Linux, and exchanging them for the Windows versions. I don't think it's a fault of Linux, though, but rather with OEMs who haven't even *tried* to polish it up before sticking it in their low-cost machines.
Here, now, how many of you have bought a Linux-equipped netbook? and how many of you *weren't* tempted to replace it with Ubuntu as soon as you first booted it up? fact is, most OEMs are treating Linux as they used to treat FreeDOS: something to stick in the machine until the user goes home and installs their pirated version of Windows in it.
Missing drivers, non-working features, ugly non-standard interfaces and practically no apps out-of-the-box, it's a pity OEMs are giving Linux such a bad image just to save themselves the effort of giving their users a quality, distinctive experience.
Guess Linux' world domination will have to come from business after all, pity...
That maxim has a clear corollary in lawmaking: "Never pass a law that huge numbers of people will break". Passing such laws does little or nothing to change human behavior, but does a great deal to undermine the rule of law.
It also gives you a legal reason to throw practically whoever you want in jail. Never underestimate the power of that little benefit.
I take it you aren't a literature student, then? easiest way to give them a heart attack is to say "I write stuff on my books". Bonus point if you actually do it in front of them, though they may attempt to murder you to stop you from doing such a despicable crime.
Now, I study math and not literature but I do understand the sentiment. My notebook (of the dead tree variant) is for note-taking, hence the name, I reserve my books for reading.
Really, there's no more point to mathematically lossless audio than for video or images.
Of course there is: storage. I rip all my CDs to FLAC, and then convert them to 128kbps MP3s for my portable player. And if I ever get a 30GB+ one, I'll just grab the FLACs, convert them to 256kbps MP3s and get the same quality I would have if I had ripped them from the CDs itself. And yes, the same applies to both video and images, as any professional photographer would tell you. You do *not* delete the RAWs for a photo you care about, ever.
Personally I don't give a crap about WMAs and AACs, they're below MP3s in ubiquity and below FLACs in quality so I'd have the worst of both worlds: lossy codecs that I have to actively look for players that support it. No thanks.
You can develop applications all you want but once you want to distribute them through the store that Apple builds and maintains you have to pay an annual fee. Which, in my understanding of economics, is actually fair.
Whether it's fair or not depends on the answer to a single question: can you distribute an app you wrote through any method other than the store that Apple builds and maintains? one that doesn't involve the people you're distributing to having to register as developers themselves?
Also, I kind of understand why Apple doesn't have much incentive to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux. You are, however, free to do so yourself, if you manage to do so without reverse engineering it.
I'll give you an incentive to port it to Windows and/or Linux: because most developers don't have an Intel Mac, most developers don't *want* to buy an Intel Mac, and most developers don't give two shits about whether it's fair for Apple to keep their phone locked to their PC platform, they only care that they do.
First off, most people don't care about lossless compression. It's a niche market. After all, even on extremely good sound gear, you are hard pressed to pick out 256k MP3 from uncompressed in blind tests.
And this matters because...? high definition video is also a niche market, as Blu-Ray vs DVD sales analysis would show. Yet obviously we're talking about popularity within its scope, otherwise not even the iPod would be popular, if we were to consider the entire human race.
Also, popular though it might be, it wasn't popular enough for the big boys to pick up. Both Apple and Microsoft did their own lossless formats.
Remember WMA? and AAC? no, the "big boys" ignored FLAC not because it wasn't popular enough, it was because both have *very* strong NIH sentiments against it, as they did with MP3.
It's hardly anthropomorphic to describe nature as self correcting? Really?
Yep. Just like when economists describe the free market as 'self-correcting', they don't mean there's a Big, All-Powerful Entity controlling it from the shadows, it's just that the system is such that minor changes will be met by opposite changes so that, overall, the system isn't affected on a large scale.
All some people are saying is, that like economies the 'self-correcting' system doesn't work as well for very large changes so when a single entity is far more greedy than it should, the entire system could be brought down by it. And since there's no "humanity bailout", we ought to be more careful with it than we have with our own markets.
People are not going to put up with their hardware refusing to do what should easily be able to do as long as there is an alternative that will do everything else too.
*cough*iPhone*cough*. There's a saying, y'know, "not a single one of us is as stupid as all of us". Never rely on the masses' intelligence or it *will* come back and bite you in the ass.
It amazes me that you got modded up to +4, Interesting simply for resuming the age-old debate of what is Freedom. But I'll tell you one thing, all the 'restrictions' in place in Ubuntu for downloading propietary codecs et al aren't a result of "zealots" wanting to "restrict your choices", they're the result of the US' extremely tight copyright and patent laws.
It used to be that Debian had a special, non-us repository just for the kind of stuff that'd be legal everywhere but the US, you'd add it and you'd have the same integration you had with any other software. But then the fuckers started exporting their legal system, and started criminalizing even *linking* to "infringing content", so the situation got to where it is.
Don't like it? write to your representative, because I highly doubt any of them read Slashdot.
Visual C#. Mono is good, Mono is freakin' awesome and I love it, but it can only do 90% of what Microsoft's.NET can do, and that 10% can be a bitch sometimes.
Still, it works perfectly in a XP VM under Linux, perhaps even better than under pure Windows since you don't have to install a bunch of media players, web browsers, shell replacements and all that crap along with it just to get an usable enviroment, since you can use your Linux install for all that and do it better.
Virtual Machines are God's way of showing He loves us and cares for our happiness.
Joking aside, I disagree. Linux needs to be good (and easy, if you want the same market share and same market demographic) at the SAME THINGS, but not necessarily the SAME PROGRAMS. There's a vast difference.
Agreed 100%, but try convincing Joe User of *that* one. I've been trying for almost as long as I've been using computers, but the only area where I've had more successes than failures has been in removing the "browser = IE" idea and that's more due to Firefox' marketing campaigns than anything else.
So now I believe if Linux world domination is ever to come, it'll be through using the same problem to fight Windows itself: get businesses to use Linux, then Joe User will believe in his tiny little mind he must use Linux-compatible programs on Linux to do his work, and comparable alternatives (or even a port of the same program) on Windows just won't do. Though I don't know whether such a victory would be worth it or not.
Problem is, chances are grandpa can't read binary, octal, decimal and hexadecimal numbers by himself, and the Windows registry just happens to be full of them. And yes, it is needed to solve a lot of problems, mainly of the kind produced by shoddy uninstallers or crappy antivirus software.
I'll assume they call themselves the "Pirate Party" because they seek the same goals as the swedish Pirate Party, whose name in turn was inspired by The Pirate Bay, which in turn probably chose the name in mockery of the RIAA's misuse of the term.
You could criticize The Pirate Bay for choosing its name (though I think it's quite funny), but all the other links in the chain have since taken the word "pirate" to symbolize a core set of values they're willing to defend, much like Democratic Parties around the world which have done nothing to replace the republican systems of their countries of origin with direct democracy, as their name would otherwise imply.
I'm sorry, but why exactly are you implying that you can't dual with BSD as well if you own the code and accomplish the same thing? A public BSD licensed version and a private proprietary licensed version with your extensions to the core.
You're right, of course, but what the GP failed to mention (but probably thought about) is that with the GPL you can have a dual-licensed product *without* propietary extensions and still have a workable business model, all thanks to some businesses' fears of open-sourcing their own code. Not so with BSD.
With Mac OS X you're confusing two parts of the system as if they were one. The OSS portion of OS X is perfectly usable.
But how useful is it? the F/OSS part has almost none of the features that are commonly associated with OSX, can run practically none of the OSX-exclusive applications, and I've yet to see a single reason to use it instead of Linux or the BSDs. And I believe that was the point of the GP's argument, not that it was broken and couldn't even compile but that it could hardly be called OSX.
Purely OSS projeccts are for geeks alone to use. There isn't a large scale OSS project anywhere that can be considered end user ready with a good interface, reliablity and good performance that isn't backed by some company using it to its for its own means.
Which single company do you consider is behind the Linux kernel, for instance? or GCC? it's obvious that once a project gets big and useful enough, companies will start investing in it but that doesn't mean they're controlling the project's direction, certainly not if there's more than one contributing large amount of patches.
Gee, that reads like the usual cliche, off-the-shelf argument, doesn't it? Now, let's fact-check with Reality. Google releases code under the BSD license, not GPL. Explain "competitive advantages". In fact, Apple used FreeBSD code and contributed back. Explain.FreeBSD didn't die because of this, or because of Linux (and neither are the other BSDs dead). Explain.
I'm not the GP but... Google has huge "competitive advantages" in their brand and resources already, and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Google has never released F/OSS code that is in any way related to marketing, their primary business. Apple contributed back but only the portions that they felt were 'safe' to contribute, there's no BSD-licensed Quartz or (God spare us) Quicktime anywhere in sight. And FreeBSD isn't dead, but it's certainly below Linux in both market and mindshare, both may enjoy the works of generous geeks but all things point towards Linux receiving the lion's share of contributions by businesses, supporting the GP's argument.
The problem with QT wasn't that it was dual-licensed, but the non-GPL license itself. You couldn't develop an initial prototype based on the GPLed version, then buy a commercial license and release the product as closed source, you had to pay for the commercial license from day 1 or not at all.
And personally, I care less about market share and world domination than how we get there and what we end up with. BSD licenses are great for getting the software "out there", as you note, but if that comes at the loss of our freedoms, what would have we gained?
Yeah, programmers and mathematicians such as myself tend to look for rigurous definitions before trying to tackle the issue of the validity of a statement. Weird thing, that, trying to agree on what is being discussed before actually discussing it, that's just crazy.
Now, while Dictionary.com defines Art in terms of aesthetics and beauty, Wikipedia does it in terms of appeal to emotions, though it notes that the definition has been heavily contended during the last century. Let us take, then, the first definition of Art as per Dictionary.com, the creation of something beautiful since at the very least anything that is beautiful appeals to emotions as well.
Now we must define "beautiful", where thankfully both Dictionary.com and Wikipedia agree, as being something which possesses qualities that bring pleasure to the viewer.
Then, our task to find a game that rivals your linked painting in terms of art becomes much easier. The painting itself is ugly as sin, so anything from Chrono Trigger to Shadow of the Colossus suffices to surpass it in terms of art.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, dear Ms. Le Guin, Mr. Doctorow makes his books available online for free and as a result I've read most of them. You don't, and I had never, *ever* heard of you before this day.
Now, guess which author will get my hard earned cash next time I go to the bookstore?
Better support for languages which are not C++. Much, much, *much* better. Last time I tried it, PyQT felt like a whitespace-aware version of C++ rather than the Python I know and love, and is there even a QT#?
And frankly, I believe you'd be nuts to use C++ for any new project and that makes QT kinda sorta useless ;) you may disagree with me, hell you probably do and like that poor SOB of a language, but those are my reasons and are as valid as anyone's.
Why? it's a wonderful platform, and an excellent language. Yes, it has some potential problems with patents, but so does half of Linux' multimedia apps and nobody cares much.
If your country has backwards patent laws it's your problem after all, not ours.
People who have actually sat down and compared both libraries, and went with GTK.
Seriously, comments along the lines of that AC get posted in *every* single story concerning GNOME, GTK, KDE or QT, and while that may have been a reasonable question when QT changed its license to GPL, and later to LGPL anyone who actually believes GNOME would change toolkits merely because QT opened up their repositories is a bloody moron. Therefore, the only reason such a comment could get posted is if it was a poor troll, trying to incite the GTK fans to a flamefest and deserves to be modded as such.
You say "hedonism", I say "philosophy". You say "because it makes you feel good" I say "in the pursuit of knowledge itself".
And honestly, if you believe there's something "horribly wrong" with the idea, you've neither met many PhDs and seen how incredibly common it is, nor given enough time to consider the alternative and its terrible implications.
Seriously, am I the only one who could care less about the DN franchise?
I'd say the opposite, pretty much *everyone* here could care less about the DN franchise. For instance, they could care so little about it they didn't even click on the story.
the games didn't push the envelope or really add much to the genre yet it seems like there are a ton of people that are like "OMG Duke Nukem!"
I can't remember who said it, it certainly wasn't in a discussion about games, but it applies well enough to The Duke: "there's a time to push the envelope, and there's a time to sit back and polish what you already have". And Duke Nukem 3D is the single most polished 2.5D FPS there is, and believe me I played a lot back in the day.
Just my .02 as I can't figure out what the draw is and why so many people care.
Play Duke 3D, then you'll understand. If you can get past the "OMG ugly!" reaction, of course, most kids these days can't.
I honestly can't blame consumers from returning netbooks loaded with Linux, and exchanging them for the Windows versions. I don't think it's a fault of Linux, though, but rather with OEMs who haven't even *tried* to polish it up before sticking it in their low-cost machines.
Here, now, how many of you have bought a Linux-equipped netbook? and how many of you *weren't* tempted to replace it with Ubuntu as soon as you first booted it up? fact is, most OEMs are treating Linux as they used to treat FreeDOS: something to stick in the machine until the user goes home and installs their pirated version of Windows in it.
Missing drivers, non-working features, ugly non-standard interfaces and practically no apps out-of-the-box, it's a pity OEMs are giving Linux such a bad image just to save themselves the effort of giving their users a quality, distinctive experience.
Guess Linux' world domination will have to come from business after all, pity...
That maxim has a clear corollary in lawmaking: "Never pass a law that huge numbers of people will break". Passing such laws does little or nothing to change human behavior, but does a great deal to undermine the rule of law.
It also gives you a legal reason to throw practically whoever you want in jail. Never underestimate the power of that little benefit.
I take it you aren't a literature student, then? easiest way to give them a heart attack is to say "I write stuff on my books". Bonus point if you actually do it in front of them, though they may attempt to murder you to stop you from doing such a despicable crime.
Now, I study math and not literature but I do understand the sentiment. My notebook (of the dead tree variant) is for note-taking, hence the name, I reserve my books for reading.
Really, there's no more point to mathematically lossless audio than for video or images.
Of course there is: storage. I rip all my CDs to FLAC, and then convert them to 128kbps MP3s for my portable player. And if I ever get a 30GB+ one, I'll just grab the FLACs, convert them to 256kbps MP3s and get the same quality I would have if I had ripped them from the CDs itself. And yes, the same applies to both video and images, as any professional photographer would tell you. You do *not* delete the RAWs for a photo you care about, ever.
Personally I don't give a crap about WMAs and AACs, they're below MP3s in ubiquity and below FLACs in quality so I'd have the worst of both worlds: lossy codecs that I have to actively look for players that support it. No thanks.
You can develop applications all you want but once you want to distribute them through the store that Apple builds and maintains you have to pay an annual fee. Which, in my understanding of economics, is actually fair.
Whether it's fair or not depends on the answer to a single question: can you distribute an app you wrote through any method other than the store that Apple builds and maintains? one that doesn't involve the people you're distributing to having to register as developers themselves?
Also, I kind of understand why Apple doesn't have much incentive to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux. You are, however, free to do so yourself, if you manage to do so without reverse engineering it.
I'll give you an incentive to port it to Windows and/or Linux: because most developers don't have an Intel Mac, most developers don't *want* to buy an Intel Mac, and most developers don't give two shits about whether it's fair for Apple to keep their phone locked to their PC platform, they only care that they do.
First off, most people don't care about lossless compression. It's a niche market. After all, even on extremely good sound gear, you are hard pressed to pick out 256k MP3 from uncompressed in blind tests.
And this matters because...? high definition video is also a niche market, as Blu-Ray vs DVD sales analysis would show. Yet obviously we're talking about popularity within its scope, otherwise not even the iPod would be popular, if we were to consider the entire human race.
Also, popular though it might be, it wasn't popular enough for the big boys to pick up. Both Apple and Microsoft did their own lossless formats.
Remember WMA? and AAC? no, the "big boys" ignored FLAC not because it wasn't popular enough, it was because both have *very* strong NIH sentiments against it, as they did with MP3.
It's hardly anthropomorphic to describe nature as self correcting? Really?
Yep. Just like when economists describe the free market as 'self-correcting', they don't mean there's a Big, All-Powerful Entity controlling it from the shadows, it's just that the system is such that minor changes will be met by opposite changes so that, overall, the system isn't affected on a large scale.
All some people are saying is, that like economies the 'self-correcting' system doesn't work as well for very large changes so when a single entity is far more greedy than it should, the entire system could be brought down by it. And since there's no "humanity bailout", we ought to be more careful with it than we have with our own markets.
People are not going to put up with their hardware refusing to do what should easily be able to do as long as there is an alternative that will do everything else too.
*cough*iPhone*cough*. There's a saying, y'know, "not a single one of us is as stupid as all of us". Never rely on the masses' intelligence or it *will* come back and bite you in the ass.
It amazes me that you got modded up to +4, Interesting simply for resuming the age-old debate of what is Freedom. But I'll tell you one thing, all the 'restrictions' in place in Ubuntu for downloading propietary codecs et al aren't a result of "zealots" wanting to "restrict your choices", they're the result of the US' extremely tight copyright and patent laws.
It used to be that Debian had a special, non-us repository just for the kind of stuff that'd be legal everywhere but the US, you'd add it and you'd have the same integration you had with any other software. But then the fuckers started exporting their legal system, and started criminalizing even *linking* to "infringing content", so the situation got to where it is.
Don't like it? write to your representative, because I highly doubt any of them read Slashdot.
Ubuntu's torrent trackers are much better than ThePirateBay's, and you'd only risk pissing off the BSA for Photoshop, not Windows as well ;)
Visual C#. Mono is good, Mono is freakin' awesome and I love it, but it can only do 90% of what Microsoft's .NET can do, and that 10% can be a bitch sometimes.
Still, it works perfectly in a XP VM under Linux, perhaps even better than under pure Windows since you don't have to install a bunch of media players, web browsers, shell replacements and all that crap along with it just to get an usable enviroment, since you can use your Linux install for all that and do it better.
Virtual Machines are God's way of showing He loves us and cares for our happiness.
Joking aside, I disagree. Linux needs to be good (and easy, if you want the same market share and same market demographic) at the SAME THINGS, but not necessarily the SAME PROGRAMS. There's a vast difference.
Agreed 100%, but try convincing Joe User of *that* one. I've been trying for almost as long as I've been using computers, but the only area where I've had more successes than failures has been in removing the "browser = IE" idea and that's more due to Firefox' marketing campaigns than anything else.
So now I believe if Linux world domination is ever to come, it'll be through using the same problem to fight Windows itself: get businesses to use Linux, then Joe User will believe in his tiny little mind he must use Linux-compatible programs on Linux to do his work, and comparable alternatives (or even a port of the same program) on Windows just won't do. Though I don't know whether such a victory would be worth it or not.
Problem is, chances are grandpa can't read binary, octal, decimal and hexadecimal numbers by himself, and the Windows registry just happens to be full of them. And yes, it is needed to solve a lot of problems, mainly of the kind produced by shoddy uninstallers or crappy antivirus software.
I'll assume they call themselves the "Pirate Party" because they seek the same goals as the swedish Pirate Party, whose name in turn was inspired by The Pirate Bay, which in turn probably chose the name in mockery of the RIAA's misuse of the term.
You could criticize The Pirate Bay for choosing its name (though I think it's quite funny), but all the other links in the chain have since taken the word "pirate" to symbolize a core set of values they're willing to defend, much like Democratic Parties around the world which have done nothing to replace the republican systems of their countries of origin with direct democracy, as their name would otherwise imply.
Anyone dumb enough to store actual, important data on a system running a beta or release candidate OS deserves to be 'hijacked' in such a manner.
It's like the concept of VMs never happened.
I'm sorry, but why exactly are you implying that you can't dual with BSD as well if you own the code and accomplish the same thing? A public BSD licensed version and a private proprietary licensed version with your extensions to the core.
You're right, of course, but what the GP failed to mention (but probably thought about) is that with the GPL you can have a dual-licensed product *without* propietary extensions and still have a workable business model, all thanks to some businesses' fears of open-sourcing their own code. Not so with BSD.
With Mac OS X you're confusing two parts of the system as if they were one. The OSS portion of OS X is perfectly usable.
But how useful is it? the F/OSS part has almost none of the features that are commonly associated with OSX, can run practically none of the OSX-exclusive applications, and I've yet to see a single reason to use it instead of Linux or the BSDs. And I believe that was the point of the GP's argument, not that it was broken and couldn't even compile but that it could hardly be called OSX.
Purely OSS projeccts are for geeks alone to use. There isn't a large scale OSS project anywhere that can be considered end user ready with a good interface, reliablity and good performance that isn't backed by some company using it to its for its own means.
Which single company do you consider is behind the Linux kernel, for instance? or GCC? it's obvious that once a project gets big and useful enough, companies will start investing in it but that doesn't mean they're controlling the project's direction, certainly not if there's more than one contributing large amount of patches.
Gee, that reads like the usual cliche, off-the-shelf argument, doesn't it? Now, let's fact-check with Reality. Google releases code under the BSD license, not GPL. Explain "competitive advantages". In fact, Apple used FreeBSD code and contributed back. Explain.FreeBSD didn't die because of this, or because of Linux (and neither are the other BSDs dead). Explain.
I'm not the GP but... Google has huge "competitive advantages" in their brand and resources already, and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Google has never released F/OSS code that is in any way related to marketing, their primary business. Apple contributed back but only the portions that they felt were 'safe' to contribute, there's no BSD-licensed Quartz or (God spare us) Quicktime anywhere in sight. And FreeBSD isn't dead, but it's certainly below Linux in both market and mindshare, both may enjoy the works of generous geeks but all things point towards Linux receiving the lion's share of contributions by businesses, supporting the GP's argument.
The problem with QT wasn't that it was dual-licensed, but the non-GPL license itself. You couldn't develop an initial prototype based on the GPLed version, then buy a commercial license and release the product as closed source, you had to pay for the commercial license from day 1 or not at all.
And personally, I care less about market share and world domination than how we get there and what we end up with. BSD licenses are great for getting the software "out there", as you note, but if that comes at the loss of our freedoms, what would have we gained?
Yeah, programmers and mathematicians such as myself tend to look for rigurous definitions before trying to tackle the issue of the validity of a statement. Weird thing, that, trying to agree on what is being discussed before actually discussing it, that's just crazy.
Now, while Dictionary.com defines Art in terms of aesthetics and beauty, Wikipedia does it in terms of appeal to emotions, though it notes that the definition has been heavily contended during the last century. Let us take, then, the first definition of Art as per Dictionary.com, the creation of something beautiful since at the very least anything that is beautiful appeals to emotions as well.
Now we must define "beautiful", where thankfully both Dictionary.com and Wikipedia agree, as being something which possesses qualities that bring pleasure to the viewer.
Then, our task to find a game that rivals your linked painting in terms of art becomes much easier. The painting itself is ugly as sin, so anything from Chrono Trigger to Shadow of the Colossus suffices to surpass it in terms of art.