The best way to fix the "fairness" problems in CS would be to keep a "skill score". A few things I would implement:
1) Award more points for killing someone with a glock than an M4, and more for an M4 than an AWP.
2) Conversely, award more points for the dollar amount of your slain opponent's equipment; a guy with a glock shouldn't be worth the same as a guy with an M4.
3) Give "assists", points for doing damage to a player if someone else kills them in the same round.
4) Finishing with 1 hp and 100 hp shouldn't result in the same score. If you get more than one kill, the point values of those kills could be mulitplied if your health is over, say, 80.
5) AFK players don't count on the scoreboard. If there has been no input from a player during a round, killing them would not impact score.
6) Implement a karma system similar to/.'s with types like "Team player," "Potential cheater," "Camper," et cetera.
Wow. In a game like CS where kills actually count for something (since you don't instantly respawn), the karma idea is pretty lame. Oh no, you shot someone from too far away. Don't ambush them as they approach their objective, either. And if you turn a corner and find a dope staring in the opposite direction, don't shoot him until he turns around or you step in front of him.
After all, killing him wouldn't be fair unless he knows you're about to do it and has a chance to kill you first.
If they'd fought WW2 by those principles, it would have been a SHORT war.
Hmm, sounds like MythTV. However in MythTV, you simply rip your DVDs and CDs to storage rather than having them in a carousel. My backend only has 4 tuners and 1TB of storage, but 6 tuners and "massive storage" is certainly feasible.
I picked the number six because that's typically the largest number of available slots. And 1 TB is pretty massive:p And I mentioned the carousel just because you're not going to be able to market a product that rips DVDs without the studios crying foul. Just trying to appease the dinosaurs until they finish dying.
I'm not a fan of MythTV at the moment. I've installed it on a PC at the house to play with it, and it just hasn't impressed me yet.
The current concept of HTPC can't last. The average home has multiple TVs and even more viewers...a decentralized entertainment system makes no sense at all.
I envision (using existing methods and technology) a "server" with massive amounts of storage and six or so TV decoders. It will handle all the requests for media, from live TV to DVDs (in a carousel? since they don't want us copying them) to recorded TV to music and stream those out to what amounts to a thin client connected to the TV.
Microsoft is starting to do this with the XBOX 360 and its connectivity with MCE, but the problem there is that the 360 doesn't really extend the functions; as I understand it, it only has limited playback abilities. Imagine if the 360 could connect to MCE, select a channel, and display it...or schedule a show to be recorded by the server while you continue gaming.
We're just scratching the surface of how networking is going to affect the way we distribute and view television and movies.
Blockbuster. About 4-6 weeks after a new DVD release, you can get it for $10-15 easily.
I rarely pay more than $5 for a DVD. A local rental place regularly sells off their previously viewed stock at buy 2, get 2 free. I just find four at $10 (or less), watch them, and sell the ones I don't like for almost as much as I paid for them. I've even turned a profit a few times.
I've worked for both a retail outlet and two small OEMs, one of which is a Microsoft gold OEM partner, or whatever that program is now.
At all three places we talked openly to MS reps about offering Linux to keep prices down. At one of the OEMs we went from all MS to about 20% Linux in the space of a year. Not once did any of that hurt our relationship with them. This sounds like a bunch of FUD to me.
My wife is pretty cool about me gaming, though early on we had a few disagreements about it.
Then I pointed out all the time she spent watching the Bachelor and it stopped. I suppose I get the whole Bachelor thing...an unrealistic scenario in a fantasy setting that could never happen in real life, characters you become somewhat emotionally attached to, if only because you want them to do things your way, even though they sometimes don't...it's sort of like a passive, team-oriented MMORPG.
I enjoy a few TV shows, but for the most part there's only so much Survivor and CSI knock-offs I can stand.
I keep hoping that some day the mainstream groupthink will come to realize that video games are no more immature a pasttime than watching television. The average American has no problem sitting in front of a TV for two hours a night, yet the same people act as if there's something wrong with an adult gaming for the same length of time.
He watches TV, she plays bridge with her friends, they read books, I play games. What's the big deal?
Because I'd have sworn I paid for a telephone connection. If Google can provide me a telephone connection, why exactly should they be paying the ISP I already paid? Because you need a phone line at each end.
Google pays for their end, I pay for mine. Now my ISP might want to make Google also pay for...what now?
It'd be like the phone company told businesses "And for a nominal fee, our customers won't hear a busy signal 1/10 times they dial your number!"
It's been a while since I read the initial volley of this stuff, but if I'm remembering correctly SBC stated then that they wanted nothing to do with a teired internet. Then they went on to acquire (and become) AT&T and are now looking at (or have just completed) acquiring Bell South.
He's definately a smart kid, but I think what makes the most difference is that my wife stays home with him, and spends a lot of time reading to him, instead of sending him off to daycare every day. Now he's 3 and a half, and we can't shut him up.
Mine is just the opposite. When my wife stayed home with him, he didn't talk much. When she went back to work and we put him in day care, he came home chattering the first day. Being around a group of kids slightly older than him every day has been very good for him; he tries hard to be on their level in every way.
Of course, ours is a very independent child. He wants to do everything for himself. He refused to be spoonfed, selects his own books and turns the pages himself when you read to him (usually on cue, too), and wants to walk everywhere. This kid started holding his bottles as soon as we had to give up breastfeeding in his second month.
Don't hinge your entire argument on a single book. I'd wager there's at least one book that directly contradicts it.
I use slow pronunciation and make it a point to strongly enunciate sounds so that my son picks up the right way to say something and can more easily communicate with people outside the family earlier. It seems to be working; since I started doing that he's had much greater success telling other people what he wants.
Mine has simply refused to learn sign language. He never had any use for it...he started walking a little before 9 months and by 10 months could get to nearly everything he wanted/needed.
He's 18 months now and can reach most anything on the kitchen counters without standing on anything. I have a three-foot-tall toddler. Yikes.
As I recall, whats-his-name at Bell South (now being consumed by AT&T, which was consumed by SBC but kept its name) actually wanted to do something like what is described.
I didn't miss the fact that the article is grossly exagerated and hopelessly sensational.
Slashdot Mirror
The best way to fix the "fairness" problems in CS would be to keep a "skill score". A few things I would implement:
/.'s with types like "Team player," "Potential cheater," "Camper," et cetera.
1) Award more points for killing someone with a glock than an M4, and more for an M4 than an AWP.
2) Conversely, award more points for the dollar amount of your slain opponent's equipment; a guy with a glock shouldn't be worth the same as a guy with an M4.
3) Give "assists", points for doing damage to a player if someone else kills them in the same round.
4) Finishing with 1 hp and 100 hp shouldn't result in the same score. If you get more than one kill, the point values of those kills could be mulitplied if your health is over, say, 80.
5) AFK players don't count on the scoreboard. If there has been no input from a player during a round, killing them would not impact score.
6) Implement a karma system similar to
Wow. In a game like CS where kills actually count for something (since you don't instantly respawn), the karma idea is pretty lame. Oh no, you shot someone from too far away. Don't ambush them as they approach their objective, either. And if you turn a corner and find a dope staring in the opposite direction, don't shoot him until he turns around or you step in front of him.
After all, killing him wouldn't be fair unless he knows you're about to do it and has a chance to kill you first.
If they'd fought WW2 by those principles, it would have been a SHORT war.
Hmm, sounds like MythTV. However in MythTV, you simply rip your DVDs and CDs to storage rather than having them in a carousel. My backend only has 4 tuners and 1TB of storage, but 6 tuners and "massive storage" is certainly feasible.
:p And I mentioned the carousel just because you're not going to be able to market a product that rips DVDs without the studios crying foul. Just trying to appease the dinosaurs until they finish dying.
I picked the number six because that's typically the largest number of available slots. And 1 TB is pretty massive
I'm not a fan of MythTV at the moment. I've installed it on a PC at the house to play with it, and it just hasn't impressed me yet.
That runs contrary that what I've been told by 360 owners...hmph.
Or you could do what I did and go to joomla.org. With most Linux projects that get /. postings, name.org works.
The more you know.
Didn't someone patent the hyperlink?
Patenting concepts that aren't even developed products is a dangerous thing.
The current concept of HTPC can't last. The average home has multiple TVs and even more viewers...a decentralized entertainment system makes no sense at all.
I envision (using existing methods and technology) a "server" with massive amounts of storage and six or so TV decoders. It will handle all the requests for media, from live TV to DVDs (in a carousel? since they don't want us copying them) to recorded TV to music and stream those out to what amounts to a thin client connected to the TV.
Microsoft is starting to do this with the XBOX 360 and its connectivity with MCE, but the problem there is that the 360 doesn't really extend the functions; as I understand it, it only has limited playback abilities. Imagine if the 360 could connect to MCE, select a channel, and display it...or schedule a show to be recorded by the server while you continue gaming.
We're just scratching the surface of how networking is going to affect the way we distribute and view television and movies.
Blockbuster. About 4-6 weeks after a new DVD release, you can get it for $10-15 easily.
I rarely pay more than $5 for a DVD. A local rental place regularly sells off their previously viewed stock at buy 2, get 2 free. I just find four at $10 (or less), watch them, and sell the ones I don't like for almost as much as I paid for them. I've even turned a profit a few times.
Hey, maybe you like clicking away on a one-button hockey puck, but that's the least ergonomic thing this side of a mouse with poison darts in it.
Crap, and I was going to name my newest product Wicrosoft Mindows. Now what am I gonna do???
I've worked for both a retail outlet and two small OEMs, one of which is a Microsoft gold OEM partner, or whatever that program is now.
At all three places we talked openly to MS reps about offering Linux to keep prices down. At one of the OEMs we went from all MS to about 20% Linux in the space of a year. Not once did any of that hurt our relationship with them. This sounds like a bunch of FUD to me.
Why reverse polarity?
Because in Star Trek, reversing the polarity always works.
Do I really need to bring up the TNG episode where Wesley is trapped in a (warp?) bubble dimension that's shrinking?
Oh, that's easy.
It's called science fiction for a reason.
I reject Mac because *gasp* I don't like it.
I love OOo, though. Free, and almost as full-features as MSO without the proprietary formats.
You can't honestly think they'd actu*NO CARRIER*
My wife is pretty cool about me gaming, though early on we had a few disagreements about it.
Then I pointed out all the time she spent watching the Bachelor and it stopped. I suppose I get the whole Bachelor thing...an unrealistic scenario in a fantasy setting that could never happen in real life, characters you become somewhat emotionally attached to, if only because you want them to do things your way, even though they sometimes don't...it's sort of like a passive, team-oriented MMORPG.
I enjoy a few TV shows, but for the most part there's only so much Survivor and CSI knock-offs I can stand.
I keep hoping that some day the mainstream groupthink will come to realize that video games are no more immature a pasttime than watching television. The average American has no problem sitting in front of a TV for two hours a night, yet the same people act as if there's something wrong with an adult gaming for the same length of time.
He watches TV, she plays bridge with her friends, they read books, I play games. What's the big deal?
...Jack's complete lack of surprise.
Because I'd have sworn I paid for a telephone connection. If Google can provide me a telephone connection, why exactly should they be paying the ISP I already paid? Because you need a phone line at each end.
Google pays for their end, I pay for mine. Now my ISP might want to make Google also pay for...what now?
It'd be like the phone company told businesses "And for a nominal fee, our customers won't hear a busy signal 1/10 times they dial your number!"
It's been a while since I read the initial volley of this stuff, but if I'm remembering correctly SBC stated then that they wanted nothing to do with a teired internet. Then they went on to acquire (and become) AT&T and are now looking at (or have just completed) acquiring Bell South.
Now just imagine what would happen if you never opened slashdot!
He's definately a smart kid, but I think what makes the most difference is that my wife stays home with him, and spends a lot of time reading to him, instead of sending him off to daycare every day. Now he's 3 and a half, and we can't shut him up.
Mine is just the opposite. When my wife stayed home with him, he didn't talk much. When she went back to work and we put him in day care, he came home chattering the first day. Being around a group of kids slightly older than him every day has been very good for him; he tries hard to be on their level in every way.
Of course, ours is a very independent child. He wants to do everything for himself. He refused to be spoonfed, selects his own books and turns the pages himself when you read to him (usually on cue, too), and wants to walk everywhere. This kid started holding his bottles as soon as we had to give up breastfeeding in his second month.
Don't hinge your entire argument on a single book. I'd wager there's at least one book that directly contradicts it.
I use slow pronunciation and make it a point to strongly enunciate sounds so that my son picks up the right way to say something and can more easily communicate with people outside the family earlier. It seems to be working; since I started doing that he's had much greater success telling other people what he wants.
Mine has simply refused to learn sign language. He never had any use for it...he started walking a little before 9 months and by 10 months could get to nearly everything he wanted/needed.
He's 18 months now and can reach most anything on the kitchen counters without standing on anything. I have a three-foot-tall toddler. Yikes.
As I recall, whats-his-name at Bell South (now being consumed by AT&T, which was consumed by SBC but kept its name) actually wanted to do something like what is described.
I didn't miss the fact that the article is grossly exagerated and hopelessly sensational.