There's a switch valve added that allows you to block only sound downloading. Its something like cl_autodownload "nosounds", check the steam forums to confirm. It was a godsend when I found it, since those sounds were really making it impossible to play the game because they were overused...not to mention I certainly didn't like waiting an extra 5 minutes when joining a server to download them.
If the ads come from the server, which is hosted by joe's like you and I...why wouldn't the server operators just block the ads? Or replace them with their own subway sub ads?
So...why does valve think they are more entitled to this then the server operators that actually pay to host the servers we play on? Ads are tolerable when they're funding some kind of service, but as it stands most of that cost is dumped onto the end users (the server operators). Valve provides support for the end users, and a download service...but those costs have always existed. (trade download service for distribution/publishing costs).
I assume they were also refering to CS:S as well as the older counterstrike.
I was under the impression that the PS3 uses a new architecture, and only supports PS2 titles in the same way that the 360 supports xbox1 titles: Through some kind of emulation/porting.
Your antecdote only further proves that you are in fact, a werewolf. And of course you didn't use your hound dog. You tore that poor thing apart during the last full moon.
Great, now all the torrent sites will require captcha verification too!;P
Actually, can they even scan torrents without downloading the entire file? And whats to stop everyone from just blocking them from accessing their websites? Are they going to go in covertly, pretending to be actual users? I can see every legit website blocking their access as well, why pay for bandwidth to supply that?
Sure, youtube can be more efficiently attacked...but youtube has been dancing in front of the cannons since its inception, we all knew it was going to get shot eventually.
Start making? Microsoft has sucked the life out of PC gaming since the xbox came out and created those port-a-rific titles that you know and love. DE2 is just a symbol of a broader trend. I don't mind ports or cross platform development, but they act like they're doing us a favor by barely making the mouse work and sticking us with clunky console menus.
But don't worry, there's good news. Microsoft is here to help! Now your PC will be just like the xbox360, its native extra abilities going unused while costing more then the equivilent hardware. Yay! PC gaming sales have lagged lately, but Microsoft is here to solve that problem, by doing exactly what it was doing before...only harder! Because if PC Gaming needs anything, its more console ports and more gamepads.
Just do what many older 9x games did when installed on 2K...leave an override switch for the installer. System Shock II runs fine on windows 2000, despite the OS not existing when the game was released. Most software I've found always supports 2K and XP, with the exception of microsoft's own titles that have hard coded blocks for 2K in order to "add value" to XP.
And honestly, your "They'll post a scathing review!" thing is a pretty weak argument IMO. Users could post a scathing unwarrented review without installing it on an unsupported operating system. They could do it because the users manual had a typo, or a toolbar wasn't on by default. They might even post one because the installer had no override so they couldn't try the software out on their unsupported machine. Blocking installation completely isn't going to win you any battles.
As the author at top correctly points out, none of your goals are accomplished by this blocking list. Read the authors synopsis, its really pretty good. Demand for this stuff isn't removed. The supply isn't removed. And the way to get it isn't removed. About the only semi useful feature it provides is that it can stop you from accidentally viewing this stuff. The list doesn't even block by IP, it blocks by URL. Its a pretty trivial matter to either use proxy or do a reverse DNS lookup in order to around this.
All you've accomplished is setting a bad precident, and opening the door for abuse of the same technique. This isn't even sacrificing freedom for some safety. This is throwing some freedom away in exchange for the ability to pretend you're safe.
Around here at least, the best a consumer can get for upload bandwidth is 384kbps...without going to a T line from the phone company. If they can't handle supporting those paltry offerings, which their customers paid a non-platry sum to get...I'm going to have a hard time mustering much sympathy up for them.
Thats the trouble though, the caps are never explicitly stated...and you better believe the p2p crippling protocol factoid will be hidden in some fine print somewhere, assuming they decide to inform of it at all. That way they can continue advertising "xMB down and yMB up" while simutaneously covertly removing or crippling all the applications that actually make any signifigant use of the bandwidth.
You hit on all the points I was going to make. Its easy to get caught in the shock factor of "they're disgusting perverts!" but if you think about the implications of this law its a pretty dangerous precident. Child pornography laws already tread into some pretty iffy areas here in the US. (There are examples of parents being arrested for innocent naked pictures of their babies, although no convictions that I know of)
You already touched on this...but I still feel like expanding. Sure, this might stop a few people from creating some hardcore fake porn featuring kids...but a fake child is hard to quantify isn't it? No one is going to write "kiddie porn" on their works so that leaves it up to the discretion of some fat busy-body somewhere to decide. Its a little easier to make the laws featuring real humans, since its easy enough to seperate them into 18 and not 18.
It is a slipperly slope, because once you stop using their actual age as a factor and instead the appearance of their age all bets are off.
The 3D models, particularly these days, do take a good deal of time to create I'm sure. (I'm not professional either so don't take my word as gospel) But, consider that the sprite character has to be redrawn for each step of its animation...do that in a higher resolution like some here seem to want and I'll bet you'll find you need expensive tools and a lot of time as well. Consider this...you don't get to draw just one set of animations either. You might get away with that in a side scroller by just mirroring the image, but in top down you've got to draw your guy swinging his sword facing up, facing down, etc.
Now imagine this, after you've done all the sprites for the characters animation some one decides that the main character needs a backpack on. Or he has a tail. With 3D, to some extent you can just open the old model and stick a backpack on it and you're done. With the sprites, you'll have to fix all images.
Sure, it was easy enough to do sprites in games like mario where he had like a 3 frame run animation, a fireball animation, and a jump/brick punch/swim animation. But you start doing this for lots of high resolution characters and its probably going to turn into a lot of work!
Now, understand I'm not saying 3D games are easier then 2D games. I'm just saying that I don't think its say 10 times easier to make 2D games.
I'd argue that the only reason it didn't hamper their saleability back then is because there were no 3D game systems to compete with.
2D graphics have their advantages, but they are limited to an extent. I'm not even saying I don't enjoy 2D games myself. But at this stage in the game, there's little cost to stick a 3D chip into a system. Sure, the best chips cost a lot but 'decent' ones don't these days.
Anyway, I'm not sure why a lot of people here seem to be (at least somewhat) opposed to using 3D graphics to render traditional sidescrolling or top down style games. If you want to do any large amount of animations for a character the sprite approach leaves you with a lot of art work to churn out. The code may take longer to write, but I'd argue its more adaptable once its done.
Sounds like a pretty awful game, tasteless and cliched but worst of all unbalanced...the anti-christ team can't even win. But why give them the handy excuse of being censored for its impending failure? I say let them sell it, and let the free kill them.
Plus, all media must be protected...even, and especially, the shitty stuff like this.
-178c temperatures and highly poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas...I'd be surprised if there were any people left on earth once we figure out how to fly them onto to this thing!
Has anyone started sellings plots of Titan moon land yet?
I mean, I knew they had some nutty censorship going on there...but they've actually got people that make sure you can't crossdress in online computer games? Is that really a big enough problem that they need assign government officials to it?
I guess I'll try to see this as an example of why all freedom of expression must be protected...even that which you disagree with. If you shrug it off, it just gets worse and worse.
I know no one of consequence ever came out and said "hydrogen will solve our nation's energy problems", but that hasn't stopped a lot of people from getting caught up in the craze and saying just that. Lets face it, the media at least initially portrayed it as exactly that. "Look! Your car runs on these clean power cells and the emmissions are just plain old water! The power is produced...elsewhere...using...technology...take that oil companies!"
I remember reading there was a huge push for this technology in cars...which only seems to push the pollution problem more into power plants and add another efficancy blasting energy conversion into the system. But when you saw those GM prototypes driving around with water dripping out of their tailpipes and their space age controls (btw, what moron engineer decided to put the gas and brake on the steering wheel as buttons?) you at least initially think "Wow! The future is coming!"
Slashdot Mirror
There's a switch valve added that allows you to block only sound downloading. Its something like cl_autodownload "nosounds", check the steam forums to confirm. It was a godsend when I found it, since those sounds were really making it impossible to play the game because they were overused...not to mention I certainly didn't like waiting an extra 5 minutes when joining a server to download them.
Hopefully you're right about the other bits.
If the ads come from the server, which is hosted by joe's like you and I...why wouldn't the server operators just block the ads? Or replace them with their own subway sub ads?
So...why does valve think they are more entitled to this then the server operators that actually pay to host the servers we play on? Ads are tolerable when they're funding some kind of service, but as it stands most of that cost is dumped onto the end users (the server operators). Valve provides support for the end users, and a download service...but those costs have always existed. (trade download service for distribution/publishing costs).
I assume they were also refering to CS:S as well as the older counterstrike.
So...what domains do I put in my hosts file to assure this crap doesn't load?
I was under the impression that the PS3 uses a new architecture, and only supports PS2 titles in the same way that the 360 supports xbox1 titles: Through some kind of emulation/porting.
Your antecdote only further proves that you are in fact, a werewolf. And of course you didn't use your hound dog. You tore that poor thing apart during the last full moon.
That sentence was a typo...it should have read "..the only game in town willing to pay for a spot on our shitty list."
Great, now all the torrent sites will require captcha verification too! ;P
Actually, can they even scan torrents without downloading the entire file? And whats to stop everyone from just blocking them from accessing their websites? Are they going to go in covertly, pretending to be actual users? I can see every legit website blocking their access as well, why pay for bandwidth to supply that?
Sure, youtube can be more efficiently attacked...but youtube has been dancing in front of the cannons since its inception, we all knew it was going to get shot eventually.
Start making? Microsoft has sucked the life out of PC gaming since the xbox came out and created those port-a-rific titles that you know and love. DE2 is just a symbol of a broader trend. I don't mind ports or cross platform development, but they act like they're doing us a favor by barely making the mouse work and sticking us with clunky console menus.
But don't worry, there's good news. Microsoft is here to help! Now your PC will be just like the xbox360, its native extra abilities going unused while costing more then the equivilent hardware. Yay! PC gaming sales have lagged lately, but Microsoft is here to solve that problem, by doing exactly what it was doing before...only harder! Because if PC Gaming needs anything, its more console ports and more gamepads.
So who pays to lay those wires?
Just do what many older 9x games did when installed on 2K...leave an override switch for the installer. System Shock II runs fine on windows 2000, despite the OS not existing when the game was released. Most software I've found always supports 2K and XP, with the exception of microsoft's own titles that have hard coded blocks for 2K in order to "add value" to XP.
And honestly, your "They'll post a scathing review!" thing is a pretty weak argument IMO. Users could post a scathing unwarrented review without installing it on an unsupported operating system. They could do it because the users manual had a typo, or a toolbar wasn't on by default. They might even post one because the installer had no override so they couldn't try the software out on their unsupported machine. Blocking installation completely isn't going to win you any battles.
We nuked the site from orbit. It was the only way to be sure.
As the author at top correctly points out, none of your goals are accomplished by this blocking list. Read the authors synopsis, its really pretty good. Demand for this stuff isn't removed. The supply isn't removed. And the way to get it isn't removed. About the only semi useful feature it provides is that it can stop you from accidentally viewing this stuff. The list doesn't even block by IP, it blocks by URL. Its a pretty trivial matter to either use proxy or do a reverse DNS lookup in order to around this.
All you've accomplished is setting a bad precident, and opening the door for abuse of the same technique. This isn't even sacrificing freedom for some safety. This is throwing some freedom away in exchange for the ability to pretend you're safe.
Around here at least, the best a consumer can get for upload bandwidth is 384kbps...without going to a T line from the phone company. If they can't handle supporting those paltry offerings, which their customers paid a non-platry sum to get...I'm going to have a hard time mustering much sympathy up for them.
Thats the trouble though, the caps are never explicitly stated...and you better believe the p2p crippling protocol factoid will be hidden in some fine print somewhere, assuming they decide to inform of it at all. That way they can continue advertising "xMB down and yMB up" while simutaneously covertly removing or crippling all the applications that actually make any signifigant use of the bandwidth.
Because fining poor people doesn't work and for some reason we don't have debtors prisons anymore.
You hit on all the points I was going to make. Its easy to get caught in the shock factor of "they're disgusting perverts!" but if you think about the implications of this law its a pretty dangerous precident. Child pornography laws already tread into some pretty iffy areas here in the US. (There are examples of parents being arrested for innocent naked pictures of their babies, although no convictions that I know of)
You already touched on this...but I still feel like expanding. Sure, this might stop a few people from creating some hardcore fake porn featuring kids...but a fake child is hard to quantify isn't it? No one is going to write "kiddie porn" on their works so that leaves it up to the discretion of some fat busy-body somewhere to decide. Its a little easier to make the laws featuring real humans, since its easy enough to seperate them into 18 and not 18.
It is a slipperly slope, because once you stop using their actual age as a factor and instead the appearance of their age all bets are off.
The 3D models, particularly these days, do take a good deal of time to create I'm sure. (I'm not professional either so don't take my word as gospel) But, consider that the sprite character has to be redrawn for each step of its animation...do that in a higher resolution like some here seem to want and I'll bet you'll find you need expensive tools and a lot of time as well. Consider this...you don't get to draw just one set of animations either. You might get away with that in a side scroller by just mirroring the image, but in top down you've got to draw your guy swinging his sword facing up, facing down, etc.
Now imagine this, after you've done all the sprites for the characters animation some one decides that the main character needs a backpack on. Or he has a tail. With 3D, to some extent you can just open the old model and stick a backpack on it and you're done. With the sprites, you'll have to fix all images.
Sure, it was easy enough to do sprites in games like mario where he had like a 3 frame run animation, a fireball animation, and a jump/brick punch/swim animation. But you start doing this for lots of high resolution characters and its probably going to turn into a lot of work!
Now, understand I'm not saying 3D games are easier then 2D games. I'm just saying that I don't think its say 10 times easier to make 2D games.
I'd argue that the only reason it didn't hamper their saleability back then is because there were no 3D game systems to compete with.
2D graphics have their advantages, but they are limited to an extent. I'm not even saying I don't enjoy 2D games myself. But at this stage in the game, there's little cost to stick a 3D chip into a system. Sure, the best chips cost a lot but 'decent' ones don't these days.
Anyway, I'm not sure why a lot of people here seem to be (at least somewhat) opposed to using 3D graphics to render traditional sidescrolling or top down style games. If you want to do any large amount of animations for a character the sprite approach leaves you with a lot of art work to churn out. The code may take longer to write, but I'd argue its more adaptable once its done.
You're right. The more I think about it, the more I think I was just flying off the handle a bit chasing after something that wasn't there.
I guess this story isn't really news then...it actually sounds like its suppose to work. Maybe that is news these days though.
Sounds like a pretty awful game, tasteless and cliched but worst of all unbalanced...the anti-christ team can't even win. But why give them the handy excuse of being censored for its impending failure? I say let them sell it, and let the free kill them.
Plus, all media must be protected...even, and especially, the shitty stuff like this.
-178c temperatures and highly poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas...I'd be surprised if there were any people left on earth once we figure out how to fly them onto to this thing!
Has anyone started sellings plots of Titan moon land yet?
I mean, I knew they had some nutty censorship going on there...but they've actually got people that make sure you can't crossdress in online computer games? Is that really a big enough problem that they need assign government officials to it?
I guess I'll try to see this as an example of why all freedom of expression must be protected...even that which you disagree with. If you shrug it off, it just gets worse and worse.
Most people do stop in their tracks when they suffer an unstoppable urge to vomit.
I know no one of consequence ever came out and said "hydrogen will solve our nation's energy problems", but that hasn't stopped a lot of people from getting caught up in the craze and saying just that. Lets face it, the media at least initially portrayed it as exactly that. "Look! Your car runs on these clean power cells and the emmissions are just plain old water! The power is produced...elsewhere...using...technology...take that oil companies!"
I remember reading there was a huge push for this technology in cars...which only seems to push the pollution problem more into power plants and add another efficancy blasting energy conversion into the system. But when you saw those GM prototypes driving around with water dripping out of their tailpipes and their space age controls (btw, what moron engineer decided to put the gas and brake on the steering wheel as buttons?) you at least initially think "Wow! The future is coming!"