er no.. I just tried that and its highlighting almost everyone. Including people whose profiles I may have viewed once or twice as far back as 6 months ago, and maybe exchanged a well post back a few months ago too. While a person whose profile I go to weekly isn't highlighted and another person I visit daily is.
Roleplaying games, however, do require that. Here, let me quote Wikipedia as to what a 'game' is: 'Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction.'.
See that 'rules'? And 'challenges'? Yeah.
Good. then you know that roleplaying doesn't require those things.
You can have goals, rules, challenges and interactions without having stats, character levels or slightly more accurate guns.
What distinguished a RPG from those things is that an RPG has a character (Which excludes puzzle, board, and card) that gains user-selected skill based on almost every random thing they have done. And that said skills are used to determine the odds of things working or not.
No, that is what is what a lot of people claim distinguish the games, but the reality is it doesn't. There are plenty of games which have these which aren't roleplaying games, and why they're referred to as first person shooters with "rpg elements". People realize those things don't make them roleplaying games. If they don't make the first person shooter an RPG, then how do they make the RPG an RPG? They don't.
I love this rather crazy idea that there are computer games where the world isn't altered by the end. There isn't a single computer game with a 'world' that you don't 'affect the world' in.
No, the idea is that the choices are rather meaningless and so are the changes. Everything is scripted. You can't deviate from the story and go off on your own. So your own choice is to go along the preset path or turn it off. No matter what role you play within the confines of the game it has zero bearing on the progression of the game, or the changes are at best superficial. They don't actually impact the game world in any meaningful way.
I haven't come across any CRPGs that could genuinely be defined as a "real" rpg. The only one that could would be one that could properly replicate an actual gaming session with a DM, which means when the players decide to not take the bait and go off in a completely different direction the DM has to roll with that and keep the world alive and moving. Regardless of the underlying rules, system, or lack thereof that a game might rely on, what would make a game a genuine roleplaying game?
1. Start with a giant sandbox, a world, or part of one 2. set the player free to interact in it 3. Give the player a staggering amount of ability to change things. All things at various levels depending on the resources available to him. He can set up stores, run random missions, buy buildings, hire guards to guard mines, caravans, etc 4. Set up conflict of some sort in the world. Economic, military, etc. 5. forget the "main" quest. The player can create his own in that kind of a world, at some point with that kind of conflict an NPC will begin to present himself as a rival/competitor for the player. 6. make the world completely living (and honestly living, not "living" like some companies have claimed in the last few years)
Basically the only genuine RPG out there would be one which combined several strong points from various games on a scale that no developer seems to have the ability to accomplish yet, but frankly given the technology that we have now, it should be possible.
In such a system a player would be free to make tons of choices that would directly impact the world and have genuine lasting effects. Saving some NPCs lost dog isn't really a meaningful change if you never interact with that NPC or the dog, or anything else ever again. If all that changes is a dog sprite/model exists where one didn't exist before it isn't really a meaningful change. However in this kind of a game you'd have the ability to eventually change everything. Just as you would in a genuine roleplaying game. Yes you'd need serious processing power to run all the people in this world. That would be about the only limiting thing, but with quad and more processors coming we
"A roleplaying game is a game where the players actions and choices have a meaningful and lasting effect on the game world and that world changes as a response to it"
When as it been that? never in computer games, and it will be a while before it can be.
It hasn't. That was his point. In the early years many games grabbed onto the RPG genre like it was some kind of title that gave them legitimacy regardless of whether or not they were actually roleplaying games.
In a truer sense, roleplaying is about the actions of the player tempered within the boundaries of the game.
Well very close. The players actions, but more importantly their choices. Those actions and choices need to have some kind of meaning. You make actions and choices in many games but if they are ultimately meaningless to what is going on in the game beyond "do I live or die" then there isn't much case to be made for the game allowing you to play a role.
It has a great meaing with disasterour outcome within the contecty of that game. Limited? yes, but roleplaying comes from the player, not the game.
As I mention in another post. Pong can be a role playing game if the players were pretending to play famous tennis player during the Australian open.
A story makes a better role playing experience, but you really don't need much of one.
You could roleplay a wonder during the French Revolution that helps people and has 'adventures' but still has no real impact on the outcome of the French revolution.
The mechanics is simple a way to add random elements to the game./blockquote. That is exactly the point. If the roleplaying doesn't come from the game, how can you call it a roleplaying game? You can't. An actual roleplaying game is only one in which the role you play actually has any meaning. It has zero meaning in pong because it has no effect. I can't make any choices. Either I hit the ball or not. In space invaders I either kill the aliens or lose. There is no real effect from the role. In most computer RPGs I either follow the plot or I stand there. There is little opportunity to make another choice and actually do something else with the game.
Yes the mechanics do just add random elements to the game, but they could be used to add random elements to any game of any genre. That was kind of the point. They don't make the game a "roleplaying game" because they have nothing to do with the actual roleplaying. Hence they're not "roleplaying elements"
While that sounds all clever and all, it's fairly idiotic when you actually think about it. That's not what a RPG is currently, and it's not what an RPG ever was.
Actually that is what an RPG has always been. When you played D&D your decisions mattered and the world in which you played was permanently changed because of it. Yes, it is very difficult to reproduce in a computer game. Hence why the RPG label has been attached to the games it has been attached to.
The definition of a roleplaying game is where players have a character with various self-selected skills and traits they start with and that grow as the game progresses,
Sorry, you can have roleplaying without any of that. People free-form roleplay all over the internet through various mediums and they don't have stats, skills or traits. You're yet another person who has confused mechanics and genre. If roleplaying can be done without any of that, how does it become a game? By allowing that roleplaying to affect the gameworld. None of which require stats or levels. It means the roleplaying you do, those choices you make, impacts the world.
Oh, and in computer games, genres are defined by the mechanics. Period. You can have a FPS with a certain plot, and an adventure game with the same plot, and a RPG with the same plot. All in different genres.
not even a little bit. The plot doesn't remotely define a genre, nor did I suggest it did so I'm not sure why you brought that up. A game with a first person perspective could be many things. It might be an action shooter, but it could easily be an RPG. It could also be an adventure game, could even be a Sim. Heck it could be a really detailed card game. The perspective has zero bearing on its genre. What has a bearing on the genre is what is happening in the game itself and unless the choices you make can actually have an effect on the gameworld, whatever role you choose is meaningless and it isn't a roleplaying game.
What this 'Desslock' thinks is 'RPG' would actually be better called 'epic', and isn't a genre of video games at all.
You obviously have no idea who Desslock is, which makes you either very young or poorly read. He wrote the RPG reviews and columns for PC Game and gamespot for a very long time. He's also written several well known and famous guides for various RPG games. He likes CRPGs, he just thinks few if any are actual roleplaying games.
Yes it does. But the progression doesn't have to be one of a stats and levels on a character basis. If that is the only progression it isn't roleplaying. What progression you might see is the build of resources in a sandbox game. People being trained to do jobs, building towns, defeating an enemy. that is progression.
Bioware defines the four pillars of RPG design as: *progression*, combat, and story telling. But what do they know about roll playing video games, right?
You think it is a silly question. But is it? You correctly identified their genre though. I highlighted that for you. There is a difference between roll playing games and roleplaying games. Most CRPGs are roll playing games. They're not roleplaying games. Including most of bioware's games. Great fantastic games that have taken huge chunks of my life, but they aren't really roleplaying games. Yes, I know. Blasphemy.
To look at it further a roleplaying game is a game in which you play a role. Obviously. But that could be said about any game. I could claim space invaders was a roleplaying game because I "played a role" when I played it. But I think you'd find most people probably wouldn't classify it as a roleplaying game. Why? because the role has no meaning. Bioware may make their RPGs With those four pillars (interestingly you only listed 3, is the fourth pillar ninjas?) but you can have all of those things and still not have a roleplaying game. You can have roleplaying games without combat, without story, and unless the progression is done right, it doesn't make it an RPG. A roleplaying is all about having the role actually meaning something in the game. What you do and how you do has to actually have some effect. I don't really count getting a better sword to fighter better enemies in a scripted fashion as having an effect.
Bringing supplies to an area, reinforcing it, securing it and building an outpost and creating an economy is having an effect on a gameworld. If you choose to play that kind of role, it does something. Even if there was no story or a terrible one, what you did actually meant something in the game and the game world which was on going. Something MMORPGs basically fail at. They're so static it is sickening. Even if you had combat there is no requirement that combat be managed by a spreadsheet and require a degree in accounting. Let's not forget Amber the diceless RPG. RPGs are about choices and how those choices affect you, your character, the world, etc.
in MMORPGs those choices do nothing. The world never changes. The choices are frankly meaningless. People can sit around and free form "roleplay" all day, but they could do that in a forum. Unless the developers actually include tools to allow that roleplaying to affect the world in some meaningful and lasting way it is the equivalent of writing a backstory and spouting one liners while playing space invaders.
in most single player RPGs they're often linear. So while you progress through the story, you're doing so on a set path and your choices are either to do it or turn off the game. There is no real freedom to make choices that actually impact the story or what is genuinely going on in the game through their play. Even most of the games which feature an angel/psychotic killer choice system are just as linear. You move from the same scenario to the next just sometimes with a different cut scene.
They're great games. They're just not RPGs. Why don't we have more of those games? because they're a pain to make. They're a pain to write a story for. If you actually give the player freedom to impact the game world in meaningful and lasting ways, you have no idea what exactly he's going to do. you can create a system to generate generic story bites like those that appear at the end of some games to give you some final ending based on your characters deeds, but its hard to craft a good story around that kind of a game. The game needs to be genuinely living. There basically can't be a "main" quest. There could be many things going on in the world. Various factions with various goals, but it would be a giant sandbox that you could play in and shape the world to your liking. Make that, and you've got a genuine roleplaying game. Anything else is a game masquerading as something it isn't for whatever reason.
I hate to break it to the writer and most of the clowns who parrot buzz words in the industry but a roleplaying game isn't defined by stats, swords, levels, or anything other mechanic. Mechanics are separate from the genre. One of the few gems to come out of a reviewer was from a fellow named Desslock. He correctly defined what a roleplaying game was and unfortunately too many people were busy trying to attach RPG to every game going in an attempt to give them some sort of claim to legitimacy. I'm paraphrasing because it was quite a few years ago, but: "A roleplaying game is a game where the players actions and choices have a meaningful and lasting effect on the game world and that world changes as a response to it"
He also pointed out at that time that there were few if any games which actually even approached being a genuine roleplaying game. Even today there isn't. The only thing that really has a chance to actually be a roleplaying game are sandbox games. The player needs the freedom to make choices and those choices need to have effects. They need to be permanent and the world itself needs to change. A game like Simcity (4 or earlier, not that latest atrocity) is far closer to being a genuine roleplaying game than some of the games in recent years full of swords and magic. Certainly much more than say..WoW.
A fairly linear shooter which adds stats, or levels doesn't include "RPG elements" because none of those things have anything to do with making a game an RPG. The game is an RPG if the player can affect and change the world with choices, not if he can pick up a better sword, or swing it slightly better. You have to play a role, but that role has to have meaning within the game world. All of those things are completely independent of the mechanics. Yes, game makers often try to bundle those things together, but in reality simply adding a sword, or hit points to a game doesn't make it a roleplaying game. It makes it whatever it is with a sword and hit points.
Every time I see some hack writer talking about "RPG elements" I feel like asking them if they think their Cobalt has Ferrari elements because it has doors and wheels.
So why does the system reference document exist and why is it licensed under the open gaming license? Companies have patented game mechanics in the past as well.
don't apologize to stargate. They haven't done anything to deserve it. They've basically said they're going to make the show they want and the fans be damned!
a few weeks ago when they changed the privacy settings anyone who had already changed ANY privacy settings had nothing changed. Only people who had never changed a single privacy setting had their settings changed.
1. This is what shows up by default 2. Also easy, you can control who can post to your wall with a single setting, only friends can post in the first place, not strangers. Yet even still: Settings -> Privacy Settings -> Profile Information -> Uncheck the allow friends to post your wall and click customize on "comments on posts" and choose "only me". No one, not even a friend could post on your wall. 3. There is a notifications tab in the account settings where you can uncheck everything. Settings -> Account Settings -> Notifications 4. Unanswered friend requests don't do anything. They get no notification if you reject it. So leaving them open would do nothing. You won't even get an email if you uncheck the notification on the notification page.
I'll call and let you know when we get those prices here in Korea.. you can still get 2 tickets, a popcorn and 2 drinks for the equivalent of about $16.00 USD.
you say it doesn't, but I say it does on private tackers I'm routinely shunned, even as the initial seed as soon as other seeds become available that are very likely geographically closer.
Almost every torrent I've added to private trackers shows a consistent max up speed until someone else hits seed and then my up basically stops. Fine when I'm the initial seed, terrible if I'm just jumping on a random torrent since 95% of the people out there won't take anything from me. I've seen plenty of people on the same trackers making the same complaint. utorrent is making decisions about that somehow already.
Canadians routinely see ads on their cable channels for businesses and products that are unavailable, a different price, or possibly illegal. It doesn't seem to bother those american advertisers.
How do those things scale? admittedly I'm not a much up on the technical specs of rocket engines, but if one VASMIR drive could get us there in 39 days, what about a ship powered with 2 or 3? Is there a practical way we could build a ship and cut that down to say a week? (if we ignored money)
I think we should be more concerned with overall trip time than pure acceleration. Acceleration is more useful in the short run..if you were dodging weapons fire or say asteroids, but if I'm going to Mars or another planet, I'd be more concerned with how long it took me to get there than how long it took me to get away from where I was.
that's unfortunate. One would hope with nuclear power there could be a way to increase both speed and distance. Without those being improved..is there much point in going nuclear?
I can remember going to a Vista beta launch and MS carrying on about how sleep was fixed. No more trouble waking up. Yeah. Still blows. my friend's HP laptop absolutely cannot function after waking up from sleep. The only USB thing that will work is the mouse. Nothing else works. Wireless internet also won't wake up.
Yes. Just to try it out I've been reading the works of Confucius on the bus/subway when I have time to kill. This makes it limited to usually 30-40 minute chunks, but its been fine for that. I'd never sit around at home though. I like to think of these devices as more of a mobile entertainment device for the subway/bus. I can throw a podcast, a movie, or a book on there and just choose what I'm in the mood for. I'd never really view it as a serious replacement for a TV or a book.
Slashdot Mirror
er no..
I just tried that and its highlighting almost everyone. Including people whose profiles I may have viewed once or twice as far back as 6 months ago, and maybe exchanged a well post back a few months ago too. While a person whose profile I go to weekly isn't highlighted and another person I visit daily is.
Good. then you know that roleplaying doesn't require those things.
You can have goals, rules, challenges and interactions without having stats, character levels or slightly more accurate guns.
No, that is what is what a lot of people claim distinguish the games, but the reality is it doesn't. There are plenty of games which have these which aren't roleplaying games, and why they're referred to as first person shooters with "rpg elements". People realize those things don't make them roleplaying games. If they don't make the first person shooter an RPG, then how do they make the RPG an RPG? They don't.
No, the idea is that the choices are rather meaningless and so are the changes. Everything is scripted. You can't deviate from the story and go off on your own. So your own choice is to go along the preset path or turn it off. No matter what role you play within the confines of the game it has zero bearing on the progression of the game, or the changes are at best superficial. They don't actually impact the game world in any meaningful way.
I haven't come across any CRPGs that could genuinely be defined as a "real" rpg. The only one that could would be one that could properly replicate an actual gaming session with a DM, which means when the players decide to not take the bait and go off in a completely different direction the DM has to roll with that and keep the world alive and moving. Regardless of the underlying rules, system, or lack thereof that a game might rely on, what would make a game a genuine roleplaying game?
1. Start with a giant sandbox, a world, or part of one
2. set the player free to interact in it
3. Give the player a staggering amount of ability to change things. All things at various levels depending on the resources available to him. He can set up stores, run random missions, buy buildings, hire guards to guard mines, caravans, etc
4. Set up conflict of some sort in the world. Economic, military, etc.
5. forget the "main" quest. The player can create his own in that kind of a world, at some point with that kind of conflict an NPC will begin to present himself as a rival/competitor for the player.
6. make the world completely living (and honestly living, not "living" like some companies have claimed in the last few years)
Basically the only genuine RPG out there would be one which combined several strong points from various games on a scale that no developer seems to have the ability to accomplish yet, but frankly given the technology that we have now, it should be possible.
In such a system a player would be free to make tons of choices that would directly impact the world and have genuine lasting effects. Saving some NPCs lost dog isn't really a meaningful change if you never interact with that NPC or the dog, or anything else ever again. If all that changes is a dog sprite/model exists where one didn't exist before it isn't really a meaningful change. However in this kind of a game you'd have the ability to eventually change everything. Just as you would in a genuine roleplaying game. Yes you'd need serious processing power to run all the people in this world. That would be about the only limiting thing, but with quad and more processors coming we
It hasn't. That was his point.
In the early years many games grabbed onto the RPG genre like it was some kind of title that gave them legitimacy regardless of whether or not they were actually roleplaying games.
Well very close. The players actions, but more importantly their choices. Those actions and choices need to have some kind of meaning. You make actions and choices in many games but if they are ultimately meaningless to what is going on in the game beyond "do I live or die" then there isn't much case to be made for the game allowing you to play a role.
Actually that is what an RPG has always been.
When you played D&D your decisions mattered and the world in which you played was permanently changed because of it. Yes, it is very difficult to reproduce in a computer game. Hence why the RPG label has been attached to the games it has been attached to.
Sorry, you can have roleplaying without any of that. People free-form roleplay all over the internet through various mediums and they don't have stats, skills or traits. You're yet another person who has confused mechanics and genre. If roleplaying can be done without any of that, how does it become a game? By allowing that roleplaying to affect the gameworld. None of which require stats or levels. It means the roleplaying you do, those choices you make, impacts the world.
not even a little bit. The plot doesn't remotely define a genre, nor did I suggest it did so I'm not sure why you brought that up. A game with a first person perspective could be many things. It might be an action shooter, but it could easily be an RPG. It could also be an adventure game, could even be a Sim. Heck it could be a really detailed card game.
The perspective has zero bearing on its genre. What has a bearing on the genre is what is happening in the game itself and unless the choices you make can actually have an effect on the gameworld, whatever role you choose is meaningless and it isn't a roleplaying game.
You obviously have no idea who Desslock is, which makes you either very young or poorly read. He wrote the RPG reviews and columns for PC Game and gamespot for a very long time. He's also written several well known and famous guides for various RPG games. He likes CRPGs, he just thinks few if any are actual roleplaying games.
Yes it does. But the progression doesn't have to be one of a stats and levels on a character basis. If that is the only progression it isn't roleplaying. What progression you might see is the build of resources in a sandbox game. People being trained to do jobs, building towns, defeating an enemy. that is progression.
You think it is a silly question. But is it? You correctly identified their genre though. I highlighted that for you. There is a difference between roll playing games and roleplaying games. Most CRPGs are roll playing games. They're not roleplaying games. Including most of bioware's games. Great fantastic games that have taken huge chunks of my life, but they aren't really roleplaying games. Yes, I know. Blasphemy.
To look at it further a roleplaying game is a game in which you play a role. Obviously. But that could be said about any game. I could claim space invaders was a roleplaying game because I "played a role" when I played it. But I think you'd find most people probably wouldn't classify it as a roleplaying game. Why? because the role has no meaning. Bioware may make their RPGs With those four pillars (interestingly you only listed 3, is the fourth pillar ninjas?) but you can have all of those things and still not have a roleplaying game. You can have roleplaying games without combat, without story, and unless the progression is done right, it doesn't make it an RPG. A roleplaying is all about having the role actually meaning something in the game. What you do and how you do has to actually have some effect. I don't really count getting a better sword to fighter better enemies in a scripted fashion as having an effect.
Bringing supplies to an area, reinforcing it, securing it and building an outpost and creating an economy is having an effect on a gameworld. If you choose to play that kind of role, it does something. Even if there was no story or a terrible one, what you did actually meant something in the game and the game world which was on going. Something MMORPGs basically fail at. They're so static it is sickening. Even if you had combat there is no requirement that combat be managed by a spreadsheet and require a degree in accounting. Let's not forget Amber the diceless RPG. RPGs are about choices and how those choices affect you, your character, the world, etc.
in MMORPGs those choices do nothing. The world never changes. The choices are frankly meaningless. People can sit around and free form "roleplay" all day, but they could do that in a forum. Unless the developers actually include tools to allow that roleplaying to affect the world in some meaningful and lasting way it is the equivalent of writing a backstory and spouting one liners while playing space invaders.
in most single player RPGs they're often linear. So while you progress through the story, you're doing so on a set path and your choices are either to do it or turn off the game. There is no real freedom to make choices that actually impact the story or what is genuinely going on in the game through their play. Even most of the games which feature an angel/psychotic killer choice system are just as linear. You move from the same scenario to the next just sometimes with a different cut scene.
They're great games. They're just not RPGs. Why don't we have more of those games? because they're a pain to make. They're a pain to write a story for. If you actually give the player freedom to impact the game world in meaningful and lasting ways, you have no idea what exactly he's going to do. you can create a system to generate generic story bites like those that appear at the end of some games to give you some final ending based on your characters deeds, but its hard to craft a good story around that kind of a game. The game needs to be genuinely living. There basically can't be a "main" quest. There could be many things going on in the world. Various factions with various goals, but it would be a giant sandbox that you could play in and shape the world to your liking. Make that, and you've got a genuine roleplaying game. Anything else is a game masquerading as something it isn't for whatever reason.
I hate to break it to the writer and most of the clowns who parrot buzz words in the industry but a roleplaying game isn't defined by stats, swords, levels, or anything other mechanic. Mechanics are separate from the genre. One of the few gems to come out of a reviewer was from a fellow named Desslock. He correctly defined what a roleplaying game was and unfortunately too many people were busy trying to attach RPG to every game going in an attempt to give them some sort of claim to legitimacy. I'm paraphrasing because it was quite a few years ago, but:
"A roleplaying game is a game where the players actions and choices have a meaningful and lasting effect on the game world and that world changes as a response to it"
He also pointed out at that time that there were few if any games which actually even approached being a genuine roleplaying game. Even today there isn't. The only thing that really has a chance to actually be a roleplaying game are sandbox games. The player needs the freedom to make choices and those choices need to have effects. They need to be permanent and the world itself needs to change. A game like Simcity (4 or earlier, not that latest atrocity) is far closer to being a genuine roleplaying game than some of the games in recent years full of swords and magic. Certainly much more than say..WoW.
A fairly linear shooter which adds stats, or levels doesn't include "RPG elements" because none of those things have anything to do with making a game an RPG. The game is an RPG if the player can affect and change the world with choices, not if he can pick up a better sword, or swing it slightly better. You have to play a role, but that role has to have meaning within the game world. All of those things are completely independent of the mechanics. Yes, game makers often try to bundle those things together, but in reality simply adding a sword, or hit points to a game doesn't make it a roleplaying game. It makes it whatever it is with a sword and hit points.
Every time I see some hack writer talking about "RPG elements" I feel like asking them if they think their Cobalt has Ferrari elements because it has doors and wheels.
So why does the system reference document exist and why is it licensed under the open gaming license?
Companies have patented game mechanics in the past as well.
don't apologize to stargate. They haven't done anything to deserve it. They've basically said they're going to make the show they want and the fans be damned!
a few weeks ago when they changed the privacy settings anyone who had already changed ANY privacy settings had nothing changed. Only people who had never changed a single privacy setting had their settings changed.
1. This is what shows up by default
2. Also easy, you can control who can post to your wall with a single setting, only friends can post in the first place, not strangers. Yet even still: Settings -> Privacy Settings -> Profile Information -> Uncheck the allow friends to post your wall and click customize on "comments on posts" and choose "only me". No one, not even a friend could post on your wall.
3. There is a notifications tab in the account settings where you can uncheck everything. Settings -> Account Settings -> Notifications
4. Unanswered friend requests don't do anything. They get no notification if you reject it. So leaving them open would do nothing. You won't even get an email if you uncheck the notification on the notification page.
compared to what other popular technology at the time?
I'll call and let you know when we get those prices here in Korea..
you can still get 2 tickets, a popcorn and 2 drinks for the equivalent of about $16.00 USD.
I must be getting too old for this, because my god this is lame.
it is like they are trying desperately to be adult.
and here is the real issue.
If it is "a lot" then they risk upsetting a lot of customers, bad pr, etc.
if it is not "a lot" then you'd have to wonder what is the rush. If its a tiny amount, amalgamate, etc.
all set to some unnecessary and crappy music by someone who thinks they're a hot shot music video producer.
you say it doesn't, but I say it does
on private tackers I'm routinely shunned, even as the initial seed as soon as other seeds become available that are very likely geographically closer.
Almost every torrent I've added to private trackers shows a consistent max up speed until someone else hits seed and then my up basically stops. Fine when I'm the initial seed, terrible if I'm just jumping on a random torrent since 95% of the people out there won't take anything from me. I've seen plenty of people on the same trackers making the same complaint. utorrent is making decisions about that somehow already.
Canadians routinely see ads on their cable channels for businesses and products that are unavailable, a different price, or possibly illegal. It doesn't seem to bother those american advertisers.
How do those things scale? admittedly I'm not a much up on the technical specs of rocket engines, but if one VASMIR drive could get us there in 39 days, what about a ship powered with 2 or 3? Is there a practical way we could build a ship and cut that down to say a week? (if we ignored money)
I think we should be more concerned with overall trip time than pure acceleration. Acceleration is more useful in the short run..if you were dodging weapons fire or say asteroids, but if I'm going to Mars or another planet, I'd be more concerned with how long it took me to get there than how long it took me to get away from where I was.
that's unfortunate. One would hope with nuclear power there could be a way to increase both speed and distance. Without those being improved..is there much point in going nuclear?
Compared to current tech, how fast and how far could such a ship theoretically travel?
I can remember going to a Vista beta launch and MS carrying on about how sleep was fixed. No more trouble waking up. Yeah. Still blows. my friend's HP laptop absolutely cannot function after waking up from sleep. The only USB thing that will work is the mouse. Nothing else works. Wireless internet also won't wake up.
Yes. Just to try it out I've been reading the works of Confucius on the bus/subway when I have time to kill. This makes it limited to usually 30-40 minute chunks, but its been fine for that. I'd never sit around at home though. I like to think of these devices as more of a mobile entertainment device for the subway/bus. I can throw a podcast, a movie, or a book on there and just choose what I'm in the mood for. I'd never really view it as a serious replacement for a TV or a book.