Correction: your C compiler is fater at multiplying by 9 than crappily written assembler.
Thats a pretty small corner you've got yourself and your case into there.
Most Important: Anything advertised as part of the game (on box or in promotion) shouldn't need to be "unlocked" - it was BOUGHT.
Personally the "unlockables" that irritate me are the ones that are limiting, or the ones that are patently artificial.
Example: the driving test at the beginning of Driver, or the licence tests in Gran Turismo
These are specifically extremely irritating in that they lock off LARGE parts of the gameplay behind a "you must be this good, or no more game for you" barrier. And in both cases "this good" is noticably BETTER than you need to be to finish the rest of the game. (specifically: you never re-use the skills required to pass the initial driving test at the start of driver again - this is merely the worst example of this I recall, but far from the only one)
That kind of design is extremely poor, FYI.
Examples to contrast: Gran Turismo 4 on the PS2: I'm stuck on the licenses at a certain point - some of the races will never be open to me because of this. By contrast I'm also at the point on Project Gotham Racing 2 where I've completed the career mode to something like everything to Bronze standard. But some of the levels I just cannot do any higher (some I have Platinum on). But because of the structure of the unlockable content, I have 2 saved games, and between the 2, I can drive all the cars on all the circuits.
See also: "new special move unlocked" which is required to be used for the next mission, and then never used again. Especially if the next mission features an enemy only suscpetible to that move, and later levels feature enemies immune to it...
Any locked off core gameplay which isn't locked off due to a continuance of a storyline (e.g. next level in Halo, or next missions in GTA), and particularly locked off gameplay which leaves you in a "can't do this? no more game for you" situation is pretty poor. Ex: sounds like the linearity of guitar hero has been shoe-horned into it, and that the unlocking of content is only to support the linearity, not implied and supported by a narative, as in Halo or GTA for example.
With a narrative to the core of the gameplay, sequential release of game content (e.g. in the form of the next level or mission) seems natural. When supported by escalating difficulty through the narrative, it makes even more sense: since if you couldn't do level X, you're unlikely to be able to do level X+1
Conversely, if you KNOW you can do level X+1, there's little interest in playing level X. Tetris understood this, and let you set your starting difficulty, even the worm game on my old Nokia phone understood this. Repetative non-narrative games would do better to emulate this model, than to drop in a "career mode" to force sequencial play.
I can't remember the name, but I had an Xbox game that required me to finish the game single player to "unlock" multiplayer - the designer who thought that was a good idea has a special slot prepared for them in hell, as far as I can see.
Unlocking extra multiplayer skins, even extra multiplayer levels (asssuming you started with a useable amount anyway), etc is OK by me, then it really is just flash that I don't need available to enjoy the game, and at that point just becomes a reward for playing (think extra special skaters in Tony Hawks as a good example)
Conversely if the nature of the game is such that the majority of its use will be non-narrative (e.g. Halo, played more multiplayer than single in my experience) then to have the narrative mode unlock content for the non-narrative mode is rather obtuse. (to make the point: if a game were to require you to play the multiplayer mode for X hours to unlock the next single player level, how great a player experience do you think that'd make? so why do is it done in reverse so often?)
From the sound of the comments regarding Guitar Hero (not that its a game i'd ever play) it sounds like the selection of starting tunes is wrong: in that it sounds like when the guy shows off the game with stu
"That is all nice until you realize you have 1gb of hard drive space and haven't used Photoshop in 2 months. Or in the case of CS2 decide that it's not worth an upgrade and it's better to go install the old version."
See, if you've BOUGHT photoshop, you're going to be using it...
(oh and the verion of norton I've got installed is the 2003 version, before they went batshit insane, its also rather cheap now)
"No,... I just know my way around WinXP, just as you know your way around OSX. My issues seem trivial to you because you know the solutions. Your issues seem trivial to me because I know the solutions."
I did actually sincerely mean "its interesting" not any form of "i don't believe you" there. To my mind its one of the core remaining weaknesses in OS design that 2 people can perform superficially similar tasks, and come away with utterly divergent user experiences. Example: there's another reply to me that states that they have installed nero without a restart: WHY did I have to restart twice then? What bizarre and minor difference in state creates that change? I mean: I had only installed Windows XP SP2, then Norton, then Nero - cannot be in that strange a state, surely?!?
"And I'm sure OSX does well when you start deleting system files from it as well."
An install log is not a system file. Also I was responding to your assertion that Add/Remove Programs can remove programs without their uninstaller, whereas what it actually does is act as a menu from which to invoke those very uninstall programs.
"I'm talking more about the OK/Cancel principle in Windows as a whole."
Then you are engaging in a straw-man argument: you responded to my comment on the control panel's use of OK/Cancel - NOT the system as a whole. I responded to your question 'oh but what if you change your mind?', with a fairly obvious comment. However apparently you were engaged in a different conversation after all?
"Until the operation is finished, you can always cancel. Therefore, if you don't know quite what you're doing and you don't know if you're about to blow something up, you can cancel. That's why it is the way it is. If you don't like it, that's fine, but now you can't say you don't understand why its in place."
OS X does use a similar set of dialogs, for example when you quit an app that has unsaved changes. My point was, and remains; in the case of the control panel type settings, the OS X way is better, and conceptually simpler if you have not been grown used to the windows way first.
In other situations there may be a better way to do things, and I recognise (and just gave an example) situations where that is so, and not-coincidentally where the two OSs converge in their treatment.
I was about to make some new snide comment about google and searching for "OS X install program" and the results you get.
Then I noticed that the results you get are about installing some chump's PHP framework, so I had to shut up.
On the plus side, the third link on google for that search does lead into the apple support pages, wherein there is a link (at the top, in pink - nice touch) to the page that lets you download PDFs of the manuals for just about any mac you care to name. (except the one you will immediately name, obviously!)
"Okay... backwards compared to an OS that insists that you put your disks in the trash (the place you put things when you want them deleted) in order to eject them"
Use the "eject" button right next to any ejectable device instead.
"And when you change the setting to something you don't want by mistake?"
Change it back??? (duh...)
"Everything I've ever installed on Mac OSX has involved an installer except for a tiny few homebrew applications."
Only things like Photoshop and iTunes (plus other apple stuff) and the OSX version of media player have used an installer (.pkg) that I've noticed..dmg and drag to applications folder is the norm for most software.
"Furthermore, I was completely unable to remove said software (I'm looking at you Epson scanner) without re-downloading the installer and telling it to remove the program."
Stuff that uses a.pkg is doing so because it makes changes outside the applications folder. Photoshop CS2, for instance is a total pig to unistall on the mac: the uninstall instructions are in a text file, and consist of a long list of things to delete by hand from the terminal. This is, quite clearly however, adobe's fault not apple's. Generally.pkg installing programs are things you'd be unlikely to want to uninstall (iTunes, Photoshop etc) unless you were uninstalling everything (at which point format and reinstall is faster)
"Windows has the Add/Remove panel where you can uninstall any softwre, regardless of whether you have the installer."
This is untrue: go to an application's directory and delete the install log: see how far you get with uninstalling it through add/remove. I've had that effect through file corruption and also through shoddy install scripts on more than one occaision. Also see under "norton ativirus can only be uninstalled via ActiveX over the web".
"And I can't remember the last time I restarted Windows after installing something."
Its interesting: you seem to manage to have used a totally different implementation of WinXP (installing nero last week required 2 reboots before it was done) AND a different implementation of OSX than me (my powerbook just had its monthly update and reboot this morning, it is very unlikely that it will be rebooted again before the next update - in fact its unlikely that photoshop will be quit before then)
"The learning curve on OSX has made me want to shoot people every step of the way. Most notably, its antiquated and nigh-unpredictable way of handling files. Is there a way in OSX to make it so that every, say, GIF image opens in a particular program? I always have to deal with the problem of them wanting to open up in the program that spawned them, and sometimes I don't want to fire up Photoshop in order to look at an image."
Select an item of the correct type. Go to the menu, click File->get info. Find the clearly marked section that says 'open with' -> pick your application. Click the checkbox that says 'use for all items of this type' Close dialog. Note to yourself the implication that 'use for all of this type' means you have the option of setting this per file rather than per type, should you choose.
Feeling clever?
(caveat: single quoted strings are from memory while at work using a PC, and may very well not be verbatim from the dialog)
you'd downloaded a.dmg file (.dmg == disk image) and when you double click that it creates a virtual drive. (.dmg is very much like a cross between a zip and a self-mounting.iso file; its basically a downloadable virtual install CD. in fact it, again, is one of those "why don't PCs have that?" moments on the mac)
To get the application installed, you double click to mount the.dmg, then drag the firefox icon to the applications folder.
You double clicked the icon, which runs the program from its virtual drive. (yet ANOTHER "why don't PCs do this?" - being able to try out a new program WITHOUT installing it... and guess how hard running firefox from a USB stick is in OSX? thats right...)
Once installed, to get it in the dock (there is no "main menu", at least not that i've seen), go to the applications folder, and (guess what?) drag the icon to the dock. Job done.
To remove from the dock? drag off the dock.
To uninstall the app? drag from applications folder to the trash.
The snide part? Guess whether this is covered in the "welcome to your mac" pamphlet that comes with every mac... (hint: answer has 3 letters)
I have found, both with myself and others, that the learning curve of switching Windows->Mac is a curve of unlearning backwards ways of doing things you've simply gotten used to on Windows.
Most simple examples:
Where to find the "save changes" button on the system settings panels? There isn't one, it just makes the changes as you go.
How to install and uninstall (most) software? Drag and drop. Need to restart after an install or uninstall? No, in fact restarts are a monthly occurance at worst.
Its a learning curve, but its a curve to doing things much, much better. Its also a curve that has you smiling all the way up it, as repetetive boring tasks you had to do on your PC become easy, or simply obsolete.
Macs use both the "drag package to apps folder" and "run installer wizard" systems.
The drag+drop is used for programs that don't need to install anything outside their own package (e.g. FTP clients etc)
The second is used for programs that do need to install things elsewhere (off the top of my head... I think photoshop installs like this, certainly the bigger apple apps do, maybe even iTunes)
If you are an admin account (or have that permission) you can just drag+drop with impunity, if you aren't given that control you are asked for an admin uid/pwd before teh drag+drop action can be done.
The wizard style install ALWAYS requires an admin authentication before installing.
I've had phishing emails that were for the right bank: and even had the right address in it (except for the fact taht I moved from the address 2 years ago...)
Phishers are getting better, and I suspect they have friends within the banks.
Slashdot Mirror
And if your game uses directX, then that 50K is looking shittier and shittier...
"The article suggests we will see the slow erosion of traditional television broadcasting, and with it, the death of the great TV ads of the past"
"the death of the great TV ads of the past"
My god!
How will we ever survive without the "great" TV ads of the past?!??!?
In some cases, sorry isn't enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut
"and is it practical? Would it sell?"
1 What does it do that the screen/screensaver/speaker cannot?
2 No
You need to become one with the concept of "Core Competency"
Is your company a spell-checker company?
If not then what does it gain you to develop your own spell-checker?
How much do you gain by not spending the time/effort to develop your own spell-checker?
s/spell-checker/$non_core_technology/
You sound like a PHB to me: all soundbite no thought.
You're not fucked as such.
You just have to write your own string escaping function (or, better, write your own statement parameterising code).
If the language doesn't even have a string replace function, then you're fucked. (or rather messing around with character arrays or pointers).
Its just levels of hassle, but its hassle that a thinking professional would only have to go through ONCE with any given language...
If the wheel doesn't exist; invent it before trying to make a car...
Correction: your C compiler is fater at multiplying by 9 than crappily written assembler. Thats a pretty small corner you've got yourself and your case into there.
Do you not see that as a huge admission of defeat? That you are _seriously_ suggesting a anti-virus/spyware CO-PROCESSOR?!?
Most Important: Anything advertised as part of the game (on box or in promotion) shouldn't need to be "unlocked" - it was BOUGHT.
Personally the "unlockables" that irritate me are the ones that are limiting, or the ones that are patently artificial.
Example: the driving test at the beginning of Driver, or the licence tests in Gran Turismo
These are specifically extremely irritating in that they lock off LARGE parts of the gameplay behind a "you must be this good, or no more game for you" barrier. And in both cases "this good" is noticably BETTER than you need to be to finish the rest of the game. (specifically: you never re-use the skills required to pass the initial driving test at the start of driver again - this is merely the worst example of this I recall, but far from the only one)
That kind of design is extremely poor, FYI.
Examples to contrast:
Gran Turismo 4 on the PS2: I'm stuck on the licenses at a certain point - some of the races will never be open to me because of this.
By contrast I'm also at the point on Project Gotham Racing 2 where I've completed the career mode to something like everything to Bronze standard. But some of the levels I just cannot do any higher (some I have Platinum on). But because of the structure of the unlockable content, I have 2 saved games, and between the 2, I can drive all the cars on all the circuits.
See also: "new special move unlocked" which is required to be used for the next mission, and then never used again. Especially if the next mission features an enemy only suscpetible to that move, and later levels feature enemies immune to it...
Any locked off core gameplay which isn't locked off due to a continuance of a storyline (e.g. next level in Halo, or next missions in GTA), and particularly locked off gameplay which leaves you in a "can't do this? no more game for you" situation is pretty poor. Ex: sounds like the linearity of guitar hero has been shoe-horned into it, and that the unlocking of content is only to support the linearity, not implied and supported by a narative, as in Halo or GTA for example.
With a narrative to the core of the gameplay, sequential release of game content (e.g. in the form of the next level or mission) seems natural. When supported by escalating difficulty through the narrative, it makes even more sense: since if you couldn't do level X, you're unlikely to be able to do level X+1
Conversely, if you KNOW you can do level X+1, there's little interest in playing level X. Tetris understood this, and let you set your starting difficulty, even the worm game on my old Nokia phone understood this. Repetative non-narrative games would do better to emulate this model, than to drop in a "career mode" to force sequencial play.
I can't remember the name, but I had an Xbox game that required me to finish the game single player to "unlock" multiplayer - the designer who thought that was a good idea has a special slot prepared for them in hell, as far as I can see.
Unlocking extra multiplayer skins, even extra multiplayer levels (asssuming you started with a useable amount anyway), etc is OK by me, then it really is just flash that I don't need available to enjoy the game, and at that point just becomes a reward for playing (think extra special skaters in Tony Hawks as a good example)
Conversely if the nature of the game is such that the majority of its use will be non-narrative (e.g. Halo, played more multiplayer than single in my experience) then to have the narrative mode unlock content for the non-narrative mode is rather obtuse. (to make the point: if a game were to require you to play the multiplayer mode for X hours to unlock the next single player level, how great a player experience do you think that'd make? so why do is it done in reverse so often?)
From the sound of the comments regarding Guitar Hero (not that its a game i'd ever play) it sounds like the selection of starting tunes is wrong: in that it sounds like when the guy shows off the game with stu
You really are a moron.
You are a moron.
Editor's drunk. Hypocrite.
Pay closer attention: note the fixed widths of the left and right columns: he asked for 3 fluid columns.
"That is all nice until you realize you have 1gb of hard drive space and haven't used Photoshop in 2 months. Or in the case of CS2 decide that it's not worth an upgrade and it's better to go install the old version." See, if you've BOUGHT photoshop, you're going to be using it... (oh and the verion of norton I've got installed is the 2003 version, before they went batshit insane, its also rather cheap now)
"No,... I just know my way around WinXP, just as you know your way around OSX. My issues seem trivial to you because you know the solutions. Your issues seem trivial to me because I know the solutions."
I did actually sincerely mean "its interesting" not any form of "i don't believe you" there. To my mind its one of the core remaining weaknesses in OS design that 2 people can perform superficially similar tasks, and come away with utterly divergent user experiences.
Example: there's another reply to me that states that they have installed nero without a restart: WHY did I have to restart twice then? What bizarre and minor difference in state creates that change? I mean: I had only installed Windows XP SP2, then Norton, then Nero - cannot be in that strange a state, surely?!?
"And I'm sure OSX does well when you start deleting system files from it as well."
An install log is not a system file. Also I was responding to your assertion that Add/Remove Programs can remove programs without their uninstaller, whereas what it actually does is act as a menu from which to invoke those very uninstall programs.
"I'm talking more about the OK/Cancel principle in Windows as a whole."
Then you are engaging in a straw-man argument: you responded to my comment on the control panel's use of OK/Cancel - NOT the system as a whole. I responded to your question 'oh but what if you change your mind?', with a fairly obvious comment. However apparently you were engaged in a different conversation after all?
"Until the operation is finished, you can always cancel. Therefore, if you don't know quite what you're doing and you don't know if you're about to blow something up, you can cancel. That's why it is the way it is. If you don't like it, that's fine, but now you can't say you don't understand why its in place."
OS X does use a similar set of dialogs, for example when you quit an app that has unsaved changes. My point was, and remains; in the case of the control panel type settings, the OS X way is better, and conceptually simpler if you have not been grown used to the windows way first.
In other situations there may be a better way to do things, and I recognise (and just gave an example) situations where that is so, and not-coincidentally where the two OSs converge in their treatment.
I was about to make some new snide comment about google and searching for "OS X install program" and the results you get.
Then I noticed that the results you get are about installing some chump's PHP framework, so I had to shut up.
On the plus side, the third link on google for that search does lead into the apple support pages, wherein there is a link (at the top, in pink - nice touch) to the page that lets you download PDFs of the manuals for just about any mac you care to name. (except the one you will immediately name, obviously!)
"Okay... backwards compared to an OS that insists that you put your disks in the trash (the place you put things when you want them deleted) in order to eject them"
.dmg and drag to applications folder is the norm for most software.
.pkg is doing so because it makes changes outside the applications folder. Photoshop CS2, for instance is a total pig to unistall on the mac: the uninstall instructions are in a text file, and consist of a long list of things to delete by hand from the terminal. This is, quite clearly however, adobe's fault not apple's. Generally .pkg installing programs are things you'd be unlikely to want to uninstall (iTunes, Photoshop etc) unless you were uninstalling everything (at which point format and reinstall is faster)
Use the "eject" button right next to any ejectable device instead.
"And when you change the setting to something you don't want by mistake?"
Change it back??? (duh...)
"Everything I've ever installed on Mac OSX has involved an installer except for a tiny few homebrew applications."
Only things like Photoshop and iTunes (plus other apple stuff) and the OSX version of media player have used an installer (.pkg) that I've noticed.
"Furthermore, I was completely unable to remove said software (I'm looking at you Epson scanner) without re-downloading the installer and telling it to remove the program."
Stuff that uses a
"Windows has the Add/Remove panel where you can uninstall any softwre, regardless of whether you have the installer."
This is untrue: go to an application's directory and delete the install log: see how far you get with uninstalling it through add/remove. I've had that effect through file corruption and also through shoddy install scripts on more than one occaision. Also see under "norton ativirus can only be uninstalled via ActiveX over the web".
"And I can't remember the last time I restarted Windows after installing something."
Its interesting: you seem to manage to have used a totally different implementation of WinXP (installing nero last week required 2 reboots before it was done) AND a different implementation of OSX than me (my powerbook just had its monthly update and reboot this morning, it is very unlikely that it will be rebooted again before the next update - in fact its unlikely that photoshop will be quit before then)
"The learning curve on OSX has made me want to shoot people every step of the way. Most notably, its antiquated and nigh-unpredictable way of handling files. Is there a way in OSX to make it so that every, say, GIF image opens in a particular program? I always have to deal with the problem of them wanting to open up in the program that spawned them, and sometimes I don't want to fire up Photoshop in order to look at an image."
Select an item of the correct type. Go to the menu, click File->get info. Find the clearly marked section that says 'open with' -> pick your application. Click the checkbox that says 'use for all items of this type' Close dialog. Note to yourself the implication that 'use for all of this type' means you have the option of setting this per file rather than per type, should you choose.
Feeling clever?
(caveat: single quoted strings are from memory while at work using a PC, and may very well not be verbatim from the dialog)
The other respders have it right:
.dmg file (.dmg == disk image) and when you double click that it creates a virtual drive. (.dmg is very much like a cross between a zip and a self-mounting .iso file; its basically a downloadable virtual install CD. in fact it, again, is one of those "why don't PCs have that?" moments on the mac)
.dmg, then drag the firefox icon to the applications folder.
you'd downloaded a
To get the application installed, you double click to mount the
You double clicked the icon, which runs the program from its virtual drive. (yet ANOTHER "why don't PCs do this?" - being able to try out a new program WITHOUT installing it... and guess how hard running firefox from a USB stick is in OSX? thats right...)
Once installed, to get it in the dock (there is no "main menu", at least not that i've seen), go to the applications folder, and (guess what?) drag the icon to the dock. Job done.
To remove from the dock? drag off the dock.
To uninstall the app? drag from applications folder to the trash.
The snide part? Guess whether this is covered in the "welcome to your mac" pamphlet that comes with every mac... (hint: answer has 3 letters)
I have found, both with myself and others, that the learning curve of switching Windows->Mac is a curve of unlearning backwards ways of doing things you've simply gotten used to on Windows.
Most simple examples:
Where to find the "save changes" button on the system settings panels? There isn't one, it just makes the changes as you go.
How to install and uninstall (most) software? Drag and drop. Need to restart after an install or uninstall? No, in fact restarts are a monthly occurance at worst.
Its a learning curve, but its a curve to doing things much, much better. Its also a curve that has you smiling all the way up it, as repetetive boring tasks you had to do on your PC become easy, or simply obsolete.
"It's might be OK for the NSA to use who you call to establish close ties to a terrorist."
You just said its OK for the government to consider ALL CITIZENS as potential terrorists AT ALL TIMES.
Are you SURE thats "might be OK"?
You just threw presumprion of innocence out the window, without even realising what you did, didn't you?
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Get with the program!
Macs use both the "drag package to apps folder" and "run installer wizard" systems. The drag+drop is used for programs that don't need to install anything outside their own package (e.g. FTP clients etc) The second is used for programs that do need to install things elsewhere (off the top of my head... I think photoshop installs like this, certainly the bigger apple apps do, maybe even iTunes) If you are an admin account (or have that permission) you can just drag+drop with impunity, if you aren't given that control you are asked for an admin uid/pwd before teh drag+drop action can be done. The wizard style install ALWAYS requires an admin authentication before installing.
Excellent point: how many people think to question if its _really_ the credit card company calling you?
The answer: ask what the issue is, then hang up and call the company yourself to sort it out.
I've had phishing emails that were for the right bank: and even had the right address in it (except for the fact taht I moved from the address 2 years ago...)
Phishers are getting better, and I suspect they have friends within the banks.