You should get back into gaming. I think most people forget that there are SO many games out now that one doesn't have to waste 1 second on a game that is bad, has bad DRM (Ubi), etc. I have so many games picked up on a whim that the next 20 years are set for me. And that's after I go through my library and find a stinker and move on to the next. I haven't played 75% of my collection yet.
Try something different. Always play the same genre? Play something new.
I agree with you. I just posted on this a second ago:
"Look at GTA IV. Yes, it was a terribly coded, complete POS port. BUT my C2D can't run it. You need a I7 920 or better to even run it independent of one's GPU. But it runs fine on a 360 or PS3. But the reason being just what I said: they made great optimizations. And Oblivion/Fallout/Skyrim are similar in scope (vast persistent world with little loading in between), or the port of Crysis 1 for the 360/PS3 (a vast world with no loading in between). It all comes down to good optimizations. Hell, not saying it was a sim, but remember Pilotwings 64 for the N64? That was on totally archaic hardware."
But no one will do it. If it was financial viable for the target demographic of a console, they would have done it already. Eh, I'm just bitter because I want to play ArmA 2 and I can't (it's choppy even at low settings which leads me to believe my problem is CPU/RAM bound). Have an aging C2D and it's not enough. But I can't justify buying another system for 1 game when I can play everything else with my 8800 GTS 512 at almost max settings (yes there are exceptions, but I don't mind just turning down settings and I'm not playing BF3/Crysis 2 on the PC).
As it stands, no. But if it was designed for the 360, I bet you they could. Look at GTA IV. Yes, it was a terribly coded, complete POS port. BUT my C2D can't run it. You need a I7 920 or better to even run it independent of one's GPU. But it runs fine on a 360 or PS3. But the reason being just what I said: they made great optimizations. And Oblivion/Fallout/Skyrim are similar in scope (vast persistent world with little loading in between), or the port of Crysis 1 for the 360/PS3 (a vast world with no loading in between). It all comes down to good optimizations. Hell, not saying it was a sim, but remember Pilotwings 64 for the N64? That was on totally archaic hardware.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but don't count out good coding. But I'm with you, the days of good coding are gone. It will always be "throw hardware at it." And I don't think anyone will make a sim for the consoles. There is just not enough money in it for the target demographic from a business perspective.
I know! It really is amazing. And before I get any crap about being some paid schill, I was running Linux and FreeBSD web servers, and using Linux on the desktop, since 95-96 IIRC.
But anyway, there's a book called "Windows 7: Inside Out" by the old school guru Ed Bott (remember him?). It's a great read. It goes over so many features Windows has this current generation (by that I mean since Vista) that are just incredible. I stopped keeping up with OS happenings for a long time. A lot of stuff I was amazed is now done by Windows and not even done by any other OS period, and a lot of common practices are now different, but made better and no longer necessary. I can't even remember off the top of my head, it's been a while, but I was floored after reading 1/3 of the book. It goes into a lot of the under-the-hood and non-glitzy stuff, which is what people don't pay attention to and that's why they all think "blah blah blah lipstick on a pig" BS. But If you appreciate that kinda stuff, it's an amazing read.
Oh it's not an attitude. I've pretty much given up on users. They either are lazy, don't care, and don't want to learn. But that's not my fault. And in anything in life, there are consequences. It's not my fault that banking details/ID theft happened. It's theirs. Let them do what they want.
BUT, when I hear the same tired old FUD repeated over and over like my parent poster, and his post is read by people who don't know better and think that it's informative, I have a problem with it. Hence the reply. Don't forget, I've been reading since/.'s beginning. It's the same ol' BS.
And to the rest of your comments, I agree with you 100% on the lock down OS's part. It's probably the worst thing ever for us. I bought an Android Tablet a few months ago. I returned it. Why? I thought to myself, why am I learning all the workarounds to get the same things done as I do on a PC? So I returned it and went back to my PC. And this was Android which is miles ahead of iOS (I have an iPhone) in freedom, customizability, and tweakability*.
* For example, in Mobile Safari, if I want to view a simple webpage and force it to a non-mobile version, I can't. In android, the browser can't either, so I used mobile Firefox and with an add-on I set the browser ID and was able to view it in non-mobile. Ah, there's one btw! Apple would NEVER allow a browser with browser extensions, which are pretty much the most useful thing ever. I can't live without AdBlock and I can get it on Android Mobile Firefox. Yes iOS has Skyfire but there is no adblock, only the user agent thing.
Also did you know in iOS you can't even download something while doing something else? So say you are downloading a big PPT file and you're bored so you figure you can browse the web while waiting. Nope, you just downloaded 100 MB and it was killed at 86 MB. That's pathetic in the year 2012. We've had true multitasking in mass market OS's since 1995, and in NT and UNIX waaaay before that. So iOS is only 17 years behind. It's cooperative multitasking in MacOS in 1997 all over again./End Rant
A lot of what you say is very insightful. And you are right, keeping a system malware free really is work, and people are what they are: lazy, or don't care.
The best advice, and what I think most people don't understand, is that security is constant work and is a process. It's not a one-off solution.
I think your problem might be a case of simple PEBKAC.
I have a Vista install since 2007 still running as fast as when I installed it, with no errors or problems. Want to know how I achieved this amazing feat?
I didn't click on "punch the monkey" ads, blindly click through installers which would install 5,000 toolbars in my web browser, click on random emails, or install software from that nice russian/nigerian person in the email.
Wow, that was so hard.
As a side note, I wonder how the companies who install pre-loaded crapware will like this. I mean, one could always reformat from the manufacturers recovery cd, but how many people did that? Here, it's so gosh darn easy, EVERY tech site will recomend it to grandma and it'll be the first thing everyone does upon arrival.
Eh, don't even bother. I go back and forth on this, but I think the console is the place for non-mmo MP gaming.
On the PC, for dedicated servers on MP FPS's, you get admins aren't always diligent, most of the time you have to join a clan or do some sort of admittance or even wait it a queue on the good ones. As an adult, I have a 1 hour window on a weekday and maybe a few on the weekend to play. I don't want to work to get into some sort of social club, even if it only takes 5 minutes, to play. I want to be in and be out. If I happen to meet a few good teammates, great! I just save them to my friend's list. And all MP games now have auto-mute all. And MS/Sony have full-time dedicated teams to police the cheaters. Not just the 50% admins who do it for fun on the weekend. It solves most of the problems.
Don't get me wrong. I'm still floored to this day with what PC gaming and dedi-servers provide. The ability to custom make a MP match, *some* responsive admins who ban cheaters, the ability to provide long MP life for games after the console brethren MP rooms have long been empty, and the ability to competitively play FPS MP with weapons that JUST aren't auto's (just try to play BOps with a shotty or bolt 1-shot sniper rifle--you just can't aim quick and precise enough) is amazing.
I started getting into ArmA 2 for the PC. I was floored at how amazing MP can be. But it's freaking work to get a simple game. No more public PvP servers (yes I know it's a co-op game primarily, but I find co-op boring), many times you have to join clan (and that's exactly what I DON'T want to do) just to get a PvP game going, or at least spent a lot of time searching for one, or finding non-modded servers. It's a double edged sword.
If I could find something like ArmA 2 for the console, I'd never use my PC again. I heard about OP:DR, but I would imagine that console game's community is long gone. Anybody have any reccomendations--AAA or even an indie for the consoles?
Eh, I'm not so sure about dedicated servers anymore. Or FPS MP on the PC in general. Admins aren't always diligent, most of the time you have to join a clan or do some sort of admittance or even wait it a queue on the good ones. As an adult, I have a 1 hour window on a weekday and maybe a few on the weekend to play. I don't want to work to get into some sort of social club, even if it only takes 5 minutes, to play. I want to be in and be out. If I happen to meet a few good teammates, great! I just save them to my friend's list. And all MP games now have auto-mute all. And MS/Sony have full-time dedicated teams to police the cheaters. Not just the 50% admins who do it for fun on the weekend. It solves most of the problems.
Don't get me wrong. I'm still floored to this day with what PC gaming and dedi-servers provide. The ability to custom make a MP match, *some* responsive admins who ban cheaters, the ability to provide long MP life for games after the console brethren MP rooms have long been empty, and the ability to competitively play FPS MP with weapons that JUST aren't auto's (just try to play BOps with a shotty or bolt 1-shot sniper rifle--you just can't aim quick and precise enough) is amazing.
I started getting into ArmA 2. I was floored at how amazing MP can be. But it's freaking work to get a simple game. No more public PvP servers (yes I know it's a co-op game primarily, but I find co-op boring), many times you have to join clan (and that's exactly what I DON'T want to do) just to get a PvP game going, or at least spent a lot of time searching for one, or finding non-modded servers. It's a double edged sword.
If I could find something like ArmA 2 for the console, I'd never use my PC again. I heard about OP:DR, but I would imagine that console game's community is long gone.
It is is an option you know. At least BOps had it. I don't think it had a mute-all, but you could mute each person so easily. Took all of about 30 seconds. BF3 and Crysis 2 even had an auto-mute all function.
I do it every time. And I played TF2 back when it first came out (non-F2P). It had the same problems. They were just said by 15-21 year olds instead of 14 year olds lol.
DO: Support F2P games. Some have some pretty novel ideas (Planetside, APB). Not only that, but the budget of AAA games is unsustainable. Developers are going F2P route anyway for consistent and repeated revenue, plus the benefit of less initially developed up front and the ability to deliver episodic content that they can charge for. Not saying that F2P is the "one true future" but it will get bigger and will eventually be at least 20% of the market.
DO: Figure out a way to get past the HDMI 24 FPS limit (at 1080p--doesn't exist for 720p, but that's all console games right now). Not sure how this will work though. I think only PC's will give us 24+ FPS for the foreseeable future.
DO: Promote the use of streaming textures or introduce an easy API to do so (BF3, Rage). I have the PS3 version of BF3. For a console game, it has the best graphics I've ever seen. And it's not because of better geometry, it's because it is able to use higher res detailed textures, uncompressed and decoded on the fly.
DO: Include a BD format. Games are only going to get bigger due to the ability to deliver better and more geometry and textures and now lighting. BF3 for the PC is 20 GB, and that's meant for consoles too. Even MW3, just the PC multiplayer portion, is 14 GB. And that's a console port with shitty PC graphics.
DO: Support better downloadable game prices like Steam does. I don't care who you are, when you see BC2 for $5 on sale, even if you don't want it, you buy it.
DO: Support non-traditional games, *somehow.* I don't know how, that is why hardware makers are paid to figure it out. But for instance, I love the game ARMA 2. It's totally non-mainstream and would probably flop sales wise on the consoles*. Help them promote it somehow so they would release it. I can barely play it now because it really needs a quad core (I only have a dual core with a 8800 GTX 512). But I'd lay money down in a heartbeat for a next gen console that would play it. And as a side note, I'm not upgrading my PC because I just don't see major developers supporting the PC due to the money being on the consoles.
I actually wonder about something more important. The fact that even the shiniest, newest HDMI spec can't play 1080p faster than 24 FPS.
The only reason some games, like COD3, are doing 60 fps, is because they're displaying it at 720p. As a side note, pretty much *every* console game is going at 720p, so we don't notice it.
Even with the more powerful hardware, I don't know how MS/Sony are going to get around this. I can't imagine 24 FPS will come across, or how consumers will like it.
In theory, it's fantastic. Cloud rendering, which future games will use because hardware reqs will get so high. I actually use OnLive games. It actually is fantastic, and worked better than I ever though it would.
BUT.
For FPS's or games that require quick reflexes, as good as it is, even on a wired ethernet connection and even no router to inctroduce packet latency, sometimes it just drives u bonkers and isn't fluid or better--predictable movement.
It's great for RPG, strategy, MMO, and slow paced platformers. Forget FPS or 3rd person shooters (GoW, not slow ones like Dead Space). And I thought Homefront would be amazing. It is, but after a while multiplayer FPS on OnLive grates at you.
I think you're right. See, what I see coming is that the next gen will require even greater amount of textures (both in resolution and amount due to increased geometry) and hence the size increase. Already BF3 is pushing 20 GB on the PC, and that's for a game designed for the consoles. Even COD:MW3, just for the multiplayer, is like 14GB. That's for a poor PC console port with terrible graphics. The only reason PC games are kept at around 9-14 GB right now is that they're console ports. You would think it would move to digital distribution, but I don't think it will. Not for AAA games. India and F2P's, yes though.
Hey Slashdotters, looks like we've been trolled again! After that story that just was released about Android having supposedly crappier apps a couple days ago. This is just garbage. And for the past few months, I can't seem to mod these stories down.
I think the Apple schills/PR machine is turning on their control of the tech media even more (releasing thinly veiled "news stories"), because they can't realize they can win on features/openness/technical merit. I mean geez, they knock android, but don't even mention that the iPhone 4 can't even make *simple calls* properly* (read: antennagate)?
I think my days of "Chips and Dip" are over. I'm thinking it's time to retire the old UID.
On a more serious note, this article should have been put in the Firehose. We've all just been trolled by this garbage. Most smartphone apps, regardless of platform, are crap. I have an iPhone. I'd venture to say that most apps that aren't games are:
1) Buggy and crash
2) Have majorly stripped down features or no features at all to make it worthless. For example: the Myspace app or the Google Voice app. They're simple web services, and therefore should easily be transported to a smartphone with all the features. Yet with the apps *you can't even do a simple delete a message or change an option in the settings.*
Honestly I've come to the conclusion that apps (unless they're good productivity ones like Google Maps, Apple Mail, or DataViz office thing) aren't the revolutionary useful thing they're touted, but just plain time wasters. Look at that article on Techcrunch recently. Like 72% of apps people use were games and social network apps. Only 9 percent were productivity that did anything.
Apps are the new "screw around with cuz im bored" crap.
I did the same thing. Just did it. Was switching carriers. Had an iPhone. Was going to get a new 4G Android phone because I hate latency (4G is almost at local wireless router latency times) and slow download speed. 4G is the one truly useful feature to come out since the smartphone. But anyway, I thought about it for a few weeks. I read online journals, text, and call on my smartphone. On the rare occasion I use Google Maps. Coming from using computers since '92-93, nothing is more refreshing than using crappy, slim-featured, buggy apps on a small screen and then going back to a nice 22" monitor on a desktop with a great designed mouse and mechanical keyboard. Aaah.
So I said u know what, f* it. I'd rather just use a desktop when I need it, or not use a computer at all. If I need to kill time, I'll bring a magazine or book (I know! Heh crazy right?:-) ). Besides, even though I love reading them for 30 min in the morning everyday, most tech news sites are just garbage. I'm probably better off.
The only exception is Pandora. That's freakin awesome. But since I get no cell reception in my gym anyway, I'd need a mp3 with local storage anyway, so might as well just get a cheapo mp3 player for the few hours in a week I need it. Why get a smartphone and the associated extra $360/year it entails.
Neither. Actually I'd choose the FB guy. He's the lesser of two evils. It just seems that anytime I meet/see a guy in real life who uses a iPhone he's a d-bag. Actually almost always.
Women it doesn't seem to be the case. I think they like it just because it looks "cute."
I'm glad they're doing it. I wish more would do it too. I've been using a 3GS for a year now. I find that while the Apps have superior performance over a cell connection, that's about it. Most apps are so poorly designed, so buggy, and lack so many features, there's just no point. At least with a mobile web site things follow mostly standard web browsing methodologies and don't crash left and right. And honestly, I'm at the point where I don't even use mobile sites anymore. It may be a PITA to view the entire full normal web page and constantly be zooming around, but at this point I'd rather do that to get all the functionality.
Actually, the more and more I think of it, feel free to keep thinking that a 10-year-old, massively complex OS is adequate. You and your money will be parted by some kind of easy silly security breach. Which will keep the crooks only looking for stupid low-hanging fruit like you, instead of getting more sophisticated and targeted people like me who are intelligent enough to know that no matter what the OS, 10 years is a long time for better security design and some great and useful computing enhancements.
Slashdot Mirror
You should get back into gaming. I think most people forget that there are SO many games out now that one doesn't have to waste 1 second on a game that is bad, has bad DRM (Ubi), etc. I have so many games picked up on a whim that the next 20 years are set for me. And that's after I go through my library and find a stinker and move on to the next. I haven't played 75% of my collection yet.
Try something different. Always play the same genre? Play something new.
I agree with you. I just posted on this a second ago:
"Look at GTA IV. Yes, it was a terribly coded, complete POS port. BUT my C2D can't run it. You need a I7 920 or better to even run it independent of one's GPU. But it runs fine on a 360 or PS3. But the reason being just what I said: they made great optimizations. And Oblivion/Fallout/Skyrim are similar in scope (vast persistent world with little loading in between), or the port of Crysis 1 for the 360/PS3 (a vast world with no loading in between). It all comes down to good optimizations. Hell, not saying it was a sim, but remember Pilotwings 64 for the N64? That was on totally archaic hardware."
But no one will do it. If it was financial viable for the target demographic of a console, they would have done it already. Eh, I'm just bitter because I want to play ArmA 2 and I can't (it's choppy even at low settings which leads me to believe my problem is CPU/RAM bound). Have an aging C2D and it's not enough. But I can't justify buying another system for 1 game when I can play everything else with my 8800 GTS 512 at almost max settings (yes there are exceptions, but I don't mind just turning down settings and I'm not playing BF3/Crysis 2 on the PC).
As it stands, no. But if it was designed for the 360, I bet you they could. Look at GTA IV. Yes, it was a terribly coded, complete POS port. BUT my C2D can't run it. You need a I7 920 or better to even run it independent of one's GPU. But it runs fine on a 360 or PS3. But the reason being just what I said: they made great optimizations. And Oblivion/Fallout/Skyrim are similar in scope (vast persistent world with little loading in between), or the port of Crysis 1 for the 360/PS3 (a vast world with no loading in between). It all comes down to good optimizations. Hell, not saying it was a sim, but remember Pilotwings 64 for the N64? That was on totally archaic hardware.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but don't count out good coding. But I'm with you, the days of good coding are gone. It will always be "throw hardware at it." And I don't think anyone will make a sim for the consoles. There is just not enough money in it for the target demographic from a business perspective.
I know! It really is amazing. And before I get any crap about being some paid schill, I was running Linux and FreeBSD web servers, and using Linux on the desktop, since 95-96 IIRC.
But anyway, there's a book called "Windows 7: Inside Out" by the old school guru Ed Bott (remember him?). It's a great read. It goes over so many features Windows has this current generation (by that I mean since Vista) that are just incredible. I stopped keeping up with OS happenings for a long time. A lot of stuff I was amazed is now done by Windows and not even done by any other OS period, and a lot of common practices are now different, but made better and no longer necessary. I can't even remember off the top of my head, it's been a while, but I was floored after reading 1/3 of the book. It goes into a lot of the under-the-hood and non-glitzy stuff, which is what people don't pay attention to and that's why they all think "blah blah blah lipstick on a pig" BS. But If you appreciate that kinda stuff, it's an amazing read.
Oh it's not an attitude. I've pretty much given up on users. They either are lazy, don't care, and don't want to learn. But that's not my fault. And in anything in life, there are consequences. It's not my fault that banking details/ID theft happened. It's theirs. Let them do what they want.
BUT, when I hear the same tired old FUD repeated over and over like my parent poster, and his post is read by people who don't know better and think that it's informative, I have a problem with it. Hence the reply. Don't forget, I've been reading since /.'s beginning. It's the same ol' BS.
And to the rest of your comments, I agree with you 100% on the lock down OS's part. It's probably the worst thing ever for us. I bought an Android Tablet a few months ago. I returned it. Why? I thought to myself, why am I learning all the workarounds to get the same things done as I do on a PC? So I returned it and went back to my PC. And this was Android which is miles ahead of iOS (I have an iPhone) in freedom, customizability, and tweakability*.
* For example, in Mobile Safari, if I want to view a simple webpage and force it to a non-mobile version, I can't. In android, the browser can't either, so I used mobile Firefox and with an add-on I set the browser ID and was able to view it in non-mobile. Ah, there's one btw! Apple would NEVER allow a browser with browser extensions, which are pretty much the most useful thing ever. I can't live without AdBlock and I can get it on Android Mobile Firefox. Yes iOS has Skyfire but there is no adblock, only the user agent thing.
Also did you know in iOS you can't even download something while doing something else? So say you are downloading a big PPT file and you're bored so you figure you can browse the web while waiting. Nope, you just downloaded 100 MB and it was killed at 86 MB. That's pathetic in the year 2012. We've had true multitasking in mass market OS's since 1995, and in NT and UNIX waaaay before that. So iOS is only 17 years behind. It's cooperative multitasking in MacOS in 1997 all over again. /End Rant
A lot of what you say is very insightful. And you are right, keeping a system malware free really is work, and people are what they are: lazy, or don't care.
The best advice, and what I think most people don't understand, is that security is constant work and is a process. It's not a one-off solution.
Why is this modded down? How is it either flamebait or a troll comment? And it's definitely not offtopic as it was a reply to COD's dedicated servers.
Lame.
So they tell you.
Over the years I've found that it's just a simple case of not wanting to make themselves look stupid. You are right, to a degree. There are:
- 0 days (except they pretty much don't get around for a few weeks and unless you're dumb and don't patch every tuesday it won't get to you in time)
- Worms (except with a firewall you're pretty much immune unless it connects via port 80 which IIRC can it even?)
The remaining primary attack vector is actual user-space software like web browsers, adobe pdf, quicktime. Which isn't Windows fault now is it?
So yeah, I'd be willing to bet, again, that *minimum* 70% of them simply told a white lie to not look stupid.
I think your problem might be a case of simple PEBKAC.
I have a Vista install since 2007 still running as fast as when I installed it, with no errors or problems. Want to know how I achieved this amazing feat?
I didn't click on "punch the monkey" ads, blindly click through installers which would install 5,000 toolbars in my web browser, click on random emails, or install software from that nice russian/nigerian person in the email.
Wow, that was so hard.
As a side note, I wonder how the companies who install pre-loaded crapware will like this. I mean, one could always reformat from the manufacturers recovery cd, but how many people did that? Here, it's so gosh darn easy, EVERY tech site will recomend it to grandma and it'll be the first thing everyone does upon arrival.
Eh, don't even bother. I go back and forth on this, but I think the console is the place for non-mmo MP gaming.
On the PC, for dedicated servers on MP FPS's, you get admins aren't always diligent, most of the time you have to join a clan or do some sort of admittance or even wait it a queue on the good ones. As an adult, I have a 1 hour window on a weekday and maybe a few on the weekend to play. I don't want to work to get into some sort of social club, even if it only takes 5 minutes, to play. I want to be in and be out. If I happen to meet a few good teammates, great! I just save them to my friend's list. And all MP games now have auto-mute all. And MS/Sony have full-time dedicated teams to police the cheaters. Not just the 50% admins who do it for fun on the weekend. It solves most of the problems.
Don't get me wrong. I'm still floored to this day with what PC gaming and dedi-servers provide. The ability to custom make a MP match, *some* responsive admins who ban cheaters, the ability to provide long MP life for games after the console brethren MP rooms have long been empty, and the ability to competitively play FPS MP with weapons that JUST aren't auto's (just try to play BOps with a shotty or bolt 1-shot sniper rifle--you just can't aim quick and precise enough) is amazing.
I started getting into ArmA 2 for the PC. I was floored at how amazing MP can be. But it's freaking work to get a simple game. No more public PvP servers (yes I know it's a co-op game primarily, but I find co-op boring), many times you have to join clan (and that's exactly what I DON'T want to do) just to get a PvP game going, or at least spent a lot of time searching for one, or finding non-modded servers. It's a double edged sword.
If I could find something like ArmA 2 for the console, I'd never use my PC again. I heard about OP:DR, but I would imagine that console game's community is long gone. Anybody have any reccomendations--AAA or even an indie for the consoles?
Eh, I'm not so sure about dedicated servers anymore. Or FPS MP on the PC in general. Admins aren't always diligent, most of the time you have to join a clan or do some sort of admittance or even wait it a queue on the good ones. As an adult, I have a 1 hour window on a weekday and maybe a few on the weekend to play. I don't want to work to get into some sort of social club, even if it only takes 5 minutes, to play. I want to be in and be out. If I happen to meet a few good teammates, great! I just save them to my friend's list. And all MP games now have auto-mute all. And MS/Sony have full-time dedicated teams to police the cheaters. Not just the 50% admins who do it for fun on the weekend. It solves most of the problems.
Don't get me wrong. I'm still floored to this day with what PC gaming and dedi-servers provide. The ability to custom make a MP match, *some* responsive admins who ban cheaters, the ability to provide long MP life for games after the console brethren MP rooms have long been empty, and the ability to competitively play FPS MP with weapons that JUST aren't auto's (just try to play BOps with a shotty or bolt 1-shot sniper rifle--you just can't aim quick and precise enough) is amazing.
I started getting into ArmA 2. I was floored at how amazing MP can be. But it's freaking work to get a simple game. No more public PvP servers (yes I know it's a co-op game primarily, but I find co-op boring), many times you have to join clan (and that's exactly what I DON'T want to do) just to get a PvP game going, or at least spent a lot of time searching for one, or finding non-modded servers. It's a double edged sword.
If I could find something like ArmA 2 for the console, I'd never use my PC again. I heard about OP:DR, but I would imagine that console game's community is long gone.
Mute.
So hard.
It is is an option you know. At least BOps had it. I don't think it had a mute-all, but you could mute each person so easily. Took all of about 30 seconds. BF3 and Crysis 2 even had an auto-mute all function.
I do it every time. And I played TF2 back when it first came out (non-F2P). It had the same problems. They were just said by 15-21 year olds instead of 14 year olds lol.
Additional:
DO: Support F2P games. Some have some pretty novel ideas (Planetside, APB). Not only that, but the budget of AAA games is unsustainable. Developers are going F2P route anyway for consistent and repeated revenue, plus the benefit of less initially developed up front and the ability to deliver episodic content that they can charge for. Not saying that F2P is the "one true future" but it will get bigger and will eventually be at least 20% of the market.
DO: Figure out a way to get past the HDMI 24 FPS limit (at 1080p--doesn't exist for 720p, but that's all console games right now). Not sure how this will work though. I think only PC's will give us 24+ FPS for the foreseeable future.
DO: Promote the use of streaming textures or introduce an easy API to do so (BF3, Rage). I have the PS3 version of BF3. For a console game, it has the best graphics I've ever seen. And it's not because of better geometry, it's because it is able to use higher res detailed textures, uncompressed and decoded on the fly.
DO: Include a BD format. Games are only going to get bigger due to the ability to deliver better and more geometry and textures and now lighting. BF3 for the PC is 20 GB, and that's meant for consoles too. Even MW3, just the PC multiplayer portion, is 14 GB. And that's a console port with shitty PC graphics.
DO: Support better downloadable game prices like Steam does. I don't care who you are, when you see BC2 for $5 on sale, even if you don't want it, you buy it.
DO: Support non-traditional games, *somehow.* I don't know how, that is why hardware makers are paid to figure it out. But for instance, I love the game ARMA 2. It's totally non-mainstream and would probably flop sales wise on the consoles*. Help them promote it somehow so they would release it. I can barely play it now because it really needs a quad core (I only have a dual core with a 8800 GTX 512). But I'd lay money down in a heartbeat for a next gen console that would play it. And as a side note, I'm not upgrading my PC because I just don't see major developers supporting the PC due to the money being on the consoles.
* And yes ARMA 2 can be played with a controller!
I actually wonder about something more important. The fact that even the shiniest, newest HDMI spec can't play 1080p faster than 24 FPS.
The only reason some games, like COD3, are doing 60 fps, is because they're displaying it at 720p. As a side note, pretty much *every* console game is going at 720p, so we don't notice it.
Even with the more powerful hardware, I don't know how MS/Sony are going to get around this. I can't imagine 24 FPS will come across, or how consumers will like it.
Streaming, ala OnLive, won't do it.
In theory, it's fantastic. Cloud rendering, which future games will use because hardware reqs will get so high. I actually use OnLive games. It actually is fantastic, and worked better than I ever though it would.
BUT.
For FPS's or games that require quick reflexes, as good as it is, even on a wired ethernet connection and even no router to inctroduce packet latency, sometimes it just drives u bonkers and isn't fluid or better--predictable movement.
It's great for RPG, strategy, MMO, and slow paced platformers. Forget FPS or 3rd person shooters (GoW, not slow ones like Dead Space). And I thought Homefront would be amazing. It is, but after a while multiplayer FPS on OnLive grates at you.
I think you're right. See, what I see coming is that the next gen will require even greater amount of textures (both in resolution and amount due to increased geometry) and hence the size increase. Already BF3 is pushing 20 GB on the PC, and that's for a game designed for the consoles. Even COD:MW3, just for the multiplayer, is like 14GB. That's for a poor PC console port with terrible graphics. The only reason PC games are kept at around 9-14 GB right now is that they're console ports. You would think it would move to digital distribution, but I don't think it will. Not for AAA games. India and F2P's, yes though.
That's really scary. Holy moly.
Hey Slashdotters, looks like we've been trolled again! After that story that just was released about Android having supposedly crappier apps a couple days ago. This is just garbage. And for the past few months, I can't seem to mod these stories down.
I think the Apple schills/PR machine is turning on their control of the tech media even more (releasing thinly veiled "news stories"), because they can't realize they can win on features/openness/technical merit. I mean geez, they knock android, but don't even mention that the iPhone 4 can't even make *simple calls* properly* (read: antennagate)?
I think my days of "Chips and Dip" are over. I'm thinking it's time to retire the old UID.
Hah ain't it the truth.
On a more serious note, this article should have been put in the Firehose. We've all just been trolled by this garbage. Most smartphone apps, regardless of platform, are crap. I have an iPhone. I'd venture to say that most apps that aren't games are:
1) Buggy and crash
2) Have majorly stripped down features or no features at all to make it worthless. For example: the Myspace app or the Google Voice app. They're simple web services, and therefore should easily be transported to a smartphone with all the features. Yet with the apps *you can't even do a simple delete a message or change an option in the settings.*
Honestly I've come to the conclusion that apps (unless they're good productivity ones like Google Maps, Apple Mail, or DataViz office thing) aren't the revolutionary useful thing they're touted, but just plain time wasters. Look at that article on Techcrunch recently. Like 72% of apps people use were games and social network apps. Only 9 percent were productivity that did anything.
Apps are the new "screw around with cuz im bored" crap.
I did the same thing. Just did it. Was switching carriers. Had an iPhone. Was going to get a new 4G Android phone because I hate latency (4G is almost at local wireless router latency times) and slow download speed. 4G is the one truly useful feature to come out since the smartphone. But anyway, I thought about it for a few weeks. I read online journals, text, and call on my smartphone. On the rare occasion I use Google Maps. Coming from using computers since '92-93, nothing is more refreshing than using crappy, slim-featured, buggy apps on a small screen and then going back to a nice 22" monitor on a desktop with a great designed mouse and mechanical keyboard. Aaah.
So I said u know what, f* it. I'd rather just use a desktop when I need it, or not use a computer at all. If I need to kill time, I'll bring a magazine or book (I know! Heh crazy right? :-) ). Besides, even though I love reading them for 30 min in the morning everyday, most tech news sites are just garbage. I'm probably better off.
The only exception is Pandora. That's freakin awesome. But since I get no cell reception in my gym anyway, I'd need a mp3 with local storage anyway, so might as well just get a cheapo mp3 player for the few hours in a week I need it. Why get a smartphone and the associated extra $360/year it entails.
Apple: "Flash sucks. Apps are superior. Make it HTML5 if you got a problem."
Facebook: "We've just released a superior HTML5 version."
FB gets ad revenue and has games with corresponding revenue in HTML5 version and Apple gets no cut
Apple: "HTML5 sucks. Apps are superior."
Fanboys: "HTML sucks now! Apps are superior!"
Lather, rinse, repeat. How much you wanna bet this happens within a year or two?
Thank god Android won't ever have that problem. ;-)
Neither. Actually I'd choose the FB guy. He's the lesser of two evils. It just seems that anytime I meet/see a guy in real life who uses a iPhone he's a d-bag. Actually almost always.
Women it doesn't seem to be the case. I think they like it just because it looks "cute."
I'd take the FB'er over the D-bag anyday.
I'm glad they're doing it. I wish more would do it too. I've been using a 3GS for a year now. I find that while the Apps have superior performance over a cell connection, that's about it. Most apps are so poorly designed, so buggy, and lack so many features, there's just no point. At least with a mobile web site things follow mostly standard web browsing methodologies and don't crash left and right. And honestly, I'm at the point where I don't even use mobile sites anymore. It may be a PITA to view the entire full normal web page and constantly be zooming around, but at this point I'd rather do that to get all the functionality.
Actually, the more and more I think of it, feel free to keep thinking that a 10-year-old, massively complex OS is adequate. You and your money will be parted by some kind of easy silly security breach. Which will keep the crooks only looking for stupid low-hanging fruit like you, instead of getting more sophisticated and targeted people like me who are intelligent enough to know that no matter what the OS, 10 years is a long time for better security design and some great and useful computing enhancements.