Why? Modding already exists for that purpose. The game industry has already solved that problem on their own, they don't need open source to come up with an alternate, shittier solution.
For one thing, modding lets artists and designers work with finished, modern games engines. Whereas your open source solution would involve them digging around in source code for months or years before they could even start on the actual game.
Who's more valuable to a games developer? Someone with an intimate knowledge of the Unreal engine/scripting engine, including sound, physics, and AI? Or someone who's built yet another half-done open source clone of Quake III?
Shitty's a little extreme, but I'm all behind mediocre. If I were playing that game in, say, 1996, then I think it'd be better... now it's just kind of yawn.
Who murdered a completely innocent Vietnam veteran.
I have no idea how it's so easy for people to forget that this guy is a terrorist and a murderer. I don't give a shit what tax laws he mentioned in his letter.
The only way to pass legislation with a clause like that is to amend the Constitution to allow it. Unfortunately, the Constitution has become something of a holy book recently, no politicians have brought up amendment in decades. I mean, the whole point of the document is that it's "living", that is, as society changes it's supposed to change to keep up.
Any bill passed with this clause, but without amending the Constitution to allow it, will be struck down sooner or later. Even the most activist judge can't pretend that it's not unconstitutional.
I always found the idea of having a party of characters that somehow all stood on the same spot and moved as a single unit quite strange. It was difficult to think of it as an actual group of people, maybe more appropriate some sort of bizarre shapeshifter "FORM OF... A RANGER!".
Wiz 8 tried to get around this by having the little mini-map showing where your characters were in relation to each other. You could re-position, or re-orient your characters at any time. When it did some combat mechanics, it took this into account-- for example if you have a character facing backwards, you can't get jumped from behind. Also if you have, say, an archer behind a warrior, and the archer gets blinded or confused, they are very likely to hit the warrior by accident.
Of course the viewpoint was still first-person, but there's not much they can do about that, not with that technology level. Now I suppose you could just render the whole game in third-person...
My main problem with Oblivion was that the world was so homogeneous compared to Morrowind. It just felt *small*. Morrowind, despite it's earlier engine, manages to have more striking scenery. I'd go so far as to call it beautiful.
The smartest thing Morrowind did was set the game on an island. So you never run into a situation where you're walking through a forest and suddenly you hit a point where the game just said, "You can't go that way." That made Oblivion's world feel small, even though it's actually larger than Morrowind's. The first time I hit that in Oblivion, it was just like... "really, Bethestha? Really? Way to destroy the last 3 hours of immersion." Despite that, I still think Oblivion is the superior game, and I play it all the time.
I'm from Germany getting lambasted by a grammar Nazi.
Ouch. Just typing the word "Nazi" probably has the police on their way.
I'll try especially hard not to fuck up from now on, just for you.
Aw, thanks. I feel like we have a special relationship going. I hope the police let you write me letters from "Mentioning Nazis" prison.
I'd mention that this situation isn't really irony except in the Alanis Morissette sense of the word, but that would probably just get you into more trouble.
I could see that, if you haven't played other Wizardry games. It kind of stands out (for me at least) as being one of the last "old-school" computer-RPGs. The problem is that by the time it came out, I think most people had moved on gameplay-wise and weren't interested in that anymore. I miss the genre... Oblivion tries, kind of, but it just doesn't work without a party.
There's also the issue that it was kind of rushed due to Sirtech's going out of business towards the end of the game's development. But the 1.2.4 patch is fine.
Yah. Just yesterday I installed Wizardry 8 on my Windows 7 PC-- worked like a champ, first try, all I had to do is set compatibility mode to "Windows 2000". That game originally came out in November, 2001.
I doubt *any* software written for Mac in 2001 still runs on Snow Leopard on a modern Mac, frankly. In fact, I can nearly guarantee it-- since the Classic layer is gone for x86 Macs, and everything released in 2001 would be written for Classic. (I guess if you're lucky enough to have a PPC Mac, you could in theory run software from 2001 in it.)
I just wish Microsoft's record of backwards compatibility on the Xbox was as good as on the PC. Their backwards compatibility toolkit for the Xbox 360 supports a lot of original Xbox games, but there's still a large number of games that simply will not run.:( But I guess as long as I can get my Panzer Dragoon Orta fix, I'm ok.
You're making shit up. Of course Microsoft had proof, otherwise how could they convince a judge to write this order? And if there was no proof, blame lies squarely at the court who issued the order with no backing.
What makes you say there was no proof? Do you have special knowledge of the case that the rest of us don't?
If someone is selling pirated versions of Microsoft products, and Microsoft has enough evidence to convince a judge, then yes-- I will be cheering. Why wouldn't I?
It saves consumers from getting ripped-off, and it shuts down some scumbag. Win-win, as far as I'm concerned.
It has an OpenGL mode for Mac OS X, but it runs much slower than the Windows version on equivalent hardware.
It also doesn't help that WOW's game engine is like 5 years old, and even when the game came out it *looked* 3 years old. It's simply not an impressive engine visually. Even when it came out, Everquest 2 (which came out within a month) looked leaps and bounds better. So even if its OpenGL support was on-par, I wouldn't use it as an example.
There's actually quite a few. I won't post the list, since someone else already has. But good attempt, Anonymous Coward.
OpenGL has a history of supporting MORE features than D3D via vendor extensions.
That's exactly the problem.
Compare that to the DirectX situation where Microsoft basically says, "your card WILL support this feature" to ensure that every card of the same generation supports (basically) the same featureset. (Thus advertising DX10 cards, or DX9 cards.) Easier on video card makers, easier on consumers, easier on developers.
What this means is:
1) There's less incentive for the video card maker to bother writing their OpenGL extensions, since the majority of their market is in games and the majority of games don't use OpenGL. The CAD market is still large enough for OpenGL to be well-supported, but a card maker saying, "fuck it, this costs too much and doesn't earn us crap" is a definite risk.
2) Developers need multiple code-paths to support the latest video card features, at least for the 4-5 years until the OpenGL standard catches up. (If it ever does.) Thus their rendering code is twice as buggy, needs much more testing than when using DirectX. You also need more boilerplate code to find alternatives if a feature *isn't* supposed by the card, which is something DirectX will do for you automatically.
And I doubt OpenGL is not suited to fast game-style graphics rendering, because GAMES ON OSes OTHER THAN WINDOWS EXIST. See Halo on Mac, Everything Blizzard on the Mac, Quake 4, etc.
The only reason games exist on the Mac is because Bungie and Blizzard did tons of work reproducing the stuff that the DirectX libraries give Windows developers for free. They soon fell into disuse and were removed from the OS. Apple has approximately zero interest in encouraging game developers to their platform, they're only there by pure luck.
I honestly don't know the answer to this question, but bear with me... it might sound trollish.
Isn't Italy part of the EU, and doesn't the EU have any kind of free speech legislation that would allow something like this to be posted? Or are those directives non-binding?
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Modding already exists for that purpose. The game industry has already solved that problem on their own, they don't need open source to come up with an alternate, shittier solution.
For one thing, modding lets artists and designers work with finished, modern games engines. Whereas your open source solution would involve them digging around in source code for months or years before they could even start on the actual game.
Who's more valuable to a games developer? Someone with an intimate knowledge of the Unreal engine/scripting engine, including sound, physics, and AI? Or someone who's built yet another half-done open source clone of Quake III?
I don't mind that they're clones. I just mind that so many Linux users claim they're original in threads around here.
It's extremely derivative of the Warlords series of games: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warlords_(game_series)
And for the record, since it's often mentioned in threads like this, Frozen Bubble is a total clone of Bust-A-Move: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puzzle_Bobble
So now you know.
Shitty's a little extreme, but I'm all behind mediocre. If I were playing that game in, say, 1996, then I think it'd be better... now it's just kind of yawn.
I'm sorry we insulted your little pet project.
yeah yeah, I can 'suspend' but none of that junk ever works properly on WinTel.
Yah it does. Unless your computer's defective. If it's defective, take it back and get one that works.
Seriously, suspend/hibernate is a solved problem for the last decade. When's the last time you tried it? Windows 98?
Who murdered a completely innocent Vietnam veteran.
I have no idea how it's so easy for people to forget that this guy is a terrorist and a murderer. I don't give a shit what tax laws he mentioned in his letter.
The only way to pass legislation with a clause like that is to amend the Constitution to allow it. Unfortunately, the Constitution has become something of a holy book recently, no politicians have brought up amendment in decades. I mean, the whole point of the document is that it's "living", that is, as society changes it's supposed to change to keep up.
Any bill passed with this clause, but without amending the Constitution to allow it, will be struck down sooner or later. Even the most activist judge can't pretend that it's not unconstitutional.
Except there's no real evidence that this happened at all. We just have to take their word for it, apparently...
Yah. It's known as a "joke."
Thank you, though, you humorless pedantic asshole.
I always found the idea of having a party of characters that somehow all stood on the same spot and moved as a single unit quite strange. It was difficult to think of it as an actual group of people, maybe more appropriate some sort of bizarre shapeshifter "FORM OF... A RANGER!".
Wiz 8 tried to get around this by having the little mini-map showing where your characters were in relation to each other. You could re-position, or re-orient your characters at any time. When it did some combat mechanics, it took this into account-- for example if you have a character facing backwards, you can't get jumped from behind. Also if you have, say, an archer behind a warrior, and the archer gets blinded or confused, they are very likely to hit the warrior by accident.
Of course the viewpoint was still first-person, but there's not much they can do about that, not with that technology level. Now I suppose you could just render the whole game in third-person...
My main problem with Oblivion was that the world was so homogeneous compared to Morrowind. It just felt *small*. Morrowind, despite it's earlier engine, manages to have more striking scenery. I'd go so far as to call it beautiful.
The smartest thing Morrowind did was set the game on an island. So you never run into a situation where you're walking through a forest and suddenly you hit a point where the game just said, "You can't go that way." That made Oblivion's world feel small, even though it's actually larger than Morrowind's. The first time I hit that in Oblivion, it was just like... "really, Bethestha? Really? Way to destroy the last 3 hours of immersion." Despite that, I still think Oblivion is the superior game, and I play it all the time.
I'm from Germany getting lambasted by a grammar Nazi.
Ouch. Just typing the word "Nazi" probably has the police on their way.
I'll try especially hard not to fuck up from now on, just for you.
Aw, thanks. I feel like we have a special relationship going. I hope the police let you write me letters from "Mentioning Nazis" prison.
I'd mention that this situation isn't really irony except in the Alanis Morissette sense of the word, but that would probably just get you into more trouble.
I could see that, if you haven't played other Wizardry games. It kind of stands out (for me at least) as being one of the last "old-school" computer-RPGs. The problem is that by the time it came out, I think most people had moved on gameplay-wise and weren't interested in that anymore. I miss the genre... Oblivion tries, kind of, but it just doesn't work without a party.
There's also the issue that it was kind of rushed due to Sirtech's going out of business towards the end of the game's development. But the 1.2.4 patch is fine.
I've seen "rediculous" enough times now that I don't even give it a second look. But "desaster!" That's a new one. Kudos.
Where are you people even finding a web browser without an integrated spell-checker these days?
I'd say, "who gives a fuck? Quake 3 sucked. When will Unreal Tournament be available?"
Yah. Just yesterday I installed Wizardry 8 on my Windows 7 PC-- worked like a champ, first try, all I had to do is set compatibility mode to "Windows 2000". That game originally came out in November, 2001.
I doubt *any* software written for Mac in 2001 still runs on Snow Leopard on a modern Mac, frankly. In fact, I can nearly guarantee it-- since the Classic layer is gone for x86 Macs, and everything released in 2001 would be written for Classic. (I guess if you're lucky enough to have a PPC Mac, you could in theory run software from 2001 in it.)
I just wish Microsoft's record of backwards compatibility on the Xbox was as good as on the PC. Their backwards compatibility toolkit for the Xbox 360 supports a lot of original Xbox games, but there's still a large number of games that simply will not run. :( But I guess as long as I can get my Panzer Dragoon Orta fix, I'm ok.
You're making shit up. Of course Microsoft had proof, otherwise how could they convince a judge to write this order? And if there was no proof, blame lies squarely at the court who issued the order with no backing.
What makes you say there was no proof? Do you have special knowledge of the case that the rest of us don't?
Or are you just a paranoid kook making shit up?
If someone is selling pirated versions of Microsoft products, and Microsoft has enough evidence to convince a judge, then yes-- I will be cheering. Why wouldn't I?
It saves consumers from getting ripped-off, and it shuts down some scumbag. Win-win, as far as I'm concerned.
In the US, you can only write-off money donated to charity, not labor.
So if you give the LUG $500, you can write it off. If you spend a couple days making their website, you can't.
Ah, there's the bad analogies we all know and love!
It has much more to do with people becoming perverts or furries.
http://raptorsafari.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-Road_Velociraptor_Safari
Raptor Safari!!!
It doesn't look like a current generation game, but it's fun as hell. I'm not sure what 3D plug-in it uses.
Ah crap, it looks like they moved the online version to Facebook... bah.
WOW is a bad example.
It has an OpenGL mode for Mac OS X, but it runs much slower than the Windows version on equivalent hardware.
It also doesn't help that WOW's game engine is like 5 years old, and even when the game came out it *looked* 3 years old. It's simply not an impressive engine visually. Even when it came out, Everquest 2 (which came out within a month) looked leaps and bounds better. So even if its OpenGL support was on-par, I wouldn't use it as an example.
What features in D3D doesn't OpenGL support?
There's actually quite a few. I won't post the list, since someone else already has. But good attempt, Anonymous Coward.
OpenGL has a history of supporting MORE features than D3D via vendor extensions.
That's exactly the problem.
Compare that to the DirectX situation where Microsoft basically says, "your card WILL support this feature" to ensure that every card of the same generation supports (basically) the same featureset. (Thus advertising DX10 cards, or DX9 cards.) Easier on video card makers, easier on consumers, easier on developers.
What this means is:
1) There's less incentive for the video card maker to bother writing their OpenGL extensions, since the majority of their market is in games and the majority of games don't use OpenGL. The CAD market is still large enough for OpenGL to be well-supported, but a card maker saying, "fuck it, this costs too much and doesn't earn us crap" is a definite risk.
2) Developers need multiple code-paths to support the latest video card features, at least for the 4-5 years until the OpenGL standard catches up. (If it ever does.) Thus their rendering code is twice as buggy, needs much more testing than when using DirectX. You also need more boilerplate code to find alternatives if a feature *isn't* supposed by the card, which is something DirectX will do for you automatically.
And I doubt OpenGL is not suited to fast game-style graphics rendering, because GAMES ON OSes OTHER THAN WINDOWS EXIST. See Halo on Mac, Everything Blizzard on the Mac, Quake 4, etc.
The only reason games exist on the Mac is because Bungie and Blizzard did tons of work reproducing the stuff that the DirectX libraries give Windows developers for free. They soon fell into disuse and were removed from the OS. Apple has approximately zero interest in encouraging game developers to their platform, they're only there by pure luck.
I honestly don't know the answer to this question, but bear with me... it might sound trollish.
Isn't Italy part of the EU, and doesn't the EU have any kind of free speech legislation that would allow something like this to be posted? Or are those directives non-binding?
Wow, you should sell Slashdot posting evaluations.