I love it! Did you write that?
Link to Original Source
Society needs revenge for certain crimes, for the sake of all our mental health. When we see evil people going unpunished, or even rewarded, it depresses us. Can you provide any rationale for why we should care so much about the comfort of a serial killer? Try to do so without appealing to some mystical, absolutist morality. Good luck.
Your premises are flawed, but I'll answer anyway. Solitary confinement cannot be societal revenge because it's not publicized at all. What society sees is an arrest, a public trial, and a prison sentence. Extra disciplinary punishments inflicted by prison guards are not public and do not involve due process of law. If solitary confinement is overused (as the article says), then it stops being discipline and starts being extrajudicial torture. That's obviously bad.
(If you don't see how extrajudicial torture is obviously bad, then let me tell you about this great deal you can get on 8x10 ft apartments...)
Oh look, a bank-like entity failed and people lost money. Good thing the FDIC is there to--
If cryptocurrencies are going to repeat the last 100+ years of economic history, can they hurry up and rediscover monetary policy too?
You have your credibility backwards. Blue's News predates Wikipedia by five years. It's not as big a deal as it used to be, but it's still a good news aggregator for video games. It's got useful information in a lightweight, text-focused design that doesn't arbitrarily change every 18 months.
Oops, I was looking at the first link and didn't even notice the video embedded in the Slashdot article. My comment is about the video in the Orlando Sentinel article.
The video is almost five minutes long and mostly computer animations. Actual footage of the moon can be found in three segments:
2:13 - 2:23 Examples of previous impact flashes
3:00 - 3:08 Full-speed MIDAS video of the big flash
3:20 - 3:30 Slow motion MIDAS video of the big flash
Duke Nukem Forever, too, I actually quite enjoyed and really just found how deep they dipped into the toilet humor to be regrettable... well that and the dream sequence level.
I interpreted the completed and polished parts of DNF as a brilliant satire on modern FPS games, with tongue-in-cheek "explanations" for things like regenerating health and bad vehicle controls. The commentary on the role of NPCs was particularly excellent. I think I'm the only one who interpreted it that way, though.
No it didn't. Deus Ex did.
They were both excellent and revolutionary, but also very different games. Deus Ex was more dialog based, while HL2 focused more on visual storytelling. Deus Ex had a series of self-contained locations, while HL2 gave the illusion of a continuous journey. Deus Ex let you influence the story, while HL2 plunged you into a flow of events beyond your control. I love both of them, but one is not a substitute for the other.
Nope. Trespasser was.
Oops, forgot about Trespasser. Not a great example, but a legitimate one. Thank you for the correction.
It still compares favorably with AAA shooters released in the last year.
You have got to be kidding. The Doom 3 engine is vastly superior to Source in every way.
I'm talking about the game, not the engine. But in terms of graphics, HL2 does have a distinctive and well-executed visual style that still stands up today.
Speak for yourself.
I did. That's why I started the sentence with "personally". I'm glad we can both find games that we like.
2. The gameplay was repetitive.
Isn't every game?
Not to that extent. The skyhook tracks in Bioshock Infinite at least had different shapes. I'm glad you enjoyed Doom 3 more than I did, though.
It's a FPS, what did you expect? You go in. You shoot monsters or bad guys, and kill the boss at the end.
Even in 2004, there was more to it than that. Wikipedia has a list of shooters that you can sort by release date. Looking at 2003-2004, I see:
* Unreal 2, which had a hub-based mission structure with consistent secondary characters. (I liked it, but nobody else did.)
* Vietcong, which tried to capture the feel of the Vietnam War (and did okay, IMHO). It was also one of the first games to allow iron sight aiming instead of crosshairs.
* Nosferatu: Wrath of Malachi, which I didn't play but I know had randomly-generated environments.
* Far Cry, which had semi-open world gameplay with stealth mechanics, plus a cool setting and okay story.
Going farther back, we have games like NOLF2 (comedy), Battlefield 1942 (vehicles galore), the first Aliens vs. Predator (play as an alien), System Shock 2 and Deus Ex (action RPGs), etc. So there was quite a lot of precedent for shooters being more than running and shooting around the time Doom 3 came out.
I disagree. The recent Serious Sam releases were great, and showed that the old-school FPSs formula still makes for a good game in today's world. Fast paced, lots of shooting, and meaningless plot.
Thank you for providing a counterpoint. My memory of the first Serious Sam mostly involves running backwards in circles, but I know a lot of people enjoyed it.
What happened to all the interesting ideas they had 10 or 20 years ago?
There are still interesting ideas -- the Mass Effect and Witcher series, for instance. I do wish developers would stop looking to MMOs for inspiration for single-player RPGs. It's just insulting when a $60 SP-only RPG hits me with a "kill 10 of monster X" quest. But I also hate crafting, so maybe there's just something wrong with me.
1. It was way too dark. They designed it to show off John Carmack's fancy new real-time lighting engine, but went too far. You couldn't use a flashlight and a weapon at the same time, which was ridiculous and broke suspension of disbelief. (One of the first mods was called "Duct Tape", and did exactly what you'd expect.)
2. The gameplay was repetitive. Every time you found a lit hallway with an item at the end, you knew that taking the item would cause the lights to go out and monsters to appear from behind hidden doors. This happened way too often, further breaking suspension of disbelief.
3. The story wasn't very exciting. It's Doom. You already knew what was going on before you even started the game.
4. Half-Life 2 came out three months later and revolutionized first-person shooters, particularly in the area of in-game storytelling. It was also the first (?) FPS to have a real physics engine with interactive environments. It still compares favorably with AAA shooters released in the last year. Doom 3 seemed mediocre by itself, but in comparison it looked even worse.
That's the history. Personally, I think the Doom concept translates poorly to modern gaming. It is to first-person shooters what Tolkien-esque fantasy is to RPGs -- revolutionary in its time, but bland and generic today. Modern games need distinctive characters, settings, stories, and gameplay to succeed (artistically, anyway). All Doom's got are space marines and monsters, which is the same recipe that ruins most of the Aliens games. But that's another rant...
Your ISP can give you a block of dynamic/static IP addresses, which your router assigns instead of 192.168.1.X?
That's how the internet works to begin with, and it used to be the norm for IPv4 networks. A lot of large networks still do it that way -- the computer I'm on at work has a globally unique IP address. You can still get a block of static IPs if you buy a business-class connection. That used to be almost the definition of a business connection, back when more people ran their own servers instead of using hosting services. IP addresses cost money, so ISPs try to have as few as possible. NAT came about when people started getting multiple computers per household but didn't want to pay for a business connection. It was never meant to prop up the internet as a whole.