An anonymous reader points out a recent article at Gamesradar discussing the frequency of major bugs and technical issues in freshly-released video games. While such issues are often fixed with updates, questions remain about the legality and ethics of rushing a game to launch. Quoting: "As angry as you may be about getting a buggy title, would you want the law to get involved? Meglena Kuneva, EU Consumer Affairs Commissioner, is putting forward legislation that would legally oblige digital game distributors to give refunds for games, putting games in the same category in consumer law as household appliances. ... This call to arms has been praised by tech expert Andy Tanenbaum, author of books like Operating Systems: Design and Implementation. 'I think the idea that commercial software be judged by the same standards as other commercial products is not so crazy,' he says. 'Cars, TVs, and telephones are all expected to work, and they are full of software. Why not standalone software? I think such legislation would put software makers under pressure to first make sure their software works, then worry about more bells and whistles.'"
An anonymous reader writes "Ben Kuchera from Ars Technica is reporting that EA/DICE has substantially changed the game model of Battlefield: Heroes, increasing the cost of weapons in Valor Points (the in-game currency that you earn by playing) to levels that even hardcore players cannot afford, and making them available in BattleFunds (the in-game currency that you buy with real money). Other consumables in the game, such as bandages to heal the players, suffered the same fate, turning the game into a subscription or pay-to-play model if players want to remain competitive. This goes against the creators' earlier stated objectives of not providing combat advantage to paying customers. Ben Cousins, from EA/DICE, argued, 'We also frankly wanted to make buying Battlefunds more appealing. We have wages to pay here in the Heroes team and in order to keep a team large enough to make new free content like maps and other game features we need to increase the amount of BF that people buy. Battlefield Heroes is a business at the end of the day and for a company like EA who recently laid off 16% of their workforce, we need to keep an eye on the accounts and make sure we are doing our bit for the company.' The official forums discussion thread is full of angry responses from upset users, who feel this change is a betrayal of the original stated objectives of the game."
Same is true in star wars apart from ligthsaber duels enemies (storm troppers) go down in 1 blaster shot. Yet in kotor or old republic MMO or any star war game it takes multiple shots to bring any down and the Smuggler PC class can go ahead to ahead against a jedi or a sith (you think Han solo can take on a jedi?)... They need to bend rules a bit for sake of balance and game play its true with any franchise not just Star trek.
Cryptic was actually glad they got sued since they used as an excuse to implement a naming policy. I remember playing it when it came out and dozens of half nude Claw/regen scrappers in Atlas park that were named Wolverine2000, Ultimate Wolverine etc, they were an eye sore. Thank god they reset all of them to genericxxx and forced them to rename it to something else.
I remember when i was in a robotic competition our coach/teacher used to ask us to write down our mother's phone number if in case we went MIA in disney world, may be these open source projects should do the same.
lets say you want to research Bulls-Pistons series in 1988 and you decide to use a squared which effectively parses and gets the data you want from Basketball-reference or one of those. Those sites will not get any page hits...
IMO C&C RA3, SupCom all were disappointing none of them had the storyline that SC had which is why the game is so remembered.
Considering IT work is more or less outsourced to Bangalore even among Pentagon contractors, i doubt companies like Wipro, TCS do much in terms of keeping their client's work secret.
Crytpic announced they are working on Star trek MMO, originally it was being developed by Perpetual which went bankrupt. They released some screen shots couple months ago.
KZ2 is excellant just like GoW or Halo but that said i does not have much replay value once you play thru it first time you are done (MP is not anything new there). IMO Action FPS will give way to Action/RPG games like Fallout 3, Bio shock, this where devs can clearly show their talent in developing a storyline/character and giving open sandbox environment for players to play with.
To date no MMO has designed a world that is as large or vivid as what Blizzard has done. Most MMOs utilize zoning while moving from one zone to another where as WoW incorporates seamless transition not to mention the amount of quests, npcs, instances is truly remarkable. I hope Blizzard will work in true successor to WoW or something new rather than more xpacs.
WAR had a good start but its shine has worn off Due to faction imbalance Races/Classes do not look that good compared to Destruction counterparts this was major mistake. Mythic believed that people will mostly choose the Good guys rather than going for coolness factor like you saw in WoW but forgot that reason why most people choose Alliance pre BC was because it was the pretty race
:p not because they were the good guys.
-As a result RvR is pretty broke in servers like Ironfist, Dest. zerg pretty much takes most keep easily as a result none of Order players even bother defending or taking Keeps during active server time. And simply cap everything at 4 am to 10 am. So much for RvR...
The game lacks in PvE content.
-Most people just queue up for scens over and over again rather than do any PQ or even RvR to level.
-Crafting is non exsistant.
-Aldorf and Inevitable city are a dead zone as a result there is very little social aspect to that game. Heck it took them 2 months just to fix the chat even though i noted that issue in beta (Too many chat channels within even one region).