Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Funny stuff (Score 1) 469

by P00k13 (#27940815) Attached to: Intel Receives Record Fine By the EU

Can Intel withdraw from the European market to avoid the fine? Then someone can sue the EU for blocking competition and creating a monopoly for AMD. That would be funny!

I don't agree with Intel's sales practices, but I think the fine is too excessive. Seems more like the EU is looking for money rather than justice. I'm not a law guy so I don't know what I'm talking about, but I expect the many people will see it this way.

Comment: Isn't This Fairly Basic Economics? (Score 1) 763

by P00k13 (#26936001) Attached to: Do Video Games Cost Too Much?

Video games are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. I don't buy games if the price is too high for what I'm getting, and Valve is saying that's true for others as well. When the game is worth the price, then people will buy. And the game usually doesn't improve after release (other than minor bug fixes), so the only thing to do is lower the price to get more sales. People tend to prefer newer games, so publishers will miss their window to sell if they don't lower the price before newer cooler games come out. The value of a game to me usually depends how long I expect to play it. If I expect it won't keep my attention long, then I won't be willing to pay much for it. For me, included DRM affects the value as well.

Comment: DRM is wrong. (Score 1) 203

by P00k13 (#26865783) Attached to: Gamers, EFF Speak Out Against DRM

I hope they ban DRM. It's not fair to the consumer to not really have full access to the media. If I buy a game, there should be no way it can be blocked from me playing it. It's totally ridiculous that you can buy access to a game and then not be able to use it because of DRM! Example, if a DRM server goes down then you can't play. That is just wrong. Most people won't boycott and just put up with it because they have no choice if they want to play the game. It's so wrong.

Comment: Why x86 Though (Score 1) 420

by P00k13 (#26772683) Attached to: Nvidia Is Trying To Make an x86 Chip

Why does it have to be x86 anyway? The only real reason I use x86 is because that's what I need to run Windows because that's what I need to play games. Nvidia is the king of gaming though. If they make a new platform on another architecture that can run games, I would be very compelled to switch to that, especially if it's Linux or BSD based. Windows is ok, but it's overpriced and I'd rather spend my money on hardware upgrades and new games than on software that runs in the background. It would be a more risky move to bypass Windows, but I think Nvidia could pull it off. On the other hand, Microsoft might budge on their x86-only policy to avoid competing with another operating system.

Comment: The price of Windows (Score 1) 583

by P00k13 (#26767633) Attached to: Microsoft May Be Targeting the Ubuntu Desktop

They wouldn't have to worry if Windows wasn't overpriced. I would have bought Vista if it wasn't so expensive. My decision not to upgrade has nothing to do with the quality of Vista and everything to do with the price. Since I build my own computers, it's especially expensive to buy Windows. If I can do without Windows, I would go with Linux to save money. The only problem is Windows is my gaming platform, so I need it. But I might switch to Playstation 3, since it's not much more money to buy a PS3 than to buy a new Windows install disk.

Comment: FreeBSD-based OS is the Future (Score 3, Interesting) 532

by P00k13 (#26582441) Attached to: Linux's Role In Microsoft's Decline

I think Microsoft will still dominate market share until Google makes an OS based on FreeBSD. Until then, Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself because while their software is over-priced, most people just keep reusing their old XP disk rather than trying to learn something new. Linux doesn't have the marketing power required to take on Microsoft no matter how good the software is. I'm not a fortune-teller, but if I were, this would be my prediction.

Comment: Re:Ideally... (Score 1) 307

by P00k13 (#26205727) Attached to: Chrome Complicates Mozilla/Google Love-In

I switched from Firefox to Chrome. Chrome does a lot of things that Firefox should be doing now with a 3.0 version and all. Instead of improving the user experience, Firefox development time is wasted reimplementing things like the bookmark system to sql, which normal users don't care about and can't see any improvements. If anything, I'm more confused by the new bookmark system. Firefox feels really 1990's to me with the file menu at the top and little innovation to the user interface over the old Netscape other than having tabs. The only thing I like more about Firefox is that it gives more tweaking power like cookies being deleted when the browser closes. Google's browser is prettier and plus never crashes. I'm not going to uninstall Firefox any time soon though, because I still trust it more than anything else in terms of security, but it would be nice if the Firefox team can learn from the things Google has done well.

Comment: Intrusive DRM (Score 1) 504

by P00k13 (#26191691) Attached to: An In-Depth Look At Game Piracy

The people who are up in arms against EA's new DRM are some of EA's best customers. These customers are mostly just afraid they won't be able to play the games they paid for a few years later because the DRM servers no longer authorize the game. They are NOT the customers who buy the game and then sell it on Ebay who won't need rights to play it years later. They are also NOT the people pirating the game. Pirates have little reason to protest because they get the games without the DRM attached anyway. The people upset are just scared because they are losing the guarantee that they can still play years later. EA suggests we should blindly trust them that we will still be authorized, yet the placement of DRM feels like they are telling us that they don't trust us.

If the article is right, I can see why EA wants to block pirates though, but I don't think it should be done at the expense of the good customers, which is what I feel EA is doing now. Personally, I hate pirates because they are taking advantage of not only the game publishers, but also people like me who buy a lot of games (as the article discusses about freeloaders taking advantage of what paying customers fund). The only real advantage I have is that I can have an effect on which games are made in the future because every purchase is basically a vote for that type of game. But punishing me further by restricting my rights, in hopes to slow down pirates, is not the answer. I'm almost to the point where I'm ready to just look for a new hobby.

As a side note, I just want to point out that the number of PC gamers aren't equal to the number of hardware sold, as the article implies. I buy a new video card yearly, and a new pc every 2 years. Hardcore PC gamers like to do that in order to get the best visual experience from new games. (Although I still get out and play my older games sometimes too and need to still have rights to play them)

I agree with the article that Steam is not the answer though. My blood pressure was way up when trying to install Left 4 Dead. I uninstalled all my steam games and steam and even reinstalled my video drivers, but the game would not install. I finally found something on a forum the next day saying I need to delete a file from the Steam folder, and then it installed. Valve might make good games, but Steam obviously has some problems, and also removes rights to install games, even just by being buggy software. I will be looking for games that don't use any DRM in the future. If the day comes when all games use DRM, I will find a new hobby to spend my time and money on.

"And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?" -- Looney Tunes, The Scarlet Pumpernickel (1950, Chuck Jones)

Working...