Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Easy answers (Score 2) 276

by QuasiSteve (#46822281) Attached to: 'The Door Problem' of Game Design

As I have been playing this game lately (friend invite)

2. Can the player open them? Yes. If you have doors in a 3D game and they don't behave like doors, you have failed.

Or succeeded - not every door in real life can be opened.

3. Can the player open every door in the game? Yes. See point 2.

Not necessarily.

4. What tells a player a door is locked and will open, as opposed to a door that they will never open? It's a door. It opens.

Unless the door knob is missing. Then it doesn't open - and every player realizes this visual cue pretty quickly.

5. What happens if there are two players? Doors behave the same for all players. It's a door. See point 2.


6. Does it only lock after both players pass through the door? See point 5.

Except for certain doors that require all players to have passed through. The door opens/closes just fine, but only locks if all players are either in the room, or outside the room but dead. How do players know? It's written on-screen - but after a while, people just know.

7. What if the level is REALLY BIG and can't all exist at the same time? Then your technology is not good enough to implement your vision and one or the other needs to change. See point 2

Or you load/save as applicable and call each section stages/chapters.

The game? Left 4 Dead 2.

Now, should all games be designed that way? No. But it's certainly a solution to the problems put forth, and fits within the game's overall design.

Comment: Re:Nothing to do with hole size (Score 1) 400

by QuasiSteve (#46805871) Attached to: In a Hole, Golf Courses Experiment With 15-inch Holes

Perhaps you don't actually know anything about golf and how it's played in the real world by real people?

Very little indeed - like I said, I only played for a little while. All the other stuff was the perception thanks to movies/TV shows, etc.

If the image they portray (and repeated in TFA) is terribly wrong, then the golf promotion bunch might go on the offensive on that :)

Comment: Re:Nothing to do with hole size (Score 1) 400

by QuasiSteve (#46803867) Attached to: In a Hole, Golf Courses Experiment With 15-inch Holes

While I could probably spend the hours, I just don't find the cost justified. I'd rather take some of the younger ones in our family to a putt-putt/minigolf.

I think it's also a bit of perception - most of the time you find a golf scene in a movie/TV show, it will generally be older people (read: men), often in business, more than well off, and generally not about the game itself but about the networking that happens while at the game. I'm inclined that it's that aspect that they're really trying to save, by making people get less frustrated about balls not going in while they're talking business deals, drinking expensive drinks, and paying up the wazoo to play at a course in the first place.

Having now RTFA, that seems to be almost exactly it.

And to think I rather enjoyed my first few rounds at a course after playing Links for years on old computers.

Comment: Re:I wonder how much damage... (Score 1) 285

by QuasiSteve (#46779907) Attached to: Apache OpenOffice Reaches 100 Million Downloads. Now What?

Not just those.. I mean, macros in general is a pain to work with in OO.o (LibreOffice as well), while it's much simpler in VBA. And I'm not talking about syntax here, but things like accessing graph data and manipulating it. Want to highlight a particular point in a graph? I don't even know where to start with OO.o as the documentation is.. well I'm sure it's to be found *somewhere*.

But also rather common things like chart titles based on a cell value. You'd think that "Weekly report - Week #" where # is the current week number would be possible, simply by referencing a cell with the week number OR referencing a cell with the full title. But alas - you cannot.
Instead you have to kludge a work-around using a second chart with completely transparent background and only showing the X Axis Label (which, of course, does auto-adjust based on the categories range set), then move that on top of the other chart.
( Correct me if I'm wrong in that, and it is possible now. )

LibreOffice is worse in this respect... recent updates have caused outright crashes when moving data around, date values getting displayed with the wrong date on charts, etc.

Comment: Re:Militia, then vs now (Score 1) 1614

by QuasiSteve (#46775223) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment

I don't need a machine gun to keep people from stealing my TV. Locks, walls, and intelligence mostly does that. I need the machine gun because it is fun to shoot at rotten pumpkins and cinder blocks out at the gun range.

Wouldn't it make sense to keep the machine gun locked away (relatively) safely at said gun range, then?

Comment: Re:Stop using Youtube (Score 1) 306

What the sibling AC said - care to share your list?

Note that for [your] online viewing habits, you don't need G+. I guess you could be doing it out of solidarity of the internet commenters or those uploaders who curse the requirement while coveting the ad/syndicated partnership income - but if you're just watching the videos, you don't need a Google+ acccount. (Yet. Not likely to change, but then Google pulls all sorts of unlikely things.)

Comment: Re:You're the only one (Score 1) 208

by QuasiSteve (#46648441) Attached to: USB Reversable Cable Images Emerge

Really? You look at your phone when plugging it in while dark with your night vision?

No, for my phone I know which way it's up, and for its cable I know which way the plug is around by the fact that it is offset (it's a short mini-micro adapter). I don't have to look for that one. That's the whole 'remember' bit.

If pretty much everyone who ever uses USB regularly tries to insert the connector backwards then that is a problem with bad design. Period. If you find that hard to fathom then you really need to get a good whack with a cluebat

Do I, or do the people who keep trying to insert them the wrong way around?

Again, I'm not saying that the new design isn't an obvious improvement. What I am saying is: a good portion of the people who keep trying to plug the things in the wrong way around, are probably going to find ways to continue to do so.

Comment: Re:Hey you, early USB plug apologist (Score 1) 208

by QuasiSteve (#46645147) Attached to: USB Reversable Cable Images Emerge

Perhaps I should clarify further, though.. I look first when I'm not familiar with the device. The fact that I have to do that at all (instead of only requiring a slight touch to determine general port orientation in the first place - see sibling comment) is enough reason to applaud a 180Â symmetrical design.

But I can't say that I identify with the vocal group who appear to find a source of continual frustration in USB plug orientation vs port orientation.

You've never tried putting a usb cable in wrong? Hard to believe.

I know - bold claims require bold evidence. Unfortunately, I have no video record of every single plugging-in of a USB plug. It's entirely possible that I did try to plug one in the wrong way around for a while there when I got a computer with USB ports, and have simply forgotten about it.

Most of the complaints seem to come from people who have been using USB products for years and are still having orientation issues with it, though. I find that hard to fathom.

Comment: Re:Hey you, early USB plug apologist (Score 1) 208

by QuasiSteve (#46644627) Attached to: USB Reversable Cable Images Emerge

My, aren't you special.

Snark aside - no, no I'm not. Certainly no more special than anybody claiming they always need to try it 3 ways :)

I've used more than one computer where they're on the back and the wrong way up (most go with the 'trident' logo on top). I have a phone and a tablet that are the same plug but the opposite way up and it's small and recessed too.

In which case for the first time around, you didn't look (perhaps you couldn't, because, well, back side of the computer and all) and for the second+ time around, you completely forgot about the first time around.

If it was properly designed, you shouldn't have to look, and if your eyesight's not brilliant that might not help anyway. As to remembering, great if you only have one machine. Not so much when you have four at home, and use many different ones at work or college.

Which just brings us back to people taking a flattened plug horizontally to a port that's oriented vertically even if the port have a 180Â symmetry.

Without seeing the back side of the computer...

Are they vertical?

Or are they horizontal?

I guess you could think that it's always parallel to the longest side, but then what orientation does it have when there is no longest side?

I guess some people would just have to try it 4 ways around.

Note that I'm in no way saying that I think the USB plugs/sockets were a great design in terms of user-experience. At the time they were certainly better than most anything out there with multiple pins. Plugging in a PS/2 plug when you couldn't see the port, now that was torture. I certainly applaud the new design (for the most part).

Ultimately though, there's always going to be people who have trouble plugging devices in - for whatever reason. Some people have trouble just plugging headsets into their phones (judging by the plethora of scratches surrounding the headphone jacks). Thankfully for them, more and more peripherals are available in wireless form.

( Well, except for the power cables. Ever try to plug a U.S. plug in the wrong way around? Easy to do if you don't check which of the pins is the broader one. The C7P (device-end) is even worse. )

Chemist who falls in acid is absorbed in work.