Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:NDS != NDS (Score 1) 61

by VGPowerlord (#48433887) Attached to: The Nintendo DS Turns 10

Both of my original DS's have a cracked hinge (rough handling from the kids), but both of them still work,

Cracked hinges were a common problem with the original DS and DS Lite. A design defect, if you will.

I kept using my DS Lite with cracked hinge until the R button stopped working and replaced it with a DSi XL... and replaced that with a 3DS XL once decent games started arriving for it.

I still have my DSi around here somewhere...

Comment: Re:Funny Timing (Score 1) 61

by VGPowerlord (#48433673) Attached to: The Nintendo DS Turns 10

Though I appreciated my time in the first game for some reason. Guess it's because it was the first Zelda game I actually experienced & played through (I had played Zelda on NES but wasn't good enough on it to have any clue where I was going, also tried Link but had even less of a clue there.)

By "Link", I'm assuming you mean The Adventure of Link for NES?

Honestly, if I had to introduce people to the Zelda series, I'd introduce them to the SNES/GBA A Link to the Past.

A Link to the Past may be 20+ years old now, but it's the first 2D Zelda game that gives you hints as to what you're supposed to be doing.

It's not truly open world (unlike its 2013 direct sequel A Link Between Worlds for 3DS), but unlike most games in the series, you have some idea of where you're supposed to be going at any given time. This is because key characters in the game helpfully mark locations on the world map for you. That isn't to say it's completely straightforward as sometimes you have to figure out how to get into the dungeons...

Incidentally, Nintendo chose to make A Link Between Worlds, a new sequel to A Link to the Past, instead of doing a remake like they did for Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask.

Comment: Re:That's because (Score 2) 227

by VGPowerlord (#48420011) Attached to: Three-Way Comparison Shows PCs Slaying Consoles In Dragon Age Inquisition

First the PC will have better specs on paper, but when it comes to running the actual game, the performance may be worse simply because having a console allows for more highly tuned and specialized code.

Yeeeah, not in this generation. That's because Sony and Microsoft went for 1.6GHz AMD Jaguar Fusion family of x86-64/GPU processors instead of custom processors this time around.

Second, that $600 PC purchased now will definitely be a lot better, but if it were purchased at the time of release, even the raw numbers wouldn't be all that much better, never mind the actual performance.

The consoles use faster RAM (actually, only the framebuffer does for the XbOne), but the PC's clock speed advantage is likely enough to close those gaps... and is pretty much guaranteed if they use a dedicated graphics card (as the RAM speed advantage largely goes away in that case).

Also if you don't already have a good monitor, that's even more of an investment, unless you want to hook up the PC to your TV as well.

If you were doing a Gaming PC, this is exactly what you'd do.

That's one nice thing about everything using HDMI cables these days.

Third, you forget the a console gamer can buy used games at a store, whereas PC gamers typically can't resell their digital downloads. Given that the online digital games on sale will probably be in the same price range as a used disc in a store for a similarly aged game and it's not that big of a difference. If you want to play the newest games as they're released the full-price cost is going to be about the same whether or not it's on PC or console.

Yeah... that's not usually the case. Steam sales tend to be cheaper than used copies of console games. And sooner in a game's lifetime as well.

However, there are some people for whom a console is a much better value proposition. If the PC was hands down better in every case, no one would buy one. However, given their popularity, it seems to suggest that there are a large number of people for who consider a console to be a better value.

Consoles are largely easier to set up and use.

This is the kind of thing that the SteamBox standard was created to fight. However, then Valve started mucking around with the "standard" before the first one was even released. Heck, I still don't think the controller has been standardized and SteamBoxes were announced like a year ago!

Comment: Re:So stating the obvious then (Score 1) 227

by VGPowerlord (#48419533) Attached to: Three-Way Comparison Shows PCs Slaying Consoles In Dragon Age Inquisition

PC is the best then PS4 then Xbox One. I guess hardware does matter when it comes to gaming. Anyone else not surprised? As for Xbox, it looks like they will be behind until the next generation unless they update the hardware. The ESRAM buffer does not seem to be making up the gap as they hoped it would.

Only behind (in graphics) to PS4 owners. Hardware is virtually the same.

Lets pull some quotes from the article.

When detail levels do rise, the PC still comes away with the best overall visuals. In this close-up, the Xbox One and PS4 are largely matched, while the PC elf has better facial coloring and slightly more detailed textures.

Above, you can see that the green crystal is far more detailed in the PC version with the PS4 following behind.

As things stand, the PC version has some notable edges over the consoles, with the PS4 nearly matching PC visuals and the Xbox One trailing behind. The PC variant of Dragon Age Inquisition will support AMD's Mantle out of the box, so it'll be interesting to see if AMD GPUs pick up any frames in that API.

In other words, the article is disagreeing with what you say.

Comment: Re:Debian OS is no longer of use to me now (Score 1) 558

by VGPowerlord (#48418133) Attached to: Debian Votes Against Mandating Non-systemd Compatibility

You are personally going to migrate your employer's systems because you personally do not like something, something every single major distro is moving too, and the top kernel developers are already using? Fuck me. What an ego or bullshitter.

In the words of Linus Torvalds:

I don't actually have any particularly strong opinions on systemd itself. I've had issues with some of the core developers that I think are much too cavalier about bugs and compatibility, and I think some of the design details are insane (I dislike the binary logs, for example), but those are details, not big issues.

I bolded the relevant parts, but included the rest so people don't blame me for cherry picking his comments.

Comment: Re:Shared hosting... (Score 2) 210

by VGPowerlord (#48413371) Attached to: Launching 2015: a New Certificate Authority To Encrypt the Entire Web

More to the point:

All modern browsers except IE on XP or lower support it.

All modern web servers support it. For reference, this is all versions of nginx; Apache 2.2.12+; and IIS8+. Assuming nginx and Apache are compiled against a version of openssl released after 2006 and didn't explicitly disable SNI.

Comment: Re:If at first you don't succeed... (Score 5, Interesting) 262

Steam has indeed come a long way, about 10 years ago it was loathed and hated by gamers. Many people would not buy a game if it needed Steam, Ubisoft with their crappy launcher are where Steam was 10 years ago.

10 years ago, Steam was a glorified auto-updater that sat there and sucked up system resources... something like 64MB of RAM when 128-512MB was standard.

Steam now takes something like 128MB of RAM in a time when 8192-16384MB of RAM is common. In addition to being an auto-updater, it also has a store, friends list, friends chat, game library, a non-puke green color scheme, and a host of other features. ...and if you ask me how I know this, I'll toss my Steam "11 year" badge at your face.

(Note: I'm guesstimating at these RAM usage numbers, and they're the numbers when you're not actively using it.)

Comment: Re: Obama screwed us intentionally or intentionall (Score 1) 307

I'm not clear why anyone cares about "net neutrality" anyway. We don't need more Internet regulations. Heavy regulation is what got us into this mess anyway. You know why there's no competition between ISPs? Because in most places, it's flat-out illegal. Fix the market and the market will ensure net neutrality never matters.

I suggest you look up who owned the US Internet backbone in the early-mid 90s before you claim "heavy regulation" got us into this mess.

Oh, you weren't aware that the government (via the National Science Foundation) owned the US Internet backbone back in the 90s and privatization got us to where we are now?

Comment: Re: RIP Java! (Score 1) 525

C# generic collections allow primitive types to be used for type parameters, and always without performance loss due to runtime downcasting like in Java.

C#'s primitive types actually aren't. They're really structs with overloads for math operators. For example, int is a System.Int32.

No, the benefit C# has here is that it only has one number representation.

Java's int is a real primitive... but as you noticed, Java's Collections don't work on primitives. So, Java has to convert it to the equivalent object.

Since Java doesn't let you do operation overloads on types, you have to convert it back to a primitive before you can most things with it.

Also, objects tend to be heavier than structs.

Comment: Re:Sounds like what Sun did (Score 1) 525

Visual Studio Ultimate costs $13,000. It doesn't include the entire MSDN suite of MS tools, although it does include the ability to re-wind your code and run it again. Really slow stepping through your code when that is on.

The full product name is "Visual Studio Ultimate with MSDN" and the Ultimate MSDN subscription covers every product on MSDN. I would say "every product Microsoft makes" but sometime in the last few years they pulled all Windows versions older than XP (except 3.1 for some reason), then when XP's support expiration date came up they removed that as well.

Visual Studio Professional is currently the only Visual Studio 2013 version you can buy without an MSDN license: $499 without MSDN; $1,199 with MSDN Professional, which is missing a lot of MS's products.

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.