This is a complete mischaracterization of what's going on. It's not that they don't want to compete with Tesla, it's that they want a cut. Right now, it's illegal for automakers to own car dealerships in most states, because when cars were in early adoption the state government didn't want to allow a situation where a car manufacturer pulled out of a state completely because it was unprofitable, leaving the citizens of that state unable to buy cars easily. So dealerships are independent from the manufacturers. Tesla is bypassing this 100 year old, out of date system, because it no longer makes sense, but the dealers aren't afraid of electric cars, they just want to make Tesla "play by the rules" and let the dealers sell (or not) the Tesla cars, so that they an make a profit off them like they do every other car manufacturer.
So far, robots don't know how to manufacture their own bullets/missiles. We'd just have to send wave after wave of our own men at them until they ran out.
Dungeon Keeper is the culmination of nothing. Just because they finally slapped a name you recognize on one of these pieces of shit doesn't mean they've reached some apex. Dungeon Keeper isn't even one of the worst offenders. This is the Facebook/mobile game model that's been popular for like 6 years.
No, that's not a missing option, that's a perfectly accurate option for you to select. If someone did not game at all 10 years ago, and played games even a little bit now, they would likely select "much more." Nowhere in the poll does it imply that it only applies to gamers. All it's asking for is a delta.
identifying the gender game in e-sports,
I meant "gender gap."
The problem with saying "half of gamers are female" is in how you identify someone as a "gamer." If you identify someone who plays phone games but doesn't own a console and hasn't purchased a AAA game since they left high school as a "gamer," you're not going to be pulling from the same pool as people who would be interested in actually playing StarCraft II or League of Legends competitively. For the purposes of identifying the gender game in e-sports, those casual gamers are not "gamers." And if that means that the pool of available players shifts to something like 75% male (I have no idea if this is true or not, this is entirely a hypothetical), then the gender gap does not appear *as* bad (but obviously would still exist). And if that means the pool shifts to 90% male, then the gender game as it applies to e-sports basically does not exist, because the gender gap in e-sports would be a result of the gender game in competitive games in general, and not an e-sports specific problem.
When I play at those difficulties, I don't really play a game, I just follow an algorithm(build order, research focus, etc), and if I don't do that I will lose.
That is a game. It might not be the game you're looking for, but it's still a game. I'm not going to, e.g. tell professional StarCraft 2 players or speed runners for various games that they are not playing a game. They're just not playing a game I want to play, even if they're playing it in the exact same game engine with the same tools I am. Optimization, memorization, and execution are all "game" skills. For some people, a game isn't fun until they're maximizing those specific attributes, for others, the more important those attributes are to success the less fun the game is. But it's still a game.
As for "better AI", I think what you're really looking for is a strategy game with a human opponent.
Just because EA is dishonest and poorly intentioned doesn't mean that the article summary needs to be dishonest and poorly intentioned, too. All it does is distract from the discussion of the actual problem and give astroturfers and apologists something to latch onto and distract from the issue. An honest submission is always better.
This is wrong. The rating is never forwarded by the app. Clicking 5 within the app brings you to the Play Store page where you can give the app whatever score you want. Clicking "1-4" opens up a feedback submission form and does not bring you to the Play Store page.
In case you were serious, beta.slashdot.org.
I feel like if editing were allowed, but all previous version were still viewable, then the intent behind not allowing editing would be preserved.
Or we can all just recognize it for the throw-away medium it is and stop putting so much weight on things said on it.
No it doesn't. Running the Steam client on SteamOS requires a Steam account.
It only takes one person who likes a piece of software to write a post promoting or defending it. It doesn't make them a paid shill.