Why wouldn't they choose h.264/mp4? It's playable just about anywhere these days.
Correct. There is no such thing as the "sharing economy."
2048 is terrible. All the clones of Threes leave out important gameplay elements, making them stupidly easy.
So the Numbers Station folks aren't out of a job yet!
So, you like-a the sauce?
LMAO commenting on websites is a "basic freedom" now?
Perhaps just recompiling it against the latest SDK (still targeting 4.0 or whatever) would be sufficient.
I'd say have some sort of "hey are you still there?" email from Apple but making sure you can still compile the thing and re-submit it would be enough of a barrier that people with the Justin Bieber Slideshow apps wouldn't bother with.
App doesn't compile in the latest SDK? Well you better get on that. Don't like it? Go to a non-curated platform.
Just an idea.
They just mean that everyone on Twitter and Youtube shared it
And here I thought it was just a death wish.. Driving a motorcycle seems like a dangerous way to get places during rush hour. Driving a car scares me enough, I'd hate to be out there on two wheels trying to doge the stupid people, the gravel, AND the guy behind me who obviously don't pay attention to anything smaller than what they are driving.
So, why does that middle aged woman bring her Harley to work most of the time? I thought she did it for the parking space, because your above theory just doesn't apply to her.
Because they're fun to ride. If you're scared of being in a car already, then a motorcycle isn't for you.
Once read, it is no longer like a letter, it is business correspondence, and a warrant is no longer required.
This is extremely relevant in law. Recently, the former head of the CIA used unsent drafts stored in a drafts folder to communicate with a lover.
It's also how the 9/11 terrorists communicated with each other: one shared web email account, they just saved and edited drafts to write back and forth.
Also, define "ran fine" - ran at max settings at 60fps with no stuttering or framerate drops? It definitely ran acceptable in some configurations on release but no one could max it out at a high resolution on day one.
But yeah that was a new idea at the time - the idea of a game being so graphically advanced that it outstripped the hardware of the era. It was always a thing that so long as you had the beefiest system then any game on the market could run perfectly. Games like Quake 3 just gracefully added features like curved surfaces when it was possible to do so. Crysis and ports like GTA4 were the first to say "no your shit still can't run the max".
To some degree it was about the messaging (had the mode been labeled "extreme" instead of "high" it might not have bothered the high end people so much) but really I think the initial issue was that the demo they released proved to everyone that it ate shit on their system. I had a 7800GT (I think) and even at the lowest settings it was crap.
For a recap: they came out with Crysis (the first one) in 2007, and it didn't sell as much as they wanted it to. They blamed piracy. I'm sure the game was pirated, probably a lot, but I don't think that's why it wasn't selling like they wanted it to. It wasn't selling like they wanted it to because it was released at a time when PC's weren't powerful enough to run it. By which I mean, in 2007 when it launched it was literally impossible to run it at the best settings. Like, it was impossible to build a PC that could run it at max settings at a high resolution at a high framerate.
And people knew this because they released a demo. You got a first hand look at how this game was going to turn your PC into a slideshow. So people didn't buy the game because they knew they didn't have the pipe to smoke it. Releasing a demo probably hurt Crysis' initial sales.
And this wasn't unforeseen - in the runup to the game's release people expressed surprise that EA, who had been all about cross platform development or cutting off the PC, here they were releasing a game just for the PC which a lot of people couldn't run.
So, the game didn't sell either because of system requirements or piracy or both. And again, I'm not saying the game wasn't pirated, I'm just saying that Crytek claimed this was the only reason it wasn't selling, and in no possible way could it be linked to the fact that they released a game which just told every PC owner on earth their system wasn't good enough.
That's not the real dick part to me though. The real dick part was when the CEO said their "proof" of piracy was that the patch for the game was downloaded more times than the copies of the games that had been sold.
OK, think way back to 2007. Hard as it is to believe, Crysis wasn't on Steam. Back then it wasn't a given that your PC game would be on Steam. Consider Fallout 3 was released in 2008 on disc-only, no digital services at all, and had GFWL baked in. Two years after that Fallout: New Vegas launches as a Steamworks title on Steam on day one, no GFWL in sight. The switch was quick but in 2007 it hadn't happened yet.
So by that logic when Crytek released a patch for Crysis, people had to go manually download it. So I can see a shred of logic to the idea that if more people are downloading the patch than buying the game then some number of pirated copies are getting patched.
The thing is, the statement doesn't make sense. How many more times are we talking here? I know back then I personally downloaded the patches a few times, usually after I would format and reinstall the game (this being before Steam made that sort of unneccessary). If the patch was downloaded 10x as much then you might have a point. But how do you even know how many times it was downloaded? The file was mirrored everywhere (I think FilePlanet still existed, etc.) did you add up all the downloads? Do all those services even give download numbers? Why are you not providing more evidence for your case?
Crytek's CEO also lamented how the Call Of Duty games were selling more copies. At the time, Crysis had sold less than a million copies whereas the CoD game of the year had sold ten million. The CoD games which had the advantage of being on consoles as well. Disregarding the fact that Crysis would hit the 1M mark soon (and according to Wikipedia has sold over 3M overall as of 2010), the CoD game sold better due to better marketing and just generally being a better game.
To be fair this was that dark era in PC gaming of the console games selling 9-10x their PC counterparts, to the point where some developers wanted to drop the PC entirely. However, if Cryek wanted to get into console gaming just do it, don't give us some sort of "you're all horrible software pirates" argument on your way out the door.
So they released Crysis 2 on PC, 360 and PS3. How did that go? They sold about three million copies, and less than the original game has sold on PC alone. Crysis 3's sales figures have not been fully revealed.
THIS is the problem I have with the "piracy is the problem" argument. Yes piracy is a problem but there's so much more to it and going to console development didn't fix their issues. Their real issue seems to be that they can't run a company worth a damn.
Spoken like a person who never owned a Macbook. I am a Linux guy, and I am by no stretch of the imagination an Apple fan, but misinformed hatred is just a form of ignorance.
Welcome to Slashdot!
B-b-b-b-but fetuses don't breathe air directly! Clearly god has spoken.