This is better than driving the SUV and not recycling the beer cans. Morally bankrupt is a bit of a stretch - I suppose you've never been even slightly hypocritical? I forgot that despite dying 13 years ago, Mother Theresa can still post on
I'm not trying to say there aren't times when realistic health works great; only that in plenty of cases (I'd argue in the overwhelming majority) it isn't ideal.
This is the problem with a HUD. Health bars look dumb, and remind you that you're not playing a person but some abstraction of a person. Magic bars, too. It's unfortunate that the real-world mechanics of death are no fun to play, and so we have to create an unreal world, but hiding this is an important aspect of design in *SOME* games.
On the other hand, the current crop of games trying to 'go no HUD' are often worse. Putting the health bar on the player's back doesn't make it less of a health bar, and serves only to remind me that they're trying to fool me. HUD is at worst a necessary evil, and at best a useful tool.
Not if It's my name.
If inscribed on a sphere, it's still 2-dimensional. You're looking for Euclidean.
mod this insightful not funny
Like it or not, the political process as it stands right now is structured in such a way that we, the people, did in fact vote for Kevin Rudd.
You can kick and scream and say 'you voted for a party', but you're being ridiculous. I could take your reduction one step further and say that you voted for a representative in your own electorate, and not a party. It just *happens* they're a member of a party.
You know as well as I do that the Labor campaign was about Rudd. Was their slogan "Labor 07"? No, it was Kevin Rudd versus John Howard, no matter how reductive you want to be, there's a presumption that Rudd will remain in office for 3 years. That's why succession was such a big issue when it was Howard-Costello.
Knowing a technical detail doesn't change the fact, and the fact is that this succession has proved Labor's claims at the 2007 election disingenuous. It's the ultimate broken election promise.
3) Writing style: You must be *very* *formal* in your writing style to be considered credible in academic circles. Have an English teacher (or similarly-minded person) go over the paper with a fine-toothed comb looking for any spelling, grammar, or word-use errors. Absolutely no slang or colloquialisms whatsoever are acceptable in a research paper. Do not use contractions. Try not to use any analogies unless they are truly apt and likely to be universally understood. Try not to use first or second person in the paper. Remember, people from all over the world from different cultures, many of whom do not speak English as their primary language, will hopefully be reading your paper, and you don't want them to get confused by any culture-specific concepts or words.
This is absolutely not the case. By all means, be clear, use correct grammar. But don't fall into the trap of writing like you've got a broomstick up your vocabulary's arsehole. Slang should be encouraged if it is universal. Do not treat your audience like babies, treat them like adults who might have English as a second language but have sufficient skills to pick up your paper.
There is only one surefire way to stand out from the crowd in academia, and that's to have styyyyllleeeeee. Too many papers are written by people who write by numbers.
The fundamental difference here that I think a lot of people miss is length.
Just as movies differ from books in length, games do. A game story's got to be sustained over 5-100 hours. It's a longer format, and that can be good or bad. The pacing's also totally different: things we do in games are often the things a movie will skip over (travel in particular).
If a film's story comes directly from a game's, there will be cutting for time reasons. If instead it's just "based in the universe" it might fall into the trap of trying to explain too much. Then if it's too scant on detail it might upset some fans.
yes i would like that very much
the four students and graduates with accounts at the end of its first year will be proof that it won't work.
april fool i'm way too late
Google has the word 'ogle' embedded as a subword.
Am I to take this as compelling evidence that Google has intent to invade my privacy?
It was a billion times more entertaining than Happy Feet.
And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones
