Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Steam Page (Score 1) 75

This is pretty much the only legitimate complaint about the advertising of the game I've seen. Murray was pretty vague about a lot of things, and I think a lot of that had to do with people asking questions and the answer being technically true, but not really in the way they were expecting.

Multiplayer is a prime example. The game was always intended to have an aspect of multiplayer, so when people ask "does it have multiplayer?" you see Murray go "Well, yes, but..." and all people seem to hear is the "yes". Then when it doesn't ship with this very minor aspect of the game people are up in arms because "you said it would have multiplayer!". It was a similar response to if Call of Duty had shipped with just a campaign mode, and it was totally out of line with what Murray said would be in the game.

NMS even shipped with what I believe Murray wanted as the core element of the multiplayer, the ability to land on a planet someone else had discovered and see who had discovered it and when (and if they gave anything funny names). The ability to run into other players was always intended to be a very rare occurrence, but pretty cool when it happened. So not shipping that part of it should not be a big deal, but it was actually a huge deal. It seems to be people's number one complaint.

The key problem, I think, was being way too vague. It's not so much that he didn't want to say no, it's that these things were technically true at the time, but he had very different ideas about what that meant than his audience, and he was far too vague in attempting to portray it.

Comment Re:Steam Page (Score 1) 75

To start out with, I'm not going to say there is nothing wrong with NMS. IMO, there is a lot wrong with it, and while I got most of what I expected out of it, it turned out to not be as shiny as I hoped.

That said, the complaints you list are absolutely idiotic, and show a clear lack of ability and listen and comprehend when other people speak.

Can you interprate a box with an ESRB rating sticker covering the original ESRB rating which was higher in part due to the online multiplayer component that the studio even announced to the ratings agency and left in place even as the boxes were being printed before launch?

Obviously multiplayer was planned, and just as obviously it didn't make the cut. Shit happens. From the very first interviews multiplayer was advertised as a minor feature, not a major part of the game, so this is at best a minor quibble. If you bought NMS for the multiplayer then you're an idiot and deserve every second of "pain and suffering" you feel you experienced because of it.

Yeah you do that about a day before your game launches when you realise all you have said was bullshit. Also he didn't downplay it he just said the game is so big you won't see other players, and then in week one two players found their exact locations on a map at the same time.

Did you watch any interviews with Murray? Every time it was brought up the mantra was essentially "don't expect to ever run into another player". How is that not downplaying it? He got real specific when he realized it wasn't going to make it into the final game, and that somehow morons on the internet thought the game was actually a multiplayer game in the sense of Battlefield or Call of Duty.

- Procedural generation with the same underlying script. Yay the aliens look slightly different but do the same thing.

They never said they would do different things. I don't know where you got that impression, it's not in any of the trailers or interviews. I will say the fact that the variety is pretty superficial is a bit disappointing, but it's not different than advertised.

- Upgrade and modification systems that have zero effect on the gameplay.

Er, what? Have you played the game? Upgrades and mods have a huge effect on gameplay. Without mods on your ship you get toasted pretty much immediately in space combat, with the right mods combat is a breeze. With mods mining is faster and safer, you can work in extreme environments with low risk, you can hold more cargo before you need to sell, etc. Mods are pretty essential to the whole thing.

- A completely omitted factional warfare system which was shown off in every preview.

The factional system is exactly as advertised. I watched an interview where Murray did the faction stuff and it was exactly the way it is in the game. I do not understand how people were mislead on this. They specifically stated you would not be able to join a faction permanently. What you can do is assist one side or the other in a space battle, and that will affect your faction standing with both races involved in the battle. And that's exactly what happens. If you jump in a battle you get a little mission tracker, where you have to blow up X number of ships for your chosen side. It's pretty much exactly as advertised.

- Finding someone elses base as shown in the preview.

It never showed a player owned base. It showed a player discovered base. Every single little base you find has a little waypoint marker you can access, and it puts your name on it. If you ever happen upon a planet someone else discovered first their name will be all over it, including the bases. You can go into your journal and rename them if you like, but I never really saw the point to name something nobody else is likely to ever see. The game was specifically designed NOT to have player bases, because they wanted people to keep moving around the galaxy. The Foundation update is a major concession in this area.

- Intense air-to-air combat scenarios (which also showed multiplayer) which ended up being dumbed down to a point and click adventure.

No, they didn't show intense air-to-air combat with multiplayer. They showed Player vs AI combat that is almost exactly the same as advertised. The only valid complaints here are that they did show combat in planet atmospheres, where in the actual game the pirates immediately flee once you get into atmosphere, and the AI is pretty basic, making for combat that is not particularly challenging once you've got a few basic mods on your ship.

They did mention the possibility that the person you were fighting could be another player, but then went on to talk about how unlikely that would be. Again, this was intended as a minor feature but the community somehow convinced itself that this was a major part of the game. So when it didn't ship it was a huge disappointment.

And perhaps the biggest of them all: The thing at the centre of our galaxy that will blow our minds. And to be fair to him it did blow our minds. It blew our minds about how we could have been so duped by the hype only to have the developers shit in the faces of the people dedicated enough to endure the incredible grind of trying to reach the centre. It blew our minds when suddenly a realisation was absolutely clear that people paid money to go through 100 hours of unenjoyable rubbish for nothing.

This is the second valid point you've made so far, and the first one that I think is actually a big deal. Though to me it felt like pushing to the center of the galaxy was meant more as simply a direction to follow, they did hype up something cool and what was delivered was decidedly not cool.

No one gives a shit about multiplayer.

Funny how pretty much every complaint you list involves lack of multiplayer as part of the complaint, except for the one reasonable complaint about the center of the galaxy. Hmmm...

Now, for a complaint of my own that you didn't mention (perhaps you tried to in your "procedural generation" comment, but did so poorly?), is that despite the vast amounts of procedural generated content, there aren't really that many things to do. The primary purpose of the game is a chill exploration of vistas as you hop across the galaxy, but it often feels like once you land on a planet you've pretty much seen all you need to see. Walk around for a bit, take some screenshots, maybe check and see which of three types of ruins are on this planet, and then it's off to the next planet. While you CAN do all kinds of things, like going trekking across the planet size planets, or trying to find all the little bases and outposts, or participating in faction combat, there isn't really much of a point to doing any of that. It doesn't feel like you progress anything when you do anything but drive toward the center of the galaxy or follow Atlas, which is disappointing.

It was advertised as being able to take distinct roles, like a combat pilot, an explorer, or a trader. Technically you can do these things, and even focus on them exclusively, but the reality of the game is that you're an explorer who is taking a break to do some combat or some trading. The exploration aspect is such a huge part of the game, it trivializes the trading and combat aspects. I was hoping for a more balanced approach, and that left me a bit disappointed.

Comment Re:This is why FOSS / CC is better than PD (Score 1) 99

I'm pretty sure they can charge for their packaging and marketing of the stories, i.e. yes, they can charge for it.

What they can't do is create and sell their product, then look up instances of people also publishing those stories and charge them licensing fees.

That is what Getty did here, they just happened to do it to the original author, so she was absolutely certain they had no right to charge her. Her mistake was in thinking she still had any right to sue them for misrepresenting a copyright claim on her works. If she had CC'd them, she could still do that, but she released them to the public domain, so she had no basis to counter-sue.

Comment Re:Damned if they do damned if they don't (Score 1) 117

Why would you make that assumption? People complain about policing on the iOS store, but it's still the most popular smartphone app store out there. The policing is clearly worth it. Why would you assume the policing would not be worth it on the Mac store? It seems to me they need something like that.

I have zero experience with the Mac store, so I'm basically just talking out my ass here, but it sounds like they chose to go the cheaper and easier route for the Mac store and just set strict requirements to develop an app for the app store, and then only check the apps when they are added to the store.

So if app makers are clever they can technically be within the rules, yet still be misleading to customers and scam them into buying the wrong product, and Apple doesn't care.

I honestly don't know if the iOS store does better, but judging by the tone of the article and a lot of comments here, it sounds like they do a lot better.

Comment Re:Very math. Such good. (Score 1) 117

Probably because CAN and AUS are the two other "dollars" Americans are most familiar with. The Brits use pounds, the rest of Europe mostly uses euros, Mexico has the peso and China the yuan, so really Canada and Australia are pretty near the top of the list of countries that call their base currency 'dollars'.

Do you think he should have used the Bahamian dollar instead? Or perhaps the Namibian dollar?

Honestly, if you're only going to pick two (why two? I dunno), Australia and Canada are pretty solid choices.

Comment Re:OK... (Score 1) 109

Blockchains don't do anything you can't do already. However, the blockchain makes it easy to get very high granualrity of data with no extra cost, whereas with traditional tracking methods there is a not-insignificant cost to obtaining all that detailed information.

The idea is simple and really quite brilliant. To create a blockchain of physical products, all you need is a barcode scanner/printer set up to generate new blocks for the block chain and a basic database that fits the number of items you sell, and you're basically done. The information needs to be uploaded, obviously, and your system needs to be robust enough to correctly handle everything that's going in, but the tedious data entry is gone.

So the farm produces some broccoli, and each shipment gets a block with a hash tag. When that shipment goes to the distributor, the distributor scans the existing block, and uses that to generate a new block for each shipment of broccoli they pack up. There is no need to hit the database to do this, btw. As long as you have the original hash available, you can generate a new block based on that hash with ease. When that shipment arrives at the store, the store generates a new block for each box they receive, and then a new block for each package they put on the shelf. Now, when they need to recall a product, they can see what box the package came out of, and all packages associated with that box. They can see what shipment that box came from, and all boxes associated with that shipment. They can see what distribution center that shipment came from, and all assicated shipments from that center. They can see what farm it came from, and all associated products from that farm, and depending on how detailed the farmer got, they may even be able to see the field and row the broccoli came from.

And all you need to do this is a database, and the ability to generate new hash tags from old hash tags. That's it.

To associate all the data they get from a blockchain automatically into a database without using blockchains, they'd have to essentially re-create the chain by hand at each step. I.e. farmer ships broccoli to distribution center. A person at the distribution center records shipment date, farm, product, ect, and probably gives it some kind of serial number specific to that shipment. Distribution center packages everything up, but they have to be diligent about what shipment gets associated with what packages, etc. It's a normal thing, but it requires effort. This continues all down the line.

The total effort to get this kind of information at every stage is so great that, in fact, most companies only track back to the distribution center level, and may not keep track of things like what specific box a product came out of. So if someone gets sick, they can tell you what company sold it, and ditch everything from that company for a given time period, but they don't have more information than that, so they wind up wasting a whole lot of product that is perfectly fine, because they simply don't know if it's fine or not.

With block chains, it's easy to track that info.

Comment Re:Barcodes are data - not a database (Score 1) 109

You only need the latest block in the blockchain. From the latest block, you can find every previous block associated with that item. That's the point of blockchains.

For example, a package of broccoli might get a barcode or QR code of a new block as it gets put on the shelf. This is the only block directly associated with this particular package of broccoli.

However, the block on the package of broccoli references the block that was placed on the box that the package of broccoli came out of. That block references the crate that the box of broccoli came out of. That block references the shipment that the crate was sent to the store on. That block references the warehouse that the crate was stored at while it waited for shipment. That block references the packaging facility that the broccoli was packaged at. That block references the farm that the broccoli was picked and shipped from. Hell, depending on how anal the farmer was about tracking, they could probably tell you the row the broccoli was picked from.

All of these blocks have timestamps, so when they scan the receipt from the customer who got sick, they have enough information in that one little barcode to see exactly where and when the broccoli was picked, and every stop it made on the way to the store. In mere moments they can freeze shipments from the farm/distributor/whatever and alert other stores to the potential for issues. They can immediately investigate exactly what happened to the shipment, and who might be affected, rather than having to do a bunch of data mining first.

Right now, all the barcode tells you is "These are Green Giant broccoli florets", plus maybe the time they were put on the shelf. With blockchains, they could say the same thing, but they'd also say "see hash XYZ". Just that little change lets you store the entire history of that broccoli.

This is all doable without blockchains, of course, but it would require a much more intricate system, with diligence in every step to prevent screw ups. With blockchains the process is simple, and requires no extra infrastructure: You just scan the latest block in the series, and generate a new block as the package moves to the next step. I imagine there are barcode printers that could do it just fine right now, just need to reference the old hash while generating a new hash, then upload the info to a database when done (I'm sure they can do that automatically, too).

Comment Re:Yeah, but who's gonna pay for it? (Score 1) 805

Maybe we should make the rich pay for it? You know, the people who can afford to? The people who have benefited the most from this land of opportunity our forefathers created?

Oh wait, no, we've decided to do the exact opposite of that and reduce taxes on those people, my bad. I guess the poor will just have to pick up the slack, eh?

Comment Re:Shocker (Score 1) 805

Most of what you list has little to do with liberal or conservative.

The strongest anti-vax, anti-GMO person I know is a strong right-wing conservative preacher. I don't know if he's anti-space, but I don't think he much cares for it, nor do I know for sure if he's anti-nuclear but given his other positions, it wouldn't surprise me.

There is an anti-intellectual movement on both sides of the political aisle, separate and motivated by very different things, but that come to essentially the same result.

So saying "liberal anti-science culture" is only hitting half of the anti-science culture. I also, just anecdotally, think the liberal anti-science culture accepts a lot more actual science than the conservative anti-science culture, much of which believes patently absurd things like the earth is only 6500 years old.

Comment Re:I"m a liberal socialist (Score 1) 805

There are only 85,000 total H1-B Visas given out every year, and that's for every industry, not just the Tech industry.

So, assuming every single H1-B went for a Tech job, it's still only 1.3% of the 6.5 million tech jobs, and 15% of the estimated 560,000 tech jobs that are currently sitting vacant for lack of qualified workers.

Comment Re:Steve Bannon, not a racist? (Score 2) 805

I don't get why people want to defend someone like Bannon, unless they also are misogynists and racists. And if they are, why don't they just say so rather than trying to claim he's not?

His paper says other things they like besides the racism. If things like racism don't affect you directly (family, friends, neighbors, etc), it can be really really easy to ignore it when somebody says a whole bunch of other things that you do like.

Most people aren't actively racist. A lot of people are what I would call passively racist. You could call them "neutral" with regards to race, but since we as humans have a natural tendency to be suspicious of the unfamiliar, I think passively racist is much more appropriate.

Rather than any sort of hate or dislike, it's more about the fact that a person doesn't look or act the way you're used to, so you're immediately uncomfortable and suspicious. We're hard wired to behave this way. On top of this, roughly 2/3 of America is non-hispanic white, which means it's not hard for those white people to simply not get much exposure to non-white culture. Meanwhile, Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, etc. are immersed in white culture, and it's harder for them to insulate.

So everywhere they go, minorities meet white people who treat them with suspicion for no good reason (other than the default evolutionary reasons). It's a whole different life experience, and I have a hard time even imagining what that's like, because I'm white, and I don't experience anything like it in my day to day life.

My point is that it's easy to ignore active racism when you yourself are passively racist, and it's really hard not to be passively racist. It's something that you have to work at, primarily by exposing yourself to different cultures and becoming acquainted with people who are very different from the people you know.

For some people that simply isn't an option, but most people could do this, but have no real incentive to. It's these people who find it easy ignore blatantly racist remarks in favor of some statement that relates to things that actually concern them, which is what Trump and Breitbart are all about.

Comment Re: Trump 2016!!! (Score 2) 2837

Ultimately, I voted for Trump because he can't do WORSE than Obama or Hilary. He might do a terrible job, but he can't do worse, and to my knowledge, he's not a happy criminal whose family has anyone who airs their laundry killed.

I think you're seriously underestimating Trump.

Comment Re:Modeling error versus exotic matter (Score 2) 164

The reason it's called Dark Matter is because of gravity. Matter is the only thing we know to have gravity, so if there's extra gravity there is (probably) extra matter. Relativity works so perfectly for everything else that the odds of the theory being the problem are very low.

Still, that doesn't mean "Dark Matter" actually matter, it's just a placeholder for this unknown mass of gravity that surrounds every galaxy in the universe. Matter is simply the most likely explanation, so that's what they called it.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have never seen anything fill up a vacuum so fast and still suck. -- Rob Pike, on X.