Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Slaves of Dubai (Score 5, Insightful) 265

Slaves yes.



The fact that it's a tough world out there doesn't excuse Dubai or UAE in general from acting like asshat clowns. They have the economy to take care of their foreign workers, but choose to screw them over. That's really not OK.

Comment Re:The cheater gets a win (Score 1) 101

not earning money != losing money

Not earning money is an opportunity cost [wikipedia.org]. When compared to other things that a company could be doing with its resources, not earning money is losing money.

There has to be a balance between bankruptcy and greed. There should also always be a balance between production cost and price to consumers. And just because one has a monopoly on a service/product, doesn't mean one has to rob the consumer blind. So as long as they do earn money, and the product is priced fair, all is well.

First off, I'm not saying voting would be ideal in all games.

I understand. I'm just trying to find counterpoints to the talking points that console fanboys have used against the promotion of PC gaming [pineight.com]. They try to spin the lack of mods as an advantage.

Well, console peasants would do that =) I love how that article is strewn with liberal political quotes. The points made reminds me of GOP talking points; like why paying out your ass for medical help is soooo much better than "socialist welfare".

One-on-One and voting is a mute point as in that case you quit the match instead.

I've played one-on-one games on Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection against Tetris DS players who used Action Replay to, say, get all I pieces. If you disconnect in a one-on-one stranger match, you get a loss on your record, and the cheater gets a win. In Mario Kart DS, on the other hand, I didn't see quite as much cheating, but I saw plenty of people complaining about snaking [neogaf.com], a novel use of the game's drift mechanic to gain speed on straightaways.

I can see how that would be irritating. Personally, I'm not a very competitive person, so losing doesn't bother me half as much as it should. I can sum up why I play a lot less MP today than say 10 years ago; Griefers, trolls, cheaters and obnoxious assholes. But still, different games draw different crowds. I haven't heard much insults etc. in ArmA 3, atleast compared to CoD.

These days I prefer a good coop game together with friends over the more individualistic MP games. I get much more out of having a good squad cohesion in eg. BF3, than actually winning the match, or be the best player etc.

Comment Re:Private multiplayer modding ethics (Score 1) 101

But did the publisher get remunerated for this replayability? A lot of publishers would rather have players spend money on paid DLC and new games from the same publisher.

This Publisher (Valve) in particular are a bit special. They dropped several DLC's as updates to the game, and not charging for them. They've also made available mod tools and dedicated server binaries etc. How far this goes to remunerating them fully for development etc., you have to ask Gabe about I guess.

Certainly a lot of publishers would rather have players spend a lot of money. That's not exactly a good thing though. Have a gander at eg. EA: BF4 standard costs 499NOK + 4 DLC's @ 129NOK a pop = 1015NOK, or $170. That is a horrible price. At the same time they've removed all possibilities of hosting your own servers, now you have to rent them for official hosting firms. Even the biggest Battefield community in Norway weren't allowed to host their own. And most gamers would agree BF4 is more or less BF3,5; too few news to warrant a new edition so close to the previous release. So in reality, we're talking 2x$170 + rental for clans own server since BF3's release. That amounts to a metric shit ton of money for EA, while my wallet bleeds.

Point is; as long as a publisher has released a game, and release dedicated servers and modding support, they can let the game loose to gamers, and let them "take over", without losing money (not earning money != losing money).

How does voting off cheaters work in a one-on-one match? And how can you be sure that a legitimately skilled player won't get voted off?

First off, I'm not saying voting would be ideal in all games. But in smaller mp games like eg. l4d2, and with no ranking system in place, voting can work very well. One-on-One and voting is a mute point as in that case you quit the match instead. But voting off one griefer from a match with more than two players, instead of having to quit the match to lose the a-hole is a better option. Sometimes genuinely skilled players gets the boot from various servers, that is true, but I have seldom experienced it. But griefers, trolls, cheaters, major a-holes and rascist/sexist fuckwits are booted out quite often.

Atleast as long as the legitimately skilled player is playing on ranked servers with punkbuster, and repeatedly kicked out and reported to PB, he will eventually be banned on eg. BF4 servers, and might even lose his entire EA account with _all_ games. That doesn't happen in L4D2 :)

Comment Re: I never asked for this (Score 1) 101

My issue is with the dumbing down of known and loved franchises.

Take an example: Anything Tom Clancy.

Rainbow 6? Died with Vegas and Vegas 2
Ghost Recon? Died with Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Third person, are you kidding!?

Those games are such radically different and dumbed down games that they bear little semblance to the original games but in name.

Comment Re:Private multiplayer modding ethics (Score 2) 101

I've downloaded 33,6GB with extra campaigns and maps for Left 4 Dead 2. It has expanded the replayability of L4D2 tremendously. Fairly recently (considering the game is over 4 years old) it also got Steam workshop support now. So modded weapons, sounds, models, textures etc. is available quick and easy. Now I've reached some 240 hours in it, and still going strong.

It support online play through official servers, best available unofficial, local server and LAN.

Running your own server also means being able to tweak other variables (gravity, firendly fire etc.), and server side mods.

And even in vs. matches, there are seldom cheating. And should you experience it anyway, the voting system makes it easy to get rid of d-bags.

This is the kind of modding support I've come to expect from a good game. Some developers get this.

Comment Re:If it is linked, it is public... (Score 1) 92

IMHO [...]

IMO... why be "humble" about one's own opinions? Surely we have good, considered reasons for holding them â" so own 'em with pride. If "IMO" seems too brash, I propose "IMCO" (condsidered), or "IMWRO"/"IMRO" ((well-) reasoned).

It's an initialism with more than one meaning. It could also mean "Honest".

IJWTHAOT - I Just Wanted To Have An Opinion Too.

Carry on...

I'm hauling along.

Comment Re:If it is linked, it is public... (Score 1) 92

I have to say though, in most cases, when someone sends me a file, I despise when they want to do a "share" rather than send me a download URL. The share semi-permanently links my account to theirs at that point, and takes up space on my allotment of space. Just send me a download link.

Must say I share that sentiment when it comes to sharing within Dropbox. When 1 person shares 1 file with, say 5 persons, that 1 file is weighted against all 5 persons quotas, thereby "stealing" alloted space. I find that kinda morally dubious at best, as people pay for their quotas.

Slashdot Top Deals

I just need enough to tide me over until I need more. -- Bill Hoest