Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This only gave grief

3 (6.1%)

Grakelin is not stupid

6 (12.2%)

Are you happier now?

1 (2%)

------ Haiku, the encore -----

17 (34.7%)

Disagreeing, Fine

0 (0%)

Why you make a fuzz 'bout it?

3 (6.1%)

Lets just be happy

19 (38.8%)

Total Members Voted: 48

[Micro102]

I like the Xbox version of shadow run. One of the better multiplayer online games.

And now it makes me want to play the board game.

[Draco18s]

Oh, and draco, besides disagreeing with you on copyright/piracy, *highfives* ... Shadowrun rocks. Were you playing 3rd of 4th ed?

4th.

I like the Xbox version of shadow run. One of the better multiplayer online games.

But it has nothing to do with ShadowRun!  The "xbox/PC" game has ressurection and teleportation!  Two things you can not ever do in ShadowRun (they're called "holy grails of magical research for a reason, hell, the closest they got to teleportation in EarthDawn--the fourth world--is Metaplanear Shortcut for the meat body; quite litterally you hit up the astral plane in the flesh).

[fenrif]

It may not have anything to do with the P&P game, but its still a pretty decent FPS. The shadowrun name was just tacked on in an obvious attempt to cash in on the brand name, sure, but its still pretty fun to play... Shame it didn't do very well becaue it pretty much means no more shadowrun games at all for a loooong time.

Though thats another problem with modern games: Company buys rights to IP, makes a game that has very little to do with IP which doesn't sell well because of obvious reasons. So the company just shelves it, makes no more games, sues anyone who tries to make their own version (that probobly sticks to what the original IP was about)

[Draco18s]

Well, yeah.  It's a "decent" game (a friend of mine played it) but basically anyone who likes the actual game detests it because of the whole licensing thing.  The game was devloped by FASA, sure, but I can't say how much Microsoft changed it (given that the game was published in 2007, but FASA went defunct in 2001).  FASA was pretty much scrabbling to stay afloat, so the name connection was used to drum up interest from an existing fan base (which is why they hate it so much).

[Sir Pseudonymous]

FYI, copyright violation is another form of theft

No, it's not in any way related to theft, and is illegal only because cokehead executives have bribed politicians who, in all likelihood, then spent that bribe money on hookers and blow, presumably in a giant hooker-and-blow orgy sponsored by the aforementioned executives.

and is prosecuted as such

Well, for one, *obtaining* unauthorized copies isn't prosecuted at all, and is only dubiously illegal (how are you, the innocent consumer, supposed to know whether a given distributor has the right to give/sell you something?), and cracking software protection is only illegal because of the DMCA, which denies consumers their rights of fair use if even the most laughably ineffective protection is put on something. Distributing isn't prosecuted either, except on a large scale commercial racket, and that is presumably only a real concern to law enforcement because of the likelihood a criminal organization is using it for funding. All of the court cases dealing with individuals uploading things to filesharing networks have been civil cases, and all based on spurious evidence brought forth by shady organizations hired by record labels.

, so let's not have anyone else preaching against the syntax as if they were qualified attorneys.

FYI, that's not what syntax means. Syntax is grammatical structure, how words fit together in a sentence. The term you're looking for is either semantics (meaning of words) or rhetoric (how words are used).

Trying to label "copyright infringement" as "theft" is a calculated move by the same PR cokeheads who compared the VCR to the Boston strangler, just like how the credit industry has coined "identity theft", replacing more appropriate terms like "bank/credit fraud", shifting the burden to the victim ("that greedy bastard shoulda been more carful with his identitay! We sure aint gonna pay for not having proper securitay and validation procedures!"). It's a libelous misnomer and nothing more.

[Nivim]

 And that, Sir, is the kind of conviction that actually hurts your side of the argument, and encourages flaming.

[dragnar]

This thread is dangerously close to 8-bit theater.

Wait! That is not how we do things around here, buddy. First we have to argue incessantly over semantics. Then one of us has to hurt one or all of us. Also, you're a villain.

Lets stop before the last part of the quote becomes true. It doesn't matter what sort of crime pirating is persecuted as, as long as we agree that it is a crime.

The problem is, pirates are impossible to stop, for all intents and purposes. DRM and similar systems are horrible systems that hurt everyone except the pirates. Besides, piracy isn't nearly as large a problem as they seem to be making it out to be. Has a study ever been preformed to see just how many people pirate games anyway? Or how many of those would be willing to buy the games they pirate if they had to? As far as I know, pirates are a very small percentage of gamers. And besides, it seems most people I know pirate music/videos and yet those industries haven't done anything near the scale of DRM to try and stop it. It would be like having to reconnect your ipod to a computer every time you wanted to use it, only being allowed to play each song once without a connection.

[moghopper]

Not to rain on everyones parade, but maybe this thread should get back on track before it degenerates into a flamewar.

[Draco18s]

Not to rain on everyones parade, but maybe this thread should get back on track before it degenerates into a flamewar.

can we move on?

[fenrif]

And besides, it seems most people I know pirate music/videos and yet those industries haven't done anything near the scale of DRM to try and stop it. It would be like having to reconnect your ipod to a computer every time you wanted to use it, only being allowed to play each song once without a connection.

Interestingly enough, when VHS and betamax and that sort of thing became commonplace the movie and TV industries were aghast. If anyone could record anything they wanted off TV, or copy rented films how were the industries supposed to survive? I once read an article talking about how a high up in the TV industry seriously lobbied to have VHS made illegal because people could record TV shows without not the adverts, which he described as theft. Obviously this didn't pan out like he thought, and both the TV and movie industry seem to be doing pretty well to this day.

Didn't stop them from trying things like DIVX and the like. The recording industry has done a few dodgey things too (I'm sure if you look around you can find some recording exec calling people who own cassete tape decks evil filthy pirates). When napster first came out pretty much every recording exec claimed this would see the end of music as we know it. Did you ever hear how sony tried putting rootkits onto audio CDs in an attempt to stop people pirating them? Or stopping them from working in computer CD drives?

Theres always something to blame. Some new reason that whatever media industry is going to catastrophically fail, spelling the end of entertainment as we know it. Fortunatly it never comes to pass, and it only ever seems to be the middlemen execs who think this way. Unfortunatly they're usually the ones who come up with hairbrained schemes to stop this: DRM, rootkits, DIVX, and lobbying whatever governments they can to change laws in their favour.

So again i reiterate: publishers are what's wrong with modern games.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

And that, Sir, is the kind of conviction that actually hurts your side of the argument, and encourages flaming.

Nothing I've said is outright untrue, even if some much of it is hyperbole. Record labels and movie studios have, since their inception, been viewed as hedonistic and degenerate, hence drawing attention to that with "hookers and blow", in order to make the point that while they're trying to stand as the moral highground on this matter, they are in fact corrupt and degenerate themselves. The fact that politicians are corrupt and receive bribes from lobbyists is also no secret.

Second and third paragraphs are both completely true.

Fourth, again calling attention to the character of the people behind the strategy to rebrand a civil matter (copyright infringement) into a criminal matter (theft), at least in public perception.

Interestingly enough, when VHS and betamax and that sort of thing became commonplace the movie and TV industries were aghast. If anyone could record anything they wanted off TV, or copy rented films how were the industries supposed to survive? I once read an article talking about how a high up in the TV industry seriously lobbied to have VHS made illegal because people could record TV shows without not the adverts, which he described as theft. Obviously this didn't pan out like he thought, and both the TV and movie industry seem to be doing pretty well to this day.

Trying to label "copyright infringement" as "theft" is a calculated move by the same PR cokeheads who compared the VCR to the Boston strangler,

The actual words he used. Look it up.

Has a study ever been preformed to see just how many people pirate games anyway?

Yes, it came to the conclusion that despite the large volume of unauthorized distribution it was almost all being done by a small percentage of the population (so, basically, "hardcore filesharers" who obtain many times their entire income in media, hence forming a striking parallel with the "little timmy" example, especially given that other studies have also shown the people who pirate the most media also spend the largest percentage of their income buying/renting media, and supplement that by obtaining the less important/lower valued media free from the internet), can't remember where it was done though, some European country if I remember right. So, pretty much what you're positing.

Not to rain on everyones parade, but maybe this thread should get back on track before it degenerates into a flamewar.

Biggest problem with modern games? Aging gamers. We grew up on shit games as kids, and now we're all jaded assholes who see the garbage of the past in a nostalgic light, and resent modern games for not triggering that too. Sure, there were occasionally gems back then, but overall the quality of games has increased, meaning there's less difference between great games and average games these days, because average is still pretty fucking good. But not even the best are worth the $50-$60 pricetags. Hell, most games aren't worth $20. The only game I've bought in the past year that I haven't regretted spending anything on is SoC, for $5 off Steam. Hell, I've bought games for $5 on Steam that I've regretted wasting my money on. So yeah.

[Soulwynd]

It doesn't matter what sort of crime pirating is persecuted as, as long as we agree that it is a crime.

We don't agree. I don't agree with copyright, IP, etc. That's the whole point.

But move on everyone, kthx. Or I might have to lock this for a day to let it cool down.

*holds the ruler like a mean teacher*

[dragnar]

Huh, I never heard of those attempts to stop pirating. (probably because I don't listen to music much)

So again i reiterate: publishers are what's wrong with modern games.

Precisely. I once read an article called "The Scratchware Manifesto". My favorite quote from it: "Death to the gaming industry. Long live games."

I don't agree with it completely, big gaming companies can make impressive graphics and massive worlds that indie developers can't match without insane dev times, but they have become flooded with bureaucracy and refuse to make anything truly new.

Biggest problem with modern games? Aging gamers. We grew up on shit games as kids, and now we're all jaded assholes who see the garbage of the past in a nostalgic light, and resent modern games for not triggering that too. Sure, there were occasionally gems back then, but overall the quality of games has increased, meaning there's less difference between great games and average games these days, because average is still pretty fucking good.

I disagree. The average quality of games has improved drastically, but the number of outliers in either direction has gone down massively. Most games are good now, but very, very few are truly great. Fewer games stink because production prices are so ridiculous they can't afford to make experimental games. Thomas Edison found "a hundred ways not to make a lightbulb." The gaming industry can't afford those failures due to too much focus on making games flashy, and instead settles for mere torches.

We don't agree. I don't agree with copyright, IP, etc. That's the whole point.

I don't agree with a good deal of it, but I think that the developers of a game do deserve some compensation for all the hard work that went into making it.  The problem is all the limitations on the game's use copyright law includes.

[Soulwynd]

Not agreeing with copyright/IP/Patents doesn't mean people wont get paid, quite the opposite.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dMuGnFdQ0s

[Sir Pseudonymous]

I disagree. The average quality of games has improved drastically, but the number of outliers in either direction has gone down massively. Most games are good now, but very, very few are truly great. Fewer games stink because production prices are so ridiculous they can't afford to make experimental games. Thomas Edison found "a hundred ways not to make a lightbulb." The gaming industry can't afford those failures due to too much focus on making games flashy, and instead settles for mere torches.

Well, besides the fact that most basic ideas have been done in one form or another so the only real difference at this point is implementation and details, I think there are a shitton of gameplay experiments. It's just that just about any gameplay you can imagine falls into a number of basic formulas, or is some combination of things that have already been done. If you refine that to gameplay that actually works, the number's even smaller.

Another reason for the perception is probably because to come up with something radically different you have to have to do something that has no (or only an obscure) technological precedent, like Portal. In that case, if something hasn't been done, it's probably because no one's figured out how to do it yet.

The only thing that actively supports the theorized outcome is that someone who's made a successful game is going to have an easier time getting backing to make more, and being human is probably going to recycle what they already did so they have less work to do and more money to spend on something other than reinventing the wheel. Like hookers and blow.