BLOGS
Media Mess
As I finish reading a short story, which I happened to download as an eBook due to time constraints. I reflect over the last few days experiences of new media and it's woeful web of intricate difficulties.Having a number of deadlines being sprung upon me. I was forced to investigate and explore different avenues of technology in order to get the job done. I've always been a fan of the idea of eBooks, but never really explored professional incarnations, let alone paid for any. Truth be told, reading The Silmarillion on a pdf was about as far as I'd been.
Yet, a Google search and five minutes of my time later and there I had a freshly downloaded copy of the book I needed. It was actually cheaper than the 'real' Amazon alternative despite the currency exchange and I had no waits on delivery nor had to spend a minimum in order to get free delivery. I would consider that a bargain!
As with all new forms of media delivery and convenience. More extravagant and draconian methods of Jewishness are unfortunately enforced. Pennies make the pounds after all, and no one likes knowing that they could've made more money if only they clamped down even harder!
Striking the balance is of course the primal issue and one that has been quite obviously and reflexively shunned by those 'in power'. They hold the cards and are free to do as they please. Regardless if it's Steam, movies or music downloads, when intellectual 'property' (I'll spare the whine about how ridiculous this concept is) is under threat, nay, 'lost profit', the businessmen are always quick to thrust the knife in to stop any vulnerable or potentially 'flexible' profit streams.
Television? With the BBC already having an online service for some time now, as well as Channel 4oD (on demand), and ITV soon enough. Traditional media is catering more and more to my needs. I can read some of the best writers in the world for free, I can watch free television, I can listen to free radio. So why do gamers begrudge paying for music, film or games?
In fact, the new technological push, leaves an interesting legal technicality open for exploitation. In the United Kingdom, if you use equipment to receive or record television, you're subject to pay the TV license, which is, £135.50 per year (£45.50 if you're using a black and white television).
I've often thought about what I would say if a TV License inspector did happen to make a call round. I've like most(?) students, received the angry letters bating for blood. I could quite confidently and calmly explain that a TV license pays exclusively for the BBC services. But since you've got no proof that I've used my USB Digital TV Tuner to watch BBC services live (I'll happily be watching Jeremy Kyle on ITV2 just at the right time, hopefully!) but I've got proof that I enjoy BBC programmes legally, surely I could win on technicalities?
In fact, just to show how far the limitations of popular stereotypical opinion are. I downloaded Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP2 and Vista Business 64 Bit, legally and free of charge earlier today. Most software comes with separate demo or trial versions, so the excuses are wearing thin.
Cost, restricting 'DRM's' or just a blatant lack of quality isn't a reason for rampant piracy, the logic is infallible and it's not helping anyone. It gives media big wigs less reason to invest in alternative media and more to ramp up prices and add further restrictions. It's just plain disrespectful.
Competitive Communities Drop the Ball
A small observation about the attitudes of emerging communities with prospective games.Call of Duty 4 : Modern Warfare marks the third installment of Infinity Wards highly proclaimed PC series. The game moves away from the world war two and moves into...'Modern Warfare'.
Publicly the game is unashamedly fun. There are few things I find annoying when playing, although the small things are like iron pokers burning into the skin. Two of the perks (similar to WoW's talent points), 'Last Stand' (when you've 'died', you drop to the floor and pull out a pistol, so it means you can snatch back a cheap kill) and 'Martyrdom' (when you've died, you drop a grenade. Which granted doesn't sound as bad as you think, but in practice, due to the quite ridiculous overpowered nature of a grenade, means that a kill is 90% guaranteed due to the stupidity of public players movement or the fact that even with sprint enabled, you're not likely to escape the hiroshima like splash) are truly innovations invented purely to remove any skill in making a kill. What's worse is that you don't know who has these skills and who doesn't.
I personally go for the grenade launcher attachment for my primary weapon, AK47. Stopping power (extra bullet damage) and extreme conditioning (means you can sprint longer).
The maps are almost carbon copies of CoD1 and CoD2 alternatives, which is no bad thing in my opinion. The graphics are gorgeous, they've this chalk pastel quality which clashes against the modern and oppressive machinery and weapons of the players. Considering at the heart of this, is the Quake III engine, shows how far aging engines can be pushed, graphically. I only wish developers could see this.
The crux comes competitively when talk turns to the unavoidable debate of rule sets and PAM. I honestly feel that the CoD2 players themselves will determine and unfortunately limit the appeal and future of CoD4. The further the CoD series moves away from comparisons of Counter Strike the better and more support it will receive.
When Counter Strike is king, you the horse, have to make concessions in order to supplant him. Counter Strike players can sit on their laurels as prospective communities debate themselves into oblivion.
I'll be honest, I was guilty of exactly of that same reflexive instinct when Enemy Territory: Quake Wars was released. I shouted for the removal of vehicles, which I felt completely undermined the speed and thrill of the game. But I knew, part of the reason why this game would become successful is more players. The vehicles were needed to attract the battlefield players, it really was as simple as that. Finding the right balance is the hard part.
There are so many reasons and innovations why CoD4 is better than its predecessor and the competitive community has just undermined pretty much all of them. It ticks all the boxes needed for success yet they seem to be in a prolonged rush in order to set a global standard, when there isn't even a spectator capability for example. You need to know where and when to place the emphasis and removing new features of a game which is barely weeks old isn't the way to go.
Counter Strike players enjoy the ride, because CoD4 is going no where.
By Richard '_evan' Armstrong
Dec 12, 2007 19:08
As I finish reading a short story, which I happened to download as an eBook due to time constraints. I reflect over the last few days experiences of new media and it's woeful web of intricate difficulties.Having a number of deadlines being sprung upon me. I was forced to investigate and explore different avenues of technology in order to get the job done. I've always been a fan of the idea of eBooks, but never really explored professional incarnations, let alone paid for any. Truth be told, reading The Silmarillion on a pdf was about as far as I'd been.
Yet, a Google search and five minutes of my time later and there I had a freshly downloaded copy of the book I needed. It was actually cheaper than the 'real' Amazon alternative despite the currency exchange and I had no waits on delivery nor had to spend a minimum in order to get free delivery. I would consider that a bargain!
As with all new forms of media delivery and convenience. More extravagant and draconian methods of Jewishness are unfortunately enforced. Pennies make the pounds after all, and no one likes knowing that they could've made more money if only they clamped down even harder!
Striking the balance is of course the primal issue and one that has been quite obviously and reflexively shunned by those 'in power'. They hold the cards and are free to do as they please. Regardless if it's Steam, movies or music downloads, when intellectual 'property' (I'll spare the whine about how ridiculous this concept is) is under threat, nay, 'lost profit', the businessmen are always quick to thrust the knife in to stop any vulnerable or potentially 'flexible' profit streams.
"I would further suggest that this is akin to a man charged with GBH punching the stenographer in the face to prove he's got a lousy left hook."
Television? With the BBC already having an online service for some time now, as well as Channel 4oD (on demand), and ITV soon enough. Traditional media is catering more and more to my needs. I can read some of the best writers in the world for free, I can watch free television, I can listen to free radio. So why do gamers begrudge paying for music, film or games?
In fact, the new technological push, leaves an interesting legal technicality open for exploitation. In the United Kingdom, if you use equipment to receive or record television, you're subject to pay the TV license, which is, £135.50 per year (£45.50 if you're using a black and white television).
I've often thought about what I would say if a TV License inspector did happen to make a call round. I've like most(?) students, received the angry letters bating for blood. I could quite confidently and calmly explain that a TV license pays exclusively for the BBC services. But since you've got no proof that I've used my USB Digital TV Tuner to watch BBC services live (I'll happily be watching Jeremy Kyle on ITV2 just at the right time, hopefully!) but I've got proof that I enjoy BBC programmes legally, surely I could win on technicalities?
In fact, just to show how far the limitations of popular stereotypical opinion are. I downloaded Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP2 and Vista Business 64 Bit, legally and free of charge earlier today. Most software comes with separate demo or trial versions, so the excuses are wearing thin.
Cost, restricting 'DRM's' or just a blatant lack of quality isn't a reason for rampant piracy, the logic is infallible and it's not helping anyone. It gives media big wigs less reason to invest in alternative media and more to ramp up prices and add further restrictions. It's just plain disrespectful.
Competitive Communities Drop the Ball
By Richard '_evan' Armstrong
Nov 30, 2007 06:39
A small observation about the attitudes of emerging communities with prospective games.Call of Duty 4 : Modern Warfare marks the third installment of Infinity Wards highly proclaimed PC series. The game moves away from the world war two and moves into...'Modern Warfare'.
Publicly the game is unashamedly fun. There are few things I find annoying when playing, although the small things are like iron pokers burning into the skin. Two of the perks (similar to WoW's talent points), 'Last Stand' (when you've 'died', you drop to the floor and pull out a pistol, so it means you can snatch back a cheap kill) and 'Martyrdom' (when you've died, you drop a grenade. Which granted doesn't sound as bad as you think, but in practice, due to the quite ridiculous overpowered nature of a grenade, means that a kill is 90% guaranteed due to the stupidity of public players movement or the fact that even with sprint enabled, you're not likely to escape the hiroshima like splash) are truly innovations invented purely to remove any skill in making a kill. What's worse is that you don't know who has these skills and who doesn't.
I personally go for the grenade launcher attachment for my primary weapon, AK47. Stopping power (extra bullet damage) and extreme conditioning (means you can sprint longer).
The maps are almost carbon copies of CoD1 and CoD2 alternatives, which is no bad thing in my opinion. The graphics are gorgeous, they've this chalk pastel quality which clashes against the modern and oppressive machinery and weapons of the players. Considering at the heart of this, is the Quake III engine, shows how far aging engines can be pushed, graphically. I only wish developers could see this.
The crux comes competitively when talk turns to the unavoidable debate of rule sets and PAM. I honestly feel that the CoD2 players themselves will determine and unfortunately limit the appeal and future of CoD4. The further the CoD series moves away from comparisons of Counter Strike the better and more support it will receive.
When Counter Strike is king, you the horse, have to make concessions in order to supplant him. Counter Strike players can sit on their laurels as prospective communities debate themselves into oblivion.
I'll be honest, I was guilty of exactly of that same reflexive instinct when Enemy Territory: Quake Wars was released. I shouted for the removal of vehicles, which I felt completely undermined the speed and thrill of the game. But I knew, part of the reason why this game would become successful is more players. The vehicles were needed to attract the battlefield players, it really was as simple as that. Finding the right balance is the hard part.
There are so many reasons and innovations why CoD4 is better than its predecessor and the competitive community has just undermined pretty much all of them. It ticks all the boxes needed for success yet they seem to be in a prolonged rush in order to set a global standard, when there isn't even a spectator capability for example. You need to know where and when to place the emphasis and removing new features of a game which is barely weeks old isn't the way to go.
Counter Strike players enjoy the ride, because CoD4 is going no where.
« Previous1Next »
Information
http://www.sk-gaming.com/rss/blog/_evanArchive
- All
- July 2008 (1)
- May 2008 (1)
- January 2008 (1)
- December 2007 (2)
- November 2007 (1)
- September 2007 (1)
- August 2007 (3)
