alanschu

I guess Gamespy called the Biotics Bionics, so now there's some hoopla about Bionics in the game or something.

I haven't followed it, but is there no chance that it turns into a good FPS like Deus Ex or System Shock 2?

As I mentioned already, the only version of Half-Life 2 that didn't come with CS: Source was the barebones version from steam. The Silver and Gold both came with it, as did both retail boxes. (Actually, tiered purchase plans is another benefit, as if you only want Half-Life 2 and nothing else, that option was available to you). Because there is confounding variables. A bicycle would take longer. Net connections do cost money, and if you don't have a fixed cost for bandwidth like I do, then DD is probably not for you. Same with people that still have to use dial-up modems. As for taking a lot more time...I suppose. Except that I can download the game at 3:30 AM if I want. I buy most of my DD games while I sleep. I don't see the large time investment required, when I can have the game download while I'm at school/work/sleeping. In any case, it's not like I can't do other stuff on my computer while I download it either. I was chatting it up on forums when I bought SR2. I know about indie games. And I want to see MORE of them. I want to see an influx of creative talent coming into the market. As for Will Wright and whatnot, thank god these guys demonstrated their abilities prior to the explosion in development costs. Will Wright had his legacy of games to keep an extremely skeptical Electronic Arts from pulling the plug on The Sims. Thankfully, The Sims made EA so much money that EA is willing to take on Will's innovative Spore. But I'd rather Will Wright not be the only person that has creative freedom in the industry. Will has also been very vocal that stagnation is all too common in this industry because of the rising development costs. I'd rather Feargus not have to rely on a "slam-dunk" to get Obsidian some money so that they have a bit more influence with publishers to start publishing their own IP. All that hard work you did demonstrating that the online cost is the same as the retail cost would indicate otherwise. As for not seeing a price drop in an online store, I disagree. Given that I, you know, actually keep track of them. I guarantee you that if sales are crap at $50 on a game, regardless of how it's distributed, it's price will go down. Consumers don't understand how much influence they have on the price of goods. I have already commented that if someone values the authentic CD and the manual, then they should buy the retail copy. The reason why I go on about economics is because you seem utterly confused that a DD game would sell for the same price. You were bitching that Half-Life 2, a game that (if the steam preload means anything) had pretty good DD sales, still sold at the standard $50. If people are willing to pay $50 for something, and a company doesn't anticipate an increase in revenue by dropping the price, they probably won't do it. No, it's not. The decision of game developers is heavily influenced by the publisher. It's part of the reason why the game developers themselves complain about stagnation in the industry. The publisher has less personal investment into the game, and seems intent on funding games like Enter the Matrix and Driv3r because they have established IPs and they are a shoo-in for making "big bux." They are seen as the primary catalyst (this is according to game devs too) behind the focus on graphics over gameplay. I wouldn't be surprised if they are the ones saying "Games should be shorter to appeal to the mass market" either. Because of the copyprotection scheme Valve implemented. You have to validate your CD key on a Steam account. I haven't tried, but as far as I can tell the only way you could successfully sell your CD is if you gave the other guy your Steam account as well. You cannot validate a CD key under a different account. Assuming of course that both the free download and the retail release are exactly the same. If they are, then the people that bought the $25 official version are being stupid. I certainly wouldn't blame any developer/publisher for that!

All that says is that it's in our nature to look out for ourselves. It doesn't say that it's in our nature to kill each other. Irrelevant. If it was in our nature to kill each other, then people would have gone through the proper protocol to launch said nuclear missiles. If it's in our nature, it wouldn't have to rely on one man, because it'd be inherent to all of us.

The closest I have ever been to drunk was feeling a small buzz one day while I was on my trip in the Dominican Republic. I agree with Llyranor that it doesn't say much as a person if you require being drunk in order to make friends. I do not typically drink (if for no other reason than cheap alcohol tastes like ****, and expensive alcohol is, well, expensive). The funny thing is, is that I am the one voted most likely to go out and act goofy on the dance floor, and out of the 4 people (including myself) that were down there, only one rivaled me in my ability to strike up a conversation with a stranger. I am not against drinking, nor do I have any beef with someone that drinks near me. I do not have a hard time meeting people and talking with them, and tend to make friends quite easily.

I'm talking about Half-Life 2, as mkreku specifically mentioned that game. Which is why I said I wasn't aware of any for other games either. In any case, I have to go to work now, so I'll continue this discussion later. EDIT: As for CS: Source, there was only 1 of the 5 different ways you could buy HL2 that did not include CS for free.

No, I can't. But I can be certain that an idea for a game that hasn't been tried before has a greater likelihood of not being squashed at the very beginning because a publisher isn't interested. Some developers will try to just get the big game sales. But developers of niche markets in particular (like the CRPG market for instance) have a greater likelihood of earning enough money to cover the costs for their development. It helps promote innovation in game design. Especially seeing as there is flexibility in price. If you think that $50 is too "greedy" then buy the game when it is $40. On the plus side, the developers will still make money off of it. If a game is pushing the envelope, the option of selling it for less to attract buyers is more viable. Don't be surprised when Half-Life 2 doesn't have any significant discounts, because people are going to buy it. And those that aren't going to buy it at $50, can buy it when the price drops to $40 (or now $30). Because they haven't done anything to prevent you from getting your precious manual. On the other hand, the only thing missing is hard copies of stuff like that. The value added is pretty moot, as there's still no content that a DD has no access to compared to a retail buyer. DD may not come with a paper manual, but it still does come with the manual. That's just it! The idea is that they CAN make it in the end. It's a new paradigm. Yes, there will be developers that only want to get the most sales and make games that follow a particular formula. But believe it or not, there are some developers that look at their work as art. The idea of making a game like Fallout or Torment, that doesn't really sell all that much, becomes that much more viable. If someone is particularly creative at making these sort of games over the high gloss 3D shooter, they aren't immediately at a severe handicap in this industry. Finally, the greater ROI also means that longer games are not as risky of an enterprise. One, they have a greater chance to recoup the costs, plus if it is true that many people don't prefer longer games, there is less reliance on needing large volume in order to make a profit. People seek to maximize their enjoyment in life. I'll take my chances that an artist (i.e. the developer) has a greater chance of finding pleasure by releasing a game (or game idea) that he really wants to do that won't sell as much, then I will with a 3rd party publisher. It happens already with literature and movies, and probably other art mediums as well. Authors don't need to hope for their book to be a bestseller to be successful, and I'm sure many are perfectly content catering to a smaller niche because it's about a topic they enjoy writing about.

You'll have a tough time doing that with the hard copy of the game as well though. In any case, it's just the same. The caveat is that you have to give up your steam account as well. Given I don't sell my games when I'm done with them, I haven't really looked into it with other companies. But with Half-Life 2, it's just as inconvenient both ways. What are you talking about? It has always been impossible to play any of those games for free, so it's not like you could play them without paying for it. In the case of CS and DOD, you had to own the original Half-Life. Alternatively, if you weren't interested in Half-Life, and just wanted to play CS, you have the option of buying just CS. Same goes for Red Orchestra and whatnot. I didn't pay any extra to play Counterstrike: Source. I just bought Half-Life 2. Nor did I have to pay for Half-Life 2: Deathmatch. I just bought Half-Life 2. However, if you were only interested in those components, you could buy just them and actually save money in the end. Because we are all talking out of our asses when it comes to how effective DD sales is right now. Then don't use DD. Problem solved. I on the other hand, find it particularly convenient to be able to buy a game while I'm busy doing something else. I don't have to waste gas driving to the store, and I WOULD rather the developers get the additional money. DD is just starting. It's way to early.

I have SLI'd in the past for performance boosts (Voodoo2). The thing is, by the time I am needing that performance boost, the card that goes with it can be acquired for particularly cheap.

Technology has been more evolutionary since WW2 in my opinion.

That would explain the drastic increase in homicides after Katrina hit! It doesn't get rid of social control. If there is one thing that people inherently are, it's that they are social beings. If social control did disappear, then everyone would be doing the looting, and acting in their own best interests (because I do believe that people are inherently selfish...it's a survival trait). Why would we be more likely to kill each other compared to other animals if, as you say, we are driven by need just the same as animals. I don't believe that it's because it is part of our nature to kill. If you could point me in the direction of some academic research to indicate that we are, I'd love to read up on it. Based purely on introspection, I would be willing to concede that people inherently desire power (which is because people are inherently social...more on this later). I do believe that people are inherently aggressive. But if it was truly in our nature to kill ourselves, I'd suspect somebody somewhere would have already pushed the button to thermonuclear destruction. Probably during a blackout when social control has disappeared.

Good point! I concede.

That's pretty much the concern I had. I guess I'll pick based on which video card I go for, because I'm not entirely against the idea of being able to add a second card a bit down the road to get a boost in performance. Thanks mkreku.

Exactly! DD is a boon for those that are in niche markets....which, oddly enough, are the PC RPG players such as those that visit this very board.

How do you take away social control though? Aren't we also social by nature? Are you saying that if we didn't have social control, we'd just kill each other for the fun of it?

I'm not saying it is necessarily. But I'd rather the market take care of people that can't keep their act together, rather than have publishers turn down innovative idea after innovative idea because they don't think they can make as much money with it. Let the companies with poor ideas fold, rather than the ones with great ideas that have never been done before. Because it's convenient? I don't have to get into my car, waste gas (kill the environment and all that jazz even!!!111), risk a car accident, and put up with a busy shopping center to get my game. Furthermore, as for the "message," you'd have to be either completely in denial, or just flat out dimwitted to not recognize that the developer will receive more of my money via direct download than through a retailer. All you have to do is spend one minute learning how retail operates to recognize this. So? In any case, costs being lower does not mean prices drop either. Read up on microeconomics if you don't believe me. The funny thing is, is that the consumer doesn't realize just how much influence, as a collective, they have over the price of goods. And if my argument is centered on it being better for developers, you didn't do a good job of disputing it. How so? Last I checked, we both paid the same for the game. The funny thing is, based on the prices you inquired about earlier, you actually would save money using direct download.

If it was in our nature to just outright kill each other, wouldn't you have more murders that mimic'd those of serial killers and whatnot? Wouldn't you and I have an inherent bloodlust to kill each other?

They also exert their influence on the creative process. The competition from established sources already incurs a higher overhead, meaning there's saturation to the point where profits would no longer be adequate enough to justify stocking the product. It confirms nothing, since we are all speculating. It just as easily confirms that the retail market is still viewed as a necessity, and has the purchasing power to influence the price that digital distribution can sell at. And yes, they are totally screwing me over by making me pay the exact same amount of money as I would in a store. Pretty weak example of "screwing us over" as there's no net difference. And don't pull the "but you're not getting a manual" and whatever baloney either. Because if you still value that stuff, you can still buy it. No one is forcing you to use direct download. If you'd rather pay for it at retail, then pay for it at retail.

I thought that humanity was its own predator though. The big thing about how it's in our nature to kill each other and all that jazz. If it's in our nature to kill each other, why does our population insist on growing so quickly?

Well, if a species is hurting itself, it probably shouldn't be growing.

Lining your own pockets could certainly be seen as a valid point of view :D Dosnt make it good for the consumer though. Unless the developer acquring more capital allows them additional creative control over their content. Competition dictates this. Digital Distribution for gaming is in its infancy, and there's not been a big push to make it mainstream.

I'm considering buying a new computer, but I'm hemming and hawing between the two motherboards. They are the ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe and the A8R32-MVP Deluxe. One is an nForce4 chipset, and the other has the CrossFire Xpress 3200 chipset. Are there any concerns that I should have with respect to video cards? If I go with the nForce chipset, should I more heavily favour an nVidia card, or vice versa? Thanks.

I agree wholeheartedly. But I guess it's one of those things that once you notice it, it's hard to go back.

Aliasing. Fair enough actually. I know what I know about the project. I guess I'll just be one of those "I know a friend" type guys But when I met Kevin Barrett at the informal "meet-and-greet" for prospective interns, he specifically mentioned to me that their interest in interns was looking for designers for Dragon Age, so I'll just go with what I know.

A friend of mine just got hired there as an intern through my University. I asked her if she was working with the Live team, and she said that it was Dragon Age.