metadigital

Welcome; I trust you've had all your t'internet shots. :mkreku:

I don't think I'd like to play-test games. From what I've heard you play the several sections over and over again, documenting each step of the way...doesn't sound too much fun. However playing a finished game and writing a review on it...that doesn't sound so bad. also :giving Mkreku the evil stare: Business (especially software design!) has a large element of due diligence, which is all that QA is. As for playing versus other QA, I can't see it being a big problem; though I wonder if joypad-blisters are then a business medical expense ... " Playing the game section over and over would allow you to stress test various elements; heck the designers might even take constructive comments from the QA, like "it would be really neat if you could open all the doors in the apartment block, and have some sort of trash to loot", etc.

Yeah, that was something I noticed: compare the mobility of Robocop and T1000, for example. :D

They hired you after you turned up to an interview dressed like that?

Isn't there going to be a singleplayer campaign?

Developers aren't going to have the resources to employ a full compliment of QA testers; most of the time they would be sitting around like vertex shaders during an indoor-scene rendering. At least the creatives are worth keeping on salary, as they contribute more than their investment ... Also, as a long-term contractor, I can tell you that this is just as useful as an entry vector into a company as any other (low-level or otherwise) job.

I eat my fillet blue.

What? I WANT IT NOW!!11!!

So like using MS Paint with a mouse?

That will make the Northern Line almost impassable for most of the game, then. Unless we drain the Thames.

The 3rd I believe was rated PG-13, and didn't have Peter Weller as well. Yep, yep. Though I am not concerned with the lack of gore, the lack of adult themes (e.g. grand auto-theft criminal being executed in the first 30 seconds of the second film), did mean the film suffered. I understand they were obviously broadening the market (probably to introduce the tv series), but even little things like his computer interface spike (in his right knuckles) is a different, cheap plastic design, for example, and the addition of a flying suit add-on (and a heart? WTF?) didn't help. Funnily enough, the new actor looks pretty similar with his helmet off (maybe they gave him a prosthetic Weller face ..?) but you can tell he's different WITH the helmet on, because his teeth noticeably are ... :D

Like the nasty ones in System Shock 2?

Is Vista (32 bit) able to see more than 2GB? Like 4GB?

"An off-duty police officer failed to see the joke" ... yeah, right. More likely s/he wanted to have their own vindictive fun.

We could adapt it with the Brahms, Chopin or, even better, Tchaikovsky 5/4 time. No bloody polka, though.

Ooo, there are monkeys? I might play this now ... In the meantime, I shall play Jade Empire.

No need to translate, the official site is live, with trailer in english http://www.starcraft2.com/ If the game trailer is indicative of the level of commitment to detail in the rest of the game, then this game is going to be very deep and compelling. Sadly, Blizzard always has good game trailers; it's not always an indication of how deep a game is. WarCraft III was about as deep as a puddle (I still thought it was fun though). But I really figure this game will be good; they're showing a lot of care and dedication in keeping the feel of the StarCraft universe intact. Also, they learned some new tricks storytelling wise since the original. Blizzard did the plot twist exceptionally well, I thought, in WC3; giving the player "rationalized" goals that masked the extent of the corruption was very well executed. (It didn't stop me from thinking "Hang on, I don't really WANT to do this, but as there is no choice in this game and I want to continue, I shall ...". ) The graphics in WC3 were certainly good enough to play the game; they didn't stop me from enjoying it.

In some limited situations in can work - i.e. "Please rescue my wife trapped inside the haunted mansion. You won't steal anything from my home, will you?" Then the game would check whether you told [truth or lie, then whether you stole anything or not (by flagging items). Interesting questions arise from - if you told the TRUTH then stole items, does that mean that you were actually lying to the game (not to the NPCs), and intended this? Or that your character changed his/her mind about the affair? Which one should the game assume and calculate player alignment (or whatever) for? Perhaps you told a LIE then decided to be 'honourable' and not take anything. But this could easily be abused - you could just 'lie' on every sort of disadvantageous promise, once again lying to the game, to try and get, i don't know, "redemptive points". (I decided not to rob this old woman, though when I promised I wouldn't, I was lying! And I 'decided' not to rob this old man even though I lied about that too! Man, I am so born again. Every two minutes.) Essentially it's extremely difficult for the game to tell when the player is lying or changing their mind in-character or just doing it to exploit the mechanic and control the variables in an extremely transparent way. I fear it would have an even worse effect on the verisimilitude if not done properly, and I think Gaider is very correct in suggesting that [T]/[L], as one of the methods we've already seen before, isn't really the best answer. I'd go with the "changed mind" dynamic, actually. Best intentions and highway-to-hell paving, and all that, after all. Also, initially lying "I will rob your house" and then not doing so would be a threat not executed. Or an act of guilt/redemptive conscience/re-assessment (the junk wasn't worth stealing). It is more complex, of course, and there would need to be a point. I see this as the biggest hurdle: the alignment of the PC is almost meaningless to the plot in nearly EVERY game (for various reasons, like ensuring every player travels through the same narrative arc, for example).

Another idea is to keep your desktop intentionally clear. Use the "My Documents" folder as a top level storage organisational point, with all your stuff sorted into subfolders therein.

Yay! Two new words! Well one and a half. Since copro is dung and lalial is chatter, could coprolalial also be used for someone who is a habitual liar? Or is that too far from the original meaning. I need a new dictionary.... That's more compulsive lying, also described as inveterate: Coprolalial is more for trash talk.

Franz Ferdinand variation?

I just watched the Robocop trilogy. The Director's Cut of the first film has extra long shots of the gory demise of the characters by incredibly large calibre weapons (ED209!). The second film took the franchise into the "monster movie" realm, because the two robocops fight in cityscape-destroying scenes of epic proportions, which manages to work only because of the large budget for special effects and a reasonable narrative / script (though it is nowhere near as good as the first). Also the female villain is excellent and novel. The third, however, branches off into dire scripting, acting and plot, and the plasticky, gimmicky props do nothing to maintain the already too-tenuous-to-succeed suspension of disbelief.

I don't mind if people can't dance, after all, who's the judge? Similarly, if a man feels more comfortable wearing high-heels and a chiffon dress, more power to them. Not my thing, but I don't mind that they choose a different way to express themselves. There are much worse ways to express oneself, like manipulating, torturing or generally hurting others for their own amusement, for example.

No need to translate, the official site is live, with trailer in english http://www.starcraft2.com/ If the game trailer is indicative of the level of commitment to detail in the rest of the game, then this game is going to be very deep and compelling.

Fixed. It always amazes me that you became a mod. What, Baley was busy? You didn't like my humorous turn on your phrase?