>> ^Hawkinson:

I cracked a smile at some parts (the multiple middleware logos), but I don't agree with the overall sentiment. Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one.


And..? McDonald's is popular, but it's food is still crap.

Appealing to the lowest common denominator may make you a lot of money but it doesn't mean your product is actually good...

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^coolhund:
>> ^EvilDeathBee:
>> ^Harzzach:
Shooter have NOT evolved. They have devolved into a profit maximized mass product for idiots.
And ...

"Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one."

Lets eat shit. Billions of flies cant be wrong!

Yep, typical gamer comment "I don't like these games, therefore people who do are idiots."
The change of shooters over the years is the very definition of evolution. The games industry is still young and will continue to evolve.
You continue to blindly cling to the past and forget it wasn't all great, there were tons of shit games then as there are now. Only differences, now the industry is so much larger than it was back then, now with so many more games to choose from. Game development is also nothing like it was back then, with player expectations ridiculously high, it costs a lot more, is a lot more difficult, requires many more people and is a lot more risky.
"Maximize profits"? Try "Just trying to not go under".

Youre talking absolute bullshit. Yes, the industry is much larger now. But you simply dont get that thats the problem. In the past tehre were LOTS and LOTS new stuff. Hell, we even had, GASP!, SPACE SIMS!!!!
Sorry, but I seriously cant take you serious. You sound like a troll.

Listen, kid (I use the word kid because even though you're probably around 30, but you speak like an ignorant, simple minded, angry child) you wanna try to hide the fact you know nothing about the way the video games industry and the gaming market actually works. It's too obvious.


Alright then, kiddo. How does it work? But first let me tell you that I am talking to you like this BECAUSE you are talking like a kid with no clue at all and just wanting to spew out something. You want to talk seriously, prove first that youre not as extremely ignorant as your posts make you look like.

Indies show its still possible to make good games. Too bad those indies get bought by these big publishers if they do something good. Look at the devs that made Call of Juarez for example, what they turned into. The first part was a real good PC game, the second one was even on the PC version infested with autoaiming and the third part is just lol.

Go ahead and tell me how the gaming market works. Or any market for that matter. Are you one of those hardliner capitalists who dont even understand the system, but want it to stay the way it is, kiddo?
Go troll somewhere else, like on your console forums. Geez...

>> ^coolhund:

>> ^EvilDeathBee:
>> ^Harzzach:
Shooter have NOT evolved. They have devolved into a profit maximized mass product for idiots.
And ...

"Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one."

Lets eat shit. Billions of flies cant be wrong!

Yep, typical gamer comment "I don't like these games, therefore people who do are idiots."
The change of shooters over the years is the very definition of evolution. The games industry is still young and will continue to evolve.
You continue to blindly cling to the past and forget it wasn't all great, there were tons of shit games then as there are now. Only differences, now the industry is so much larger than it was back then, now with so many more games to choose from. Game development is also nothing like it was back then, with player expectations ridiculously high, it costs a lot more, is a lot more difficult, requires many more people and is a lot more risky.
"Maximize profits"? Try "Just trying to not go under".

Youre talking absolute bullshit. Yes, the industry is much larger now. But you simply dont get that thats the problem. In the past tehre were LOTS and LOTS new stuff. Hell, we even had, GASP!, SPACE SIMS!!!!
Sorry, but I seriously cant take you serious. You sound like a troll.


Listen, kid (I use the word kid because even though you're probably around 30, but you speak like an ignorant, simple minded, angry child) you wanna try to hide the fact you know nothing about the way the video games industry and the gaming market actually works. It's too obvious.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^Harzzach:
Shooter have NOT evolved. They have devolved into a profit maximized mass product for idiots.
And ...

"Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one."

Lets eat shit. Billions of flies cant be wrong!

Yep, typical gamer comment "I don't like these games, therefore people who do are idiots."
The change of shooters over the years is the very definition of evolution. The games industry is still young and will continue to evolve.
You continue to blindly cling to the past and forget it wasn't all great, there were tons of shit games then as there are now. Only differences, now the industry is so much larger than it was back then, now with so many more games to choose from. Game development is also nothing like it was back then, with player expectations ridiculously high, it costs a lot more, is a lot more difficult, requires many more people and is a lot more risky.
"Maximize profits"? Try "Just trying to not go under".


Youre talking absolute bullshit. Yes, the industry is much larger now. But you simply dont get that thats the problem. In the past tehre were LOTS and LOTS new stuff. Hell, we even had, GASP!, SPACE SIMS!!!!
Sorry, but I seriously cant take you serious. You sound like a troll.

>> ^Harzzach:

Shooter have NOT evolved. They have devolved into a profit maximized mass product for idiots.
And ...

"Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one."

Lets eat shit. Billions of flies cant be wrong!


Yep, typical gamer comment "I don't like these games, therefore people who do are idiots."
The change of shooters over the years is the very definition of evolution. The games industry is still young and will continue to evolve.

You continue to blindly cling to the past and forget it wasn't all great, there were tons of shit games then as there are now. Only differences, now the industry is so much larger than it was back then, now with so many more games to choose from. Game development is also nothing like it was back then, with player expectations ridiculously high, it costs a lot more, is a lot more difficult, requires many more people and is a lot more risky.

"Maximize profits"? Try "Just trying to not go under".

Shooter have NOT evolved. They have devolved into a profit maximized mass product for idiots.

And ...

"Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one."

Lets eat shit. Billions of flies cant be wrong!

I cracked a smile at some parts (the multiple middleware logos), but I don't agree with the overall sentiment. Doom/quake/descent/etc appealed to a few thousand PC owners when they were released, the modern-military-competitive-online-multiplayer-first-person-shooters are purchased by millions of console owners on day one.

I don't resent their success, I just don't play them, and unlike sports (which I also have no interest in) it doesn't interfere with the things I actually want to consume by preempting programming or causing traffic.

>> ^garmachi:

Hopefully there's someone of Japanese/Chinese/some other Asian descent who can answer this for me.
Why is it that I can pronounce "walk", "wok" AND "werrrrrrk", yet this guy can't? I also hope no one thinks I'm racist, I'm just ignorant.


The other replies to this were great, but I thought I'd chime in with a "shoe on the other foot" anecdote.

I am an American but I moved to Thailand almost 5 years ago to teach ESL English. I've been working on learning to speak and understand Thai. My comprehension is reasonable now, but my speaking is more mediocre and native Thai listeners sometimes have to guess what I am shooting for based on context, etc.

The tough part is tones. Depending on the pitch, in Thai the word "kow" can mean rice, white, mountain, or knee. A tongue-twister my students use is "krai kai kai gai" which means "who sells chicken eggs", if you get the tones right.

I think that if I live here another 20 years I could probably get to be fluent in Thai comprehension, but I'll never be good in pronunciation of the tones like a native Thai speaker. I can definitely get by and have a functional command of the language, but to a native Thai ear I will always have poor pronunciation somewhat analogous to this guy's inability to say walk/wok/weerrrrrk.

Also, they have done studies on brain that show if certain sounds aren't used often by the brain as a child, the brain trims that area and people later in life will find it hard, and in some cases impossible, to learn those sounds. More and more, we learn that the human experience isn't nature or nurture, but nature AND nurture. The formative years are as much as a stumbling block as they are an opportunity in this case, which is such an alarming parental responsibility I doubt I could ever rationally convince myself to procreate.

>> ^garmachi:

>> ^azukipie:
>> ^garmachi:
Hopefully there's someone of Japanese/Chinese/some other Asian descent who can answer this for me.
Why is it that I can pronounce "walk", "wok" AND "werrrrrrk", yet this guy can't? I also hope no one thinks I'm racist, I'm just ignorant.

I posted this because I am an ESL teacher, and speak Japanese and I run across this everyday! So I think your comment IS justified. To give you some perspective, in Japanese they only have 5 vowel sounds. In American English is have 15 and that is NOT including all the diphthongs (double vowel) sounds. We use more of our mouth speaking English than almost ANY other language and therefore Japanese just DON'T have the muscles to create a difference between walk, wok and work without YEARS of practice. Japanese also don't have any /r/ sound that isn't followed by a vowel so saying an /r/ between /wa/ and /ku/ is totally foreign for them. Hope that helps!

This is precisely what I was hoping to learn! Thank you!

>> ^azukipie:

>> ^garmachi:
Hopefully there's someone of Japanese/Chinese/some other Asian descent who can answer this for me.
Why is it that I can pronounce "walk", "wok" AND "werrrrrrk", yet this guy can't? I also hope no one thinks I'm racist, I'm just ignorant.

I posted this because I am an ESL teacher, and speak Japanese and I run across this everyday! So I think your comment IS justified. To give you some perspective, in Japanese they only have 5 vowel sounds. In American English is have 15 and that is NOT including all the diphthongs (double vowel) sounds. We use more of our mouth speaking English than almost ANY other language and therefore Japanese just DON'T have the muscles to create a difference between walk, wok and work without YEARS of practice. Japanese also don't have any /r/ sound that isn't followed by a vowel so saying an /r/ between /wa/ and /ku/ is totally foreign for them. Hope that helps!


This is precisely what I was hoping to learn! Thank you!

>> ^garmachi:

Hopefully there's someone of Japanese/Chinese/some other Asian descent who can answer this for me.
Why is it that I can pronounce "walk", "wok" AND "werrrrrrk", yet this guy can't? I also hope no one thinks I'm racist, I'm just ignorant.


I posted this because I am an ESL teacher, and speak Japanese and I run across this everyday! So I think your comment IS justified. To give you some perspective, in Japanese they only have 5 vowel sounds. In American English is have 15 and that is NOT including all the diphthongs (double vowel) sounds. We use more of our mouth speaking English than almost ANY other language and therefore Japanese just DON'T have the muscles to create a difference between walk, wok and work without YEARS of practice. Japanese also don't have any /r/ sound that isn't followed by a vowel so saying an /r/ between /wa/ and /ku/ is totally foreign for them. Hope that helps!

Hopefully there's someone of Japanese/Chinese/some other Asian descent who can answer this for me.

Why is it that I can pronounce "walk", "wok" AND "werrrrrrk", yet this guy can't? I also hope no one thinks I'm racist, I'm just ignorant.

Wellllllp,

The airplane is a p-51 Mustang from the WW2 era, apparently equipped with multiple modern recording devices. While mid-flight a piece from the tail end of the aircraft (edit: the piece is the elevator trim tab) broke off, affecting the planes ability to maneuver effectively, causing catastrophic failure and the pilot lost all control on a turn. The plane then pitched up and took a sharp turn downwards as it nose dives into a luxury box-seat area killing dozens and wounding 70 or so.

While the tragedy in this story is obvious, the physics are not. Notice the lack of explosion upon impact or shortly there after. Usually there is a massive fireball that proceeds a crash like this and it has baffled scientists and engineers alike.

In reply to this comment by Shepppard:
I would REALLY like some backstory on this.

What was going on? Was it a race, or an air show? what the hell was the pilot doing in the first place, the angle of that descent means he either did the most boneheaded loop ever, or something went catastrophically wrong.

I'm not even happy having watched this. It's not exactly snuff, because we don't explicitly see anybody die (I mean, obviously the pilot, but we only see an after explosion) but even still, I'm uncomfortable watching it. However, just because I'm uncomfortable watching it, doesn't automatically make it snuff.

ehh.. one way or the other, I see controversy brewing with this video.

I would REALLY like some backstory on this.

What was going on? Was it a race, or an air show? what the hell was the pilot doing in the first place, the angle of that descent means he either did the most boneheaded loop ever, or something went catastrophically wrong.

I'm not even happy having watched this. It's not exactly snuff, because we don't explicitly see anybody die (I mean, obviously the pilot, but we only see an after explosion) but even still, I'm uncomfortable watching it. However, just because I'm uncomfortable watching it, doesn't automatically make it snuff.

ehh.. one way or the other, I see controversy brewing with this video.

My family is of Mennonite descent, so I was raised a Christian. Was "born again" when I was seven, read the Bible cover-to-cover at 14 and thought about attending Bible School after finishing high school. The only reason I didn't go on to more religious stuff is that my marks in high school were good enough that not attending university would have been a waste.

Became an atheist in university thanks to some good religion teachers and watching Dawkins and Hitchens videos.

As for the atheist/agnostic debate, I would put myself as a 6 on Dawkins' scale: Very low probability of god, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'