An Elysian Tail

A forum for the gamers among us. Which is probably all of us.

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Shackler » Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:03 pm

Monthenor wrote:Now that Braid's been mentioned, I would love to know how he implemented the well-nigh-infinite rewind. That just astounds me, that it can record over two hours of an entire level. Definitely something I wouldn't want to attempt in C#.


You think that's fancy?
Shackler
Blueberry Class Leader

  Offline
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:21 pm

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Monthenor » Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:12 am

Oh believe me, I am a follower of Achron's Twitter account. It's not going to track two whole hours, of course, but it's tracking dozens of units. Mindbending.
User avatar
Monthenor
Apple Class

  Offline
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:33 pm
Location: Right where I need to be

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:27 am

Coda wrote:I'm primarily a Mac user and developers who make that choice frankly piss me off. It's NOT hard to develop cross-platform software.


I actually still have trouble thinking of the Mac as an actual computer, and not just a toy computer for kids. Though, that's my problem, not the Mac's problem. Not only is it an actual computer but now Cell Phones are actual computers and it's like, Cell Phones are the new Mac. ^.^;;

That said I do try to write my stuff so that I can make it multiplatform, but unless I get a Mac or Cell Phone or Linux box to compile and test on, I probably won't be publishing on them. ^.^;;
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Shackler » Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:03 pm

Shackler
Blueberry Class Leader

  Offline
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:21 pm

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Coda » Sun Aug 23, 2009 5:34 pm

The nice thing about Linux is that *ANYONE* can have a Linux box. At worst all you have to do is slap a CD in your drive -- you don't even have to install it. You can also set up a virtual machine, or you can dual-boot, or you can load it onto that piece of junk from three years ago and it'll run better than the OS that it displaced.

Macs used to be toys and artist's tools. That really started changing in 2000, with the release of Mac OS X -- the platform suddenly became developer-friendly and the tools needed to program for it were free. The price also started coming down, and the performance started going up. Nowadays, a Mac will be running practically the same hardware as a Windows machine and it'll outrun Vista any day of the week. (Whether or not it outruns XP depends on what you're doing.) Its biggest shortcoming is that people still think its a toy and an artist's tool and don't recognize that it has become a viable platform for general-purpose use.

Interesting note: the iPhone runs Mac OS X directly. It doesn't use the same graphical front end, but it's the same kernel, same internal organization, same core libraries (except, as mentioned, the graphical front end).

And by the way: THANK YOU for that article. On a related note, most of the Web acknowledges (or at least supports) Linux and Mac as equal partners. HTML, CSS, Javascript, and Flash are all common technologies that all of the platforms support without the developer having to worry about anything but stupid bugs in Microsoft's vendor-locked browser.

Edit: That doesn't mean I like Flash. But I do respect it as a vehicle for carrying rich content across platforms, when it's the right choice for the job.
User avatar
Coda
Magickal Melon 666

  Offline
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Holy crap, Coda set an avatar

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:34 am

I like Flash, though I only really started learning it with the most recent version, Flash CS4 and ActionScript 3.0. Reading the comparisons of what they fixed and changed, I can totally see why people would have hated it in the past. If you haven't taken a good look at modern Flash you should give it a try! ActionScript 3.0 completely re-writes the way Flash works, programatically, to make it more efficient and sensible.

As for other operating systems...

Coda wrote:primarily survives due to vendor lock.


You might not like it but the king is the king simply because the king is the king. It's a self-reinforcing position. You can start a revolution if you want but you're either working for the king or you're stealing from the king. Your life still revolves around the king, even if he's an undeserving king. And frankly, I think you know as well as I do that Apple would be just as bad, if not WORSE, given Microsoft's position.
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Coda » Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:50 am

Relee wrote:I like Flash, though I only really started learning it with the most recent version, Flash CS4 and ActionScript 3.0. Reading the comparisons of what they fixed and changed, I can totally see why people would have hated it in the past. If you haven't taken a good look at modern Flash you should give it a try! ActionScript 3.0 completely re-writes the way Flash works, programatically, to make it more efficient and sensible.

I don't have a problem with Flash ITSELF. I have a problem with Flash ABUSE, which is probably what a majority of Flash content on the Internet actually is.

I actually like ActionScript 3.0; it's an ECMAScript derivative and I really like ECMAScript.

Relee wrote:You might not like it but the king is the king simply because the king is the king. It's a self-reinforcing position.

That's pretty much the definition of vendor lock. :P

Relee wrote:You can start a revolution if you want but you're either working for the king or you're stealing from the king. Your life still revolves around the king, even if he's an undeserving king.

That doesn't mean it's hopeless, just an uphill battle. Cross-platform software is the perfect weapon for the revolution: You're not working FOR the king, and you're not stealing FROM the king -- you're working WITH the king, using his power for your own benefit while giving the people the tools they need to be autonomous. It's like judo, in a way.

Relee wrote:And frankly, I think you know as well as I do that Apple would be just as bad, if not WORSE, given Microsoft's position.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on when in history it would have happened. After the OSX transition, with the open-source foundation underneath it, at the very least the platform is more accessible than Windows.

Remember the days you and I would discuss these things on the BnG forums? :P
User avatar
Coda
Magickal Melon 666

  Offline
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Holy crap, Coda set an avatar

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:49 pm

Coda wrote:
Relee wrote:I like Flash, though I only really started learning it with the most recent version, Flash CS4 and ActionScript 3.0. Reading the comparisons of what they fixed and changed, I can totally see why people would have hated it in the past. If you haven't taken a good look at modern Flash you should give it a try! ActionScript 3.0 completely re-writes the way Flash works, programatically, to make it more efficient and sensible.

I don't have a problem with Flash ITSELF. I have a problem with Flash ABUSE, which is probably what a majority of Flash content on the Internet actually is.

I actually like ActionScript 3.0; it's an ECMAScript derivative and I really like ECMAScript.



From what I've read, ECMAScript isn't actually a language, but the specifications for creating a language, is that correct? I can't imagine going to the trouble to truly understand the roots of something like that, without an extremely good reason.

I've heard that Java is also based on ECMAScript, though having used them both I honestly think I like ActionScript 3.0 and Flash more than Java, even for the things Java is technically better at.


Coda wrote:
Relee wrote:You might not like it but the king is the king simply because the king is the king. It's a self-reinforcing position.

That's pretty much the definition of vendor lock. :P



Well yeah, my point was that if you want to do business, you have to do business with Microsoft because they've established themself as the dominant power. Microsoft also rewards those who make Microsoft-only software, and they develop software of their own with the intention of holding the people down. They're very good at it. Mac may have some share of the market here in the West but in the East Microsoft is super-god. According to the press I've read, they don't even use Firefox over there, they prefer IE completely. Of course the difference is that their rate of sharing is vastly higher as well, so Microsoft isn't actually making a lot of money off of them...

I don't even know what they're planning with stuff like .NET and Silverlight. The whole point behind Java and Flash was that they're extremely portable, and as far as I can tell .NET and Silverlight are Microsoft trying to make their own versions of Java and Flash... But they're not extremely portable? What's the point?


Coda wrote:
Relee wrote:You can start a revolution if you want but you're either working for the king or you're stealing from the king. Your life still revolves around the king, even if he's an undeserving king.

That doesn't mean it's hopeless, just an uphill battle. Cross-platform software is the perfect weapon for the revolution: You're not working FOR the king, and you're not stealing FROM the king -- you're working WITH the king, using his power for your own benefit while giving the people the tools they need to be autonomous. It's like judo, in a way.



It's getting harder though. It seems more and more like OpenGL isn't getting any support, while DirectX is easy to use and continues to grow and make use of all the latest widgets. Honestly I don't even know how graphical support works on a Mac, as far as I understand you buy them whole and complete from the store, and you don't upgrade them at all? Do Macs support the same level of graphics as modern PCs? And if you need to upgrade, can you swap up your graphics card, or do you need to buy a whole new Mac? Most of my friends with Macs can't play modern games even if they do come out on Mac, or use other modern software. Or even indie games, a lot of the time. Or the latest edition of the Mac OS, now that I think of it. It all gives me low expectations for the platform. ^.^;;

I have a hard time dealing with anyone who refers to their PC by a brand name instead of a list of it's components. "Oh I have an eMachines-6667!" "I've got a Dell Insperon 9001." That means nothing. With Mac it's even harder. Of course, it doesn't help that I haven't even USED a Mac since the early/mid ninties. There's no Mac store, I don't think they even sell them at the Future Shop, let alone any of the Mom&Pop Computer stores. Actually I had the same problem with Vista, it was years before I finally actually saw a PC with Vista running on it. I use a taiwanese hacked version of Windows XP with some special features built in, though I honestly wouldn't mind getting a legit copy of the OS if I could afford it. I might end up upgrading past Vista and straight to Windows 7 eventually; everyone I know says it's the bees knees, but that can wait for now.


Coda wrote:
Relee wrote:And frankly, I think you know as well as I do that Apple would be just as bad, if not WORSE, given Microsoft's position.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on when in history it would have happened. After the OSX transition, with the open-source foundation underneath it, at the very least the platform is more accessible than Windows.



Even now, Apple is doing so much to press the DRM movement, and not in the good direction. They're famous for not giving you control over everything in your OS. I don't know myself, like I said above I haven't used one since grade school, but don't they restrict you much more than Windows? I've always read that Windows will let you do whatever you want, even blow up your computer, but that Mac OS is a safety-net playpen for little kids. Plenty of pretty balls for babies to play with, but no power tools for babies to maim themselves with. Yet, no power tools for grownups either.

If I can ever afford it I'll probably run all three platforms simultaneously on seperate computers, just to experience them and to have someplace to compile and test multiplatform software, but I'd probably go Linux before I went Mac. I like to be able to take apart my computer and put it back together a different way, even if I don't do that often.


Coda wrote:Remember the days you and I would discuss these things on the BnG forums? :P



Not really, but I have a pretty bad memory. XD I wouldn't have thought I'd have an oppinion on Mac six years ago.
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Shackler » Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:40 pm

Do you really think Mac OS X is more restrictive than Windows Vista? That seems to be an extreme minority viewpoint and I'm interested in what led you to that conclusion.

On an unrelated note, my Mac can run many modern games on maximum graphics with no lag whatsoever.
Shackler
Blueberry Class Leader

  Offline
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:21 pm

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Coda » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:10 pm

I don't know where you read that about ECMAScript. ECMAScript is simply a formalization of Netscape's Javascript, and has absolutely no relationship to Java whatsoever beyond a vague syntactic similarity -- which is the reason the name "Java" doesn't appear in it anywhere.

I mentioned before: Macs will outrun a Vista machine hands down, given equivalent hardware and ports of the same software. Heck, occasionally you'll find a Windows program run faster in CrossOver on a Mac than it runs natively on Vista, although that's something of an extreme case. If you WANT to make a comparison, don't talk Vista. Look at XP or Win7.

Macs have a reputation for high-quality visuals. It should come as no surprise that a Mac can keep up (or outrun!) a Windows machine graphically.

.NET and Silverlight are SUPPOSED to be cross-platform, with Mono and Moonlight being the open-source "equivalents" that Microsoft nominally "supports." Of course, that doesn't stop Microsoft from offering Windows-only APIs and not publishing standards on how that stuff is supposed to work, so Mono can fail to run even so much as a "Hello World" program if you used a Windows Forms "OK" button in it. THIS is what pisses me off most about .NET. (I have separate complaints about C# as a language.)

I mentioned before that DirectX is one of the few really GOOD ideas to come out of Microsoft. Its API has a Microsoft-ish feel to it, admittedly, but the overall model is much better for interactive systems than OpenGL is -- OpenGL is designed for high-quality, high-precision rendering; DirectX is designed for fast, easy interactive software. I would love to see someone write a driver layer for Mac (theoretically this SHOULD be possible) that can use DirectX-enhanced graphics card features and expose a DirectX-compatible API. The latter has already been done by the WINE project (which is used in CrossOver and TransGaming), but the former would grant a significant performance boon if pulled off.

Desktop Macs have had PCI slots for YEARS, and the newer ones have PCI Express slots, so hardware compatibility is surprisingly good. The CPUs are standard off-the-shelf Intel chips and should, theoretically, be upgradeable as long as they're not soldered on the board. (I haven't opened up a desktop Mac recently to check.) Furthermore, Mac supports most USB devices, with the exceptions being funky devices that don't follow any sort of standard but instead install a Windows device driver. Furthermore, it's actually fairly EASY to identify what's in a given Mac by its model and age. If you say "late 2008 13-inch MacBook" I know you have EXACTLY the machine sitting in my lap, differing by no more than the installed hard drive and RAM. I also know you're running Tiger (OSX 10.4) unless you've purchased a Leopard upgrade. ($99 gets you EVERYTHING, as opposed to paying $199 for a feature-restricted upgrade-only version of Windows.) Of course, a Mac will tend to have better staying power than an equivalent PC anyway; I'm not sure I understand why this is true, but I know my old iBook G4 is still alive and kicking -- it could run World of Warcraft all the way through Burning Crusade, although admittedly with the graphics on their lowest settings.

As far as DRM is concerned... It's true that Apple has bent to market pressures on many things, but Apple's DRM setup has to be the best I've ever seen. You can burn CDs of your purchased music with minimal restrictions. (You can proceed to re-rip them if you want. Poof, DRM gone.) You can transfer your DRM'ed music to other computers with very little trouble. (I think you can have three computers authorized to play your music, and you DON'T have to have access to them to revoke access -- no lock-out because your old machine had a hard drive crash!) And many tracks available on the iTunes store offer "iTunes Plus," where you can simply buy the tracks with no DRM attached at all for a small premium.
User avatar
Coda
Magickal Melon 666

  Offline
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Holy crap, Coda set an avatar

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:03 pm

Coda wrote:I don't know where you read that about ECMAScript. ECMAScript is simply a formalization of Netscape's Javascript, and has absolutely no relationship to Java whatsoever beyond a vague syntactic similarity -- which is the reason the name "Java" doesn't appear in it anywhere.



Well like I said, I had read that Java was based on it, though it could have easily been JavaScript, that's the problem with them having such similar names. It was in a book on ActionScript 3.0, describing how AS3 is based on ECMAScript, and comparing it with Java, or I guess, JavaScript. so it's not like it was a Java book. ^.^;;


Coda wrote:I mentioned before: Macs will outrun a Vista machine hands down, given equivalent hardware and ports of the same software. Heck, occasionally you'll find a Windows program run faster in CrossOver on a Mac than it runs natively on Vista, although that's something of an extreme case. If you WANT to make a comparison, don't talk Vista. Look at XP or Win7.



I'm not talking Vista, like I said I've only seen it briefly. That's Shackler, talking about Vista. I've heard great things about Windows 7, but I haven't tried it yet either. People are saying that it's what Vista should have been, and that it even works great on pre-vista computers that you would use XP or Windows 98 on.


Coda wrote:Macs have a reputation for high-quality visuals. It should come as no surprise that a Mac can keep up (or outrun!) a Windows machine graphically.



I haven't heard much of a reputation that way, most of the people I know who prefer Mac do it because the interface is easier to use, and doesn't let you shoot yourself in the foot like Windows does. I of course prefer being able to shoot myself in the foot if I choose...


Coda wrote:.NET and Silverlight are SUPPOSED to be cross-platform, with Mono and Moonlight being the open-source "equivalents" that Microsoft nominally "supports." Of course, that doesn't stop Microsoft from offering Windows-only APIs and not publishing standards on how that stuff is supposed to work, so Mono can fail to run even so much as a "Hello World" program if you used a Windows Forms "OK" button in it. THIS is what pisses me off most about .NET. (I have separate complaints about C# as a language.)



Yeah, my point is though, why make something that is supposed to be cross-platform, and NEEDS to be easily cross-platform if it's going to succeed, unless you're going to make sure it IS. They're not making it easily cross-platform and that means it's not good to use. It seems like a wasted investment if it's all part of some sinister plot to keep people from learning other languages, though.


Coda wrote:I mentioned before that DirectX is one of the few really GOOD ideas to come out of Microsoft. Its API has a Microsoft-ish feel to it, admittedly, but the overall model is much better for interactive systems than OpenGL is -- OpenGL is designed for high-quality, high-precision rendering; DirectX is designed for fast, easy interactive software. I would love to see someone write a driver layer for Mac (theoretically this SHOULD be possible) that can use DirectX-enhanced graphics card features and expose a DirectX-compatible API. The latter has already been done by the WINE project (which is used in CrossOver and TransGaming), but the former would grant a significant performance boon if pulled off.



DirectX has good sides and bad sides. One bad side is that you can't use DirectX 10+ on a Windows XP machine, which is one of the things holding me back. The fact that most games are developed using DirectX is what really keeps them from being crossplatform. The idea of being able to use DirectX 10 or DirectX 11 on a Mac when you can't on an XP box would be kinda nutty. ^.^;;

On the other hand, any time you start talking about OS emulation like WINE you exit the realm of the casual user. Just because a Mac can do something doesn't mean a Mac user can make their Mac do it.


Coda wrote:Desktop Macs have had PCI slots for YEARS, and the newer ones have PCI Express slots, so hardware compatibility is surprisingly good. The CPUs are standard off-the-shelf Intel chips and should, theoretically, be upgradeable as long as they're not soldered on the board. (I haven't opened up a desktop Mac recently to check.) Furthermore, Mac supports most USB devices, with the exceptions being funky devices that don't follow any sort of standard but instead install a Windows device driver. Furthermore, it's actually fairly EASY to identify what's in a given Mac by its model and age. If you say "late 2008 13-inch MacBook" I know you have EXACTLY the machine sitting in my lap, differing by no more than the installed hard drive and RAM. I also know you're running Tiger (OSX 10.4) unless you've purchased a Leopard upgrade. ($99 gets you EVERYTHING, as opposed to paying $199 for a feature-restricted upgrade-only version of Windows.) Of course, a Mac will tend to have better staying power than an equivalent PC anyway; I'm not sure I understand why this is true, but I know my old iBook G4 is still alive and kicking -- it could run World of Warcraft all the way through Burning Crusade, although admittedly with the graphics on their lowest settings.



See, when you say your old iBook G4 could run World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade on the lowest settings, I don't know what to compare that too, PC-side.
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Coda » Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:32 pm

Coda wrote:Macs have a reputation for high-quality visuals. It should come as no surprise that a Mac can keep up (or outrun!) a Windows machine graphically.


I haven't heard much of a reputation that way, most of the people I know who prefer Mac do it because the interface is easier to use, and doesn't let you shoot yourself in the foot like Windows does. I of course prefer being able to shoot myself in the foot if I choose...


Remember that OSX is, under that shiny UI, full-blown certified standards-compliant UNIX. In fact, if it weren't, I would have been seriously stuck earlier today -- my Mac Pro crashed today while I was installing OSX 10.5 on it and when I got it booted back up I didn't have any administrator accounts. If it weren't UNIX, I wouldn't have been able to get in with the install disk and poke around the shell to fix the problem.

Yeah, my point is though, why make something that is supposed to be cross-platform, and NEEDS to be easily cross-platform if it's going to succeed, unless you're going to make sure it IS. They're not making it easily cross-platform and that means it's not good to use. It seems like a wasted investment if it's all part of some sinister plot to keep people from learning other languages, though.


I don't see how this is intended to be a counter-argument to my statement that software should be cross-platform, only that the tools Microsoft is touting aren't a good choice for software development, which I agree with completely. You could be using Qt, or Adobe AIR, or for all I care you could be using TransGaming, and even Java's better than the alternative.

DirectX has good sides and bad sides. One bad side is that you can't use DirectX 10+ on a Windows XP machine, which is one of the things holding me back. The fact that most games are developed using DirectX is what really keeps them from being crossplatform. The idea of being able to use DirectX 10 or DirectX 11 on a Mac when you can't on an XP box would be kinda nutty. ^.^;;

At the same time, pretty much nothing of note uses DirectX 10, either. DX9 is still the primary target for pretty much everyone who wants to sell to the typical consumer.

On the other hand, any time you start talking about OS emulation like WINE you exit the realm of the casual user. Just because a Mac can do something doesn't mean a Mac user can make their Mac do it.

That's why you have CrossOver, which is a simple one-click install, and then double-clicking Windows .exe files automatically launches them.

See, when you say your old iBook G4 could run World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade on the lowest settings, I don't know what to compare that too, PC-side.

My iBook G4 was released in late 2004, and the G4 was an old chip when the laptop was produced anyway. (The G5 never made it into a laptop due to power consumption issues that IBM hadn't solved by the time Apple decided to switch to x86.) Compare it to the late Pentium III systems, or better yet the AMD systems that were competing with the early P4s.
User avatar
Coda
Magickal Melon 666

  Offline
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Holy crap, Coda set an avatar

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:14 am

Coda wrote:
Yeah, my point is though, why make something that is supposed to be cross-platform, and NEEDS to be easily cross-platform if it's going to succeed, unless you're going to make sure it IS. They're not making it easily cross-platform and that means it's not good to use. It seems like a wasted investment if it's all part of some sinister plot to keep people from learning other languages, though.


I don't see how this is intended to be a counter-argument to my statement that software should be cross-platform, only that the tools Microsoft is touting aren't a good choice for software development, which I agree with completely. You could be using Qt, or Adobe AIR, or for all I care you could be using TransGaming, and even Java's better than the alternative.



I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just talkin' 'bout gripes. ^.^;;

I did say I design most of my software to be eventually cross-platform, you know. I'm just saying why some folks and some big companies don't do it.


Coda wrote:
DirectX has good sides and bad sides. One bad side is that you can't use DirectX 10+ on a Windows XP machine, which is one of the things holding me back. The fact that most games are developed using DirectX is what really keeps them from being crossplatform. The idea of being able to use DirectX 10 or DirectX 11 on a Mac when you can't on an XP box would be kinda nutty. ^.^;;

At the same time, pretty much nothing of note uses DirectX 10, either. DX9 is still the primary target for pretty much everyone who wants to sell to the typical consumer.



I've heard conflicting comments on that. Some people insist that most things aren't using DirectX 10, while others say they simply aren't REQUIRING DirectX 10; they're USING it but it's optional and if you use DirectX 9 instead you're not getting the full experience. Certain high-end graphics modes aren't supported by DX9


Coda wrote:
On the other hand, any time you start talking about OS emulation like WINE you exit the realm of the casual user. Just because a Mac can do something doesn't mean a Mac user can make their Mac do it.

That's why you have CrossOver, which is a simple one-click install, and then double-clicking Windows .exe files automatically launches them.



You still need to find and install it. For a lot of people that would take someone telling them that it exists at all. I used to do mission control for Geek Squad and a lot of the time I had to tell people how to turn off their computers because they couldn't figure it out.


Coda wrote:
See, when you say your old iBook G4 could run World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade on the lowest settings, I don't know what to compare that too, PC-side.

My iBook G4 was released in late 2004, and the G4 was an old chip when the laptop was produced anyway. (The G5 never made it into a laptop due to power consumption issues that IBM hadn't solved by the time Apple decided to switch to x86.) Compare it to the late Pentium III systems, or better yet the AMD systems that were competing with the early P4s.



That doesn't sound that different from the computer I first played World of Warcraft on, then. Though, it definately looks better on a higher-end computer. I kind of wish I could turn up the draw-distance even further. ^.^;;
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Coda » Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:36 am

I've heard conflicting comments on that. Some people insist that most things aren't using DirectX 10, while others say they simply aren't REQUIRING DirectX 10; they're USING it but it's optional and if you use DirectX 9 instead you're not getting the full experience. Certain high-end graphics modes aren't supported by DX9

It's worse than that. The latest Shadowrun game, for instance, "requires" DX10 and installs it, but never actually makes any non-DX9 calls -- Microsoft's desperately trying to force the issue, but it's just not taking off because nobody wants to ship something that won't run on XP.

You still need to find and install it. For a lot of people that would take someone telling them that it exists at all. I used to do mission control for Geek Squad and a lot of the time I had to tell people how to turn off their computers because they couldn't figure it out.

That is admittedly true, but all you need to do is drop a name and you've just enabled someone. Who's going to find Unicorn Jelly without someone telling them or a serendipitous search result?

That doesn't sound that different from the computer I first played World of Warcraft on, then. Though, it definately looks better on a higher-end computer. I kind of wish I could turn up the draw-distance even further. ^.^;;

Sure, it looks better, but I didn't have to upgrade my computer (at least, not any more than just sticking in another RAM stick, which is really easy on that model -- take the battery out, flip a lever, click) and still got four years of solid use out of it. I think what really stuck out most to me is when I realized that the little thing outran my desktop.
User avatar
Coda
Magickal Melon 666

  Offline
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Holy crap, Coda set an avatar

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Thu Aug 27, 2009 9:14 am

Coda wrote:
I've heard conflicting comments on that. Some people insist that most things aren't using DirectX 10, while others say they simply aren't REQUIRING DirectX 10; they're USING it but it's optional and if you use DirectX 9 instead you're not getting the full experience. Certain high-end graphics modes aren't supported by DX9

It's worse than that. The latest Shadowrun game, for instance, "requires" DX10 and installs it, but never actually makes any non-DX9 calls -- Microsoft's desperately trying to force the issue, but it's just not taking off because nobody wants to ship something that won't run on XP.



The government here finally said 'No we're not doing Vista' and went back to XP, or so I've been told. Any government office has to specifically ask the government if they can upgrade, and give a very good reason. It wasn't cost-effective or time-effective for their purposes. Windows 7 might change things, but Microsoft lost a lot of people's trust with Vista. It'll be a while yet before we know how the world will turn.


Coda wrote:
You still need to find and install it. For a lot of people that would take someone telling them that it exists at all. I used to do mission control for Geek Squad and a lot of the time I had to tell people how to turn off their computers because they couldn't figure it out.

That is admittedly true, but all you need to do is drop a name and you've just enabled someone. Who's going to find Unicorn Jelly without someone telling them or a serendipitous search result?



Well, finding a website is one thing, but just giving a low-level computer user the name Unicorn Jelly would only get them as far as the front page, and maybe they'd start reading the comic. Most of them would be too afraid to try using these forums, if someone didn't walk them through it. Scary forms! Oh noes!

Installing applications are the same deal. Some virus-makers have clued in and started providing very insistant walkthroughs that tell computer users how to disable their security and install the virus, but regular people are afraid of anything that doesn't hold their hand every step of the way.
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Alfador » Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:29 pm

Relee wrote:See, when you say your old iBook G4 could run World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade on the lowest settings, I don't know what to compare that too, PC-side.


I don't know when iBook G4's came out, but my previous PC was built back in late 2004, with video card ordered in January of 2005. It ran WoW: Wrath of the Lich King pretty decently on minimum settings--though with the RAM issues, it was choking horribly whenever I had Recount active and got in a situation with tons of raid damage.

My new machine cost around 800 dollars American currency, and runs WoW at maximum settings (though there are some flicker glitches with the Ultra-setting shadows, so I dialed that slider back to medium-low since I don't need super-crisp shadows in overcast Zul'Drak anyway. :P) with little to no framerate problems.

Except Dalaran. Everybody has problems in Dalalag.
Arf! *wagwagwag*
User avatar
Alfador
1000 Post Forum Master!

  Offline
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:29 am
Location: Kirkland, WA

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Alfador » Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:32 pm

Relee wrote:I kind of wish I could turn up the draw-distance even further. ^.^;;


"I can see the other continents from here!" (no, not really)
Arf! *wagwagwag*
User avatar
Alfador
1000 Post Forum Master!

  Offline
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:29 am
Location: Kirkland, WA

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Relee » Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:36 pm

Alfador wrote:
Relee wrote:I kind of wish I could turn up the draw-distance even further. ^.^;;


"I can see the other continents from here!" (no, not really)


Well it's like, in the Blood Elf newbie area there's this high place you go to for a quest, and you can see the distant spires of Silvermoon, but they're all dark and shaded 'cause of the distance-fog effect, and I want to be able to see them properly darn it. XD
-- Relee the Squirrel --
User avatar
Relee
Watermelon Graduate

  Offline
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:25 am
Location: Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way, Universe 2

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby Alfador » Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:36 am

Relee wrote:
Alfador wrote:
Relee wrote:I kind of wish I could turn up the draw-distance even further. ^.^;;


"I can see the other continents from here!" (no, not really)


Well it's like, in the Blood Elf newbie area there's this high place you go to for a quest, and you can see the distant spires of Silvermoon, but they're all dark and shaded 'cause of the distance-fog effect, and I want to be able to see them properly darn it. XD


I probably couldn't even see them when I went through that area, because I did that before my upgrade, and had the distance at minimum. :P
Arf! *wagwagwag*
User avatar
Alfador
1000 Post Forum Master!

  Offline
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:29 am
Location: Kirkland, WA

Re: An Elysian Tail

Postby neoTatewaki » Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:46 pm

Coda wrote:
neoTatewaki wrote:As for the platform, well... sorry, and not to sound fanboyish or like an asshole, but I've always viewed PC users as my target demo. To be honest, the X360 deployment capability is a cool afterthought and second to PC development, IMO (though I'm already learning that coding for console isn't as forgiving, and it's a good lesson to learn :P). If one can find a way to execute anything I develop under MacOS or Linux, so much the better... but those users aren't factoring into my design process. As such, I have no hesitation in abandoning C++ for C#/XNA. I know; the market for Linux gaming exists (Lokigames, anyone?), but it's best left to someone else.


I'm primarily a Mac user and developers who make that choice frankly piss me off. It's NOT hard to develop cross-platform software.


Don't get pissed. Life's too short. :P

Ease of the task is irrelevant when one doesn't have the drive. It's not hard to learn to program, yet we're in HIGH demand. I'm being honest about it, at least; I've used linux before, so i'm not totally a M$ drone. For a while, I actually considered (at a friend's insistence) attempting to tap the aforementioned linux gamer market (getting a little ahead of myself considering I haven't even tapped the Windows gamer market), but I came to the conclusion that the only reason I mucked around with linux in the first place is because it was the "cool" thing to do.
... which says something about the people I associated with (j/k). Fortunately, I made peace with my inner geek and removed the linux partition.

It's simple: Making someone do something that they have absolutely no interest in doing will almost always result in piss-poor work. Unless you throw obscene amounts of money at them, or tie their well-being to the completion of the hated project, it's best to let people do what they enjoy. And, until this stops being a self-funded venture, I'mma do what I enjoy... and the rest of the world be damned (for now).

So, in closing, don't get pissed, get coding. :)
neoTatewaki
Welcome, New User!

  Offline
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:19 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Games and Gaming

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron