By reading my blog you tacitly agree you owe me $100. Sounds stupid? Exactly.

I'm really astounded about people understanding of the legalistic/police structure that hangs above them.

In fact this is exactly the same principle I've described where people complain about gankers ganking them, never thinking the ganker could not without the programmer putting in the ability.

It's like all you have to do to become utterly invisible to people is that you get someone else, who was otherwise incapable of attacking them, then arm that person and send them on the attack. The only thing the target will think about, apparently, is the person attacking them. You, the arms dealer - your invisible! Enjoy your stay at club blindness!

And so it is here

The idea that somehow, magically, other people in the world just mystically have the capacity to obtain your tacit agreement to use your copyrighted property.

No.

No they don't.

Instead there is a legalistic/police structure where for some reason. Somewhere in that mess are people(s) saying that if someone uses your copyrighted property and you don't 'move against them', you've given them tacit approval.

Except everyone blames the person either using the copyright material or the one suing them for it - they are all blind to a third party. A third party who is an ass. As well?

Would you pay 20cents to play a naked orc game? No? That sounds silly?

Is it an observation to say that what seems to be the cool thing, though not much to do with the game...



Is done here in the second video?




I dunno, perhaps there in the current wow there is more running around in the word and massively hammering stuff as part of gameplay (I'm not sure pissing about in crossroads counts as part of gameplay)?

It also raises the question that if you pitched a game where you said "Hey, in this game for two hours you can run around as a naked orc and wail on something to not much effect" the very people in this video would be unlikely to buy it, or even download such a game for free. Yet here they are, doing it, no doubt for roughly two hours or so (including getting there, etc).

People act like they have high standards and pretend they aren't into certain game stuff, so much so they wouldn't buy it. But they are. It's hard when your actually trying to make games, yet people wont admit they wanna do X. Even to themselves.

Oh, the twenty cents I pulled from the idea of playing five hours a day multiplied by say thirty days. Then divide $15 by that.

Far cry: Search for treasure, Philip!

I really think farcry 2 could have done with dual currencies. I'm playing it and I keep thinking that.

You work in rough diamonds (blood diamonds), and once you buy a gun with them, you have an unlimited amount of them.

I really think that if they used paper money as well as diamonds, it'd add more of a sense of currency to the game. Like the diamonds unlock the gun, but if you want a replacement after because yours got lost or rusty, it costs paper money.

The environment is pretty spartan - really there isn't much point to exploration, and yet at the same time nor is it like space invaders and shuttling you instantly to the next war (ie, there's lots of driving, but not much to see).

While if your collecting cash here and there, it makes the world seem more textured as there, like, actually appears to be something there. Even if you have more cash than you really need, there still seems to be more to the word if you can actually grab something from it that's potentially of use.

Perhaps they were shooting for a grim, nihilistic, empty world feel. But that's the problem with shooting for feel like that - it might make actually playing the game (as opposed to looking at it) not very fun.

Far Cry 2: Mercy

In farcry 2, you can wing someone and they just end up wounded - on the ground, using a crappy pistol.

The funny thing is, no matter what, they will keep shooting at you, if you get close enough. They will never give in to you or do any other approach.

What's interesting to me is that in this circumstance, trying to shoot them in the leg so they don't die, as some sort of mercy, really, definately and is scientifically proven to be pointless.

It's really strange to contemplate the hope for a better world that mercy is, being utterly pointless. Like, there is no point. Just kill them. Nothing can change, ever. Mercy is a stupid, pointless move.

It almost feels like a flickering candle in a infinite darkness, flickering out. Except it's just a game. But it's strange to even get a remote sense of what the end of hope is like.


Oh, who knew I'd end up philosophising on this blog?

"I'm so addicted!" "It's so addicting!"

Mr Shouty thinks this game is addicting...

It's really surprising how in terms of online multiplayer games, or even single player, the phrase "It's so addicting!" is said with a possitive inflection.

I mean, just chew on that for a second. Is that really a possitive quality?

Perhaps to the person addicted it is. But I imagine people on heroin probably think the world of heroin as well.

Anyway, I'm off to play farcry 2 some more, as I've got an itch to play it...