Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, February 27, 2012
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Friday, February 24, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
TEDxDartmouth 2011- Thalia Wheatley: How the Brain Perceives Other Minds - March 6, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXRgbl4TtQ
At the end of the video, she discusses a discovery that seems very interesting, and potentially very important regarding how people of different races perceive each other.
At the end of the video, she discusses a discovery that seems very interesting, and potentially very important regarding how people of different races perceive each other.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
Monday, February 06, 2012
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Saturday, February 04, 2012
Governments are not content to mind their own buisness.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120124/11270917527/what-is-acta-why-is-it-problem.shtml
"Some European nations, for example, already have a history of seizing shipments of perfectly legal generic drugs in passage to somewhere else. For example, say that a pharmaceutical company in India is shipping drugs to Brazil that are legal in both countries. However, those drugs violate a patent in Europe. If, during transit, those drugs pass through Europe, customs agents may seize them."Wtf.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Rarity
In MMOGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Games) a problem that many developers have run into is something that got called mudflation. It's when items which were ment to be rare and valuable, end up becoming easy and cheap to obtain on the player market.
A common solution to mudflation is to make items that cannot be traded or sold to other players after they've been equipped. This causes any item that players actually use, to disappear from the player market preventing the market from getting flooded with hand-me-downs.
I've started wondering if perhaps a game seeking to maintain a strong player driven economy, might be better served by instead examining the issue of rarity. If an item's market value gets driven down by how numerous they are, then perhaps it simply isn't rare enough.
Many MMOGs balance their loot drops using the same methods used by single player games. However, in a multiplayer game, a player driven market will be filled with items acquired by the many, many hours of gameplay already enjoyed by previous players. A single player game does not have this, instead the number of hours worth of loot acquisition is restricted solely to the hours put in by the current player. This drastic difference pretty much guarantees that a system designed for one game type won't work well in the other game. The standard system is to just have a % chance of a given loot item dropping from specific monsters. As the total number of monsters slain steadily increases over the life of a MMOG, this results in an ever increasing number of items in existence that were ment to be rare.
Alternate methods of creating rarity and value:
Limited quantity: In EVE online, there were some ultra rare items of which only a specific number were ever given out. Some might even be described as priceless. These items can be traded and often go for crazy high prices when compared to the price of other items with similar functional ability. Having the total quantity of certain items be limited based upon the size of the player base might be an effective way to keep certain items rare.
Increasing utility: A very basic way to increase value is to provide a way for players to make use of old gear. The most common method I'm aware of is to let it be broken down for parts to use in crafting. If the price of the good goes too low, people will start buying it for scrap. If the devs think an item's market price is too low, they can increase the amount of scrap it gives to raise it's value. This can also be a form of item destruction.
Item destruction: EVE Online makes heavy use of item destruction to keep rare items rare. Death in that game results in most of the gear which was in use, being destroyed. Thus, items which are most useful also end up getting destroyed frequently, keeping them from ever being too abundant. Personally, I think it might work to have games with two modes: normal without gear destruction, and a hardcore mode with gear destruction. Then if the two modes share markets, the destruction by the hardcore players can help drain the entire market of valuables. Not everyone wants to deal with gear destruction, but some people do like it, and letting them get stuff destroyed could help the games economy. An alternate form would be to have some regions with gear destruction, though it would be important to make it clear to players that entering such areas is dangerous, as anyone who lost stuff by accident would be rather upset.
Ultimately, the experience some games are trying to create doesn't fit well with an MMO environment: the idea of an item simply needing X hours of effort to acquire item Z runs into problems when people who have done it can give the item away to someone else. It's like trying to fit a single player game into a multi-player environment instead of trying to focus on what creating a living world full of players really means.
A common solution to mudflation is to make items that cannot be traded or sold to other players after they've been equipped. This causes any item that players actually use, to disappear from the player market preventing the market from getting flooded with hand-me-downs.
I've started wondering if perhaps a game seeking to maintain a strong player driven economy, might be better served by instead examining the issue of rarity. If an item's market value gets driven down by how numerous they are, then perhaps it simply isn't rare enough.
Many MMOGs balance their loot drops using the same methods used by single player games. However, in a multiplayer game, a player driven market will be filled with items acquired by the many, many hours of gameplay already enjoyed by previous players. A single player game does not have this, instead the number of hours worth of loot acquisition is restricted solely to the hours put in by the current player. This drastic difference pretty much guarantees that a system designed for one game type won't work well in the other game. The standard system is to just have a % chance of a given loot item dropping from specific monsters. As the total number of monsters slain steadily increases over the life of a MMOG, this results in an ever increasing number of items in existence that were ment to be rare.
Alternate methods of creating rarity and value:
Limited quantity: In EVE online, there were some ultra rare items of which only a specific number were ever given out. Some might even be described as priceless. These items can be traded and often go for crazy high prices when compared to the price of other items with similar functional ability. Having the total quantity of certain items be limited based upon the size of the player base might be an effective way to keep certain items rare.
Increasing utility: A very basic way to increase value is to provide a way for players to make use of old gear. The most common method I'm aware of is to let it be broken down for parts to use in crafting. If the price of the good goes too low, people will start buying it for scrap. If the devs think an item's market price is too low, they can increase the amount of scrap it gives to raise it's value. This can also be a form of item destruction.
Item destruction: EVE Online makes heavy use of item destruction to keep rare items rare. Death in that game results in most of the gear which was in use, being destroyed. Thus, items which are most useful also end up getting destroyed frequently, keeping them from ever being too abundant. Personally, I think it might work to have games with two modes: normal without gear destruction, and a hardcore mode with gear destruction. Then if the two modes share markets, the destruction by the hardcore players can help drain the entire market of valuables. Not everyone wants to deal with gear destruction, but some people do like it, and letting them get stuff destroyed could help the games economy. An alternate form would be to have some regions with gear destruction, though it would be important to make it clear to players that entering such areas is dangerous, as anyone who lost stuff by accident would be rather upset.
Ultimately, the experience some games are trying to create doesn't fit well with an MMO environment: the idea of an item simply needing X hours of effort to acquire item Z runs into problems when people who have done it can give the item away to someone else. It's like trying to fit a single player game into a multi-player environment instead of trying to focus on what creating a living world full of players really means.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
Nano Paint Could Make Airplanes Invisible to Radar
http://www.technologyreview.com/article/39238/
Sounds like a really neat technology. It also sounds potentially dangerous. What scares me most is the possibility that someone might use it to develop a stealth ICBM (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile) and then nuke someone thinking no one will be able to figure out who fired it. Hopefully enough resources will be put into better detection methods to thwart any efforts at creating a stealth ICBM.
Sounds like a really neat technology. It also sounds potentially dangerous. What scares me most is the possibility that someone might use it to develop a stealth ICBM (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile) and then nuke someone thinking no one will be able to figure out who fired it. Hopefully enough resources will be put into better detection methods to thwart any efforts at creating a stealth ICBM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)