Digital distribution of games

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Hi,

An interesting article on how the industry insiders see the move to
digital distribution of their games.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1151&Itemid=2&limit=1&limitstart=0

Good points about the totally different approach/embracement of this by
the games industry compared to the music/movie morons, brand awareness,
the retail shopping experience, the road ahead and other assorted stuff

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:

> My first question is, can anyone name a *non-digital* means of
> distributing computer software?

Oh, damn - you just ruined my ongoing little game with Briarroot
[Google +"digital download" +analog +briarroot for earlier rounds]

But, to answer your question : I think it's to differentiate between
online buying of the software (remote retail ?) where you get a box
delivered through the mail and the online buying of software where your
purchase comes down the wire. Or else because Digital Download has such
a nice acronym

> Secondly, why do web designers insist on breaking a tiny little article
> like this into five separate pages that a reader must clicket-clickety-
> click on through? Just make one long document; we know how to scroll.

Advertisements & page-clicks ...

> Thirdly, is it just me, or did anyone else find this article studiously
> avoiding any discussion of The Elephant In The Living Room? That
> pachyderm, of course, is piracy - more accurately, the staggering
> restrictions that some distributors will place on software to avoid the
> terrible thought that someone, somewhere, might be <gasp!> playing their
> little game without paying for it!

Well, it's the first article in a series - I'm hoping the "journalist"
will ask the above and other uncomfortable questions like "monthly
subscription systems yes/no", "real ownership or just renting software"
and other questions in the follow-up articles.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:

> And our area of the software world is probably going to lean towards the
> Matrix-model of minimally-intrusive copy protection schemes.

Serial number linked to purchase ought to be enough.

> I've been
> sorta keeping an eye peeled for serialz or crackz to online-distributed
> wargames at the usual sites, and thus far <touches wood> not a single
> file.

I'm afraid I've got news for you there. I've got a buddy who sort-of
collects games - I say collect because he never plays them - too busy
with the downloading, burning and inventoring Real wargames *do*
appear on certain channels. The good news is that I doubt wargame
companies are losing a lot of sales because of this. Every poll shows
the average age-group of wargamers to be 30-40. An age group where the
gamers are short on playing time, not on petty cash.

If wargame publishers are interested in this I could ask him which
wargames are available where and how, but I doubt they'll bother.

> [And who is "Lindsay Lohan," and why do so many people want me to look
> at images of her naked? Is she the new Helen of Troy or something?]

??? but googling that name as soon as I get home from work

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In article <1127895819.601990.256540@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...

> An interesting article on how the industry insiders see the move to
> digital distribution of their games.
>
> http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1151&Itemid=2&limit=1&limitstart=0
>
> Good points about the totally different approach/embracement of this by
> the games industry compared to the music/movie morons, brand awareness,
> the retail shopping experience, the road ahead and other assorted stuff

My first question is, can anyone name a *non-digital* means of
distributing computer software? I'm not sure shipping racks of punch-
cards counts, and an analog modem still starts and ends with ... guess
what. Why not call this something like "Online Distribution?"

Secondly, why do web designers insist on breaking a tiny little article
like this into five separate pages that a reader must clicket-clickety-
click on through? Just make one long document; we know how to scroll.

Thirdly, is it just me, or did anyone else find this article studiously
avoiding any discussion of The Elephant In The Living Room? That
pachyderm, of course, is piracy - more accurately, the staggering
restrictions that some distributors will place on software to avoid the
terrible thought that someone, somewhere, might be <gasp!> playing their
little game without paying for it!


--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In article <1127906458.216790.33090@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...

> > My first question is, can anyone name a *non-digital* means of
> > distributing computer software?
>
> Oh, damn - you just ruined my ongoing little game with Briarroot
> [Google +"digital download" +analog +briarroot for earlier rounds]
>
> But, to answer your question : I think it's to differentiate between
> online buying of the software (remote retail ?) where you get a box
> delivered through the mail and the online buying of software where your
> purchase comes down the wire. Or else because Digital Download has such
> a nice acronym

"Online Buying" is a better term, even. Simple, succinct, and entirely
expressive. This was another article where I had to read several
paragraphs before it became 100% clear that they were talking about OB,
"Digital Distribution" being entirely applicable to a CD, DVD, Floppy
Disk, ThumbDrive, 40GB DAT, etc.

> > Secondly, why do web designers insist on breaking a tiny little article
> > like this into five separate pages that a reader must clicket-clickety-
> > click on through? Just make one long document; we know how to scroll.
>
> Advertisements & page-clicks ...

As if anyone ever looks at that bullshit my proxy-server dikes out.

> > Thirdly, is it just me, or did anyone else find this article studiously
> > avoiding any discussion of The Elephant In The Living Room? That
> > pachyderm, of course, is piracy - more accurately, the staggering
> > restrictions that some distributors will place on software to avoid the
> > terrible thought that someone, somewhere, might be <gasp!> playing their
> > little game without paying for it!
>
> Well, it's the first article in a series - I'm hoping the "journalist"
> will ask the above and other uncomfortable questions like "monthly
> subscription systems yes/no", "real ownership or just renting software"
> and other questions in the follow-up articles.

I wasn't finding much "journalism" in this mess either; more like a
series of self-plumping industry press-releases explaining how bright
the digital future is.

And our area of the software world is probably going to lean towards the
Matrix-model of minimally-intrusive copy protection schemes. I've been
sorta keeping an eye peeled for serialz or crackz to online-distributed
wargames at the usual sites, and thus far <touches wood> not a single
file. Of course, I'm not looking very hard, but one has to practically
shovel the DOOM3 crackz out of the way to navigate through some of these
red-light districts.

[And who is "Lindsay Lohan," and why do so many people want me to look
at images of her naked? Is she the new Helen of Troy or something?]

--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

eddysterckx@hotmail.com wrote:
> Giftzwerg wrote:
>
>>My first question is, can anyone name a *non-digital* means of
>>distributing computer software?
>
> Oh, damn - you just ruined my ongoing little game with Briarroot
> [Google +"digital download" +analog +briarroot for earlier rounds]

Hey!


> But, to answer your question : I think it's to differentiate between
> online buying of the software (remote retail ?) where you get a box
> delivered through the mail and the online buying of software where your
> purchase comes down the wire. Or else because Digital Download has such
> a nice acronym

Well, at least it's better than *Direct Download.* I still hate that one!


>>Secondly, why do web designers insist on breaking a tiny little article
>>like this into five separate pages that a reader must clicket-clickety-
>>click on through? Just make one long document; we know how to scroll.
>
> Advertisements & page-clicks ...

And feedback on whether or not visitors actually read the entire
article. If it were all on one page they couldn't tell if anyone read
the whole thing or merely left the page up while they went to feed their
cat.


>>Thirdly, is it just me, or did anyone else find this article studiously
>>avoiding any discussion of The Elephant In The Living Room? That
>>pachyderm, of course, is piracy - more accurately, the staggering
>>restrictions that some distributors will place on software to avoid the
>>terrible thought that someone, somewhere, might be <gasp!> playing their
>>little game without paying for it!
>
> Well, it's the first article in a series - I'm hoping the "journalist"
> will ask the above and other uncomfortable questions like "monthly
> subscription systems yes/no", "real ownership or just renting software"
> and other questions in the follow-up articles.

(In line with Giftzwerg's "is it just me" plaint...)

Is it just me or does anyone else remember the days when the words
"marketing" and "product" would *never* have passed the lips of a game
developer? <sigh>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:
> In article <1127906458.216790.33090@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...
>>
>>Well, it's the first article in a series - I'm hoping the "journalist"
>>will ask the above and other uncomfortable questions like "monthly
>>subscription systems yes/no", "real ownership or just renting software"
>>and other questions in the follow-up articles.
>
>
> I wasn't finding much "journalism" in this mess either; more like a
> series of self-plumping industry press-releases explaining how bright
> the digital future is.

Apparently, that's how these guys normally talk - *all* the damn time! :-/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In article <1127911867.802760.109180@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...

> > I've been
> > sorta keeping an eye peeled for serialz or crackz to online-distributed
> > wargames at the usual sites, and thus far <touches wood> not a single
> > file.
>
> I'm afraid I've got news for you there. I've got a buddy who sort-of
> collects games - I say collect because he never plays them - too busy
> with the downloading, burning and inventoring Real wargames *do*
> appear on certain channels. The good news is that I doubt wargame
> companies are losing a lot of sales because of this. Every poll shows
> the average age-group of wargamers to be 30-40. An age group where the
> gamers are short on playing time, not on petty cash.

Well, I don't think there's a single piece of software yet produced that
hasn't appeared in pirated form *somewhere*, but the fact that
astalavista.box.sk or cracks.am is entirely silent on certain titles
tells me that it hasn't reached the point where a Matrixgames is going
to *need* some Byzantine protection scheme.

In fact, we can cobble together a rump equation for "Relative Piracy
Likelihood." My candidate equation would be:

RLP = MA% * (20/UDAA) * (CS/100)

where:

RLP = Relative Likelihood of Piracy
MA = Percentage of target audience likely to want the product
UDAA = User Demographic Average Age
CS = Cost of Software (USD)

Thus for, say, HTTR, we arrive at
MA=10% (10 percent of all gamers might want it)
UDAA = 35 (average age of someone who wants it)
CS = $49 (how much it costs, USD)

So RLP = .1 * .57 * .49 ~= .03

Thus for every 100 legal buyers of HTTR, there are probably 3 pirates.

For DOOM3, we get
MA=70%
UDAA=18
CS=$59

or .45

So there's almost a pirate user for every other DOOM3 buyer.

For something like PHOTOSHOP, we should get a stunningly high number
(*everybody* pirates Photoshop, except corporate users, professional
photographers, and graphic artists...):

MA=90%
UDAA=35
CS=$600

or 3.09!

Yup. I'd be willing to bet that only one in four copies of Photoshop
out there is legit.

Of course, I'm just pulling numbers out of thin air, and my admittedly
based-on-nothing-but-gut-feeling equation is made up from whole cloth
.... but just considering the issue makes me wonder if there isn't a
*real* equation out there somewhere in the software industry. Certainly
Bill Gates isn't going to tell us what his calculations are, but I'll
bet he's got some numbers just like these rolling 'round Redmond.



--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In article <MPG.1da485109df22a198a56d@news-east.giganews.com>,
giftzwerg999@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com says...

> Thus for, say, HTTR, we arrive at
> MA=10% (10 percent of all gamers might want it)
> UDAA = 35 (average age of someone who wants it)
> CS = $49 (how much it costs, USD)
>
> So RLP = .1 * .57 * .49 ~= .03
>
> Thus for every 100 legal buyers of HTTR, there are probably 3 pirates.

One other thing that bears mentioning. Copy protection - particularly
nasty, ugly activation-based batshit that tramples all over a user's
right to freely use the software he's buying - doesn't come without a
price.

If we believe that there are 3 pirate users of HTTR for every 100 legal
users (and my calculations are probably just bullshit...), we have to
balance that against "Percent of potential buyers so pissed off at copy
protection that they avoid the title altogether."

What I'm saying is that a company like Matrix might calculate that a
minimally-intrusive copy protection scheme (simple serial number, as
now...) might piss off zero potential buyers and leave them with 3/100
piracy levels. A nasty-bastard "subscription" scheme might piss off X
potential buyers. If X > 3 then they're deep into net-loss territory,
since an additional marginal download *costs them virtually nothing*.
So a Matrixgames has a very low probability of needing such nonsense.

Adobe, on the other hand, is virtually certain to ratchet up the ugly on
copy protection.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:

> One other thing that bears mentioning. Copy protection - particularly
> nasty, ugly activation-based batshit that tramples all over a user's
> right to freely use the software he's buying - doesn't come without a
> price.

> ... "Percent of potential buyers so pissed off at copy
> protection that they avoid the title altogether."

The smart companies have already figured this one out I think - there
are some additional angles here as well

- extreme copy protection schemes aren't cheap to implement, increasing
your unit cost.

- additional cost in after-sales care (phone calls, emails, forum ...)
for your paying customers who can't play the game they've just bought
....

- amount of sales you lose for every such gamer who starts complaining
about your game on public forums.

- it won't stop the real pirates - those who copy your game and sell it
on the streets in Eastern Europe & the Far East.

- a game pirated does not equal a sale lost. I'm always howling with
laughter as I hear the music/movie industry blabbering about x billion
$ lost in sales due to people downloading stuff. Not a single
journalist has ever asked the question : would *all* those same people
that downloaded your song/movie go out and buy that cd/dvd if it wasn't
available on the P2P networks ? The same holds true for games - this
buddy of mine who downloads each and every game hasn't cost the game
industry a single penny. He doesn't play these games, he just collects
them, he's a collector, not a gamer - he'd be collecting stamps if
games didn't exist.

- a serial number linked to you personally *is* a good copy protection
method for wargame companies. Nobody is daft enough to "give" his
serial number away as it can easily be traced back to him. And who is
ever going to write a serial number generator for a particular wargame
- I mean, the average warez-dude/hacker isn't interested in wargames
and those programmers within the wargame community won't do it.
So, even if an individual wargame does appear in the warez-channels -
with the copy protection stuff removed, but then patch 1.01 is released
and you'll need that serial number to patch your pirated game or wait
for a crack to appear - if ever. All this hassle over less money than
the average dress your wife wears ?


> Adobe, on the other hand, is virtually certain to ratchet up the ugly on
> copy protection.

Depends on the product - if it's something that students use/want a lot
I'd go for a light protection scheme. These same students don't have
the money to buy your product anyway, so having a heavy protection
scheme drives them to using your competitors lightly defended product.
After they graduate and enter the workforce they've become used to your
competitors product and if the company they work for then has to decide
which product to buy ...

I've seen this happening with some very good software like Writing
Assistant, Lotus 1-2-3 and others.

.... but it's a different thing if you've got a virtual monopoly in a
certain field (like AutoCad). There I'd go full-out with
copy-protection methods

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Briarroot wrote:

> Is it just me or does anyone else remember the days when the words
> "marketing" and "product" would *never* have passed the lips of a game
> developer? <sigh>

Yeah, I remember those days - and I don't want them ever to come back.

A wargame is a software product for a niche market, but it's still a
product that must adhere to the rules of good business practices.

One of those is good marketing. Marketing is *not* a dirty word. If
you're in the business of making wargames you better make sure your
potential customers know you exist and what products you make. This
benefits both you (you get money you can use for your next game) and me
as I get to know/play the type of game I like. A win-win situation.

As to the use of the word "product" - I've used it a couple of times as
well in the sentences above - a bit on purpose really because I don't
want wargame developers to lose sight of this : you can put your heart
and soul in developing a game, but if at the end of the day you didn't
make enough money to support your family, this one game will be your
final one. You won't be designing wargames anymore, and we will have
lost a wargame designer - a lose-lose situation.

Treating it as a "product" means making harsh decisions as to features
you want to implement and always keeping your eye on the bottom line.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:

> In fact, we can cobble together a rump equation for "Relative Piracy
> Likelihood." My candidate equation would be:
>
> RLP = MA% * (20/UDAA) * (CS/100)
>
> where:
>
> RLP = Relative Likelihood of Piracy
> MA = Percentage of target audience likely to want the product
> UDAA = User Demographic Average Age
> CS = Cost of Software (USD)

I've been thinking about this formula (never a good thing ...) and I
would suggest 2 slight alterations :

1) CS/100 - gut feeling here that the sweet point is more like CS/50
2) 20/UDAA - too linear, I'd go with something more logarithmic - now
the difference between a 15-year old kid and a 30-year old is only a
factor 2.

> ... but just considering the issue makes me wonder if there isn't a
> *real* equation out there somewhere in the software industry.

I'm pretty certain some consultant or other has earned a lot of money
selling such a formula
.... And if I ever get to sell such a thing, I'll cut you in on the deal


Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:
> In article <1127992404.673172.147000@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...
>
> > > In fact, we can cobble together a rump equation for "Relative Piracy
> > > Likelihood." My candidate equation would be:
> > >
> > > RLP = MA% * (20/UDAA) * (CS/100)
> > >
> > > where:
> > >
> > > RLP = Relative Likelihood of Piracy
> > > MA = Percentage of target audience likely to want the product
> > > UDAA = User Demographic Average Age
> > > CS = Cost of Software (USD)
> >
> > I've been thinking about this formula (never a good thing ...) and I
> > would suggest 2 slight alterations :
> >
> > 1) CS/100 - gut feeling here that the sweet point is more like CS/50
>
> That was my first thought, but I wanted an equation that was generally
> applicable to software beyond games. Many significant applications
> software packages and operating systems appear to cluster in the Just-
> Around-$100USD zone, so this is what I made the baseline. But sure,
> we'd have to lower it to get an equation that would be optimized for
> gaming - or raise it to correctly consider, say, enterprise server
> packages.

Agreed on second thought - I was too fixated on game-prices.

> > 2) 20/UDAA - too linear, I'd go with something more logarithmic - now
> > the difference between a 15-year old kid and a 30-year old is only a
> > factor 2.
>
> Agreed. But I'm afraid "logarithms" is a concept that long-ago
> disappeared into the murky soup of Forgotten Stuff That Was Once Oh, So
> Critical.

And now it's one of those "You Thought You'd Never Have Any Use For It,
But Now You Regret Sleeping Through That Class" kind of things

> So you bright young folks will have to supply the math here.

Well, that rules me out on 3 counts [I'm not a folkie either]

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Giftzwerg wrote:

> > > Agreed. But I'm afraid "logarithms" is a concept that long-ago
> > > disappeared into the murky soup of Forgotten Stuff That Was Once Oh, So
> > > Critical.
> >
> > And now it's one of those "You Thought You'd Never Have Any Use For It,
> > But Now You Regret Sleeping Through That Class" kind of things
>
> Considering the degree to which it proved practically useful, my only
> regret is that I put *any* effort into learning any of that nonsense.

I find them very useful - my overtime rates are based on it

[One of the more frustrating experiences I once had was trying to
explain to someone that a Richter 5 earthquake is 10 times more
powerful than a Richter 4 and not just 25% worse]

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In article <1127988487.819557.60760@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
eddysterckx@hotmail.com says...

> - it won't stop the real pirates - those who copy your game and sell it
> on the streets in Eastern Europe & the Far East.

Something interesting. A friend of mine travels extensively throughout
the Middle East - Dubai, Bahrain, etc. He brought back about 247
zillion dollars worth of pirated software. I asked him if US Customs
even batted an eyelash at a *plainly* pirated disk (I'm reasonably sure
Bill Gates stopped using a 72dpi inkjet printer to label his CDs some
years ago...) and he asked, "Why should they?"

Huh. That seems rather a hole in ... something. I mean, if my shady
pal were bringing the monetary equivalent of that much illegally
obtained software, I'm sure eyebrows would have raised. Not to mention
if he'd had that much $$ in gold on him.

> > Adobe, on the other hand, is virtually certain to ratchet up the ugly on
> > copy protection.
>
> Depends on the product - if it's something that students use/want a lot
> I'd go for a light protection scheme. These same students don't have
> the money to buy your product anyway, so having a heavy protection
> scheme drives them to using your competitors lightly defended product.
> After they graduate and enter the workforce they've become used to your
> competitors product and if the company they work for then has to decide
> which product to buy ...

Bingo. And you're touching on a fabulous point here; some software
products became the *de facto* world standard *only because of piracy*.
Think about WordPerfect back in the DOS era; the bloody thing cost
something like $500 - which was real money back in 198X. Only
corporations could really afford to use WP - but *everyone* had a nice
little unprotected copy of the floppy disk at their PC, and copied it
for their home PC.

Would a single home user have opted for WP if not for piracy? Nope.
And yet, it quickly ruled the world, personal use reinforcing corporate
use leading to more personal use in a happy spiral of profits for <I
forget, those original WP guys>.

That's why I think it's crucial to factor the costs of software into the
piracy matrix. As I've said for years, if Adobe got real with the price
of Photoshop, they would have to worry about protecting it. Most
people's price-point for a software product is about $100. Less than
that, and they'll opt for a legal copy. More than that, and they'll
start casting around for "another option."

--
Giftzwerg
***
"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq - now, over
1,800 deaths - is generally devoid of context. Here's some context:
between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died
accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286
per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly
two to one."
- John Hinderaker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

> - a serial number linked to you personally *is* a good copy protection
> method for wargame companies. Nobody is daft enough to "give" his
> serial number away as it can easily be traced back to him. And who is
> ever going to write a serial number generator for a particular wargame
> - I mean, the average warez-dude/hacker isn't interested in wargames
> and those programmers within the wargame community won't do it.
> So, even if an individual wargame does appear in the warez-channels -
> with the copy protection stuff removed, but then patch 1.01 is released
> and you'll need that serial number to patch your pirated game or wait
> for a crack to appear - if ever. All this hassle over less money than
> the average dress your wife wears ?

Battlefield has this going pretty well even though it's not a wargame.
Online play is a big part of it. To play online you need a UNIQUE
serial number.

Epi

----
Sub sims have always seemed like they should be fun.
With Silent Hunter III they finally made one that is.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

In message <1128002389.041208.104630@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"eddysterckx@hotmail.com" <eddysterckx@hotmail.com> writes
>Giftzwerg wrote:
>
>> > > Agreed. But I'm afraid "logarithms" is a concept that long-ago
>> > > disappeared into the murky soup of Forgotten Stuff That Was Once Oh, So
>> > > Critical.
>> >
>> > And now it's one of those "You Thought You'd Never Have Any Use For It,
>> > But Now You Regret Sleeping Through That Class" kind of things
>>
>> Considering the degree to which it proved practically useful, my only
>> regret is that I put *any* effort into learning any of that nonsense.
>
>I find them very useful - my overtime rates are based on it
>
>[One of the more frustrating experiences I once had was trying to
>explain to someone that a Richter 5 earthquake is 10 times more
>powerful than a Richter 4 and not just 25% worse]
>
But that conversation does not get any easier if you introduce the word
"logarithm" into it. In fact the concept isn't too hard, but when you
label it "logarithmic" people's brains seem to switch off.
--
John Secker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

John Secker <john@secker.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:TC1C$LEJsBPDFwdC@secker.demon.co.uk:

> In message <1128002389.041208.104630@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "eddysterckx@hotmail.com" <eddysterckx@hotmail.com> writes
>>Giftzwerg wrote:
>>
>>> > > Agreed. But I'm afraid "logarithms" is a concept that long-ago
>>> > > disappeared into the murky soup of Forgotten Stuff That Was Once
>>> > > Oh, So Critical.
>>> >
>>> > And now it's one of those "You Thought You'd Never Have Any Use
>>> > For It, But Now You Regret Sleeping Through That Class" kind of
>>> > things
>>>
>>> Considering the degree to which it proved practically useful, my
>>> only regret is that I put *any* effort into learning any of that
>>> nonsense.
>>
>>I find them very useful - my overtime rates are based on it
>>
>>[One of the more frustrating experiences I once had was trying to
>>explain to someone that a Richter 5 earthquake is 10 times more
>>powerful than a Richter 4 and not just 25% worse]
>>
> But that conversation does not get any easier if you introduce the
> word "logarithm" into it. In fact the concept isn't too hard, but when
> you label it "logarithmic" people's brains seem to switch off.

<sigh> I know now - the simple *concept* of a non-linear scale was alien
to the guy. I've known for a very long time that "some people can't
count", but this guy was pretty clever in every other field so I hadn't
expected it.

Incidently a good book on this is "Innumeracy" by John Allen Paulos
http://www.complete-review.com/reviews/maths/paulosja.htm

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx


--
"Ceterum censeo Belgicam delendam esse."
(Cato, 'Pro Gerolphe')