pooping out games

Wonderman looks like she's trying to drop a mean duce. but it's not as bad as how EA pretty much decided to destroy a fairly popular title by announcing this:

DICE currently working on 5 Battlefield games
June 24 2008

EA Has Five Battlefields In the Oven
June 24 2008

no matter what kind of resources you have to pull this off, the thought of -- "omg, there's going to be 5 games of this?" just makes me want to say: f#ck it. i only want one good game. not 5 mediocre ones.

and if you're gonna $#!t out games year after year - don't be surprised when the public respond with - "didn't that come out last year?"

a title needs to have time between sequels. a lot of gamers are getting to know what studios are producing the fun time-suck games versus the"alternate year" studios. which in my opinion tarnishes the "franchise". [ infinity ward vs. treyarch ]

now, i can't tell you a single person i know who bought consecutive years of the madden games. and if there's someone out there who did, you're a tool. so what about these announcements:

EA craves sequels for Dead Space, Army of Two, and Battlefield: Bad Company
EA: Dead Space, Army of Two, Bad Company sequels in the works
EA Considering Sequels to Dead Space, Army of Two
oct 23 2008 - three games - three links

as long as it's every other year - then i don't mind. but if you're going to shovel it down our face every year - people are gonna start ignoring the marketing blitz. while paying more attention to these kinds of headlines:

EA Laying Off 600 As Revenue, Losses Rise, Citing Weakening Retail
Oct 31 2008

EA promises its games won't be 'crappy' anymore
Aug 5 2008

EA: Investors don't give a sh*t about quality
July 22 2008

Lawsuit flags EA for illegal procedure on football monopoly
June 12 2008

so you poop out "crappy" games because you are only interested in increasing shareholder value? not caring about the ramifications for the long term? (and it really isn't that long: only 18-24 months cycles - for a title.) and trying to squeeze something out in every 12 month (again, of the same project) -- just to see customer loyalty destroyed at the end of the fiscal year? good going f#ck bags.

oh, you want new buyers? thanks for caring. we're the ones who recommends games to your new potential buyers.

if you have nothing new, nothing exciting and not worth paying full price for -- then why do you wonder people are not buying your games. you'd be lucky if someone waits until it hits the bargain bin.

stick to new/multiple titles. don't grind on the same title until it literally turns in to dust. over exposure is a sure way to turn people off. sequels aren't a bad thing (can't wait for diablo3 & starcraft2). but i guess that's not stopping articles (like this one) from flying off the shelf (even though we are all pretty much talking about the same thing):

Insomniac loves sequels, so it should MARRY them
oct 23 2008

Why Are Gamers Cynical Of Sequels?
oct 24 2008

ps. yes, i know the DC characters here have nothing to do with this article, but they were too easy to pass up to make d!ck and f@rt jokes with...

evil telcos - double charge

this post is a side bar to the main P2P article.

network caps. please note that there is a difference between bandwidth size limits and bandwidth rate limits. how are these different? i watch A LOT of internet videos (video length contributes to the file size downloaded) and i don't like waiting through the "buffering..." messages (how fast can the video stream be downloaded).

the speed at which the file can be downloaded is dependent on how fast your ISP will plow the files to your home. in fact, when looking into or recommending an ISP to others - i look for the fewest "buffering" message moments. some ISPs do not seem to get this. (yes, speed is also dependent on how fast the source server is - but we are talking about the ISP services to your home. major internet video broadcast networks makes use of CDNs - content distributed networks. and some even distribute their shows on torrent networks. but it all comes down to how tight the pipes gets closed when the ISP's rips you off.)

now i understand that they should be charging more for people with a faster network pipe (which they already do). they have T-1, T-3, OC-3, OC-12, OC-48 and OC-192 dedicated lines. and they come with (most of the time) unlimited transfer sizes. remember, it's a dedicated line. (and i say most of the time because, for example, it seems to be regional for academic institutions. who knows why - maybe some crazy legislation is why. see my previous article.)

in a nuttshell, the evil-telcos want to double charge you for the same product and services. here's what i mean. a T-1, for example, is a 1.544 megabits per second pipe. a T-3 is 43.232 Mbps, which has 28 times the capacity of the T-1. or in other words, it would take 28 times longer to push the same amount of data on a T-1 than on the T-3. (by the way, a T-3 is just 28 T-1's bundled together. and yeah yeah yeah, packet data [payload] versus packet header [overhead] bliz blaz.) but, keep this simple math in mind as we continue.

Comcast's New Network Management Will Slow Down Heavy Users for Up to 20 Minutes
Aug 20 2008

Comcast to slow down heaviest 'Net users to DSL speeds
Aug 21 2008

we see they no longer wish to honor the services they said they will provide when they have no problem charging you money every month for it. here's where the double charges come in:

It's official: Comcast starts 250GB bandwidth caps October 1
Aug 28 2008

"there was also buzz that Comcast might try to charge customers $15 for every 10GB they went over the limit."

HA! nickle and dime, i tells ya! although this is just a rumor, i'll bet the air you're breathing that this will happen.

ok, back to the double charge and the basic math i mentioned earlier. most DSL and cable modem provider charge you a certain amount of dollars for a certain bandwidth rate.

AT&T DSL price quote as of Oct 19 2008
price	up stream	down stream
$14.99	384 Kbps	768 Kbps
$25.00	384 Kbps	1.5 Mbps
$30.00	512 Kbps	3.0 Mbps
$35.00	768 Kbps	6.0 Mbps

note: i could have posted some cable modem, fiber and DSL prices here from the P2P unfriendly bastards that are all over the newsfeeds. but, this is just an example of the price scam i want to bring up. and you can do your own math with the ISP you're using to see for yourself. oh wait, where's the $10 package AT&T said they are offering? i would put the link here but it doesn't seem to be up anymore. evil and greedy f#ck bags. note: AT&T was required by the FCC to offer the low cost service as an agreement for the bellsouth merger. and what do you know, "at" bellsouth, you can find the information on how to get the cheap offereing.

let's say that you want to download a few files that totals to 250 GB - maybe it's every Linux Distro ISO and all of the source codes that were used to make it. let's see how long it would take to download it.

time to download 250GB
rate	days	hours	mins	secs
768 Kbps	32	8	43	22.67
1.5 Mbps	16	13	40	55.77
3.0 Mbps	8	6	50	27.88
6.0 Mbps	4	4	25	13.94

note: 1GB = 2^30 bytes which is then multiplied by 250 and again by 8 to get the number of bits we are looking to download. yeah yeah yeah packet headers, retransmission & delay windows. just consider them all part of the total 250 GB downloaded.

so, on the slowest tier, it would take the whole month for you to download all of that. good for you! you physically can't download it fast enough to even hit the limit. but if you went and upgraded to the faster rate, not only will pay more for it, but will download it faster and faster and hit the "limit" quicker than the month would end. so you would be charged extra in order to keep using the internet feed you already paid for - or spend the rest of the month unable to access the internet. told you the telco's want to DP you in the @$$.