I have organised two LAN parties over the past few months. I would like to share a few tips and tricks and some pitfalls with you.
- Create a list of games you are going to play up front, and make sure everyone agrees on it. You don’t want to find out on the event that half the people there do not like the games on the list.
- Make sure people attending have the right set of mind. A LAN party is about playing games together. Think about who you are inviting, there really are people out there who will start playing single player games while being at a LAN party.
- Think about power usage. One or two PCs will not make a breaker fault, however ten PCs might. Make sure you spread them across power groups, you do not want the power to go down.
- Arrange for food and dinner agreement up front, don’t forget about drinks and snacks needed while playing.
- Pick the right games, you don’t want to play an RPG all day only to end with level 10 characters, or play halfway through the Serious Sam 2 campaign. Shooters and fast RTS games (Red Alert 2) are great for one day events.
- Have everyone bring headphones. I don’t really need to explain why having a dozen different set of game sounds in the same room is a bad idea, now do I?
- Have people bring long UTP cables, you don’t want to supply them for everyone and with a dozen people attending the switch isn’t going to be nearby for all of them.
- Make sure you have backup materials for all hardware. Murphy is on your shoulder, there will always be some piece of hardware failing. Either UTP cables which don’t work, or are one centimetre short, switches which malfunction etc, etc.
- Finally the bottom line: get your agreements straight. You will most likely depend on others for part of the materials and other stuff, make sure everyone knows the agreements and abides them. On my last event we had to wait for an hour for the switch to arrive, that is not ideal.
These nine points will help you organise your LAN party well, so you can have a lot of fun making your friends fall off of Q3DM17 and see your 25 Kirov Airships turn their base into virtual dust in a matter of minutes. It’s all about fun!
Every year it’s the same thing: because Christmas makes people buy more games a lot of them are released in the fall. After a almost complete lack of releases over the summer from September onwards a lot of games are released. The real hose is around November and early December, however more and more we see games try to circumvent that by being early (September) or late (January/February) which results in a big hose of game releases from September to early February. The first months of the new year are also filled with a few games that were originally scheduled for the holiday period, but got delayed.
The reason why some games try to circumvent it is that games can and will be snowed under all those AAA releases. Not only do those attract all the attention, people can only spend their money once. Although they do spend more for the holidays, only die-hard fans buy more than about four games in one month. So if they are already buying Red Alert 3, Need for Speed, FIFA and Fallout 3, where are you going to fit in? Besides, September is a nice period for selling games to teenagers looking for games to spend the money from their summer jobs on. I believe this is known as the back to school period in the US.
Having all those games release in the same times has its pros and cons. It’s nice to have so many great games, perhaps like celebrating your birthday and Christmas on the same day, getting two presents from everyone. The downsides however are obvious with that analogy as well, you are getting all presents on the same day however you will have to wait for a full year to get presents again. We do get all those great games now, however it does result in big releaseless gaps in spring and summer. Of course one can hold out and play some games then, and save some money at the same time. However that kind of defeats the purpose, as no publisher intends its customers to do that.
There are also some not so obvious downsides. The first is the risk of rush jobs, releasing the game in the holiday period even though it’s not finished yet. This results in bugs ruining a game’s experience, which EA recently proved with the release of Mercenaries 2. Most reviews agree: a great game, if it were not for all those bugs. The second downside is for those writing about games. During the down periods they have trouble filling their magazines and websites, during the high days they lack space to fit it all in.
We have seen this period grow in length for the past few years, it would appear some companies are seeing its not working. I hope this trend will continue to develop and we will get rid of most of the downtimes, overall it would be better for everyone: players, developers and journalists.
Sometimes you are just trying too hard. In motor racing this is called overdriving the car, trying so hard to go faster that you overdo it and go slower, because you brake so late that you miss the corners, you hit the gas so early that you get wheel spin out of the corners, etcetera.
In IT there is the same phenomenon, however it is not as obvious as in motor racing. There is a lot of great technology, and each and every one of them has its fans, people who love it and say it is the best thing that ever happened. However you have to be careful, because technology has it’s limits. Especially with PCs, if you push the limit too much it will break and you get into trouble. When you get into trouble with PCs, you do not just get into trouble, you get into mayhem.
You probable guessed it by now, I am not writing this as a theory, I am writing it because of experience, recent experience. Due to hard drive space requirements I am running three drives, so when I added the two about a month ago I figured it was a nice opportunity to run in a RAID configuration. The Intel chipset on my motherboard allows me to run multiple levels of RAID on the same hard drive, enabling me to run a small portion RAID 1 for data security, and the rest RAID 0 for high speeds and a lot of space. Of course RAID 0 means a higher chance of lost data, as one broken drive means everything on that RAID volume is lost. However, I figured that chances of a hard drive breaking down are so small, that twice that is still acceptable, to me that is.
Well, I landed in a heap of trouble. First of all, I moved over my windows install from a regular drive to the raid volume. Of course Windows cannot handle this change (why would it, reinstalling it is fun!). It got slow and crappy, so I had to go through a reinstall, even though the previous one was only a couple of months old. Luckily I had skipped it when buying my new video card, otherwise it would have been the second reinstall in a few weeks time.
That is not so bad, right? Indeed it is. However I have a poster of Murphy’s Law on the wall behind my PC for a reason. You guessed it, one of the drives failed me after only a few weeks. However my luck is my luck, so I could recover most data. Most. Out of the 800 gigabytes of data on the volume I was able to save over 799 gigabytes. Only one file did not check out completely, just one file. Not bad right? Well, of course it had to be a file which I cannot easily replace, because it’s source is not easy to access. It could not be one of the 500 MB game demos on that disk, or a 50 KB script downloaded years ago. No, my luck dictates that it had to be one of the files I will have a lot of trouble replacing.
RAID 0 was a bad idea, though I would have had the same problem if it was a single disk. The real problem was recovering the data. To be able to check the disk’s SMART data I needed to take it out of the RAID array. To be able to do that I had to backup all data on the RAID array, as that is destroyed when taking the drive out of RAID. As I do not have that hard drive space available (it is why I bought those two) I had to buy another hard drive and store everything on that.
When I had done that I checked the drive’s SMART data, which signalled a high read error rate. A thorough test using a tool from the drive manufacturer (which lasted two hours) revealed two bad sectors and a dozen more LBA errors. Conclusion: the drive is most likely broken. The tool suggests a low level format, which I will perform this night. A new test will have to reveal whether that will fix the problem. Both the format and the new test will last for hours, rendering my PC useless in the mean time.
The problem was not really worsened by the fact that it was a RAID array, as the bad sector would have destroyed some data if it was in a single drive configuration as well. However, the array did make resolving the problem much, much more difficult. If I had been running three separate drives I would have had enough space on two to temporarily store all data from the third, which would have saved me from purchasing another drive. Meanwhile the windows install from a few weeks ago had to be moved back to a single drive configuration, making it extremely slow and unsuitable for anything but browsing the internet, chatting on IRC and listening to MP3 music. I will have to spend a lot of time reinstalling windows, (most likely) RMA-ing the broken drive, redistributing my data across three drives and getting everything up and running again. I know better ways of spending free time to be honest.
All in all I can only conclude that the more advanced technology I was using (RAID) did not only create the need for reinstalls (a lot of inconvenience), it also made resolving a problem (bad sectors on a HDD) a lot more difficult. In other words: by using RAID in the configuration I was running it I was trying to outsmart technology. I failed. I learned my lesson though, in my new configuration I will be running software raid to protect a small set of important data from HDD drive failure, and RAID 1 for game installs only, where data loss really does not matter.
I thought about protecting all my data using RAID 5, however the high price tag combined with the write speed penalty made me decide against it. RAID 10 has a good performance but is even more expensive. Maybe in a year or so I will reconsider this. Even though software RAID has a big disadvantage (you cannot run your operating system off it) I chose that for one important reason: if your RAID controller breaks down (the motherboard in my case) you will be able to access the array on another PC, you cannot do that using firmware RAID. It would not be the first broken motherboard I had…
Bottom line: do not try to outsmart technology, it will send Murphy after you who will hunt you down and punish you as easy as stealing candy from a baby.
And I fell for it. But it is not so bad, I am not exactly the only one that fell for it, if the 1000+ responses are anything to go by. Besides, it was a good joke, not to mention the fact that it can be quite enjoyable to bash something like this.
Enough with the digging myself in, go read up at AntiSpore.com if you missed it. Enjoy.
Yes, I really do believe this beats the real life rickrolls with guys in gray raincoats, though those are superb as well.
I have criticized EA quite a bit over the years, from the way they treated Westwood, to the state of the Need for Speed series, to the quality of their games on the PC. However for the past week things have turned for the worse.
First there was the DRM protection EA has decided to start using on their games. A normal protection will try to prevent you from making illegal copies of the game, at the cost of preventing you from making legal copies as well (as far as legal goes in your country). EA however, has decided that that is not enough. They will now try to prevent you from making illegal copies, at the cost of preventing you from doing perfectly legal things as well. EA now gives you a limited amount of installs of your game. You have to activate your copy of the game, you can do this on three different hardware setups. After that you have to call EA to get more installs, which will be allowed on a case by case basis. In other words: change the hardware of your PC enough (perfectly legal) and EA will punish you. Despite the fact that you bought the game you depend on them allowing you to install the game, if they refuse (which is quite likely) your 50 euro license is suddenly worth nothing. This is exactly what is described as treating the customer as a criminal in The Gamer’s Bill of Rights.
If you think that is bad enough, well here is a surprise for you. Last week the demo versions of FIFA 2009 were released. It did not take long for gamers to realise that the PC version looks and plays much worse than the console versions. The PC being the superior machine this of course does not make any sense. Except to EA ofcourse.
The PC version of FIFA 09 is different to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions because of the CPU processing power required for the architecture of the game.
The majority of gamer’s PC’s do not have enough CPU processing power for this architecture, so FIFA09 on PC has been built to have the best possible graphics and gameplay engine while still being accessible to as many fans of the game as possible. If the architecture was identical to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, FIFA09 on PC would only be accessible to 1-3% of the PC systems on the market.
Having said that, FIFA09 on PC delivers a very deep gameplay engine, along with leading-edge visuals.
Before I go on, I’d like to point out that Graphics power and CPU power are two very different technical parameters, and it’s because of the CPU power that FIFA09 on PC can not (and does not) have the same architecture as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions. The Graphics are a separate matter, and FIFA09 on PC has leading-edge graphics.
With that said, please allow me to further explain what I said earlier in this thread, as I believe that some of you may have misunderstood;
Quote:
The majority of gamers PC system’s do not have enough CPU processing power[1] for this architecture[2], so FIFA09 on PC has been built to have the best possible graphicsand gameplay engine while still being accessible to as many fans of the game as possible[3]. If the architecture was identical to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, FIFA09 on PC would only be accessible to 1-3% of the PC systems on the market.[4]
Having said that, FIFA09 on PC delivers a very deep gameplay engine, along with leading-edge visuals.
[1] I am aware that some PC systems are as capable as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 (and that some are even more capable than them), but the majority of PC systems aren’t (see [4]).
[2] The fact that a PC system can run Gears of War, Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed, etc. is irrelevant: the gameplay architecture of FIFA09 can not be compared to games of a different genre, and it is a fact that the majority of PC systems do not have enough CPU processing power for FIFA09 on PC to be the same as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions.
[3] This means that, although some of your PC’s may be able to ‘handle’ a better gameplay architecture, only 1-3% of PC systems on the market could ‘handle’ the same gameplay architecture that FIFA09 on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 have (see [4]).
[4] “If the architecture was identical to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, FIFA09 on PC would only be accessible to 1-3% of the PC systems on the market.” That is a fact.
However, because the PC continues to benefit from constant graphics and performance increases (and always will), the FIFA series on the PC will continue to improve each year, and it’s architecture will, in time, ’surpass/exceed’ the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 versions.
I didn’t say that FIFA 2010 on PC will (or won’t) be the same as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions of the game (because I do not know whether it will (or won’t) be, at this moment in time).Thank you for the constructive feedback that most of you have provided on this subject, so far.
Phenom
Source: Electronic Arts UK Community
Well I have news for you: this is total bullshit. Excuse my language here but there is no better word to describe what EA is saying here. They are lying to their teeth, it is as simple as that.
Valve’s Steam Hardware Survey proves that the average gamer’s PC is not as weak as EA is saying it is. Sure low-end PCs are not as powerful as an Xbox 360 or a Playstation 3, however there is a solution to that problem: scalability. Just about every PC game out there has a settings menu where among other things you can tune the graphics settings. This allows people with less powerful PCs to still play the game, at the cost of graphics quality. The gameplay however, does not change. If EA is saying it cannot create a game that runs well on low-end and mainstream PCs this only means that they should hire better programmers, as their engine clearly does not scale enough.
In [2] Phenom is saying that FIFA has exceptional requirements as far as CPU processing goes. Well mister Phenom, please explain to me why other companies can create vast open worlds with loads of animation going on, and make that run on mainstream PCs. Explain to me how one measly stadium with 22 guys running around needs so much more CPU processing than an open world with a lot of things going on. This does not make any sense whatsoever.
Let me tell you what EA does not want you to know. EA has decided to go to war against piracy on the PC. It has decided that in that war anything goes, good or bad for their customer, the one paying for their product. Harsh copy protections, crappy ports from the PS2 instead of a current-gen platform, it does not matter. EA believes that pirates are to blame, and there is just about nothing they will not do to stop them. This results in the DRM on Spore. However things get worse. Because EA thinks that they cannot earn a lot of money on the PC version they are unwillingly to invest a lot of money there. The result is that they do not invest enough money to create high-end games, which is the reason why the PC version of FIFA is so much worse than the console version.
Of course this is complete nonsense, you will not stop piracy with draconian copy protections, in fact: you will not stop piracy at all. However the result of EA’s policy is that they are screwing over their customers: they give them inferior versions with ridiculous copy protection. I for one do not want to put up with this any longer. I refuse to be punished for legal actions. Therefore I will do the only thing a consumer can do to show a company he or she does not like their policy: to not buy their products. So until further notice I will not buy any games created and/or published by EA Games or any of its divisions. This includes micropayments on a free-to-play game such as Battlefield Heroes. There are more than enough games for me to choose, I do not see a reason to put up with crap when I can happily play something else. It is their loss, not mine.
Today Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock Systems) announced The Gamer’s Bill of Rights. 10 Commandments where he attempts to secure the rights of PC gamers. I support his views (especially number 8) and thus would like to refer you to his article.
Just like humanity in general, PC gamers are entitled to basic liberties: freedom to return computer games that don’t work (for a full refund); minimum requirements that are actually accurate; to not be treated as a criminal by game companies, and so forth.
Read the rest of the article at Edge Online: The Gamer’s Bill of Rights.
I’d like to give a heads up to ravenger online, a blog by Jerry “ravenger” Tromp (I guess I could call him an acqaintance). He started posting on it about game development recently and I find his posts quite interesting, so you might too. Ignore the crappy theme for now though, he really needs to get some proper hosting instead of this free wordpress.com stuff…
On a side note: GTA IV has been announced on PC today. A big I-told-you-so moment for me. As a fan of the series and a fan of the PC platform (not a fanboy though, thank you very much) I am very happy about it.
Until next time, enjoy your holiday!
There have been far too litle posts on this blog recently. The last post before the one I just posted was posted on May 25th. That’s not how I intend it to be. I was quite busy with school and other stuff however that is not an excuse.
To resolve this I am going to change my intended post-schedule from once a week to once every two weeks. Though with the busy fall period (for the games industry) ahead of us this might prove to be a minimum sooner than later. Anyway, I will do my best to stick to that to prevent a lack of posts for months again.
This change will commence august 18th. I’m currently on holiday so for the coming three weeks (and a bit) I will post at random, whenever I feel like I want to and have something to say. My advice: subscribe to the RSS feed so you won’t be bothered, you’ll notice a new post whenever it appears, sooner or later.
For my project I’ve been testing the motion sensing capabilities of the WiiMote. Based on nothing (rumours and hypes) we expected direct motion control, this however is not what the WiiMote currently offers. It detects certain movements which trigger a certain action. In other words: for WiiSports it can detect four different hit-movements, if you perform one the Mii will perform roughly the same movement and hit the ball. There is no direct control of the bat.
After some research we discovered why this is the case. The WiiMote does not have a gyroscope, it only has accelerometers. Sensing changes in speed of movement allows for the trigger detection I describe above, however in no way does it allow for direct control. This was kind of a disappointment as we needed that for our project. In the end we solved the problem by using infra-red, however for this to work you need extra hardware, more IR-leds to be precise.
As I’m sure most of you will be aware off, last week at the E3 Nintendo announced a new addon for the WiiMote which improves the motion sensing: the Motionplus. As you might understand by now, I was far from suprised when I read the addon includes a gyroscope. That is exactly what the WiiMote needs to allow for real-time motion sensing, which will vastly improve the capabilities of the WiiMote and allow for significantly different and arguably better gameplay.
Some people will argue that Nintendo is “milking” the Wii, and when you look at the list of add-ons and the cost you will see there is a point to be made there. However I do not think the Motionplus is an example of that. I do not believe in complot theories so unless someone from Nintendo says so I will not believe this was thoughtout from the beginning. For one reason or another the gyroscrope was not included at first, to set things straight now they will make one available. As this is a big improvement which will benefit players I do not think this is milking.
It would be nice if the rumours of the gyroscope being included by default in the WiiMote in the future were true. Otherwise this will be yet another add-on needed by default. The Wii already has so many of them it makes it more expensive than the other consoles, which is a bad thing if you look at the price of the console itself. That is milking, it would be great if Nintendo put a stop to that.
In conclusion: the Motionplus is expected to be a nice add-on for the Wii, bringing a big improvement to the capabilities of the Wiimote. It would be nice if it were included in the mote by default in the future. It’s too bad it’s just a bit too late to be included in my project though.
It’s bad, however I still haven’t had the time to write something properly. My holiday will begin tomorrow though, so I will write something sooner than later. In the mean time, enjoy this picture. It’s a joke, so don’t take it too seriously…
Source: GraphJam.com
Recent Comments