Spring RTS Engine

Felix the Cat wrote:I'd clarify your analogy a bit: the shoe shop is selling shoes for between $75 and $100 a pair. The shoes are in sealed boxes. The outside of each box of shoes contains some promotional material written by advertisers that may or may not accurately describe the actual shoes, including pictures that may or may not accurately represent the shoes that are inside the box. Sizes are marked, but they're not standardized, and there's no way to know if any particular box contains shoes that fit your feet. There may be two or three pairs of shoes that are available in the store to try out - but in all likelihood they are childrens' shoes. Once you buy a box of shoes and break the seal, there's no possibility of returning them, even if the shoes are made of sub-standard materials, have shoddy worksmanship, and are patently different from what was advertised on the outside of the box. In addition, once you break the seal, you are bound by a shoe wearer agreement that is printed in fine print on the sole of each shoe, even though you didn't have an opportunity to read the agreement before agreeing to it. Finally, some shoes may directly cause serious injuries, or may include mandatory "shoe support products" that are integrated into the shoe, or may have holographic projectors that project advertisement in front of you while you are wearing the shoes, and these are all covered by aforementioned agreement.

If this were true, I'm sure there'd be a thriving black market in counterfeit shoes shipped in from China and sold for $10 a pair.

JohannesH wrote:This is ridiculous

JohannesH wrote: This is ridiculous... If the games/shoes are really that shitty, just dont buy them?

If a game company doesnt let you try the game out before you buy, just vote with your feet and get a game that offers you a demo or something. The makers of a piece of art have every right to control the ways in which their product is distributed. Just because you are able disregard their wishes doesnt mean that that's the right thing to do.

zwzsg wrote:I long for the day when rapid prototyping* machines will be cheap enough for every household to have one, so that we can start downloading physical objects.

*Actually, rapid manufacturing.

HeavyLancer wrote:http://www.reprap.org - An open-source 3D printer that will eventually be able to make the parts for a copy of itself. Seriously, open-source is going to revolutionise industry and capitalism as we know it today.

Regret wrote:

JohannesH wrote:This is ridiculous

No it is not.

PicassoCT wrote:Contradicition can┬┤t be a argument!

PicassoCT wrote:Look if i argue with you, i must take the contrary Position!

JAZCASH wrote:

PicassoCT wrote:Look if i argue with you, i must take the contrary Position!

But it isn't just saying "No it isn't".

JAZCASH wrote:No it isn't! An Argument's an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gain saying of anything the other person says!

bashar wrote:

JAZCASH wrote:No it isn't! An Argument's an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gain saying of anything the other person says!

depend on his shoes' color.

JAZCASH wrote:No it isn't! An Argument's an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gain saying of anything the other person says!