Out of the Blue

It is with fascination that I read the extensive thread that's popped up as a result of the posting of the single-player Medal of Honor demo yesterday. Frans has already made a lengthy post explaining what we did and why we did it, so I won't go further into that, but I will say that I am sort of pleased to see the debate that centered around whether we were doing the right thing or not in this case, since we actually do exert a lot of effort here to try and avoid coloring outside the lines (which some feel posting this demo qualifies as), and it's reassuring to see so many of you feel this is an important effort to make (though we certainly are a bit surprised at some of the motives that have been attributed to us here considering the efforts we take in this regard). Anyway, regardless of your opinions on this subject, your feedback is appreciated.

Link of the Day: Worthless word for the day. Thanks Zdim.
Bonus Link: The Massachusetts State Lottery Winning # for 12/31/01. Thanks MDG.
Wild Science: NASA satellite pair to tackle weighty task. Thanks Jamie Fullerton.

View : : :
29.
 
Re: bah... easy question to answer
Jan 2, 2002, 23:21
WarPig
 
29.
Re: bah... easy question to answer Jan 2, 2002, 23:21
Jan 2, 2002, 23:21
 WarPig
 
Like I said, demo should be synonymous with freely
distributable. Or at least maybe another term that means
the same thing should be put to use.

-Hyatus
"da da da"

I think this is a good point. If EA had called the demo the "Medal of Honor - Single Level Edition" or the "Medal of Honor - $5 Sneak Peak", or the... oh screw it.

What do I care anyway, I don't give a rat's pooter about realism in games. I'm already psyched about UT2.

Avatar 1750
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@199.221
2.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.78
3.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
4.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@195.92
14.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
5.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
11.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
18.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
19.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
21.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
 29.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
    Re: bah... easy question to answer
6.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
9.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
12.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
15.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
16.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@208.241
38.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@213.1
7.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
8.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@151.201
10.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
13.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
20.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@213.51
28.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
17.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@207.217
22.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@213.105
23.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@216.26
24.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@128.205
25.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@64.218
27.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@64.218
26.
Jan 2, 2002Jan 2 2002
anon@165.121
30.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
31.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
32.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
33.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@216.26
34.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
35.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
36.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@198.182
37.
Jan 3, 2002Jan 3 2002
anon@204.201
39.
Jan 4, 2002Jan 4 2002
40.
Jan 4, 2002Jan 4 2002
41.
Jan 8, 2002Jan 8 2002