|
|
Wow! I don't know why I always assumed all solar systems were in the same plane.
|
|
|
|
|
This seems to be an odd decision for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
They are definitely shooting themselves in the foot.
I was wondering why my Lightroom uploader doesn't work anymore. They must have disabled it as well.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, a website that's built on one aspect, and one aspect only - image content, makes it difficult for users to upload that content. What could go wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Their shine is flickering.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: Lightroom Isn't that an Adobe product, not a Yahoo product?
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: Isn't that an Adobe product, not a Yahoo product?
Yes but there's a Flickr, among other plugins, that use Flickr's API.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
Very odd me thinks. Surely a business plan for social media that reduces content is flawed?
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
It turns out people* are just using the uploadr as a backup tool, never marking the uploaded photos as public and therefore not effectively generating any new content to drive page views (and advertising revenue).
* Sample size: 1
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I see nothing bad in this decision. In case all services on the Web would cost something, we would return to a normal life again and not communicate at the same table we are sitting by "what's ever".
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
They could have asked for the resolutions on which to upload the photos. Just the way Google does, to upload full-sized images in a limited space and for more space, get a subscription.
After all, this is Yahoo!, who likes that?
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
One small step backwards for Flickr, one giant leap forward for mankind!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's a giant leap forward for Google Photos.
|
|
|
|
|
Google Photos has a REALLY long way to go before one can consider it going forward! It is a piece of crap compared to the excellent PICASA service they're considering dropping...
|
|
|
|
|
|
With Yahoo in financial trouble, maybe it is a way to move forward on a few projects!? If the tool is any good, people should be willing to put up a bit of cash for it.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm wrapping up a (very, very, basic) game for the Android platform and have encountered an interesting situation. In the game, I'm keeping track of playing statistics. For example, I'm keeping track of: 1) how many turns it took to win, 2) the quickest time to win, 3) the highest points in a game. Don't worry about exactly what these mean; I've tried to generalize them so as not to get bogged down in details. One of the settings you can define is how many points to play to. The statistics are currently being tracked individually, so that if you improve on any of the three, the new "best" gets recorded.
After playing several rounds it occurred to me that you can sacrifice one of those statistics to improve the other. For example, if I purposely take an extra 2-3 turns to win a game, the resulting score is possibly going to be bigger than the current high score. So herein lies my question: for those of you that play an assortment of games, do they track statistics/achievements as individual things or do they do something more along the line of picking a difficulty level (e.g., easy, normal, hard), and track the statistics/achievements as a whole (i.e., they all have to be improved upon in order to persist)?
Thank you for any input.
- DC
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
modified 9-Mar-16 10:47am.
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the mobile games that I play have something along the lines of:
Maximum/Minimum turns it took to win (per difficulty). (Depending on the objective.)
Maximum/Minimum points in game (per difficulty). (Depending on the objective.) Games like Pipes require the shortest distance or moves for example.
Scoring against friends and/or global community.
Without knowing the game, it's hard to determine which statistics is best. However, the best approach, for mobile IMHO, is to keep track of the best score for each difficulty since it's usually only three and have an overall scoring card for achievements to unlock other features.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that having an overall stat that combines the three you have into one score is a good thing. Then the goal could be getting all three higher to maximize the end result. If you do that then it becomes a strategic move to actually allow one to decrease to increase the others. Which adds a little something to the game.
I do think that tracking the three and recognizing a new high is a good thing also.
Jack of all trades, master of none, though often times better than master of one.
|
|
|
|
|
I completely disagree on combining stats. Three separate stats helps with replayability. Take something like Super Mario brothers. Once you have memorized the path you are done. That is unless you start making your own variations like speed runs. Or high/low point runs, or maximum/minimum coin runs.
|
|
|
|
|
do your stats by difficulty level. You can win 50 easy levels and lose one hard level and you still look like a badass...at wimpy-easy level.
Gamers know that the only level that matters is the one that is most challenging, the one that will give you the most bragging rights.
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on the game; in Wow it seems like transactions, where every achievement is tracked. There's a number showing total achievements (different weight), but no such thing as a real "score".
In the games we created in school we often chose to multiply various metrics to come to a total. Ie, number of moves multiplied by the level one is playing on. Subtract time used. That way each variable has influence on the end-score, if you want a single number to base your overall performance on.
I like both approaches, if it fits the game; a total score in Warcraft does not make much difference, but it was a nice addition in the early "Pirates!" and Civilization games. According to the last score, I became a beggar in Antigua after my retirement
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I play wow and there is no difficulty level in WoW - only one level really. You level up, but you don't get achievements just based on leveling up, they count as a whole toward your toon.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I play wow and there is no difficulty level in WoW - only one level really. You go with your level 1 character to Scarlet Monestary - you'll find that it is hard to play if you are not "near" your own level.
It might not be the exact same thing as a level in the Super Mario games, but the concept is similar. Your current level determines the amount of XP required to gain a new level, and some things are out of reach until you reach a certain level. And, once you get there, you get a message saying congratulations with the level up.
The major difference with other games is that you do not "win", since there is no way to "finish" the last level.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|