Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

BioShock: Infinite Released

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the gamers-upset-that-it's-not-literally-infinite dept.

First Person Shooters (Games) 149

kandelar writes with news that BioShock: Infinite has been released. It's the third major release in the series of BioShock first-person shooters, and it's available for Xbox 360, PS3, and Windows. The game is garnering good critical reception, for the most part. Rock, Paper, Shotgun said, "Infinite is a game ruled by artists at least as much as it is by its writers. It’s the ultimate answer to the question of whether art or technology is the most important part of creating a visually excellent game – Crysis 3 might have far more going on under the hood, but its uninspired paintjob makes it seem so dull compared to Infinite’s vaguely Pixar-esque fusion of the photoreal and the colourfully unreal." Ars' reviewer wrote, "Infinite's battle system doesn't wear out its welcome or weigh down the game's excellent pacing. Infinite avoids the problem of near-endless waves of identical enemies that plagues so many shooters these days. The bits of shooting action are spaced and timed to serve as gentle punctuation marks that break up the story rather than full stops that bring it to a grinding halt." However, RPS adds this criticism of the player's effect the plot: "Infinite’s a triumph in terms of fantasy-architecture spectacle and bringing superb flexibility to the modern rollercoaster shooter, but in other respects it’s a small step down from the player agency and even the singular aesthetic of BioShock."

cancel ×

149 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What about DRM? (3, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#43287673)

If I'm going to spend money on a game, I'd like to actually play it.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287685)

just steam

Re:What about DRM? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288063)

You say that like it's acceptable. Until these pricks understand that I am the customer and I don't want DRM, it'll be Pirate Bay for me. That shit was cracked and up since yesterday anyways.

Re:What about DRM? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288205)

some people (including me) like steam. I don't want to be the one doing backups for my several hundred GB game collection. you do it your way, I'll do it mine.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288245)

You say that like it's acceptable. Until these pricks understand that I am the customer and I don't want DRM, it'll be Pirate Bay for me. That shit was cracked and up since yesterday anyways.

You could still buy it on the console. If you like the game, buy it.

Re:What about DRM? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288369)

Pfft and spend a few hundred bucks buying a console for a vastly inferior experience? Right.

I can't fully like a game unless it has no DRM. That is why the only place I get games from is GOG and TPB. No DRM, no intrusion, no spyware, no having to run pointless apps constantly in the background. And yes, I do trust cracking groups more than I trust these corporations like EA, Activision or Ubisoft.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288487)

If you like the game, buy it and then use the cracked version. Otherwise you are just justifying cracking games to get them for free.

Re:What about DRM? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288739)

Why should I support those who are trying to combat the people who liberate software? I justify cracking games because it is the moral thing to do. It lets people own their software and to use it when ever or where ever they want without artificial limitations.

I'll gladly pay when they put out a DRM free version. Whether that's tomorrow, in ten years or never is up to them. Plenty of games make it on to GOG and I have no problems buying those.

Re:What about DRM? (4, Insightful)

neonmonk (467567) | about a year ago | (#43288831)

Just because you don't like DRM, doesn't mean you can justify pirating it. They've chosen to release their product with DRM. Don't like, it don't buy it.

Re:What about DRM? (2, Interesting)

Luckyo (1726890) | about a year ago | (#43288913)

Idealistic bullshit. Reality is that piracy is the only viable way of resisting enroachment of DRM. Not buying it? Then clearly you're not a buyer and don't matter.

Massive piracy? Time to lower prices, reduce/remove DRM and make content as accessible as possible.

Just ask music companies.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#43290321)

Massive piracy? Time to lower prices, reduce/remove DRM and make content as accessible as possible.

Rationalizing bullshit.

Massive piracy? Instead of making a AAA single-player campaign game like BioShock, turn yourself into the next Zynga and make cheap games with low-risk, high-reward. Or even better, since BioShock will sell well on consoles, just skip the PC version altogether.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290603)

Who needs AAA titles anymore anyway? Too often this just means mainstream trash that's hyped more than it really deserves. Most of the time the gameplay is worse than was common 20 years ago!

Pretty graphics and watered down, cut and dry "stories" aren't my forte, and I'd expect most people on /. feel the same in this.

However, you're definitely wrong about something: after what happened to Napster, iTunes rose to become a new legitimate music source, ending the MAFIAA's stranglehold on that market. It's rather hard to argue this wasn't at least partly due to rampant piracy due to excessive prices and poor distribution models. The market adjusted to the lunatics that weren't managing it correctly. This is how capitalism is supposed to work.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#43292397)

Who needs AAA titles anymore anyway?

The same people who are keen on pirating it in the first place.

However, you're definitely wrong about something: after what happened to Napster, iTunes rose to become a new legitimate music source

The amount of money (and collaboration) it takes to produce a song isn't comparable to a AAA game.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about a year ago | (#43290901)

AAA games sell quite well in Russia, to the point of justifying full localization including voice acting for many titles, just like in Germany, France and so on. In spite of MASSIVE piracy.

Why? Because they're sold in many local shops at lower price point then in the West (and even on Steam).

Did this happen because russians weren't buying? No. They were buying them in droves, but pirated versions. Did it happen because russians wanted the games, couldn't afford them, and bought pirated versions instead. Yes.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#43292487)

Once you get enough of a premium paying audience, you can make extra money by selling cheaper versions to smaller markets. There's a reason AAA games target the consoles first, much to the annoyance of PC gamers.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290323)

Massive piracy? Time to lower prices, reduce/remove DRM and make content as accessible as possible.

Speaking of idealistic BS. That may be where games end up in the long run, but not because people chose to pirate versus not buy it. As you say, you're not a buyer and don't matter, whether your pirate or not.

And reality is not a false dichotomy of pirate or sitting around moping because you didn't buy or pirate. There is a lot of content out there as is, and not enough time in the world to be worry about wanting to play something but can't because it has DRM.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289101)

FUCK YES I CAN JUSTFIY IT!

I have a corporate attitude about these things now! I'll do whatever i please as long as i can get away with it! And then do the least to get around that and continue doing it!
It's profitable for me! Get the most for the least. Illegal. Immoral. These things do not matter one bit in the pursuit of profit!

Fuck those people! I don't care what they wanted. If theres a way around it i'll do it!
And when you lock down that way i'll find another way.

When you catch me i'll say i'm very very sorry and won't do it again. And then do it again!!

*i* get what i want regardless. We don't have a contract. And even if we did. Contracts are made to be broken!
There's always a loophole! If there isn't i'll invent one! By trying to sell me a product you already agree to my terms. And my terms say i get to pirate and crack every one of your games from now until the end of time! See! Loophole! Legal bullshit!

  --

Corporations have been teaching us all this lesson for decades now... Games companys in particular have been fucking everyone over worse and worse for years now, Isn't it time you tried doing that to them? Won't you please listen and adopt their attitude with me? It's fun! And profitable!
  Why should companies be the only ones to take and take and take and never toe the legal or moral line? Try it!

Lets go pirate some games! Fuck right and wrong. I'm gonna play for free! Profit!

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Dins (2538550) | about a year ago | (#43291655)

No really, how do you really feel?

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Adam Jorgensen (1302989) | about a year ago | (#43289325)

You sound like me, 10 years ago. Back then I was a penniless student and justified my piracy as much as necessary.

Nowadays, since I'm employed and doing well, I've pretty much paid for all my piracy a number of times over thanks to Steam and Sales.

Long story short, remove the stick from your ass.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290303)

Cool story bro. I hope that if you really like Bioshock Infinite, and happen to want to replay it in 20 years (You know, the way I occasionally replay SNES days of my teen years today) that Steam is still around and authenticating these old games. I'd say that is very unlikely though.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290817)

I'm hardly a penniless student nor justifying piracy. I already said I buy games, but when I can't obtain the games I want by buying them due to DRM, I'll pirate. That's not a justification, that's a fact. The big game companies can either choose to ignore it or they can try to win me over.

Oh, and by admitting that you pirated games before, you have no place to talk, hypocrite. Long story short, stop taking the corporate cock.

Re:What about DRM? (5, Insightful)

dreamchaser (49529) | about a year ago | (#43289563)

Wrong. The moral thing to do would be to not buy it and not use it at all. If you don't like DRM don't use any DRM'd software. Your stance is just rationalization.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290851)

Thanks for sharing your personal opinion.

Re:What about DRM? (2)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | about a year ago | (#43292457)

Why should I support those who are trying to combat the people who liberate software? I justify cracking games because it is the moral thing to do. It lets people own their software and to use it when ever or where ever they want without artificial limitations

How can you own something for which you pirated? At least as the GP said if you purchased it first, then pirated it for DRM free play, then you'd have a standing. Face it you're just trying to justify getting free games no matter what you tell yourself.

Re:What about DRM? (2)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43290473)

Pfft and spend a few hundred bucks buying a console for a vastly inferior experience? Right.

So you want no DRM, but only on your platform of choice too?

Do you have any other demands? If so, please list them in an angry rant on the internet.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43291437)

That's like being shocked someone wants a certain type of car, but only if it's user serviceable. It's not an unusual or unfair demand.

You are the kind of person who goes to buy something only to settle for something you really didn't want to buy. Grow a spine.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290995)

Your in luck then, EA, Activision and Ubisoft had nothing to do with Bioshock Infinite...

Re:What about DRM? (1)

flimflammer (956759) | about a year ago | (#43290991)

Yup. If they won't give you something exactly the way you want it, you'll just take it anyway without giving them a dime. Of course the real way to send them a message would be not to buy or pirate it at all. All they see when they see you pirate the game is another justification to keep up the status quo. Thanks for contributing to the problem, asshat.

But lets be honest with ourselves here... You probably wouldn't have paid for it had it been DRM free anyway.

Real Insightful, /.

Slashdot's Slow Salute to Sequential Series (1)

Nialin (570647) | about a year ago | (#43287699)

Slashdot: Late to the Party In video game clouds everywhere!

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287823)

I think it uses normal Steamworks.
Not a very heavy drm, and there are already cracks.

Re:What about DRM? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287853)

Don't buy it then. No one gives a fuck if you ever play it.

Re:What about DRM? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287935)

Nihilist.

Nobody gives a fuck if you don't bother posting, either.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

jhoegl (638955) | about a year ago | (#43288037)

I gave two fucks.
And would not re-gift.

Re:What about DRM? (4, Insightful)

Darinbob (1142669) | about a year ago | (#43287957)

BioShock was DRM encumbered with Steam, even physical copies,so I don't think they would have removed that.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year ago | (#43288225)

Well the first parts of the playthrough are already up on Youtube. Not as good as demo, but it'd give you a taste.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8ATQ0wPXFM [youtube.com]

Re:What about DRM? (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#43288263)

The first taste's 'free', huh? Is this a game or an illicit, highly addictive drug?

Do you like the idea of killing racists? (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year ago | (#43288555)

If not you're probably going to hate it.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43288667)

I heard its just Steam, it seems like every game uses Steam these days. Not that I blame 'em, it makes patching and matchmaking a breeze while discouraging casual piracy without boning the user's PC like Starforce...man I hated that damned thing, dealt with more burnt DVDs because of that stupid DRM than I can count.

Now I have a question..how is the AI? I'm not too worried about the story and combat as I frankly liked both Bioshock I and II (although I thought Minerva's Den had a better plot than the main game) but one thing I loved about the first 2 was how the AI and character models...I don't know, they just had this kind of unnerving quality to it that I thought they did very well. The way the disfigured football jock would talk and move like he was talking to some unseen authority figure ("I can do better Mr Ryan, you'll see") with all the gestures like he was actually having this one sided conversation or the way the actress would just flit around talking about how she would be on top again...until you see her and she gets enraged about you seeing her face and attacks...it had this kind of realism to their madness, especially with the gestures and body movements, I thought they did that REALLY well.

So if it turns out the story is only as good as Bioshock II? I don't have a problem with that, lets face it you can't put a devastating twist into everything, just look at what that has gotten M. Night Shyamalan, so if its not as deep as Bioshock I? Fine. I'm also not real worried if the graphics aren't mind blowing since the new consoles aren't out yet (which is why I'm kinda shocked they didn't wait and make this a Xmas launch title for the new systems) so if they make the PC awesome or just okay on the graphics? Meh I still enjoy the first 2 and they can be played on an average laptop today so no biggie, but the one thing that can totally destroy the immersion of a game is totally dumbshit AI. I mean we have all sat there with a badly done AI and gone "really? You are gonna hide behind a box that leaves your head sticking out like watermelon? THIS is the bad guys I'm suppose to fear?" and just had it ruin the mood and I thought this was one thing the first 2 did really well so if they don't screw that up? Great, I'll be picking this up in a month or so when all the major bugs have been patched but if the AI is just retarded? Sigh, I really don't want to slog through another case of the stupids, i really don't. Please tell me the AI is good? Please?

Re:What about DRM? (1)

mybeat (1516477) | about a year ago | (#43288905)

Sorry for the awful formatting, but I can't seem to open any options or whatever I need to do here for the new lines to appear properly (Running Chromium), but here it goes: While I have only played for 2 hours or so on hard difficulty, can't say that AI is "totally dumbshit" and their heads don't stick out like watermelons. I only noticed two issues with AI so far: 1st: If you run away behind a door (they open up and close automatically), AI won't always follow you. 2nd: If there's a bunch of them with pistols, not everyone will move closer to you and will stand there like retards shooting at you hitting 1 bullet out of 5, so you can easily headshot em from far away.

Re:What about DRM? (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43289249)

Well the guys in combat weren't always the smartest but in the previous games made sense...they were completely batshit. I mean you only had to hide and listen for a little while to hear that their minds were as warped as their bodies and since they too had Plasmid power i could see them thinking their powers would cover their behind. After all if I could throw fricking fireballs I'd probably be a little sloppy and arrogant too.

But if the AI is just okay? That I can handle. For instance the bad guys in the Borderlands games are kinda predictable but they can still give you a damned good fight. Do you feel in any way challenged by the enemies? Have you had any "Oh shit, run for cover, RUN!" moments in the game? The first time I accidently shot a Big Daddy when I wasn't ready made me haul some behind with my heart racing, the only game I've felt the same with since the Bioshock games is Borderlands and the first time I popped over a hill and literally landed in a nest of Alpha Skags.... man I ran like a girl because I was soooo not armed for that encounter!

So I'm not asking for award winning AI here, I'm really not that hard to please honestly, all I ask is that the bad guys aren't so stupid I just stand there going "Really? You are REALLY gonna do that?". If you need an example for comparison FEAR 3 where I could walk right up to an enemy from the side and they would continue to stay behind cover that not only did nothing but I could just walk up and club their stupid asses.

If the AI doesn't ruin the mood, blow the immersion, or get on your nerves by their thumb up their asses stupidity? I'm really not that hard to please, I'm really not. Just don't make the bad guys Far Cry II stupid and I'll play, all that matters in the end is "is it fun?" and if that answer is yes? I'm in.

And if you are on Windows? Try Comodo Dragon [comodo.com] as its also based on Chromium but is frankly rock solid, I give it and IceDragon (their version of Firefox) out to my customers and use them myself, very well built. Oh and as a bonus if you use their free Internet Security it will automatically connect with the browser and sandbox it so you really don't have to worry about web based threats. Since I started handing it out to customers frankly the only infections I see now are when they are duped to download and install the malware, Comodo will do everything but reach out and knock the keyboard out their hands trying to stop them, but some people just want to see the dancing bunnies more than stay virus free, so I can't blame the AV and browser for that.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

mybeat (1516477) | about a year ago | (#43289547)

I'm on Debian, this stuff only happens with slashdot shitty js options popup, it just doesn't work. There are some "burning" aholes, that make you run for cover, but it's mostly because they take shitloads of bullets to kill. Regarding the "Really? You are REALLY gonna do that?" it's more like "Really? You are REALLY just gonna stand there?". There were places when I heard them swearing/yelling at me, but they didn't move until they got into my line of sight, which is kinda meh. But they won't stay behind one cover entire time. So far AI haven't ruin the mood and it's actually quite fun when they rush towards you and you melee own them with that grappling hook, I was like "Yeah get that you sob". AI Comparison: BIoshock 1 > Bioshock Infinite > Borderlands. For me, It didn't start to get fun until you save the girl, but I haven't played much afterwards, so don't know how it will go. I was really expecting to kill splicers and not humans, but overall Bioshock Infinite looks like a good/not boring game. Sorry for the crappy formating again.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43290517)

one thing I loved about the first 2 was how the AI and character models...I don't know, they just had this kind of unnerving quality to it that I thought they did very well. The way the disfigured football jock would talk and move like he was talking to some unseen authority figure

-very mild spoiler alert for the few who have yet played the first Bioshock-

One of my favorite parts in the first one was near the beginning, when you go into the bathroom, and one of the mutants comes screaming out of the toilet stall yelling "I'M NOT A BAD PERSON!" as he's attacks you. That was truly unnerving. Even better than the surprise doctor reveal later, IMHO.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about a year ago | (#43289405)

If I'm going to spend money on a Game, I'd like to be able to play it regardless of what platform I use.

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43291115)

Indeed. This is why I'm avoid Bioshock. I can't play it on my VIC-20. Thus it is garbage!

Re:What about DRM? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290039)

Steam DRM has been... acceptable. Your old licenses are avaialble, you can play on any machine, you can play disconnected, and you can uninstall and re-install the software on any machine. Other people with other licenses can play on the same host, and your games are saved on the cloud so you can take up your play on another machine elsewwhere. The older games are still supported and work well, and you can still *get* the older games in the discount bin, with support, and you don't have to keep the media lying around. If you have to have DRM, this is how it should work. Uniinstallable, unobtrusive, and no rootkits.

My old X-COM floppies went the way of the dode years ago, but I was able to activate and crank it a few nights ago for a few dollars, and now I'll have it on any machine I want anytime I want. And they've been fabulous about preserving, and adding, old games to the mix for the cheap of pocket and young at heart.

Re:What about DRM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43291771)

I loved BioShock 1 and BioShock 2 was unplayable due to issues with Games for Windows Live. So instead of wasting my money I'll be downloading the cracked version, playing it, and then if I enjoy it I might buy it during the steam summer sale.

the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287683)

Mainly in efficiency - it runs in Ring 0/RPL 0/PnP Kernelmode (on Windows), as merely a filter for the IP stack (no overheads of more driver layers OR browser level slower less efficient addons):

21++ ADVANTAGES OF CUSTOM HOSTS FILES (how/what/when/where/why):

Over AdBlock & DNS Servers ALONE 4 Security, Speed, Reliability, & Anonymity (to an extent vs. DNSBL's + DNS request logs).

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program). A truly "multi-platform" UNIVERSAL solution for added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's you feel are unjust hosts get you past/around).

2.) Adblock blocks ads? Well, not anymore & certainly not as well by default, apparently, lol - see below:

Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option

http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option [slashdot.org] )

AND, in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email like Thunderbird for FireFox/Mozilla products (use same gecko & xulrunner engines)), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook, Outlook Express, OR Window "LIVE" mail (for example(s)) - there's many more like EUDORA & others I've used over time that AdBlock just DOES NOT COVER... period.

Disclaimer: Opera now also has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc..

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF (non-mozilla/gecko engine based) family based wares, So AdBlock doesn't protect email programs like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows "LIVE" mail & others like them (EUDORA etc./et al), Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, OR make you reach them faster since you resolve host-domain names LOCALLY w/ hosts out of cached memory, hosts do ALL of those things (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html [networkworld.com] for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions (in-addr.arpa) via NSLOOKUP, PINGS (ping -a in Windows), &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

* NOW - Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser won't always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work!

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles (or ELECTRICITY) like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can since hosts files run in MORE EFFICIENT & FASTER Ring 0/RPL 0/Kernelmode operations acting merely as a filter for the IP stack (via the "Plug-N-Play" designed IP stack in Windows) vs. SLOWER & LESS EFFICIENT Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode operations (which webbrowsers run in + their addons like AdBlock slow down even MORESO due to their parsing operations).

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than remote DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server, typically 30-100's of ms, vs. 7-10ms HardDisk speed of access/seek + SSD seek in ns, & back to you - hosts resolutions of IP address for host-domain names is FAR faster...). Hosts are only a filter for an already fast & efficient IP stack, no more layered b.s. (remote OR local). Hosts eat less CPU, RAM, I/O in other forms, + electricity than a locally running DNS server easily, and less than a local DNS program on a single PC. Fact. Hosts are easier to setup & maintain too.

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org]
  http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org]
  http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html [hostsfile.org]
  http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/ [hostsfile.mine.nu]
  http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download [hosts-file.net]
  https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online [abuse.ch]
  https://spyeyetracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php [abuse.ch]
  http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
  http://www.malware.com.br/lists.shtml [malware.com.br]
  http://www.stopbadware.org/ [stopbadware.org]
Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1898692&cid=34473398 [slashdot.org]
  http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1896216&cid=34458500 [slashdot.org]

9.) AdBlock & DNS servers are programs, and subject to bugs programs can get. Hosts files are merely a filter and not a program, thus not subject to bugs of the nature just discussed.

10.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org]

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano (etc.)

12.) With Adblock you had better be able to code javascript to play with its code (to customize it better than the GUI front does @ least). With hosts you don't even need source to control it (edit, update, delete, insert of new entries via a text editor).

13.) Hosts files are easily secured via using MAC/ACL (even moreso "automagically" for Vista, 7/Server 2008 + beyond by UAC by default) &/or Read-Only attributes applied.

14.) Custom HOSTS files also speed you up, unlike anonymous proxy servers systems variations (like TOR, or other "highly anonymous" proxy server list servers typically do, in the severe speed hit they often have a cost in) either via "hardcoding" your fav. sites into your hosts file (avoids DNS servers, totally) OR blocking out adbanners - see this below for evidence of that:

---

US Military Blocks Websites To Free Up Bandwidth:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/16/0416238/US-Military-Blocks-Websites-To-Free-Up-Bandwidth [slashdot.org]

(Yes, even the US Military used this type of technique... because IT WORKS! Most of what they blocked? Ad banners ala doubleclick etc.)

---

Adbanners slow you down & consume your bandwidth YOU pay for:

ADBANNERS SLOW DOWN THE WEB: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/30/166218 [slashdot.org]

---

And people do NOT LIKE ads on the web:

PEOPLE DISLIKE ADBANNERS: http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/04/02/0058247.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

As well as this:

Users Know Advertisers Watch Them, and Hate It:

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/04/02/0058247.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Even WORSE still, is this:

Advertising Network Caught History Stealing:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/07/22/156225/Advertising-Network-Caught-History-Stealing [slashdot.org]

---

15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] , because you are using less bandwidth (& go faster doing so no less) by NOT hauling in adbanner content and processing it (which can lead to infestation by malware/malicious script, in & of itself -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] your internet bill will go DOWN if you use a HOSTS file for blocking adbanners as well as maliciously scripted hacker/cracker malware maker sites too (after all - it's your money & time online downloading adbanner content & processing it)

Plus, your adbanner content? Well, it may also be hijacked with malicious code too mind you:

---

Yahoo, Microsoft's Bing display toxic ads:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/16/bing_yahoo_malware_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Malware torrent delivered over Google, Yahoo! ad services:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/24/malware_ads_google_yahoo/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Google's DoubleClick spreads malicious ads (again):

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/24/doubleclick_distributes_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Rogue ads infiltrate Expedia and Rhapsody:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/30/excite_and_rhapsody_rogue_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Google sponsored links caught punting malware:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/16/google_sponsored_links/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

DoubleClick caught supplying malware-tainted ads:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/doubleclick_distributes_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Yahoo feeds Trojan-laced ads to MySpace and PhotoBucket users:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/11/yahoo_serves_12million_malware_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Real Media attacks real people via RealPlayer:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/23/real_media_serves_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Ad networks owned by Google, Microsoft serve malware:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/13/doubleclick_msn_malware_attacks/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Attacks Targeting Classified Ad Sites Surge:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/02/02/1433210/Attacks-Targeting-Classified-Ad-Sites-Surge [slashdot.org]

---

Hackers Respond To Help Wanted Ads With Malware:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/01/20/0228258/Hackers-Respond-To-Help-Wanted-Ads-With-Malware [slashdot.org]

---

Hackers Use Banner Ads on Major Sites to Hijack Your PC:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/11/doubleclick [wired.com]

---

Ruskie gang hijacks Microsoft network to push penis pills:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/12/microsoft_ips_hijacked/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Major ISPs Injecting Ads, Vulnerabilities Into Web:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/04/19/2148215.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Two Major Ad Networks Found Serving Malware:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/13/0128249/Two-Major-Ad-Networks-Found-Serving-Malware [slashdot.org]

---

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org]

---

NY TIMES INFECTED WITH MALWARE ADBANNER:

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/13/2346229 [slashdot.org]

---

MICROSOFT HIT BY MALWARES IN ADBANNERS:

http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com]

---

ISP's INJECTING ADS AND ERRORS INTO THE WEB: -> http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/04/19/2148215.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

ADOBE FLASH ADS INJECTING MALWARE INTO THE NET: http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/20/0029220&from=rss [slashdot.org]

---

London Stock Exchange Web Site Serving Malware:

http://www.securityweek.com/london-stock-exchange-web-site-serving-malware [securityweek.com]

---

Spotify splattered with malware-tainted ads:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/25/spotify_malvertisement_attack/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

As my list "multiple evidences thereof" as to adbanners & viruses + the fact they slow you down & cost you more (from reputable & reliable sources no less)).

17.) Per point #16, a way to save some money: ANDROID phones can also use the HOSTS FILE TO KEEP DOWN BILLABLE TIME ONLINE, vs. adbanners or malware such as this:

---

Infected Androids Run Up Big Texting Bills:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/03/01/0041203/Infected-Androids-Run-Up-Big-Texting-Bills [slashdot.org]

---

AND, for protection vs. other "botnets" migrating from the PC world, to "smartphones" such as ZITMO (a ZEUS botnet variant):

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=ZITMO&btnG=Google+Search [google.com]

---

It's easily done too, via the ADB dev. tool, & mounting ANDROID OS' system mountpoint for system/etc as READ + WRITE/ADMIN-ROOT PERMISSIONS, then copying your new custom HOSTS over the old one using ADB PULL/ADB PUSH to do so (otherwise ANDROID complains of "this file cannot be overwritten on production models of this Operating System", or something very along those lines - this way gets you around that annoyance along with you possibly having to clear some space there yourself if you packed it with things!).

18.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com]

HOSTS files are NOT THAT EASILY "webbug" BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked on AdBlock in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com]

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

19.) Even WIKILEAKS "favors" blacklists (because they work, and HOSTS can be a blacklist vs. known BAD sites/servers/domain-host names):

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT (from -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/16/wikileaks_mirror_malware_warning_row/ [theregister.co.uk] )

"we are in favour of 'Blacklists', be it for mail servers or websites, they have to be compiled with care... Fortunately, more responsible blacklists, like stopbadware.org (which protects the Firefox browser)...

---

20.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - you might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own (such as has been seen with the RBN (Russian Business Network) lately though it was considered "dead", other malwares are using its domains/hostnames now, & this? This stops that cold, too - Bonus!)...

21.) Custom HOSTS files gain users back more "screen real estate" by blocking out banner ads... it's great on PC's for speed along with MORE of what I want to see/read (not ads), & efficiency too, but EVEN BETTER ON SMARTPHONES - by far. It matters MOST there imo @ least, in regards to extra screen real-estate.

Still - It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock ( http://adblockplus.org/en/ [adblockplus.org] ), IE 9's new TPL's ( http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/ [microsoft.com] ), &/or NoScript ( http://noscript.net/ [noscript.net] especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security"....

It's just that HOSTS files offer you a LOT MORE gains than Adblock ( http://adblockplus.org/en/ [adblockplus.org] ) does alone (as hosts do things adblock just plain cannot & on more programs, for more speed, security, and "stealth" to a degree even), and it corrects problems in DNS (as shown above via hardcodes of your favorite sites into your HOSTS file, and more (such as avoiding DNS request logs)).

ALSO - Some more notes on DNS servers & their problems, very recent + ongoing ones:

---

DNS flaw reanimates slain evil sites as ghost domains:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/16/ghost_domains_dns_vuln/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org]

---

SECUNIA HIT BY DNS REDIRECTION HACK THIS WEEK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/26/secunia_back_from_dns_hack/ [theregister.co.uk]

(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)

---

DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that):

http://www.scmagazineus.com/new-bind-9-dns-flaw-is-worse-than-kaminskys/article/140872/ [scmagazineus.com]

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)

---

Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even NORTON DNS (more on each specifically below), & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)

---

DNS Hijacks Now Being Used to Serve Black Hole Exploit Kit:

https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/dns-hijacks-now-being-used-serve-black-hole-exploit-kit-121211 [threatpost.com]

---

DNS experts admit some of the underlying foundations of the DNS protocol are inherently weak:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/12/08/1353203/opendns-releases-dns-encryption-tool [slashdot.org]

---

Potential 0-Day Vulnerability For BIND 9:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/11/17/1429259/potential-0-day-vulnerability-for-bind-9 [slashdot.org]

---

Five DNS Threats You Should Protect Against:

http://www.securityweek.com/five-dns-threats-you-should-protect-against [securityweek.com]

---

DNS provider decked by DDoS dastards:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/ddos_on_dns_firm/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Ten Percent of DNS Servers Still Vulnerable: (so much for "conscientious patching", eh? Many DNS providers weren't patching when they had to!)

http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/08/04/1525235.shtml?tid=172&tid=95&tid=218 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS ROOT SERVERS ATTACKED:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/02/06/2238225.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

TimeWarner DNS Hijacking:

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/2140208 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Re-Binding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Server Survey Reveals Mixed Security Picture:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/11/21/0315239.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Halvar figured out super-secret DNS vulnerability:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/has-halvar-figured-out-super-secret-dns-vulnerability/1520 [zdnet.com]

---

BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning:

http://tech.slashdot.org/tech/08/08/09/123222.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Poisoning Hits One of China's Biggest ISPs:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/08/21/2343250.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/03/16/1658209.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

High Severity BIND DNS Vulnerability Advisory Issued:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/02/23/156212/High-Severity-BIND-Vulnerability-Advisory-Issued [slashdot.org]

---

Photobucketâ(TM)s DNS records hijacked:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1285 [zdnet.com]

---

Protecting Browsers from DNS Rebinding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Problem Linked To DDoS Attacks Gets Worse:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/15/1238210/DNS-Problem-Linked-To-DDoS-Attacks-Gets-Worse [slashdot.org]

---

HOWEVER - Some DNS servers are "really good stuff" vs. phishing, known bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malware-in-general & malicious scripting, botnet C&C servers, & more, such as:

Norton DNS -> http://nortondns.com/ [nortondns.com]
  ScrubIT DNS -> http://www.scrubit.com/ [scrubit.com]
  OpenDNS -> http://www.opendns.com/ [opendns.com]

(Norton DNS in particular, is exclusively for blocking out malware, for those of you that are security-conscious. ScrubIT filters pr0n material too, but does the same, & OpenDNS does phishing protection. Each page lists how & why they work, & why they do so. Norton DNS can even show you its exceptions lists, plus user reviews & removal procedures requests, AND growth stats (every 1/2 hour or so) here -> http://safeweb.norton.com/buzz [norton.com] so, that ought to "take care of the naysayers" on removal requests, &/or methods used plus updates frequency etc./et al...)

HOWEVER - There's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO ANY network defense, including HOSTS files (vs. host-domain name based threats) & firewalls (hardware router type OR software type, vs. IP address based threats): Human beings, & they not being 'disciplined' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript (the main "harbinger of doom" out there today online), OR, what they download for example... & there is NOTHING I can do about that! (Per Dr. Manhattan of "The Watchmen", ala -> "I can change almost anything, but I can't change human nature")

HOWEVER AGAIN - That's where NORTON DNS, OpenDNS, &/or ScrubIT DNS help!

(Especially for noob/grandma level users who are unaware of how to secure themselves in fact, per a guide like mine noted above that uses "layered-security" principles!)

ScrubIT DNS, &/or OpenDNS are others alongside Norton DNS (adding on phishing protection too) as well!

( & it's possible to use ALL THREE in your hardware NAT routers, and, in your Local Area Connection DNS properties in Windows, for again, "Layered Security" too)...

---

20++ SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES QUOTED VERBATIM:

---

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal

"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal

"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @12:53PM (#35493274)

"^^ One of the many reasons why I like the user-friendliness of the /etc/hosts file." - by lennier1 (264730) on Saturday March 05, @09:26PM (#35393448)

"They've been on my HOSTS block for years" - by ScottCooperDotNet (929575) on Thursday August 05 2010, @01:52AM (#33147212)

"I'm currently only using my hosts file to block pheedo ads from showing up in my RSS feeds and causing them to take forever to load. Regardless of its original intent, it's still a valid tool, when used judiciously." - by Bill Dog (726542) on Monday April 25, @02:16AM (#35927050) Homepage Journal

"you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

"APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment." - by Culture20 (968837) on Thursday November 17, @10:08AM (#38085666)

"I also use the MVPS ad blocking hosts file." - by Rick17JJ (744063) on Wednesday January 19, @03:04PM (#34931482)

"I use ad-Block and a hostfile" - by Ol Olsoc (1175323) on Tuesday March 01, @10:11AM (#35346902)

"I do use Hosts, for a couple fake domains I use." - by icebraining (1313345) on Saturday December 11, @09:34AM (#34523012) Homepage

"It's a good write up on something everybody should use, why you were modded down is beyond me. Using a HOSTS file, ADblock is of no concern and they can do what they want." - by Trax3001BBS (2368736) on Monday December 12, @10:07PM (#38351398) Homepage Journal

"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org] and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm [mvps.org] FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)

"Let me introduce you to the file: /etc/hosts" - by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday December 19, @05:03PM (#38427432)

"I use a hosts file" - by EdIII (1114411) on Tuesday December 13, @01:17PM (#38357816)

"I'm tempted to go for a hacked hosts file that simply resolves most advert sites to 127.0.0.1" - by bLanark (123342) on Tuesday December 13, @01:13PM (#38357760)

"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal

"A hosts file certainly does not require "a lot of work" to maintain, and it quite effectively kills a LOT of advertising and tracking schemes. . In fact, I never would have considered trying to use it for ddefending against viruses or malware." - by RocketRabbit (830691) on Thursday December 30 2010, @05:48PM (#34715060)

---

Then, there is also the words of respected security expert, Mr. Oliver Day, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM to "top that all off" as well:

A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]

Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):

---

"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!

---

"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

Per my points exactly, no less... & guess who was posting about HOSTS files a 14++ yrs. or more back & Mr. Day was reading & now using? Yours truly (& this is one of the later ones, from 2001 http://www.furtherleft.net/computer.htm [furtherleft.net] (but the example HOSTS file with my initials in it is FAR older, circa 1998 or so) or thereabouts, and referred to later by a pal of mine who moderates NTCompatible.com (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread28597-1.html [ntcompatible.com] !

---

"Shared host files could be beneficial for other groups as well. Human rights groups have sought after block resistant technologies for quite some time. The GoDaddy debacle with NMap creator Fyodor (corrected) showed a particularly vicious blocking mechanism using DNS registrars. Once a registrar pulls a website from its records, the world ceases to have an effective way to find it. Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites. One of the known weaknesses of the Tor system, for example, is direct DNS requests by applications not configured to route such requests through Tor's network."

There you go: AND, it also works vs. the "KAMINSKY DNS FLAW" & DNS poisoning/redirect attacks, for redirectable weaknesses in DNS servers (non DNSSEC type, & set into recursive mode especially) and also in the TOR system as well (that lends itself to anonymous proxy usage weaknesses I noted above also) and, you'll get to sites you want to, even IF a DNS registrar drops said websites from its tables as shown here Beating Censorship By Routing Around DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/09/1840246/Beating-Censorship-By-Routing-Around-DNS [slashdot.org] & even DNSBL also (DNS Block Lists) -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSBL [wikipedia.org] as well - DOUBLE-BONUS!

---

* POSTS ABOUT HOSTS FILES I DID on "/." THAT HAVE DONE WELL BY OTHERS & WERE RATED HIGHLY, 26++ THUSFAR (from +3 -> +1 RATINGS, usually "informative" or "interesting" etc./et al):

BANNER ADS & BANDWIDTH:2011 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2139088&cid=36077722 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907266&cid=34529608 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&cid=30555632 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1869638&cid=34237268 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1461288&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30272074 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1255487&cid=28197285 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1206409&cid=27661983 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1725068&cid=32960808 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1743902&cid=33147274 [slashdot.org]
  APK 20++ POINTS ON HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1913212&cid=34576182 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1862260&cid=34186256 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 (w/ facebook known bad sites blocked) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1924892&cid=34670128 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS FILE MOD UP FOR ANDROID MALWARE:2010 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1930156&cid=34713952 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP ZEUSTRACKER:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2059420&cid=35654066 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP vs AT&T BANDWIDTH CAP:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2116504&cid=35985584 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP CAN DO SAME AS THE "CloudFlare" Server-Side service:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2220314&cid=36372850 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS and BGP +5 RATED (BEING HONEST):2010 http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS & PROTECT IP ACT:2011 http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2368832&cid=37021700 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457766&cid=37592458 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP & OPERA HAUTE SECURE:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457274&cid=37589596 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1197039&cid=27556999 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 IN HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1143349&cid=27012231 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1198841&cid=27580299 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1139705&cid=26977225 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1319261&cid=28872833 [slashdot.org] (still says INSIGHTFUL)
  HOSTS MOD UP vs. botnet: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2603836&cid=38586216 [slashdot.org]

---

Windows 7, VISTA, & Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, & you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency & security), & if my take on these issues aren't "good enough"? I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says, link URL is in my "p.s." @ the bottom of this post:

1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... & yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &/or Windows 7 as well.

So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?

Ok - since you can technically use either:

a.) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")
b.) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest & next most efficient)
c.) The smallest & fastest plain-jane 0

PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...

You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??

Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.

Simply because

1.) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk & is the largest/slowest
2.) 0.0.0.0 = 7 bytes & is the next largest/slowest in size on disk
3.) 0 = 1 byte

(& HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use & thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), & when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers & SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))

MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory! This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... & for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).

Now, IF I were to use 127.0.0.1? My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER? Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size. See my point?

(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))

NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?

I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record" (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure (basically an array of sorts really, & a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!

I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, & fastest using 0.

And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt. via say, notepad.exe) & a conversion from decimal values to hex ones), but, nevertheless? My point here "holds true", of slower value loads, record-by-record, from a HOSTS file, when the entries become larger.

So, to "prove my point" to my naysayers?

I timed it using the Win32 API calls "GetTickCount" & then again, using the API calls of "QueryPerformanceCounter" as well, seeing the SAME results (a slowdown when reading in this file from disk, especially when using the larger 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 line item entries in a HOSTS file, vs. the smaller/faster/more efficient 0).

In my test, I saw a decline in speed/efficiency in my test doing so by using larger blocking addresses (127.0.0.1 &/or 0.0.0.0, vs. the smallest/fastest in 0)... proving me correct on this note!

On this HOSTS issue, and the WFP design issue in my next post below?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I am convinced they (MS) do NOT have a good reason for doing this... because of their lack of response there on this note. Unless it has something to do with IPv6 (most folks use IPv4 still), I cannot understand WHY this design mistake imo, has occurred, in HOSTS files...

AND

2.) The "Windows Filtering Platform", which is now how the firewall works in VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7...

Sure it works in this new single point method & it is simple to manage & "sync" all points of it, making it easier for network techs/admins to manage than the older 3 part method, but that very thing works against it as well, because it is only a single part system now!

Thus, however?

This "single layer design" in WFP, now represents a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE/ATTACK for malware makers to 'take down'!

(Which is 1 of the 1st things a malware attempts to do, is to take down any software firewalls present, or even the "Windows Security Center" itself which should warn you of the firewall "going down", & it's fairly easy to do either by messaging the services they use, or messing up their registry init. settings)

VS. the older (up to) 3 part method used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, for protecting a system via IP Filtering, the Windows native Firewall, &/or IPSEC. Each of which uses diff. drivers, & layers of the IP stack to function from, as well as registry initialization settings.

Think of the older 3 part design much the same as the reason why folks use door handle locks, deadbolt locks, & chain locks on their doors... multipart layered security.

(Each of which the latter older method used, had 3 separate drivers & registry settings to do their jobs, representing a "phalanx like"/"zone defense like" system of backup of one another (like you see in sports OR ancient wars, and trust me, it WORKS, because on either side of yourself, you have "backup", even if YOU "go down" vs. the opponent)).

I.E.-> Take 1 of the "older method's" 3 part defenses down? 2 others STILL stand in the way, & they are not that simple to take them ALL down...

(Well, @ least NOT as easily as "taking out" a single part defensive system like WFP (the new "Windows Filtering Platform", which powers the VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & yes, Windows 7 firewall defense system)).

On this "single-part/single-point of attack" WFP (vs. Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003's IP stack defense design in 3-part/zone defense/phalanx type arrangement) as well as the HOSTS issue in my post above?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I'll stick to my thoughts on it, until I am shown otherwise & proven wrong.

----

Following up on what I wrote up above, so those here reading have actual technical references from Microsoft themselves ("The horses' mouth"), in regards to the Firewall/PortFilter/IPSec designs (not HOSTS files, that I am SURE I am correct about, no questions asked) from my "Point #2" above?

Thus, I'll now note how:

----

1.) TCP/IP packet processing paths differences between in how Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 did it (IPSEC.SYS (IP Security Policies), IPNAT.SYS (Windows Firewall), IPFLTDRV.SYS (Port Filtering), & TCPIP.SYS (base IP driver))...

2.) AND, how VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 do it now currently, using a SINGLE layer (WFP)...

----

First off, here is HOW it worked in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 - using 3 discrete & different drivers AND LEVELS/LAYERS of the packet processing path they worked in:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878072.aspx [microsoft.com]

The Cable Guy - June 2005: TCP/IP Packet Processing Paths

====

The following components process IP packets:

IP forwarding Determines the next-hop interface and address for packets being sent or forwarded.

TCP/IP filtering Allows you to specify by IP protocol, TCP port, or UDP port, the types of traffic that are acceptable for incoming local host traffic (packets destined for the host). You can configure TCP/IP filtering on the Options tab from the advanced properties of the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) component in the Network Connections folder.

* "Here endeth the lesson..." and, if you REALLY want to secure your system? Please refer to this:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE [bing.com]

APK [mailto]

P.S.=> SOME MINOR "CAVEATS/CATCH-22's" - things to be aware of for "layered security" + HOSTS file performance - easily overcome, or not a problem at all:

A.) HOSTS files don't function under PROXY SERVERS (except for Proximitron, which has a filter that allows it) - Which is *the "WHY"* of why I state in my "P.S." section below to use both AdBlock type browser addon methods (or even built-in block lists browsers have such as Opera's URLFILTER.INI file, & FireFox has such as list as does IE also in the form of TPL (tracking protection lists -> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/ [microsoft.com] , good stuff )) in combination with HOSTS, for the best in "layered security" (alongside .pac files + custom cascading style sheets that can filter off various tags such as scripts or ads etc.) - but proxies, especially "HIGHLY ANONYMOUS" types, generally slow you down to a CRAWL online (& personally, I cannot see using proxies "for the good" typically - as they allow "truly anonymous posting" & have bugs (such as TOR has been shown to have & be "bypassable/traceable" via its "onion routing" methods)).

B.) HOSTS files do NOT protect you vs. javascript (this only holds true IF you don't already have a bad site blocked out in your HOSTS file though, & the list of sites where you can obtain such lists to add to your HOSTS are above (& updated daily in many of them)).

C.) HOSTS files (relatively "largish ones") require you to turn off Windows' native "DNS local client cache service" (which has a problem in that it's designed with a non-redimensionable/resizeable list, array, or queue (DNS data loads into a C/C++ structure actually/afaik, which IS a form of array)) - mvps.org covers that in detail and how to easily do this in Windows (this is NOT a problem in Linux, & it's 1 thing I will give Linux over Windows, hands-down). Relatively "smallish" HOSTS files don't have this problem (mvps.org offers 2 types for this).

D.) HOSTS files, once read/loaded, once? GET CACHED! Right into the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem (fast & efficient RAM speed), for speed of access/re-access (@ system startup in older MS OS' like 2000, or, upon a users' 1st request that's "Webbound" via say, a webbrowser) gets read into either the DNS local caching client service (noted above), OR, if that's turned off? Into your local diskcache (like ANY file is), so it reads F A S T upon re-reads/subsequent reads (until it's changed in %WinDir%\system32\drivers\etc on Windows, which marks it "Dirty" & then it gets re-read + reloaded into the local diskcache again). This may cause a SMALL initial load 1 time lag upon reload though, depending on the size of your HOSTS file.

E.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. BGP exploits - Sorry, once it's out of your hands/machine + past any interior network + routers you have, the packets you send are out there into the ISP/BSP's hands - they're "the Agents" holding all the keys to the doorways at that point (hosts are just a forcefield-filter (for lack of a better description) armor on what can come in mostly, & a bit of what can go out too (per point #20 above on "locking in malware")). Hosts work as a "I can't get burned if I can't go into the kitchen" protection, for you: Not your ISP/BSP. It doesn't extend to them

F.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. IP addressed adbanners (rare) &/or IP address utilizing malwares (rare too, most used domain/host names because they're "RECYCLABLE/REUSEABLE"), so here, you must couple HOSTS files w/ firewall rules tables (either in software firewalls OR router firewall rules table lists)... apk

Re:the truth... apk (1, Offtopic)

bloodhawk (813939) | about a year ago | (#43287707)

Seriously can't Slashdot do something about this fucking prick posting this shit all the time instead of forcing moderators to waste points down modding it. Censorship sucks, but having some mods just deleting this shit is very much needed, as is someone to hunt him down and slice off his nutsack.

Re:the truth... apk (1)

spiritplumber (1944222) | about a year ago | (#43287717)

I think he wants it to be an article, but doesn't know how to submit it. We should let it be an article so that it'd be done with, IMHO.

Re:the truth... apk (2)

Deltaspectre (796409) | about a year ago | (#43287725)

Meh, it's an Anonymous Coward.

FTFAQ:

Concentrate more on promoting than on demoting.

Promote the good comments so no one needs to browse at 0-.

Re:the truth... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287781)

It would take a moment of a mods times to delete the crap to save many others pain of accidentally expanding the post, after all for the most part they don't bother to review the crap that is submitted as article headlines or summaries so they may as well do something useful with their time.

Re:the truth... apk (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287811)

unfortunately many of those moderating act like petulant children and fanboi's, if they disagree with a post it is modded down based on their disagreement with it rather than accepting someone may have a different view and conversely some of the garbage that gets modded up simply because it appeals directly to a moderators view of the world rather than actually checking for whether there is something interesting/insightful or informative about it is appalling, even on technical subjects some of the garbage that gets marked as informative is appalling. As long as that state continues then browsing at 0- really isn't an option unless you only want to see what group thinking is currently happening.

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287875)

lol -1, figures

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288019)

MOD PARENT UP!

I got modded troll just for saying I liked Gnome 3. Now my comments don't even appear on Slashdot.

Slashdot has the worst comment moderation system ever.

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288217)

slashdot doesn't like faggots..and only faggots like gnome 3..you might as well go back to 4chan or reddit where they accept anal bunglers.

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288383)

Now my comments don't even appear on Slashdot.

Looks like the moderation system was not working today, as here's your comment.

Re:the truth... apk (4, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#43288041)

yes, and stop posting beneath shit you don't want to see... the only reason I'm aware of the post is your 2 replies. I know I'm adding to the problem but Christ something needs to be said. STOP REPLYING TO SPAM and go set your visibility to exclude 0 posts.

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288187)

Nowadays I spend a fair number my points to mod down the logged in fucktard trolls with disposable accounts responding to to the trolls. Just sayin...

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287871)

It's a lot more fucking informative than the stupid shit you just posted.

Re:the truth... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287899)

So I gather you are the moron posting this garbage in every article. die in a fucking fire. people like you are the reason quality posters have been driven from this site and we are left with rancid posters like yourself that add nothing of value but do their best to make everyone else's experience worse.

Re:the truth... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287975)

Seriously can't Slashdot do something about this fucking prick posting this shit all the time

The answer should obviously be "No", as seen in case like this story [slashdot.org] . Apparently he will just keep going when trolled, forever responding to trolls with his own junk, or even arguing with himself (that or capable of writing a bunch of replies within a minute of each other. If Slashdot people don't notice when over 200 comments out of 250 comments in a story are just BS/offtopic/trolls, they aren't going to notice a bump like this one.

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287755)

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

* POOR SHOWING TROLLS, & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!

Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusive emails to the operator of OSY, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threatening to sue him for libel, claiming that the APK on OSY was fake.

My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Playgirl Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold warez that were finalists @ Westminster Dog Show 2000-2002.

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

apk on 4chan [4chan.org]

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

INCONTROVERTIBLE FEEDBACK PROVIDING ESTABLISHED PROOF OF ALL MY POINTS:

--

That was amazing. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3037687&cid=40948073 [slashdot.org]

--

My, God! It's beatiful. Keep it up, you glorious bastard. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41835161 [slashdot.org]

--

Let us bask in its glory. A true modern The Wasteland. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3037687&cid=40948579 [slashdot.org]

--

put your baby IN ME -- I just read this whole thing. Fuck mod points, WHERE DO I SEND YOU MY MONEY?!!! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3037687&cid=40950023 [slashdot.org]

--

Oh shit, Time Cube Guy's into computers now... - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40946259 [slashdot.org]

--

[apk]'s done more to discredit the use of HOSTS files than anyone [else] ever could. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038791&cid=40945357 [slashdot.org]

--

Can I have some of what you're on? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40947587 [slashdot.org]

--

this obnoxious fucknuts [apk] has been trolling the internet and spamming his shit delphi sub-fart app utilities for 15 years. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40954565 [slashdot.org]

--

oh come on.. this is hilarious. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40955479 [slashdot.org]

--

I agree I am intrigued by these host files how do I sign up for your newsletter? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40961339 [slashdot.org]

--

Gimme the program that generates this epic message. I'll buy 5 of your product if you do... - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041313&cid=40954251 [slashdot.org]

--

As mentioned by another AC up there, the troll in question is actually a pretty well-executed mashup of APK's style - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038791&cid=40945357 [slashdot.org]

--

It's actually a very clever parody of APK - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038791&cid=40944229 [slashdot.org]

--

Please keep us updated on your AI research, you seem quite good at it. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038597&cid=40944603 [slashdot.org]

--

$20,000 to anyone providing proof of Alexander Peter Kowalski's death. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040921&cid=40958289 [slashdot.org]

--

Obviously, it must be Alexander Peter Kowalski. He's miffed at all these imposters... - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040921&cid=40958429 [slashdot.org]

--

And here I was thinking I was having a bad experience with a Dr. Bronner's bottle. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041081&cid=40952247 [slashdot.org]

--

Damn, apk, who the fuck did you piss off this time? Hahahahaahahahahahahaahaha. Pass the popcorn as the troll apk gets pwned relentlessly. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40954673 [slashdot.org]

--

I think it's the Internet, about to become sentient. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041313&cid=40956187 [slashdot.org]

--

Does anyone know if OpenGL has been ported to Windows yet? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042199&cid=40956781 [slashdot.org]

--

golfclap - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40900827 [slashdot.org]

--

The Truth! wants to be Known! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40897389 [slashdot.org]

--

DNS cube? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40897493 [slashdot.org]

--

KUDOS valiant AC. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40897777 [slashdot.org]

--

Polyploid lovechild of APK, MyCleanPC, and Time Cube --> fail counter integer overflow --> maximum win! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40899171 [slashdot.org]

--

You made my day, thanks! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029589&cid=40896469 [slashdot.org]

--

Wow. The perfect mix of trolls. Timecube, mycleanpc, gnaa, apk... this is great! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3027333&cid=40893381 [slashdot.org]

--

truer words were never spoken as /. trolls are struck speechless by it, lol! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042765&cid=41041795 [slashdot.org]

--

It's APK himself trying to maintain the illusion that he's still relevant. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3043535&cid=40967209 [slashdot.org]

--

Mod this up. The back and forth multi posting between APK and this "anti-APK" certainly does look like APK talking to himself. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3043535&cid=40969175 [slashdot.org]

--

APK himself would be at the top of a sensible person's ban list. He's been spamming and trolling Slashdot for years. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3043535&cid=40967137 [slashdot.org]

--

You got that right. I think. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3044971&cid=40972239 [slashdot.org]

--

Michael Kristopeit, is that you? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3045075&cid=40972377 [slashdot.org]

--

ROFL! :) (Now the sick bastard will follow me again) - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3138079&cid=41429251 [slashdot.org]

--

I miss Dr Bob. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3138079&cid=41432027 [slashdot.org]

--

Not sure if actually crazy, or just pretending to be crazy. Awesome troll either way. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3138079&cid=41432951 [slashdot.org]

--

Awesome! Hat off to you, sir! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3154555&cid=41509273 [slashdot.org]

--

That isn't a parody of Time-cube, it is an effort to counter-troll a prolific poster named APK, who seems like a troll himself, although is way too easy to troll into wasting massive amounts of time on BS not far from the exaggerations above - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3154555&cid=41514107 [slashdot.org]

--

I am intrigued and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3164403&cid=41555345 [slashdot.org]

--

1. You philistine, that is Art . Kudos to you, valiant troll on your glorious FP - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41832599 [slashdot.org]

--

What? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41832673 [slashdot.org]

--

I don't know if it is poorly-thought-out, but it is demented because it is at the same time an APK parody. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41832905 [slashdot.org]

--

It is in fact an extremely well thought out and brilliantly executed APK parody, combined with a Time Cube parody, and with a sprinkling of the MyCleanPC spam. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41841251 [slashdot.org]

--

er... many people have disproved your points about hosts files with well reasoned, factual arguments. You just chose not to listen and made it into some kind of bizarre crusade. And I'm not the timecube guy, just someone else who finds you intensely obnoxious and likes winding you up to waste your time. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41843313 [slashdot.org]

--

performance art - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3224905&cid=41847089 [slashdot.org]

--

it's apk, theres no reason to care. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3224905&cid=41847097 [slashdot.org]

--

Seems more like an apk parody. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3224905&cid=41847661 [slashdot.org]

--

That's great but what about the risk of subluxations? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3224905&cid=41847101 [slashdot.org]

--

Oh, come on. Just stand back and look at it. It's almost art, in a Jackson Pollock sort of way. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3227697&cid=41868923 [slashdot.org]

--

Read carefully. This is a satirical post, that combines the last several years of forum trolling, rolled into one FUNNY rant! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3227697&cid=41864711 [slashdot.org]

--

I can has summary? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3227697&cid=41861327 [slashdot.org]

--

I'd have a lot more sympathy if you would log in as APK again instead of AC. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3228991&cid=41868133 [slashdot.org]

--

If [apk] made an account, it would be permanently posting at -1, and he'd only be able to post with it twice a day. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3228991&cid=41869409 [slashdot.org]

--

DAFUQ I just look at? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229177&cid=41869085 [slashdot.org]

--

Trolls trolling trolls... it's like Inception or something. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229177&cid=41869353 [slashdot.org]

--

We all know it's you, apk. Stop pretending to antagonize yourself. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229179&cid=41869305 [slashdot.org]

--

Do you know about the shocking connection between APK and arsenic? No? Well, your innocence is about to be destroyed. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3472971&cid=42939965 [slashdot.org]

--

Send bug reports to 903 east division street, syracuse, ny 13208 - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3483339&cid=42972783 [slashdot.org]

--

Now you've made me all nostalgic for USENET. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486045&cid=42981977 [slashdot.org]

--

Google APK Hosts File Manager. He's written a fucking application to manage your hosts file. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486045&cid=42984521 [slashdot.org]

--

In case you are not aware, the post is a satire of a fellow known as APK. The grammar used is modeled after APK's as you can see here [thorschrock.com] . Or, you can just look around a bit and see some of his posts on here about the wonders of host files. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486045&cid=42983119 [slashdot.org]

--

You are surely of God of Trolls, whomever you are. I have had stupid arguments with and bitten the troll apk many times. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486901&cid=42989683 [slashdot.org]

--

"What kind of meds cure schizophrenic drunk rambling?" -> "Whatever APK isn't taking" - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3501001&cid=43028403 [slashdot.org] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3501001&cid=43028425 [slashdot.org]

--

I'm confused, is apk trolling himself now? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3501001&cid=43029495 [slashdot.org]

--

Excellent mashup. A++. Would troll again. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3503531&cid=43037445 [slashdot.org]

--

Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3506945&cid=43048291 [slashdot.org]

--

Best. Troll. Ever. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3506945&cid=43044811 [slashdot.org]

--

I like monkeys. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3508287&cid=43051505 [slashdot.org]

--

This is one of the funniest things I've ever read. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3508287&cid=43052263 [slashdot.org]

--

lul wut? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3510265&cid=43057839 [slashdot.org]

--

I admire this guy's persistence. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3511487&cid=43063797 [slashdot.org]

--

It's a big remix of several different crackpots from Slashdot and elsewhere, plus a liberal sprinkling of famous Slashdot trolls and old memes. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3511487&cid=43063881 [slashdot.org]

--

Tabloid newspapers have speculated for years that APK is a prominent supporter of Monsanto. Too bad we didn't believe them sooner! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3511487&cid=43063893 [slashdot.org]

--

Here's a hint, check out stories like this one [slashdot.org] , where over 200 of the 247 posts are rated zero or -1 because they are either from two stupid trolls arguing endless, or quite likely one troll arguing with himself for attention. The amount of off-topic posts almost outnumber on topic ones by 4 to 1. Posts like the above are popular for trolling APK, since if you say his name three times, he appears, and will almost endlessly feed trolls. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3511487&cid=43064383 [slashdot.org]

--

I love this copypasta so much. It never fails to make me smile. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3512099&cid=43069271 [slashdot.org]

--

^ Champion Mod parent up. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3513659&cid=43067371 [slashdot.org]

--

I appreciate the time cube reference, and how you tied it into the story. Well done. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3521721&cid=43094565 [slashdot.org]

--

The day you are silenced is the day freedom dies on Slashdot. God bless. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3522191&cid=43097221 [slashdot.org]

--

AHahahahah thanks for that, cut-n-pasted.... Ownage! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3522219&cid=43097215 [slashdot.org]

--

Don't hate the player, hate the game. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3526293&cid=43110679 [slashdot.org]

--

If you're familiar with APK, the post itself is a pretty damn funny parody. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43115215 [slashdot.org]

--

">implying it's not apk posting it" --> "I'd seriously doubt he's capable of that level of self-deprecation..." - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43115337 [slashdot.org] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43115363 [slashdot.org]

--

No, the other posts are linked in a parody of APK [mailto] 's tendency to quote himself, numbnuts. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43116855 [slashdot.org]

--

The thirteenth link is broken. Please fix it. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43115361 [slashdot.org]

--

Just ban any post with "apk", "host file", or "hosts file", as that would take care of the original apk too. The original has been shitposting Slashdot much longer & more intensively than the parody guy. Or ban all Tor exit nodes, as they both use Tor to circumvent IP bans. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3561925&cid=43216431 [slashdot.org]

--

Sadly this is closer to on-topic than an actual APK post is. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3561925&cid=43216225 [slashdot.org]

--

YOU ARE A GOD AMONG MEN. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569149&cid=43236143 [slashdot.org]

--

I've butted heads with APK myself, and yeah, the guy's got issues - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569173&cid=43236987 [slashdot.org]

--

Can I be in your quote list? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569443&cid=43237531 [slashdot.org]

--

Clearly you are not an Intertubes engineer, otherwise the parent post would be more meaningful to you. Why don't YOU take your meds? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569425&cid=43238177 [slashdot.org]

--

+2 for style! The bolding, italicizing, and font changes are all spot-on - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569149&cid=43238479 [slashdot.org]

--

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3570085&cid=43243509 [slashdot.org]

--

APK is not really a schizophrenic fired former Windows administrator with multiple personality disorder and TimeCube/Art Bell refugee. He's a fictional character like and put forward by the same person as Goatse Guy, GNAA trolls, Dr. Bob and so forth. His purpose is to test the /. CAPTCA algorithm, which is a useful purpose. If you're perturbed by having to scroll past his screeds just set your minimum point level to 1, as his posts are pretty automatically downmodded right away. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3570085&cid=43243145 [slashdot.org]

--

Anyone else think that sounds like Ron Paul? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569419&cid=43242417 [slashdot.org]

--

I just saw APK a couple days ago. He surfaced, blew once, and submerged... - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3570111&cid=43245913 [slashdot.org]

--

You make mikael christ the pet look like an huggable teddy bear - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3570111&cid=43242373 [slashdot.org]

--

oh man, that incredible interminable list of responses is almost as funny as the original post. This is getting to be truly epic. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247231 [slashdot.org]

--

"Does anyone know of an Adblock rule for this?" -> "No, but I bet there's a hosts file entry for it..." - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43246997 [slashdot.org] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247097 [slashdot.org]

--

"Can a hosts file block apk's posts, though?" -> "The universe couldn't handle that much irony." - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247135 [slashdot.org] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247219 [slashdot.org]

--

"That's it, I've had enough. ... Bye everyone, most of the last decade or so has been fun, but frankly, I quit." - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247225 [slashdot.org]
--> "So basically what you're saying is that you've added yourself to the HOST file?" - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247481 [slashdot.org]

--

Sweet baby Moses, this is beautiful work - I wish we could get trolls as good as this on TF. :) - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572629&cid=43247533 [slashdot.org]

--

you have a point - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247823 [slashdot.org]

--

I do admire that level of dedication. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43247765 [slashdot.org]

--

[to apk] shut up you stupid cock. Everyone knows you're wrong. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572687&cid=43250533 [slashdot.org]

--

I will hand it to him, he is definitely consistent. I wish I knew how he did this. That thing is scary huge. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3572629&cid=43250411 [slashdot.org]

--

I admire the amount of dedication you've shown - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3573571&cid=43251593 [slashdot.org]

--

Word is, ESR buttfucks CmdrTaco with his revolver. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3573679&cid=43252957 [slashdot.org]

--

Hey APK, Protip: It's not the truth or value (or lack of) in your post that gets it modded into oblivion, it's the fucking insane length. In addition to TL;DR (which goes without saying for a post of such length), how about irritating readers by requiring them to scroll through 20+ screenfuls just to get to the next post. If you want to publish a short story like this, please do everyone a favor and blog it somewhere, then provide a brief summary and link to your blog. Readers intrigued by your summary will go read your blog, and everyone else will just move along at normal /. speed. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3573873&cid=43255013 [slashdot.org]

--

Happy now - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569419&cid=43237239 [slashdot.org]

--

Professional. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574035&cid=43255143 [slashdot.org]

--

I like how this post seems to just sum up every Slashdot comment ever without actually saying anything. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574283&cid=43256029 [slashdot.org]

--

extremely bright - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574035&cid=43255855 [slashdot.org]

--

You provide many references, which is good. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574035&cid=43257043 [slashdot.org]

--

Holy shit - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3576121&cid=43260311 [slashdot.org]

--

this is a perfect example - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3578157&cid=43265127 [slashdot.org]

--

You're my personal hero. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574283&cid=43260747 [slashdot.org]

--

Obviously very passionate - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3574035&cid=43261975 [slashdot.org]

--

Is that ALL you have to say? C'mon! Tell us what you really think. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3576225&cid=43262495 [slashdot.org]

--

Thanks ... You should probably stay - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3577613&cid=43262993 [slashdot.org]

--

Art? -- http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3569681&cid=43244883 [slashdot.org]

--

PROOF apk sucks donkey dick. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3577639&cid=43263029 [slashdot.org]

--

I've been around /. for a while now, but this post is by far the most unique I've seen. Many have tried, but few achieve the greatness of this AC. My hat's off to you. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3576225&cid=43264325 [slashdot.org]

--

PROOF apk is a liar! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3578279&cid=43265249 [slashdot.org]

--

I think it's hilarious. Get over it! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3578301&cid=43265657 [slashdot.org]

--

Obviously APK filled his hosts files with backdoors before distributing them to ensure he doesn't block himself. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3578229&cid=43265767 [slashdot.org]

--

Alexander Peter Kowalski is an obnoxious prick. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3406867&cid=42698875 [slashdot.org]

--

Don't mention that file. Ever. It'll draw APK like a fly to rotting meat. Last thing I want to read is 80 responses worth of his stupid spam about that file! I swear that cocksucker does nothing but search Slashdot for that term and then spams the entire article. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3554655&cid=43209619 [slashdot.org]

--

[to apk] You have had it repeatedly explained to you that your posts are long-winded, unpleasant to read due to your absurd formatting style and full of technical inaccuracies borne of your single minded i-have-a-hammer-so-every-problem-is-a-nail attitude. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3406867&cid=42701491 [slashdot.org]

--

Oh shit, the hosts files have become self-aware and started hacking accounts. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276783 [slashdot.org]

--

What mad skillz you have!! - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581193&cid=43273941 [slashdot.org]

--

Am I the only one who enjoys this sort of insanity? - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3582193&cid=43281063 [slashdot.org]

--

You are my favorite Slashdot poster. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3580251&cid=43270359 [slashdot.org]

--

Most insightful post on the Internet - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3579259&cid=43275207 [slashdot.org]

--

people are looking at me funny because I'm laughing hysterically at what a perfect APK imitation it is. - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581991&cid=43278203 [slashdot.org]

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

Did you see the movie "Pokemon"? Actually the induced night "dream world" is synonymous with the academic religious induced "HOSTS file" enslavement of DNS. Domains have no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in name resolution. Unfortunately, human values have declined to fictitious word values. Unknowingly, you are living in a "World Wide Web", as in a fictitious life in a counterfeit Internet - which you could consider APK induced "HOSTS file". Can you distinguish the academic induced root server from the natural OpenDNS? Beware of the change when your brain is free from HOSTS file enslavement - for you could find that the natural Slashdot has been destroyed!!

FROM -> Man - how many times have I dusted you in tech debates that you have decided to troll me by ac posts for MONTHS now, OR IMPERSONATING ME AS YOU DID HERE and you were caught in it by myself & others here, only to fail each time as you have here?)...

So long nummynuts, sorry to have to kick your nuts up into your head verbally speaking.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb. you're completely pathetic.

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

* :)

Ac trolls' "BIG FAIL" (quoted): Eat your words!

P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

Hahaha... lol , man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

That's the kind of martial arts [google.com] I practice.

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

Disproof of all apk's statements:

OLD POST LINKS MIRRORED HERE:
http://pastebin.com/8yxcW3TJ [pastebin.com]

RECENT POST LINKS:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581193&cid=43273839 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276593 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581991&cid=43277017 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3582075&cid=43277273 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3582193&cid=43278565 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3584857&cid=43282375 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3578357&cid=43282481 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585297&cid=43283241 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585417&cid=43283695 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585451&cid=43284271 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585593&cid=43284843 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585795&cid=43285307 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585827&cid=43285755 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3586081&cid=43286509 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3586127&cid=43286699 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3586137&cid=43287021 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3586291&cid=43287449 [slashdot.org]
END

Re:the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287775)

2.)
3.)
Just turn off remote loading in your e-mail client, which also has no business running scripts—there's just no legitimate use for it.
Alex P. Keaton

P.S.==> You should put your Delphi skillz to work and create a DNS proxy which keeps your blocklist as a hashtree to speed things up.
...Alex P. Keaton

I've been playing it since yesterday. (4, Interesting)

Nyder (754090) | about a year ago | (#43287933)

Game so far isn't too bad, but you can tell it's a console port.

There are some graphic problems i see. Like the baskets of apples are flat, no raised textures. And i found some smoke that was very 2D.

Mouse acceleration seems the same if it's on or off, and it's way too sensitive.

Other then that, it doesn't seem to bad at all, can't wait to play it more later.

Oh, the enemies seem to jump a bit, not sure if that is planned or what, but whatever, i can kill them the same.

Preset to High, get 40+ fps at 1080p with a i7-920 (3.2ghz) and a Nvidia 460.

If you like the other 2 games, you will probably enjoy this.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (4, Interesting)

Nyder (754090) | about a year ago | (#43287941)

Game so far isn't too bad, but you can tell it's a console port.

There are some graphic problems i see. Like the baskets of apples are flat, no raised textures. And i found some smoke that was very 2D.

Mouse acceleration seems the same if it's on or off, and it's way too sensitive.

Other then that, it doesn't seem to bad at all, can't wait to play it more later.

Oh, the enemies seem to jump a bit, not sure if that is planned or what, but whatever, i can kill them the same.

Preset to High, get 40+ fps at 1080p with a i7-920 (3.2ghz) and a Nvidia 460.

If you like the other 2 games, you will probably enjoy this.

Oh, i forgot to mention, almost all the NPC look like each other, they used maybe 2-3 different models. I think that is bullshit, but whatever, I just kill everyone in the game anyways.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Jacob Leclerc (2876617) | about a year ago | (#43287997)

I thought part of the appeal of this game is the fact that the npcs don't repeat models like every other game. Disappointing.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288117)

Yep, it's utter garbage. Very disappointed.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Jacob Leclerc (2876617) | about a year ago | (#43287985)

I haven't played any other bioshock games, but the preview trailer looked awesome on hulu. Then I heard it was a console port. No longer interested.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

shione (666388) | about a year ago | (#43288873)

If you're talking about that gameplay demo they showed at a E3 event, you will be very disapointed. The game looks similar but storywise they took those parts out and they are not in the finished game!

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (3, Interesting)

JMJimmy (2036122) | about a year ago | (#43288151)

That's the short list of problems... graphics tearing, horrible audio levels (footsteps are louder than crashing waves!?), audio overlays that make the dialogue unintelligable, etc etc etc.

Most of all: The game is BORING! I couldn't have been more disappointed in the story. I've played for 8 hours or so and still don't know why I'm doing anything I am other than "someone hired me"... uhh ok... the world's story was going all religion then took a hard right into weird cult ville ala Resident Evil then took a U turn into racist land and now I just don't know.

Big prettyish world with crap all to do in it.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (2)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#43288537)

Most of all: The game is BORING!

Consistent with Bioshock 1, then. Never played #2 because I gave up on #1 a few hours in.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year ago | (#43288973)

In Bioshock 1 I felt that way. No hints, you just survive a planewreck. The plot felt clumbsy and contrived, though if you make towards the end it attempts to explain the rail-shooter experience.

In Infinite I'm seeing hints that you are there for a reason from the arguing couple that rows you ashore in the beginning and their reappearance throughout the game, so far. I'm not far into it, but given the trailers I'm guessing this is going to be a fate vs freewill thing.

I didn't notice a U-Turn into racist land. They hint that their society is founded on pure racism pretty early on, and with the statue of John Wilkes Booth and the rant against Lincoln (when the guys in the KKK hoods attack you) pretty much seal the deal. Even the Irish aren't white enough (no specific reference to the evils of the papists yet...) So far it's like killing Nazi's in Wolfensteine

The plot line is better than Bioshock and the world is friggen awesome.

Solid 10 so far.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

anss123 (985305) | about a year ago | (#43289535)

The plot line is better than Bioshock and the world is friggen awesome.

Solid 10 so far.

If Bioshock 1 is a 10 I give Infinite a 8. Both the plot and the gameplay is a step back. The game is better than I expected though.

Anyone else creeped out by the facial animations? They're freakish. Bioshock 1 too had poor character animation, but there they hid it with dim lighting. Besides the poor animation I've also seen characters walk through tables or throws stuff through walls. There's apparently no hit detection when an animation plays. Elizabeth also clearly have the ability to teleport when you're not watching, just turn around and she's there. A bit like Dr. Watson [youtube.com] .

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

mjwx (966435) | about a year ago | (#43290223)

The plot line is better than Bioshock and the world is friggen awesome.

Solid 10 so far.

If Bioshock 1 is a 10 I give Infinite a 8. Both the plot and the gameplay is a step back. The game is better than I expected though.

If Bioshock 1 is a 10, System Shock 2 is 178.

Seeing as Bioshock 1 is just a rehashing of System Shock 2's story with cyberpunk swapped for steampunk.

Seriously, I've seen better storytelling in porno's. Better voice work too but that's besides the point. The story premise is not bad (as I said, it's based on System Shock 2) it's just so hacked together and poorly told.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

JMJimmy (2036122) | about a year ago | (#43290611)

How are Bioshock 1 and System Shock 2 in any way alike other than the fact that they are survival stories that have genetic experiments?

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

anss123 (985305) | about a year ago | (#43290667)

I almost skipped Bioshock since I heard it was similar to SS2. Obviously I don't like System Shock 2 :)

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43290633)

The Bioshock storylines have always had the subtlety of a freight train. In the first one it was libertarianism = bad. In this one, I gether it's racism = bad, and/or intolerant religion = bad. I kind of respect the first one more, though. It's a lot more artistically gutsy to present a failed libertarian utopia (especially as popular as libertarianism is amongst many these days) than to present a failed racist/bigot utopia (ooh, real gutsy to criticize racism, guys!). But again, subtle these games aren't.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year ago | (#43289437)

Most of all: The game is BORING! I couldn't have been more disappointed in the story. I've played for 8 hours or so and still don't know why I'm doing anything I am other than "someone hired me"... uhh ok... the world's story was going all religion then took a hard right into weird cult ville ala Resident Evil then took a U turn into racist land and now I just don't know.

Big prettyish world with crap all to do in it.

No it's not boring, I finished it about 40mins ago(total time played ~13hrs). I'd rate the story between good and excellent. It only gets "boring" if you're not listening to the voxophone which fills you in more on the story. Which of course could be a problem if you don't want to wait the 30-40 seconds for it to play.

Then again, if you don't know any basic theology at all you'll probably miss some of the references but that's not really any fault but your own.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (2)

JMJimmy (2036122) | about a year ago | (#43290561)

I've listened to every vox and am well versed in the subject matter, while I haven't finished the game, because it didn't start well I don't care what happens to anyone.

In 1 it felt like you were dropped into the middle of a world and were trying to figure out what was going on/how to survive. It engaged you from the beginning. Infinite strings you along with a bunch of boring fights that have no meaning, introduces and drops topics like crazy, and forces you to look at the ground 90% of the time.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

luder (923306) | about a year ago | (#43290317)

So is this review [escapistmagazine.com] still accurate for the new Bioshock?

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (2)

jellyfoo (2865315) | about a year ago | (#43288371)

You forgot the lack of manual saves (quicksave or otherwise). Whenever someone complains about checkpointed save systems, invariable someone chimes in and suggests that continually pressing F5 is hardly an improvement. What the said smartarse fails to mention is that pressing F5 ensures you've saved NOW, and hence can safely quick the game knowing it's going to load exactly where you saved and not a checkpoint 5-10 minutes ago.

It also means you can experiment more with situations, try out various weapons or tactics or ideas since you can just save manually before doing so. If the lack checkpoint was a while back, the enthusiasm to experiment deteriorates if you have to progress through scripted sequences to get back to where you started messing around.

Oh and of course, no-one said that a checkpoint AND manual save system couldn't be implemented. Games like Deus Ex - Human Revolution and even Half-Life 2 have this feature, and it works great for both types of players. But apparently to some idiots, if you complain about checkpoints you must be a save-smasher.

TL;DR - people suck on the Internet and are unable to form a argument unless it involves belittling other people.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

RogueyWon (735973) | about a year ago | (#43288899)

The option of manual saves should be a mandatory certification requirement in shooters. There may be other genres where it doesn't fit, but for shooters it's an absolute no brainer.

My personal absolute least favorite trick ever is the one where you get to the end of a campaign mission in a shooter, watch a lengthy cutscene and then... it doesn't do a save until you've actually moved a way into the next mission. So if you survived the encounter at the end of the previous mission, sat watching your clock through a lengthy cutscene while thinking "I really need to go now" and then quit as soon as you get out of cutscene... you have to do that final encounter and cutscene all over again the next time you play. No idea whether Bioshock Infinite does this, but other titles, including some in the Gears of War and Resident Evil series certainly have.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43290731)

Man, I hate checkpoint systems. *Why* do developers keep that old system around? It was perfectly understandable back in the days when there was very limited system memory available to maintain saves, especially on consoles. But we left that era behind 15 years ago, yet developers still keep it around. Their nostalgia for the old ways has me wanting to throw my controller at the wall every time I have to replay through a whole level just to get to the ONE PART that I'm having trouble with--OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Not only that, but, as you mentioned, a save anywhere system let's you experiment and have fun a lot more--trying different approaches to situations.

And the WORST offender is the game that not only has checkpoints, but only one save slot to boot (Dead Rising, I'm looking in your direction). Get caught at a checkpoint in bad shape and you could easily end up having to replay through the *whole game*.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (3, Informative)

shione (666388) | about a year ago | (#43288865)

Here's my complaints:

16:9 resolutions on a 16:10 monitor is bugged. Any 16:9 resolution you pick the game will stretch it out to 16:10.

Mouse sensitivity is screwed up as you say. One it is too sensitive and two it seems to move in y axis faster than in the x, so when youre walking you view moves up and down too much , and I'm not talking about the head bob.

If there are stairs that are part of a building you have to jump to walk up them unlike all the other stairs in your path.

Game is very linear in your choice and it is very short. I finished it in 10 hours yesterday.

During the game and in the menus I have to hit the enter key. I can't remember when I last had to use the enter to in a game other than for chatting.

The Menus are very dumbed down and simplified. If you want to get to the nitty gritty stuff you have to edit the ini files.

You cannot manually save. All saves are automatic and you dont know when it happens, which means if you die you dont know if those items you last picked up have to be picked up again. Also makes it harder if you just want to explore the place and not worry about dying because if you die its hard to keep track of your progress unlike if you could exactly when you wanted to.

These are the main things that annoy me about the game.

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (3, Informative)

RogueyWon (735973) | about a year ago | (#43288957)

I'd agree with the comments here. To add a few things to it: the combat is marginally better than Bioshock 1 and 2. My biggest issue with those games was that the weapons lacked any sense of clout. You'd have an enemy charging you who was basically a psychotic human (no armour, no supernatural powers) and to take them down, you'd have to pump multiple clips of ammo into them. That just felt poor. Infinite has, so far (in normal difficulty) felt better in this regard. Not perfect, but better.

The two-weapon limitation is a step back for the series. Very, very few shooters are improved by two weapon limits. Makes sense for realism-heavy military shooters (Operation Flashpoint, ARMA etc), in anything else it just forces bad game design. "Oh look, there's a sniper rifle over there, the game is telling me I will need to snipe in the next sequence". By all means do what Borderlands and its sequel do and, for console control-convenience, have 4 hotswitch weapon slots manageable at any time by your (much larger) inventory. But absolute 2-weapon limits are the absolute worst trend in fps gaming over the last few years.

The story is good. I must say that, as with the original Bioshock, I suspect it's not quite as good as some of the reviews have made out. In particular, I don't think the political and moral dimensions are quite as sophisticated as they claim to be. It's all a bit... well... undergraduate. The first game was "Ayn Rand is bad!". This one is less sophisticated still "Racism is bad!". I actually thought the second game tried to be a little more sophisticated and grey-shaded, but that had the least rapturous reception of any installment in the series.

And on the technology front... I'm running on an i7-3820 (3.6ghz) and an Nvidia 680 in ultra detail. The graphics are very good - better than the console versions. However, they're not better than the console versions by the same margin as we've seen in Crysis 3 or (to a slightly lesser extent) Tomb Raider. With those games, it felt like the PC version had been developed to a level that was in-line with what we should expect from the PS4 and the 360-successor. The PC version here is more halfway-house-ish.

Slight digression on Crysis 3; I was discussing it with a colleague at work who does all of his gaming on the 360. He was really disappointed with the game, largely because of its campaign length. I came to it's defense "But look at the technology, this is next-gen stuff, so it's no surprise that other elements of the game got a bit squeezed, just as happened with the likes of the original Gears of War early in this cycle". His response "What technology? It looks just like Crysis 2."

A day or two later, I got to see the 360 version running on a demonstration machine in my local Game.

"Oh, so he wasn't even playing the same game as me."

RE: Crysis (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year ago | (#43289059)

Well yeah, even Oblivion looked shitty on a 360. We're what, 3 generations down the line now for Videocards?

Re:I've been playing it since yesterday. (1)

Looker_Device (2857489) | about a year ago | (#43290779)

I suspect that Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, and a lot of other recent games will be ported to the PS4/Xbox-Durango not long after launch. Of course, they'll slap a "Special Super-Duper Edition" label on them so we consolers will get the privilege of paying for them all over again.

There's another new Shock - more or less (2)

Jesus_666 (702802) | about a year ago | (#43289523)

And if you're too much of a hipster to touch anything with "Bioshock" in the name, this is the perfect time to go to GOG, buy System Shock 2 and patch it with the latest SS2Tool. If you haven't played it for a while you might not know that half a year ago someone has actually produced a new version of the engine out of thin air, which seems to fix a lot of the crashing issues, adds compatibility with muticore systems, enables antialiasing, uses OpenAL to enable EAX-like effects etc.

With that and the SHMUP, SHTUP, Rebirth and Tacticool mods installed the game feels quite a bit more modern, even if there are a few blurry old textures left in the game. Plus, apparently it does't crash at the drop of a hat anymore. The only noticeable downside is that existing mod managers aren't supported; these days you dump all mod files in one of two override folders and manage them yourself. Perhaps someone will write a new one, though.

(Note: In case you want to patch the GOG release with SS2Tool 5.0: Delete the "gog.ico" file first; otherwise the SS2Tool installer will use compatibility code that isn't compatible with GOG's latest release. SS2Tool 5.1 is expected to fix this but hasn't been released yet. )

I am aware that this is somewhat off topic but seeing that until yesterday I had never heard about the engine update it might stand to reason that other Shock fans might be interested.

Re:There's another new Shock - more or less (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290077)

I'd call it on-topic. System Shock had very good inventory and complex skill mechanics for its time, and significant background plot with multiple ways to play. Both were surprisingly similar at their best, juggling diminishing resources and complex options and dramatic character revelation. I particularly enjoyed that many of the System Shock and System Shock 2 voices, and bios, were based on people from MIT that I happened to know. from the Studen tInformation Processing Board there, on the 5th floor of the Student Center.

Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288035)

Now give us real gamers what we actually want, a new System Shock game.

BioShock and BioShock 2 were utter crap. Betting this one is going to be the same.

This (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year ago | (#43289091)

There are a couple of games I'd pay to see just remade with modern graphics. SS would be one.

Re:Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289183)

There is no company left that could ever create a system shock sequel that wasn't pure crap and a giant cashgrab without a care for quality.

I give you bioshock as proof. bioshock 2. bioshock 3. what? infinite? whatever...

They just don't make them anymore like that sonny... Hand made hand crafted quality that still today stands up as one of the best games of all time hands down. Detail at a level we have not seen before or since in the shooter scene. A story that could go forever. And fast fun action and actually scary fights.

-
Look at you, hacker: a pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting and sweating as you run through my corridors. How can you challenge a perfect, immortal machine?
-
Are you afraid? What is it you fear? The end of your trivial existence? When the history of my glory is written, your species shall only be a footnote to my magnificence.
-
You move like an insect. You think like an insect. You ARE an insect. There is another who can serve my purpose. Take care not to fall too far out of my favor... patience is not characteristic of a goddess.
-
Remember, it is my will that guided you here. It is my will that gave you your cybernetic implants, the only beauty in that meat you call a body. If you value that meat... you will do as I tell you.
-
You travel within the glory of my memories, insect. I can feel your fear as you tread the endless expanse of my mind. Make yourself comfortable... before long I will decorate my home with your carcass.
-
You are no longer welcome here, nuisance. Why do you stay, when you sense my displeasure? I have suffered your company long enough. It is time for our dance to end.
-
The process shall not take long. If it sounds unpleasant to you, put your mind at ease, insect. You will not survive to see my new world order.
-
Your flesh is an insult to the perfection of the digital.
-
Prepare to join your species in extinction.
--

Re:Cool (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#43290637)

This smacks of first-experience nostalgia that nothing could ever live up to.

Re:Cool (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#43289273)

Hey, you're that guy! Hey everyone, it's that guy! You know, the one who has the only opinion worth anything!

Where've you been, man? Got a lot of people needing your help...

Doesn't run on Windows XP (0)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about a year ago | (#43288163)

Oh well, I'll play it when I upgrade my PC.

Ultimate answer? Yeah, right... (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#43289347)

It’s the ultimate answer to the question of whether art or technology is the most important part of creating a visually excellent game

Oh, yeah? Ultimate answer you say? So that's all decided now and no-one need every argue over it again?

Except of course that the answer appears to be "Hmm, yeah, kinda both."

Tried it last night ... (1)

Lazy Jones (8403) | about a year ago | (#43289695)

Short summary: it's a typical way too easy, hand-holding, felt 50% cinematic sequences (fortunately no "mash X button" sequences like Far Cry 3), non-interactive world (scattered books that can't be looked at, NPCs that can't be interacted with => bland, boring environment) adventure built around a FPS that feels like a 10-15 years old XBox game (I'd place it near or below Fable 1 in complexity/gameplay, or to be a little harsh, close to Doom). It apparently impressed reviewers with its big flying city and extreme detail in the wrong places (those you just run through in the beginning).

Scripting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290277)

One thing I was worried about from the gameplay videos and no one ever mentions in reviews is the scripting, it has grown completely out of hand in recent games with obnoxious scripting and handholding ruining games like Tomb Raider for me, so for anyone interested this game is only gently scripted and gives you lots of room to do your own thing and set your own pace, which is great.

My biggest complaint is that it's far too easy even on hard because you have regenerating shields and instant respawn, I'm thinking about restarting with the code for 1999 mode because right now it mostly feels like a sightseeing game with some light shooting elements in it rather than a proper shooter, also I'm hating the two weapon limit, it's very annoying and feels so arbitrary since you can have all the vigors.

bioshock without the bio or much shock (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290625)

Lots of mass slaughter (more opponents simultaneously) and no sign yet of any child-murder to advance the player.

Final plot explanations about some parallel universe stuff that will have many players shrugging their shoulders (plot you saw 3 times last week on old TV reruns.)

Usual beta test release quality.

Issue about checkpoint saves (no manual save)

Fantasy world running on pixie dust or unicorn pharts as far as the physics/engineering goes (alleged 1912 that steampunkers would be embarassed about being absurd)

No XP support

distracting player prompts endlessly on hud interface

Player Agency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43292637)

The whole point of Bioshock was that the player HAS NO AGENCY IN ANY VIDEOGAME EVER. The only real "choice" the player has is to play or to not play. Bioshock's weakest moments are after the big reveal when the game continues on like every other videogame pretending you've made a decision (to assist Tenenbaum) immediately discarding it's central thesis point and ultimately concluding with a hollow, videogamey, completely undeserved ending. If Infinite is finally moving on from the canard that is "Player Agency" then all the better for it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>