Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Buy Vivendi Games Division?
Unknown Relic writes "While far from confirmed, it is reported that Microsoft is seriously looking into buying, or
may have already bought, Vivendi's Games Division. For those who aren't aware, Vivendi owns several prominent gaming companies, including Valve and Blizzard! While no official announcements have been made, one is apparently expected soon. While this would doubtlessly be a great boon to Xbox's library, it could be a shock to other consoles as titles which were originally planned for a diverse release become Xbox exclusives."
Microsoft Buys Vivendi? 9:40 AM - Andrew "Andy" Burnes - Game Biz.: General News - (119)
Well I was sitting on the fence with regards to posting this earlier after I heard of this from various sources but now Computer & Video Games has posted the story. As the article mentions this would mean that Microsoft would control the publishing rights of Half-Life and this would certainly make the rumour of Half-Life 2 being Xbox exclusive more of a reality:
If insider speculation is to be believed, Microsoft has bought US publisher Vivendi, with an announcement to that effect due soon. Take a deep breath and reflect on the implications of that, if true.
Half-Life 2, Warcraft, Counter-Strike, Crash, Spyro, Lord of the Rings... Vivendi has an enormous portfolio boasting some of the biggest titles on all formats, and it would be an ultra-smart move on Microsoft's part to snap them up. Such a buyout, of course, would come at a terrifically high price, making the 365 million acquisition of Rare look like peanuts. But if anyone has the necessary funds, it's Microsoft.
Furthermore, an email from Universal was accidentally sent out to developers last week stating that all work on GBA titles should be suspended. The email was promptly recalled and branded an error, but could it be that this was in some way tied in with this alleged deal?
We contacted Vivendi for comment and a spokesperson told us: "We've heard all sorts of rumours over the past months - Activision, EA and many more. They'd all like to get their hands on Blizzard. I guess Microsoft are one of the few companies that has enough money."
If this is true as various sectors of the press believe then we should be seeing an official announcement on Friday. So Microsoft now has its hands in Valve, Blizzard and others if this is true... Dark times or more security for developers considering Vivendi's habit of dropping underperforming studios?
I am me...I think
So much for linux releases of Counter-Strike server, or Mac versions of Diablo/Starcraft/Warcraft.
Well this makes the quote that Bill Gates said they couldn't be a monopoly because they weren't in the game console market as well, even more funny...
Well, normally id insert some antimicrosoft thing here saying how this will ruin everything, but blizzard has never released games for linux, and I do own an xbox, so hey, cool.
Vivendi does not own Valve, Sierra published Half-Life and it stands to reason they'll publish whatever else Valve does, but they don't own them.
Schnapple
This means we'll see Commander Clippy on the battlefield in StarCraft II. :/
Hmmm!
That's the current trend in Microsoft. They don't have any innovations of their own. They don't have to. They are so rich they can buy any innovation and sell it under the name of Microsoft.
If Microsoft can't beat them, they just buy them.
...that Valve actually release something other than another patch for Half-Life?
Nah, not even Micro$oft can manage that!
Slink
Since Blizzard currently provides the battle.net system for free, will Microsoft starting charging for the service as they charge for everything else.
Aw man. That sucks. I'm not playing Diablo on an Xbox. I wonder if Worlds of Warcraft will be forced Xbox only.
Just sayin'
Great. Now more PC games like Halo can be hijacked in a desperate to promote the X-Box.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
I know they are desperate and only a year ago their was a total of 7 games for the xbox and that was it. They sell each unit at a $150 loss and are actually paying developers not to release games for the competition. Does anyone see a future monopoly here?
Sega is gone and nintendo might be next. Sony will take a long time to kill but its possible ms can majorily harm it.
Again it relates to Microsoft using money obtained from one monopoly and using it to crush competition in another which is illegal under the sherman anti trust act.
What really sucks is the drm signed code that is required to run a game. This makes ms the gatekeeper. If they were smart they would make it free for anyone to write games for it and then use the signed code feature on the xbox-2.
http://saveie6.com/
If this is true, this could indicate that Microsoft is ready to go on another spending spree and part with some of that $40 billion dollars. I suspect that they'll start buying companies up again, now that they've won/lost the anti-trust case. They waited a while for things to cool down, and now they are going to heat things up again as it were.
Sony should terrify MS. The playstation is rapidly starting to evolve into the long awaited "computing appliance" and it doesn't run windows (tho it can run linux).
You're darn right MS will lose billions on xbox and will use it's multi-billion dollar slush fund to line up as many key players on its court as possible because when game consoles start doing word processing and browsing the internet, guess who wants to the OS you use to do it?
Buying vivindi and getting Blizzard (!!!!) and Valve and every fantasy MMORPG (present and near future including World of Warcraft, Eve, and MIDDLE EARTH ONLINE) that ISN'T everquest is just a perfect match from Microsoft's perspective.
... Damn, I was really looking forward to playing Star Craft:Ghost on my gamecube. With Rare bought and now maybe Blizzard, The XBox is beginning to look like a good choice for games, too bad the way MS made it that was by buring the competition in piles of money.
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
Half-Life 2 belongs on the PC...and they better not get involved in the way Blizzard makes their games.
Just because MS can buy someone, doesn't mean they have to. Being an avid gamer who does not and has no intention of owning an xbox, I am frankly pretty pissed off about this.
Rumors of buyouts have been swarming the gaming world recently. Nintendo will buy Sega. Microsoft will buy Sega. Nintendo will buy Capcom. EA will buy Capcom. Nintendo will buy Sega AND Capcom. Microsoft will buy Nintendo. Sony will buy General Electric (ok, so I just made that last one up). You get the idea.
Please. Until you read about this from Microsoft, Vivendi, or on legit gaming sites, assume that somebody made this crap up and are just looking for web traffic.
Does anyone believe for a second that MS will allow things like bnetd to continue to exist? If they thought it was bad before, they've got a horrible nightmare to wake up to now...
'monopoly money'?
Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
If this goes through, it will be a shame to see Blizzard's simultaneous Mac/PC releases become a thing of the past. After Steve Jobs all but declared war on MS at MWSF, no way in hell will Redmond put out Blizzard titles for OS X at the same time as Windows, if at all. This is a shame as Mac gamers are all too familiar with second rate status. Blizzard was one of the few companies (outside of a few porting houses and Mac publishers) who treat Mac gamers with some respect.
There goes any chance of my ever playing StarCraft 2 on the PC... what a gyp.
"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - George Orwell
Well, it makes sense, and don't anybody go acting surprised. It's become a mantra that Xbox competitors have more games. A normal company would respond to that by trying to offer more games themselves, but MS doesn't have to play that way. They have the luxury of saying "Hey, we won't increase the number of Xbox titles--instead, we'll take some games away from PS2 and Nintendo. Sure, the customer loses, but Redmond wins!" Wow, I couldn't script a better villian!
This is typical for microsoft. The X-box is a gigantic money hole, and they are STILL not number one in the console market. The only choice they have is to BUY every game producer within reach. That way they can ensure all the great titles exclusive to their PC-in-a-box.
I suppose it's more likely $Bill will take over and micromanage them into banality, but I'm ever the optimist. If he gives the clever folk who created games like Dungeon Keeper the time and money to keep the pipeline full, we could see some cool stuff coming our way real soon.
I'll tell you what the 'effect' is! It's pissing me off!
Vivendi CEO Jean-René Fourtou has told shareholders that the company will undergo restructuring and that some parts of it will be sold off, but he has no intention of selling Vivendi's game divisions.
Vivendi is in financial debt and company executives had previously stated that they were considering selling off their profitable gaming divisions, which include Blizzard and Valve.
Vivendi is seriously cash-strapped at the moment and Micro$oft is just looking to expand its market share with the x-box. Personally I think its sickening that a Republican president will allow an abusive monopoly like micro$oft to control so much of what we do every day. I don't think Mac game releases are in jeopardy though, M$ allows a few of their top sellers to get ported.
This is the most useful first post I've ever seen!
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
Now instead of the Mobs in halflife your going to be shooting BSA agents coming to check your licenses.
Neck_of_the_Woods
#/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
...stop making shitty games? It's probably too much to hope for though. We'll probably all have to go play "Solitaire" on the Xbox now.
Bah humbug.
No Warcraft for you, heretic!
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
If you can't beat them,
Buy them.
Seriously though, this would be terrible
Nosce te Ipsum
Part 1- Embrace and extend the PC industry. Gain Monopoly power by suffocating competition. Stifle innovation.
Part 2- Embrace and extend the video game industry. Gain Monopoly power by suffocating competition. Stifle innovation.
Part 3- ?? Takeover of US Govt?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
just like AOL was going to buy Red Hat. No this is not a flamebait, troll, redundant, or anything else learn how to moderate or don't moderate at all.
You guys are so gullible, yeah did you hear? Microsoft bought the Holy Roman Church! I dont know how many more "Microsoft bought..." stories that Slashdotters will believe...sheesh! Yeah, I heard Microsoft has bought Linux..... and I have this bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to sell you....oh no wait, Microsoft just bought it from me...
Tee-hee!
If some re$ources get put behind proper games (e.g. Blizzard) in time to fend off the onslaught of f*cking Sims and footbal titles from EA, that's a GOOD THING.
Also, if a mysterious virus passed via game packaging suddenly wipes out the hordes of spotty drones who cluster around the whole shelves of EA Sims'n'Sports games at the local game store, that's an even BETTER THING.
Give gaming back to the geeks! And yes, MS are geeks.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
moron... at least have the guts to use your real user account
It's about time this country stopped supporting illegal activities like this. This guy is a total criminal and needs to be stopped. Bill Gates needs to be dealt with. We need an all out TOTAL boycott of MS.
I clicked a random link on their site and got this error:
/ipage.asp, line 16
Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'
Type mismatch: '[string: "86 height=0 Marginwi"]'
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
If they're going to buy every game maker there is, that is a great incentive to start new such companies, with the guarantee that they will be bought at a good price. Microsofts costs will just rise and rise indefinitely if they try that.
Let Sierra rest in peace.
I guess I should expect to see DEFUNCT under Sierra's status on Home of the Underdogs.
Try to imagine Kings Quest for X-Box...
You are great player! Present you with points!
If this does indeed happen, and it's for XBox games, then the console industry is on its way down like when the Atari/Intellivion systems blew it up. It just seems Microsoft has no idea what they're doing in the console industry at all. They're treating it like all games PC games are couch potato games, which they most certainly are NOT.
At least I *think* it is. This is all just personal opinion so I might as well be pulling it out my ass.
Every person I know with an Xbox owns a PC and plays CS. I'm trying to think of one Xbox owner that doesn't own a PC...
Nope, out of the people I know can't think of any off hand.
The Xbox only has 800k units in the US right? PS2 has like 2million. Can I think of any PS2 owners without a PC? Hmm, yea I can name about 6 or 7 off the top of my head. Mainly people under 12 or so.
So with that in mind, why would MS restrict itself to the Xbox only? I don't think they would shoot themselves in the foot by excluding PC players, it's their biggest market right now, and it sells 2 products.
Windows- Which only costs them the duplication costs of a CD
The game- Self explanitory.
Software will always be Infinetly cheaper to distribute than hardware, the Xbox is just a distraction from a DRM windows.
If this keeps up Microsoft could be in danger of being seen as trying to build some sort of monopoly!
The reason most people run windows on PC's is game support. If MS buys out/forces out all games from PC's, nobody will have a reason to run windows anymore. Thank you Gates, for so mercifully ceding the PC market to Linux.
Hotmail still exists and is still free. Microsoft's own gaming site, the Zone is free too.
This information makes me think that in fact Microsoft would keep battle net free.
Microsoft buying a company[division]? I have never seen this before from them. I always thought their products and services were the best, making them a powerful entity.
There are alternatives? What? I thought the XboX was the only video game system ever made. Don't tell me this! I dont wanna hear it!
Go away!
This seems like a premature move on Microsoft's part. Sure, they have more money than Ft. Knox, and can buy whatever they want, but this is obviously to shore up the Xbox.
What's more interesting is that this is a wildcard for Microsoft--they can buy these companies as a ploy to make people think they are shoring up the next generation of Xbox games, and then put out tons of (high quality) PC games, dominating a market that no one thought they wanted.
Is Sony going to start buying up development now too? Has the rush on game developers begun?
--My other sig is a ferrari.
Their corporate overview mentions Sierra Entertainment, as does their list of studios. The only time Valve is mentioned is on the articles reporting this. And Sierra says on their own corporate info page that they have a partnership with Valve, they don't own it. So don't sweat it yet, Half-Life 2 could still be released for Linux.
Guess there's advantages to dancing with the devil, more games!
This could be the spark of some real creativity as a slew of ideas gets to be tried.
A game franchise is only a franchise for so long. We need new franchises. There is 50Mu PS2's out there vs 8.3Mu for Xbox.
This means that new idea can make money with a low penetration PS2, something that is not possible for Xbox. Say, 1% equates to half a million titles sold for the Sony camp or 80K for MS. Where would you put your bet?
Help fight continental drift.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Hmm, I can't decide, is this trolling or flamebait?
"Hey, It looks like you're trying to rush the Terran Base! Would you like help with that?"
Considering Vivendi (being the owner of Blizzard) is suing the bnetd.org folks releasing their own open source reversed engineered replacement for battle.net (Blizzard's) servers, I think Vivendi and Microsoft ought to see eye to eye on most issues! I've been boycotting Blizzard for over a year now.
Personally I think it would be a disaster if MS would buy Vivendi games, because then the chances of ever getting more linux games are suddenly ZERO.
Now, wouldn't it be funny though if MS managers were reading slashdot and would think "Hey, they're all thinking it's bad if we buy Vivendi games, GO let's do it!"
Vivendi does not own Valve or Half-life. Valve bought the Half-life IP from Sierra when Sierra was undergoing a management change.
Half-life 2 will probably not be published by Sierra. Microsoft is much more likely. (I guess that will be a moot point if they buy Vivendi though.)
See subject.
Viewsonic said, "Why would this be bad? Vivendi make **PC** games.Not console games! Both mediums are entirely different. Trying to mix the two together would be a horrible mistake. I know Microsoft needs games, but come on, who the heck wants to play games that were designed for PCs?"
Mircosoft has done a really good job ignoring consumers and doing what they feel will be the best for their market share. While no one wants to play computer games for PCs, if Microsoft felt they could increase XBOX sales by releasing exlusives (which they probably could) do you honestly think they wouldn't do it?
What's to stop them from releasing a "XBOX Commander" (like their failed PC RTS controller) and releasing Starcraft II as an XBOX exclusive? If they buy the company that makes the game, then nothing. They could even release a RTS game for the XBOX and just have crippled controls using the XBOX controller.
"They're treating it like all games PC games are couch potato games, which they most certainly are NOT."
That's the whole point. Personaly, I think console first person shooters are a crime against nature. Sniping with a controller? HA! Give me a mouse and a keyboard any day. (I know Microsoft is not the only one releasing FPS games on consoles.) The point is companies are ignorring the difference in the advantages of keyboard/mouse vs. controller, and the ability to 'fun-ly' play Diablo II on computer compared to Legend of Zelda on a console.
Personally, I don't want to see the two cross over. I hope to Jebus this buyout won't happen, partially because I hate to see anything that gives Microsoft an advantage, but more because I think it will result in poor games. When you try to make a PC game for a console or a console game for a PC, the gamer usually ends up with the short end of the stick.
-Trillian
There have been mac versions of all three for a long time now.
Isn't it funny how everyone has their own fears..
Non-slashdotters started stock piling for Y2K and hoarding cash in their matresses.
We hear Microsoft is going to be buying someone else out and we start running and cuddling with our PSII's and linux kernels =)
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
Like some mad garden of human flesh devouring plants from Little Shop Of Horrors, the M$ tentacles extend a little further... one day if the M$ Op3r4t1ng Syst3m ever dies, M$ will still be around, virtually everywhere!
Sing it with me, "Little shop! Little Shop of Horrors!"
We can't have Diablo III running under Winex now, can we?
Buy 'em out, boys! (cue maniacal laughter)
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
If you really think that the reason most people run Windows is because of game support, you are an idiot.
If this is true then only a few people know about it. I work at Microsoft Game Studios and I haven't heard a thing. We just recently did some staffing changes in managment in order to manage Rare. We would have to do another huge re-org in order to absorb Vivendi. I've heard nothing along those lines. If we bought Vivendi then my team would have to double in size and haven't been told to do that.
Obviously Sony (and to some extent Nintendo) rely on 3rd party games to push their consoles. Sont historically have not had a good 1st party line up. Nintendo have been the other way around.
If this sale is true, then Sony will be the biggest loser.
Think about this theory. In the PC industry, Microsoft became a monopoly by buying software companies (DOS, Powerpoint, Visio) and releasing it under the Microsoft brand. Thereby stopping all support for other companies like Apple.
The same thing is starting to happen in the games industry. Microsoft is buying the games companies and releasing it under the Microsoft name thereby stopping all support for the Playstation.
Like I said before the playstation has the most to lose from this. To combat this, Sony could buy Take2 (wise but expensive move) or put more focus on their 1st party titles (nintendo-like). I don't want Microsoft to dominate another industry (gaming) by leveraging it with another (PC industries money), but it will eventually happen. Anti-trust alert?
I'm looking forward to 3d big screen warcraft for the xbox . That will rock . I love blizzard games . Thats microsoft for ya . If they can't be the best they just buy the best and thats that .
maybe micros~1 will get Valve off their ass and make Half-Life 2 :P
Sure the X-Box is only good for running games. MS Windows is the same way.
But having M$ say "All your games are belong to us now" would really frost my Wheaties.
"Giving money and power to governments is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke
Doesn't Microsoft still produce the MS Office suite for Mac? And IE/OE? And a load of other products?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
"While this would doubtlessly be a great boon to Xbox's library, it could be a shock to other consoles as titles which were originally planned for a diverse release become Xbox exclusives."
Why not? They did it to Bungie. Remember why Halo was going to be a multi-platform release?
Triv
I wouldn't go so far as to say they wouldn't even release SC 2. It would make millions of $$$$ and It's not like MS to pass up money. It will just be a real shitty version of what it could be.
You never know though, I was extremely dissapointed with Warcraft 3. Maybe MS will invest money in blizzard to let them make SC2 everything War3 butchered.
Why stop at just one?
Hey, Heretic wasn't a bad game...
For those of you who are speculating about Nintendo being bought out--
The Xbox is tanking in Japan. This is because Japanese are loyal to their own companies. Do you think for a moment a Japanese based company would sell out to American interests?
If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
If you can't beat 'em . . . BUY 'EM!
I haven't lost my mind!
It is backed up on disk...somewhere...
Did we ever get back word on the other rumored MS acquisitions including:
2 16 &mode=thread&tid=109
3 23 2&mode=thread&tid=109
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/12/073
Borland
and
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/23/122
Macromedia?
Next thing you know, MS will be buying the U.S. government or something.
I got another link for you to make.. how about a link to anything mentioning that turbine is developing middle earth online.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
I work at Rare. What's your name?
for confining ANY game to just one platform. I'd love to play Metroid Prime but I am NOT buying a gamecube for it, I would PAY $$'s for a PC version, but alas they do not want my money. Halo is another that I won't be spending money on, any number of racing titles, what happened to cross platform standards ? Any game publisher MORONIC enough to limit the audience for their product to one platform deserves just what they get.. Let's face it, I am an avid gamer with a budget of about 200$ monthly, and I CAN'T FIND A GAME WORTH BUYING.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I'd tell you but your name is Anonymous Coward.
MS should terrify MS. The XBox is rapidly starting to evolve into the long awaited "computing appliance" and it doesn't run windows (tho it can run linux).
;)
Sorry, it had to be said.
"Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
*Sony or Nintendo buy game developer, make all its products exclusive to their respective console*
Slashdot Crowd: "Oh, bummer. Anyway....."
*Microsoft buys game developer. Makes all of its content exclusive to the Xbox*
Slashdot Crowd: "OMG! Evil conspiracy! Even though Sony and Nintendo have bought out multitudes of companies and made countless games exclusive (which is what makes a console survive in the first place) the very fabric of morality must be dissolving as we speak!"
Microsoft is only following the example set by their predecessors. Bitching at them more than you would bitch about another company doing the same thing is hypocritical and it severely weakens your argument.
It really, really sucks when a game you desperately want to play is only coming to a console you do not have. That is, however, the very nature of the business and exlcusive content is what makes or breaks a console.
I don't like business monoplies, I don't like to think that one company is attempting to control everything, but in this case I'm not worried.
Why?
There are two, very well-established and very skilled competitors who are trying to do the same thing. (though, Nintendo isn't so fierce). They are both using the same tactics, and they are both surviviing. I feel the pressure has made the industry better. There is now so much being put into getting the best hardware and the best games out there that the quality of the hardware/software lineup we are seeing now and will see in the future will be based on the struggle to not be left behind. A strong aversion to resting on one's laurels will pervade the console gaming industry.
So, when people talk about Microsoft being a big, bad guy in the console gaming world, I just chuckle, knowing that the next Sony and Nintendo consoles will be that much better than they would be otherwise. The two companies have no choice.
I for one, am glad the Xbox is here.
PS2 and GameCube fans should be, too.
Except when that game you wanted is picked up by a competing console. Even then, just grin and bear it. Your day will come....and then it will come again, and again and again.
Things in the console world are better than they've ever been.
You just have to open your eyes.
Motification? motification? ?????
Well, at least Bungie had the sense to give the Myth franchise to Take2. Otherwise, it'd been Highly Odd that I'd have had a copy of Bungie-Microsoft's Myth II for Linux. I mean, I got my copy wayyy after Bungie was assimilated and LokiGames fell... =)
Hrrm, have to start playing Myth II and III again. Warcraft III sort of pales compared to them.
but I am still not going to buy an Xbox. For that matter I won't get a CE Pda, cell phone either.
Sure, it's childish, but I really don't care. It is not about how good the machine is, it is about principle.
Anyone that lets *one* company be the source for a large number of things in their life is a fool plain and simple.
Why do you think business likes more than one source? It's so that source does not screw them over when things get tough. That is what happens to us when we are stupid enough to limit our choices.
This applies to everyone, like it or not.
Someday in the future, you might use your MS PC to send e-mail through your MS ISP that contains a picture encoded with your MS codec to your friend who better be using a MS capable machine in order to see anything you wrote or produced.
Later that day you are interested in their thoughts, so you call on your MS phone on your way to work, where you use more MS products and services. You wind down at the end of the day with a game or two, maybe some pay per view media with your MS entertainment console.
Your bank is intergrated with your MS computer so the fat MS bill comes out at just the right time each month.
Now lets say most of us do this. Who is in control of our lives and choices? What incentive would MS have to act in our best interests?
Exactly none.
That's why I will not ever buy an X-box...
Blogging because I can...
It seems like a logical move for MS. I would never buy an X-Box though because they are old tech. My PC is old but is still higher spec than the x-box. I prefer the games on my pc too. They have higher resolution and more options etc. It worries me to see MS in a postion where it could afford to make titles for x-box only platform etc. There will always be a pc market i think, but it's annoying that MS could take such a big slice of the cake and end up giving preference to its own hardware over others. Never thought MS was scary; Now i do! :-(
bye bye Tribes2 for Linux...
Double in size? So, where do I send my resume? (if the rumor is true of course).
C'mon, man, buying Vivendi isn't going to give your 'team' twice as many toilets to clean, Mr. Janitor.
;)
I'm gonna take this one time to bitch about how my identical news submission on this topic was rejected hours ago >...
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
I'll bet some people would really like to do it too
Bungie also used to make **PC** games...
They're gonna buy them...
:)~
They're not gonny buy them...
They're gonna buy them...
They're not gonny buy them...
Sheesh, it is like this Microsoft rumor is on a Bungie cord.
Oh, wait.....
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
another blow to the videogame industry from a greedy man who consider himself beyond ANY law...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Brand loyalty is still very much a factor in the minds of people who have, for thirty years, watched Nintendo go from being an infant struggling company to a leader in the game console market.
Quite a few people treat their consoles the same way other people stand behind their sports teams. The same way Apple has it's loyalists and Linux has it's advocates, Nintendo can continue to survive by catering to it's diehard following as long as it stays true to what the company represents to those fans (assuming they don't do anything immensely stupid).
That all aside, it's true that Nintendo isn't the leader in the States, but sales are still strong! If you can put the US market share aside, and look at operations over in Japan, one can quickly see by searching any of the major game news sites that the GameCube is kicking major booty, taking second and third place in sales early november! The proofs in the pudding.
'nough said.
What do you get when you cross a mountain-climber with a mosquito? Nothing! You can't cross a scaler with a vector.
OK... Follow me here
First: Microsoft is losing money on the X-Box hardware. Their whole business plan was to recoup losses on licensing fees from GAME DEVELOPERS.
Now: Microsoft buys a game developing company to soley make titles for their X-Box, Although they may recoup some losses by getting the whole proceeds from the purchase of the game, its simply going to be an internal money transfer, and not necessarily gaining them any money.
We all know Microsoft is out to get all the money it can. I just don't see how this is necessarily going imporve their X-Box Economic outlook.
AND, If they only sell the titles for X-Box thereby forcing others to by the X-Box they'll be ultimately losing more money on those X-Box sales...
Does this make sense?
This is just sig!
Unless you're lying... which I think M$ does best.
please, not Battle.NET!? =\
A more reliable rumor now circulating among game mags and their informers is that Half Life 2 is actually coming quite soon. The nature of the project has changed a bit, though.....
Apparently the President of Valve has spent A LOT of time in Redmond.
*coughXboxExclusiveTitle*cough*
If the intent of "Xbox Exclusive" remains "It will come out somewhere else later on, almost always the PC" I will have no problem with this. The PC community is needed for modding. The Xbox can be where people go to play the game, and its mods with a performance guarantee.
xbox runs a stripped down version of win32
Sega's already in bed with Microsoft. They have been since the Saturn.
As for 'experts and leaders', Sega fell a long time ago. Let's rack up their total points scored, shall we?
Four consoles that failed, due to little or no advertising.
A terrible failed foray into the world of online gaming. (Sega did it first, as usual. However, they did it wrong, as usual.)
The most cheat-filled game since Diablo, with less stability than a '95 box connected to the net without a firewall: Phantasy Star Online. (It's the game that stole the phrase 'BSoD' from Microsoft!)
Capcom's a leader. Though I despise Square's games, they're certainly a leader. Konami's still going strong. I haven't heard much at all about Enix lately.
Square is Sony's whore, after ditching Nintendo's bed for more shiny bling bling. Microsoft arguably might have the capital to win Square over (which would mean millions of drooling Final Fantasy sheep), but I doubt Gates would waste that much money on a single gaming studio. Insert stuff about putting too many eggs in one basket.
Capcom and Konami, I think, are far too wise to be restricted to one console. They've been around for ages, and know the joys of console independence.
Enix, however, could be a good choice. In the past, Enix released some damned fine games.
Microsoft should snag studios like Enix, but they should concentrate more on smaller studios that would be able to produce high quality games. See the indie developer thread awhile ago - if they could get a gaming house that'd sell games for $25-30 as opposed to the standard $60+, it'd be a good thing(tm) for them.
The big names in gaming won't stoop that low. 'Indie' console developers would be able to.
The problem is, there's a distinct lack of indie console developers. If Microsoft could somehow change that in regards to the X-box, they'd lead Sony to the slaughterhouse.
There's a large segment of the gaming population that consists of adults with a clue as to how the general idea of money works. When presented with an expensive console with expensive games, or an expensive console with cheap (as in cost) games, guess which one they'd choose?
The Vivendi gamed divison includes Universal Interactive, Sierra, and Dynamix, and Blizzard. MS NEEDS to buy these divisions to show more support for its XB console. Rockstar slipped through MS's fingers, and this should NOT be allowed to happen again. Purchasing these companies would not only improve MS's PC content, but would provide great new, EXCLUSIVE content for the XB console. Crash Bandicoot could become an XB exclusive. Tribes for the PS2 could be cancelled and ported over for XB Live. Sierra's SWAT series could be put on XB as an alternative to the Red Storm games based on Tom Clancy materials. It would also be a major boon to have Warcraft and Diablo exclusive to PC and XB, and to have the World of Warcraft for XB Live. This is a chance to own some of the world's top studios and licenses, and should not be passed up. MS needs to take this opportunity, along with others that may arise, to put the hurt on Sony and Nintendo. Imagine if Sony purchased the Vivendi games division instead...would you really want the PS2 or PS3 to have an exclusive on World of Warcraft, regain their exclusive on Crash Bandicoot, and own the worlds of Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft, Tribes, SWAT, and all the other titles of these companies? Perhaps even Blizzard and Sierra would be diverted primarily to console development, further hurting MS's power in the home PC arena. Buying Vivendi's games division is in the best interests of MS and XB owners around the world, to say nothing of PC gamers. Do it, MS...it's the smart move to make.
I've been hearing this *rumor* for months? Could it be that it is actually true after all? If this does happen, I wonder what will happen for multi-platform projects like Ghost?
How would Warcraft even work on a typical console controller?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Not all game companies want to be bought
They may not have a choice. A company that's significantly larger than Nintendo can accumulate Nintendo stock little by little and then boom, hostile takeover.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The rank and file grunts at Square and Enix knew nothing of the merger before it was announced so I doubt a grunt like you would have knowledge of anything either.
The Xbox ... doesn't run windows (tho it can run linux).
Wasn't there a Slashdot story some time ago about Windows booting under Plex86 under Linux on an Xbox console?
Will I retire or break 10K?
MS bought Bungie software. A mac game shop for a long time. Heck HALO was even demoed by Steve Jobs. The MS buys it and Bungie says, oh yeah, we'll still release Halo for the PC and Mac. MS put a stop that real quick.
I guess when you have billions in the bank and can't develop your own titles you buy the talent..
sigh....
Square is Sony's whore, after ditching Nintendo's bed for more shiny bling bling.
No. Square ditched Nintendo when Square found out that the Nintendo 64 console's program storage device (cartridges based on masked semiconductors) would be limited to 8 megabytes initially and would never top 64 megabytes over the life of the system. On the other hand, Sony's program storage device (Compact Disc Read Only Memory) held 640 megabytes.
Will I retire or break 10K?
He just scored to pass Wilt Chamberlain on the NBA all time scoring list.
Road Rage II - Taxi Driver. Where do you want to go today?
MS has already ruined one groundbreaking game (Halo), lets see how many more companies they can ruin, eh?
Xbox is also selling very poorly in Europe. Nintendo outsells the Xbox there, and of course the PS2 outsells them both combined by a factor of 2. As you said, Nintendo is not going away. They turn a profit.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Boy i can't wait until bill gates next birthday when the boys and microsoft get him promoted to saint.
For The Best Jazz/Hip-hop fusion > COlD DUCK
I'm sure everyone here has seen how much revenue
the gaming industry boasts. It's phenomenal! If MS would
invest so much of its coffers into the X-Box even if it loses
money, then it stands to reason that they would absorb whatever
talent they could to grapple a hold in the market. Common
practice that we have seen over the years.
I'm not pro-MS and I'm not anti-MS but I do develop an opinion
while observing so many business purchases of MS over the
past few years. If they cannot beat the competition, they buy the
competition and brand it. It's not innovation they are offering
me, it's their ability to buy out competition and then sell it
to me again.
There was a URL posted several months back but I
cannot seem to find it. It listed several companies/corporations
and the subsidiaries they owned. Anyone mind posting
if they recall it?
My dad owns Blizzard AND Microsoft, and he says that they're coming out with Warstarcraft of Empires 5000. It'll be the best game, EVER.
Read The Wealth of Nations and get a bit better understanding of capitalism. In this particular instance, Microsoft isn't being any more evil than most other large corporations. So get to the back of the bus and sit down!
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Many people like pepperoni pizza while there are those that don't. Isn't opinion and choice great? Yet wouldn't we all be talking about an entirely different type of "choice" or "opinion" if say people began to argue that Pizza was in fact an African or perhaps Japanese dish? I'm not talking about any facts about history books having some odd mention of a "Saharan Deep Dish" or "Fuji Stuffed Crust." No, I am talking about people just mutilating the whole idea of catagorization and by definition that of communication as well.
So, with that I just want to ask: "WHY DO THESE "REVIEWERS" KEEP REFERING TO GAMES LIKE FINAL FANTASY AS ROLE PLAYING GAMES" They are not and this has nothing to do with the actual worth of the game. No, this has in fact everything to do with professionalism and common curtesy. A buyer (or someone viewing web pages) should be able to look up "RPG" and expect the kind of game that he/she wants in order to then read the review, look at the features, etc and make his/her decision based on that. What should not happen is for them to not be able to trust that Game X is in fact a action and/or adventure game set in a fantastical setting (elves, dragons and magic most often) while Game Y over here is independent of its actual setting but is a dynamic, free flowing game that forces the player to instead of just following the dotted lines and being a mere observer/watcher must actually make the game unfold. Story and Plot do not a RPG make, but they are important to the underlying backdrop. (Gary Gygax once said that it is actually the players that should create the story, not instead be bumped around and blatantly (read: obviously) steered within the stories very linear bounds)
I have heard on countless occasions a very serious (but admittingly often inflamatory) statement that RPG is defined as any game where you play a role of a character and control them. Well, that would therefore mean that Mario Bros is a dedicated RPG, and since it also has story and plot as is the second most often heard definition, then it must be the trend setter of RPG's.
I have enjoyed many of the Final Fantasy games, even some of the recent ones to a degree. Yet I can no more approve allowing the continued bastardization of a categorization system for these games then I could if suddenly it became hip and cool to call Trucks and Van's "compact cars." That only serves to confuse people.
However I will add this... I believe when these foppish reviewers (and any other people who add and organize content on a "professional" web site) call games such as these "RPG" then I begin to question their reasoning and pattern recognition skills... both of which are rather important in coming up with objective reviews and organizing their thoughts in a cohesive enough manner to make it clear to readers what exactly is unique about a game and what things make it bad, good or just average. Given their inability to see the difference between Role Playing Games and Action/Adventure games (or "Interactive Story" perhaps) then I can more put faith into their judgement of games at large than I could based on the opinion of some net straggler I see write, "Yeah, that game was the bomb" or "that game suxors."
Please, how many other games to you think the EA sports and Sim titles are able to fund? Without them, many of their other games wouldn't even see the light of day.
Nintendo told them to go f*ck themselves because they didn't want any of it, and were interested in making quality games themselves. So MicroSoft decided to design the XBox.
But the info here is really just a rumor. Check out Yahoo News. It's on there. But the news is from Total Video Games UK and Slashdot.
That the most poplular game ever, Counter-Strike, could become Windows only!!
oh, wait.....
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
Wow! I guess this is confirmation of MS employees hiding their links when promoting MS products on /.
3 92 419
;p
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=41527&cid=4
Maybe you should have mentioned that you're a MS employee there in that 'impartial' comment
I always thought the antitrush remedy should have been to restricted MS from buying into technology companies which would have instead forced them to start from scratch and do what they claim they are best at anyways and that is to innovate. They use their monopolistic hoard to buy up the competition and move into new technology areas that they would have a more difficult time if they had to start from scratch - and oh no - compete!
Case in point: When they completely misjudged the growth of the Internet (talk about vision!) they quickly bought a browser by buying spyglass. Had they had to start from scratch they would have been months behind and the game may have played out differently. Same is true with hotmail, powerpoint, SQL server, Visio, etc.
It's not like it's a hostile take-over or anything. Vivendi's trying to unload the division. EA, Microsoft and Sony have been contending to try and buy it up.
I suppose in typical slashdot fashion, it's be better of Sony bought it all up.
SDL is the cross-platform answer to DirectX, and its only serious competition. Blizzard employs Sam Latinga, who originally developed SDL and whose fulltime job is to continue to develop it. I find it hard to believe that Microsoft will allow Blizzard to continue to develop SDL by employing Sam, unless they are subjected to a serious amount of scrutiny about it. It is obviously in Blizzard's interest as a game company to support SDL, but that will certainly change if Microsoft controls them, and given that Microsoft has understandably not shown the slightest fear of trustbusters lately, I expect them to act fairly promptly to rid themselves of this little thorn.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
in my opinion, Microsoft is bleeding and losing money on just about anything, except Office and server licenses.
In my opinion, nothing good has ever happened to companies they bought, so don't despair, the free spirit of creativity will soon be crushed by the suits.
Get your ear to the ground rook..rook...rookie! I can tell you're new to corporate America.
Personally I think that X-box specific games are a great thing!
Nothing sucks more than seeing some game developed that suffers from the crutch of having to accomodate all these damn down level systems.
i mean, when I see that the game is compatible with the ps2 I automatically assume that, yes, the xbox version will have fresher paint; but the framing is going to be weak.
Bash M$ all you want, but Halo is a great game. It wasn't "ruined" by Microsoft, unless your definition of ruined means "You can't have it unless you give money to Microsoft".
Sure, MS bought bungie and now Halo is XBox only. So what? You won't see any Mario Bros. games come out for the PC or Mac soon, and Square won't make a PC version of FF9 or FF10 the way they did with FF7 and FF8. What MS did with Halo isn't different from any of the other "Exclusive to " titles.
The amusing thing about it is that PC's running Windows are the closest thing we have to a "universal gaming platform" just because of the M$ near-monopoly.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
A company having a monopoly in one industry does not make it a monopoly in ALL industries.
You people are freaks. Any mention of Microsoft brings some kind of "...yep, it's a monopoly.." post faster than my dog can find the raw chicken at the bottom of the trash.
Out of curiosity, do you even have the foggiest idea what Microsoft did that was against the law?
A modern day witchhunt.
"...it relates to Microsoft using money obtained from one monopoly and using it to crush competition in another which is illegal under the sherman anti trust act..."
I think you should attend a different law school. This one obviously isn't working for you...
A modern day witchhunt.
Dark ages are upon us the Bill Gates (666) will use his money to buy up all competition and also buy the goverment.
.Not, Windoze and now XBOX will have full monopoly.
Oh hold on... they already have Bush and US Goverment in their pocket.
So if you cant beat em then buy em So the MS Evil Empire is thrusting along.
Bill Gates the GREAT SATAN is smiling as we moron's suffer in his wrath.
Oh, so we're going to be able to buy it for the PC and Mac just like Halo then. Ummm, where can I buy Halo for the Mac or PC? It came out last summer, just like Microsoft promised it would, right...?
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
great, now we loose the ability to play games on cross platform. I love windows and all (yak here) but now all the mac and linux guys have no hope of any games ever going cross over again. gotta love the lack of action as microsoft buys out more and more while the government supposedly just told them to stop breaking every law that isnt actively being inforced.
if this is not just a wee rumour, where is the wee american government?
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
That was an incredible 2-part series on the History Channel. And, yes--it would be wonderful if we had him today. Oh,well.
1000 SlashDot sigs
and don't waste any mod points on this post!
Cheers
basically it bill gates won't stop until every nook and cranny is owned by M$, everything that people do anything digital it has to me M$, your money should go to M$ for everything electronic/digital/software, there should be no competition because M$ considers it bad for their business.
and guess what? people are ACTUALLY supporting them. Yay! Go M$! Resistance is futile!
And this will go on even after that bastards demise, most probably his children will continue to strangle the world.
Assuming the deal is legit, I doubt MS will limit titles to XBox. Way more people own PCs. Although restricting a game to a certain platform will limit its appeal and hurt sales, I can see MS restricting titles to PC and XBox. This makes a good business strategy as MS can gradually wean PC gamers onto the XBox without alienating them at the start.
"Ack. Yech. Barf. Snort." - Bill the Cat
>Why would this be bad? Vivendi make **PC** games.
>Not console games!
Well, Blizzard is working on that game called Starcraft: Ghost. It is for console only, not PC.
He's not an idiot. He's just a kid. He hasn't yet realized that his motivations for doing something are not necessarily everyone else's motivations.
He'll take care of that ;-)
More seriously, *if* this deals succed, it could be a hard blow to mac gamers... I know the warcraft serie is pretty popular among mac users, and Blizzard is known for being pro-mac (the W3 cd is a hybrid (it runs on both mac & PC)). Having one of the last company to release a major game simultaneously on mac and PC bought by Microsoft would be bad indeed =/
What do you know about World Politic? Find out in this quiz
Look elsewhere. See what's happening with Apple, Linux, BSD, QNX, Sun, IBM, and so on. Or check what's going on abroad.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Halo wasn't ruined because it was exclusive, it was ruined because it wasn't even close as good as it's original ideas are. It's just not a great game. All hype, unfortunately.
Halo was originally intended to be a dynamic squad based FPS, very similar to the multiplayer mode of CandC Renegade. This was a very exciting idea..battling in a persistant world where your success or failure would affect a battle at large. Instead, it because a one-man army FPS. Ho-Hum. The Multiplayer mode is fun, but it lacks Bots, which severely limits it.
Considering the product called warcraft III and the fact that was the last straw (game not running without a cd in the drive, game not working on several boxes, registered account not working on bnet server, the bnet server limitations itself) I could really care less what microsoft does with these companies, they will never see a dollar from me ever again.
Love Music? Got a Band? Are you a Label? http://garageradio.com
Has anybody considered that Microsoft wants to gain more from this then just exclusive rights on Xbox games? Although Xbox seems to be the predominant reason.
As Linux becomes more mainstream, an important selling point should be the ability to run games comparable to games on windows. With Microsoft owning the rights to all of these games, the possibility of them being ported to Linux seems nonexistent.
William Gates III = Diablo III
Of course MS is out to make money. But guess what they only make money on Office and Windows (with about 75-85 % profit margin.). They loose much money on everything else MSN/XBox/Other software. Look at there breakdown in there financial statements.
They're also a convicted monopolist. So buying a software company and killing off other platforms is different for them. Also you have to scratch your head when they buy a mainly MAC software development company to make Xbox software. It doesn't make a lot of sense, especially since XBox is supposed to be easy for PC software maker to program for. What could be there motive?
And guess what, Best Buy, EB, Babbages all compete with each other so there markup doesn't approach the 75%-85% that MS can get. MS knows how to run a bussiness very agressively and seem to be doing quite well.
My main problem is with MS claims to be so "Inovative". Thats what they said during they're anti-trust trail "freedom to inovate". Buying another company is not innovative. Copying Nintendo/Sony is not innovative.
The accepted wisdom is that most console companies (Microsoft especially) don't make money from consoles, they make money from games. I don't understand how making a game exclusive for a console helps the overall profits of the company. Wouldn't Microsoft be better off buying a game company and making sure it produces games accross ALL consoles, thus make far more money on each title?
As far as I'm concerned, this should have happened a while ago.
I don't claim to be old school when it comes to the RTS games, but I played Warcraft II. Loved it. I own and paid for it, as well as two copies of StarCraft and Brood War (I switched to a Mac, and StarCraft is a necessity). When Warcraft III came out, I bought it. Paid more than my conscience was happy with, at like $60-$65 at Fry's the week it came out. Played some of it, but it was just boring. The graphics weren't pretty, it was choppy in some places (likely the fault of my aging hardware, can't blame them for that), but the characters were blocky. No matter how high or low I turned the graphics options, the characters were built ouf of polygons that were too big to be building characters. Oragami has more polygons.
I run a Microsoft free computer. Actually, I run three, but that's not my point. My Mac will never have Microsoft code on it. Media player? Nope, don't need it. Office? Ha! IE? There's the exception. MacOS updates (like 10.2 aka Jaguar) keep installing IE, and I delete it every time. I hate Microsoft with a passion. Not solely because of their heavy handedness with OEMs, nor because of their abuse of DrDOS and Netscape, nor because of their neglect for the Mac platform arguably helping cause the Age of Darkness before the Second Coming of Jobs, and not even because of their FUD tactics against open source (despite using BSD network code). All of those put together, with the fact that the XBox is a hideous piece of crap I feel like they're trying to force down my throat, cause me to hate Microsoft. I've seen so many TV commercials for the XBox since it came out, I can't keep track. I've seen zero for the Game Cube or the PS2 in months.
Now, if Microsoft had purchased Blizzard last year, I would not have wasted my >$60, or those hours of my time. Blizzard, you've sold the StarCraft franchise to the overpopulated first person shooter, you released a WarCraft III that's far uglier than StarCraft with lower restrictions on the number of units in play. As far as I'm concerned, you have a mortgage against your soul. Just sell it and be done.
The key to redemption is making StarCraft:FPS worthwhile and on at least PS2 and GC, making a StarCraft II that doesn't use silly 3d aspects of video cards intended for racing and FPSes, but uses higher resolution characters than the original with a good extension to the plotline. And turn down Microsoft's offers for purchase.
I don't call that talks. I call that being hit on.
This way, you can have the seemingly pathetic endless combing of acts 3 and 5 killing Mephisto and Pindleskin over and over again looking for equipment while at the same time your real body - complete with brain and eyeballs - is at a nightclub getting drunk and ogling chicks with whom you stand a greater chance of banging in the not too distant future than you do of getting that elusive Windforce to drop.
In the event you fail to score, there will evidently be a really good elite unique item waiting for you at home in your stash, which is nearly as good as hot geeky sex.
mmmm.. unique balrog skin.. *fap* *fap* *fap*..
I say good for you.
Fuck Microsoft. Fuck Bill G. Fuck Stevie Baldmerhairless. Fuck the Nazis. Fuck War. Just go Fuck.
Actually, FUCK YOU. If you have or do use Windows then you too are part of the fucking problem. Thanks for making my job a career mistake you fuck. I fucking hate administering Windows boxes. Fucker.
Hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars for Windows, Word & Excel stolen so far. People are so fucking blind. IT'S CRAP SOFTWARE ALREADY. Fuck this planet.
This has always been the way for Microsoft. They have virtually no technology that started in-house.
DOS? Nope - stolen. Windows? Nope - copied. Sql Server? Nope - purchased. Office? Nope - purchased.
At least X-Box isn't directly purchased, I suppose, but they obviously weren't the first ones to market there either.
I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
Pennywise (IT) returns to Maine to feed every 30 years . . . but oh yeah, he was killed (wasn't he?) in 1990 by the Loser's Club.
its not that i worry about the blizzard games on my console or that m$ could have all their games on their console. Its the fact that I could be playing ms blizzard games on my pc. the greatist fact of blizzard is that they make great games, and they care enough that they won't ever market a game that isn't ready yet...no matter what the demand. (just look at wcIII) MS on the other hand will take that and pump games that have even the slightest ideal to make money. which could mean WCIV - X in a matter of a year or two just to flood the market...that sucks!! My biggest beef is with MS and the way they gimped the Mechwarrior series. MechCommander II sucked...it seemed like it had no QA attached to it what so ever, they just pumped it out and hoped the name made the money back! The same will happen to the blizzard name and all those games that we enjoy so much. I get frustrated enough playing a great game on a crappy OS, but a crappy game on a crappy OS?? I'll make the complete move to Console and save my pc for development only for the consoles. - my $.002 -
- my $.02? - you can't have it...it's all I have!!
That's funny, my motivation for running Windows on my PC is game support, and I'm 30.
Murphy was an optimist.
Microsoft must die Sony, Nintendo strike now! Kill the Beast swiftly
Murphy was an optimist.
primary focus by any means but why ignore the other platforms. Damn I REALLY WANT to play that game, but I don't see anything else out there worth playing on a gamecube :(
If some other companies started producing XBOX games, M$ would shrivel and die. No, I see what you are saying but the whole monopoly concept of consoles irritates me intensely. I guess I will just molder away with my PC. My only voice is my $$$'s and I will continue to not spend them on RIAA members products and console games.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Most of your stupidity was a bit too low ball for me so I won't bother replying to it. Your charge of racism was interesting though. I wasn't actually referencing that particular era of American history although I can see how that could be inferred. Looking back to a long time ago, when I was a wee lad, the "bad" kids always sat in the back. They sat in the back of the classroom. They sat in the back of the bus. They sat in the back, wherever we went. This was normally so they could goof off, cause trouble, and not be good moral citizens who are pursuing knowledge. I had assumed that most people were familiar with this concept. I have no way of knowing the race of the person who I was replying to, so the racism charge doesn't really make sense. Of course, judging by your nonsense, you are not a person who is held down by sense. I apologize that you got confused and wish you better luck next time.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
scary is:
Windows Advanced Game Server
in this age of communication i'm just not getting through
I dont like Microsoft now. H-L 2, Warcraft 4, Starcraft 2, and more games that should be released.
Imagine how shocked I must be: I woke up this morning and found not one but two witty zingers from you in response to my post! Oh joyous day! I am very excited that we can continue a discussion of how you are right and I am wrong. To answer your question: "Yes." I hope that helps. Don't OR-link your sentences together if you want a more helpful answer. You're like those assholes that say, "Say, do you want to go to the mall and hang out and be assholes or no?" Obviously the answer is always going to be yes. One either wants to go to the mall or one doesn't. But I know what you intended to mean. Yes, I am capable of conducting a civil discussion. My belief is that you don't want a discussion though. You have a soapbox and you want to stand on it. My response, while rude, brought up the valid fact that you had twisted what I said to fit what you wanted to say. You did not reply to what I said but rather what you wanted me to say. That is not what a discussion should be. My question to you is the following; are you capable of conducting a civil discussion? My guess is that you're so set in your views that you would never want to actually discuss something and would much rather talk to people who agree with you and receive positive feedback from them. You need people to tell you how right you are. Enjoy that life!
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technolo gyNews&storyID=2106129
Here is the problem. Let's look at this statement: "I just posted a link and said 'Here's a counter-argument.'" This is, in fact, a lie. There was no argument being made. I was pointing to the Wealth of Nations as a book that explains some of the basic principles of capitalism. This was mainly used a pointer to the fact that companies buy other companies because of competition. Capital will point out the same fact. I did not say whether this was moral or immoral but you decided that by pointing to the Wealth of Nations, I was endorsing the book. That is how I knew you were liberal scum. [Note I never called you a socialist you fucking moron.] Only liberal scum would read a use of Wealth of Nations as an endorsement of the opinions in it. The Wealth of Nations is a factual account of capitalism with opinion mixed in. So is Capital. I could have cited either for my purposes. You decided to pervert the argument because you had a point to make.
And fuck you for your petty little first paragraph you fucking loser. I hope you get diarrhea.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
XBOX.com is down! Maybe they putting up some vinendi stuff up :)
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings:
(10) Sorry, but that's too useful.
(9) Dammit, little-endian systems *are* more consistent!
(8) I'm on the committee and I *still* don't know what the hell
#pragma is for.
(7) Well, it's an excellent idea, but it would make the compilers too
hard to write.
(6) Them bats is smart; they use radar.
(5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in
here?
(4) How many times do we have to tell you, "No prior art!"
(3) Ha, ha, I can't believe they're actually going to adopt this
sucker.
(2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth.
(1) Gee, I wish we hadn't backed down on 'noalias'.
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...