Top 20 Gaming Lows of 2004

An anonymous reader writes "Gamepro has posted a story about the gaming lows in 2004 -- a fair roundup of all the junk that's happened this past year. Those poor smugglers..."

Comments

Not all of them are lows

[plover]

From the article, here's #13:

13) Legislators Move to Restrict Sales of Mature Games--And Fail
Politicians raise a rhetorical maelstrom for the opulence of violence in video games, but ultimately leaves a barely discernable ripple in the industry. Targeting games such as Grand Theft Auto: Vice City and Manhunt, legislators from Florida and California sought to more strictly enforce sales of violent games to minors--some even suggested making it a third-degree felony for allowing minors to obtain a copy of an "M" rated game. The wealthy game industry beat out angry moms, the only change being some retailers showing a clearer indication of the ESRB's rating system.

That's not a low. There's no reason for legislation, or for having the ESRB and the retailers act as surrogate parents.

Parents should do their job -- raising a kid, teaching THEIR values, not Congress's, or some Million Mom Marchers. If that means they have to do extra work, and learn that Vice City is a piece of filth on their own, it's their job. Leave me and my kid alone.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Anonymous Coward]

Leave me and my kid alone.

Since you'll just buy the stuff for your kid, those rating don't affect you.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[jeffkjo1]

That's not a low. There's no reason for legislation, or for having the ESRB and the retailers act as surrogate parents.

The last time I went to walmart, I bought a video game that was rated M (One of those repacked Midway arcade series things... god knows why it was rated M, the whole screen consists of about 200 pixels.) Anyway, the Wal-Mart cashier carded me. I gave him a funny look and he said he had to make sure I was at least 18. Apparently Wal-Mart has decided that they are going to act as a surrogate parent to video game buyers.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Anonymous Coward]

His kids will just download an ISO image of the thing if he doesn't buy the CD anyway...

Re:Not all of them are lows

[bladesjester]

That's not that strange with Walmart. They try to perpetuate their "family friendly" reputation. They don't sell any music with the parental advisory on it (all the cds are the "clean" version). They also card like crazy on movies and games (I haven't looked 17 for quite a few years, and I still get carded).

I find the whole thing rather annoying. This is why I tend to shop elsewhere.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[autocracy]

I would say the attempt at legislation and kids trying to blame games was the low part. I doubt they're calling the failure of legislation a low...

Re:Not all of them are lows

[utlemming]

Humm...I find it painfully interesting that the legistlatures of states would try to enforce age restrictions on "M" rated games when fifteen year olds are freely walking into violent PG-13 and R rated movies. As it turns out the Gaming Industry was praised for the standards on how they rate video games, while the MPAA washes back and forth and allows some movies which should be R to be PG-13. At least with the Gaming Industry an M rating will be given with even the hint that it should be M rated, while the movie industry will tweak with a movie to take content out to sqeek it down to PG-13. So in my mind, I would like to see legislatures take on the MPAA and tighten the ratings before they get into games. Movies reach a larger audience than games do. If Government is going to get into legislating morals and games, then they should make it so minors can't get into R rated movies, rent them or buy them. I am tired of different standards being placed on different forms of media than others. The MPAA, RIAA and the Gaming Industry ought to get togther and develop a media neutral content rating system. That way a parent can reliably compare games to movies to music to print to whatever form the diffenet medias take. And if you compare M to the MPAA ratings, it turns out that M comes out to be the equivalent of a PG-13 rating. While Adults Only (AO) is closer to the mid-range R to NC-17.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[tdhillman]

I wholly agree that the government shouldn't be doing the parenting. HOWEVER, there are many other factors in play here. What about the time when you are your parenting are simply out of the picture? It happens, and unless you live on the moon there's little that you can do about the influence of societal acceptance of a violent gaming paradigm.

And indeed, there is societal accpetance. Every day, I have the thrill of watching Channel One news at school, and as such see a pretty fair amount of exactly what is being directed toward kids in the school- hopefully the most protected of atmospheres.

The number one advertiser on Channel One is the US government, shilling participation in the armed forces and drawing comparisons between "playing soldier" sand living a real life.

The one that troubles me though is the incessant ad for Tony Hawk's Pro Skater. In the ad, the characters spend a fair amount of time doing your basic garden variety vandalism. Slashing tires, tagging walls, etc. While the game doesn't seem violent in nature, it sure puts a premium on anti-social behavior. There's no way that you, the parent, know when the kids are seeing this maner of ad.

Now I'm not a prude- my kids Halo away on weekends, but I worry for those who do not take the time to put the needed effort into decent parenting. It begets the question of whether we should protect our kids from the parents who throw the kids to the fancy of the game designers.

The parents, already strapped for time, don't take the time to learn parenting skills. Who needs to pick up the slack then?

Re:Not all of them are lows

[techno-vampire]

Movies reach a larger audience than games do.

But in most cases, you only see the movie once. Games you see over and over for days, weeks or months on end. The effect is stronger, and lasts longer. That's not to say the movie ratings system may not need tweeking, but it does explain why the games people are sricter.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Darthmalt]

shoot wal-mart'll card you for buying rubber cement. Accrording to them you have to be 21 to buy it.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[OblvnDrgn]

That's not strange in general. Gamestop and EB both do that, more or less depending on who's working that day and how strict their district manager is. Granted that sometimes they'll just ask you how old you are instead of demanding to see ID, figuring kids under 18 won't know enough to say they're older. Or something.

The basic idea, far as I understand it anyway, is that it doesn't piss off the majority of the customers and it makes a few (say, some of the nearby parents) feel better about the store. It's all business.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[mboverload]

Need For Speed 2 was the biggest low fo the year.

You ALWAYS have a huge 4 inch logo for cingular on your screen and there are billboard ads everywhere. Fricken nightmare.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[MilenCent]

It was rated M because it contains two Mortal Kombat arcade titles, along with NARC. These were the games that kicked off this whole violence in games uproar -- wasn't it a Genesis copy of Mortal Kombat that Leiberman shook in the middle of Congress back in the 90's?

Re:Not all of them are lows

[bladesjester]

To give you an idea of what I mean, I don't generally get carded at bars, but I still get carded to buy movies and games at walmart.

After a while, it just becomes silly.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, they just want to be sure to follow the ratings system, or else what's the point of it? Or do you think minors should just be able to walk in and buy whatever they want?

Why does that make them a "surrogate parent?" Or is it just more reactive knee-jerk Slashdot wording?

Re:Not all of them are lows

[sqlrob]

They're acting less of a parent than they used to.

They originally stated that they were not going to carry M rated games *at all*

Then a little thing called GTA III came out... Money won over their ethics.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Queer Boy]

Personally, I don't really feel the need to give some minimum wage McJob employee my billing information just to buy a video game. All he has to do is remember my address and zip code and he already has my credit card number. Credit card numbers may not be printed on your receipt, but look when you sign the slip that prints out, it's on there.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[parliboy]

Good.

There's a reason that theatrical releases don't get as much parental grief as they could: they're perceived as making strides to police themselves. Video games have to give the same vibe, or we're going to have more legislation every year.

This isn't just about freedom, but about maturation on the industry. Despite the fact that's it's a multi-billion dollar business, it still has a stigma that should accompany something much smaller and seedier. Industry-enforced policing tells people that it really is an industry.

So if it means that a 12-year-old has to have daddy buy "Kill Mail Murder Destroy Deluxe 5" for him, it's a tradeoff I can accept.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Archimonde]

1997 called, they want their game back.

Thats' Need For Speed Underground 2.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[lachlan76]

I've never had EB do that over here in Australia, but this could all just be some American thing.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[nwbvt]

"That's not a low. There's no reason for legislation, or for having the ESRB and the retailers act as surrogate parents."

Since you seem to feel that a parent should have a right to keep their kids from buying certain games (or CDs or movies or whatever the medium of the day is), I'm curious as to how you expect them to go about that. Are parents supposed to keep their kids chained up so they can never go anywhere near a store that sells violent video games? Are they supposed to monitor and watch their kid's every move?

Carding kids who try to buy violent video games doesn't interfere with your parenting any more than carding kids who try to see violent movies. If you feel the game (or movie) is fine, you are free to buy it for them or accompany them when they buy it.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[grumbel]

### Parents should do their job -- raising a kid, teaching THEIR values

Yes, and thats EXACTLY why enforcing the ESRB ratings is a good thing. It gives parents the freedom to decide what their kids should play and what not without monitoring them 24/7.

If you don't enforce such things you don't give control in the hand of parents, but into the hands of video game manufactors and the marketing departments.

Remember, if the parents think their kid is ready for such games, they can always buy it for them.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[qoa]

Target checks too. On a side note, checking thier PC games clearance rack is a goldmine sometimes. Decent games for under 10 bucks (granted they aren't just released).

Re:Not all of them are lows

[el-spectre]

I had a cashier pull this about a year ago (I'm 28) and I refused. I was nice about it, but mentioned that there was no law against a minor buying it (a profane comedy dvd), nor did she have the legal authority to stop anyone from purchasing it.

Poor thing didn't know what hit her...

Re:Not all of them are lows

[DLR]

I suppose kids ought to be able to just walk in and buy Hustler and Marlboroughs too? Y'know kids get a lot of free time these days, especially during the summer. I'd rather have the retailer have to have some responsibility rather than just take anyone's money and turn a blind eye to the needs of the community.

And if you want your child to have that particular "piece of filth" then how much of a hardship is it for you to go down there with your child and get it with/for them?

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Inf0phreak]

Exactly. And if there's one thing that most certainly is not "underground" it's product placement.

I (thankfully) don't have the game, but I suspect it would make me barf after a few minutes.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[stanmann]

Of course she does, they have the legal authority to refuse service for any reason and beligerance definitely qualifies, and so does being under 18 and legally unable to purchase ANYTHING under US contract law. A minor can purchase and return anything other than consumables and return it for no reason at all as long as it is in ~original condition.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[d34thm0nk3y]

Hell, maybe this is a good thing. Maybe the fact that the industry is defining this sort of mature audience will in fact encourage more mature titles.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[Minna Kirai]

Of course she does, they have the legal authority to refuse service for any reason

Wrong. In the USA there is a list of things you can't discriminate on, such as race, sex, religion, and age. (The last bit is rarely enforced, but the law exists)

legally unable to purchase ANYTHING under US contract law.

That's part of an argument for why software EULAs are nonbinding, not that children can't buy software. Despite publishers' claims to the contrary, software is not licensed: it is sold.

Re:Not all of them are lows

[scot4875]

Ok, so the logo isn't as big as he said it is. Does that make it ok?

--Jeremy

Lame List

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

Doom 3 should be the #1 gaming low of the year. What a disappointment.

Re:Lame List

[Fallingcow]

The parent poster will probably get modded troll or flamebait, but he's right.

At first I thought that my expectations for it had just been too high, or that my tastes in gaming had begun to change... but now that HL2 is out, I can be sure that neither of these things were true, and Doom 3 was, in fact, just a crappy game. Ravenholm was one of my favorite parts of HL2, and that kind of atmosphere was what I expected throughout Doom 3. It didn't deliver.

HL2's Steam system being on this list while Doom's craptasticness is omitted is unjust.

Re:Lame List

[tomstdenis]

I'll third that motion. Definitely not worth the 60$ or so I spent on it.

If I wanted to be in dark room with monsters I'd just turn the lights out at a Bush war-time briefing. ba-dum-dum-ching!

Thanks, I'll be hear all night... all tommorow morning, afternoon and night, and well, the rest of 2k5.

Tom

Re:Lame List

[XopherMV]

it wasn't THAT bad. It gets above average scores consistently and I enjoyed it as well as many others. I mean when it first came out people were saying it was great, even those that finished it. Now everyone is calling it a disappointment. WTF

The graphics were good. However, the gameplay was about the same as a 2D scroller. The game constantly kept you on the same path, without giving you true freedom of movement. You basically had the choice to either move forward or backward.

Half-Life 2 had this problem as well, but it certainly wasn't as noticeable. Although there was a definite way to go in the game, Half-Life 2 maps were larger and more open than Doom 3. This gave more of the illusion of control.

What we need are more games like FarCry were the user can truely move anywhere they want to go.

Re:Lame List

[Col. Bloodnok]

Part of Doom 3's problem was that it had to meet some huge expectations. Doom 1 was *such* a ground breaking game, but Doom 3 failed to deliver the expected 'raising of the bar' in any of the areas that people were looking for: graphics (technically good, but not exactly stunning, considering the horsepower required), gameplay (pretty dull), characters (what characters?), weapons (fairly crap). level design (polished, but too samey and waay too dark).

I know when I'm playing a good FPS; I only get that 'I'm starting to get bored' feeling after the 3rd or 4th day (usually on the second go through). I played Doom 3 through once - I started again on 'hard' and I just lost interest half way through.

The other problem with the perception of Doom 3 is that the two decent FPSs which came before and after (FarCry and HL2) are just *way* better. If you took Doom 3 and sent it back in a time machine to 2002, perhaps it would have been that ground breaking smash-hit that people were expecting.

I'm certainly looking forward to games by Ravensoft et al. based on the Doom 3 engine.

Re:Lame List

[Fallingcow]

Agreed. I finished FarCry shortly before I got Doom 3, and played some Doom 1 a bit to get me in the mood for it...

Both FarCry and Doom 1 were more fun than Doom 3.

The engine might be good, though. Oddly enough, it didn't seem like the game showcased it very well, even though there were lots of claims that the game was just a marketing ploy to show off the engine. The textures were largely unvaried and boring, the lighting was not flattering, and there weren't any truly "wow" parts, where you walk around a corner and see the engine in its full glory in an impressive area. I'm hoping some later games will show us what it can really do.

Re:Lame List

[IoN_PuLse]

That's nice, I liked Doom3 a lot. I also do not think it's a crappy game.

Re:Lame List

[pilkul]

No, what does it matter how much freedom you have? I have the freedom to walk anywhere in my house and manipulate any object in real life but that doesn't make my house a fun playhouse. The trick in a good game design is not to maximize freedom, but to set clear and intuitive boundaries such that the player will never even be tempted to violate the rules of the game. Take Tetris: all you can do in the game is move and rotate blocks, but did you ever have the desire to do anything more? No, of course not. Lack of freedom is only annoying when e.g. a game provides buildings with doors that can't be opened.

Too many American developers waste their time making "realistic" games that provide "freedom" and yet are boring and unpolished because the developers couldn't cope with the resulting combinatorial explosion. The best solution is often to add more limitations rather than more freedom. Instead of making it possible to enter the buildings, just remove the doors.

Re:Lame List

[mcbridematt]

I personally think its the other way around. HL2 was too overhyped and to me at least, didn't show that much of an improvement over HL1. If you seriously expected a Ravenholm type atmosphere in Doom 3, you need a head check.

Re:Lame List

[Anonymous Coward]

I have the freedom to walk anywhere in my house and manipulate any object in real life but that doesn't make my house a fun playhouse.

You could probably make it fun if you had a chain saw, a rocket launcher and a plasma gun.

Re:Lame List

[Fallingcow]

Yeah, it has zombies and demons from hell... I definately shouldn't have expected it to be at least a little bit frightening and/or suspenseful *rolls eyes*

Re:Lame List

[antiMStroll]

Complete agreement. HL2 was a massive disappointment, ironically for the same reason I found Doom 3 to be less than the sum of its parts. Both games adhered to the 'one path to next objective' game structure that locks a player's options and defines boredom. There was more open game structure in a single level of FarCry, particularly that big island level, than all of HL2.

HL2 had nicer water though.

Re:Lame List

[Fallingcow]

More open levels are definately the way to go, and FarCry did that very well. I must've played the level where you first get the hang glider more than 30 times, just trying to see how many different ways I could do things.

Re:Lame List

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

No, what does it matter how much freedom you have? ... The trick in a good game design is not to maximize freedom, but to set clear and intuitive boundaries such that the player will never even be tempted to violate the rules of the game.

Ugh ... a console fanboy rears his ugly head.

What's great about wide open maps and "freedom" is that it allows you attack a problem several different ways rather than have the game mimic a linear amusement ride. In Far Cry, the maps are so wide and the AI so good that I can plan an attack a half dozen ways. Infact I enjoyed reading how others tackled a tough level on the related forums since their solutions often varyied, a refreshing change from the standard walkthrough.

Too many American developers waste their time making "realistic" games that provide "freedom" and yet are boring and unpolished because the developers couldn't cope with the resulting combinatorial explosion.

Yawn ... here comes the standard Japanese are better at games/animation/whatever than American and European creators.

Re:Lame List

[Deraj DeZine]

Doom 3 lived up to all of my expectations and provided exactly what I was expecting. Maybe you shouldn't get your hopes up so much in the future?

Re:Lame List

[pilkul]

Ugh ... a console fanboy rears his ugly head.

Whatever. I don't even own a console.

What's great about wide open maps and "freedom" is that it allows you attack a problem several different ways rather than have the game mimic a linear amusement ride.

This is a good property, but it doesn't have a whole lot to do with "wide open maps".

Yawn ... here comes the standard Japanese are better at games/animation/whatever than American and European creators.

I never said that. However, Japanese developers don't make this particular mistake.

Re:Lame List

[MP3Chuck]

HL2 didn't entirely live up to its hype either, though ... I remember when it was first shown in summer 2003. The combine soldiers kicked down a door that had a table jammed behind it, and they claimed that it wasn't scripted. When the game was leaked, it turns out it was scripted. When they demonstrated NPC's helping Gordon, they said that they "act independantly" and not just follow you blindly. I don't know about you, but I found myself bumping into them (and not being able to get around them) quite a bit.

I thoroughly enjoyed HL2, it's one of the best games I've ever played... but people seem to be forgetting the things Valve promised and didn't deliver on.

Re:Lame List

[macshit]

Lack of freedom is only annoying when e.g. a game provides buildings with doors that can't be opened.

Speak for yourself...

There more sucky and less sucky ways to force a player to stick to a linear path, but even in a very polished game, it's often pretty obvious what's being done, and yes, it can be annoying even when done "well."

Clearly it's impossible to give arbitrary amounts of freedom, but even a little goes a long way towards improving the experience; think of it as "sorta linear, but with a lot of fuzz aroung the edges", where the fuzz can be optional little side-quests or hidden things for the player to find, dealing naturally when players try to avoid restrictions (I'm thinking of the Metroid games here, where there was a clear order of things you should do, but extremely advanced players could sometimes skip ahead by using very tricky techniques to avoid "impossible" obsctacles).

In the end, I think many players (maybe not you) really like the feeling of freedom, so game developers have a lot of incentive to try more general techniques that avoid pre-computing stuff in favor of more realistic models. Maybe in the short term this can decrease the quality of games, but in the long term it could result in something extremely cool...

Re:Lame List

[FyRE666]

I'm sorry, but if you honestly believe the lighting and textures were bad, then you must have played it on a mid to low-end rig. In fact, the biggest problem D3 had/has are people moaning about its performance on their Athlon 1200 with GF3MX GPU and 256MB of system RAM. Yes, it doesn't look cutting edge when you have to turn off all the eye candy to play the damned thing!

That said, HL2 was a great game too, but in a different way - I loved Doom III's tense atmosphere and amazing (on my system at least) graphics and lighting. HL2, on the other hand had more variety, although it was impossibly tough in places (I became so bored trying to finish the prison section where you must set up 3 sentry guns and survive against an entire fucking army at close range that I just switched on the God mode).

Doom III *IS* a showcase for the engine though; I'm reallying looking forward to seeing it running Q4 and hopefully another Wolfenstein episode. Likewise, I'll be looking for games based on Valve's Source engine (I do hope they drop Steam though, it really, really sucks...)

Re:Lame List

[oliverthered]

The only good NPC is a dead one, reload, oh a combine, I got one.
I tried beating them but they don't take hits.

Re:Lame List

[JFitzsimmons]

On that note, did doomIII even have water?

Re:Lame List

[melikamp]

I do hope they drop Steam though, it really, really sucks.

IMHO, Steam will not be dropped. If you think about it, it is the only viable copy protection scheme out there, and the only one which can enable the production of big games like HalfLife 2 after (and if) the beast of copyright is subdued. Personally, I felt that Steam is very comfortable, because CD is not required to play the game. For a company that uses Steam-like technology to protect its assets, there is no longer a temptation to scan user's system for 3-rd party software, to install low-level drivers -- none of this stupidity; authentication seems to be enough.

We use the ubiquity of Internet to gain access to the information, while they use it to get paid for their work. That's a fair game I'm willing to play, and this means a lot, coming from an anti-copyright zealot like myself.

Re:Lame List

[Moofie]

"it is the only viable copy protection scheme out there"

If by "viable" you mean "keeps me from playing the game when I want to, even though I paid Valve directly for it", yeah, it's really viable.

It's also a huge pain in my ass.

"That's a fair game I'm willing to play,"

I'd be willing to play too, if I could ever not lose.

Re:Lame List

[Moofie]

Or maybe I should have pretty high expectations for an entertainment product I'm going to spend $50 on?

Re:Lame List

[sowdog81]

You shouldn't have expected much more then a maze of twisty little passages all a like. iD games are like that. You SHOULD have been excited about was the new engine which will be adopted by many developers thus raising the bar.

Re:Lame List

[oliverthered]

Boolocks, you can get a no-steam single palyer crack for HL2 and I run the crackola privacy version the I got from loki.

Re:Lame List

[CaptnMArk]

I am not much dissapointed with D3. Graphics are the best ever and the game is almost exactly like Doom. I'd hope for bigger hordes of enemies, but that problem was known before the release.

I'm more dissapointed with HL2 ending and with Steam requirement for single player (this will make me not buy HL3 or whatever sequel).

Re:Lame List

[FortranDragon]

L2, on the other hand had more variety, although it was impossibly tough in places (I became so bored trying to finish the prison section where you must set up 3 sentry guns and survive against an entire fucking army at close range that I just switched on the God mode).

Here's a tip to survive that spot without taking any damage:

Take out each sentry gun, turn it around, and then put it back in its storage slot. (You might want to make sure a sentry gun is in a slot on the outside of the little corridor.) Place yourself in the empty inner slot. Now the sentry guns will mow down the soldiers and can't be knocked over. If any soldiers do make into that little corridor you can kill them with the double-shot from the shotgun. If you stay back in your spot you may never see a soldier or take any damage.

Some of the areas in HL2 are tough if you try to go toe to toe with the enemy. If you thing defensively you can make it through quite easily.

Not that HL2 is perfect (or even the best game ever) I wish Valve had put a manual in the game (lamest collectors edition ever!). I never realized until recently that you can roll a grenade on the floor (right click). There's an area in the game where that would have been nice to know about the first time around.

Re:Lame List

[Ford Prefect]

There was more open game structure in a single level of FarCry, particularly that big island level, than all of HL2.

I played the demo of Far Cry a while ago (I'll get round to buying the full game once I've upgraded my PC), and while much of the game did feel pretty derivative, the multiple-paths thing was very impressive.

Hopefully it'll be the kick-start to other games adopting something similar - Far Cry came out too recently to really affect the developers of the latest batch of big-title FPS games, but with a bit of luck it'll act as a catalyst for future development. :-)

Re:Lame List

[FyRE666]

Ah, I might try that when I start it again... I did get in the habit of carrying a sentry gun about in the prison to save ammo. The part with the big bug thing in the prison washroom was simple with the sentry - just walk to the room where you'd jump over the fence and trigger the bug, then walk back and get the sentry gun, then as you walk back into the washroom the bug is sitting there on the other side of the fence! Just aim the sentry at it and wait a while until it's dead ;-)

I thought the manual was just missing from my box - only had a flimsy leaflet with no clue to the misson, or which keys I should use etc... Not that read the manuals anyway, of course...

Re:Lame List

[Deraj DeZine]

That's why I got it used for $30. Actually, I didn't, but my friend did and I play it on his machine.

Re:Lame List

[Moofie]

What does that have to do with anything?

Re:Lame List

[Minna Kirai]

I'm sorry, but if you honestly believe the lighting and textures were bad, then you must have played it on a mid to low-end rig.

So you're telling me that a faster videocard will actually expand the flashlight's field of view, or enable some kind of "photonic reflectance" effects to illuminate the other walls of the room?

Re:Lame List

[Minna Kirai]

For a company that uses Steam-like technology to protect its assets, there is no longer a temptation to scan user's system for 3-rd party software, to install low-level drivers

For all you know, Steam already does all of those things. And even if they don't yet, they can in the future, because Steam itself is self-updating and mandatory.

none of this stupidity; authentication seems to be enough.

Authentication has been done before (and better!) without Steam.

Re:Lame List

[Minna Kirai]

Both games adhered to the 'one path to next objective' game structure that locks a player's options and defines boredom.

Are you by any chance an "experienced gamer"? You may be facing the "critic's dilemma"... what you see as hackneyed and derivative appears new and exciting to the less-travelled members of the mass public (and that mass market is where big sales come from)

The "one path rule" is supported by customers who want to see the art content they've paid for, and don't want to wander around a lot to do it... that's like having to work, when they just want to sit back and have fun. The more parellel paths that exist, the shorter it takes to "finish" the game- and today's reviewers are careful to point out how many hours of play one can expect from every title.

Re:Lame List

[Minna Kirai]

You shouldn't have expected much more then a maze of twisty little passages all a like. iD games are like that.

If Doom3 was just the same old id-game with a prettier engine, that would've been fine. But it was far less fun than the previous Doom and Quake series, both because it was too dark, and the monster population was too sparse.

Re:Lame List

[Minna Kirai]

Doom 3 should be the #1 gaming low of the year.

But... Doom3 contributes to de-illumination, as 1000s of gamers were forced to quench their home-lights each night to have even a vague chance to discern monsters on the gloomy screen. So it supports astronomy, you should be happy!

Re:Lame List

[mink]

Just a hint if you ever play it again.
You can bring the 2 sentry guns from the 1st control room down to the jail and toss them in from above.
This gets you 5 guns for the trial. I also liked to run around holding one as they auto fire and target, saves ammo and acts as a enemy detector.
Another tactic that helps is grab some doors, desks, cabinets, barrels, anything not nailed down and completly jumble over the upper two entrances, then they have trouble shooting/grenading from above. Sadly if you block off the lower 2 (from the outside) magically your stuff vanishes (unless you keep it inside and away from the area the scripted event cleans up).

I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[Icarus1919]

I think it is a low, because while I'm not in favor of legislating morality, I think this will actually give video games a hand up. Rather than people saying "Oh how dare the video game companies make games such as this that children can play!" once this legislation is in place, no one will be able to blame the game companies anymore. It will become "How dare the parents of these children buy (insert game) for them and allow them to play it!" Which should have been that already, but isn't.

And when children blame their misdeeds on the video game, the parents will be blamed and not the industry.

Re:I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[Maleclypse]

I am afraid that no matter what legislation is in place people will always be looking to place blame on others. Specifically corporations that sell mainly to youth who are considered impressionable.

Re:I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[KneepadsOfAllure]

However, the problem with legislation is that

a) Legislation can alost always been too broadly interpreted or loopholes in the wording can have unintended consequences

and b) It's really NOT the place of the state to dictate what is and is not the appropriate way for a parent to raise his/her child. I'm sure that legislation would prevent kids from playing a lot of games that I think they shouldn't be playing, but that is not my choice or anyone else's choice to make. Only the parent should be making that choice.

Re:I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[sangreal66]

Noone is stopping parents from making that choice. All the proposed legislation does is prevent stores from selling adult rated (self-rated by the industry, btw) directly to children. Parents can buy their children whatever porn games they want to if they think that is the appropriate way to raise their children. The point is just to make sure parents know what their children are being exposed to. I'm not saying children shouldn't be allowed to play any adult games, I grew up on adult rated games like Police Quest (Yes, PQ was considered adult in those days), and I don't consider myself worse off.

Re:I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[Deraj DeZine]

Obviously. The point is that there won't be a logical connection between the game companies and children getting a hold of games with questionable content. Blaming someone who gave your kid a violent game versus blaming someone when you gave your kid the violent game yourself are completely arguments.

+5, Cynical

Re:I'm not entirely sure that's true...

[MonkeyCookie]

Actually, parents won't be taking responsibility if their children still get their hands on video games. They'll just call for stricter enforcement, stricter laws, and more crackdowns in general. Then nobody will be able to get their hands on them except the teenagers who download them off the Internet anyways.

Before there were video games, parents blamed other things. Earlier it was athiests, then communists, jazz, then rock and roll music. (Yes, Jazz used to be considered to be degrading moral-values and causing youngsters to behave in scandalous ways. Now many consider it to be old-people music)

How is this a low?

[Darthmalt]

"Nokia Admits Taco-Shaped Handheld Not Selling" whoopdeedoo the n gage hasnt done well since it was released.

every page had at least one thin that was politically motivated. "video games make kids fat" " Legislators Move to Restrict Sales of Mature Games--And Fail" "Video Games--The New Terrorist Device of Choice" etc. I think someone had an axe to grind

Re:How is this a low?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

"Nokia Admits Taco-Shaped Handheld Not Selling"

and you repost that on Slashdot? you're a troll magnet baby...

Re:How is this a low?

[Darthmalt]

"Nokia Admits Taco-Shaped Handheld Not Selling" and you repost that on Slashdot? you're a troll magnet baby...

hmmm now we know how nokia should have marketed the engage.

Re:How is this a low?

[MilenCent]

Yeah, but they were twenty different axes. I couldn't sense any overriding agenda here.

In fact, they said nary a word about Nintendo, and I rather expected them to be up there somewhere. They may even deserve a spot up there somewhere, for all their gaming quality, it's been a tough year for them in console sales.

Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[FinchWorld]

1-20) Placing an article over several pages, everybody knows scroll bars/wheels are useless. On the plus side they hit the nail on the head with EA at number 1

Re:Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[Stiletto]

Just send the article's author an email, with the following multiple documents attached:

Dear

NEXT->

John P. Author

NEXT->

You do realize

NEXT->

that most web browsers

NEXT->

have these things called

NEXT->

"scroll bars", don't you?

NEXT->

They let you put the entire

NEXT->

article on one page where it

NEXT->

is easier to read.

NEXT->

Please make use of these

NEXT->

"scroll bars" on your next

NEXT->

article. Thank you.

Re:Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[bob beta]

I hope you included a clickable ad banner, with a warm friendly 'Fuck You' graphic, at the top of each page of the email message.

Re:Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[lspd]

It's just a cheap way of getting 3x the ad revenue from a single article. The article here wasn't even that bad.

Video card reviews tend to be much worse. They make the charts unreadably small, slap 20 words of text with each chart and make the review 15 pages long with several hundred kb of advertising on each page.

Re:Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[arth1]

Make sure you send it in FONT SIZE=-2 too.

I already use large fonts on my system, but still had to boost the font size up to 150% before I could read a word. Ah. IDG. That explains it -- those guys "design" for what they have on their locked down in-house machines.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Top 10 Website lows of 2005

[Tackhead]

> You do realize
> NEXT->
> that most web browsers
> NEXT->
> have these things called
> NEXT->
> "scroll bars", don't you?

Hey, I know you! You're the guy from Tom's Hardware Guide!

What a load of shit this list is

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't even mention the GBA release of "That's So Raven", without a doubt the lowest point in gaming last year.

you know what i think

[Striker770S]

the lowest point in gaming happened when the 50th release of the same wargame genre which has even crappier gameplay than the predicessors that it tried to copy off of. And yes I am talking about shellshocked nam 67 or whatever the hell it was. Oh and dont forget about [insert random wwII refrence], man that game sucked compared to call of duty. All these should teach game producers to at least pass a test run with a retarded monkey before giving us the game, but every day a new war era game is released.

Re:you know what i think

[Thing 1]

And yes I am talking about shellshocked nam 67 or whatever the hell it was.

God DAMN what a horrible game that was! The three worst points: the view is "randomly third person" from behind, which made precise targeting impossible; it's not obvious where you can and cannot walk (some "slopes" are too steep but look the same as the rest of the terrain); and the NPCs gang up behind you especially in a corner so you get stuck--and you can't even shoot them to kill them so you can get by!

Microwaving the install CD was a welcome relief.

Re:you know what i think

[Striker770S]

i got another good 3 points... 1) not good graphics and playability, 2) came after battlefield vietnam, 3) sucked much more than battlefield vietnam. im just glad i was able to get rid of it and completely clean my harddrive of that filth.

Re:Article Text

[Anonymous Coward]

Site's characteristically slow, and they intentionally spread out the article over three pages for the page views. Screw it, here's the text:

Nice attempt at justifying cheap-ass karma whoring, but unfortunately it didn't work because the site is neither slow nor annoying to read over several pages.

Therefore, you rightfully find yourself modded down. Enjoy...

Re:Article Text - However...

[bluedust]

...spread out the article over three pages for the page...
Ha, not only did you infringe copyright.. but your list got spread over a
Read the rest of this comment :-P

They forgot to list...

[Jaidon]

...nVidia graphics cards for requiring more and more (insane amounts of) power to operate with each new model. The newest of these cards require a 480 watt power supply and spare hard drive power dongle to boot.

What's next? An ADDITIONAL PC required to process graphics for the main system? No wonder why I prefer console gaming!!

Re:They forgot to list...

[tomstdenis]

Um, you don't notice this trend? My 5200FX [which runs doom3/ut2k4/etc decently, sure not 300FPS but it's still good enough] doesn't even have a fan

For the curious it's the MSI brand of 5200 with 128MB of ram and 8x AGP interface. It has a massive [but short so it doesn't hit neighbouring cards] heatsink and that's it. The thing gets a bit warm during play but that's about it.

I'm sure the same calibre GPU two years ago would have required a fan + more power. I'm sure 2 years from now the 6800FX will be a "moderate" card by the newer standards.

So if you don't need excessive GPU power right now get a 5200FX series card. They're good bang for buck. I mean for 100$ [cdn] I got

1. nvidia GPU [e.g. works in linux with good 3d in x86_64 mode]
2. 128MB of DDR 400 memory
3. AGP 8x interface [sounds impressive]
4. Capable DX and GL support
5. Card that can play modern games, specially UT2k4
6. Drives a 1280x1024 LCD monitor at 75Hz ;-)

Tom

Re:They forgot to list...

[HolyCoitus]

The ATI requires nearly the same. The reason for the second molex connector is stability. Under most conditions you can get away without it, however the AGP power is not always completely clean and if the molex is putting out a smaller amount, there can still be issues.

X-bit Labs did tests to show this. These tests show there is not a difference that is significant in power consumption throughout, although the new XT cards are improving with their heat loss and power consumption.

Re:They forgot to list...

[GregoryD]

yeah the problem is that 480 power "requirement" is a myth. When nvidia initially released this number they were way on the conservative side. Many websites have done tests with a 350 watt power supply and it was fine. Nvidia has also come out and said 350 watts is the true minimum.

Go back to playing FPS with controllers. ;p

Re:They forgot to list...

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

Its an added power requirement because it renders better. I could render your console graphics with a geforce2mx400. PC ports of games always look so much better (assuming they had good enough textures to scale). I'd much rather play tony hawk at 1024x768 with full antialiasing and all that fun stuff than NTSC resolution on a tv.

And don't get me started on load times. a PS2 takes about as long to load a map of an average game as doom3 takes to load >512megs of a single map. You can't even compare them. The only argument people have against PC gaming is all fallacy. You can buy just as good controllers for usb, you can buy much better monitors (and put them infront of your couch, if thats your thing), and then people complain about having to upgrade your PC.. Atleast you can upgrade. I recently started playing GTA3VC on PC again. It looks so much better on my upgraded computer than when it first came out, and loads instantly. Still just as slow on a PS2 though.

Re:They forgot to list...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

You forgot the seemingly constant maintainance that goes with maintaining a gaming PC. Also, don't get the latest PC game until the first set of patches come out.

Re:They forgot to list...

[cipher uk]

theres a hell of a lot of cheap ati radeon 9200 se around at computer markets. i payed £52 for one about ten months ago.

1. works great in xfree86. last ati card to do so.
2. 128MB of DDR 400
3. AGP 8x
4. DX and GL support
5. Plays modern games. I run UT2k4 on near max. GTA:VC manages max settings.
6. I'm on 1600x1200 CRT at 140Hz :-)

i'm sure not its reduced to maybe £35. if your a linux user i recomend this card ... unless you use a distro where you want 3d in x.org.

Re:They forgot to list...

[tomstdenis]

52 quid ... IS ~100$ or so ;-)

Also ATI support for linux [and specially x86_64] SUCKS ASS.

As for your CRT.... I doubt that. I don't know of many commercial CRTs [at retail outlets] that will do 1600x1200 let alone at 140Hz. The card may be able to output that but I doubt your monitor can.

Tom

Re:They forgot to list...

[cipher uk]

my monitor also cost £52.

21" monitor by silicon graphics. sony tube ... google for GDM-20E21. :)

drivers for radeon 9200 below work fine in xfree86. can't say much about x86_64 as i don't have it.

and yeah i know theres no 3d for ati drivers in x.org at the moment.

Re:They forgot to list...

[dj245]

The fan on my fx5200 died and I haven't bothered to replace it. It gets pretty hot but its still stable. But if you're looking for a decent budget card I would go with the fx5700 (regular card, not the Ultra and not the LE). Its only about $90 on ebay now and it has considerable more performance.When I switched cards my Tribes 2 scores doubled.

Re:They forgot to list...

[tomstdenis]

fx5200? Which brand? ASUS?

The MSI board has no fan, only a huge heat sink and it's never overheated during gameplay [though I only play for like 30-60 mins at most in one sitting].

Tom

Re:They forgot to list...

[dj245]

I think it is an Abit or Asus, the Media centre version of the 5200 card. Its in a box somewhere (just moved). Its a medium sized heatsink with a sort of indentation where the fan used to be. Standard graphics card fans won't fit but it runs ok without one.

Re:They forgot to list...

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"The newest of these cards require a 480 watt power supply and spare hard drive power dongle to boot."

No, they don't. The slightly-lower-clocked 6800GT only requires a 300W PSU and one Molex connector.

NVIDIA overstated the power requirements for the 6800 Ultra because they wanted to account for those "480W" power supplies that only put out 10A at 12V. A decent 350W power supply (Antec, for example) puts out 16-25A at 12V.

In reality, the 6800 Ultra requires around 50W, only about 10W more than the Radeon 9800XT.

Re:They forgot to list...

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

The only argument people have against PC gaming is all fallacy

The phrase, "PC gaming" pisses me off. And "Platform" too. It's a pointless distinction between the two. They're both places where games can go.

Re:They forgot to list...

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

Yeah, I'm always covered in oil underneath my PC, tightening up the bolts and changing the oil.

Wait, I mean your post makes no sense. About a year ago I put my computer together. That's all the maintenance ever.

Tim

Re:They forgot to list...

[FortranDragon]

I'm sure the same calibre GPU two years ago would have required a fan + more power. I'm sure 2 years from now the 6800FX will be a "moderate" card by the newer standards.

You're spot on. I just replaced my son's GF3 Ti200 with an on-sale GF FX 5700LE. While the 5700LE does need a fan, it doesn't need the molex connector like my 5600 Ultra that I purchased a year and a half ago. (The two cards are approximately equal in performance.)

Re:They forgot to list...

[adam613]

Also ATI support for linux [and specially x86_64] SUCKS ASS.

The Radeon 9200 series has open-source drivers included with xorg. My AMD box has a Radeon 9200 and my glxgears score is 1566 fps.

Oh, and I paid $65 for the card a year ago. You could probably pick one up for $50 now.

Re:Hmmmmm

[salvorHardin]

"Those poor smugglers..." ... and yet you post the article on Slashdot to give those companies extra exposure ? :)

I take it 2004 wasn't a good year for Guybrush Threepwood and Monkey Island? ;-)

Re:Article Text

[MrHanky]

19) Duke Nukem--A Decade in the Making
Just when everybody forgot the existence of Duke Nukem, 3D Realms announces that it signed Swedish firm Meqon to handle the physics engine for its vaporous sequel, Duke Nukem Forever. While 3D Realms has a reassuring "it's done when it's done" stance for the shooter, the numerous delays either signals a new Half-Life--or the new Daikatana.

Ah, come on! This isn't a low point at all. A game that has survived ten years of development without being officially canned is nothing short of amazing. Duke sets new standards for vapour. A true legend in the making, haha!

They Forgot...

[Draconix]

2)Fileplanet World of Warcraft final stress test fiasco.
Fileplanet offered a subscription-only WoW final stress test download that was by no means wait-free, as many users had to wait an excess of 24 hours to be able to download, and once they were able to download, it was a ripping-fast average rate of 3k/s.

1)Gamespy/Fileplanet still exists.

Re:They Forgot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. What purpose does File Planet serve anymore? Why don't distributers use BitTorrent?

Re:They Forgot...

[ctishman]

It's Peer-to-Peer, and thus obviously piracy. DUH.

Re:They Forgot...

[loraksus]

Because a bunch of ISPs and especially universities are crippling bittorrent bandwidth. WoW had a shitload of people bitching about it during beta testing.

It was NEWS from this year

[SuperKendall]

I don't think you read all the way through. First of all, "smugglers" is a reference to the Star Wars MMORPG and the shafting that profession is getting.

The DNF reference refers to the news (from this year!) that they have selected a company to produce the physics engine for DNF. So, there you are - shameful news from this year.

Author of the Article knows /. pretty well

[Man in Spandex]

Alongside SCO and Microsoft, geeks now have found a new giant to shake their digital fists at.

Now, don't get me wrong, they are all "evil" but I have not found a place other than slashdot where I hear people argue on how much SCO or EA "suck" but geeks are found everywhere (or almost). In conclusion, the author is then a member of slashdot, isnt' that right COWBOY!

Number 1?

[ewanrg]

I'm a little surprised that EA was considered the number 1 "bad thing" for the 2004 market. Yes, they treat their employees poorly - though I don't think they have a lock on that market.

And yes, they have a lock on the NFL, but there are other types of football and a lot of other sports.

Personally I think that long term some of the legislative efforts are going to be much worse for the industry than the few poor judgements made by EA.

---

Opinions here too. Read at your own risk :-)

Re:Number 1?

[pilkul]

The legislative efforts are going nowhere. Meanwhile, EA is swallowing lots of formerly good companies and seriously stifling innovation in the industry. When was the last time EA released anything worthwhile? Early nineties?

It's depressing to think that Origin, Maxis, Bullfrog and Westwood were all swallowed into the vile pool of slime that is EA, never to release a decent game again. Argh!!

Re:Number 1?

[CAIMLAS]

It's not just that EA has made poor judgements that negatively impact the game industry.

It's that EA is allowed to exist at all in its current form, really. It's a monopoly which regularly behaves in a predatory manner - fully exercising the business model set forth by Bill Gates and company.

Small game companies get bought out, or simply can't compete against the megolithic monster that is EA. When a small game company has the option of make a good game, or advertise, and they decide to make a good game - nobody buys it, because a) it doesn't get shelf or advertising space, and b) EA markets the hell out of even their mediocre games.

Finally, EA is the largest game producer, bar none. They've got more money, more production studios, etc. This "monoculture" is bad, as it stifles the creative process - it would be the same as having all the film studios belonging to a single parent studio, and all the producers answering directly to the top. It wouldn't work, creatively. Even less creative, original films would get through the cracks than do now.

Re:Number 1?

[qurk]

SSX3 was a game that I picked up a few months after it came out and was $20 used, and it just blew me away. I'll admit I'm not a big fan of their sports games and I was expecting to be disappointed with SSX3, instead I was glued to the game for 3 weeks.

Now I haven't been able to get into a Madden title since it was on PC Engine and Mutant League Football was on Genesis..... and have never been able to get into the NHL or NBA stuff at all... and the NFL exclusive makes me mad as hell.... however I am eagerly lookin forward to the next SSX!

Re:Number 1?

[Headcase88]

Burnout 3 and Def Jam: Fight for New York would rank in my top 10 this year. However, these games are the exception, not the rule.

Overall I agree that EA is really stifling the industry, but hey, the creative workers of the swallowed companies could theoretically leave and start up or join other companies. I guess.

Re:Number 1?

[superpulpsicle]

You people give Bill Gates alot of credit. He was not single-handed responsible for the concept of monopoly. Read up on Rockafeller (pardon spelling) from way back.

Anyways, EA also tried to buy the NBA despite the massive complaints by so many people. David Stern literally told the EA lawyers to go to hell.

Expect PS3 sports games from EA to look identical to PS2. They have no need to work harder on a new engine. Who cares, there won't be another game in the market for the next 5 years.

Re:Number 1?

[hobbesx]

but there are other types of football...

I'm actually typing this out on my cell phone, camped outside GameStop, waiting for the next CFL release as I post this. Dude, I am so psyched!

No mention of the Ultima Online low-downs?

[lordsilence]

Heh... just thinking of Ultima Online could make up for a whole book of low-downs.

Everything from the release of Age of Shadows (turning UO into a item-based PVP game and trying to make it a gigantic Diablo 2 clone) to the release of 7th anniversary edition (yet another expansion-pack for UO which wasn't worth the money).
Oh, and did I mention that EA is the one holding the lashes?

Re:No mention of the Ultima Online low-downs?

[Lord_Dweomer]

Oh, you're still playing retail UO. I was wondering why you were so angry. Try some of the player made shards, they fix a lot of what was originally crappy about the game, and the people are generally cooler.

Re:No mention of the Ultima Online low-downs?

[lordsilence]

Don't get me wrong. I dont feel the urge to play "freeshards", they usually tend to reflect negatively on you after you're finished with that powertrip of not having to pay. Usually you wont bicker too much, after all it's "free". But taking all the good things in account there are those crappy people at the helm. Who does nothing then bicker, also the downtimes and rather small playerbase is there to reminds you that you're playing on a freeshard. Then of course there are the shard wars where they are DDoS:ing eachother or generally trash-talking one another.

Indeed.

[mcc]

In particular I don't really think I'd call the end of Acclaim a low. They were one of the worst publishers out there, they didn't seem to be good for anything except creating gaming "low points", and they were pretty much just dead weight on the industry. Red Star may be suffering as a result but overall I think I'd say the industry is better off without them; in particular I'd say that what happened to Acclaim isn't nearly as bad of a thing for gaming as the things Acclaim did this year before they died (for example what happened to Black Isle, which is at #17 on this list...)

But, I think the point of this list wasn't so much "bad things in gaming" as "embarrasing news items in gaming". And Acclaim's Infinium-like final flameout was nothing if not embarrasing.

Re:Indeed.

[acidrain69]

I was halfway through your first paragraph, wondering what Rod Stewart had to do with gaming, when I realized my eyes are playing tricks on me. I misread "red star".

Bizarre.

Re:Indeed.

[mcc]

wondering what Rod Stewart had to do with gaming

Well... "Young Turks" is one of the songs in the in-game soundtrack of GTA: San Andreas..

Re:Indeed.

[dj245]

in particular I'd say that what happened to Acclaim isn't nearly as bad of a thing for gaming as the things Acclaim did this year before they died (for example what happened to Black Isle, which is at #17 on this list...)

Personally I don't know why they numbered the biggest "lows" of the year. Whether or not you think that the "low" is in fact "low" depends on your personal relationship with the game studio and whether or not you've played the games (except for perhaps the Half-life debacle, I can see how that could be pretty low).

I would put the fall of Fallout and Black Isle in the top 5, they were a fantastic studio, much better than EA or Acclaim and they will be missed. At the end of Fallout 1, I cried for my poor protagonist character. I've never done that for another game before or since, that game was so moving. Their games touched you in a soul-wrenching way that other games just don't do anymore.

Re:Indeed.

[SkankhodBeeblebrox]

" in particular I'd say that what happened to Acclaim isn't nearly as bad of a thing for gaming as the things Acclaim did this year before they died (for example what happened to Black Isle, which is at #17 on this list...)"

I think you're confusing Acclaim with Interplay... Acclaim made some crappy games, there's no excusing that, but they didn't axe BIS... that was Interplay... (or I'm misunderstanding your post, which is entirely possible)

Re:Indeed.

[mcc]

Huh. No, I actually was under the apprehension Acclaim was responsible for Black Isle's demise. It appears I'm wrong.

Acclaim was the publisher in Europe for at least one of Black Isle's games while Interplay owned them, which could be how I got them confused?

Gaming Low #21

[SnAzBaZ]

#21) Completing HL2 :(

Re:Gaming Low #21

[Lisandro]

Hear, hear. The game was pretty good until the ending, but it seems like the phone rang or something when they were writting that part. A crying shame.

Re:Gaming Low #21

[Fallingcow]

I liked the ending.

It's like a song, building tension for the a big crescendo at the end (HL3).

Of course, if HL3 blows, then it's all for naught.

*crosses fingers*

Re:Gaming Low #21

[MP3Chuck]

If I didn't think that HL3 would topple the greatness of HL2 I'd complain about the ending too... as long as HL3 doesn't take another 5 years!

If you're completely confused about what's really going on and how HL and HL2 correlate, there's a great timeline here. Obviously there are some spoilers if you havn't played HL2.

Re:Gaming Low #21

[Ford Prefect]

Personally, I really liked the ending - in keeping with the ultra-subtle, sparse storytelling, it has an ending which leaves almost everything to the imagination. The beginnings of a massive explosion, suggesting that you've succeeded in destroying the main Combine citadel, and some deliberately provocative words from the G-man, all wrapped up with a demonstration of how he can mess with the flow of time, pretty much confirming the 'stasis' Gordon must have been in between HL1 and HL2...

I can see why some people hate it, and the manner in which the overall story was told, but try playing the game again. You'll notice a hell of a lot more, and notice some - ambiguities - in what some of the characters say, particularly Dr Mossman. A lot of her apparent 'betrayal' is down to an incorrect assumption by Alyx. Judith's actions are in fact entirely justifiable, but she's the one being maniuplated, in this case by Breen...

What I've been saying to people who dislike the Half-Life 2 ending - please think of a better one. I don't think I can. ;-)

The N-Gage entry is invalid for this year

[Fricka]

The entire entry on the N-Gage basically complains about features on the previous model of N-Gage, in other words, it's old news. The only thing it mentions about the new N-gage (which did come out this year) is that it is more "bearable" (a positive note) and that a certain ad campaign isn't running any more. That hardly qualifies as a low for this year in my opinion.

To complicate matters, I happen to think the N-Gage QD is quite a nifty device -- aside from being a cell phone it runs symbian software, has bluetooth (and can act as a remote control to my laptop). Also, it doesn't suffer from the drawbacks mentioned in the article (it isn't side talking, you *can* hot swap games and memory cards easily, etc).

On the gaming side of things, Sega just realeased a MMOG for the N-Gage called Pocket Kingdom which is a great game and a news maker in that it is the first true MMOG for a portable handheld. The campaign for that game has been running pretty strongly so it quite compensates for the ending of the other campaign mentioned in the article. Perhaps the author just didn't notice it since they have shifted more to online advertising than offline ads? Either way, again, the end of an particular ad campaign is hardly qualification for a "Lowest" point of the year.

Re:The N-Gage entry is invalid for this year

[SteveXE]

The Ngage sucks, dont try to justify buying one

Re:The N-Gage entry is invalid for this year

[Scrameustache]

I happen to think the N-Gage QD is quite a nifty device [...] Sega just realeased a MMOG for the N-Gage [...] they have shifted more to online advertising than offline ads

Such as paying people to hype their crap on slashdot?

Re:The N-Gage entry is invalid for this year

[generic-man]

The N-Gage is a good handheld gaming system.

The N-Gage has at least one on-line game that lets you play over the Internet using built-in hardware. In North America, I haven't seen any game that lets you do that on any Nintendo, Sega, Atari, NEC, or Sony portable system.

It's cheap, it has Bluetooth, it runs a popular handheld OS for which many freeware apps are available, and the QD model addressed many of the UI concerns in the original. Unfortunately, none the games for the N-Gage stand out and there is no "killer app" for the system yet.

And trust me, Nokia doesn't pay enough for me to troll for them.

Sierra!

[Staplerh]

Geez.. I felt that the item concerning Sierra on-line's shut down was the 'top' gaming low. From TFA:

While technically still existing for the sake of retaining the brand, Vivendi Universal shut down cut its Seattle-based staff of 350--ending a long legacy of PC gaming. One of the most respected in the 80's and into the 90's, the company created games such as Kings Quest, Quest for Glory, Red Baron, Aces of the Pacific, and Aces Over Europe (from now defunct flight sim studio Dynamix). In not-so-consoling news, Leisure Suit Larry still lives on as a series of mini-games.

Heck, the loss of Space Quest alone is the saddest thing I've ever heard. Now.. those were games. Thank goodness for abandonware - even though I'm sure this Vivendi Universal company owns the rights, I'll still be downloading Space Quest games.

Re:Sierra!

[despik]

While technically still existing for the sake of retaining the brand, Vivendi Universal shut down ...
Stuff like this just fucking kills me. Retaining the brand!? What about the people responsible for making Sierra the gaming megapower of days long past? Oh right, they're just engineers, easily replaceable. MBAs are the scum of the land.

Re:Sierra!

[AtariKee]

Good show, old sod.

Another great example of the brand-retaining travesty is Atari. Now tell me this: do you still feel the same warm and fuzzy feeling about Atari that you felt playing Tempest when you play something like SSX Tricky? Hell, the Atari name was soiled when the Tramiels bought the consumer division and rammed it right into the ground. I'm glad Atari Games (arcade division) still existed as a separate company and continued to put out some great original games.

Re:Article Text

[mtrisk]

Like a previous slashdotter said about Infinium Labs:

"Perhaps this is the game - the waiting - and then when the date comes, they'll say 'Good job, thanks for playing!'"

The death of the mid-sized developer.

[muntumbomoklik]

That's gotta be one of the bigger stories over, well, the past two years or so: EA and Vivendi constantly 'consolidating' development studios as they eat them up and shut them down. The industry is turning into an arena of untouchable behemoths and tiny indy groups who can't hope for decent sales, but can hope to get rich by being bought out and shut down by the large corporations. That's a bigger scandal than EA's bad work policies, is their constant takeovers of mid-size developers only to drive them out of business. RIP Westwood, Origin, Acclaim, Sierra, Maxis.....

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[Bulln-Bulln]

Acclaim went out of business, because their games sucked and nobody bought them.

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[ThousandStars]

RIP Westwood, Origin...

Amen to that. Ultima 6 and 7 were both great games that I will long remember. Sadly, there like was never again made by Origin, and I do not think any studio will take up their legacy.

Ultimas 8 and 9 were atrocious, and UO had more problems than I care to remember. Sadly, the industry has become top and bottom heavy, as you say, and leaves no room in the middle for innovative but still top-flight production games.

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[Xentropy]

EA isn't the only one at fault here, though. Infogrames (now Atari--also affiliated with Hasbro) has killed its share of great developers in its time. Microprose anyone?

The problem with the gaming industry isn't EA in particular, it's big publishers in general. In all the comments on this entire article, everyone keeps lamenting the death of [insert developers] at the hands of [insert publisher], yet no one seems to entirely grok the fact the real problem is the publishers.

Think about it. What do publishers do? Fund, advertise, and distribute. The internet makes their hand in distribution mostly a moot point nowadays, since if a developer had a truly great game, they could sell it online. The publisher only advertises in an effort to make money themselves, not to help out the developers, and contracts don't even usually include a promise for any amount of advertising. So the key point comes to funding. Basically, publishers are--in a nutshell--venture capitalists. They give the developer money up-front to fund the development (pay the creators and whatnot) and in return garner the vast majority of the profits.

The problem lies in how much control these speculative investors demand in their contracts. The publisher ends up with the right to control nearly everything in return for the starting capital and an expectation (sometimes not even followed through) to advertise and garner sales. The publisher can back out at any time and leave the developer in a lurch just because some MBA in a suit didn't think the game being developed had enough "mass appeal," and sometimes even come away with the rights to the name of the game being developed despite never following through. Since they provide all the money, most of the time a game is released too soon with lots of bugs, it's because of the publisher, not the developer. No developer dares piss the publisher off by taking too long and finding their baby scrapped when almost complete.

A developer with the ability to fund themselves from the start could make far more long-term profit even with a moderate number of online sales at a budget price than developers of hit top-retailing games ever see. Most of the time, royalties barely amount to double digit percentages (even for a proven developer), and the funding provided during development is an advance on those royalties, so the developer doesn't see a penny after the game launches until the half million units move...if that ever happens. Meanwhile, the publisher breaks even at 50k units and rakes in the dough past that. A publisher with the smallest amount of advertising moxie can guarantee that amount of sales of even a buggy bomb of a title, as anyone who's ever microwaved a game CD can attest.

Granted, nothing is likely to change anytime soon, since developers don't have a couple mill sitting around to develop a game on their own. But if you ever see a game selling online for a nice price directly from a developer, keep in mind almost your entire dollar is going straight to them, instead of $15 to the retailer, $10 to a box and manual you might flip through once, $15 to a publisher like EA...and $5 also to the publisher to pay off the developer's advance.

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[Synbiosis]

The industry is turning into an arena of untouchable behemoths and tiny indy groups who can't hope for decent sales, but can hope to get rich by being bought out and shut down by the large corporations.
Wow, sounds exactly like the drug, car, and (to a limited extent) movie industries.

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[ediron2]

For every barrier to entry a big company throws up, there are a dozen backdoors. Kwitcherbitchin' and use one.

Develop non FPS games. Develop machinema, since that'll teach you data formats and other engine-specific skills. Develop puzzles, strategy, online-adaptations, or some other unconventional p2p games. Develop for lower-profile markets (anything non-male-teen-to-twenty5). Grow by viral marketing (word of mouth, not SANTY-C!). Use Flash or shockwave. Go open-source. Develop for some older platform that's been cracked, and use that to get experience and street cred to carry with you when you go seeking investors willing to support you as a solo shop. Buy a game engine and use it to make your own stuff (and the price is damn short of prohibitive-- the last time I checked, good engines were available for about what a *hobbyist* videography geek spends on cameras and lenses. Call 'em tools of the trade and suck it up.

Complaining that the big game companies keep eating the smaller ones is like complaining that big movie companies have destroyed the indy/arts movie arena. Nope! Not yet, not ever!

It's just that distribution and marketing are difficult and complex enough that, even after you solve the 'perfect game' equation, you have to choose between 2 devils: MegaCorpBuyout or BecomeMarketingWonk. For a programmer, both have a tastes-like-ass aftertaste.

Or, you can stay small. And that's not so fun, either.

Oh, and EA and Vivendi look a lot like Cisco and CA and a few other computer industry monoliths... except the gaming industry gets less respect in the stock market. They're well-capitalized, they need growth to keep shareholders happy, and the best way to grow is still to acquire known value.

As with everything else in life, it really is a lot more complex than you want to make it.

Re:The death of the mid-sized developer.

[mblase]

The industry is turning into an arena of untouchable behemoths and tiny indy groups who can't hope for decent sales, but can hope to get rich by being bought out and shut down by the large corporations.

Name one industry, just one, over ten years old that hasn't settled down into this selfsame pattern.

This sort of thing isn't a scandal; it's a script.

Stupid and Wrong

[Erik Fish]

Deus Ex: Invisible War was (by far) the biggest thing that went wrong in 2004. The only reason it didn't make this list was because GamePro (and most of the other critics) gave it ridiculously positive reviews.

All the "video games are bad" items torn from the pages of mainstream newspapers should never have made it to this list. When damn near everyone plays or has a friend who plays video games the journalists and politicians behind these stories are pissing in the wind (and most of them know it).

Re:Stupid and Wrong

[rnb]

I'm not sure it was the biggest, but it definitely should have been on the list. The original Deus Ex is one of my favorite games ever. I've played it through many, many times. I couldn't even finish the sequel once before moving on to something else. Gah.

Support Steam

[eraser.cpp]

Bashing steam is so popular that it's difficult to find an article that is actually objective. Cutting out the publisher only makes sense. Most of the purchase money goes into their hands, and it seems unjustified. Most games today no longer contain pretty manuals, maps, or even jewel CD cases. The percentage valve actually makes off each retail purchase is surprisingly low. Broadband users, whose number and capabilities are always rising, are able to obtain games in a manner more conveniant by using Steam. Furthermore their games are kept up to date easily and they should theoretically be cheaper (due to a contract with VU this was not so for HL2). I'm not trying to say there haven't been difficulties in the Steam system thus far, but that's to be expected in the first years of such an ambitious idea. Support the idea of Steam.

Re:Support Steam

[Man in Spandex]

the goal that Valve are trying to reach with Steam is all good. I'd just like to see a few features implemented such as cd-key transfering. If that's not possible, then maybe something to enable us to run 2 or more steam accounts at the same time. That way, I wouldn't be switching logins to play HL1 or HL2 back n forth. Their faq does state that the current feature of cd-key transfering is in the works so that's good I guess. Currently, only way of doing this is to pay $10 to Valve and ship your retail copy (if any) and tell them where to transfer the key. They are just being greedy.

By keeping automatically Steam up to date, it makes pirates go nuts to have to update their distributions of games so hopefully systems like this will discourage pirates since it keeps them working nonstop. It is a fact that not long ago Valve has banned another 30 000 accounts from trying to use an invalid/cracked key and with those first 20 000 banned, it shows that Valve are commmitted to fight back against cheapskates.

Re:Support Steam

[aluminumcube]

Yea, I've got to say, Steam makes a lot of sense to me.

I just bought my first PC for work (having been an avid Mac user for 15+ years) and decided, while I was at it, to get some nice games to go with it. The HL franchise never registered with me, having been a Mac user, but I downloaded Steam one night and made a total impulse buy of the Silver HL2 package about a week before HL2 was released.

For me, Steam worked out slicker then dog snot. I paid like $60 and got all sorts of good content at that price; the original HL, CounterStrike, Day of Defeat etc. It all just magically showed up on my box and within a couple of hours, I was playing pretty much the entire Valve catalogue.

Having wetted my appetite, I was eagerly anticipating HL2 and at midnight on it's launch, it took 5 minutes for my pre-downloaded copy to authenticate and I played the hell out of it for the next 20 hours of so and loved every minute of it. HL2 is a mindblowing game...

In my book, the Steam system deserves to be the future of how video games are distributed. Yea, there were some big time bugs- since I am not a dedicated HL fan, I feel really sorry for the guys who pre-ordered boxed copies and waited for years only to have authentication problems while I, an HL noob was playing by 12:05. Publishers are adding less and less value these days while they still take huge chunks of profit off of the work of the actual developers. This needs to end and I think Steam (both better incarnations of Valve's and different versions for different publishers) is the way this industry is gonna cut out the useless middlemen.

Re:Support Steam

[KhalidBoussouara]

I was considering getting HL2 but the whole steam thing changed my mind. The idea is really good but they way Valve has treated their customers is going to ruin it in everyones mind. Most of the difficulties with steam could have been easily solved. I know the servers couldn't handle all those people activating but they shouldn't have to (the server should ouly need to send a couple of kilobytes of data). Support Valve? No fucking way!

I cant wait till another company like tries this. One which listens to their customers, provides a support system, and allows them to play the game without connecting to the internet every time.

Re:Support Steam

[Bulln-Bulln]

Hell no! Steam makes it impossible to sell HL2 once you completed it. This alone is a good reason to hate Steam.
And that's not the only reason for me to hate it, but it's the most important.

Re:Support Steam

[MegaManXcalibur]

While a completely agree that more money going to the developer is a good thing I have to say the way Valve implamented it was pretty sad.

The thing that made me realize this was when I went to unlock the game day of released and had to wait several hours before I could get through.

Also since you have to sign onto Steam every time you want to play Half-Life 2 (requiring an Internet Connection to play a single-player game is nuts in my opinion) you are pretty much screwed if you want to play some night when Steam or your own Internet connection is down.

Third I just don't like to have to ask permission to install and use a piece of software I paid for. I have a nice DVD here that contains Half-Life 2 but it is useless without concent from Valve (unlocking). So if Valve would ever go under there is a good chance that you could never play Half-Life 2 again.

Finally when you are done with the game you can't sell it. This doesn't bother me since I usually keep my old games, but I know a lot of people who wanted to sell this game after they completed it, but couldn't.

Overall the idea behind Steam is great, but the implamentation is still quite flawed.

Re:Support Steam

[vhold]

A few things that are seriously uncool about Steam thus far:

Mandatory patches that actually made the game stutter worse for quite a few people with no possibility of reverting.

The ability to lose value. Half Life 2 Silver comes with the back catalog of Steam games right? Well I bought that into my existing steam account, what that means is that my old original Half Life CD key was basically absorbed into nothingness. If I wanted to play LAN Half Life games, I'd have to buy another copy of Half Life now even though I 've bought 2 copies.

"Scanning" I have no idea what this was but it basically used my full upstream bandwidth for several hours out of nowhere. No explanation what it was doing at all.

Since direct to consumer game publishing has existed for a long time, it doesn't really bring anything good or new to the table.

If every game developer followed in their footsteps, how many little icons do you think the average gamer is going to end up with in their taskbar? Spinning CPU cycles, downloading things in the background, randomly consuming bandwidth while they are trying to play a game from a different developer.... Something that has already happened to me.

Re:Support Steam

[a-freeman]

Several warez groups jointly released a Steam server emulator within hours (like maybe 24 at most) of HL2 being officially released, effectively eliminating most of the anti-piracy features of steam.

Of course, legit consumers still get to deal with all of Steam's annoying aspects, regardless.

This is why many gamers use a no-cd crack, or something similar, even with a legit copy of a game. Sorry, but I just can't be bothered to hunt around for the original install media every time I want to use software that I purchased.

In the case of HL2, the funny thing is that the cracked version runs even runs slightly faster, because all the texture files are permanently decrypted instead of being decrypted on the fly as they are loaded.

Re:Support Steam

[Man in Spandex]

This is why many gamers use a no-cd crack, or something similar, even with a legit copy of a game. Sorry, but I just can't be bothered to hunt around for the original install media every time I want to use software that I purchased.

Its true. We needed the cds in the drives in order to play HL2 but that's the past. Valve removed the cd-check a while ago therefor making retail copies look exactly like a bronze deal from Steam. You can check since the file "Source Shared Securom.gcf" is no longer downloaded by Steam if you use a retail key.

From the looks of your reply, you seem to be playing the pirated version seeing how well you know the game provided by erm, lets say Emporio? *WinkWink*.

The game's good, The system's intention is good. Therefore I support it.

Re:Support Steam

[ThousandStars]

By keeping automatically Steam up to date, it makes pirates go nuts to have to update their distributions of games so hopefully systems like this will discourage pirates since it keeps them working nonstop. It is a fact that not long ago Valve has banned another 30 000 accounts from trying to use an invalid/cracked key and with those first 20 000 banned, it shows that Valve are commmitted to fight back against cheapskates.

Their effort at preventing copyright infringement is fantastic. The only way OSS games will ever take off in any meaningful way is if companies can prevent the vast majority of piracy

Re:Support Steam

[sqlrob]

Or perhaps you'd like to sell the DVDs you bought?
Or the book you just finished?

Re:Support Steam

[miu]

You paid for some entertainment, which you received, and now you want your money back?

The media companies are the ones that want to eat the cake and have it too, either they are selling media or content. If it is content then back up copies and multiple formats are legal use, if it is media then you can resell the media when you are done with it.

That said I think Steam is a fairly good idea, but there are some issues that need to be worked out.

Re:Support Steam

[Johnny Mnemonic]

I just bought my first PC for work... played the hell out of it for the next 20 hours of so

I won't tell your boss that you only needed a 1Ghz Celeron, and "integrated" video memory, to run Outlook and Word...

As a long time Mac user myself, I feel your pain. I finally broke down and bought a remainder bin PC too, enough to upgrade and play games on. One thing Macs suck at is games--at least we have WoW, and CoD.

Re:Support Steam

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

" Hell no! Steam makes it impossible to sell HL2 once you completed it."

Not true. You are welcome to sell your Steam account. Many people *do* sell Steam accounts on eBay.

Re:Support Steam

[DirePickle]

And when Valve goes out of business in a few years or loses interest in its present games, you're suddenly no longer able to play it. I like being able to play games without them calling home for the OK.

Re:Support Steam

[capt.mellow]

I understand the many objections to Steam, but my own experience with it has been positive. I installed it, keyed in my old Blue Shift cd code, and watched as the original HL, all the add-ons (CS, DoD, DMC, TFC, etc.), and even Opposing Forces became available. And the cd can go back into the rack to collect dust, as I no longer need it. From what I understand, I can log into my steam account from any other computer and play any of these games--the content will be downloaded to whatever comp I am on atm. Now, that is pretty darned neat. I even got to try out the HL2 demo through Steam. I didn't know if it would run on my pitiful xp box (athlon 1.2, pci gforce4, 512 ram), and I was pleasantly surprised at how playable it was. It's funny, because we have all recently seen the true actualization of the software business model, and it's pissing people off. It was really easy to ignore the business model back when software companies had no control over things. Now, we see XP's activation and Valve's Steam, and we are up in arms. Yet, this is nothing new--I remember reading EULA's from the 90's saying that I merely had the license to use my copy of the software, and that it could be revoked. I remember how the licensed software was described like a book--you were to use one copy only. You could loan it to a friend--but you couldn't keep using it while your friend had it. Now, we see companies finally have a means of making those license agreements a reality, not some feeble fine print which is scoffed at with total impunity. We've all known the rules for years. Now we are being forced to play by them. I've honestly tried to follow the rules, so this is no big deal to me. But I do get ticked when I replace a motherboard in my XP box and have to reactivate over the phone by keying in a _colossal_ activation code, then get transferred to a live person who starts asking me for the activation code again--I was ready to scream, but thankfully he stopped after the first group of characters. When he asked me if I had XP installed on any other computers, I said 'no', and was tempted to add, 'my other 2 computers run linux, and I'm sure glad I don't have to jump through all these hoops to set them up!'

Re:Support Steam

[tepples]

The only way OSS games will ever take off in any meaningful way is if companies can prevent the vast majority of piracy

It'll need more than better copyright enforcement to make OSS games take off. How can I get an OSS game onto a game console? Or how can I make PC players appreciate a same-screen multiplayer OSS game?

Re:Support Steam

[cortana]

Not only are Valve very publicly against this practice, but it is also no good if the seller didn't take the trouble to create a separate Steam account for each game he wanted to sell.

Re:Support Steam

[Pendersempai]

He didn't pay for "some entertainment," he paid for A GAME. So I have two questions for you:

-How would you feel if you bought a book and read it, but somehow could not sell it or loan it to a friend?

-What if this sort of content control had always been in place for copyrighted works? How much would the world suck if the Mona Lisa disappeared when its first owner died, or if people weren't allowed to donate old books and DVDs to libraries?

Content control is a terrible idea. If it were perfect -- i.e. if it could accomplish its goals while not restricting Fair Use and all other legal enjoyment of copyrighted works at all -- then maybe. But we're not there, and while contemporary content control does protect the publisher's rights, it does so at the expense of the people's.

Re:Support Steam

[Minna Kirai]

The only way OSS games will ever take off in any meaningful way is if companies can prevent the vast majority of piracy

That does not compute.

Piracy of an OSS game is virtually impossible- "OSS" means the author allows anyone to redistribute copies, and "piracy" means someone distributing copies without permission. (Kinda like how tattooing "Yes" on your private parts makes you immune to rape)

Possibly, a corporation selling a closed-source modification of an OSS game could qualify as a "pirate", but that's a far cry from what most game publishers are afraid of.

Re:Support Steam

[Minna Kirai]

Yea, I've got to say, Steam makes a lot of sense to me.

Your defense of Steam is the same flavor of logical fallacy George W Bush uses to defend his unilateral policies: the false dichotomy.

For one example (out of many possibilities), there is no reason Steam couldn't give you all the benefits you listed without also denying non-internet connected persons the ability to play a CD-ROM copy of Half-Life 2 purchased in shop.

While a felony is excessive

[Sycraft-fu]

I don't think it's a bad thing to require retailers to enforce ratings. Some already do so voluntairly (I was carded to buy Halo, much to my amusement since I was at least 5 years older than the guy selling it to me). Parents should, of course, be allowed to buy their kids any game they want. However I don't see a problem with requiring retailers to ensure that the kid themselves isn't buying the game without their parents' permission.

This is perhaps not a real problem for console games, since they are on the TV and you can watch your kids playing them, but what about handheld games? The portables are getting very powerful and realistic (I think I may have to get myself a DS), and you can't very well be hovering over your kids' shoulders all the time, it defeats the point.

So say you get your 13 year old kid a handheld, and a selection of fun games who's content you find appropriate. However, some day when he has free time, he slips over to a game shop near his school and picks up a rated M game who's content you do not find appropriate. He swaps the label for something else, and you are none to the wiser.

All this is easily prevented, as with R movies, by simply not allowing kids to buy the game. If you decide it is appropriate for your kids, you can buy it for them, while your neighbour might decide it is not appropriate for their kid and not.

I don't see any real problem, it's no more inconvienet than being carded to buy tobacco or alcohol. It helps ensure that parents are the ones who decide what is appropriate for their kids and when.

It's a nice ideal to say "Well parents should always know what their kids are doing" but that's just not how it works. You cannot watch your kids 24 hours a day. Even if you could, you wouldn't want to because an important part of development is feeling a sense of control and independence. If you are hovering over their shoulder all the time, that won't happen.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[Anonymous Coward]

While this may all work the overly religious parents I have would never let me buy anything that wasn't E rated. Then I turned 17, told them to mind their own buisness and now happily rent M rated games and R rated films (ex: Matrix, Doom, ect.). Sometimes our parents do too much regulating. Now certain games and films I wouldn't rent, but I am old enough I think to knwo what I like and dislike. There comes a time where parents have to let their kids make decisions on their own. We can't have our hand held for all of our life. Now I will agree there are certain things that are inappropriate for little kids, but overzealous parents don't help either.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[KtHM]

There's a difference there. Cigarettes and alcohol will kill you. Games are just entertainment.

And if you're kid's smart enough to be sneaking around like that, then chances are good they're old enough to play the game. A little gratuitous violence and sexuality never hurt anyone.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[lachlan76]

And if I want to buy a game with my parents' permission and neither of them cam come to buy the game for me?


It's a nice ideal to say "Well parents should always know what their kids are doing" but that's just not how it works

It's a nice ideal to say "By censoring out any information which I think will make my children not think things that I want them to, I will make them better people". But that isn't how things work in real life, IMO.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[wyldeone]

I would disagree with your logic by virtue of the fact that twelve year olds are not able to drop by their local game store and pay $50 for a game. For children it is almost always the case that the parents buy the games themselves; thus avoiding the problem.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

You cannot watch your kids 24 hours a day. Even if you could, you wouldn't want to because an important part of development is feeling a sense of control and independence.

And having the stores act as mommies is going to make kids feel in control and independent?

Re:While a felony is excessive

[damiam]

Until p2p networks start checking ID, kids will be able to obtain pretty much any game they want to. By not allowing them to buy games, game companies are encouraging piracy.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[ikkonoishi]

Any parent that allows their child to have the unmonitored access to a computer that is required to download a pirated game is neglecting their duties to their child.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[ccbutler]

I concur with you 100% with your point about overzealous parents. Nor do i feel that while parents can't watch their children 24/7, if they did it would be damning to their relationship to say the least. Sadly I feel that my point was not recieved in a way that i had origionaly intended.

That being, moral values instilled into our children by our parents have a more posative long term impact than that of any legislation.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[damiam]

Depends on the kid and their age. I'd be pissed if I were 17 and my parents came in and monitored everything I did on my computer, every web site I visited and every process I ran. OTOH, your statement is quite true for, say, ten-year-olds.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[Class Act Dynamo]

I think Chief Wiggum put it best when he asked Ralph, "What is your fascination with my forbidden closet of mystery?"

Re:While a felony is excessive

[Starsmore]

I was too when I was 17.

However, as I'm no longer 17, I can relate to where my parents were coming from. The internet is a pretty fucked up place (hell, look at /.), and when my kid gets to the age where he can use the computer, or the neurojack rig, or VR goggles, or whatever, damn straight I'm going to be keeping an eye on what he sees and does.

Of course, by then I do hope I'll have taught him enough sense about right, wrong, ethics, etc, that he won't do anything stupid. But then again, part of growing up is making some mistakes. It's just a parents job to keep the kid from making the really bad ones (going to meet that '17yrold hottie' he met in chat, or deciding that the Jocks in school look alot like pinkies from Doom, and need to be chainsawed.)

Re:While a felony is excessive

[jaoswald]

almost always the case that the parents buy the games themselves

Indeed; that's the whole point of the ratings; little Johnny tells her "everybody is getting grand theft auto...it's just about racing cars."

The M rating shows that little Johnny isn't being honest about the content of the game. Unpleasant parental surprise avoided.

But it turns out parents (and other adult relatives buying for gifts) don't understand the ratings, and get inappropriate games for young kids.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[AndyL]

17 year olds are supposed to be pissed at their parents.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[tunah]

A little gratuitous violence ... never hurt anyone.

...

Re:While a felony is excessive

[mgkimsal2]

And having the stores act as mommies is going to make kids feel in control and independent?

In some ways, perhaps. They can 'independantly' verify that it's not just their parents but many other grownups who also feel that certain games/movies/media are inappropriate for children.

Re:While a felony is excessive

[ikkonoishi]

Yes and when the kid is 17 you can back off a bit because he has more freedom. Including the freedom to play violent video games.

Re:Erm...

[tomstdenis]

Yeah wow, didn't realize that. So tom learns yet another hard lesson...It's a 16ms response time [62hz] but can sync to 75hz [this is it]

That's like selling 100GB disks making the customer think it's 100GiB...

ARRG I HATE THE WORLD!!! PEOPLE ARE JUST NOT HONEST!!! FUCK HUMANITY FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK HUMANITY!!!! ... FUCK!

Re:Article Text

[bar-agent]

Duke sets new standards for vapour. A true legend in the making, haha!

God, that's awful. Mod parent up!

Game mags going is no loss.

[upsidedown_duck]

With sites like GameFaqs, spending money on a gaming magazine is a true waste. Even strategy guides are a waste with all the detailed enthousiast faqs out there for free. Plus, the free faqs are actually honest. This is no longer the days of Nintendo Power.

Re:Game mags going is no loss.

[centipetalforce]

I still like holding a real magazine in my hands. That's really the main reason people still subscribe to PC Gamer.

Re:Game mags going is no loss.

[generic-man]

I find it helpful to read game reviews from the same source. GameFAQs reviews often gravitate towards the "THIS SUCKS!!! 0/10" or the "THIS RULES!!! 10/10." The same goes for many on-line forums where people post reviews just to debate other reviews.

Bash on IGN, Gamespot, etc. all you want. I trust them more than I trust reader-submitted reviews alone. As an organization, they get to review all the games that come out, employing consistent (not "good," just "consistent") guidelines when they do so.

And if you're going to reply and say "HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT WHEN THEY GAVE X RATING TO GAME Y?!?!?" or "YOU SHILL THEY CLEARLY FAVOR THEIR SPONSERS AS EVIDENCED BY THIS ONE EXAMPLE," just don't unless you can prove that reader reviews are 100% spotless.

Re:Game mags going is no loss.

[upsidedown_duck]

GameFAQs reviews often gravitate towards the "THIS SUCKS!!! 0/10" or the "THIS RULES!!! 10/10."

Forum reviews should always be taken with a grain of salt, but there is usually one or two reviews with a serious author behind them. Not everyone is a game fanboy or doom-sayer. Also, it is easy to skim the reviews for meaningful details, like references to bugs or games that are really short or linear. "Professional" reviewers often have conflicts of interest that might cause these details to be buried (intentionally or not).

Bash on IGN, Gamespot, etc. all you want.

GameFaqs links to these reviews, too, for what it's worth.

Re:Game mags going is no loss.

[upsidedown_duck]

So your mention of Nintendo Power makes no sense.

Nintendo Power was the magazine back when I was in elementary school. Nintendo was so good at the hype machine, but they backed it up with their great games. Nintendo was the Disney of console gaming (until Disney became evil, that is). Magazines now are just flashy hype with no soul. I'd rather just search Google and go to GameFaqs and save my money.

Parents need help not more worries

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sick of BS like this. Once upon a time it took a village to raise a child. Now it takes two parents to protect themselves from the village. Ok, when I'm a parent I'd like to think I'll be involved. But to have to defend my kid from:

Fast food
Junk food
Violence and sex on TV
Children of slacking parents
Violence and sex in Video games
Violence and sex on the internet
advertising advertising advertising for all sorts of useless sh*t, etc.

Give a break. Or rather, give me a hand. Get the fast food out of the schools! Don't give me this 'it's your job as parents' bullshit. How about I walk around with a fucking gun and blow away your kids? It'll be your job as parents to protect them.

Re:Parents need help not more worries

[Anonymous Coward]

Once upon a time it took a village to raise a child.

No, it didn't.

Fast food

It was in schools before. The difference was we made students workout at least 1 period out of the school day and we DID NOT have this "everyone is equal" mentality. There are winners and losers, period. Get it out of peoples minds that "everyone's a winner" and you'll start to see things turn back.

Junk food

Same as above.

Violence and sex on TV

Might be a little more now, but with hundreds of channels, I still have no problem finding programming without sex and violence.

Children of slacking parents

These were there before too. Yes, I knew some (the children, not the parents).

Violence and sex in Video games

These were there too, but the graphics weren't as good. Think Leisure Suit Larry, Strip Poker, and Dope Wars.

Violence and sex on the internet

It wasn't the Internet before, it was BBSs.

advertising advertising advertising for all sorts of useless sh*t, etc.

Again, nothing new here.

If anything, with all the tools available to parents today, it's easier than EVER to keep them from seeing things you don't want them to see. You can check browser history, allowing only what you deem appropriate through the firewall. You can block out certain channels with a code to access them. There really is no limit to what you as a parent can do these days.

But back to the point. Yes, the retailers and theaters should enforce the ratings system, period. Sure, kids will find a way around it, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be enforced. People find ways to rob banks, but that doesn't mean we don't enforce burglary laws now does it.

Re:Parents need help not more worries

[Rico_Suave]

If I had mod points, you'd get them. It drives me up the wall with all the idiots who just scream "BAD PARENTING" every time a kid gets out of line. Regulating game/movie/music sales to minors is NOT censorship, and it's NOT a substitute for parenting. It's simply giving RESPONSIBLE parents additional tools to help them raise their children, because unless you plan on keeping your kids locked in their room until they're 18, they are going to have access to things that you as a parent are going to disapprove of. It has nothing to do with being a good parent - it's ridiculous to assume parents can monitor their kids 24/7, and GOOD parents need every bit of help they can get.

Re:Parents need help not more worries

[Class Act Dynamo]

There are winners and losers, period. Get it out of peoples minds that "everyone's a winner" and you'll start to see things turn back.

I do agree with the "everyone's a winner" comment simply because that is not how the world works. However, I don't believe it is quite so black and white. I think the message that kids need to get is that there will be things at which they excel and things at which they are horrible. It's not so much about being a 'winner' or a 'loser' as it is about finding the things at which they do accel. Self-acceptance is the name of the game.

Re:Parents need help not more worries

[HeavyK]

Regulating game/movie/music sales to minors is NOT censorship,

When the government does it, yes it is censorship, towards minors of course which is still censorship all the same. The government is deciding what free speech material (materials that express points of view and opinions) are appropriate or not for dissemination to minors, not the individual minor's parents.

and it's NOT a substitute for parenting.

Actually, yes it is. It allows parents who object to violent content to become altogether uninvolved in the process of regulating what their children are allowed to watch. People other than the parents are put in charge of preventing access to the objectionable content so that parents don't have to deal with it themselves. After all, as long as it's somebody else's responsibility to prevent my son from playing DOOM 3 I am relieved from having to worry about it.

It's simply giving RESPONSIBLE parents additional tools to help them raise their children, because unless you plan on keeping your kids locked in their room until they're 18, they are going to have access to things that you as a parent are going to disapprove of.

The government shouldn't restrict access to materials to minors based on what some parents may find unsuitable or offensive when those parents can damn well do it themselves.

Should religious parents expect the government to restrict their kid's access to Harry Potter books, Heavy Metal music and Dungeons & Dragons? Should Atheist parents expect the government to restrict their kid's access to the Bible and other religious materials? Should health nut parents expect the government to restrict their kid's access to junk food like soda pop, potato chips and chocolate bars? If not then why should the government restrict access to kids in regards to violent video games because of parents who object to their violent content?

It has nothing to do with being a good parent - it's ridiculous to assume parents can monitor their kids 24/7, and GOOD parents need every bit of help they can get.

Parents can't nor shouldn't have to be around their kids 24/7 BUT they are or should be around their kids enough to know what kind of things they're getting into or ahold of.

What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[Black Art]

They forgot about Lucas Arts canceling the long awaited Sam and Max game. The original almost always gets listed as one of the best games of all time and one of the more fondly remembered games produced by Lucas Arts.

But Lucas Arts sales people canceled it because the only thing they know how to market is yet another Star Wars title.

Is Lucas Arts planning on producing any title in the near future that is not a rehash of the Star Wars franchise?

I expect "JarJar's Big Adventure" or "Jedi of Gor" and day now...

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[NthDegree256]

Perhaps... just perhaps... LucasArts decided that they didn't want to risk turning out a lackluster sequel, given the acclaim afforded the first one.

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[787style]

You think its a bad thing management realized how bad and unimaginative the game was going to be and they cancelled it? Managements inability to cancel a doomed game gave us Outpost, X-Com Enforcer, Wipeout 3, Final Fantasy 8+ (including the movie), and Return to Zork. Get a clue - some games should be left alone. Thank god no one has tackled Twinsen's Odyssey again.

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[Black Art]

You think its a bad thing management realized how bad and unimaginative the game was going to be and they cancelled it?

That is not the reason that Lucas Arts gave.

Here is what Steve Purcell, the creator of Sam and Max had to say about the cancelation.

LucasArts' sudden decision to stop production on Sam & Max is mystifying. Sam & Max was on schedule and coming together beautifully.

I couldn't have been more pleased with the quality of the writing, gameplay, hilarious animation and the gorgeous 3D world that Mike Stemmle's team has created. The rug has been pulled out from under this brilliant team who've so expertly retooled Sam & Max for the 21st century.

I'm extremely frustrated and disappointed especially for the team who have devoted so much effort and creativity to Sam & Max. It's a shame to think that their accomplishments, as well as the goodwill that has been growing in the gaming press toward this project, will all go to waste due to this shortsighted decision.

Thanks everyone, for continuing to make your feelings known.

--Steve Purcell

The Lucas Arts press release (which you obviously never read) gave the reason of the cancelation as "it was not the right time to release a graphic adventure". In other words, they could not figure out how to sell anything that was not a Star Wars game.

Quality (or lack thereof) had nothing to do with it.

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[nEoN nOoDlE]

I don't know if I want to see something from Lucasarts that isn't Star Wars related. All the great game developers from LucasArts have long since left, so I don't want to see how they ruin my favorite franchises.

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[upsidedown_duck]

...the only thing they know how to market is yet another Star Wars title.

Sad that they only way they know how to make yet another Star Wars title is to make it suck. Come up with a new game model, guys! There are only so many ways to rehash a speeder mini-game!

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[Jay Carlson]

I expect "JarJar's Big Adventure" or "Jedi of Gor" and day now...

I'm reminded of the Minicon "Wage Slaves of Gor" ad. I suppose we're getting really obscure now...

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[sacredchao]

Hear, hear. I was scrolling down looking for someone who'd already mentioned this. The screenshots were glorious, the teaser vid was great. I was ready to buy it (you hear that Lucasarts? Not hunt for it via Kazaa or BitTorrent...BUY it!) the moment it came out. Well and truly pissed off by that one disappearing.

Re:What about the Sam and Max fiasco?

[Flyboy Connor]

And if axing Sam & Max 2 wasn't enough to earn them a place amongst the low numbers of the 2004 Game Lows, the fact that they axed Full Throttle 2 a few weeks before that should be enough to put LucasArts on number 1.

Unique??!!??!!!???

[macz]

In the article:

3) Video Game Mags Up in Smoke

Last year had the fall of Ziff Davis' GameNow--this year saw the fall of GMR, XBN, and our very own Gamestar magazine. Not to mention layoffs seen in countless publications this year. A year where many unique magazines have met their untimely end--may they rest in peace.[emphasis mine]

I feel for these people, but I can't honestly tell the difference between one mag and another. The only difference I can see is the platform they focus on... other than that they contain 90% advertising.

With that many ad's, how can they possibly lose money?

Oh wait... someone has to want to SEE the CONTENT of the magazine, to be willing to put up with the ad's

I think that the gaming magazine market may be having a "correction" that is entirely appropriate given the vacuous wasteland that is their subject matter. When all you produce are reviews, throw out the occasional spoiler, and every once and awhile interview a meaningful industry player asking stupid questions like "was coming up with the sequel to Daikatana III difficult?" it is extremely easy to see how this is happening.

I think many of these rags are the product of an industry that is so brimful of cash, that any leaky bucket of a publication was able to sop up some of the spill. Once the novelty of the magazine settled down into predictable pablum, the reader voted with their wallet, and saved the ridiculous newstand price for these mags (I mean who subscribed?) for purchasing more games that they read reviews of for free online.

As soon as these magazines lost the ability to hide behind the "We're in start-up mode and just building our readership" excuse, they dried up and blew away.

Please learn from your mistakes Gaming mag industry... please surprise me with the originality of your content, the accuracy of your acumen, the ... FUCK IT, JUST COMP ME A SUBSCRIP.

Re:Unique??!!??!!!???

[Lord_Dweomer]

"When all you produce are reviews, throw out the occasional spoiler, and every once and awhile interview a meaningful industry player asking stupid questions like "was coming up with the sequel to Daikatana III difficult?" it is extremely easy to see how this is happening."

Reviews? HAHAHAHAHA! The one thing I would love to see is a Penny Arcade magazine in print form where they actually give real reviews about games, and aren't afraid to say it sucks. Part of the problem is that there's tons of reviews for games, but they're all good because thats how they keep getting free stuff from the game companies.

Sour grapes?

[deanj]

This guy sounds like he was putting his own personal "lows" into this, rather than looking at it more objectively.

Smugglers in SWG a low?

EQ2 dead? OK, EQ2 might not be everyone's favorite, but ripping on EQ2 while praising WoW is just fanboy talk.

Re:Sour grapes?

[miu]

Smugglers in SWG a low?

The way smuggler players were treated typified the entire SWG experience. SOE basically took a guaranteed hit and flushed it down the toilet by ignoring what players wanted and focusing on what marketing decided would pull in new players.

So yeah I agree that SWG as a whole was really one of the lows of 2004.

Re:Sour grapes?

[@madeus]

EQ2 dead? OK, EQ2 might not be everyone's favorite, but ripping on EQ2 while praising WoW is just fanboy talk.

I don't think it's fan boy talk at all, I think to suggest that it is, is in itself much closer to 'fanboy talk' of the EQ2 variety. EQ2 has been widley fairly reguarded as a flop because people have full knowledged of how SOE run their titles and after SWG in particular customers were very shy of them.

In a building full of developers and IT workers from 20-35 only one has taken up EQ2 to my knowledge. People have never the less intentionally avoided EQ2 because they are fully aware of what to expect from an SOE title and by and large it's not something people equate with 'fun' (or competant mangement, witness SWG, PS). As we are a European office we don't have WoW here yet (a few weeks to go), but all the MMO players here are itching to play it again after having had such a great time in the open (and closed) beta.

Sony On Line grind-a-thons simply have little appeal in the wider market; as the take up of the more traditional gaming experience found in WoW has shown, which is unique centered around allowing players to solo any quest if they wish, not worry to much about money or skill and just concentrate on fun things like exporing, gaining new abilities (at a fairly rapid pace I might add) and learning about the game world. As a consequense of course it fails the hardcore players somewhat (due to the relative ease of levelling and the aquisition of items), though the genuine diversity of classes and races should provide a significant amount of longevity. The vast majority of people prefer games to be fun-centric with many rewards and the oppertunity to explore new environments, they don't want to play some crazy 3D fantasy equivolent of a hardcore Japanese shoot-em-up.

Of course some people find hardcore games provide 'a different form of entertainment', other people find them an exercise in frustration (I fall into the latter and get quite pissed off if a game is not entertaining or if I'm frustaded by an inadequte design). While the division is much smaller in the PA reading community (for example), the majority of gamers - both dedicated and casual - are in the same camp as me to a large extent.

I don't think this is an indication that people want easier games, indeed I don't think that has anything to do with it, though I mention this as it's often cited. The truth is people just want better games that don't fall back of doing repetative tasks (or illogical puzzles, or pixel perfect jumping puzzles, or big reverse-engineering puzzles where you try to workout how the game mechanics are implimented in order to get the most out of the game, rather than concentrating on just playing it in an abstract manner) as a way of demonstrating your commitment or ability.

I have a friend who plays L2, _a lot_. He has a Jedi in SWG. He really likes to level, to challange the game mechanics and 'beat' the game. In each an every game he evaluates it and uses all his reasources to reverse engineer the game mechanics to work out what weapon used on what monters at what level will allow you to level fastest or produce the most 'wins' in PvP, down to the (what can be surprisingly complex) math routines underneath. I think that L2 caters to players like him brilliantly and is a testament to NC Soft (as is CoH I would add, which caters to a totally differnt segment of players). That L2 has have very little take off in the west is hardly surprising though, it's just no the sort of experience most people are looking for in an entertainment title.

The same is true of EQ2. The wider world is simply much more impressed with WoW, no surprise it was Penny Arcade's game of the year. As comptent a follow up as it is and as good as it's parts are, I think EQ2 is a contender for anyone's game of the year as the crucial gratifying gameplay factor just isn't there.

We'll have a better idea by the spring/summer about how the EQ2 style of MMO is going to do agains

Re:Sour grapes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I had to wonder about that. If they wanted to rip into an actual lame MMORPG release, they could have gone with Square's worthless Chains of Promathia expansion for FFXI.

To give you an idea, Chains of Promathia was an expansion pack that added a bunch of new areas to the game - that was it. (Someone will probably get on my ass and point out that the areas included new items, enemies, quests, etc., but that's completely missing the point, as the only new content involves the new areas.)

Anyway, access to some 90% or so of these areas is only gained through a quest. Well, actually, a quest split into three parts. Each part is essentially identical. But anyway, it involved three dungeons, each with a boss at the end. These dungeons were divided into floors that you teleport across by defeating these mini-boss like things. Because "fucking waste of time" and "MMORPG" must go together, there were like four of these mini-bosses on two of the four floors. Only one of them would teleport you down a floor when killed, chosen randomly. (The attempt I made before quitting involved killing six of them before finding the real one - yes, that would involve two of them respawning and the first one not being chosen.)

To top it all off, the areas were level capped at 30 (max level is 75). The enemies in the area were, of course, too tough for a normal party of six level 30s, so instead an alliance (think "half-assed raid") of three parties was required, or a total of 18 people. Once you got to the end, of course, only six people can attempt the boss at a time. To make this even more annoying, only three or so of the fifteen jobs (think classes) were actually useful in these dungeons. All the other classes were totally ineffective. So finding a collection of people who could actually complete the quest was next to impossible.

Keep in mind that you must do this THREE TIMES to gain access to 90% of the expansion pack.

Needless to say, most people just said "fuck this," got pissed off at spending $30 on an expansion pack that requires nine hours or more of effort to unlock 90% of the content, and quit. (Like I did.)

There's no way the EQ2 release can come close to that.

Just desserts for SOE

[miu]

It is wrong of me to gloat, but I am thrilled that EQ2 looks to be a dud - maybe ignoring and insulting your customers really isn't a good move. It really looked to many SWG players as though their game was being ignored for the sake of the "next big thing". SWG had a great number of innovations, excellent ideas and a setting that guaranteed them fans, but for some reason development seemed to flail around and never focused on the bug fixes or polishing that are essential to long term success.

Re:Just desserts for SOE

[TwistedUranium]

WoW won sales wise and game wise, EQ2 bit it. Maybe they should focus on making the game next time, instead of putting everything in marketing and gimmics(actors). This was a win for the oldschool crowd, and a loss for the(unstopable) hollywoodification of the videogame industry.

What about JFK Reloaded?

[Meneudo]

In my opinion this is the lowest the Gaming Industry has sunk to.

A game in which you re-enact the killing of JFK for yourself? And have the option of shooting civilians?

While other games may have assassination and killing people, but usually there is some decent end you achieve. This, on the other hand, is pure garbage, the game that legislators will be looking to when trying to 'tone-down' video games.

Re:What about JFK Reloaded?

[gad_zuki!]

> but usually there is some decent end you achieve

Decent end? In GTA? Or a host of other games? Especially those war games that are so popular. Killing nobody conscripts is suddenly okay but a pretty president from a wealthy and powerful family is hands off? Lets not get too "patriotic" here, comrade.

Its a game, get over it.

To me, this was a height of free expression and if Joe and Jane Sixpack don't like it, they can somehow force themselves not to buy it.

Re:What about JFK Reloaded?

[bigtrouble77]

I agree with you, but for a completely different reason....

This game(I use that term loosely) is utter crap. It only lasts about 20 seconds, there's nothing historical about it (as the dev claims), it's not fun, the graphics suck, it's EXTREMELY buggy, the camera mode is horrible, it's virtually featureless, and it's sorta offensive.

With that said, it got ENORMOUS exposure purely because of it's controversial nature. The low point here is that those phenominal games in the 'Indie Games of the Year'
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/31/ 2137205&tid=206/ aren't getting a fraction of that kind of exposure.

Re:What about JFK Reloaded?

[miu]

I agree that in real life the killing of some nobody conscript in some stupid war is as big a tragedy as the assassination of a leader. There are some differences in depicting the two as the subject of game violence.

First, JFK was an actual person - the victims in most games are just game counters. Few people could defend GTA if your victims in the game were real life victims of street violence. Second, popular leaders are the representative of an expression of free speech, the murder of MLK was an attempt to murder the idea of racial equality - you would have a difficult time trying to convince people that acting out that murder would be a fit subject for a video game.

Re:What about JFK Reloaded?

[Legion303]

"you would have a difficult time trying to convince people that acting out that murder would be a fit subject for a video game."

The nice thing about America (where this game was released, IIRC, and feel free to punch me in the nuts if I'm wrong) is that you don't have to convince people. Not until Ashcroft's successor gets around to suspending the first amendment, anyway.

Re:What about JFK Reloaded?

[miu]

It's legal, but offensive - that means you may not be able to convince anyone to fund its development or convince anyone to buy it.

Article is wrong

[Kohath]

EQ2 is a success. WoW is a success too. WoW has more subscribers than EQ2, but EQ2 is doing well.

Steam really on the list?

[rmdyer]

"HL2's Steam system being on this list"

Yes, it is on the list, but the real purpose it should be on there is not because of the stated reasons.

I personally really wanted to buy Half-Life 2. I was one of those gamers who was anxiously awaiting its release. I then found out that I would not be able to play the game at all in single player without registering. Ding! There goes my sale. Using a scheme like this is akin to needing to be on-line to play an audio CD. How many /.'ers will do that? But how many of you went out an purchased HL2 without making a big deal about it? Nail to coffin, hammer to nail. Your future privacy is being stripped away. I just want to say thanks to all those that know how to boycott. To those that don't, well you know what you deserve!

Re:Steam really on the list?

[Fallingcow]

I'm hoping they'll do what the UT folks do, and eventually release a patch to remove the "copy protection", and make the game playable w/out Steam.

If they fail to do this in the next 1-2 years, then I'll never buy another thing off Steam.

Re:Steam really on the list?

[MP3Chuck]

It doesn't remove copy protection, it just removes the CD check. You still have to have a valid key to play online...

Re:Steam really on the list?

[westlake]

How many /.'ers will do that?

Damn near everyone who buys the game. Talk of boycotts on Slashdot is just so much hot air.

Re:Steam really on the list?

[Moofie]

How do you know?

Re:Why so hard?

[MegaManXcalibur]

Personally I like seeing some difficulty put back into games again. One of the "worst video game offenses" in my opinion was dumbing down titles to make them easier for casual gamers.

I was just playing 1943 for the NES again and got a good reminder of what difficulty was. Most new games that I have played were way to easy and I almost felt offended that game developers didn't think gamers could handle a good challenge anymore.

There is nothing worse (game wise) then putting down your cold hard cash for a game and then beating it in less then a few hours without any problems. Luckily some game developers have kept making fun and challenging games for those of us who hate titles that are far too easy.

Kind of funny how the article...

[bob670]

failed to mention Valve's many double dealings (with both thier partners and the fans) or what the long term implications of Steam are? Everyone cried about DRM on music but the game publishers get to walk right in?

Or how about more specifics on how all these mergers are going to limit the number of good games we will see in lieue of sequels? Of course we didn't see any of this because there really isn't a legitimate gaming press to speak of, one of the many reasons so many gaming publications (a fact the article actually managed to mention) keep disappearing, they are filled with unreliable information, much of it seeded by game publisher PR departments and kick backs.

Re:Kind of funny how the article...

[Starsmore]

Everyone cried about DRM on music but the game publishers get to walk right in? I don't know about you, but I've read alot of outcry about Steam and Half-Life 2 on /. alone, not counting the handful of other forums.

Re:Kind of funny how the article...

[bob670]

Very true, but the gaming press, as it stands, has ignored these implications. And judging from most gaming forums the majority of gamers are as well.

Re:Kind of funny how the article...

[Starsmore]

When was the last time you read an article in Rolling Stone complaining about DRM?

Number 8 Rules

[Roofus]

8) Nokia Admits Taco-Shaped Handheld Not Selling

No shit, who would want a handheld shaped like an overweight computer geek who runs a website with a stupid name?

Steam is to software what Realplayer is to music

[Tackhead]

> Support the idea of Steam.

Which idea?

The idea of cutting out the publisher, yes.

The idea of phone-home product activation and 30MB of DRM^H^H^H spyw^H^H^H^Hcontent distribution mechanism resident in memory whether you're going to play the game today or not, no.

The idea that you no longer buy software, but that you merely rent it until the company that wrote it goes under and pulls the plug on the authentication server, no.

The idea that the first sale doctrine no longer applies, no.

Bottom line: When HL2 came out, I thought about buying the retail CD and sending $10 to Valve on principle, but the more I learned about Steam, the less I liked it.

To date, I have yet to purchase HL2. Neither Vivendi nor Valve have (or will) see a penny from me. I will not install Steam or any Steamlike clones. I will not purchase any game that requires them.

I hate warez puppies and won't warez HL2, but anybody that manages to break Steam and puts Valve and this horrid idea out of business -- has my congratulations and my eternal thanks.

Vivendi is to Valve what RIAA is to musicians.

Tell me -- did your favorite indie artist break free from RIAA middlemen by foisting DRM-crippled, plays-only-in-his-custom-phone-home-audio-player music files on you?

Or did he find another way of offering you better value for your money?

Why is that a problem?

[Sycraft-fu]

You also can't go buy firearms with your parents' permission. Your parents may buy firearms and give them to you, but you yourself can't until you are 18 (for long guns, 21 for handguns).

Also I am very hard pressed to come up with a situation where your parents or guardian would be able to give you permission to get a game, yet not be able to get the game themselves. I realise there might be a situation where they can't at that particular moment, but you have no specific right to have the game immediatly.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

Think something like:

"Working late for the next couple of weeks, X needs to be finished. You're going to the movies on saturday, why don't you get it then? Oh yeah...they aren't allowed to sell to you. Meh, you can wait 2 weeks/a month.".

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Lemmy Caution]

Oh, cry me a river. So you wait 2 months. If you are so immature that this is traumatic for you, then you are definitely too immature to be playing an M rated game.

Do I give media-effects theory much truck? No, I don't. Do I have a problem with limiting minors' access to some media without explicit guardian approval? Not a lick.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Starsmore]

So you wait. Simple enough.

Your parents are your parents. As long as you are a minor, they have final say in everything you do, see, etc etc etc. If they decree you can't have a game, then that's the final say.

The smart child would improve their attitudes and show the parent how responsible they are, mature they are, how much of a non-fuckup they are, proving that getting San Andreas and playing it won't cause them to dress all in green and go shoot up the Mexicans down the block.

The rest of my comments have already been said. Boils down to Soccer Moms trying to run the rest of the world, because they are too busy having an open and exploratory sexual relationship with the mailman to parent their kids.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

Do I have a problem with limiting minors' access to some media without explicit guardian approval? Not a lick

Did I say that there was a problem with that?

And anyway, I was just trying to give an example of a situation where you can have permission, but the parents can't actually buy the game for the child. I'm not saying it's a huge problem, but to me it is annoying.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

"Did I say that there was a problem with that?"

Seems to me like you did, yes.

How does a parent give a child permission to go to an R-rated movie? They buy them tickets. How does a parent give a child permission to buy an M-rated game? They buy it for them.

What would you propose? Writing a note? Come on. How on earth would a retailer vet that signature?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

What would you propose? Writing a note? Come on. How on earth would a retailer vet that signature?

If there was a way to verifiy the age remotely, it could always be pre-ordered...but no, I can't think of anything that doesn't involve crypto stuff. Which usually means anything I think of won't work.

Also, you need to remember to make the distinction giving permission and proving that permission was given. Buying it for the child proves that the parent has given permission.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

What? A retailer should have to buy a crypto system in order to verify that the kid is allowed to buy stuff? Christ, how hard is it to say "Mom, would you buy this for me on Amazon?"

I don't need to make any distinction at all. I think it's completely reasonable to require a parent to make the purchase, since there's no practical way to verify the existence of "permission".

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

What I mean is that there is a difference between giving permission and proving permission, even though in practice there is no difference when it is being enforced.

And then there is the question of whether this should be done at all.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

Er, so, what exactly is your argument?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

I don't think that the idea of keeping kids in their own world, trying to protect them from the knowledge of bad things in life. And when I say bad, I mean what a few people think are bad.

Especially when such things are decided by a group of people who seem to find fault in anything. And making people pay to have their material censored.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

I totally agree with your first paragraph. It is the parent's final responsibility to generate a well-adjusted child who won't go postal the first time they see somebody get shot on TV. In order to do that, the parents need some control over what their kids are allowed to buy.

You might not think that video games are harmful, and that's your prerogative as a parent. However, there's a substantial body of research that contradicts your supposition.

I don't happen to agree that playing GTA will turn a child instantly into a hooligan. However, I would not allow an eight year old to play that game, any more than I'd let them smoke a cigarette or watch a hardcore porn movie.

Requiring parental permission is not "censorship".

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

If they decree you can't have a game, then that's the final say

This isn't about the parents saying the child can't have the game, it's about the government saying it.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

In order to do that, the parents need some control over what their kids are allowed to buy

How is government enforced limitations giving parents control over what their kids are allowed to buy?

Requiring parental permission is not "censorship".

Yes, it is censorship, even if in some cases it is a good thing. Controlling the flow of information that someone gets is censorship, it doesn't matter if it is for good or bad reasons.

And it isn't the families who are supposedly benefiting from this who foot the bill either.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

Requiring video games to be rated is reasonable. Requiring retailers to card purchasers is reasonable. Making it a felony to sell games to minors is horrendous overkill.

If you want to define "censorship" as any restriction on the transfer of information, sure. I choose to define it more narrowly. Prior restraint by a governing body is censorship. A company deciding that it might be unpopular to sell a product is not censorship.

"And it isn't the families who are supposedly benefiting from this who foot the bill either."

The bill for what?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

Who do you think sets the ratings? The companies themselves? It's done by a government agency, and they charge the publisher for it.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[murdocj]

Meh, you can wait 2 weeks/a month.".

Whoa, now there's a crisis! That's a reason to get rid of all the ratings systems... you might have to wait a week or two to get the latest game that you'll probably play 15 minutes and decide is a pile of junk.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[AvitarX]

My experience as a child tell me that the children of those parents are the ones that we DON'T want to have the game. I had friends with parents like that, and it was fun to hang out with them, it was fun to play their games, they suffered to varying degrees from this upbringing, and the games didn't help.

I am not saying they were killers or criminals because of it, but if nothing else it gave a focal point for violent fantasies and general violent behavior (mostly verbal bullying types stuff). The "coolness" factor of GTA leads to petty crime and vandalism, again not directly and it is mostly a failure of the parents/chemical imbalance in the child, but glorification of criminal activity in the media is certainly a cantributing factor.

I actually think that wrestling (which in games is generaly T) is worse then Mortal Kombat because it is portrayed as real, and noone is getting hurt, but again it is the household that the parents are nowhere to be found, incapable of buying a game for 2 mmonths that I want to have violent games the least.

I can say that violent and gory games did not harm me in any way, and I think that most people in their teens are capable of playing them with no effect at all, but
i can't say for sure, the first gory/violent game I had was Doom and I would say it is a far cry from GTA III.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

It's not a government agency, it's a trade group. And they charge the publisher, just like the movie rating body.

The cost is trivial. Do you really, really think your game prices would go down if the ESRB went away?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Starsmore]

My response was to the parent poster going on about his hypothetical parents telling him no, or wait, or something.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

It's not the cost itself, it's the principle...and anyway, I don't live in the US, and in Australia, it is the Office Of Film And Literature Classification (a government body) that does this.

What I don't like about it is that the publisher is the one responsible for paying it, when it is clearly meant to be benefiting the majority, and taking away sales from the publisher.

So really, you're charging a publisher to not allow their games to be sold (and especially over here, since there is no R rating for games, and they are simply refused classification, and not allowed to be sold).

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

Take out the last sentence, and my point still holds. It wasn't about immediacy, i was just trying to point out that there are situations when the parent can't buy the game for the child, but still give permission.

I probably shouldn't have put in "Meh, you can wait 2 weeks/a month", everyone seems to be paying attention to that over what I was trying to point out.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

The producer is responsible for certifying their product according to the Laws of the Land. It's true for movies, for food, for drugs: Those are costs of doing business (that are, of course, passed right along to the customer). You might be able to put together an argument if the game companies were on the financial ropes. This is obviously not the case.

"when it is clearly meant to be benefiting the majority, and taking away sales from the publisher."

So, what? Ten year olds should be able to pop into the store and buy MurderDeath 5? I don't agree that the publishers have a Right to that audience. For another thing, complying with the ratings requirements will to some degree indemnify them from lawsuits by parents whose kids have just gone and shot up a schoolyard.

The cost of the ratings system is trivial, and the benefit is a benefit for all parties. What's the problem?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

Are games able to be banned entirely in the US?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

Not to my knowledge, no. It'd take a specific act of Congress.

Wal Mart chooses not to sell some titles (which is of course their prerogative), but there's no facility for a nationwide "ban".

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

But the reason that the parents were saying no or to wait was because the government wouldn't allow the game to be sold unless the parent (who was unable to buy the game themselves) bought it themselves.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

I live in Australia, and there is no R or AO rating for games, and anything which is not found to be suitable for an M15 classification is given an RC (Refused Classification) rating, and is not allowed.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Moofie]

Seems to me like changing that law would be a good idea. Get to it. You live in a democracy, right?

Re:Why is that a problem?

[lachlan76]

It is a democracy, but it seems that we really just do whatever the US tells us or does themselves.

I mean it's not like we have freedom of speech over here...

Sony Online Entertainment and Star Wars Galaxies

[mikaelhg]

SOE and SWG as a whole should take the place #2, for their unsurpassed gap between promises and deliveries.

Re:mod parent down, dammit

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

Who thought it would be wise to mod up someone with the logon "irc.goatse.cx troll (http://gnaa.us/)"?
If that wasn't obvious enough, you could have read the content to realise it was a troll:

Already at the cap again, thanks.

* Constant need to upgrade hardware.
Its optional, you only really NEED to upgrade every 4 or 5 years, exact same with a console. Until then, everything you get just makes your old games play better.
* Constant need to upgrade software.
No? You can just use the drivers that came with your hardware, but you have the OPTION to upgrade to newer, more optimized code.
* Hardware components must be compatible.
Awww shit, this dual geforce pci-x SLI setup wont fit in my sparc!.
Its a non issue, pretty much every pc component is compat with eachother, if you're worried, google it before buying it.

* You will have to patch your game.
No, you CAN patch your game. Or you can play the bugged game that shipped, as you're FORCED to do on consoles. If you think console games are perfect, you've never played halo2 online, or any of the tons of buggy games. I still remember a PSX racing game that shipped with the AI disabled, no sound, and noclip mode on your car. Obviously horrible Q&A, but could be patched later on PC, but not console. Although console games have had patches since as long as I've been playing them (NES), just look at any game genie/gameshark code list and you'll see the different listings for revisions of the game. But if you bought the buggy first version, good luck patching it.

* Less QA.
Cite a source. For every buggy PC game you can name, I can name a ton of buggy console games. Frankly I'd trust a company like IDSoft to release a less buggy game than someone like EA.
* The Microsoft Tax.
I'd rather pay a little more for the OS than subsidize the cost with each game purchase.

No, overzealous parents don't help

[Sycraft-fu]

However, that's their right. You can fight to change that, but at this point so long as your parents provide for your welfare and don't abuse you, they have the right to control your life in pretty much any way they wish.

Also, for many parents, there's a happy medium between total restriction and no restriction. As an example one of my coworkers, who is the father of two boys around 12 years old, asked about UT 2004. He was thinking of getting it for his kids, but wanted to check it out first. I let him borrow my copy and he tried it. He decided that it was acceptable, but with the parental controls engaged turning down the gore level. GTA, on the other hand, he finds unacceptable (though fun).

However the shooters are a new thing for them, he didn't used to let his kids play them, he just feels they've grown up enough that it's ok now. In a couple years, he'll allow for more gore and probably most M rated games.

But that's a decision for him to make, and restricting the sale of M games helps. An M rating doesn't mean he won't let his kids play it, it means he needs to evaluate it first, then make a decision. A T rating means that it's probably fine as is since it limits the amount of violence and such allowed.

You can't fix stupid parents, but the ratings can help responsible parents do their job easier.

Re:No, overzealous parents don't help

[Xentropy]

An M rating doesn't mean he won't let his kids play it, it means he needs to evaluate it first, then make a decision.

Unfortunately when it comes to any type of digital media, it's almost impossible to "evaluate" without knowing someone who already owns it, since if you make a purchase and it doesn't make the cut, most stores won't allow you to return it, calling you a software pirate if you try.

Re:No, overzealous parents don't help

[Meagermanx]

Actually, a lot of PC games have demos, and, at least in my Wal-Mart, they have scanners that allow you to view In-Game footage of all of their games.

Re:No, overzealous parents don't help

[Gewis]

My hiccup here comes with, "as long as your parents provide for your welfare and don't abuse you, they have the right to control your life in pretty much any way they wish."

That's true only to a small degree. If a teenager turns rebellious and says, "I'm going to watch rated R movies and play rated M games anyway," the parents can't *STOP* providing for the welfare of their children. Maybe they can confiscate the games and movies, but controlling their lives "any way they wish" is laughable at best.

merging systems is not the answer

[pluke]

A large proportion of minors do not buy the games themselves, relying on getting their parents to buy it for them, i believe from several conversations I have had with game shop staff that most parents think games are 'only games' and buying little jimmy the latest goreland 7 video game is perfectly acceptable, totally disregarding the age ratings. With a movie for a minor to see the latest release he has to get through the cinema staff, which is a major barrier, and if getting a parent to hire a movie, they tend to be a lot stricter adhering to the recommended age ratings. The education of the parents as to the age system is what the industry should concentrate on. I think trying to directly compare the Movie and video game age ratings is unfair, you are talking about comparing, for example, waqtching someone being killed by a murderer to actually playing out the part of the murderer yourself.

Re:merging systems is not the answer

[Moofie]

"most parents think games are 'only games' and buying little jimmy the latest goreland 7 video game is perfectly acceptable, totally disregarding the age ratings."

Since they're the parents, they get to make that determination. It's their responsibility to do so.

Laws like sausage: its all a game

[xtermin8]

You're trying to see logic where there is none. Its about people grabbing power however they can, in the name of decency. Its a marketing tool too. When moviegoers were going to R-rated movies, a little more sex was in films. Lately PG-13 is more fashionable, there's a little less. I just bought the original Dawn of the Dead. It was unrated in '78. The cartoonish gore was laughable. And there has been a huge change of decency standards since cable became common. Why try to make sense of it?

Half-Life 2 Collectors Edition Inspired

[FauxReal]

Half-Life 2 Cookie Edition.

Painfully interesting indeed...

[atomic_toaster]

The idea that "it takes a village to raise a child" may have worked when the village consisted of 100 people of the same moral/religious background as the parents, but in today's mix of cultures, religions, and values, it doesn't work all that well. These days, parents actually have to take responsibility for their children, instead of expecting the village/state to. Who is to say that your opinions of what is appropriate for a child to see/play/read will be the same as your next-door neighbor's, let alone the entire country's? Then why should the state be able to dictate what your child is allowed to see/play/read? What the ratings system teaches people is that it's impossible for the government to a) rate all media by the same scale, and b) that it's impossible, outside of a police state, to enforce all of the restrictions.

Interview with the Vampire was rated R in theatres, but the book is available to everyone of every age in most bookstores, for less than the cost of seeing the movie in theatres, most of the time. People argue that some media is more graphic than others, but just watch Quills (rated R), go read Justine, Philosophy in the Bedroom, and Other Writings (available to anyone who wants to pay $25.50 for a trade paperback), and then tell me which is more graphic. There is a reason that despite the prevalence of video games and movies, some print is still censored in some countries and schools. For crying out loud, the Harry Potter movies are rated PG, which allows children to go see it in theatres without parental supervision, but reading the book at school can result in the book being confiscated, or even the child being suspended.

It's time to stop blaming the ratings system and the media itself for peoples' actions, and start taking personal responsibility. If you don't want your children doing/watching/reading something, you have to pay attention. Granted, it's impossible to do this 24/7, but didn't knowing that your parents would find out eventually and understanding that there would be consequences influence your behaviour as a child? The government, by its very nature, will never be consistent. If you want your children to turn out in a way that you approve, then it's time for parents to be.

Re:Painfully interesting indeed...

[utlemming]

"It's time to stop blaming the ratings system and the media itself for peoples' actions, and start taking personal responsibility."

You must not be an American?

I don't think revamping the ratings system will will fix the problem per se. My reason for promoting a ratings revamp that would span across all media is based on the fact of being able to make good decision based on strict rules. If you are looking for smut, then you may or may not bea able to find it in an R rating. The same goes for games -- if you are looking to avoid violence, then you know to avoid an M rated game; the game also includes the reason on the box, but not always on movies. It would be easier for parents and those wanting to avoid certain content material if the rating system was uniform and consistant. But as it stands now you have to do research like http://www.screenit.com/ in order to find out if there is potentially objectionable material in a movie.

I whole-heartedly agree with you on blaming the ratings system. I don't think that we should blame anything on the ratings system. The reason that objectionable material is being produced is based on the fact that it is supported by the almighty dollar. If money wasn't flowing into the coffers of the smut peddler, then porn wouldn't be an issue. If people weren't buying video games it wouldn't be an issue. The problems that society is seeking to shield children from are the very things that have been created by some of those people themselves; by voting for the content on TV and movies and music via the almighty dollar they have made that content avaliable. The fact is that we live in a society that seeks freedom in choice and then to seeks protection from the consquences (few people realize that chosing A or B is not that simple, you actually choose conquences -- if you chose to touch the burner, then you will be burned, you chose to be burned). If parents would be actual parents and parent, then I doubt that we would have half of the problems society is facing. But when you seek to fix the symptom with out solving the root problem, then the problem will find another way to express itself. So no, I don't think that "it takes a villege to raise a child" but the standards of that villege will affect that child one way or the other. But then again, America has grown so materialistic that parenting has become a chore.

Re:Painfully interesting indeed...

[Minna Kirai]

for a trade paperback), and then tell me which is more graphic.

Quills. That was too easy, give me another one! Or just consider the definition of "graphic" in relationship to books...

Leisure Suit Larry Min-Games

[Saint Stephen]

I don't know if it makes the top 20, but the mini-games in LSL are the worst idea in history. I hope whoever came up with that idea is shot.

It's more fun to be anally raped at the dentist than to play those games.

#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

Why is it that everyone complains about DRM, but when Valve released Steam, no one complained? People bitched about Palladium, but when Steam came out, everyone bent over like a lifer in the shower.

Right now Steam exerts as much control over your computer as any Trojan, except we pay for the privilege. Steam tells you want to do, when you can do it, how you can do it, and can pull the plug for ANY reason. Right now Valve has pulled accounts for those who allegedly run warez versions of its game. But what's stopping it from branching out?

What if Valve gets bought out by Sony, for example, and Sony decides to crack down on MP3 and Divx files?

What if Valve decides to charge a monthly access to Steam?

What if Valve goes out of business or its servers get shut down?

And here's the important one: What if Steam makes mistakes and people who validly paid for the game gets screwed out of ALL of their Valve games?! Does Valve really think it has created the first perfect system in all of humanity?! From their press releases it sure sounds that way.

With Steam buyers of Half-Life 2 have given up any resale rights. They have given up any right to play the game off line. And despite the fact that the game is validated every time you play it, you're still stuck using the CD when you play. Oh, and by the way, if you have any other Valve games you lost the same rights on those too because Steam will conveniently convert them to its draconian DRM, free of charge.

And where is the advantage to the user?! If Steam eliminated all piracy of Half-Life 2, why isn't it cheaper?!

The bad news is that because Half-Life 2 is such a success, Steam will be the future of PC gaming. So it's only a matter of time before ALL games are sold this way. But the really bad news is because people are accepting this Palladium-lite in droves, it's only a matter of time before ALL software is sold this way!

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

See what I mean!!! I get labeled flamebait merely for pointing out facts about Steam! If Microsoft had put out Steam, I'd be labeled insightful. Why oh why are people defending the erosion of our rights?!

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Man in Spandex]

Steam tells you want to do
Play games

when you can do it
When you're logged in with your games fully updated which is done automatically from servers faster than waiting lets say, in-line at fileplanet or searching for a mirror on google or filemirrors.

how you can do it
You can play offline if you save your login info in your pc. Otherwise, configure it as you want like HL1 (before Steam) via user-specific configs or use whatever tool to launch games. It's not any different.

and can pull the plug for ANY reason
That's right. If you hack and are caught, you're banned. If you're cd-key is spreaded among people, then your account is banned. Otherwise, its one account to have as long as Steam is online.

What if Valve gets bought out by Sony, for example, and Sony decides to crack down on MP3 and Divx files?
Valve made two games until now. Half-Life and Half-Life 2. That and several mods that they bought the rights or ported such as Counter-Strike and Day of Defeat. They are on top of their game and the last thing they'd do is let this company be acquired by a giant. Won't happend unless Valve screws up somewhere.

What if Valve decides to charge a monthly access to Steam?
Do you have a chain around your neck saying that you are owned by them? If they somehow decide that fees should be payed to use Steam for whatever reason, people aren't stupid, they will leave and so would I.

What if Valve goes out of business or its servers get shut down?
Steam servers going offline is the only thing that worries me. Without those servers, our copies would be useless but I guess a company that wouldn't want to lose loyal fans would release some kind of patch so we could play even at that worst possible scenario.

What if Steam makes mistakes and people who validly paid for the game gets screwed out of ALL of their Valve games?! Does Valve really think it has created the first perfect system in all of humanity
It could happend. If that happends, then nothing's stopping you from taking action against them. You have rights as a consumer and federal laws say so from Canada, US, UK, Germany, and many others. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

It's far from a perfect system but until now, it's doing the job that it's suppose to do. A lot of europeen customers got screwed because their dvd drive couldn't read their media. Valve ignored for a long time (I was going nuts too) but they eventually gave in and now theres no cd-check. They don't completely ignore us.

With Steam buyers of Half-Life 2 have given up any resale rights. They have given up any right to play the game off line. And despite the fact that the game is validated every time you play it, you're still stuck using the CD when you play.
Ignorant. Read my last statement. Valve did remove the cd-check. The file "Source Shared Securom.gcf" is no longer downloaded by Steam.

And where is the advantage to the user?! If Steam eliminated all piracy of Half-Life 2, why isn't it cheaper?!
I don't understand that logic. So if a product can be pirated, then it has to be more expensif? Damn dude! Lets Raise the price of Windows up to $5000 USD!

That's it that's all.

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Raijin Z]

If they somehow decide that fees should be payed to use Steam for whatever reason, people aren't stupid, they will leave and so would I. People are most certainly stupid. Do you think the diehard HL/CS camp would greatly protest paying $5 or so per month to play games through Steam? "Hay, it's cheaper than those stupied mmolololwtf games"

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

"Do you have a chain around your neck saying that you are owned by them? If they somehow decide that fees should be payed to use Steam for whatever reason, people aren't stupid, they will leave and so would I."

So you don't mind throwing 45 bucks away? Right now I can play my copy of Doom and tons of other games anytime I want. Why are you willing to pay for a game where you even MIGHT have to stop playing?!

"a company that wouldn't want to lose loyal fans would release some kind of patch so we could play even at that worst possible scenario"

Why would a company that's out of business care about loyal users. Loyal users paid for their games but they are still forced to use Steam.

"It could happend. If that happends, then nothing's stopping you from taking action against them."

But the decks are stacked against the user. Valve knows that no one is going to sue over a 45 dollar game. It can shut down accounts right and left and NOTHING will ever get done about it. Why are you supporting such a system?

What about losing your resale right? I guess you don't mind being screwed out of that too?

"I don't understand that logic..."

Let's assume that 10% of all games are pirated. Now that people have to pay to play, Valve makes MORE money. And also, because there are no aftermarket sales, once again, Valve makes MORE money. Valve is making MORE money, we're giving up rights, and are getting screwed in the process.

Once again, why do you support such a system?!

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

"You can play offline if you save your login info in your pc."

I wanted to verify this. I downloaded and attempted to install the Steam/Half Life 2 demo. It says, and I quote, "your computer will NEED to be connected to the Internet to play any Steam games."

"Ignorant."

You can call me ignorant all you want. But all the information I have I got from the internet. Everything I wrote I read somewhere. There is a difference between being "wrong" and being "ignorant." What would be nice is if Valve told us eactly what Steam would do and what our rights are.

And regarding the cost of Half-Life 2, since there is no longer a distrubtor being paid, a shipper being paid, a packager being paid, the person pressing the CDs being paid, and no retailers being paid, Valve is making a LOT more money per game than it ever did before.

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[strikethree]

>>And where is the advantage to the user?! If Steam eliminated all piracy of Half-Life 2, why isn't it cheaper?!
>I don't understand that logic. So if a product can be pirated, then it has to be more expensif? Damn dude! Lets Raise the price of Windows up to $5000 USD!"

I think his point was that the industry always says they have to raise prices because of piracy. Since there is supposedly less piracy under Steam, the prices should therefore be lower.

Personally, I think it is absurd to pay retail prices through Steam since there are fewer middlemen to have to pay.

strike

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

Did you actually read all the frigging steps you have to go through?! Right now I can simply double click on icon and the game starts. Once again, why would ANYONE want to pay the same prices and get less value?!

I have no doubt Half-Life 2 is a great game. But a draconian system is a draconian system, regardsless of how "cool" it's presented.

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

Oh, and if you NEED an internet connection to play off-line, you can't really play off-line when your connection is down can you?!

"Sure you can play off-line any time you want. Simply connect to our servers and we'll give you permission."

Don't you get it. Valve controls your computer, NOT you!

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Richard Jones]

And anyway, it *was* cheaper for me to buy through Steam. Off the shelf, aroun $100. From Steam, around $75. *And* the money goes to Valve, not filtered through the publisher.

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[frikazoyd]

The way the current system works under Steam, if you buy Half Life 2 (in store or from Valve directly) you have to connect to a Valve server, to go through a key verification process. After that, Half Life 2 is "Unlocked", and you can play offline. For the skeptics, log on to Steam, then shut steam down. Disconnect your LAN line. Now, run Steam again. It will say "Unable to connect" and give you options to shut Steam down, retry, or work in offline mode. Voila, you can play without being connected. This is all covered in the steampowered faq, by the way.

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Minna Kirai]

you have to connect to a Valve server

True, which is why this is a lie:

Voila, you can play without being connected.

False. Attach "anymore" to the end of the sentence and it becomes true. But as written, it was a simple lie: Valve will NOT allow you to play HL2 without an Internet connection

Re:#1 should have been Steam!!!

[Anita Coney]

Off-line mode does NOT work. If you need an internet connection to go off line, THERE IS NO OPTION FOR OFF-LINE PLAY!!!

Try telling someone who wants to play Half-Life 2, when their connection is down, then there is an option for off-line play. See how far you get.

"I used to think I could educate my non-technically inclined friends and family about this stuff. Guess what? Nobody cares!"

I agree that no one cares. Heck, I've gotten SO flamed merely from pointing out that Steam is no different than Palladium. If you remember, all I said was that in my opinion Steam should have been the number one low of gaming in 2004.

Can you think of a lower point in gaming than the exact year we turned over control of our computers to corporations, merely because we wanted to play a cool game for a few hours?! Microsoft has been trying to implement a similar system for years but has been unable to do so. Valve did it without even trying.

Heck, if Microsoft was smart it'd buy out Valve and make Steam mandatory for all applications and files. It'd be the easiest way to get Palladium in our computers.

Re:#1 low: the World of Warcraft patch downloader

[IKnwThePiecesFt]

In the retail version of WoW you can simply click a checkbox and only get the patch straight from Blizzard. Maybe in beta they required you to use the torrent system, but who cares, it was their beta and if someone didn't like that, they had lots of other people who would willingly take their spot.

Re:Steam is to software what Realplayer is to musi

[Anita Coney]

I was going to respond, but you already said everything I was going to say anyway.

I actually bought Half-Life 2. I didn't install it because of Steam. I ended up selling it to get my money back. There is no way in heck I'm going to pay the same price, give up resale rights, give up the right to play off line for the SAME amount of money.

If Half-Life 2 sold for 10 bucks with all those restricts, I'd consider it. But not for a penny more.

The portables are getting very ... realistic

[oliverthered]

Pop down you local gunshop and go out hunting maybe take up a Martial art or boxing, or you could always go out on a rally day.

I don't think portables are anything like realistic.

Re:Why so hard?

[sqlrob]

What did you find hard about it?

The only really hard part was the final boss, and if you saved up for the RYNO, even he was a piece of cake.

HL2 was crap too...

[oliverthered]

Both doom 3 and HL2 were like being given a tour of some pretty graphics and 'bad' AI.

when they said 'interactive movie' they were right, just sit down, press a few buttons and watch the preplanned show.

After playing GTA years ago I was expecting a little better than the very linear game play and the horrible predictable, and samey levels.

Doom 3, and the corridors and spiders.
HL2 and the building or outposts full of baddies that you can skip straight past and save a couple of days of playing the game.

Re:HL2 was crap too...

[upsidedown_duck]

I wonder if game makers go through cycles where they are so overwhelmed with new technology that they can't make a non-linear game to save their lives. There was a whole series of RPGs for the playstation that were mind-numbingly linear, then they got better, then Final Fantasy X came out (linear again). Is there a trend where the "ground breaking" games are more hype than substance, because of the new technical challenges?

Re:HL2 was crap too...

[oliverthered]

At least with the original doom you had loads of secrets you could find, which made things a little more interesting.

What happened in doom 3 if you kill the boss when you first meet him in about the 5th level?

what about the customer?

[Ender Ryan]

I hate Steam because it is a system that is hostile towards me, the customer. As a customer, the developers' cutting out the middleman is of no concern to me unless it enables them to give me more or charge me less. So far it has done no such thing, and only serves to prevent me from making fair use of products, such as installing on multiple machines for personal use, or excercising my right as a consumer to resell a product I am no longer using under the doctrine of first sale.

As an avid gamer, I often play older games. With Steam, there is no guarantee I would be able to install and play a game 5 or 10 years down the road, due to the forced online registration(even with the goddam boxed retail version of HL2).

Re:Erm...

[Lehk228]

that's not really dishonest, 16 ms response only limits to 62 hz if every pixel changes every frame, all this means is that it can start drawing changes on some pixels before other ones finish updating.

Re:Spongebob Squarepants The Movie Game for PC

[Zen Punk]

Ummm...what exactly were you expecting when you bought a video game based on a movie based on a children's cartoon?

Re:Article Text

[SwimsWithTheFishes]

Come on, NO ONE, I mean NO ONE has that much gum!

Re:Spongebob Squarepants The Movie Game for PC

[Starsmore]

So it's basically the PC Version of Spider-Man 2: The Game, but with Spongebob Squarepants instead of Peter Parker? :)

Re:Why so hard?

[upsidedown_duck]

I'm not particularly good at memory games, so breaking the locked doors was frustrating. Also, trying to beat the flying saucer on the moon got pretty old. Flying with the glider took too much finesse.

I think R&C 2 would have benefitted greatly from two or three difficulty settings. A slower setting for "old fogies" like me (I'm not even 30...) and a faster setting for 12-year-olds. It would not have been hard at all for the game programmers to have made the glider 15% slower or the damage done by enemies 15% less. These would be trivial programming additions.

Otherwise, it is truly a great game in every way. I just wish I could better enjoy the later stages of it.

People bash Steam because it failed

[MMaestro]

Bashing Steam is popular because they keep saying its for the good for developers and gamers by cutting out the publishers yet they've failed in every respect.

They charged the same price as the boxed version, the first no-no. Secondly, the whole 'pre-caching' of Half-Life 2 on your computer was excuted HORRIBLY given the fact that the servers outright crashed from some, horribly affected gameplay on other games on Steam or Steam simply froze up for others. Third, if the pre-caching of Half-Life 2 was a stress test for Steam, considering its results, Half-Life 2 never should have been released over Steam without some major overhauls within the system (not to mention the Half-Life 2 launch problems).

I'll support the idea of Steam when they admit and face their problems rather than trying to cover it up with hype.

Re:Why so hard?

[upsidedown_duck]

This must be stoopid-mod day. Why don't you go mode down the Doom 3 thread as off topic, too, then!

Seeding

[tepples]

You think people are going to keep seeding files of mods, patches, etc? As soon as most people get what they need they will kill it

Have the program automatically seed the files during online play. This would work better for an MMORPG than for a game with a strong single player component.

Nintendo DS will go online very soon

[tepples]

In North America, I haven't seen any game that lets you do that on any Nintendo, Sega, Atari, NEC, or Sony portable system.

The current Nintendo DS games use a proprietary non-routable layer 3 (nicknamed Ni-Fi) over 802.11b, but titles that use standard Wi-Fi (TCP/IP over 802.11b) are coming very soon.

Re:Nintendo DS will go online very soon

[generic-man]

That's good to know; I'm fence-sitting about the DS for this reason. My point is that the N-Gage has built-in GPRS to go directly onto the Internet from anywhere*, while 802.11[bg] requires you to be near a base station in order to access the Internet.

* in the T-Mobile US GPRS network, serving over 100 people

Consoles are locked

[tepples]

The internet makes their hand in distribution mostly a moot point nowadays, since if a developer had a truly great game, they could sell it online.

You can't sell a game online if it works best with a gamepad, especially if it's a same-screen multiplayer game. Most PC gamers seem to shun games in such genres in favor of titles in keyboard-and-mouse LAN-party genres, and the console makers aren't friendly to new publishers.

Internets? What internets?

[tepples]

The fact is, once you "activate" your copy of Half-Life 2 using Internet access, you can save your login information and play offline.

How will the local public library react to players who cart in their PCs to activate HL2?

Sounds acceptable to me

[Sycraft-fu]

Again, you have no right to any sort of immediacy in getting a game, or any right at all for that matter. Also please excuse those of us that now work for a living if we are less than sympathetic. I face the same kind of wiating often, though it's not becuase my parents say no, I'm an adult now, it's because I simply lack the money. If something like my fridge breaks, I have to replace it, and when I spend money on that, I cannot spend it on videogames, even if a I really want them. Thus I must wait until I can afford the game.

Life is not something where we always get what we want, unfortunately. Those of us that are fortunate enough that videogames are the main thing we can't get whever we want really don't have room to complain, there are a lot of people who worry about far more basic needs.

Re:Sounds acceptable to me

[lachlan76]

I know, but I was just trying to point out that there are situations where you can have permission, but the parent can't come.

I just happen to be of the opinion that trying to keep kids in their own little world is a bad idea.

Especially since these things are being rated by people who seem to try to censor every single thing that could possibly be seen as offensive by anyone.

Re:Sounds acceptable to me

[Sycraft-fu]

Sorry, but parents have a right to keep kids in their own little world. If you want that changed, you need to fight to change the law for what rights minors and their guardians have. At this point, parents can shelter their kids, for better or worse.

As I noted in another post, there is a wide swath between sheltering kids, and giving them unrestricted access to information. There is plenty that a responsible parents might now want their kid to be exposed to.

"I was carded buying a game" and other whines

[nicksthings]

I'm surprised to see what a burden it is for some people to actually have to pull out their ID to show it to a cashier before purchasing an M rated game.

Listen, I work video game retail and my company requires that myself and all of my employees verify that a purchaser is 17 years or older before buying an M rated game. In many cases, it's certainly not necessary, but if you're carding one person, you should probably, as a rule, card everyone. I've seen 16 year olds who look like they're 29 and 29 year olds who look like they're 16.

"But I have a full beard!" Congratulations - I knew this girl in middle school who was rocking some chin hair for awhile. All of the kids used to send her to get pork rinds, Hustler and cigarettes from the local Exxon. Now I'm an overweight, porn addicted chain smoker.

If someone asks to see your ID and you're insulted or inconvenienced, talk to your doctor about changing your meds. We're not playing surrogate parent, we're just trying to enforce the ESRBs ratings here. I have had some of my employees NOT card teenagers when purchasing an M rated game and there have been instances where the parent came back wondering why we sold them Mortal Theft Autohunt: Streets of LA. This isn't a particularly good situation to be in for a company (or a store manager who has to calm an irate parent), so it's a good practice to have.

And trust me, I for one think that there are indeed many children not "of age" who are "mature" enough to play Manhunt or Halo 2. But it's not my job to decide that and there's certainly no harm in erring on the side of caution. Hell, you're going into your wallet anyhow; your ID is already right there, man!

Re:"I was carded buying a game" and other whines

[CreationLtd]

Carding for games is unlikely to restrict underage access to said games. All the kid has to do is pay a friend, acquaintance or whoever to go in buy the game for him, walk out the store and hand him the game and the receipt.

All you're doing by carding is creating a rich environment for someone to make money off of buying games for kids and selling it to them for a little profit.

Unlike booze, handing a kid a mature game is not illegal. Carding is just not a well-thought out idea.

Re:"I was carded buying a game" and other whines

[nicksthings]

"All you're doing by carding is creating a rich environment for someone to make money off of buying games for kids and sellling it to them for a little profit."

You're kidding me, right? This is a stretch...it's not perfect by any means, but it works. I've seen it. A child walks up to the counter and attempts to purchase GTA: San Andreas. They're met with, of course, a speech about how it's an M rated game and they'll need to have proof of age or an adult. So they grab their parent.

"What game are you getting," they'll ask.

The cashier explains what the game is about and shows them the ESRB rating. The incredulous parent says, "Heck no! Pick out a nice dirt bike game."

Carding just "worked." That happens more often than not. Does that happen all of the time? Nah. Your scenario about how this is creating some kind of "Buy Games for Underage Kids" underground is a bit far fetched however and not a really great argument against it.

Re:"I was carded buying a game" and other whines

[Minna Kirai]

A child walks up to the counter and attempts to purchase GTA: San Andreas.

Where do you live that kids with $60 in their pockets are seen with a parent in a public store? In all my detailed observations, that simply isn't how mall-rat culture works.

Your scenario about how this is creating some kind of "Buy Games for Underage Kids" underground is a bit far fetched however and not a really great argument against it.

True, if they're forced underground, they'll just "pirate" the games, rather than give money to a corporation that's working to block their patronage. I expect carding would make PS2-copiers more prevalent...

Too expensive!!!!!!!

[phantomfive]

OK, if the point is to make the game cheaper by cutting out the publisher, WHY DOES THE GAME STILL COST $50????????

STEAM pros and cons

[andr0meda]

You list a lot of technical and economic advantage, but the reasons why people are upset about STEAM are neither of those. It's a move that removes freedom and traditional personal computing rights from the player. It discriminates people who do not have internet connections. I'll admitt that this is mostly a theoretical argument, but when STEAM servers go down, that essentially means that you pay for something that isn't there, and there's no way to get your money back.

It's a trojan horse that is a valid response to the defunkt middle-man buisiness model that also plagues the games industry since the advent of the internet. But there's also a downside: it removes a legal player that protects and fights for it's customer volumes; the same retailers and publishers that are being cut out. So unless the gaming community can find an answer that can confront the game studio with it's needs and problems in adequate terms, this IS a problem.

Right now it's just too easy for Valve to silence (or "wait-out") the little guy in the street, much easier than it is to silence big retail houses or publishers when problems arise.

Re:I do hate file planet, but....

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

You don't need people to keep seeding. When a patch is released, the game company's server is the initial seed. People will download the patch, sharing their bandwidth at least while they are downloading and probably seeding for a few hours or days. So in the frenzy surrounding the release of the patch, you can support a Fileplanet sized crowd for the cost of a server or a few in the colo.

After a periood, everyone will have stopped seeding, but at that point you can support fast downloads for the one or two people at a time that will be downloading, because the company just keeps seeding forever.

Tim

Halo 2

[ElliotMadHatter]

Gaming low of the year: Halo 2 release... what a let-down, I can't believe people even considered it being better than Half-Life 2!

EQ2 in the list?

[murdocj]

I was a bit surprised (well, no, I was VERY surprised) to see the release of EQ2 in the list. Here you've got a list of companies closing down, sweatshop companies, legal actions... and the successful release of a new online game.

All of the reviews I've seen of EQ2 vs. WoW have basically said the same thing: "they are both good games, WoW has lower requirements and is quicker to get into, EQ2 has better graphics". I started playing EQ2 and am also trying out a free month of WoW, and I'd have to say that assessment is pretty accurate.

Adding EQ2 to the "lows" list is just an individual bias thing, which pretty much throws the whole list into doubt for me.

Re:EQ2 in the list?

[Xlipse]

Very true. The numbers I saw about 2 weeks ago put EQ2 at around 200,000 active accounts (I think I saw it on Slashdot??), with WoW at just under 300,000 active accounts - it was in that neighborhood somewhere. Regardless, EQ2 had quite a bit more than everyone thought and it had and is at least COMPARABLE to WoW's subscribers. "No one cared" eh? OKAY! In other words.. HARDLY 'no one cared'. The author of that list is DEFINATELY baised and it's easy to tell by reading a few of the other items in this "list of lows". But everyone's entitled to their opinion! (for the record, I play WoW and EQ2)

Re:EQ2 in the list?

[akisugawara]

The userbase isn't low for EQII definitely--but when you look at the substantial time and money spent into making the game, the high expectations, it is a "low" to have an MMORPG newcomer like Blizzard beating out Everquest--which basically established the genre.

Everquest II is selling, still has a dedicated userbase, but it didn't turn out to be the MMORPGs to end all MMORPGs--and therefore disappointing.

Nonsense...

[el-spectre]

1) They weren't refusing service, they were attempting to police what people buy.
2) I clearly said I wasn't beligerant. Confusing disagreement with agression is a dangerous mental path to walk down.
3) A cash transaction isn't a contract, of course kids can buy things.

There's a difference between what private businesses attempt, and the LAW.

Re:Nonsense...

[stanmann]

Certainly, they were choosing to refuse to sell item X rated M to anyone without an ID, that is by definition refusing service.
YOU clearly were beligerant, It doesn't matter how "nice" you think you were, and they should have refused to sell you anything.
WRONG, THE LAW states that a cash transaction is EXACTLY a contract. You may disagree, but you will be wrong. A minor may purchase a CD, DVD, or piece of computer software and his parents may return it and MUST be refunded the money regardless of store policies on the matter, do some research.

Re:Nonsense...

[el-spectre]

Heh, speaking of beligerant...

Since you're clearly correct about everything (including my behavior in an incident that you did not witness), I'm not even gonna try to continue.

Concole makers FORCE devs to fix bugs

[Scrameustache]

you only really NEED to upgrade every 4 or 5 years, exact same with a console. [...] You can just use the drivers that came with your hardware, but you have the OPTION to upgrade to newer, more optimized code.

That is a lie.
PC games are meant to be used with the latest drivers released.

Its a non issue, pretty much every pc component is compat with eachother

Another lie. Game companies spend thousands on compatibility testing because many configurations (OS, motherboard, video and asound card) combinations produce... unpreditable results.

you CAN patch your game. Or you can play the bugged game that shipped, as you're FORCED to do on consoles.

Again, false and misleading.
PC games are routinely released with critical bugs (crashing, impossibility to complete the game) that are NOT allowed on consoles, where the console maker will require that all games released for their machine have no known critical bugs. They test these games to make sure they are major-bug free, while on PC the game is released and patched later.

Less QA.
Cite a source.

Me.
I know first hand that "we'll patch it" is a PC game develloper's mantra. When they do their first console game, they are dismayed, shocked that they actually have to fix the bugs if they want the game to ship.

"Patriotic?"

[Meneudo]

There is a difference between killing someone who 'is' a real person, and someone without a real-life name or story attached. No, I'm not trying to be "patriotic" or anything here. I'm just saying there is a fundamental between killing people with randomly generated names/faces/etc and killing a 'real person.' I would say that it is a low in the gaming industry. Hell, it doesn't matter if it was JFK. I would be appalled if people took the names of veterans who died in the war, and placed them back in their situations only to have you kill them again. Yeah, I must not have been thinking when I wrote the "decent end" stuff, though.

Thank you, come again

[nicksthings]

Not only was your comment rude, but completely not funny. But good job. And by the way, argue semantics with me all you want ("my company"), but you should know that those in retail management positions and higher up tend to see checks a wee bit higher than $200. It's usually around $203.48 after taxes.

Re:Article Text

[mink]

I thought battlecruiser survived at least that long.