Slashdot Mirror
GTA IV On PC Goes Exclusive With 'Games For Windows Live'
Erik J writes "Microsoft has announced that the PC version of Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto IV will exclusively use Games for Windows Live for its multiplayer mode when it hits shelves November 18th. Rockstar founder Sam Houser explained the decision: 'As we work toward the release of the PC version, Games for Windows Live affords us the opportunity to seamlessly translate the multiplayer console experience for PC gamers, the service is a natural fit for the platform and we strongly believe it will help in building a strong online community around GTA IV PC.'"
Wired is running a story suggesting that this release could save the rather unpopular Microsoft PC gaming platform.
Instead of facing the fact that the economy of the entire world is swirling down the drain you, you fucking hypocrite, are here on Slashdot...
How cute, someone is feeling impotent about the problems in the world so they are turning to an internet forum to soothe their ego by berating others for not doing enough to alleviate their discomfort.
Who the fuck cares about some tiny country in a tiny planet orbiting a tiny sun in a not-very-significant galaxy? get off your fat ass and start working on the means to reverse entropy, or the universe itself shall cease to exist as we know it.
Douglas Adams said it best, that the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
In round numbers, it's a trillion dollar bailout. That's about a 50% one year increase in the federal budget. In ten years or so, it'll probably be recompensed, maybe at a loss, maybe at a profit. Let's say it'll be at a 50% loss, so we'll get 500 billion back.
In scale, that's similar to a typical US household, earning $60,000, getting a loan for $30,000, buying a expensive car, then selling it for $15,000 ten years from now.
It's a bitch and a half, but it's not the ruin of the economy. Hell, if we simply instituted a freeze in government growth, we would be running a surplus in about four years, and would probably have made back the trillion dollars within ten years. Don't let the panic on the TV reports spook you. That's what they want.
Also, buying videogames, and other such pastimes, are absolutely necessarily to keep the economy growing.
In round numbers, it's a trillion dollar bailout. That's about a 50% one year increase in the federal budget.
So far...
In ten years or so, it'll probably be recompensed, maybe at a loss, maybe at a profit. Let's say it'll be at a 50% loss, so we'll get 500 billion back.
In scale, that's similar to a typical US household, earning $60,000, getting a loan for $30,000, buying a expensive car, then selling it for $15,000 ten years from now.
A typical US household can't afford to do that. A whole country of them doing it all together doesn't somehow magically make the fact that they can't afford it go away.
It's a bitch and a half, but it's not the ruin of the economy.
Not by itself. But its part of a larger spiral. It devalues the dollar, making imports more expensive in a country that relies HEAVILY on imports. Meanwhile local and foreign investors pull their money out of the USA because they are losing money hand over fist and the risk of losing it all is climbing, which exacerbates the credit crunch by removing capital, raising unemployment, and further devaluing the dollar.
Still, the trillion dollar bailout MAY soften the landing, or let it turn around faster with less acute pain than otherwise. I'm not against public intervention on this scale, but the plan they've got on the table right now is utterly idiotic.
Hell, if we simply instituted a freeze in government growth, we would be running a surplus in about four years, and would probably have made back the trillion dollars within ten years.
If the economy spirals into a depression there will be no 'running a surplus in about four years', assuming they could actually freeze spending (which is pretty unlikely).
Don't let the panic on the TV reports spook you. That's what they want.
Agreed. TV reporters are thoughtless ass hats.
Also, buying videogames, and other such pastimes, are absolutely necessarily to keep the economy growing.
In other words: "Set aside whats good for you and put whats good for the economy, for the country, ahead of your own interests."
I believe that's called "communism", one of the dirtiest words one can say in the U-S-of-A.(*)
Advocating to just hang in there is UTTERLY futile. Its only going to work if everyone does it. However, the people that pull out, convert their money to gold, foreign assets, whatever, etc hedging against US currency devaluation, bank failures, further stock market declines, etc start doing better than their peers who stick with the US economy. And that just motivates more and more people to pull out.
Globally the best course of action is to ride it out together, you are right. But individually the best strategy is to get yours out while you can. In a society founded on capitalism and everyone for himself... well... working for the global otpimum is about as likely as a functioning communist system spontaneously happening.
Its ironic because the people calling out for this sort of 'sacrifice whats best for you for whats best for the economy, and it will work out..." includes the staunch free-market libertarians. Yet 'just keep spending and carrying on as normal' is fundamentally a communist and anti-free-market strategy.
(*) Communism as defined by members of society allocating resources for the greater good rather than for their own personal benefit, in the beleif that by serving the greater good. Specifically communism DOESN'T require a state-run-dictatorship allocating resources centrally. Many small communes, for example, are entirely democratic, and the 'sacrifices' are voluntary instead of coerced. It just doesn't work on a larger scale for a variety of reasons. And it won't work to save the US economy for those same reasons.