Sorry, which greedy bastards are you blaming the mortgage scandal on exactly?
The greedy realtors who lied on mortgage forms about buyers' income?
The greedy home buyers who bought way beyond their means, or bought 2nd and 3rd houses with interest-only loans with the expectation to resell it in 6 months at a major profit?
The greedy builders who built entire neighborhoods on spec, creating far more product than the demand for houses could support?
Or were you just blaming the banks who approved the loans, because they're the ones who got bailed out of their mistake?
I'm not sure if it's spammers exactly, but Apple probably wanted people to see something to indicate who was adding them besides an email address.
WOW is an MMO where you spend a lot of time with people you only know from the internet. Real names don't even mean anything there between most friends. "Tom? Who the crap is that? Oh, you mean elwinlybronzebottom?"
Gamescenter, from what I can tell, is for you to play Scrabble with people you're already friends with. Does it even support playing with random players on the internet? Maybe some games do, but without voice or fast-typing chat, you're probably not going to be making many friends on the service.
They could avoid the whole issue by only showing your real name when you add someone by e-mail address, which you tend to give out to people you know IRL, and not using real names when friending by Apple/Gamecenter ID. If you're adding someone from a menu within a game, for instance, odds are you don't know the person. (If such alternate friends-adding options even exist, which they probably don't)
I think you've confused the article with MMOs. The article is NOT talking about MMOs like WOW, the article is talking about Farmville and the like.
WOW is a mix of the elements you laud from games like Starcraft and GTA and the "turn brain off" accomplishment reward from games like Farmville. The biggest draw to WOW isn't even the accomplishment-reward addiction, it's the social "hang out with friends" aspect.
Comparisons can be drawn between WOW and Farmville for sure, but don't conflate the article's discussion of barebones "click-reward-only" games like Farmville to games with actual gameplay, storyline, and socialization like WOW.
Just looked it up, and apparently it's a "prepared meals tax", so the tax may still apply to take-out. I'll try getting it "to go" next time anyway and see if it works. Thanks for the tip!
In my area sales tax is down around 5%, but if I go into the city it jumps to something like 12% (at least for restaurants). Seeing $0.25 added onto your $5 taco bell purchase is one thing, seeing $0.60 added makes you stop and think about cross the city line to get those tacos.
Regarding online retailers though, as long as the selection is better and prices are 20% cheaper to begin with, not paying sales tax is just icing on the cake.
Neither Best Buy nor Amazon include sales tax in their advertised prices. Yet Amazon's (and Neweggs, and etc.) prices are typically discounted 20% or more compared to the brick and mortar stores. Even after accounting for shipping. I don't think lack of sales tax is why people pick Amazon and Newegg.
If laws are being broken, law enforcement will subpoena the user from Verizon based on IP at a particular time, and punish appropriately. How is it Verizon's responsibility to make judgement calls on content posted on arbitrary websites by their users?
Weren't these only "dress-up barbie" cosmetic items?
Or did they also include weapons and other "required-to-play" content that CAN be obtained for free in-game, but only through laborious grinding?
I know they said something like "all items can also be obtained in-game", but you put enough hours or a small enough droprate on those items and it's effectively for-pay only.
The way games work these days, there is a LOT to be said for waiting until a price drop (or several) before buying. By then the game is stable, more optimized, the design is often improved in important areas, and the DLC may even be included.
There are too many $20 (bought new) excellent games out there right now for me to justify buying brand new $50-60 broken games.
Where they get you is with the multiplayer that all your friends are playing when its $50, and sick of when its down to $20.
All they stock is the expensive shit and anything older than 3 months is in the "Pre-owned", scratched-to-death pile and still costs 2/3rds of its original price.
I bought Halo Reach at Gamestop, used. They charged $55 for it. I got it home, opened the case, and realized it REEKED of cigarette smoke. Returned it for a full refund, and went to Costco where I bought it new for $52.
For every older game I've looked for, the internet has become the only option at all. Games that are 3-year-old best-sellers have already been re-released in stores as $20 "platinum hits", sold out of stock, and been dropped from the stores altogether.
It's as if all brick and mortar stores have seen what happened to the video rental market and decided to follow suit by accelerating their own death.
Calling Steam evil for these reasons is a bit ignorant of the history and alternatives. Retail games were requiring internet registration before Steam (which in turn prevents resale), and banning users for cheating as well.
Your options here have never been "no DRM or Steam". Your options are "draconian DRM that constantly interferes with your gaming experience OR Steam that mostly doesn't".
But, I guess we should be thankful for Steam's success that we've gained so much ground that we can again call Steam "evil DRM" and try to push all the way back to "no DRM". Not that it's likely to ever happen, but more power to you for trying. Just be careful not to shoot down the good+realistic option and leave us with the bad+realistic draconian DRM option.
Really, Steam may not be perfect (I really wish more online stores were DRM free), but compared to Gamestop and company, they're practically saints. I know which side I'm rooting for.
I'm rooting for Steam too, Valve has more than earned my trust. The killer for me is that Steam is somehow *incredibly* unresponsive. It also likes to churn disk while I'm playing games. So I sadly end up turning it off and losing the Friends list and other features unless I'm running a Steam game at that exact moment.
I recently got a 360, and the prices at Gamestop are truly amazing. Not in the good way. Their tagline should be
"Used games at New game prices!"
That's just compared to brick and mortar stores. Amazon has almost every used game they sell for cheaper new even after shipping cost.
The ONE exception I could find is games that are legitimately out of stock, ie: Beautiful Katamari for the 360. It was cheaper at Gamestop, but only if you can find a Gamestop that has it in stock. The game used to go for $20 new at Best Buy, but is now $30 used at Gamestop, and $35+ used on the internet. They have a bizarre habit of under-producing Katamari games. The same thing happened on the PS2.
1997 was fine, the problem was around 2004-2006 when people were buying (and building) houses as investment speculation, often with no down payment, interest-only loans, and sometimes with no job at all.
Those people are at fault primarily, but the banks are also largely at fault for giving loans to people who couldn't afford them and sometimes misleading people into thinking they COULD afford them.
This whole "Clinton caused the housing crisis because he wanted poor people to buy houses" angle I've only heard as a racist rant, never from any economist.
Movie theaters are like Wal-mart. I must be a bit forgetful, so once or twice a year I'll say "Hm, haven't been there for a while!" And every time I'm severely disappointed.
With movie theaters it's the ticket price, the snack prices, 30 minutes of ads, then people talking on cell phones or bringing in infants.
Forget the hipster protest stuff with Wal-mart -- every time I go I can not find what I'm looking for. A cooler, an electric griddle, a video game their website said they had in stock at that particular store, they're always out of stock. Sometimes you can find another section in the store that has the same item in stock, but usually all 2-3 places are empty. The parking lot and store layout (or mislayout as it may be) are just icing on the cake.
People didn't integrate Wave into their daily routine, but that hardly means the internet gave a "yeah, whatever". It was impressive tech without a clear purpose, nor enough bugfixes to make it usable full-time even if it DID have a full purpose.
I think any company would be smart to hire that guy or his whole team, especially if they were able to apply a little direction to their technical skills.
If only they had cross-linked every image of a floating spinning skull and under-construction worker, they could have gotten this down from 900gb to about 100mb!
And then stick with that. You'll be surprised how quickly they'll adopt to Firefox, a firewall and all that. (Well, most likely; there is also a chance that they won't. But if they don't, then by definition, it won't be your problem anymore.)
It'll take a GeekSquad (or similar) repair bill the first time, but after that they might start following recommendations.
I totally agree when it comes to having to meet strangers to play a game online, that can take relaxation time and make it feel like work. Especially in WOW where raiding and dungeons can quickly turn into babysitting.
But for people you already know, I don't see think there's a huge chasm between going out bowling versus getting on Xbox Live and playing Halo Reach.
Agreed on the problem with single and multiplayer being "bundled" these days. I generally view those games as multiplayer-only and avoid them. Not necessarily because the game is bad either, but because I'm not going to get much out of it when I already have 2-3 multiplayer games on my plate for my social/online time.
Or to put it another way, who wants to pay $60 for a game and not be able to get past 1/3rd of the content? That's stupid for everyone involved - the player (who got $20 of content for $60), the content creators (whose work is never even experienced), and (when it sells poorly) the publisher.
This is why games have difficulty levels. If you want it harder, make it harder. If you chose to play on easy, why complain the game is easy?
Right - people who play longer will already have more experience, and as a result, more skill. Do they really need to give those already-better players uber gear and weapons to boot? What are they thinking when they design these games?
I had a friend who thought Counter-strike was stupid because winners are rewarded with money that can be used to buy better weapons, which of course leads to more winning. But at least that was reset every time you change maps, these new FPS games make that rich-get-richer mechanic permanent. Buying into one of those games much after the initial launch is the equivalent of paying to get bullied.
C) Silently vote kick or leave group to get away from the "baddie"
The problem with C is it shuffles a clueless "baddie" between groups even faster, aggravating even more players.
If you stick to A instead, at least give the baddie a *chance* at learning what they're doing wrong and improving. If worse comes to worst and you're in a hurry or they're not improving, at least they'll know WHY they got booted, and have the chance to do some research or ask around in chat for help.
Indeed, as you said, it's sad how rarely people choose A.
How is socializing online inferior to socializing in a golf cart or softball game or restaurant?
I think there's a rather strong argument that being in Vent with 20 people for several hours is more social than standing out in left field by yourself. It's also "free", whereas going to a coffee shop or restaurant or bar or club inevitably means spending money, often on things you already have at home for much cheaper. Is it really worth spending $30 on $5 worth of drinks to sit with the same handful of buddies over hanging out in Vent?
I really don't want to be forced to socialize with others in order to play a computer game at home.
So....don't play multiplayer games? Why not complain that softball and the gym are "forcing" you to socialize with others too?
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, which greedy bastards are you blaming the mortgage scandal on exactly?
The greedy realtors who lied on mortgage forms about buyers' income?
The greedy home buyers who bought way beyond their means, or bought 2nd and 3rd houses with interest-only loans with the expectation to resell it in 6 months at a major profit?
The greedy builders who built entire neighborhoods on spec, creating far more product than the demand for houses could support?
Or were you just blaming the banks who approved the loans, because they're the ones who got bailed out of their mistake?
I'm not sure if it's spammers exactly, but Apple probably wanted people to see something to indicate who was adding them besides an email address.
WOW is an MMO where you spend a lot of time with people you only know from the internet. Real names don't even mean anything there between most friends. "Tom? Who the crap is that? Oh, you mean elwinlybronzebottom?"
Gamescenter, from what I can tell, is for you to play Scrabble with people you're already friends with. Does it even support playing with random players on the internet? Maybe some games do, but without voice or fast-typing chat, you're probably not going to be making many friends on the service.
They could avoid the whole issue by only showing your real name when you add someone by e-mail address, which you tend to give out to people you know IRL, and not using real names when friending by Apple/Gamecenter ID. If you're adding someone from a menu within a game, for instance, odds are you don't know the person. (If such alternate friends-adding options even exist, which they probably don't)
I think you've confused the article with MMOs. The article is NOT talking about MMOs like WOW, the article is talking about Farmville and the like.
WOW is a mix of the elements you laud from games like Starcraft and GTA and the "turn brain off" accomplishment reward from games like Farmville. The biggest draw to WOW isn't even the accomplishment-reward addiction, it's the social "hang out with friends" aspect.
Comparisons can be drawn between WOW and Farmville for sure, but don't conflate the article's discussion of barebones "click-reward-only" games like Farmville to games with actual gameplay, storyline, and socialization like WOW.
Just looked it up, and apparently it's a "prepared meals tax", so the tax may still apply to take-out. I'll try getting it "to go" next time anyway and see if it works. Thanks for the tip!
In my area sales tax is down around 5%, but if I go into the city it jumps to something like 12% (at least for restaurants). Seeing $0.25 added onto your $5 taco bell purchase is one thing, seeing $0.60 added makes you stop and think about cross the city line to get those tacos.
Regarding online retailers though, as long as the selection is better and prices are 20% cheaper to begin with, not paying sales tax is just icing on the cake.
Neither Best Buy nor Amazon include sales tax in their advertised prices. Yet Amazon's (and Neweggs, and etc.) prices are typically discounted 20% or more compared to the brick and mortar stores. Even after accounting for shipping. I don't think lack of sales tax is why people pick Amazon and Newegg.
If laws are being broken, law enforcement will subpoena the user from Verizon based on IP at a particular time, and punish appropriately. How is it Verizon's responsibility to make judgement calls on content posted on arbitrary websites by their users?
Weren't these only "dress-up barbie" cosmetic items?
Or did they also include weapons and other "required-to-play" content that CAN be obtained for free in-game, but only through laborious grinding?
I know they said something like "all items can also be obtained in-game", but you put enough hours or a small enough droprate on those items and it's effectively for-pay only.
The way games work these days, there is a LOT to be said for waiting until a price drop (or several) before buying. By then the game is stable, more optimized, the design is often improved in important areas, and the DLC may even be included.
There are too many $20 (bought new) excellent games out there right now for me to justify buying brand new $50-60 broken games.
Where they get you is with the multiplayer that all your friends are playing when its $50, and sick of when its down to $20.
All they stock is the expensive shit and anything older than 3 months is in the "Pre-owned", scratched-to-death pile and still costs 2/3rds of its original price.
I bought Halo Reach at Gamestop, used. They charged $55 for it. I got it home, opened the case, and realized it REEKED of cigarette smoke. Returned it for a full refund, and went to Costco where I bought it new for $52.
For every older game I've looked for, the internet has become the only option at all. Games that are 3-year-old best-sellers have already been re-released in stores as $20 "platinum hits", sold out of stock, and been dropped from the stores altogether.
It's as if all brick and mortar stores have seen what happened to the video rental market and decided to follow suit by accelerating their own death.
Calling Steam evil for these reasons is a bit ignorant of the history and alternatives. Retail games were requiring internet registration before Steam (which in turn prevents resale), and banning users for cheating as well.
Your options here have never been "no DRM or Steam". Your options are "draconian DRM that constantly interferes with your gaming experience OR Steam that mostly doesn't".
But, I guess we should be thankful for Steam's success that we've gained so much ground that we can again call Steam "evil DRM" and try to push all the way back to "no DRM". Not that it's likely to ever happen, but more power to you for trying. Just be careful not to shoot down the good+realistic option and leave us with the bad+realistic draconian DRM option.
Really, Steam may not be perfect (I really wish more online stores were DRM free), but compared to Gamestop and company, they're practically saints. I know which side I'm rooting for.
I'm rooting for Steam too, Valve has more than earned my trust. The killer for me is that Steam is somehow *incredibly* unresponsive. It also likes to churn disk while I'm playing games. So I sadly end up turning it off and losing the Friends list and other features unless I'm running a Steam game at that exact moment.
I recently got a 360, and the prices at Gamestop are truly amazing. Not in the good way. Their tagline should be
"Used games at New game prices!"
That's just compared to brick and mortar stores. Amazon has almost every used game they sell for cheaper new even after shipping cost.
The ONE exception I could find is games that are legitimately out of stock, ie: Beautiful Katamari for the 360. It was cheaper at Gamestop, but only if you can find a Gamestop that has it in stock. The game used to go for $20 new at Best Buy, but is now $30 used at Gamestop, and $35+ used on the internet. They have a bizarre habit of under-producing Katamari games. The same thing happened on the PS2.
1997 was fine, the problem was around 2004-2006 when people were buying (and building) houses as investment speculation, often with no down payment, interest-only loans, and sometimes with no job at all.
Those people are at fault primarily, but the banks are also largely at fault for giving loans to people who couldn't afford them and sometimes misleading people into thinking they COULD afford them.
This whole "Clinton caused the housing crisis because he wanted poor people to buy houses" angle I've only heard as a racist rant, never from any economist.
Keep in mind you can also play co-op against the computer. It may be cheesy, but it's still a lot of fun.
Movie theaters are like Wal-mart. I must be a bit forgetful, so once or twice a year I'll say "Hm, haven't been there for a while!" And every time I'm severely disappointed.
With movie theaters it's the ticket price, the snack prices, 30 minutes of ads, then people talking on cell phones or bringing in infants.
Forget the hipster protest stuff with Wal-mart -- every time I go I can not find what I'm looking for. A cooler, an electric griddle, a video game their website said they had in stock at that particular store, they're always out of stock. Sometimes you can find another section in the store that has the same item in stock, but usually all 2-3 places are empty. The parking lot and store layout (or mislayout as it may be) are just icing on the cake.
People didn't integrate Wave into their daily routine, but that hardly means the internet gave a "yeah, whatever". It was impressive tech without a clear purpose, nor enough bugfixes to make it usable full-time even if it DID have a full purpose.
I think any company would be smart to hire that guy or his whole team, especially if they were able to apply a little direction to their technical skills.
If only they had cross-linked every image of a floating spinning skull and under-construction worker, they could have gotten this down from 900gb to about 100mb!
(my own geocities site included)
It also works on OSX and linux
Really? Can you show me how to watch Netflix Instant from Linux?
And how many versions behind is the Linux version of Silverlight again?
And then stick with that. You'll be surprised how quickly they'll adopt to Firefox, a firewall and all that. (Well, most likely; there is also a chance that they won't. But if they don't, then by definition, it won't be your problem anymore.)
It'll take a GeekSquad (or similar) repair bill the first time, but after that they might start following recommendations.
I totally agree when it comes to having to meet strangers to play a game online, that can take relaxation time and make it feel like work. Especially in WOW where raiding and dungeons can quickly turn into babysitting.
But for people you already know, I don't see think there's a huge chasm between going out bowling versus getting on Xbox Live and playing Halo Reach.
Agreed on the problem with single and multiplayer being "bundled" these days. I generally view those games as multiplayer-only and avoid them. Not necessarily because the game is bad either, but because I'm not going to get much out of it when I already have 2-3 multiplayer games on my plate for my social/online time.
Or to put it another way, who wants to pay $60 for a game and not be able to get past 1/3rd of the content? That's stupid for everyone involved - the player (who got $20 of content for $60), the content creators (whose work is never even experienced), and (when it sells poorly) the publisher.
This is why games have difficulty levels. If you want it harder, make it harder. If you chose to play on easy, why complain the game is easy?
Right - people who play longer will already have more experience, and as a result, more skill. Do they really need to give those already-better players uber gear and weapons to boot? What are they thinking when they design these games?
I had a friend who thought Counter-strike was stupid because winners are rewarded with money that can be used to buy better weapons, which of course leads to more winning. But at least that was reset every time you change maps, these new FPS games make that rich-get-richer mechanic permanent. Buying into one of those games much after the initial launch is the equivalent of paying to get bullied.
One more that IMO is the most ubiquitous:
C) Silently vote kick or leave group to get away from the "baddie"
The problem with C is it shuffles a clueless "baddie" between groups even faster, aggravating even more players.
If you stick to A instead, at least give the baddie a *chance* at learning what they're doing wrong and improving. If worse comes to worst and you're in a hurry or they're not improving, at least they'll know WHY they got booted, and have the chance to do some research or ask around in chat for help.
Indeed, as you said, it's sad how rarely people choose A.
How is socializing online inferior to socializing in a golf cart or softball game or restaurant?
I think there's a rather strong argument that being in Vent with 20 people for several hours is more social than standing out in left field by yourself. It's also "free", whereas going to a coffee shop or restaurant or bar or club inevitably means spending money, often on things you already have at home for much cheaper. Is it really worth spending $30 on $5 worth of drinks to sit with the same handful of buddies over hanging out in Vent?
I really don't want to be forced to socialize with others in order to play a computer game at home.
So....don't play multiplayer games? Why not complain that softball and the gym are "forcing" you to socialize with others too?