Don't forget that the reason McDonald's served their coffee ridiculously hot was to cover up the fact that if they didn't the coffee tasted awful, so that they could sell more of it and compete with places serving higher-quality products. That was likely why the jury awarded the very high initial judgement - they were penalizing McDonald's for letting their desire for higher profits outweigh the danger to their customers.
I found that out after continuing to read the comments. In any case, I always liked ICEE better, probably at least in part because it was available in more places than just 7-11.
No joke - thanks for the informative website. Now that I know my local Target has an Icee machine, I may just head down there and see if they're as good as I remember. Coke Slurpees are good, but the rest of the flavors tend to be just plain weird. If they use the same artificial cherry flavoring they used to, I know I'll enjoy an Icee again.:)
I don't remember the last time I walked in and didn't find the Coca-Cola flavor available, which is my personal favorite. When I was a kid, though, I preferred the Icee which was a Slurpee knock-off - I thought the Icee had a better cherry flavor.
Also, mice - whatever type - require an at least mostly flat surface on which to play, which is a monstrous disadvantage given the way most people use their game consoles.
I think an argument could actually be made that forcing two-card play for full-on Advance Wars is a good thing for the players. Specifically, it would be no fun at all to play the game against someone who has never played it, and people who actually know Advance Wars will probably buy the game. Game like Meteos, Puyo Pop, etc. have a much shorter learning curve (though they can take time to really master), so a novice won't be easy to beat for long.
Then again, someone who played through Advance Wars on the GBA might make a quality opponent and just be too cheap to buy the DS version, so what do I know?:)
Not as such. In fact, out of the three examples the only one I don't have appreciation for is Pearl Harbor - I haven't seen it because I'm picky about movies. I used it as an example because it received so much critical scorn.
As for Law & Order, I actually quite like the various versions. The only two I disliked were Crime & Punishment (I get enough justice reality from the History Channel) and Trial By Jury (written badly, wasting some pretty good actors). With John Grisham, I stopped reading with "The Brethren" but liked the books that came before, recognizing, though, that there was nothing in them that "pushed the envelope" in terms of creativity. They were just well-written legal thrillers.
All in all, I like a LOT of mainstream stuff. My point was simply that videogames are no more guilty of a lack of creativity, or a lack of artistic value (implied by your "blood and tits" comment), than any of the other entertainment media you mentioned. While there are game developers who push out derivative crap intended to appeal to the LCD, there are also game developers who try to do something new and different.
Good to know you're so up-to-date on the videogame industry which produces games like Nintendogs, Pokemon and The Sims, among many other best-sellers which have little or nothing to do with blood or nudity...
As for your [paranoid] point, it's not much to worry about. Even conservative Supreme Court justices have a track record of standing behind the First Amendment (though I admit they sometimes have trouble with others like the 4th and the 9th), so the chances of these anti-gaming laws passing constitutional muster are slim to none. Thus, your concerns about the incredibly inventive, creative media such as TV (yay, a sixth Law & Order sereies!), books (John Grisham's contributions to literature can't be overstated) and films (thank God for the freedom to see Pearl Harbor) are pretty unfounded.
Hey, I wish we could change some of them too. Society has decided, for example, that people under age 18 are not capable of knowing what love is and expressing that emotion through sex--at least with another individual who is over age 18.
You're either joking or you're a NAMBLA member/supporter. I honestly can't tell which...
The truth is that people who care and know anything understand the situation and are not fooled, while the people who care and don't know anything will never tell the difference. It's always seemed like a nonissue to me...
Pattern recognition might be a good way of accomplishing this. For example, I never use any automated process to delete files on my home computer. If the OS could be made to recognize this fact, then it could offer an alert if a process like this was run. The same could apply to modifying system files - if the OS is aware that the only time certain files are changed is when the native update process is run, then any other executable trying to do this could be made to trigger an alert, requiring additional user input to continue.
So, in a sense, yes, the OS could be made a bit "psychic." After all, unless you actually believe in psychic powers you probably know that most people claiming to be such are actually relying on behavioral cues to do their readings (the others are probably delusional). An intelligent system that could calculate probable user intentions would be little different, and no more mysterious.
Such a system would obviously work best on the uninitiated - people who aren't given to modify their PC in significant ways - but that would be the point since it would protect those among us who aren't very good at protecting themselves.
If SquareSoft could release their later Final Fantasy games at $49, games which spanned over several discs and are among the more expensive games developed thanks to the huge development staffs and times, yet still apparently turn a healthy profit, I don't see anything to validate these claims.
For one thing, Final Fantasy games are already well into the black before they even leave Japan. The reason they can afford the high development costs is that they sell ridiculous numbers of units. So, Square Enix (like Rockstar and the GTA series) is probably not the best example to use.
As for why Microsoft can afford to stay at the lower price point, that's pretty easy: They don't have to pay the console manufacturer for every unit sold since they ARE the manufacturer. This is the same reason that Sony first-party titles tend to get released for US$40. It's also the reason that PC games tend to have quicker, and more dramatic, price drops than do the console games.
While live casino-style gambling is illegal throughout most of the US (with the exceptions already mentioned in other responses), it's important to note that there are many communities that have determined poker NOT to be gambling. It's classified more commonly as a game of skill rather than chance.
This seems particularly reasonable when you watch professional poker on television where a relatively small number of players win tournaments over and over again.
It's cheaper in china - that is true - but that's just local pricing. It's not being dumped (near) free to 'foil pirates', because it can't be pirated.
Yes, thank you. I thought my response was clarification enough. Let me know if that hammer starts to wear out and I'll hand you another with which to hit me over the head.
I did get it slightly wrong. When reading this article, I misremembered that they were talking about two different games. To be specific, they released Warcraft 3 at a price "within an "arm's reach" of the pirate price" (pirated games going for about US$1 versus legal games at $15). They then released World of Warcraft at the regular price - which, of course, still means that Chinese gamers are paying less than half the price paid by US gamers.
I would submit that, handled properly, Power Pack could be a kick-ass kids movie. The comic book origin story included (obviously) cute kids with super powers, good aliens with equine features, evil lizard aliens...With the right script it's perfect for the younger crowd and movies aimed at that audience make some nice chunks of change.
Not to be too pedantic, but the number is $200 million if 4 million people pay $50 per unit. But, not every customer pays the same price. For example, WoW is steeply discounted in China so that they can take business away from the software black market over there.
Game designers have realized that their aim is not to defeat the player and force him to give up...
If only I had a Kewpie doll to send out to you.
Folks forget that the early console game designers came out of the world of arcades where at least part of the design paradigm was to reduce the playtime per quarter. Videogames had a tendency to ramp up in difficulty quickly, and they would often force situations that were virtually impossible for the average player to surmount. This continued into the console era and lasted for a very long time, partially because the style was part of what defined videogames as a medium and partially because it was difficult to add the subtle gradiations in gameplay that might allow a player to think around a problem instead of getting by on awesome reflexes.
That being said, there are still games that are hard. In addition to your own example (NG), I found Splinter Cell plenty hard the first time through, Pikmin had some controller-tossing areas to learn, and even licensed games like Buffy The Vampire Slayer (a game I really liked) can make you weep at times.
Something else that I think makes some games seem easier is the easy access to help through the Internet. Back in olden times, you often had to just keep going at it and going at it - sometimes leading to giving up - until either a friend helped you or maybe one of the very few gaming magazines gave the answer. Now, of course, if someone feels stuck all it takes is a quick trip over to GameFAQs and virtually any current game will be thoroughly documented within a week of release - not to mention the videogame guidebooks that so often launch day and date with the game itself.
All of these sorts of articles are written from the perspective of someone who's been playing games for a long time. It stands to reason that anyone who has been playing games for years is going to have an easier time with a new one than someone for whom the new game is their first...
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget that the reason McDonald's served their coffee ridiculously hot was to cover up the fact that if they didn't the coffee tasted awful, so that they could sell more of it and compete with places serving higher-quality products. That was likely why the jury awarded the very high initial judgement - they were penalizing McDonald's for letting their desire for higher profits outweigh the danger to their customers.
I found that out after continuing to read the comments. In any case, I always liked ICEE better, probably at least in part because it was available in more places than just 7-11.
No joke - thanks for the informative website. Now that I know my local Target has an Icee machine, I may just head down there and see if they're as good as I remember. Coke Slurpees are good, but the rest of the flavors tend to be just plain weird. If they use the same artificial cherry flavoring they used to, I know I'll enjoy an Icee again. :)
I don't remember the last time I walked in and didn't find the Coca-Cola flavor available, which is my personal favorite. When I was a kid, though, I preferred the Icee which was a Slurpee knock-off - I thought the Icee had a better cherry flavor.
I got a charge out of it, too.
Also, mice - whatever type - require an at least mostly flat surface on which to play, which is a monstrous disadvantage given the way most people use their game consoles.
Then again, someone who played through Advance Wars on the GBA might make a quality opponent and just be too cheap to buy the DS version, so what do I know? :)
All I know is that I finally had something funny to say and you SCREWED ME! I will hunt you down and give you noogies until you cry "Bill Gates"! :D
I would contend that our dominance wasn't assured until the digital watch...
I was making a joke, so clearly you missed mine.
Wow. I mean, wow. You mean half the population of this website are over 116 years old?
Not as such. In fact, out of the three examples the only one I don't have appreciation for is Pearl Harbor - I haven't seen it because I'm picky about movies. I used it as an example because it received so much critical scorn.
As for Law & Order, I actually quite like the various versions. The only two I disliked were Crime & Punishment (I get enough justice reality from the History Channel) and Trial By Jury (written badly, wasting some pretty good actors). With John Grisham, I stopped reading with "The Brethren" but liked the books that came before, recognizing, though, that there was nothing in them that "pushed the envelope" in terms of creativity. They were just well-written legal thrillers.
All in all, I like a LOT of mainstream stuff. My point was simply that videogames are no more guilty of a lack of creativity, or a lack of artistic value (implied by your "blood and tits" comment), than any of the other entertainment media you mentioned. While there are game developers who push out derivative crap intended to appeal to the LCD, there are also game developers who try to do something new and different.
Short version? Your post was shit.
Good to know you're so up-to-date on the videogame industry which produces games like Nintendogs, Pokemon and The Sims, among many other best-sellers which have little or nothing to do with blood or nudity...
As for your [paranoid] point, it's not much to worry about. Even conservative Supreme Court justices have a track record of standing behind the First Amendment (though I admit they sometimes have trouble with others like the 4th and the 9th), so the chances of these anti-gaming laws passing constitutional muster are slim to none. Thus, your concerns about the incredibly inventive, creative media such as TV (yay, a sixth Law & Order sereies!), books (John Grisham's contributions to literature can't be overstated) and films (thank God for the freedom to see Pearl Harbor) are pretty unfounded.
You're either joking or you're a NAMBLA member/supporter. I honestly can't tell which...
The truth is that people who care and know anything understand the situation and are not fooled, while the people who care and don't know anything will never tell the difference. It's always seemed like a nonissue to me...
Earlier, but not by much (they were released the same month), and Spider-Man 2 was purchased and played by a lot more people.
No, but a lot of kids wanted mylar environmental suits for Christmas that year...
So, in a sense, yes, the OS could be made a bit "psychic." After all, unless you actually believe in psychic powers you probably know that most people claiming to be such are actually relying on behavioral cues to do their readings (the others are probably delusional). An intelligent system that could calculate probable user intentions would be little different, and no more mysterious.
Such a system would obviously work best on the uninitiated - people who aren't given to modify their PC in significant ways - but that would be the point since it would protect those among us who aren't very good at protecting themselves.
For one thing, Final Fantasy games are already well into the black before they even leave Japan. The reason they can afford the high development costs is that they sell ridiculous numbers of units. So, Square Enix (like Rockstar and the GTA series) is probably not the best example to use.
As for why Microsoft can afford to stay at the lower price point, that's pretty easy: They don't have to pay the console manufacturer for every unit sold since they ARE the manufacturer. This is the same reason that Sony first-party titles tend to get released for US$40. It's also the reason that PC games tend to have quicker, and more dramatic, price drops than do the console games.
This seems particularly reasonable when you watch professional poker on television where a relatively small number of players win tournaments over and over again.
Yes, thank you. I thought my response was clarification enough. Let me know if that hammer starts to wear out and I'll hand you another with which to hit me over the head.
I did get it slightly wrong. When reading this article, I misremembered that they were talking about two different games. To be specific, they released Warcraft 3 at a price "within an "arm's reach" of the pirate price" (pirated games going for about US$1 versus legal games at $15). They then released World of Warcraft at the regular price - which, of course, still means that Chinese gamers are paying less than half the price paid by US gamers.
I would submit that, handled properly, Power Pack could be a kick-ass kids movie. The comic book origin story included (obviously) cute kids with super powers, good aliens with equine features, evil lizard aliens...With the right script it's perfect for the younger crowd and movies aimed at that audience make some nice chunks of change.
Not to be too pedantic, but the number is $200 million if 4 million people pay $50 per unit. But, not every customer pays the same price. For example, WoW is steeply discounted in China so that they can take business away from the software black market over there.
If only I had a Kewpie doll to send out to you.
Folks forget that the early console game designers came out of the world of arcades where at least part of the design paradigm was to reduce the playtime per quarter. Videogames had a tendency to ramp up in difficulty quickly, and they would often force situations that were virtually impossible for the average player to surmount. This continued into the console era and lasted for a very long time, partially because the style was part of what defined videogames as a medium and partially because it was difficult to add the subtle gradiations in gameplay that might allow a player to think around a problem instead of getting by on awesome reflexes.
That being said, there are still games that are hard. In addition to your own example (NG), I found Splinter Cell plenty hard the first time through, Pikmin had some controller-tossing areas to learn, and even licensed games like Buffy The Vampire Slayer (a game I really liked) can make you weep at times.
Something else that I think makes some games seem easier is the easy access to help through the Internet. Back in olden times, you often had to just keep going at it and going at it - sometimes leading to giving up - until either a friend helped you or maybe one of the very few gaming magazines gave the answer. Now, of course, if someone feels stuck all it takes is a quick trip over to GameFAQs and virtually any current game will be thoroughly documented within a week of release - not to mention the videogame guidebooks that so often launch day and date with the game itself.
All of these sorts of articles are written from the perspective of someone who's been playing games for a long time. It stands to reason that anyone who has been playing games for years is going to have an easier time with a new one than someone for whom the new game is their first...