...seeing as how the ESRB slapped the "Nudity" descriptor onto Dead or Alive: Extreme Beach Volleyball when there was no nudity in it.
Very skimpy clothing, yes, near nudity, yes, but no actual nudity...and the ESRB decription is VERY clear on this:
""Nudity - Graphic or prolonged depictions of nudity.
Partial Nudity - Brief and mild depictions of nudity."
DOA: XVB doesn't fall into either of these categories...it does however fall under:
""Mature Sexual Themes - Provocative material, possibly including partial nudity."
So why did the ESRB choose to blatantly lie about DOA: XVB? Nobody knows. So, I don't care how descriptive the SRB make their tags, becausee they don't use them properly. Might as well just slap, "For Kids of All Ages" on every game, since you're just going to lie about them anyway.
What's embarrassing is that the guy who posted the article spelled it "Yar's Revenge" when anyone who played the game can tell you it's SUPPOSED to be "Yars' Revenge" since you're avenging a race known as "The Yars".
The humiliating part comesalong once you click on the link he provided and the main graphic on the page has it spelled properly.
When you're starting up a company, you'll need to impress people with who are invovled with your project. By grabbing resumes from people they can say, "Powerful figures from companies like Midway and Squaresoft are supporting our project."
This will make investors think the project looks attractive, and plunk money in, which I'm guessing is what these guys are honestly hoping for.
Re:Not absorption...less obstinance.
on
Ageism in IT?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You're doing it exactly right...but typically the longer someone stays doing a particular job the more rigid they are in their ways. You'll notice I was careful not to say, "This is the way everyone old is."
There is a large segment who are, though. When younger people are obstinate, you can generally smack them out of it because you'll have more experience, and they'll come around...that option doesn't generally exist for someone who's been around for 20 years.
The way you describe yourself is the way things should be. The ideal way to keep yourself employed is to keep adapting...it just happens that most people like working themsevles into a groove as time progresses.
Not absorption...less obstinance.
on
Ageism in IT?
·
· Score: 1
You are exactly right. I do tech support. Without question, the MOST annoying calls we get are from older tech who will start off the phone conversation with, "By the way, I've been programming for over 20 years, and I think..."
My response to this is, "And how long have you been using our software, sir?"
They have the hardest time grasping that their way isn't the way something needs to be done in order for it to work in our software. They're obstinate, and that's why people don't want to hire them.
I like older programmers. You can learn a lot from them, however, for the most part, they don't feel the same about you, and this is where the problem lies.
As far as the conjecture that programming isn't a talent, in order for you to believe that, you have to believe that the mind truly is a blank slate once you are born.
All that you really need to be a good coder is a good grasp of logic. People that have set themselves up that way in life should be able to perform well when presented the task of coding.
Then you get other people, like this one guy I used to live with, who could not understand how to set up variables for x and y and add them together. Literally, 3 people tried to help him comprhend this for an hour, and left him to do it on his own, and he couldn't. He's never going to become a coder now.
Exactly. Damn cursive handwriting. I sucked at it in elementary school, and my mom would make me spend all this time outside of class practicing it. Who really gives a damn? I've been in the job world for over 10 years now, and never ONCE have I seen a cursive letter sent by ANYONE.
So cursive goes the way of the microfiche? Good riddance. I'll be happy the day they take it out of schools, and start using that time to teach kids something useful with it instead. (I mean, not like they will, but there's always hope, right?) Typing is faster, easier to read, and takes far less time to learn.
Good luck finding new jobs, all ye who work at the Society for Cursive Writing.
You're assuming that his parents, grandparents, etc, aren't going to be under constant threat if he doesn't fulfill his obligations while he's there.
In addition, you underestimate the value of propaganda. Some of those guys are seriously brainwashed. Just because you can use a computer exceptionally well doesn't mean that you have a lick of common sense.
Just because they're hacker from North Korea doesn't mean they live in North Korea. All they have to do is cross 1 border, and they're in the most wired nation in the world.
Who keeps all their spies in their own country anyway?
If someone steals your pen and paper, it's like $1.50 to replace it, and you won't feel the same amount of grief as when someone jacks your handheld.
In addition, you look like a total retard tapping away at a PDA when everyone else has a pen & paper. You'll look equally lame with the laptop.
Third, and most important, the best way to get notes, is to find someone in class who strikes your fancy and is somewhat studious, go up to them and ask for their notes. You either get notes or a date out of it...or rejected...but think positively, man.
Only computer I had in the dorms was my desktop. Which is ideal for browsing the web if I needed to do research, and for playing games against dormmates. It's a lot easier to prevent the big desktop that you leave in house from getting stolen. (It's either your fault for not locking the door, or the school is partially liable.)
So, pen and paper for notes, or better yet, another live body with pen & paper. Desktop for everything else.
I'm not missing the point of E3...I'm trying to make it obvious to the general consumer that handing out those awards for E3 basically dishonest.
It's like watching movie trailers and awarding the Oscars based off of that.
Nobody calls the award, "Game That's Going to Rock Sometime in the Future" or "Game That Will Sell the Most Copies in 2-3 Years".
E3 is what it is...a chance for the game companies to show off their upcoming stuff. The point of the show is clear. I don't have any beef with that, I have a problem with the majority of gaming sites that give this kind of coverage, because it isn't legitimate, and it isn't helpful.
Click through the past nominees of the awards, and you'll notice games that have been nominated back to back years. This is utterly stupid. If you're trying to crank up and sustain hype for 2 years before a product's launch...that's detrimental to the product's performance. There's no way it can live to anyone's expectations at that point.
E3 is about hype. Journalism shouldn't be. That's why I think these awards are stupid. That's why I think those awards should be based off of what is playable...otherwise you end up with Team Fortress 2 syndrome.
Now, your original point was "if it's not there for the general public, it shouldn't count" - guess what. Half Life 2, biggest buzz EVER. Kinda kicks your theory in the arse, don't it?
If the award was called, "Thing We Could Hype Up Most", I suppose that would make you right. If this was a film festival, that would work, too.
However, this is a GAME. A game that requires interaction in order to get a real feel for it. If you are giving a game Best of Show, and you can't play it...you're a hypocrite. That's my original point. I don't care how much hype it generates. It's not an award for hype. Best Game of Show means Best Game of Show and if you can't play it, you can't give out that award, unless you want to brand yourself as a complete and utter liar.
Yeah, and the "Absolutely nobody under the age of 18" disclaimer they stamp on there every year. I don't know if they're all from "Make A Wish" or whatever, but there are always a bunch of kids in there.
The "industry only" event is a sham. I understand that behind closed doors, the purpose of the E3 is to network with buyers, and try and negotiate deals with the retail chains, but the other main purpose is to inform the public about the games.
Otherwise, you and every other company on the show floor wouldn't bother printing out tens of thousands of fliers to pass out about your games...there simply are not that many media and buyer out there who need those little junkets.
I've worked 5 E3s. I can tell you that the people I've demoed the games for were not media. The people trying to grab free t-shirts are not media. On the surface, everyone wants to say this is a industry-only event, but it isn't and most of the game companies acknowledge this.
There's a huge difference between "saw" and "played".
If you don't think the show's for the general public, you're also high, the vast majority of all the badges at E3 are "Exhibits Only" ones...the ones the general public gets.
Buyers, media, exhibitors, etc all have their own badges...you're lucky if you spot more than a handful of buyers.
I do mention that if you could use it to import your face, it has potential to be useful...but the game they had for it were easily the biggest bunch of crap on the game floor. Even the N-Gage and its 1 1/2 inch screen were cooler.
What the hell are these guys thinking? They're obviously just trying to suck up to Sony. The Karaoke machine for the XBox was a far better idea. The stupid Eye-Toy had games where you were supposed to kill ninjas before they hit your head...however, you could just shuffle left and right, and KILL THEM WITH YOUR HEAD.
I don't feel that anything that isn't on the floor and playable should be listed as "Best of Show". If the general public can't play something, that means that they're afraid of it getting broken.
Not all of the journalism is absurd...some of us still have standards...however, we're also the ones who aren't getting paid.
See, your whole thing is that you like the art. I don't. I also thought the concept had been done enough already...(Kung-Fu Chaos, Jackie Chan's Stuntmaster, Seigi no Mikata, Rising Zan, Rent-A-Hero, etc.) and the voice acting sucks.
It's not like Metal Slug in the sense that you don't have a gun, but the side scrolling, and the bombs and enemies dropping from the sky make it more Metal Slug than Double Dragon.
Slashdot Mirror
...seeing as how the ESRB slapped the "Nudity" descriptor onto Dead or Alive: Extreme Beach Volleyball when there was no nudity in it.
Very skimpy clothing, yes, near nudity, yes, but no actual nudity...and the ESRB decription is VERY clear on this:
""Nudity - Graphic or prolonged depictions of nudity.
Partial Nudity - Brief and mild depictions of nudity."
DOA: XVB doesn't fall into either of these categories...it does however fall under:
""Mature Sexual Themes - Provocative material, possibly including partial nudity."
So why did the ESRB choose to blatantly lie about DOA: XVB? Nobody knows. So, I don't care how descriptive the SRB make their tags, becausee they don't use them properly. Might as well just slap, "For Kids of All Ages" on every game, since you're just going to lie about them anyway.
What's embarrassing is that the guy who posted the article spelled it "Yar's Revenge" when anyone who played the game can tell you it's SUPPOSED to be "Yars' Revenge" since you're avenging a race known as "The Yars".
The humiliating part comesalong once you click on the link he provided and the main graphic on the page has it spelled properly.
It's a ploy.
When you're starting up a company, you'll need to impress people with who are invovled with your project. By grabbing resumes from people they can say, "Powerful figures from companies like Midway and Squaresoft are supporting our project."
This will make investors think the project looks attractive, and plunk money in, which I'm guessing is what these guys are honestly hoping for.
Here's a link that's had this reviewed since the 27th of May. On top of that, no charge to view stuff there.
Game Boy Player Review. They give it a 9.2.
You're doing it exactly right...but typically the longer someone stays doing a particular job the more rigid they are in their ways. You'll notice I was careful not to say, "This is the way everyone old is."
There is a large segment who are, though. When younger people are obstinate, you can generally smack them out of it because you'll have more experience, and they'll come around...that option doesn't generally exist for someone who's been around for 20 years.
The way you describe yourself is the way things should be. The ideal way to keep yourself employed is to keep adapting...it just happens that most people like working themsevles into a groove as time progresses.
You are exactly right. I do tech support. Without question, the MOST annoying calls we get are from older tech who will start off the phone conversation with, "By the way, I've been programming for over 20 years, and I think..."
My response to this is, "And how long have you been using our software, sir?"
They have the hardest time grasping that their way isn't the way something needs to be done in order for it to work in our software. They're obstinate, and that's why people don't want to hire them.
I like older programmers. You can learn a lot from them, however, for the most part, they don't feel the same about you, and this is where the problem lies.
As far as the conjecture that programming isn't a talent, in order for you to believe that, you have to believe that the mind truly is a blank slate once you are born.
All that you really need to be a good coder is a good grasp of logic. People that have set themselves up that way in life should be able to perform well when presented the task of coding.
Then you get other people, like this one guy I used to live with, who could not understand how to set up variables for x and y and add them together. Literally, 3 people tried to help him comprhend this for an hour, and left him to do it on his own, and he couldn't. He's never going to become a coder now.
I guess microfiche is a bad example, because it, unlike cursive, actually IS useful.
I don't really consider flipping burgers to be "in the job world". Sorry to discount your profession...
Exactly. Damn cursive handwriting. I sucked at it in elementary school, and my mom would make me spend all this time outside of class practicing it. Who really gives a damn? I've been in the job world for over 10 years now, and never ONCE have I seen a cursive letter sent by ANYONE.
So cursive goes the way of the microfiche? Good riddance. I'll be happy the day they take it out of schools, and start using that time to teach kids something useful with it instead. (I mean, not like they will, but there's always hope, right?) Typing is faster, easier to read, and takes far less time to learn.
Good luck finding new jobs, all ye who work at the Society for Cursive Writing.
Except you're phoneticizing it wrong. It's Koh-bay, as in, not like the basketball player's name.
It comes from cows raised in the city of Kobe.
Yeah, my point exactly. There's not even a concerted brainwashing effort going on wherever that guy is from...just the media.
You're assuming that his parents, grandparents, etc, aren't going to be under constant threat if he doesn't fulfill his obligations while he's there.
In addition, you underestimate the value of propaganda. Some of those guys are seriously brainwashed. Just because you can use a computer exceptionally well doesn't mean that you have a lick of common sense.
Just because they're hacker from North Korea doesn't mean they live in North Korea. All they have to do is cross 1 border, and they're in the most wired nation in the world.
Who keeps all their spies in their own country anyway?
Seriously...for multiple reasons:
If someone steals your pen and paper, it's like $1.50 to replace it, and you won't feel the same amount of grief as when someone jacks your handheld.
In addition, you look like a total retard tapping away at a PDA when everyone else has a pen & paper. You'll look equally lame with the laptop.
Third, and most important, the best way to get notes, is to find someone in class who strikes your fancy and is somewhat studious, go up to them and ask for their notes. You either get notes or a date out of it...or rejected...but think positively, man.
Only computer I had in the dorms was my desktop. Which is ideal for browsing the web if I needed to do research, and for playing games against dormmates. It's a lot easier to prevent the big desktop that you leave in house from getting stolen. (It's either your fault for not locking the door, or the school is partially liable.)
So, pen and paper for notes, or better yet, another live body with pen & paper. Desktop for everything else.
I'm not missing the point of E3...I'm trying to make it obvious to the general consumer that handing out those awards for E3 basically dishonest.
It's like watching movie trailers and awarding the Oscars based off of that.
Nobody calls the award, "Game That's Going to Rock Sometime in the Future" or "Game That Will Sell the Most Copies in 2-3 Years".
E3 is what it is...a chance for the game companies to show off their upcoming stuff. The point of the show is clear. I don't have any beef with that, I have a problem with the majority of gaming sites that give this kind of coverage, because it isn't legitimate, and it isn't helpful.
Click through the past nominees of the awards, and you'll notice games that have been nominated back to back years. This is utterly stupid. If you're trying to crank up and sustain hype for 2 years before a product's launch...that's detrimental to the product's performance. There's no way it can live to anyone's expectations at that point.
E3 is about hype. Journalism shouldn't be. That's why I think these awards are stupid. That's why I think those awards should be based off of what is playable...otherwise you end up with Team Fortress 2 syndrome.
Now, your original point was "if it's not there for the general public, it shouldn't count" - guess what. Half Life 2, biggest buzz EVER. Kinda kicks your theory in the arse, don't it?
If the award was called, "Thing We Could Hype Up Most", I suppose that would make you right. If this was a film festival, that would work, too.
However, this is a GAME. A game that requires interaction in order to get a real feel for it. If you are giving a game Best of Show, and you can't play it...you're a hypocrite. That's my original point. I don't care how much hype it generates. It's not an award for hype. Best Game of Show means Best Game of Show and if you can't play it, you can't give out that award, unless you want to brand yourself as a complete and utter liar.
Yeah, and the "Absolutely nobody under the age of 18" disclaimer they stamp on there every year. I don't know if they're all from "Make A Wish" or whatever, but there are always a bunch of kids in there.
The "industry only" event is a sham. I understand that behind closed doors, the purpose of the E3 is to network with buyers, and try and negotiate deals with the retail chains, but the other main purpose is to inform the public about the games.
Otherwise, you and every other company on the show floor wouldn't bother printing out tens of thousands of fliers to pass out about your games...there simply are not that many media and buyer out there who need those little junkets.
I've worked 5 E3s. I can tell you that the people I've demoed the games for were not media. The people trying to grab free t-shirts are not media. On the surface, everyone wants to say this is a industry-only event, but it isn't and most of the game companies acknowledge this.
There's a huge difference between "saw" and "played".
If you don't think the show's for the general public, you're also high, the vast majority of all the badges at E3 are "Exhibits Only" ones...the ones the general public gets.
Buyers, media, exhibitors, etc all have their own badges...you're lucky if you spot more than a handful of buyers.
I do mention that if you could use it to import your face, it has potential to be useful...but the game they had for it were easily the biggest bunch of crap on the game floor. Even the N-Gage and its 1 1/2 inch screen were cooler.
Are you f*cking serious?!
It was roundly given "Worst Peripheral of Show" by us.
What the hell are these guys thinking? They're obviously just trying to suck up to Sony. The Karaoke machine for the XBox was a far better idea. The stupid Eye-Toy had games where you were supposed to kill ninjas before they hit your head...however, you could just shuffle left and right, and KILL THEM WITH YOUR HEAD.
I don't feel that anything that isn't on the floor and playable should be listed as "Best of Show". If the general public can't play something, that means that they're afraid of it getting broken.
Not all of the journalism is absurd...some of us still have standards...however, we're also the ones who aren't getting paid.
Well, you should probably look to some different sites:
Netjak has FF Crystal Chronicles at #10 for their best of show, and FF Tactics Advance was #1.
Sword of Mana and Zelda: Four Swords made their Best Surprises list, and both of their reviewers have the GBA in the top spot for the best console.
There's the link for their full coverage.
I know. 2 of the Nominees for "Best of Show" weren't even on the show floor in playable form.
What the hell is this? This is exactly why you end up with games being Best of E3 2 years in a row without ever shipping.
That's the thing about "kitsch", or "cheese factor". One person's going to like it, and someone else is going to hate it...for the exact same reason.
See, your whole thing is that you like the art. I don't. I also thought the concept had been done enough already...(Kung-Fu Chaos, Jackie Chan's Stuntmaster, Seigi no Mikata, Rising Zan, Rent-A-Hero, etc.) and the voice acting sucks.
It's not like Metal Slug in the sense that you don't have a gun, but the side scrolling, and the bombs and enemies dropping from the sky make it more Metal Slug than Double Dragon.