But strangely, a PSP can play games with 3D, considerably better than most laptops with integrated Intel chips. If the laptop only had to render in 480x272, I'm sure it would do just fine.
As long as pc's have free online play and user mods and maps that are free Consoles will still be behind. The PS3 has completely free online play and support for mods in UT3. Home and LittleBigPlanet will have tons of user-generated content ("mods"). In addition, you can use bluetooth or USB keyboards and mice on it, and some games support these. Web browser's built-in, too. Install Linux on it, and you can take advantage of those free games.
Sooo, consoles still behind? Not by your qualifications.
3) His argument about PCs not being good gaming platforms is that they don't contain enough DRM? Truly, go back and read this again. What the hell does he want, a gun pointing a peoples faces if their mouse gets near the rip or copy button? You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. It's bad from a consumer viewpoint, but the game companies love it.
Don't forget that copyright is ridiculous when it applies to the RIAA and MPAA, but it's incredibly important when it applies to flash games and the GPL.
This isn't the first set of blatant hypocrisy around these parts.
It's significant because typically the lawyers aren't the ones paying the opposing team's costs. Usually, the lawyers always win every trial, because they get paid no matter what. If you punish the lawyers themselves for going ahead with cases they know are frivolous, then you'll start to see far, far fewer lawyers taking frivolous cases.
Here's hoping the scratch resistant layer is pretty damn tough! It is. I can't find the article, tragically, but someone took the Talladega Nights blu-ray that came with their PS3 and put it through a torture test, and it performed amazingly.
It was the superior format with no region encoding, PIP early on, cheaper production, etc. Compared to Blu-ray's higher capacity, unscratchable coating, and higher data read rates. Each format had their benefits.
Lack of a built-in high-capacity storage medium is already hurting the 360. I bought Lost Odyssey last week (which, incidentally, is an amazing game), and it came on four DVDs. If that same game were released for PS3, it would be on one disc.
The PS3's duty is to play games. Even if Blu-ray completely failed, the PS3 would still play games, and the Blu-ray drive is still worthwhile to have in it because of its huge capacity. There are already some 360 games that come on 4 DVDs, and as the years go by, space is going to be in more and more demand.
Microsoft should have put an HD-DVD drive standard on the 360 for that reason alone.
It will only (maybe) become a pattern in games where you have to pay to play. Why does Blizzard care if you buy the game for $15 if they're getting their $15/mo from you?
Watermarks tied to users offer the RIAA an easy way to frame anyone, since they can create a watermarked copy of any file with your details and release it on the Internet. How is this insightful? Doesn't this seem incredibly paranoid to anyone else? Is it only modded up because it's anti-RIAA? It's completely ridiculous to think that they have it out for certain people and would "frame" them.
The RIAA, as much as they're (rightfully) demonized here, is acting defensively, not offensively. People are sharing the RIAA's copyrighted material, and they are taking legal action against those people. They'd use watermarks to track the sources of the released files. This allows for them to more accurately identify who are the people actually illegally distributing the files, so they don't end up going after everyone from four-year-old children to grandmothers who don't own computers. Isn't more accuracy a good thing?
Slashdot Mirror
Sooo, consoles still behind? Not by your qualifications.
I can play games from the original Playstation on my PS3. That's coming up on 15 years ago.
Considering that vastly less people are on the road at night, it's disproportionate.
Don't forget that copyright is ridiculous when it applies to the RIAA and MPAA, but it's incredibly important when it applies to flash games and the GPL.
This isn't the first set of blatant hypocrisy around these parts.
You sound familiar.
Posting on Slashdot, they basically did.
Get a $399 PS3 and put Linux on it, then.
Outsourcing jobs to Japan would be the dumbest move ever.
It's significant because typically the lawyers aren't the ones paying the opposing team's costs. Usually, the lawyers always win every trial, because they get paid no matter what. If you punish the lawyers themselves for going ahead with cases they know are frivolous, then you'll start to see far, far fewer lawyers taking frivolous cases.
Perhaps not completely scratchproof, but it'll stand up to things far, far, far more than other discs: Video.
Lack of a built-in high-capacity storage medium is already hurting the 360. I bought Lost Odyssey last week (which, incidentally, is an amazing game), and it came on four DVDs. If that same game were released for PS3, it would be on one disc.
Why would it be doomed to failure?
The PS3's duty is to play games. Even if Blu-ray completely failed, the PS3 would still play games, and the Blu-ray drive is still worthwhile to have in it because of its huge capacity. There are already some 360 games that come on 4 DVDs, and as the years go by, space is going to be in more and more demand.
Microsoft should have put an HD-DVD drive standard on the 360 for that reason alone.
You're in luck, then - Blu-ray is nearly unscratchable due to the protective coating they put on the discs.
It will only (maybe) become a pattern in games where you have to pay to play. Why does Blizzard care if you buy the game for $15 if they're getting their $15/mo from you?
No, but the Republican party still wants a chance at this election. If another war was started, it would guarantee a Democrat victory.
That's a wonderful idea!
I hear there's a really good text-based advertising system available.
It's easy to charge low prices when you don't actually pay the people who make the music.
The RIAA, as much as they're (rightfully) demonized here, is acting defensively, not offensively. People are sharing the RIAA's copyrighted material, and they are taking legal action against those people. They'd use watermarks to track the sources of the released files. This allows for them to more accurately identify who are the people actually illegally distributing the files, so they don't end up going after everyone from four-year-old children to grandmothers who don't own computers. Isn't more accuracy a good thing?