Of the three XBox owners I know, none of them liked XBox Live at all. They all decided the same thing: Playing games online is best played on the PC.
Really? See I've had the exact opposite experience. All of my buddies are PC gamers (so am I), but we all love XBox Live so far.
Well, consindering you NEED broadband to play XBox Live, this basically translates that the person has some fat cash to pay a $50+ monthly fee for internet access. Do these types of people typically have really crap computers? No. MicroSoft has walked into a virtual minefield without looking at marketing demographics first. The people that will keep this afloat are people without broadband and decent computers, which are NOT the people who can actually use it.
I understand what you're saying here, but MS' Live sales simply don't seem to back this up. It's selling like hotcakes, and games that use it are selling like hotcakes. If anything, I would think that folks with PCs and broadband were techies who would love to pick up a console as well.
And after your first free year, targeted monthly rate for this service will be $10-15/Month. It's not set in stone, but if it is any lower than $10, they will lose money on every single player.
I've been keeping track of this, and all of the rumors so far have said that it's looking like it'll be another flat fee (probably another 50). MS isn't stupid, and I'm sure they realize that they'll lose lots of customers because they don't want to have to worry about paying a bill every month. I really wouldn't worry about this.
You can see why Sony and Nintendo are taking their time. Leave it to Microsoft to boldly blunder into a market area it is entirely unfamiliar with and die, then work out a program that actually *works*.
Sony will probably never take off with online gaming since it has no centralized system. You'll have to pay a seperate bill for every single online PS2 game you want to play. Who's going to want to do that? I can understand if they come out with a killer online app, but that's only one game. Nintendo isn't taking their time, they're simply not placing emphasis on online gaming as an important part of GC. All that's coming out is Phantasy Star Online. Period. As far as MS blundering, trust me, it hasn't. I'm very happy with the service, as are most people I've talked to. Most reviews are also positive. I must ask, how can you justify that the biggest software company in the world has no experience in online gaming? Did I miss something?
PC Gaming is here to stay, that's for sure. But XBox Live has impressed me very much. PC Gaming does not let you bring 3 of your buddies over and play football in the same room against 4 other guys from the other side of the country. PC gaming is a bitch to set up. XBL couldn't be easier. I've seen very few lag issues so far. PC gaming is more exposed to cheating at this point than XBL.
I would definitely reccomend that anyone with broadband and an XBox pick this kit up and get themselves a copy of MechAssault (which I feel is the best XBL game right now). Try it for yourselves.
Well- with a few exceptions, Linux's GUI is trying to keep up with MS's. Say what you will about MS, but I think their GUI has a nice feel and generally makes sense. I can't really say the same for Linux's. I feel the two big boys are coming along, but have a ways to go as far as catching up with MS. MS has invested years and god knows how much money into researching GUI's- why not take advantage of this?
This kind of project could pull in a lot of folks who want Linux stability/reliability with a MS feel. I imagine that's a pretty decent-sized market.
Not until 2010? 7 years is a long time. Shouldn't that amount of space be pretty much commonplace by that point anyhow? Sure, it sounds like a lot now, but somehow I don't think that number will be at all impressive in 7 years.
I imagine that if one of these gets scratched you're gonna lose a whole lotta data unless it has some sweet error correction going for it.
Since the vast majority of users use Windows, it's likely that they would feel more comfortable seeing a cell phone that uses an interface that they already comfortable with and used to.
Re:Warning: It runs Windows!
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
The sad state of Slashdot moderator's can be observed in this post's moderation. IT WAS A JOKE.
Re:Speaking of roller coasters....
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
Those are the best pictures I've found on the internet that show you how high the new one is with respect to the other rides. The webcams on the official site are a bit deceptive, as the lenses give you the impression that it's shorter than Power Tower.
I have some from inside of the park if you want them. Note that these pictures are taken from the other side of the Causeway, and so Millenium is actually much CLOSER to the camera than the new one; the two rides are on opposite sides of the penninsula. The closest ride to the new one that you can see in the pictures is Magnum. If you look at the first picture in the group, you can see Magnum to the left of the new one. It's less than half as tall in comparison.
Straight up, and straight down again with a twist. If you're in the area, I highly recommend checking it out- it's unbelievable. Can't wait until we start running it.
Re:Speaking of roller coasters....
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
"third of the park that I work in and am responsible for"
are you ignorant or just stupid?
Re:Speaking of roller coasters....
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
I work at Cedar Point, as a matter of fact the new ride is in the third of the park that I work in and am responsible for. Can't wait until Slashdot does an article on it. The pictures don't do this ride justice. You truly have to see it yourself on the causeway- Millenium is eclipsed.
Re:These will NOT replace coasters
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
Apologies, I wasn't able to view the article as it was/.ed and a little too flash-heavy. My parent post is aimed at coaster sims in general.
These will NOT replace coasters
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Simulations like these lack some of the major elements that make coasters so fun. I'm a big enthusiast of coasters, and I've ridden a lot of the simulations. They don't compare, here's why generally.
There's no wind in your hair, which detracts greatly from your sense of speed.
You know that you're in a simulation. One of the things that makes Millenium Force such an awesome ride is that it scares the shit out of you on the way up- you ARE 300 ft up. A lot of the suspense that goes with riding a ride is waiting in the line and getting strapped in. What's going to be more effective, walking into a room or strapping yourself into a metal behemoth like http://www.cedarpoint.com/public/inside_park/webca m/camera1.cfm that?
Though simulators are good at playing games with your inner ear etc, the sensation of being upside-down or highly banked has never felt quite right to me- again, this probably has a lot to do with the fact that throughout the whole ride I know it's not really happening.
This thing works mostly off of visual cues. That's not going to make the "ride" a lot of fun, it's going to make many of it's passengers sick. Sure, coasters can do that too, but since what your eyes think is happening is more or less actually happening (I say that because good Coaster designers will mess with you a bit), I (personally) find getting sick generally happens much less compared to sims.
Finally, riding coasters is a bit of a psychological ordeal. You are conquering your fears/challenging yourself/trying to push yourself in some way. Sims don't really offer this aspect. Worry not, roller coasters of the world- you are in no danger.
Posts like these are old and tired- I wasn't aware that everyone who didn't like the MPAA was boycotting it. Did I miss something?
I don't like the **AA's, that's for sure, but not enough to stifle my interest in movies/music that I find genuinely worth experiencing or at least learning more about.
a female Terminator could have certain psychological advantages in manipulating humans over a male terminator.
Whenever the bad terminators "manipulated" a human, it was to kill/try to kill them. The only deviation I can think of is when T1000 tries to make Sarah call out to John. I do however go for the idea that the female chassis was made to be effective at infiltration.
This is why I already don't like T3. T2 did indeed have a great ending, and an emotional one at that. There was a very good sense of closure, and now that's ruined a bit, unless T3 blows me away. With the coming of this new movie, the impact of that ending is going to be decreased. T3 will probably have the same kind of plot- Terminator tries to kill Connor, Connor and co try to take out Skynet.
Does anyone else think the female terminator is a bit of a cliche Hollywood trick? Why does Connor look like a thin nerd when in T2 we see him ripped and ready for war? Why didn't they get Eddie Furlong?
I fear that this movie will detract from the series as a whole. Much like the Alien movies, folks will say "Oh yeah, they were decent movies, but 3 and 4 sucked."
Please, prove me wrong T3.
Re:Over 30 comments posted...
on
Web Zeitgeist
·
· Score: 2
Linux probably outranks MS because more users are searching for support for Linux products than MS products. Most users probably know that www.microsoft.com has the support they need. I can't really think of one definitive linux site that can say that much. Thus the searches.
Why spend the money and go through the trouble of setting up another system when you can download this or Exult (see above) and pay nothing, while at the same time being more convenient?
The article implied that the gaming environment was composed of PS2s, GCs, and XBoxen; no direct reference to PCs (though the picture in the article showed one).
What's more, I've never heard a bunch of people linking their CONSOLES together (that's what this "theatre" is running, not PCs) and call it a LAN party. Plus you have to pay.
Might be fun to try out, but for the price of a movie ticket you can rent two games and hang on to them for days instead of two hours. Besides, with XBox Live and PS2's online system, it doesn't strike me as necessary to pay a fee for player matchmaking. Sure, with this the players are actually physically there, but aren't the only people you want to be talking to your gaming buddies anyhow? And if that's the case why not just have all of them cover over to one geek's house and all play from there?
Slashdot Mirror
See, almost all the good console games come from Japan
:)
Nintendo owner
Of the three XBox owners I know, none of them liked XBox Live at all. They all decided the same thing: Playing games online is best played on the PC.
Really? See I've had the exact opposite experience. All of my buddies are PC gamers (so am I), but we all love XBox Live so far.
Well, consindering you NEED broadband to play XBox Live, this basically translates that the person has some fat cash to pay a $50+ monthly fee for internet access. Do these types of people typically have really crap computers? No. MicroSoft has walked into a virtual minefield without looking at marketing demographics first. The people that will keep this afloat are people without broadband and decent computers, which are NOT the people who can actually use it.
I understand what you're saying here, but MS' Live sales simply don't seem to back this up. It's selling like hotcakes, and games that use it are selling like hotcakes. If anything, I would think that folks with PCs and broadband were techies who would love to pick up a console as well.
And after your first free year, targeted monthly rate for this service will be $10-15/Month. It's not set in stone, but if it is any lower than $10, they will lose money on every single player.
I've been keeping track of this, and all of the rumors so far have said that it's looking like it'll be another flat fee (probably another 50). MS isn't stupid, and I'm sure they realize that they'll lose lots of customers because they don't want to have to worry about paying a bill every month. I really wouldn't worry about this.
You can see why Sony and Nintendo are taking their time. Leave it to Microsoft to boldly blunder into a market area it is entirely unfamiliar with and die, then work out a program that actually *works*.
Sony will probably never take off with online gaming since it has no centralized system. You'll have to pay a seperate bill for every single online PS2 game you want to play. Who's going to want to do that? I can understand if they come out with a killer online app, but that's only one game. Nintendo isn't taking their time, they're simply not placing emphasis on online gaming as an important part of GC. All that's coming out is Phantasy Star Online. Period. As far as MS blundering, trust me, it hasn't. I'm very happy with the service, as are most people I've talked to. Most reviews are also positive. I must ask, how can you justify that the biggest software company in the world has no experience in online gaming? Did I miss something?
PC Gaming is here to stay, that's for sure. But XBox Live has impressed me very much. PC Gaming does not let you bring 3 of your buddies over and play football in the same room against 4 other guys from the other side of the country. PC gaming is a bitch to set up. XBL couldn't be easier. I've seen very few lag issues so far. PC gaming is more exposed to cheating at this point than XBL.
I would definitely reccomend that anyone with broadband and an XBox pick this kit up and get themselves a copy of MechAssault (which I feel is the best XBL game right now). Try it for yourselves.
Well- with a few exceptions, Linux's GUI is trying to keep up with MS's. Say what you will about MS, but I think their GUI has a nice feel and generally makes sense. I can't really say the same for Linux's. I feel the two big boys are coming along, but have a ways to go as far as catching up with MS. MS has invested years and god knows how much money into researching GUI's- why not take advantage of this?
This kind of project could pull in a lot of folks who want Linux stability/reliability with a MS feel. I imagine that's a pretty decent-sized market.
Not until 2010? 7 years is a long time. Shouldn't that amount of space be pretty much commonplace by that point anyhow? Sure, it sounds like a lot now, but somehow I don't think that number will be at all impressive in 7 years.
I imagine that if one of these gets scratched you're gonna lose a whole lotta data unless it has some sweet error correction going for it.
How does satellite imagery get us closer to Mars? This is just an interesting project using existing technology.
Since the vast majority of users use Windows, it's likely that they would feel more comfortable seeing a cell phone that uses an interface that they already comfortable with and used to.
The sad state of Slashdot moderator's can be observed in this post's moderation. IT WAS A JOKE.
http://www.virtualmidway.com/mystery/default_p1214 02.asp
Those are the best pictures I've found on the internet that show you how high the new one is with respect to the other rides. The webcams on the official site are a bit deceptive, as the lenses give you the impression that it's shorter than Power Tower.
I have some from inside of the park if you want them. Note that these pictures are taken from the other side of the Causeway, and so Millenium is actually much CLOSER to the camera than the new one; the two rides are on opposite sides of the penninsula. The closest ride to the new one that you can see in the pictures is Magnum. If you look at the first picture in the group, you can see Magnum to the left of the new one. It's less than half as tall in comparison.
Straight up, and straight down again with a twist. If you're in the area, I highly recommend checking it out- it's unbelievable. Can't wait until we start running it.
"third of the park that I work in and am responsible for"
are you ignorant or just stupid?
I work at Cedar Point, as a matter of fact the new ride is in the third of the park that I work in and am responsible for. Can't wait until Slashdot does an article on it. The pictures don't do this ride justice. You truly have to see it yourself on the causeway- Millenium is eclipsed.
Apologies, I wasn't able to view the article as it was /.ed and a little too flash-heavy. My parent post is aimed at coaster sims in general.
Simulations like these lack some of the major elements that make coasters so fun. I'm a big enthusiast of coasters, and I've ridden a lot of the simulations. They don't compare, here's why generally.
a m/camera1.cfm that?
There's no wind in your hair, which detracts greatly from your sense of speed.
You know that you're in a simulation. One of the things that makes Millenium Force such an awesome ride is that it scares the shit out of you on the way up- you ARE 300 ft up. A lot of the suspense that goes with riding a ride is waiting in the line and getting strapped in. What's going to be more effective, walking into a room or strapping yourself into a metal behemoth like http://www.cedarpoint.com/public/inside_park/webc
Though simulators are good at playing games with your inner ear etc, the sensation of being upside-down or highly banked has never felt quite right to me- again, this probably has a lot to do with the fact that throughout the whole ride I know it's not really happening.
This thing works mostly off of visual cues. That's not going to make the "ride" a lot of fun, it's going to make many of it's passengers sick. Sure, coasters can do that too, but since what your eyes think is happening is more or less actually happening (I say that because good Coaster designers will mess with you a bit), I (personally) find getting sick generally happens much less compared to sims.
Finally, riding coasters is a bit of a psychological ordeal. You are conquering your fears/challenging yourself/trying to push yourself in some way. Sims don't really offer this aspect.
Worry not, roller coasters of the world- you are in no danger.
Posts like these are old and tired- I wasn't aware that everyone who didn't like the MPAA was boycotting it. Did I miss something?
I don't like the **AA's, that's for sure, but not enough to stifle my interest in movies/music that I find genuinely worth experiencing or at least learning more about.
a female Terminator could have certain psychological advantages in manipulating humans over a male terminator.
Whenever the bad terminators "manipulated" a human, it was to kill/try to kill them. The only deviation I can think of is when T1000 tries to make Sarah call out to John. I do however go for the idea that the female chassis was made to be effective at infiltration.
This is why I already don't like T3. T2 did indeed have a great ending, and an emotional one at that. There was a very good sense of closure, and now that's ruined a bit, unless T3 blows me away. With the coming of this new movie, the impact of that ending is going to be decreased. T3 will probably have the same kind of plot- Terminator tries to kill Connor, Connor and co try to take out Skynet.
Does anyone else think the female terminator is a bit of a cliche Hollywood trick? Why does Connor look like a thin nerd when in T2 we see him ripped and ready for war? Why didn't they get Eddie Furlong?
I fear that this movie will detract from the series as a whole. Much like the Alien movies, folks will say "Oh yeah, they were decent movies, but 3 and 4 sucked."
Please, prove me wrong T3.
Or I could be way off.
Why spend the money and go through the trouble of setting up another system when you can download this or Exult (see above) and pay nothing, while at the same time being more convenient?
The article implied that the gaming environment was composed of PS2s, GCs, and XBoxen; no direct reference to PCs (though the picture in the article showed one).
What's more, I've never heard a bunch of people linking their CONSOLES together (that's what this "theatre" is running, not PCs) and call it a LAN party. Plus you have to pay.
Might be fun to try out, but for the price of a movie ticket you can rent two games and hang on to them for days instead of two hours. Besides, with XBox Live and PS2's online system, it doesn't strike me as necessary to pay a fee for player matchmaking. Sure, with this the players are actually physically there, but aren't the only people you want to be talking to your gaming buddies anyhow? And if that's the case why not just have all of them cover over to one geek's house and all play from there?
No way, dude.
No way.
I suppose most of us knew those folks were joking since they're still (supposedly) in development.
Where exactly is the market demand for these?
Microsoft will find ways to break Wine support.
They won't simply let nix develop game support without any resistance.
Yes, because the Windows interface is much more difficult and intimidating to get into than Linux' and everything.
Come on now.