No. I never said that. That also doesn't change a thing about what I said.
If they aren't aren't buying new consoles, nor new games, the money of the budget gamers never reaches the industry. They might as well not exist to the industry. Only the retailers make any profit from them and they aren't responsible for the development of new games.
It doesn't matter to the publishers whether the gamers that spend $20 a month on used games will only buy a new game every 3 months. For them, that is profit already. Not a cent spent on used games goes to the publishers and studios. It all goes to Gamestop and other retailers.
Even if people buy 1 new game every six months rather than 10 used games a month, it's more beneficial for the publishers that way.
As long as content creators support Flash, it will still exist. Newgrounds, as an example, still has a large community of flash artists and programmers, which regularly provide animations and games for free.
When these sites make the transition, Flash may die. Until then, it may be used significantly less, but it will still be there.
The game looks good, but I can't buy it. I travel regularly and I don't always have an internet connection available. Always on connection for single player is a deal breaker.
This announcement sounds perfectly reasonable to me--not having plugins in the Metro browser closes a lot of security holes and eliminates crap like Flash that's proprietary, hurts performance, etc. It's a competitive move that raises the bar for other browsers to become more secure and stop supporting things that people don't want.
Emphasis mine.
Speak for yourself. I regularly watch flash animations, play flash games and use web apps made in flash. If I were one of the creators, I wouldn't be very happy either. It should be my choice to make, not Microsoft's. Limiting my choice is not a benefit.
Would it really? Foxconn has been target of controversy for quite some time, but iPhones still sell very well.
By censoring this game, not only they triggered Streisand effect and brought the problems about iPhone production to attention just the same, but also made the iPhone look like a restrictive platform for developers once again.
Besides, do you really think iPhone buyers really actually care about it's production problems enough to not to buy them?
But then again, I don't know a single person that has original Photoshop, because the price is absurd. How is it acceptable that an image editing software costs almost as much as an entire computer?
I regularly use "cloud stuff" like Google Docs and the Aviary apps, as well as Dropbox. That means I can access and edit my documents everywhere I can find a barely decent computer with internet connection. As well as download them everytime I need.
So, no. Using the "cloud" has saved me a lot of hassle.
What is boring for some people is fun for other people. Wandering around, exploring the game world, hunting and such is what made RDR interesting for so many people. It wasn't just a western game, it was a full blown wild west world. In it's particular case, I think there is a considerable amount of people that didn't buy it for the story, but for the sandbox world. So, it doesn't matter whether they finish the game, because it doesn't mean they didn't enjoy it.
While I do believe there is a lot of unnecessary padding in games, not everything would be benefited by being cut shorter. Hell, there are even people that like grinding, so it's really something to be thought in a case by case basis.
If I'm not mistaken, Alan Wake does that, downright to mimicking the TV series intro format. A few games also display story summaries as text in the loading screens, but I agree that it is missing from most of them.
Their trademark is "Elder Scrolls". While I think Mojang's "Scrolls", even as a fantasy game, is too generic to be trademarked, it is not violating Bethesda's trademark. They are claiming they own the individual words of their trademark, even though they are common english words, and that's clearly absurd.
Spoilers may not ruin the story, but having a surprise every now and then is nice. Besides, for genres like detective stories, part of the fun for some people is in figuring out who is the criminal before it's revealed.
Fun is not an absolute concept quantifiable by value that adds up that way. Mario, Zelda and Metroid, as well as Metal Gear, God of War and Uncharted are fun in different ways among themselves and than Angry Birds. A significant amount of people is not gaming just for killing time and even if there cheap smart games that are fun, they sometimes they can't provide the same value as a $40 game.
In case you haven't read, games and game notifications will be placed on it's own, entirely separate, area. But don't let that stop you from being bitter and grumpy, if that's what you want.
But they were tricked. The fact that they didn't pay anything doesn't change the fact that they were misled.
Another thing about the free shirts is that at the same time you didn't pay for the shirt, they didn't pay you for the free advertisement. They had the cost of producing the shirts, but they reap the benefits indirectly.
Possibly, but gaming is how I spend significant amount of my free time. During this time, I'd rather play quality games, so it's interesting to clarify which factors can make a game better or worse. That would allow me to choose better games to play, as well as recommending better games to interested people. Hobby or not, if you pour thousands of hours over the years into something, it's not surprising it starts being given more importance.
Discussion of this nature might reach the attention of people involved with the game industry. That way, the player opinions can influence, even if slightly, the direction that the gaming medium goes. Also, don't forget that, for the people involved with the game industry, discussions of this nature are undeniably serious, since they involve considerable amounts of very real money, their livelihoods and investments.
Besides, I do have an interest in game design myself, just as people may be interested in literature, paintings, music and the most diverse subjects. Are we not allowed to? What is the problem in discussing seriously about something that you like? Why would not taking it seriously be better in any way?
So you can't build an archive to release when the content becomes public domain. While it doesn't surprise me, it makes me wonder. How one should go about legally preserving content for the future? Are there initiatives dedicated to that?
Including the eletronic components? I don't think so. Everytime they I hear someone saying that any 3D printer can "print itself", it strikes me as marketing speech.
Twitter is itself a digest of opinions, announcements and general information. There is no "best of twitter" just as there is no best of any social networking site. Especially because there is not a single way to use Twitter. Some use it as a RSS feed, providing links for news and articles, some use it as the microblogging service it's called, whether like a personal (but public) diary, for discussing specific topics, for jokes or social commentary. It is also often used as a way of leaving messages for your friends, without having to to contact them one by one, since you account broadcast your messages publicly or just to the people you allow to follow you, if you protect your account.
If you want to get into Twitter, see if there is someone who posts about matters you are interested into and follow them. Unfortunately, their recommendations aren't too good. They only start being barely useful when you already follow people.
Slashdot Mirror
No. I never said that. That also doesn't change a thing about what I said.
If they aren't aren't buying new consoles, nor new games, the money of the budget gamers never reaches the industry. They might as well not exist to the industry. Only the retailers make any profit from them and they aren't responsible for the development of new games.
It doesn't matter to the publishers whether the gamers that spend $20 a month on used games will only buy a new game every 3 months. For them, that is profit already. Not a cent spent on used games goes to the publishers and studios. It all goes to Gamestop and other retailers.
Even if people buy 1 new game every six months rather than 10 used games a month, it's more beneficial for the publishers that way.
Maybe https://checkout.google.com/ ?
As long as content creators support Flash, it will still exist. Newgrounds, as an example, still has a large community of flash artists and programmers, which regularly provide animations and games for free.
When these sites make the transition, Flash may die. Until then, it may be used significantly less, but it will still be there.
The game looks good, but I can't buy it. I travel regularly and I don't always have an internet connection available. Always on connection for single player is a deal breaker.
I will wait for Torchlight 2
This announcement sounds perfectly reasonable to me--not having plugins in the Metro browser closes a lot of security holes and eliminates crap like Flash that's proprietary, hurts performance, etc. It's a competitive move that raises the bar for other browsers to become more secure and stop supporting things that people don't want.
Emphasis mine.
Speak for yourself. I regularly watch flash animations, play flash games and use web apps made in flash. If I were one of the creators, I wouldn't be very happy either. It should be my choice to make, not Microsoft's. Limiting my choice is not a benefit.
Would it really? Foxconn has been target of controversy for quite some time, but iPhones still sell very well.
By censoring this game, not only they triggered Streisand effect and brought the problems about iPhone production to attention just the same, but also made the iPhone look like a restrictive platform for developers once again.
Besides, do you really think iPhone buyers really actually care about it's production problems enough to not to buy them?
But then again, I don't know a single person that has original Photoshop, because the price is absurd. How is it acceptable that an image editing software costs almost as much as an entire computer?
I regularly use "cloud stuff" like Google Docs and the Aviary apps, as well as Dropbox. That means I can access and edit my documents everywhere I can find a barely decent computer with internet connection. As well as download them everytime I need.
So, no. Using the "cloud" has saved me a lot of hassle.
We used to drive excellence through insults.
No, you used to drive away poor quality jobs through insults. Don't fool yourself into thinking you are responsible for someone else's success.
Besides, when the internet was younger, it's users were far more likely to be technologically adept.
Which is odd, as I expect a machine to be more logical than a human.
And that's the point. Since they aren't all that logical, they are more easily perceived as humans.
Well, Super Mario Bros. Crossover is still out there.
What is boring for some people is fun for other people. Wandering around, exploring the game world, hunting and such is what made RDR interesting for so many people. It wasn't just a western game, it was a full blown wild west world. In it's particular case, I think there is a considerable amount of people that didn't buy it for the story, but for the sandbox world. So, it doesn't matter whether they finish the game, because it doesn't mean they didn't enjoy it.
While I do believe there is a lot of unnecessary padding in games, not everything would be benefited by being cut shorter. Hell, there are even people that like grinding, so it's really something to be thought in a case by case basis.
If I'm not mistaken, Alan Wake does that, downright to mimicking the TV series intro format. A few games also display story summaries as text in the loading screens, but I agree that it is missing from most of them.
Their trademark is "Elder Scrolls". While I think Mojang's "Scrolls", even as a fantasy game, is too generic to be trademarked, it is not violating Bethesda's trademark. They are claiming they own the individual words of their trademark, even though they are common english words, and that's clearly absurd.
Spoilers may not ruin the story, but having a surprise every now and then is nice. Besides, for genres like detective stories, part of the fun for some people is in figuring out who is the criminal before it's revealed.
Fun is not an absolute concept quantifiable by value that adds up that way. Mario, Zelda and Metroid, as well as Metal Gear, God of War and Uncharted are fun in different ways among themselves and than Angry Birds. A significant amount of people is not gaming just for killing time and even if there cheap smart games that are fun, they sometimes they can't provide the same value as a $40 game.
In case you haven't read, games and game notifications will be placed on it's own, entirely separate, area. But don't let that stop you from being bitter and grumpy, if that's what you want.
But they were tricked. The fact that they didn't pay anything doesn't change the fact that they were misled.
Another thing about the free shirts is that at the same time you didn't pay for the shirt, they didn't pay you for the free advertisement. They had the cost of producing the shirts, but they reap the benefits indirectly.
The solution is simple: don't buy games that are not fun, do buy games that are fun.
So, how do I know a game is fun? What makes a game fun? How can I define fun? And so it goes...
Possibly, but gaming is how I spend significant amount of my free time. During this time, I'd rather play quality games, so it's interesting to clarify which factors can make a game better or worse. That would allow me to choose better games to play, as well as recommending better games to interested people. Hobby or not, if you pour thousands of hours over the years into something, it's not surprising it starts being given more importance.
Discussion of this nature might reach the attention of people involved with the game industry. That way, the player opinions can influence, even if slightly, the direction that the gaming medium goes. Also, don't forget that, for the people involved with the game industry, discussions of this nature are undeniably serious, since they involve considerable amounts of very real money, their livelihoods and investments.
Besides, I do have an interest in game design myself, just as people may be interested in literature, paintings, music and the most diverse subjects. Are we not allowed to? What is the problem in discussing seriously about something that you like? Why would not taking it seriously be better in any way?
So you can't build an archive to release when the content becomes public domain. While it doesn't surprise me, it makes me wonder. How one should go about legally preserving content for the future? Are there initiatives dedicated to that?
Great, now I'm hungry.
Including the eletronic components? I don't think so. Everytime they I hear someone saying that any 3D printer can "print itself", it strikes me as marketing speech.
Twitter is itself a digest of opinions, announcements and general information. There is no "best of twitter" just as there is no best of any social networking site. Especially because there is not a single way to use Twitter. Some use it as a RSS feed, providing links for news and articles, some use it as the microblogging service it's called, whether like a personal (but public) diary, for discussing specific topics, for jokes or social commentary. It is also often used as a way of leaving messages for your friends, without having to to contact them one by one, since you account broadcast your messages publicly or just to the people you allow to follow you, if you protect your account.
If you want to get into Twitter, see if there is someone who posts about matters you are interested into and follow them. Unfortunately, their recommendations aren't too good. They only start being barely useful when you already follow people.