I would take the bigger paycheck and spend my hobbie time creating something cool/continue learning. I see work as a paycheck that lets me do what I really want.
It occurs to me that if the legislature sides with them and says "Google, don't do that." they will still become a blackhole to the world's most popular search engine as Google will simply say "Ok." and remove them. With or w/o Big Brother's involvement, they could end up losing.
Kinda interesting you mention this. I just watched a History Channel show that covered cannabilism through the ages. They mentioned that in N. Mexico and that region, there are some interesting pieces they are putting together to support cannabilistic peoples around the time of the Asazi. However they don't think it was the Asazi, but Aztecs or another Central Mexican clan that moved north to get away from civil war, either to maintain their lifestyle or just to find a people to enforce themselves upon universally.
Long story short, there is some interesting anthropological finds coming out of that region (NM/AZ) when, as usual, we thought we already knew the majority of it.
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. The only reason, Splash Damage. I STILL play Wolf: ET at least 2-3 hours a week, and I am keen to see what Splash Damage does in the Quake universe.
Actually a few years ago Todd Hollenshead said in an interview that they *do not* make the majority of their money from licensing of the engine. I can't remember which publication it was, but this was not too long ago (3-4 years max), when the Quake III engine was everywhere in games.
I work @ Sprint and a lot of our customers that look at our PDA devices have been asking the sales people "Will it work with my bank site?" There is a demand, I think, for certain businesses to offer mobile access to accounts to pay bills and all that. However does say Intel really have a reason for a "mobile" site? Would General Motors need one? But if you're a service provider (cable, utility), financial institution, or a Google or Yahoo, then catering to a mobile audience at least partially, could be a bonus.
he said right off the bat "i just watched the video." it does seem a bit suspect to me. the headline is a bit scandalous, but that's expected around here. i didn't see much "attacking" by the octopus. and yes, mammal was not the right word.
I'd argue that it is. Unless MMOG doesn't mean massively multiplayer online game (look at it written like this: massively-multiplayer online game to see where the emphasis on the title really is). I do believe they have greater than 1 million players (quick google search gave up this clicky and that's a 9/05 post), offer a fairly large world to adventure in, but just because that world is instanced and not seamless like WoW, EQ, etc., doesn't NOT qualify it for the title of Massively Multiplayer Online Game.
For real. They should save that money they shovel into sequels, licensed shit (usually shit properties to begin with) and put THAT towards creative games. Is there some number chart somewhere that says selling fewer copies of multiple crap titles is better than selling a lot of copies of fewer BETTER titles?
Part of the problem is that the games industry thinks better graphics == innovation. All this "research" funding is going into prettier explosions, higher res blood stain textures, and boobie bounce physics. Meanwhile, games like Tetris, going on 20 nearly years old, is still one of the most well known and played games ever. I highly doubt you will be saying that about Halo 2 in 19 years. Or GTA.
Kinda off subject, but in a way not, while competently designed and addictive in its way, GTA III/Vice City/San Andreas really aren't that innovative. You can't tell me that 10 or 15 years ago someone didn't anticipate a time when games would offer up the free roam stylings of GTA. Merely being first to the gate is not, to me, indicative of creative genious.
The market needs to be one that diversifies into many different types of gaming. Make fewer quality games in more genres and to get more gamers, rather than pumping out 3D shooters as fast as possible.
Unfortunately this is the mindset of most American entertainment. Look at movies, a lot of fluff geared at specific target audiences. Music, the same. Even comic books, publishers throw out as many spandex clad hero, big breasted damsel in distress titles each month looking to get as many easy dollars from a target group. Meanwhile in other countries comic books are read by every age group of both genders because of diversity in the releases.
I don't find it surprising when I find an article that talks about the game industry becoming a place that is managed more like the movie industry. ALL industry here is managed in nearly the same way.
XFire is cool and I have an account, as do many of my friends, but none of us have logged in to them for nearly a year. Like so many announcements of this nature, how many of those 3 million sign ups are actively using the service? Particularly in this case since it isn't costing a service fee.
i completely agree. but the next thing i would like them to add is semi destroyable worlds, where you impact the setting. it could be through events, where a piece of the landscape is forever changed because of users actions, or instanced missions, where the environment is more alive. they give you so much character tweaking, but the rest of the world just seems too static.
i am holding out for the DC Comics MMO, despite the fact that it is being developed by SOE, to see if they take this approach. I picture epic destructo battles akin to what you see in an episode of the Justice League cartoon.
I can't find the article I read at work today, more a blurb really, but there is a DS and PSP game coming out in the Trek universe. RTS as well. Don't know if it will be this game in a mobile format or a completely different story. On the DS all the controls will be on the touchscreen, naturally, leaving the game view unobstructed.
So far other places have claimed that the game will be called Star Trek: Legacy and allow you to play roles from different time periods, using the ever handy time travel mechanic to blend the story together through several eras of Trek.
On the whole, I can't say. I am fairly confident in saying that MS and their "accessory" drive for the 360 most likely will not sell and you will not see one next to every 360. Why? SegaCD, 32x, etc. Addons to console that create confusion for consumers and in the case of this HD-DVD drive, use up more entertainment center space, usually do poorly. Add to that that real audio/videophiles probably would consider it a sin to have an "accessory" to a game console as their HD-DVD player and there goes that segment of potential buyers.
Secondly, if it isn't used for games, parents will not see a reason to plop down more $$ just so their kids can watch HD-DVDs. Gamers will see no use for it. Only completist gizmo nerds and clueless shoppers who a Best Buy rep. is able to convince into plunking down cash, will buy this drive.
Are we that brainwashed by Hollywood's post apocalyptic representation of future society? When things begin to slide, we all g onucking futs and brandish sawed off shot guns? Look at all the worldwide catastrophies these days, 9/11, Indonesian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina... Yeah there were some bad apples, most likely not the highest on the food chain or IQ meter, looting and crap (not so much after 9/11), but there was also a ginormous amount of reflection and handouts after these events. Doesn't that give people any fucking hope that if shit goes south we WON'T turn into a buncha non-bathing, fanged tooth creatures lookin' to give our children away for a slice of bread?
We always hear that "The revolution is coming!" from naysayers and wannabe prophets, but if they put that energy into fixing stuff, would it have to turn out that way? I'm not saying the world will instead end up like Demolition Man, where all restaurants are Taco Bell and we where togas, but I don't think we'll become cavemen again.
I'm in the beta for DnD. This isn't anything like WoW. It's more like Guild Wars. You create a party and get an instanced dungeon for your party. It has a lot of the DnD "atmosphere" with text descriptions of the scene quickly popping up when you move through areas to replicate the DM feel. All in all the feeling of the game is actually cool. Pubs and inns have wonderful atmosphere, the music is catchy, and you feel like you're really almost there. I haven't progressed too far into higher levels though, so I can't say much about that. I will need to find more free time to play before it launches though, so I can see if it will be worth it to buy. (and help report bugs too of couse)
Although this begs the question, why do we really need to make game -> movie adaptations (and vice versa) in the first place? I would rather each market battle each other out for our dollars by creating things that only that specific form of entertainment can provide rather than just milk each others ideas.
Of course the answer to this question is $$. From a purely marketroid point of you, you'd be crazy not to make a Halo movie because you're almost guaranteed a few hundred million above what you spent on production.
But fucking Bloodrayne? The mere fact they made a Bloodrayne movie at all is a joke. The game is nothing but a vampire Lara Croft, which is a license that itself has been milked into oblivion. (And yes I have played all of the games to some extent in each series I mention)
Slashdot Mirror
I would take the bigger paycheck and spend my hobbie time creating something cool/continue learning. I see work as a paycheck that lets me do what I really want.
http://www.iphone.org/
Maybe you can find some jewels of wisdom about stable code in general from this story
Oh whoops. That's more than once I've done that. I blame the liqour. The best part is, I even read both articles.
Deja vu
A whole 9 hours in between, but only 3 stories apart on games.slashdot.org.
It occurs to me that if the legislature sides with them and says "Google, don't do that." they will still become a blackhole to the world's most popular search engine as Google will simply say "Ok." and remove them. With or w/o Big Brother's involvement, they could end up losing.
Kinda interesting you mention this. I just watched a History Channel show that covered cannabilism through the ages. They mentioned that in N. Mexico and that region, there are some interesting pieces they are putting together to support cannabilistic peoples around the time of the Asazi. However they don't think it was the Asazi, but Aztecs or another Central Mexican clan that moved north to get away from civil war, either to maintain their lifestyle or just to find a people to enforce themselves upon universally.
Long story short, there is some interesting anthropological finds coming out of that region (NM/AZ) when, as usual, we thought we already knew the majority of it.
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. The only reason, Splash Damage. I STILL play Wolf: ET at least 2-3 hours a week, and I am keen to see what Splash Damage does in the Quake universe.
Actually a few years ago Todd Hollenshead said in an interview that they *do not* make the majority of their money from licensing of the engine. I can't remember which publication it was, but this was not too long ago (3-4 years max), when the Quake III engine was everywhere in games.
I work @ Sprint and a lot of our customers that look at our PDA devices have been asking the sales people "Will it work with my bank site?" There is a demand, I think, for certain businesses to offer mobile access to accounts to pay bills and all that. However does say Intel really have a reason for a "mobile" site? Would General Motors need one? But if you're a service provider (cable, utility), financial institution, or a Google or Yahoo, then catering to a mobile audience at least partially, could be a bonus.
he said right off the bat "i just watched the video." it does seem a bit suspect to me. the headline is a bit scandalous, but that's expected around here. i didn't see much "attacking" by the octopus. and yes, mammal was not the right word.
I'd argue that it is. Unless MMOG doesn't mean massively multiplayer online game (look at it written like this: massively-multiplayer online game to see where the emphasis on the title really is). I do believe they have greater than 1 million players (quick google search gave up this clicky and that's a 9/05 post), offer a fairly large world to adventure in, but just because that world is instanced and not seamless like WoW, EQ, etc., doesn't NOT qualify it for the title of Massively Multiplayer Online Game.
In their last meeting, Apple reps. were rumored to have consoled them by saying, "Don't worry, it happens to a lot of chip makers."
For real. They should save that money they shovel into sequels, licensed shit (usually shit properties to begin with) and put THAT towards creative games. Is there some number chart somewhere that says selling fewer copies of multiple crap titles is better than selling a lot of copies of fewer BETTER titles?
Part of the problem is that the games industry thinks better graphics == innovation. All this "research" funding is going into prettier explosions, higher res blood stain textures, and boobie bounce physics. Meanwhile, games like Tetris, going on 20 nearly years old, is still one of the most well known and played games ever. I highly doubt you will be saying that about Halo 2 in 19 years. Or GTA.
Kinda off subject, but in a way not, while competently designed and addictive in its way, GTA III/Vice City/San Andreas really aren't that innovative. You can't tell me that 10 or 15 years ago someone didn't anticipate a time when games would offer up the free roam stylings of GTA. Merely being first to the gate is not, to me, indicative of creative genious.
The market needs to be one that diversifies into many different types of gaming. Make fewer quality games in more genres and to get more gamers, rather than pumping out 3D shooters as fast as possible.
Unfortunately this is the mindset of most American entertainment. Look at movies, a lot of fluff geared at specific target audiences. Music, the same. Even comic books, publishers throw out as many spandex clad hero, big breasted damsel in distress titles each month looking to get as many easy dollars from a target group. Meanwhile in other countries comic books are read by every age group of both genders because of diversity in the releases.
I don't find it surprising when I find an article that talks about the game industry becoming a place that is managed more like the movie industry. ALL industry here is managed in nearly the same way.
Uranus is so big it has its own orbit!
</astronomy toilet humor>
XFire is cool and I have an account, as do many of my friends, but none of us have logged in to them for nearly a year. Like so many announcements of this nature, how many of those 3 million sign ups are actively using the service? Particularly in this case since it isn't costing a service fee.
i completely agree. but the next thing i would like them to add is semi destroyable worlds, where you impact the setting. it could be through events, where a piece of the landscape is forever changed because of users actions, or instanced missions, where the environment is more alive. they give you so much character tweaking, but the rest of the world just seems too static.
i am holding out for the DC Comics MMO, despite the fact that it is being developed by SOE, to see if they take this approach. I picture epic destructo battles akin to what you see in an episode of the Justice League cartoon.
I can't find the article I read at work today, more a blurb really, but there is a DS and PSP game coming out in the Trek universe. RTS as well. Don't know if it will be this game in a mobile format or a completely different story. On the DS all the controls will be on the touchscreen, naturally, leaving the game view unobstructed.
So far other places have claimed that the game will be called Star Trek: Legacy and allow you to play roles from different time periods, using the ever handy time travel mechanic to blend the story together through several eras of Trek.
On the whole, I can't say. I am fairly confident in saying that MS and their "accessory" drive for the 360 most likely will not sell and you will not see one next to every 360. Why? SegaCD, 32x, etc. Addons to console that create confusion for consumers and in the case of this HD-DVD drive, use up more entertainment center space, usually do poorly. Add to that that real audio/videophiles probably would consider it a sin to have an "accessory" to a game console as their HD-DVD player and there goes that segment of potential buyers.
Secondly, if it isn't used for games, parents will not see a reason to plop down more $$ just so their kids can watch HD-DVDs. Gamers will see no use for it. Only completist gizmo nerds and clueless shoppers who a Best Buy rep. is able to convince into plunking down cash, will buy this drive.
Day being the operative word. I'm pretty sure I wasn't born in the year 1706. Would be cool if I had been and still only looked mid-20's!
Are we that brainwashed by Hollywood's post apocalyptic representation of future society? When things begin to slide, we all g onucking futs and brandish sawed off shot guns? Look at all the worldwide catastrophies these days, 9/11, Indonesian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina... Yeah there were some bad apples, most likely not the highest on the food chain or IQ meter, looting and crap (not so much after 9/11), but there was also a ginormous amount of reflection and handouts after these events. Doesn't that give people any fucking hope that if shit goes south we WON'T turn into a buncha non-bathing, fanged tooth creatures lookin' to give our children away for a slice of bread?
We always hear that "The revolution is coming!" from naysayers and wannabe prophets, but if they put that energy into fixing stuff, would it have to turn out that way? I'm not saying the world will instead end up like Demolition Man, where all restaurants are Taco Bell and we where togas, but I don't think we'll become cavemen again.
Or Grandma Ugh started to stink up the cave, so they buried her out back.
That's great, move the timeline ahead. Let's not actually make a worthwhile game.
I'm in the beta for DnD. This isn't anything like WoW. It's more like Guild Wars. You create a party and get an instanced dungeon for your party. It has a lot of the DnD "atmosphere" with text descriptions of the scene quickly popping up when you move through areas to replicate the DM feel. All in all the feeling of the game is actually cool. Pubs and inns have wonderful atmosphere, the music is catchy, and you feel like you're really almost there. I haven't progressed too far into higher levels though, so I can't say much about that. I will need to find more free time to play before it launches though, so I can see if it will be worth it to buy. (and help report bugs too of couse)
Although this begs the question, why do we really need to make game -> movie adaptations (and vice versa) in the first place? I would rather each market battle each other out for our dollars by creating things that only that specific form of entertainment can provide rather than just milk each others ideas.
Of course the answer to this question is $$. From a purely marketroid point of you, you'd be crazy not to make a Halo movie because you're almost guaranteed a few hundred million above what you spent on production.
But fucking Bloodrayne? The mere fact they made a Bloodrayne movie at all is a joke. The game is nothing but a vampire Lara Croft, which is a license that itself has been milked into oblivion. (And yes I have played all of the games to some extent in each series I mention)