There were two decent Game Company Newsletters that I used to get. The first one was the New Zork Times (later change to the Status Link after the New York Times sicked some Orks on them). It was kind of jokey, and would have articles about their new games and also their disasterous, company destroying business product the Cornerstone database.
The other was SEGA Visions the free SEGA magazine. It was really good for a free magazine, and had some good strategy guides (I think I still have the one for Dark Wizard someplace).
Some other companies tried, but none of their efforts impressed me. Usually they gave up after a while... of course, even SEGA eventually did that on their slow slide to oblivion...
The scary thing is that the article talks about children, and the guy was 18 years old. Oh, also calls for a nationwide ban on paintball and lazer tag. (Bavaria, apparently, already has such a ban.)
Yes, but he doesn't have a point. What he has is a lot of incoherent nonsense about "Modern Technology=Bad."
Here's an example: What is an iPod? It's basically a high tech Walkman. We've had lower tech versions of Walkmans for years, both radios, cassette players, and CD players. People have always been able to carry a music collection with them to listen to, or listen to the radio for hours if they wanted to. The iPod offers only convenience and storage. So why single out the iPod? Answer: Future Shock on O'Reilly's part.
Oh, and it would be disingenuous to believe that O'Reilly meant old fashioned Walkmans when he says iPods. He wasn't making a point about all technology but just about hip, trendy technology. I think it just doesn't register with him that an iPod is just an improved version of the Walkman. (I really don't think he's very bright.)
If we ignore the fact that he lumps iPods, video games etc. together and just focus on video games, then we aren't debating what he actually said, we're debating a point that was brought up by O'Reilly's point. Not off topic exactly, but certainly not the main topic of the article.
I disagree. The discussion is in fact about Mr. O'Reilly. If J. Random Nobody made the same comments on his blog, people would pretty much ignore it. O'Reilly makes most of his arguments using appeals to authority (including himself, as an authority).
Seriously, if this was an Ask Slashdot, "Do video games, ipods and technology destroy social networks?" and some person said, "Well, that's what O'Reilly thinks and he's a frothing right-wing nutjob," you'd have a point.
However, I'd argue that this is much more about Bill O'Reilly than it is about his rant. Of course, I've probably just been successfully trolled, because who's going to say that an informal Slashdot discussion about something Bill O'Reilly said isn't allowed bring up the dubious authority of the man himself?
We saw this happen before when 3Com tied its fortunes to Microsoft in the late 1980s with the lamented 3Com-Microsoft LAN Manager network operating system, which was ironically Microsoft's answer to Novell at that time. Then 3Com CEO Bill Krause felt the only way to compete with Novell was through an alliance with Microsoft. So 3Com bought its way into the relationship, ended up doing all the work (MORE THAN all the work if you count recoding Microsoft blunders), then had to BUY ITS WAY BACK OUT when the product failed.
After that deal was over and the blood had dried, 3Com founder Bob Metcalfe claims that a Microsoft exec told him, "You made a fatal error, you trusted us."
I still think Microsoft is less evil than Sony though... but only just.
Does anyone else have one of those big, heavy battery packs that you could put D batteries in for your Lynx? Those D Batteries last a long time, I can't remember the last time I had to replace them. Of course, at this point your Lynx is only portable in the military sense, on the other hand GBA games are a lot bigger than Lynx cards.
What I really need to do is buy a replacement AC adaptor before they're all gone (or get a mini-Mr.Fusion converter for it, whichever I get around to first... they were supposed to be out by now, I think...)
This is without a doubt the stupidest comment I have ever read. Which would make you one of the stupidest people on Slashdot. Possibly the stupidest, I'm not sure.
Oh, right, I have no reply argument, I just wanted to make that point.
I would reply to you, but all my arguments would go right over your head. I could just see you there sitting at your keyboard, furrowing your brow and trying to understand them, puss oozing from the many open sores on your face.
Then you'd come up with a reply that'd be a total non sequitur. Then I'd try to explain the non sequitur and you'd come up with one even more egregious and so on. Finally, it would end up just being you throwing lame insults at me in order to try to provoke a response.
Oh and it's also pretty obvious that your comment is pure flamebait. Surprised it hasn't been modded down.
The criticism he's leveling is usually leveled by sound money capitalists, not socialists or communists (who have other apocalypses to worry about).
What is capitalism worth when an increasingly socialist/fascist government can just print itself as much money as it needs? How can you call a system capitalism when it abandons the primary tenet of capitalism, it's golden rule: TAANSTAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch).
1. It's a First Amendment Litmus test issue: My opinion of people jumping on the anti-gaming band-wagon is that they have no respect at all for the First Amendment. This is because I think games are generally milder than what you see on mainstream commercial television (I've watched Scarface on commercial television, I also watch Heroes. Heroes has some disturbing imagery related to my favorite character, scary undead cheerleader girl.) I think the politicians out to ban them have no idea what they are talking about and have a witchhunt mentality. I don't want witchhunters in office, I don't think they'll respect unpopular political dissent any more than they respect games.
2. Politicians are often Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee: In other words, they both voted for the Iraq war, and both support staying the course, etc. The only difference between two politicians might be their stance on games. (Or they might be identical on that, too, but different on taxes... etc.)
3. Politicians may have limited power: Do I care what position someone running for City Council has on the Iraq war? Maybe emotionally, but otherwise it is irrelevant. Do I care what position he has on videogames? Yes, because he may try to, say, ban arcades within the city limits or create an anti-gaming tax.
4. The race is probably not even close: In many cases, it's not going to matter who you vote for, and you might as well stay home. If you care enough to drag yourself to the polls to cast a vote against an anti-game politician, you might also take the time to vote for other candidates and ballot initiatives.
5. Jobs and Economy: See, here's a good example of where one issue is related to another issue. There have been a few anti-game initiatives that have been designed to make games, or certain types of games, economically unviable. These issues impact me as a consumer, and impacts the job market and also my options as a consumer. I've noticed where I am that all the arcades closed. Is part of the reason dealing with these stupid controversies? Who knows, but what I do know is that many politicians wanted the arcades closed and enacted legislation to speed it along (some of the anti-gaming laws particularly targetted arcades with vague restrictions against undefined violence in games which could mean House of the Dead or could mean Tekken). If I wanted to open an arcade as a business and stock the kind of games I want, I'm probably out of luck.
Now, me, I don't see much point in voting for non-Libertarian candidates. My opinion of the two major parties is "A pox on both their houses" and the same goes for most Independents. There are even many Libertarians who aren't orthodox enough for me. That said, I will drag myself to the polls just to spite an anti-game politician by voting against him. Because while I think the two major parties mainly disagree about how to decorate this handbasket we are all in, I am will to vote out of the important political emotion, spite.
I've bought some games from J-List but I only play them for the articles....
Actually, I was thinking of buying a Domo-kun from them (see URL link). But now we are outside the realm of games unless you mean PC games. In which case we may as well mention X-Arcade.
This is all academic anyway, as I'm in debt up to my eyeballs for the next 5 years at least....
Is this intended to be "Who will replace Lik-Sang?" or is it more like one of those Final Destination movies, "Who will Sony destroy next?"
For import gaming I always used National Console Support, I mainly used Lik-Sang for wierd stuff. So what I'm looking for is not a replacement import gaming place, but a replacement wierd stuff place. I suppose The Goat Store could help me replace some of this. (Note: An acronym for Games of all Types, some./'s probably have an unreasonable fear of goats at this point.) Unfortunately, that's mainly a retro store, not a wierd stuff store. Telegames used to be good, but they've scaled back on the products they carry.
Sony are sort of like Necrons (from Warhammer 40K) or Judge Death (from Judge Dredd).
You know, evil.
I'm reminded of the time that Judge Cal remarked to Judge Death, "You must give me the name of your tailor," and Judge Death responded, "I regret he is no longer with us."
That would be anti-competitive behaviour and would be litigated against by Sony's trigger happy lawyers. They'd probably win, too, even against Microsoft.
Speaking of which has anyone ever seen that TV show Profit? One of the oddities of this show was that the corporate intranet that Jim Profit would access was rather strangely set up in primative 3D. I've never been able to figure out why. My guess is that the producers of the show (this was in the early 90s, think giant cellphones and dialup for everyone who even had Internet and wasn't in a school or some such) had no clue about computers and wanted something that would look cool and highly advanced.
Also, people seem to discount the possiblity that Nintendo learnned from its mistakes (and it has made many more than just Virtual Boy). I think they introduce ideas they think might be profit making for them in a more limited way these days and test the waters first before going full throttle with them.
They aren't even going "all in" with the Wii, it will definitely still play traditional games. You couldn't say that about Virtual Boy. If the red and black virtual reality screens gave you a headache, you were basically stuck with a useless videogame player.
But the reality is the only reason why people keep bringing up Virtual Boy is because it was "wierd" and the Wii is seen as "wierd."
Of course, lest we forget, PSP defenders have done the same thing with the "wierd" DS.
Yes, but anyone who believes what you've just written is not in Sony's core market focus group. To quote an article I read long ago:
Sony made this distinction, to a large extent, not so much through original design or perspective or technology as through psychology. Their message: videogames are childish, uncool garbage. What we have to offer, it's barely even videogames. It's more like movies, or some other kind of entertainment. They reinforced the premise by generally refusing "old fashioned" 2D games on their systems, unless explicitly labeled as a retro package; through putting a heavy emphasis on "mature"-themed games, and by funneling Sony's limitless funds into years of blanket advertising - rarely showing actual game footage if CG was available, emphasizing the cinematic and familiar. The implication was, the less videogames in any sense resembled what you and I think of as videogames, the better.
-- What's Wrong With Console Design?
This has been Sony's marketing philosophy going forward, "Everything that has come before sucks, even our stuff." So, they have two kinds of fans, people who buy into this philosophy, and people who just go with the market leader which they've been up until now. therefore, you can divide the Sony fans into two groups, the diehard fanboys who buy into Sony's twisted gaming philosophy and the people who just want the system with the most variety of games. This is why, as far as fanboys are concerned, Sony fanboys are the most obnoxious.
Honestly, while I'm anti-Sony for various reasons, the way the Sony videogaming marketing department has approached gaming with a Maoist Chinese-style "Cultural Revolution" would be tops on the list. Still, they must have been right, it got them control of the videogame market, unfortunately.
Slashdot Mirror
The other was SEGA Visions the free SEGA magazine. It was really good for a free magazine, and had some good strategy guides (I think I still have the one for Dark Wizard someplace).
Some other companies tried, but none of their efforts impressed me. Usually they gave up after a while... of course, even SEGA eventually did that on their slow slide to oblivion...
The scary thing is that the article talks about children, and the guy was 18 years old. Oh, also calls for a nationwide ban on paintball and lazer tag. (Bavaria, apparently, already has such a ban.)
Python script named "Life of Bryan," eh?
Nice nitpick on the always, but O'Reilly wasn't talking about 20 year old technology, and you know it.
Here's an example: What is an iPod? It's basically a high tech Walkman. We've had lower tech versions of Walkmans for years, both radios, cassette players, and CD players. People have always been able to carry a music collection with them to listen to, or listen to the radio for hours if they wanted to. The iPod offers only convenience and storage. So why single out the iPod? Answer: Future Shock on O'Reilly's part.
Oh, and it would be disingenuous to believe that O'Reilly meant old fashioned Walkmans when he says iPods. He wasn't making a point about all technology but just about hip, trendy technology. I think it just doesn't register with him that an iPod is just an improved version of the Walkman. (I really don't think he's very bright.)
If we ignore the fact that he lumps iPods, video games etc. together and just focus on video games, then we aren't debating what he actually said, we're debating a point that was brought up by O'Reilly's point. Not off topic exactly, but certainly not the main topic of the article.
Seriously, if this was an Ask Slashdot, "Do video games, ipods and technology destroy social networks?" and some person said, "Well, that's what O'Reilly thinks and he's a frothing right-wing nutjob," you'd have a point.
However, I'd argue that this is much more about Bill O'Reilly than it is about his rant. Of course, I've probably just been successfully trolled, because who's going to say that an informal Slashdot discussion about something Bill O'Reilly said isn't allowed bring up the dubious authority of the man himself?
Bill O'Reilly Wants to Ban Horror Movies (and is a Moron)
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_200 61110_001188.html
Relevant quote from Cringely article:
I still think Microsoft is less evil than Sony though... but only just.What I really need to do is buy a replacement AC adaptor before they're all gone (or get a mini-Mr.Fusion converter for it, whichever I get around to first... they were supposed to be out by now, I think...)
Oh, right, I have no reply argument, I just wanted to make that point.
I would reply to you, but all my arguments would go right over your head. I could just see you there sitting at your keyboard, furrowing your brow and trying to understand them, puss oozing from the many open sores on your face.
Then you'd come up with a reply that'd be a total non sequitur. Then I'd try to explain the non sequitur and you'd come up with one even more egregious and so on. Finally, it would end up just being you throwing lame insults at me in order to try to provoke a response.
Oh and it's also pretty obvious that your comment is pure flamebait. Surprised it hasn't been modded down.
What is capitalism worth when an increasingly socialist/fascist government can just print itself as much money as it needs? How can you call a system capitalism when it abandons the primary tenet of capitalism, it's golden rule: TAANSTAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch).
Reckoning day is coming, and that right quick!
1. It's a First Amendment Litmus test issue: My opinion of people jumping on the anti-gaming band-wagon is that they have no respect at all for the First Amendment. This is because I think games are generally milder than what you see on mainstream commercial television (I've watched Scarface on commercial television, I also watch Heroes. Heroes has some disturbing imagery related to my favorite character, scary undead cheerleader girl.) I think the politicians out to ban them have no idea what they are talking about and have a witchhunt mentality. I don't want witchhunters in office, I don't think they'll respect unpopular political dissent any more than they respect games.
2. Politicians are often Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee: In other words, they both voted for the Iraq war, and both support staying the course, etc. The only difference between two politicians might be their stance on games. (Or they might be identical on that, too, but different on taxes... etc.)
3. Politicians may have limited power: Do I care what position someone running for City Council has on the Iraq war? Maybe emotionally, but otherwise it is irrelevant. Do I care what position he has on videogames? Yes, because he may try to, say, ban arcades within the city limits or create an anti-gaming tax.
4. The race is probably not even close: In many cases, it's not going to matter who you vote for, and you might as well stay home. If you care enough to drag yourself to the polls to cast a vote against an anti-game politician, you might also take the time to vote for other candidates and ballot initiatives.
5. Jobs and Economy: See, here's a good example of where one issue is related to another issue. There have been a few anti-game initiatives that have been designed to make games, or certain types of games, economically unviable. These issues impact me as a consumer, and impacts the job market and also my options as a consumer. I've noticed where I am that all the arcades closed. Is part of the reason dealing with these stupid controversies? Who knows, but what I do know is that many politicians wanted the arcades closed and enacted legislation to speed it along (some of the anti-gaming laws particularly targetted arcades with vague restrictions against undefined violence in games which could mean House of the Dead or could mean Tekken). If I wanted to open an arcade as a business and stock the kind of games I want, I'm probably out of luck.
Now, me, I don't see much point in voting for non-Libertarian candidates. My opinion of the two major parties is "A pox on both their houses" and the same goes for most Independents. There are even many Libertarians who aren't orthodox enough for me. That said, I will drag myself to the polls just to spite an anti-game politician by voting against him. Because while I think the two major parties mainly disagree about how to decorate this handbasket we are all in, I am will to vote out of the important political emotion, spite.
Is it Happy Hour yet?
Actually, I was thinking of buying a Domo-kun from them (see URL link). But now we are outside the realm of games unless you mean PC games. In which case we may as well mention X-Arcade.
This is all academic anyway, as I'm in debt up to my eyeballs for the next 5 years at least....
For import gaming I always used National Console Support , I mainly used Lik-Sang for wierd stuff. So what I'm looking for is not a replacement import gaming place, but a replacement wierd stuff place. I suppose The Goat Store could help me replace some of this. (Note: An acronym for Games of all Types, some ./'s probably have an unreasonable fear of goats at this point.) Unfortunately, that's mainly a retro store, not a wierd stuff store. Telegames used to be good, but they've scaled back on the products they carry.
If not, they did an episode of the Simpsons about it, "Buy him out, boys!"
You know, evil.
I'm reminded of the time that Judge Cal remarked to Judge Death, "You must give me the name of your tailor," and Judge Death responded, "I regret he is no longer with us."
http://games.slashdot.org/~sesshomaru/journal/1411 44
Tremble in fear before my evil psychic powers!!!
That would be anti-competitive behaviour and would be litigated against by Sony's trigger happy lawyers. They'd probably win, too, even against Microsoft.
He meant mercantilist system, but I blame the American education system, which conflates the two.
Speaking of which has anyone ever seen that TV show Profit? One of the oddities of this show was that the corporate intranet that Jim Profit would access was rather strangely set up in primative 3D. I've never been able to figure out why. My guess is that the producers of the show (this was in the early 90s, think giant cellphones and dialup for everyone who even had Internet and wasn't in a school or some such) had no clue about computers and wanted something that would look cool and highly advanced.
http://www.spyfilms.com/sr_whatsnew/default.asp?mv =1.mov&&w=1001&h=731
They aren't even going "all in" with the Wii, it will definitely still play traditional games. You couldn't say that about Virtual Boy. If the red and black virtual reality screens gave you a headache, you were basically stuck with a useless videogame player.
But the reality is the only reason why people keep bringing up Virtual Boy is because it was "wierd" and the Wii is seen as "wierd."
Of course, lest we forget, PSP defenders have done the same thing with the "wierd" DS.
Honestly, while I'm anti-Sony for various reasons, the way the Sony videogaming marketing department has approached gaming with a Maoist Chinese-style "Cultural Revolution" would be tops on the list. Still, they must have been right, it got them control of the videogame market, unfortunately.
BTW... that's just a really bad attempt at Lovecraftian humor, Eris is a fine name for the planet.