So if I have a perfectly good piece of OSS running that hasn't died on me, is secure and doesn't have any real issues, I should expect it to die anyways after X days, regardless of need?
And what if there's no update available after said expiration?
If I wanted softwate that was designed to die after so many days, I'd use Windows. (At least, sometimes it seems like it was designed that way.)
Try rawhide, Red Hat's bleeding edge alpha-type system. Should be on ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/linux/rawhide, or something to that effect. (That's where I got them, but I'm rebuilding from src, as it's a little flaky.)
You are so right. Slashdot's standards are obviously falling. I mean, a year ago, a good hack took seven lines of code to merit frontpage news. Now it only takes two.
I predict the next great hack frontpage story to be "Linux in one really huge line of Perl".
To be fair, taco didn't say that stuff, it was the person who submitted the article, "mr lee". Don't shoot the messanger.
J
Re:I've had an MRE (and I'm not military)
on
The Future of MREs
·
· Score: 2
Speaking of Canadian IMPs, there are already Canadian macaroni and cheese rations. Actually, there were two types of mac and cheese rations: one with peas (wtf) and later, one without.
I was an cadet for five years or so, and I've had my share of military rations. Some of them were excellent (the beefaroni, lasagna, beef stew and sheppard's pie were my faves), while others I absolutely despised and did everything in my power to avoid (like macaroni and cheese with peas and dry, flaky chicken and green gravy). The actual mac and cheese (minus the peas) was pretty good with a lot of ketchup.
When I finally got to be a cadet drill sergeant, I had my pick of the litter. The trouble-making cadets in my unit all got mac and cheese. And peas. Nasty, nasty shit.
What is Darwin? Darwin is the core of Mac OS X. The Darwin kernel is based on FreeBSD and Mach 3.0 technologies and provides protected memory and pre-emptive multitasking. Darwin runs on PowerPC-based Macintosh computers and a version is also available for x86-compatible computers.
Actually, the Zend engine is now covered under a BSD-like license, just like PHP4, and should be acceptable according to the Debian guidelines. Both PHP and the Zend engine contain the original BSD advertising clause, which some people don't like, but other than that, they're both fine. See http://www.zend.com/license/2_00.txt for details.
I've been using a 7.2 beta on a production website for a while now. I know it's not generally considered kosher to run a beta of a new release on a production website, but it isn't exactly a high-traffic site, and it's been running without a hitch since I started it up a month ago. I'd estimate it does about a few thousand transactions a day or so. (Not true begin-commit-rollback-transactions, just updates/inserts and selects.)
A few good features...
- vacuum doesn't need to lock things up all the time, which is definitely nice.
- the speed increase is noticible, especially on a dual P3 SMP.
- there have been a few changes to a number of the datatypes, like the increased resolution on timestamps (now recorded with milliseconds), changes to char and varchar types (they now reject strings longer than their limits -- i.e. a varchar(30) won't accept 31 characters by cutting off the excess).
- you can supply passwords via md5 hashes rather than plaintext or using crypt, which is definitely good, especially for connections made over the wire. You can also supply the passwords via UNIX domain sockets now, which for some reason you couldn't before. (You had to start postmaster with -i and connect via an INET port for that sort of authenication. Ew.)
The databases are not binary compatible, so upgrading from 7.1 to 7.2 will require a pg_dump-from-7.1-initdb-and-dump-into-7.2. Life is rough.
I've been working with it quite a bit and I haven't had any real problems throughout beta testing and the RCs. The "production" site will probably be upgraded later today, or tomorrow.
I have no idea about RPMs, since I always compile from source, but check out freshrpms or rpmfind.net or something.
I remember seeing posted somewhere, maybe a on usenet or something, a long time ago. Pretty funny, I guess.
Subj: Wolf-3D Section: Action/Arcade Games
From: Ty Graham 72350,2636 # 191387, * No Replies *
To: Id Software 72600,1333 Date: 24-Jul-92 18:27:27
Jay, just thought I'd drop a note to let you know how popular Wolf3D is
here at Microsoft. It seems like I can't walk down a hall without hearing
'Mein Leben' from someone's office. I hope you guys are getting revenue
from all this.
Anyway, we were sitting around talking the other day, discussing games for
Windows, and someone said 'What are those cool guys at Id doing?'. So how
about it. Are you guys looking at Win games at all? Win32?
In a perfect world, I'd have you guys port the Wolf engine to a multiuser
maze game for Windows for Workgroups. We need a good M'user Win game.
Anyway some thoughts.
Ty Graham (Microsoft)
Wolf3D in Windows for Workgroups? Sitting next to the Microsoft Hearts Network? Hah.
To each their own then, I guess. Personally I thought SM64 had excellent play control. I doubt that holding up to run in the direction Mario is facing would have been an improvement, though. I mean, how stiff was the control in Resident Evil, which used a similar approach? I believe Bubsy 64 tried a similar approach and its overall design was quite similar to SM64, and although I haven't tried Bubsy 64, I hear it's an utter mess. I do agree about Tomb Raider and ST:E, though. (Although, Tomb Raider did have that "press up to go where X is facing" and its controls were still terrible. But I doubt that anything could have fixed that game.)
The only other thing I'm wondering about -- Zelda and King's Quest? King's Quest had zero action in it, especially the earlier ones where you had to type out commands and such. Man, those early ones got annoying...
> look box
It looks like a box
> look IN box
It's closed
> open box
It's locked
> unlock box
You unlocked the box
> look in box
The box is closed
> OPEN BOX
The box is open
> LOOK IN FUCKING BOX
I don't understand what you are trying to say
Ugh. They sure seemed fun at the time. I used to love those games. I still have an original King's Quest V CD, actually, haven't pulled that sucker out in quite a while. I still have copies of Police Quest 1 and 2 and Space Quest 1 through 4 sitting around somewhere. (Spread out across 40 3.5" floppies, of course.)
Okay, so you've made your point that you're obviously an RPG fan, since every second sentence of your post mentions RPGs in some way or another, but there are other genres out there, and he's touched quite a few.
Lousy controls? Have you played Super Mario 64 or Zelda 64? They have near-perfect control, at least in my (and apparently many, many others') opinion. Very fluid, and for a mere console game, quite intuitive.
I wouldn't even consider Zelda an RPG in the first place, more of an action/adventure, 'cause it seems to be missing all of that standard-fare RPG stuff, like endless character stats, class-building, experience points and all that jazz.
The thing about F-Zero and SMK is is that they're both FUN. Maybe not terribly innovative (although their use of "Mode-7" scaling and rotation was pretty cool at the time), but they're fun. Is that not the most important innovation of all when it comes to games? You can have all of the gee-whiz graphics and next-gen online world crap you want, but if the game isn't fun, then what's the point? How many cart games were really that great before SMK?
Donkey Kong? An RPG? You obviously don't think much of the man if you think him that insipid. To my knowledge, Miyamoto himself has never called any of his games "RPGs," because none of them really are, including Zelda. (Except for maybe Paper Mario, which I haven't tried.)
As for consoles and cartridges... what is your point? Maps make the game? "Real" RPGs need a lot of storage space? Storage space equals interaction? Would Tetris be any more interactive or engaging if it came on a DVD with millions of background images than it would be on a GameBoy with one "map"? This so-called limitation you see is a thing of the past anyways, as we see consoles like the PS2, GameCube, etc. coming out with games on DVDs (hope that solves your lack of maps) and USB ports for keyboards (will that make the game more interactive?). Not that any of those things necessarily make a game better or more fun...
'BTW, "How many cart games borrow from SMK?" Isn't that a problem with the Nintendo console? Few games (compared to the PS) and mostly derivative...'
Huh? You do realize that when I say, "borrow from SMK", I do mean that there are other games on other consoles that borrowed heavily from this game. Yes, that means consoles (and PCs and whatever else) that *weren't* designed by Nintendo? This was never supposed to be about Nintendo, so I don't see what your point about "the Nintendo console" is, so perhaps you'd like to elaborate? Are you trying to so say that only games on the Nintendo consoles borrowed from SMK? I think you'll find that there are more than a few PS games that borrowed from SMK, and believe it or not, many of them are quite derivative.
You might not like him or his games, but his influence on game design is undeniable.
Just look at a few of his games (that he either directed, designed or produced) and think about how many others they've influenced...
Pretty much all of the Mario series -- SMB 1-3, SMW, SM64...
Same with Zelda -- Zelda 1-3, Zelda 64, a few of the GameBoy Zelda's...
F-Zero (man I loved that one)
Super Mario Kart (and to a lesser extent, Mario Kart 64, which I'm not overly fond of compared to the original)
the original Donkey Kong, which ranks up there with Space Invaders and Pac-Man as one of the most important games in the early days of arcade gaming. (And later home gaming, when it was ported to the ColecoVision, which rocked, but unfortuntely didn't do enough to win over users from Atari's piece of crap 2600/5200/etc series. The 2600 port was terrible.)
Those are his more well-known games, and they've obviously influenced a lot of other games and game designers out there. How many platformers were based on Super Mario Brothers? How many kart games borrow heavily from Super Mario Kart?
Quoth Romero himself in an interview with Primagames: "You can't forget about Shigeru! He's just awesome. He's the game-design god of the universe." I don't know about "the" god, but he's definitely up there with the best, or at least most influential.
between him and john carmack there has been no one who has had as big an effect on the current game industry (with the except of warren spector and sid mierer)
And the possible exceptions of...
Shigeru Miymoto (Mario, Zelda, all things Nintendo)
Gumpei Yokoi (R.I.P. -- died in a car crash in '97; responsible for the GameBoy among other things)
Will Wright (all things Sim)
Hironobu Sakaguchi (all things Final Fantasy and Square).
Peter Molyneux (Populous, B&W)
Carmack might be a 3-D engine/DeathMatch god, there's no question on that one, but all of the above guys have had major contributions to the entire concept of a video game. (There are many others, of course, these are but a few...)
I've been playing FF games since the original came out in, like, '87 or so (I think it was the first or second NES game I ever owned, way back when), and I've played 'em all (yes, I even bought FF: Mystic Quest the week it came out), so I guess I'm as qualified as anyone to opinionate. I'll try not to include any spoilers (or what I think are spoilers), but if I do, know that you've been warned.
1. Each FF game is totally separate in terms of characters, story, world, all that jazz. Things like magic spells, monsters, character classes and parts of the battle system have carried over from one to another (for instance, the Black Mage class in FF 1 makes its return in several of the games in the series, the most memorable being Vivi from FFIX), and a certain "Cid" character has cropped up in every game since 2, but other than that, the games are totally separate. No chronology whatsoever. You could just as easily start with FFX as you could with any other game in the series.
I've only played FFX for a few hours, so I'll save judgement 'til I'm done. Personally, I've got the softspot for the 2-D games (1 through 6). Things were just simpler back then. The 16-bit FF games, for their time, had amazing graphics, and especially sound -- FF4 and 6 have some of the most memorable soundtracks in video games history, and still sound good today. My pick of the 2-D games is probably FFIV (II for the SNES, part of the FF Chronicles set for the PSX). That's totally biased, though, 'cause I love that game to pieces. It's a quick one compared to the rest. I can't get through it now in 8-12 hours or so, but it probably took about 20-24 the first time through. Most FF fans seem to prefer FF VI. (III on the NES, available as part of FF Anthology for the PSX.)
For the 3-D games, if you have a PS2, obviously go with X. If you've just got a PSX, IX is amazing, especially if you've followed the series from the beginning. (I couldn't believe I heard the Marsh Cave music from FF I almost 13 years later in a cave in FFIX!)
2. These questions are all pretty subjective, so no matter what I say I'll probably get flamed by somebody, so I'll try to remain at least partially objective. I'm not far enough into FFX, so I can't comment it on it yet for anything but e)...
a) FF VI probably has the best storyline of them all. It covers a lot of characters and in some spots is even kind of non-linear, since you don't need all of the characters to get through game.
b) Unfortunately, the overload of characters in FF VI means character development leaves a bit to be desired. (It's not that bad, but there are quite a few characters...) I really liked FF IX in this department. Vivi was especially cool.
FF VIII is a total mess in character development. You have this main character, Squall, and from the opening sequence 'til the end of the game, he's a prick. He doesn't mature at all, from beginning to end. He's annoying at first because of his apathy and attitude, but you figure he'll eventually grow out of that towards the end. Guess again.
c) FF IV seemed like a real departure when it first came out in terms of the battle system, because when it hit the US in the form of FF II, it was so different from FF I. It's still the only FF game that lets you use 5 characters in a party, which is pretty cool. I still like it's combat system.
FF VI probably has the most balanced battle system out of the lot. Four characters, lots of skills and abilities that we individual to each character. (Some of the other FF games, like IIIj, V, VII, etc. let you customize characters, making them all pretty homogenous.)
d) I can usually plow through these games in short order, so I'll adjust the time to beat accordingly. Whenever a review site or somebody tells me "at least 40 hours", I always beat it between 25 and 30 or so. So, For each game:
FF I (NES) -- simplistic, but still fun. This one still takes quite a bit of time to finish, but the story along the way is minimal. (Bad guys threaten world, four warriors set out on Quest.) Don't know how long it would take me today, but it's gotta be up there, just 'cause it's a bitch to level up. Say 20-30 hours at least.
FF II (Famicom, get an emulator and a translated version) -- more of a story over FF I, and the battle system has been improved. Starts out with a bang (very first scene is a battle) and starts some of the long lasting traditions of the series (Cid, etc.). The level up system is way different vs. other games in the series and is more like Chrono Cross or the SaGa series. (Or the FF Legend series on the GameBoy.) Haven't a clue how long it took me on this one, probably at least 20+ hours.
FF III (again, emulate) -- the crystals deal from the first game is back. This one was kind of the basis for the job system you see in FF V and FF Tactics. Makes for some cool combinations of classes, like a summoner crossed with a knight and such. Best of show for the 8-bit games. 25 hours or so should do.
FF IV (II on the NES, see FFC on the PSX for the "hard" edition) -- I absolutely love this game. Maybe it's nostalgia, or something, but I love it. No job manipulation like in FF III, but a lot of cool characters. The story is pretty decent, although nothing complicated or never-before-seen. Kain ruled. Probably 25-30 hours for a newbie.
FF V (emulate, or see FFA on the PSX) -- half decent story -- asteroids hit earth, contain visitors from another planet, your planet in danger. The job system from III returns. Overall it's pretty mundane, actually. 30 hours.
FF VI (III SNES, FFA on PSX) -- probably best of show overall for the 16-bit games. Lots of characters, good story, great villians. (Especially Kefka, of course.) Loved Locke and Shadow. 40-45 hours or so, I would think.
FF VII (PSX) -- first of the 3-D games. The story was fscked up at times, especially near the end, but overall, it kicked much ass at the time. Borrows a bit from FF VI in terms of the ability management system, what with the summons and such. Second best of the series on the PSX. 40 hours or so.
FF VIII (PSX) -- Squall is an annoying prick. Most of the characters aren't overly interesting, and the "Draw" system is ridiculous. Basically, you can "Draw" spells from any enemy infinitely, equip them to boost character stats, or cast them. The summon spells are absolutely ridiculous and if you overuse them, you'll go insane. It wasn't the "real-time rendering" that made the game bad, because it doesn't have any (well, except in fights, I guess), it was the ridiculous battle and management systems, the characters, and that stupid fscking love song near the end. 40 hours or so. It's not 100% crap, but compared to the others on the PSX, it leaves MUCH to be desired.
FF IX (PSX) -- best of the PSX games, easily. Likeable characters, good story, lots of stuff borrowed from the other games, a useable management system (eat it, FF VIII), and a return to the series' roots over VII and VIII. (Fantasy, not sci-fi.) Probably tied with FF VI as the overall best in the series as far as I'm concerned. 40 hours or so.
Can't comment on FFX yet, except that to answer e), yes FFX does have the prettiest graphics, but that's always, always secondary to fun, gameplay, storyline, etc.
3. Overall, FF II for the NES is probably my least favorite, not VIII, but yes, VIII sucked large for the reasons mentioned above.
Is this slashdot or a Windows bug tracker?
on
Clever New Windows Worm
·
· Score: 2, Flamebait
Is it just me or is slashdot slowly turning into bugtraq here? Do we really need to hear about every single fscking Windows bug and exploit found?
I see two stories concerning an Outlook virus and an XP exploit within two hours or so of each other, with one new story in between.
Can we move along to some real news for nerds, some real stuff that matters? Or at least add an option to ignore the damn Outlook virus updates and other nonsense.
Think about it, though -- if T3 is about the rise of the machines, you might get, like 10 thousand Arnolds on screen at once, as they, uh, rise and shit.
Tell me Hollywood wouldn't be all over that deal -- tons of Arnold at a fraction of the cost! The more Arnolds, the greater the savings!!
Expect many Arnolds is this logic holds up. (And in Hollywood, it just might.)
And how many applications are available for this proprietary multitasking OS versus the number of applications available for Linux and UNIX-like systems?
Actually, the Game Gear was much closer to the Master System than it was to the Genesis -- it was an 8-bit system versus the Genesis' 16-bits, and in almost all respects, it's specifications were very close to the MS. Actually, it even had a Master System-to-Game Gear adapter.
A much closer fit to the "Portable Genesis" was the Sega Nomad, which actually was a portable Genesis, literally. It was slightly bigger than the GG, had the whole 7-button Genesis set up (from later on, of course, the original Genesis controllers only had three action buttons and a start button), and a huge cartridge slot on the top for Genesis carts.
I've only played the system a few times, as my brother has one, and it was quite good. "Revenge of Shinobi" looked great on the system.
As for the Game Gear, here's an interesting and even more inaccessible version of the system -- many years ago, I read a few quick blurbs in a Die Hard GameFan magazine (or maybe it was EGM, I'm forgetting) about two super special, non-sense versions of the Game Gear. One had an outer shell made of gold (or at least covered in gold), while another version had tons of diamonds hammered into a white shell. There were only a few of these Game Gears ever made, and they were priced at ridiculous amounts. (Even more than the "special" white Game Gears sold in Japan.)
There are pictures of the systems out there, but I haven't been able to find any on the 'Net. If I can find those copies of GameFan/EGM I'll scan 'em, they're interesting tidbits of Sega history.
The system is going to need some kind of OS when it comes time for Sony to launch their Internet platform for it. Why not use something that's already available with tons of applications rather than re-writing everything? When it comes time for people to connect to the Internet through their PS2 (which Sony has always envisioned as an all-on-one-DVD/games/networkable box), they're already going to have good browsers, mail programes, office suites, hell, even ftp and web servers.
No use recreating the wheel. It's not just cool, it's somewhat practical for them.
Slashdot Mirror
So if I have a perfectly good piece of OSS running that hasn't died on me, is secure and doesn't have any real issues, I should expect it to die anyways after X days, regardless of need?
And what if there's no update available after said expiration?
If I wanted softwate that was designed to die after so many days, I'd use Windows. (At least, sometimes it seems like it was designed that way.)
J
Maybe then we wouldn't have to put up with Jar Jar for another two episodes.
J
Try rawhide, Red Hat's bleeding edge alpha-type system. Should be on ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/linux/rawhide, or something to that effect. (That's where I got them, but I'm rebuilding from src, as it's a little flaky.)
J
You are so right. Slashdot's standards are obviously falling. I mean, a year ago, a good hack took seven lines of code to merit frontpage news. Now it only takes two.
I predict the next great hack frontpage story to be "Linux in one really huge line of Perl".
J
... maybe slashdot should move here. No more subscriptions!
Of course I'm kidding. Silly Americans wouldn't be able to handle the beer and the cold.
J
To be fair, taco didn't say that stuff, it was the person who submitted the article, "mr lee". Don't shoot the messanger.
J
Speaking of Canadian IMPs, there are already Canadian macaroni and cheese rations. Actually, there were two types of mac and cheese rations: one with peas (wtf) and later, one without.
I was an cadet for five years or so, and I've had my share of military rations. Some of them were excellent (the beefaroni, lasagna, beef stew and sheppard's pie were my faves), while others I absolutely despised and did everything in my power to avoid (like macaroni and cheese with peas and dry, flaky chicken and green gravy). The actual mac and cheese (minus the peas) was pretty good with a lot of ketchup.
When I finally got to be a cadet drill sergeant, I had my pick of the litter. The trouble-making cadets in my unit all got mac and cheese. And peas. Nasty, nasty shit.
J
From http://www.opensource.apple.com/projects/darwin/:
What is Darwin? Darwin is the core of Mac OS X. The Darwin kernel is based on FreeBSD and Mach 3.0 technologies and provides protected memory and pre-emptive multitasking. Darwin runs on PowerPC-based Macintosh computers and a version is also available for x86-compatible computers.
JActually, the Zend engine is now covered under a BSD-like license, just like PHP4, and should be acceptable according to the Debian guidelines. Both PHP and the Zend engine contain the original BSD advertising clause, which some people don't like, but other than that, they're both fine. See http://www.zend.com/license/2_00.txt for details.
J
I've been using a 7.2 beta on a production website for a while now. I know it's not generally considered kosher to run a beta of a new release on a production website, but it isn't exactly a high-traffic site, and it's been running without a hitch since I started it up a month ago. I'd estimate it does about a few thousand transactions a day or so. (Not true begin-commit-rollback-transactions, just updates/inserts and selects.)
A few good features...
- vacuum doesn't need to lock things up all the time, which is definitely nice.
- the speed increase is noticible, especially on a dual P3 SMP.
- there have been a few changes to a number of the datatypes, like the increased resolution on timestamps (now recorded with milliseconds), changes to char and varchar types (they now reject strings longer than their limits -- i.e. a varchar(30) won't accept 31 characters by cutting off the excess).
- you can supply passwords via md5 hashes rather than plaintext or using crypt, which is definitely good, especially for connections made over the wire. You can also supply the passwords via UNIX domain sockets now, which for some reason you couldn't before. (You had to start postmaster with -i and connect via an INET port for that sort of authenication. Ew.)
The databases are not binary compatible, so upgrading from 7.1 to 7.2 will require a pg_dump-from-7.1-initdb-and-dump-into-7.2. Life is rough.
I've been working with it quite a bit and I haven't had any real problems throughout beta testing and the RCs. The "production" site will probably be upgraded later today, or tomorrow.
I have no idea about RPMs, since I always compile from source, but check out freshrpms or rpmfind.net or something.
J
I remember seeing posted somewhere, maybe a on usenet or something, a long time ago. Pretty funny, I guess.
Subj: Wolf-3D Section: Action/Arcade Games
From: Ty Graham 72350,2636 # 191387, * No Replies *
To: Id Software 72600,1333 Date: 24-Jul-92 18:27:27
Jay, just thought I'd drop a note to let you know how popular Wolf3D is
here at Microsoft. It seems like I can't walk down a hall without hearing
'Mein Leben' from someone's office. I hope you guys are getting revenue
from all this.
Anyway, we were sitting around talking the other day, discussing games for
Windows, and someone said 'What are those cool guys at Id doing?'. So how
about it. Are you guys looking at Win games at all? Win32?
In a perfect world, I'd have you guys port the Wolf engine to a multiuser
maze game for Windows for Workgroups. We need a good M'user Win game.
Anyway some thoughts.
Ty Graham (Microsoft)
Wolf3D in Windows for Workgroups? Sitting next to the Microsoft Hearts Network? Hah.
J
To each their own then, I guess. Personally I thought SM64 had excellent play control. I doubt that holding up to run in the direction Mario is facing would have been an improvement, though. I mean, how stiff was the control in Resident Evil, which used a similar approach? I believe Bubsy 64 tried a similar approach and its overall design was quite similar to SM64, and although I haven't tried Bubsy 64, I hear it's an utter mess. I do agree about Tomb Raider and ST:E, though. (Although, Tomb Raider did have that "press up to go where X is facing" and its controls were still terrible. But I doubt that anything could have fixed that game.)
The only other thing I'm wondering about -- Zelda and King's Quest? King's Quest had zero action in it, especially the earlier ones where you had to type out commands and such. Man, those early ones got annoying...
> look box
It looks like a box
> look IN box
It's closed
> open box
It's locked
> unlock box
You unlocked the box
> look in box
The box is closed
> OPEN BOX
The box is open
> LOOK IN FUCKING BOX
I don't understand what you are trying to say
Ugh. They sure seemed fun at the time. I used to love those games. I still have an original King's Quest V CD, actually, haven't pulled that sucker out in quite a while. I still have copies of Police Quest 1 and 2 and Space Quest 1 through 4 sitting around somewhere. (Spread out across 40 3.5" floppies, of course.)
J
Okay, so you've made your point that you're obviously an RPG fan, since every second sentence of your post mentions RPGs in some way or another, but there are other genres out there, and he's touched quite a few.
Lousy controls? Have you played Super Mario 64 or Zelda 64? They have near-perfect control, at least in my (and apparently many, many others') opinion. Very fluid, and for a mere console game, quite intuitive.
I wouldn't even consider Zelda an RPG in the first place, more of an action/adventure, 'cause it seems to be missing all of that standard-fare RPG stuff, like endless character stats, class-building, experience points and all that jazz.
The thing about F-Zero and SMK is is that they're both FUN. Maybe not terribly innovative (although their use of "Mode-7" scaling and rotation was pretty cool at the time), but they're fun. Is that not the most important innovation of all when it comes to games? You can have all of the gee-whiz graphics and next-gen online world crap you want, but if the game isn't fun, then what's the point? How many cart games were really that great before SMK?
Donkey Kong? An RPG? You obviously don't think much of the man if you think him that insipid. To my knowledge, Miyamoto himself has never called any of his games "RPGs," because none of them really are, including Zelda. (Except for maybe Paper Mario, which I haven't tried.)
As for consoles and cartridges... what is your point? Maps make the game? "Real" RPGs need a lot of storage space? Storage space equals interaction? Would Tetris be any more interactive or engaging if it came on a DVD with millions of background images than it would be on a GameBoy with one "map"? This so-called limitation you see is a thing of the past anyways, as we see consoles like the PS2, GameCube, etc. coming out with games on DVDs (hope that solves your lack of maps) and USB ports for keyboards (will that make the game more interactive?). Not that any of those things necessarily make a game better or more fun...
'BTW, "How many cart games borrow from SMK?" Isn't that a problem with the Nintendo console? Few games (compared to the PS) and mostly derivative...'
Huh? You do realize that when I say, "borrow from SMK", I do mean that there are other games on other consoles that borrowed heavily from this game. Yes, that means consoles (and PCs and whatever else) that *weren't* designed by Nintendo? This was never supposed to be about Nintendo, so I don't see what your point about "the Nintendo console" is, so perhaps you'd like to elaborate? Are you trying to so say that only games on the Nintendo consoles borrowed from SMK? I think you'll find that there are more than a few PS games that borrowed from SMK, and believe it or not, many of them are quite derivative.
J
Just look at a few of his games (that he either directed, designed or produced) and think about how many others they've influenced...
- Pretty much all of the Mario series -- SMB 1-3, SMW, SM64...
- Same with Zelda -- Zelda 1-3, Zelda 64, a few of the GameBoy Zelda's...
- F-Zero (man I loved that one)
- Super Mario Kart (and to a lesser extent, Mario Kart 64, which I'm not overly fond of compared to the original)
- the original Donkey Kong, which ranks up there with Space Invaders and Pac-Man as one of the most important games in the early days of arcade gaming. (And later home gaming, when it was ported to the ColecoVision, which rocked, but unfortuntely didn't do enough to win over users from Atari's piece of crap 2600/5200/etc series. The 2600 port was terrible.)
Those are his more well-known games, and they've obviously influenced a lot of other games and game designers out there. How many platformers were based on Super Mario Brothers? How many kart games borrow heavily from Super Mario Kart?Quoth Romero himself in an interview with Primagames: "You can't forget about Shigeru! He's just awesome. He's the game-design god of the universe." I don't know about "the" god, but he's definitely up there with the best, or at least most influential.
J
And the possible exceptions of...
- Shigeru Miymoto (Mario, Zelda, all things Nintendo)
- Gumpei Yokoi (R.I.P. -- died in a car crash in '97; responsible for the GameBoy among other things)
- Will Wright (all things Sim)
- Hironobu Sakaguchi (all things Final Fantasy and Square).
- Peter Molyneux (Populous, B&W)
Carmack might be a 3-D engine/DeathMatch god, there's no question on that one, but all of the above guys have had major contributions to the entire concept of a video game. (There are many others, of course, these are but a few...)J
And don't forget, you can tune a database, but you can't tuna fish.
(blatantly modified from tunefs(8) manpage)
J
Yet, unlike a PC, there is no way to easily patch a console game.
There is if the game employs the PS2 hard drive, which is supposed to come with the Ethernet/modem, which the game will obviously rely on.
J
This is a long, long post.
I've been playing FF games since the original came out in, like, '87 or so (I think it was the first or second NES game I ever owned, way back when), and I've played 'em all (yes, I even bought FF: Mystic Quest the week it came out), so I guess I'm as qualified as anyone to opinionate. I'll try not to include any spoilers (or what I think are spoilers), but if I do, know that you've been warned.
1. Each FF game is totally separate in terms of characters, story, world, all that jazz. Things like magic spells, monsters, character classes and parts of the battle system have carried over from one to another (for instance, the Black Mage class in FF 1 makes its return in several of the games in the series, the most memorable being Vivi from FFIX), and a certain "Cid" character has cropped up in every game since 2, but other than that, the games are totally separate. No chronology whatsoever. You could just as easily start with FFX as you could with any other game in the series.
I've only played FFX for a few hours, so I'll save judgement 'til I'm done. Personally, I've got the softspot for the 2-D games (1 through 6). Things were just simpler back then. The 16-bit FF games, for their time, had amazing graphics, and especially sound -- FF4 and 6 have some of the most memorable soundtracks in video games history, and still sound good today. My pick of the 2-D games is probably FFIV (II for the SNES, part of the FF Chronicles set for the PSX). That's totally biased, though, 'cause I love that game to pieces. It's a quick one compared to the rest. I can't get through it now in 8-12 hours or so, but it probably took about 20-24 the first time through. Most FF fans seem to prefer FF VI. (III on the NES, available as part of FF Anthology for the PSX.)
For the 3-D games, if you have a PS2, obviously go with X. If you've just got a PSX, IX is amazing, especially if you've followed the series from the beginning. (I couldn't believe I heard the Marsh Cave music from FF I almost 13 years later in a cave in FFIX!)
2. These questions are all pretty subjective, so no matter what I say I'll probably get flamed by somebody, so I'll try to remain at least partially objective. I'm not far enough into FFX, so I can't comment it on it yet for anything but e)...
a) FF VI probably has the best storyline of them all. It covers a lot of characters and in some spots is even kind of non-linear, since you don't need all of the characters to get through game.
b) Unfortunately, the overload of characters in FF VI means character development leaves a bit to be desired. (It's not that bad, but there are quite a few characters...) I really liked FF IX in this department. Vivi was especially cool.
FF VIII is a total mess in character development. You have this main character, Squall, and from the opening sequence 'til the end of the game, he's a prick. He doesn't mature at all, from beginning to end. He's annoying at first because of his apathy and attitude, but you figure he'll eventually grow out of that towards the end. Guess again.
c) FF IV seemed like a real departure when it first came out in terms of the battle system, because when it hit the US in the form of FF II, it was so different from FF I. It's still the only FF game that lets you use 5 characters in a party, which is pretty cool. I still like it's combat system.
FF VI probably has the most balanced battle system out of the lot. Four characters, lots of skills and abilities that we individual to each character. (Some of the other FF games, like IIIj, V, VII, etc. let you customize characters, making them all pretty homogenous.)
d) I can usually plow through these games in short order, so I'll adjust the time to beat accordingly. Whenever a review site or somebody tells me "at least 40 hours", I always beat it between 25 and 30 or so. So, For each game:
FF I (NES) -- simplistic, but still fun. This one still takes quite a bit of time to finish, but the story along the way is minimal. (Bad guys threaten world, four warriors set out on Quest.) Don't know how long it would take me today, but it's gotta be up there, just 'cause it's a bitch to level up. Say 20-30 hours at least.
FF II (Famicom, get an emulator and a translated version) -- more of a story over FF I, and the battle system has been improved. Starts out with a bang (very first scene is a battle) and starts some of the long lasting traditions of the series (Cid, etc.). The level up system is way different vs. other games in the series and is more like Chrono Cross or the SaGa series. (Or the FF Legend series on the GameBoy.) Haven't a clue how long it took me on this one, probably at least 20+ hours.
FF III (again, emulate) -- the crystals deal from the first game is back. This one was kind of the basis for the job system you see in FF V and FF Tactics. Makes for some cool combinations of classes, like a summoner crossed with a knight and such. Best of show for the 8-bit games. 25 hours or so should do.
FF IV (II on the NES, see FFC on the PSX for the "hard" edition) -- I absolutely love this game. Maybe it's nostalgia, or something, but I love it. No job manipulation like in FF III, but a lot of cool characters. The story is pretty decent, although nothing complicated or never-before-seen. Kain ruled. Probably 25-30 hours for a newbie.
FF V (emulate, or see FFA on the PSX) -- half decent story -- asteroids hit earth, contain visitors from another planet, your planet in danger. The job system from III returns. Overall it's pretty mundane, actually. 30 hours.
FF VI (III SNES, FFA on PSX) -- probably best of show overall for the 16-bit games. Lots of characters, good story, great villians. (Especially Kefka, of course.) Loved Locke and Shadow. 40-45 hours or so, I would think.
FF VII (PSX) -- first of the 3-D games. The story was fscked up at times, especially near the end, but overall, it kicked much ass at the time. Borrows a bit from FF VI in terms of the ability management system, what with the summons and such. Second best of the series on the PSX. 40 hours or so.
FF VIII (PSX) -- Squall is an annoying prick. Most of the characters aren't overly interesting, and the "Draw" system is ridiculous. Basically, you can "Draw" spells from any enemy infinitely, equip them to boost character stats, or cast them. The summon spells are absolutely ridiculous and if you overuse them, you'll go insane. It wasn't the "real-time rendering" that made the game bad, because it doesn't have any (well, except in fights, I guess), it was the ridiculous battle and management systems, the characters, and that stupid fscking love song near the end. 40 hours or so. It's not 100% crap, but compared to the others on the PSX, it leaves MUCH to be desired.
FF IX (PSX) -- best of the PSX games, easily. Likeable characters, good story, lots of stuff borrowed from the other games, a useable management system (eat it, FF VIII), and a return to the series' roots over VII and VIII. (Fantasy, not sci-fi.) Probably tied with FF VI as the overall best in the series as far as I'm concerned. 40 hours or so.
Can't comment on FFX yet, except that to answer e), yes FFX does have the prettiest graphics, but that's always, always secondary to fun, gameplay, storyline, etc.
3. Overall, FF II for the NES is probably my least favorite, not VIII, but yes, VIII sucked large for the reasons mentioned above.
Hope that long, long post helped even a bit.
J
Besides news is always about repetition
Especially on Slashdot.
J
Is it just me or is slashdot slowly turning into bugtraq here? Do we really need to hear about every single fscking Windows bug and exploit found?
I see two stories concerning an Outlook virus and an XP exploit within two hours or so of each other, with one new story in between.
Can we move along to some real news for nerds, some real stuff that matters? Or at least add an option to ignore the damn Outlook virus updates and other nonsense.
J
What about OpenBSD? Supposedly, their code auditing is pretty thorough.
J
Think about it, though -- if T3 is about the rise of the machines, you might get, like 10 thousand Arnolds on screen at once, as they, uh, rise and shit.
Tell me Hollywood wouldn't be all over that deal -- tons of Arnold at a fraction of the cost! The more Arnolds, the greater the savings!!
Expect many Arnolds is this logic holds up. (And in Hollywood, it just might.)
J
And how many applications are available for this proprietary multitasking OS versus the number of applications available for Linux and UNIX-like systems?
J
Actually, the Game Gear was much closer to the Master System than it was to the Genesis -- it was an 8-bit system versus the Genesis' 16-bits, and in almost all respects, it's specifications were very close to the MS. Actually, it even had a Master System-to-Game Gear adapter.
A much closer fit to the "Portable Genesis" was the Sega Nomad, which actually was a portable Genesis, literally. It was slightly bigger than the GG, had the whole 7-button Genesis set up (from later on, of course, the original Genesis controllers only had three action buttons and a start button), and a huge cartridge slot on the top for Genesis carts.
I've only played the system a few times, as my brother has one, and it was quite good. "Revenge of Shinobi" looked great on the system.
As for the Game Gear, here's an interesting and even more inaccessible version of the system -- many years ago, I read a few quick blurbs in a Die Hard GameFan magazine (or maybe it was EGM, I'm forgetting) about two super special, non-sense versions of the Game Gear. One had an outer shell made of gold (or at least covered in gold), while another version had tons of diamonds hammered into a white shell. There were only a few of these Game Gears ever made, and they were priced at ridiculous amounts. (Even more than the "special" white Game Gears sold in Japan.)
There are pictures of the systems out there, but I haven't been able to find any on the 'Net. If I can find those copies of GameFan/EGM I'll scan 'em, they're interesting tidbits of Sega history.
J
The system is going to need some kind of OS when it comes time for Sony to launch their Internet platform for it. Why not use something that's already available with tons of applications rather than re-writing everything? When it comes time for people to connect to the Internet through their PS2 (which Sony has always envisioned as an all-on-one-DVD/games/networkable box), they're already going to have good browsers, mail programes, office suites, hell, even ftp and web servers.
No use recreating the wheel. It's not just cool, it's somewhat practical for them.
J