Yeah, I figured it was something that didn't make much sense, but I was giving the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I can't imagine how the position of the stick on the controller would make a difference.
Oh well. I would prefer a GC version but if it only comes out for PS2 I'll still get it.
Oh yeah, I absolutely agree that it's just a nit pick. The original LOZ is probably a bit too hard if you don't already know where everything is. LTTP was a good balance, though. So was OOT.
I'm definitely looking forward to the next Zelda, as I have every reason to believe that it will rock. Every iteration seems to improve on the previous in terms of control and immersiveness. Interesting that the series is experimenting with different graphical styles, too. There were a lot of vocal people complaining about the cell shading, but I think it's a great way to mix things up. I certainly hope we'll see more of it in the future.
I agree, but my single biggest complaint with WW was the fact that it was way too easy. The dungeons weren't very complicated, and none of the enemies were dangerous. The "savage labyrinth" may have been long, but it certainly didn't put you in danger of actually dying - especially with the help of the boomerang.
The triforce piece finding didn't bother me too much, but I was disappointed to find that the map just led to simple treasure chests, rather than an underwater dungeon for each piece.
These are really just nit picks, though. WW was a really fun game to play.
Also note that his review is suspiciously similar to this one that was posted on Slashdot a while back. Coincidence?
That aside, the review I mentioned above is worth attention. If you're already familiar with the story then I would highly recommend reading this particular review. It's a lot more than just an "it sucks" review, it's a totally damning "it sucks" review with specific evidence to back up his opinion. I'm definitely *not* going to see this movie in the theater. Maybe I'll rent it. Maybe.
When I said you can't make laws to prevent the conspiracies, I meant laws that make it not worth doing even if you get away with it. You CAN make laws that punish the offenders after the fact. The murder itself happens to be illegal.
...wouldn't it be better, in the long run, to want to keep them alive so that you could get more movie deals out of him?
Yes, that would be another reason why the "life +5 years" rule would work fine. However, I still think a fixed number of years from date of creation or date of publication would be better. How to define and record the date of creation might be tricky, though.
The contract negotiated between the author and the filmmaker doesn't expire just because the copyright does. In order to get the rights to make a movie of the material while it's still copyrighted, the film studio might agree to pay royalties to the author's estate forever - in which case they don't benefit from the author's death. I guess they might kill off the author so they can adapt a screenplay and make a movie after the copyright expires, but you just can't make laws to prevent conspiracies that are that involved. It's silly.
All that said, I'm not sure that "5 years after author's death" is the best choice. Just because you create a creative work doesn't guarantee you profits for life. You want income, you need to keep producing. How about 20 years from the date of publication? I think that's pretty generous.
No, that makes no sense. Do you have an optical computer from the future?
The point is that your burner is connected to your motherboard via a non optical interface (IDE, SATA, whatever). The only optical interface is actually reading the physical disc or writing to it.
Big battles like in Rome Total War but in First Person and shiny
Yeah, that would be pretty awesome, and that's pretty much the image I got from this quote:
An army of soldiers are fighting with you and an arsenal of weapons and vehicles are at your disposal in this heroic and epic battle between worlds.
Sounds great, but I think it's doubtful. The one screenshot with the article shows a single enemy in a dark room. Can the DOOM3 engine actually handle large outdoor environments with hundreds of enemies and vehicles? I don't know, but I certainly haven't seen anything to suggest that it can.:(
Well, that's your opinion. I actually prefer single player games. Co-op multiplayer could be fun, but I've never seen it done really well.
I enjoy deathmatch, CTF, etc, but they get pretty old after a while. The pace is always the same - full throttle. With single player games you get slower paced exploration and puzzle solving (hopefully not just "find the key" puzzles) interspersed with gunplay. You also get characters with different motivations - no actual human character is going to want to hang around and guard the reactor. Only an NPC will tolerate something so boring. Even if you got a human player to do it, they would be "playing the game" rather than "playing the security guard." The NPC guard is more likely to be looking at his watch than strafing back and forth looking for somebody to snipe.
I guess the sum-up is that I like single player games because they tend to be more immersive. Of course, you could make a multiplayer game with these elements, and maybe such a game exists - but I haven't played it.
Does somebody want to bother calculating how much energy it would take to catch this thing? I think it's safe to assume that such a feat would be impossible.
How about making a composite "mini moon" from quarried moon rock? I think that would be fairly realistic.
Hmm. I haven't been following the other thread that you're referring to. Perhaps the AC's posts are all below my threshold.
Anyway, I'm glad to see that you're more thoughtful about the situation than I thought you were. Based on the initial post that I responded to:
I don't know if you're an American, but I will go ahead and say this. An American calling American's dumb doesn't make himself sounds smart. An American calling Americans dumb sounds kind of like this, no matter how eloquently he puts it.
"Duhhhh, HI! I'm an American! Look at meeeee! I'm dummbbbbbb!! American schools suck! I'm the product of an American education. That must make me dummbbbbb!!! American's love Dubya! Dubya is dumb! Americans are dumbbbbb! But not meee. I'm smart, because I call Americans dumbbbbb."
...I didn't think that this conversation was going to go anywhere. I haven't read your other responses to this person, but the kind of argument quoted above doesn't mean much - even to an immature 14 year old. Don't give in to dumbing down your argument to the level of your competitor. Even if the person you're arguing with only thinks on that level, the spectators are forming opinions too. He may not realize that you whooped his ass logically, but maybe someone else will learn something.
Do you think if you moved to France that all of the sudden you'd be surrounded by people bearing PhDs?
Nope.
I don't know what the statistics are as far as comparing us to the rest of the world, but we're certainly not the leaders that we should be when it comes to having an educated populace. Besides, shouldn't we be setting our own standards? Should we say that our education is good enough because France's isn't any better? Ultimately everyone on the planet should be a well informed and critical individual - but we can only realistically start at home.
In my opinion, Americans lack mental exercise as much as they lack physical exercise. Would the country be better off if we weren't so mentally lazy? I certainly think so.
What the hell is your point? Do you think that the grandparent poster was complaining about ignorance in order to look smart? Yes, anyone who did such a thing would themselves be dumb.
The point, however, isn't to "look smart" by pointing out ignorance. The point is to recognize a problem so that we can fix it. Why do most Americans know so little about how the world works? We certainly don't have the excuses that most of the world's citizens do. Americans don't have famine and war to deal with. We have access to a nearly limitless amount of information. So what's the problem? How can we fix it before our country is so irrelevant that we can only sustain our position through warfare?
Go ahead and make some idiotic comment about how I'm only complaining in order to "look smart" or "get attention" or something. Those kind of statements are totally meaningless. Maybe you disagree with me because you think Americans are as informed as they need to be. Maybe you think we're better off being ignorant. Whatever your position is, if you can't defend it rationally then maybe you should reconsider it.
I checked out the eMusic site, and it looks pretty interesting. I was going to blow them off since I had trouble finding out what encoder they used and what bitrate their mp3s are encoded at... but I just hadn't dug around enough. Looks like LAME 3.92, and they're using a VBR that supposedly averages 192k.
That sounds like the exact format I want my portable music to be in, so I may be opening an account. Thanks for the tip!
A bit of a tangent, but can you recommend a better 2D pad than the standard SNES pad? I've been trying to get ahold of a couple in decent shape for emulator use, because I didn't think better controllers existed. Anybody have any recommendations about new controllers that are good for playing old snes games - preferably USB?
Yeah, they really failed to take advantage of the great combat system. AFAIK, the combat system for the new zelda will be the same or very similar. Assuming it is more difficult and has more fighting, it should be a good time.
Sure, anything is possible. ANYTHING. Should we try to teach every single possible explanation for the universe in science class? Oh wait, that would be impossible. I guess we need a way to narrow it down to the most *likely* explanations.
Let's see, ID has exactly the same amount of evidence as humans being put here by aliens... 8P
What it comes down to, really, is that ID is not science. If you want to teach it in school, teach it in religious studies or something. Keep in mind that all belief systems are going to get equal time, though, and that we'll probably have to put warning stickers on the textbooks:
The material contained in this textbook is believed to be true by some people. Keep in mind, however, that there is no scientific evidence that any of the following is true.
As you were saying, ID *could* have played a part in evolution, but I'm certainly not going to waste my time looking for evidence of it. Based on what I know about the world right now, I think that such a hypothesis is extremely unlikely to have any experimental support.
I'm sick of writing '"trusted"', so I'm going to start writing 'trussed' instead.
Can't my trussed computer send any http message it wants out to another trussed computer? There has to be a way to get data in and out of the trussed program that makes the http connection, or it would be useless. Say you have a trussed web server. You want to modify your web page. How do you do it? You have to get data into your webserver that isn't coming from a trussed source.
I like your ideas. If the internet is going to be completely hijacked, then the only option is to build an alternative. The time to start working on it is now, while people still know what open communications and general purpose computing are.
Wireless meshes have a lot of advantages, but there are a lot of tough problems like you mentioned - the long haul and possible regulation, for example.
I think there's also another option - a virtual network that piggybacks on the "secure" network. You have a "gateway" machine that's "secured" by DRM hardware, and it talks to other "secure" machines. Using a standard protocol, the secure machines pass data with embedded Alternet packets. Once the packets are received and recognized as Alternet packets, they're sent on to the appropriate non-DRM'd machine inside of the local network.
This loses a lot of the advantages of the wireless networks (requires the use of DRM hardware, it's not independent of the corpnet) but it also gains some advantages like using existing (and future) high bandwidth intercontinental fiber. Perhaps the best solution would be to have local wireless meshes and then piggyback on corpnet for long distance routing.
High Definition/High Density DVD's are designed to carry HD content.
They're designed for high definition DVD MOVIES. You can store a high definition video game on anything. In fact, most existing games on DVD-or-equivalent would look great if they were rendered in higher resolution. The reason that they're not in HD is because the console doesn't support it, not because they don't have enough storage.
In other words, Hawkins hears "HD-DVD" and thinks "allows HD display modes" instead of "greater storage capacity." Now this doesn't necessarily make him a moron, but I'd say that it discredits his ability to forecast Nintendo's future.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh well. I would prefer a GC version but if it only comes out for PS2 I'll still get it.
I'm definitely looking forward to the next Zelda, as I have every reason to believe that it will rock. Every iteration seems to improve on the previous in terms of control and immersiveness. Interesting that the series is experimenting with different graphical styles, too. There were a lot of vocal people complaining about the cell shading, but I think it's a great way to mix things up. I certainly hope we'll see more of it in the future.
The triforce piece finding didn't bother me too much, but I was disappointed to find that the map just led to simple treasure chests, rather than an underwater dungeon for each piece.
These are really just nit picks, though. WW was a really fun game to play.
That aside, the review I mentioned above is worth attention. If you're already familiar with the story then I would highly recommend reading this particular review. It's a lot more than just an "it sucks" review, it's a totally damning "it sucks" review with specific evidence to back up his opinion. I'm definitely *not* going to see this movie in the theater. Maybe I'll rent it. Maybe.
When I said you can't make laws to prevent the conspiracies, I meant laws that make it not worth doing even if you get away with it. You CAN make laws that punish the offenders after the fact. The murder itself happens to be illegal.
Yes, that would be another reason why the "life +5 years" rule would work fine. However, I still think a fixed number of years from date of creation or date of publication would be better. How to define and record the date of creation might be tricky, though.Exactly.
All that said, I'm not sure that "5 years after author's death" is the best choice. Just because you create a creative work doesn't guarantee you profits for life. You want income, you need to keep producing. How about 20 years from the date of publication? I think that's pretty generous.
Of course, by the time I preview this post a couple of times someone else will post the equivalent...
The point is that your burner is connected to your motherboard via a non optical interface (IDE, SATA, whatever). The only optical interface is actually reading the physical disc or writing to it.
I enjoy deathmatch, CTF, etc, but they get pretty old after a while. The pace is always the same - full throttle. With single player games you get slower paced exploration and puzzle solving (hopefully not just "find the key" puzzles) interspersed with gunplay. You also get characters with different motivations - no actual human character is going to want to hang around and guard the reactor. Only an NPC will tolerate something so boring. Even if you got a human player to do it, they would be "playing the game" rather than "playing the security guard." The NPC guard is more likely to be looking at his watch than strafing back and forth looking for somebody to snipe.
I guess the sum-up is that I like single player games because they tend to be more immersive. Of course, you could make a multiplayer game with these elements, and maybe such a game exists - but I haven't played it.
How about making a composite "mini moon" from quarried moon rock? I think that would be fairly realistic.
Anyway, I'm glad to see that you're more thoughtful about the situation than I thought you were. Based on the initial post that I responded to:
...I didn't think that this conversation was going to go anywhere. I haven't read your other responses to this person, but the kind of argument quoted above doesn't mean much - even to an immature 14 year old. Don't give in to dumbing down your argument to the level of your competitor. Even if the person you're arguing with only thinks on that level, the spectators are forming opinions too. He may not realize that you whooped his ass logically, but maybe someone else will learn something.I don't know what the statistics are as far as comparing us to the rest of the world, but we're certainly not the leaders that we should be when it comes to having an educated populace. Besides, shouldn't we be setting our own standards? Should we say that our education is good enough because France's isn't any better? Ultimately everyone on the planet should be a well informed and critical individual - but we can only realistically start at home.
In my opinion, Americans lack mental exercise as much as they lack physical exercise. Would the country be better off if we weren't so mentally lazy? I certainly think so.
The point, however, isn't to "look smart" by pointing out ignorance. The point is to recognize a problem so that we can fix it. Why do most Americans know so little about how the world works? We certainly don't have the excuses that most of the world's citizens do. Americans don't have famine and war to deal with. We have access to a nearly limitless amount of information. So what's the problem? How can we fix it before our country is so irrelevant that we can only sustain our position through warfare?
Go ahead and make some idiotic comment about how I'm only complaining in order to "look smart" or "get attention" or something. Those kind of statements are totally meaningless. Maybe you disagree with me because you think Americans are as informed as they need to be. Maybe you think we're better off being ignorant. Whatever your position is, if you can't defend it rationally then maybe you should reconsider it.
That sounds like the exact format I want my portable music to be in, so I may be opening an account. Thanks for the tip!
It also helps if you give the computer the "just in case I need it" look.
Look at computer, look at hammer, look back at computer, give it the look. Maybe give a little nod. My old Pentium 66 always got the hint.
Let's see, ID has exactly the same amount of evidence as humans being put here by aliens... 8P
What it comes down to, really, is that ID is not science. If you want to teach it in school, teach it in religious studies or something. Keep in mind that all belief systems are going to get equal time, though, and that we'll probably have to put warning stickers on the textbooks:
As you were saying, ID *could* have played a part in evolution, but I'm certainly not going to waste my time looking for evidence of it. Based on what I know about the world right now, I think that such a hypothesis is extremely unlikely to have any experimental support.
Can't my trussed computer send any http message it wants out to another trussed computer? There has to be a way to get data in and out of the trussed program that makes the http connection, or it would be useless. Say you have a trussed web server. You want to modify your web page. How do you do it? You have to get data into your webserver that isn't coming from a trussed source.
Wireless meshes have a lot of advantages, but there are a lot of tough problems like you mentioned - the long haul and possible regulation, for example.
I think there's also another option - a virtual network that piggybacks on the "secure" network. You have a "gateway" machine that's "secured" by DRM hardware, and it talks to other "secure" machines. Using a standard protocol, the secure machines pass data with embedded Alternet packets. Once the packets are received and recognized as Alternet packets, they're sent on to the appropriate non-DRM'd machine inside of the local network.
This loses a lot of the advantages of the wireless networks (requires the use of DRM hardware, it's not independent of the corpnet) but it also gains some advantages like using existing (and future) high bandwidth intercontinental fiber. Perhaps the best solution would be to have local wireless meshes and then piggyback on corpnet for long distance routing.
In other words, Hawkins hears "HD-DVD" and thinks "allows HD display modes" instead of "greater storage capacity." Now this doesn't necessarily make him a moron, but I'd say that it discredits his ability to forecast Nintendo's future.