Wipeout XL/2097 was a good example
on
Advergames
·
· Score: 1
In Whipeout 2097, the advertising worked and fitted the context. Billboards with a hip energydrink brand where position next to the track, telling you you could up youre score with it, due to higher concentration.
I still think of it during a long drive cross the state. Ok, I bought it only once, but hey!
Well, for an obvious start: Sega's Phantasy Star Online. More than one player I would say. You can even play split screen on the Gamecube version.
Less obvious, Arc the Lad Collection, by Working Designs. This is actually a feature I only discovered by looking at the credits to fan requests. The games where originally designed for one person, but Working Design made it possible to let the second psx controller to have control as well. In this way you can split up your party members during battle, and let each player control his or her own group! Well, the same can be achieved by passing the control umpteen times with any party based 1 player rpg, but anyway.
And now we also have a four player Link adventure as part of the re-release of Zelda: A Link to the Past in GBA! Hooray!
Oh now I think of it, in Ogre Tactics: The Knight of Lodis you can pitch your trained party with another GBA player. This was also possible in Kartia for PSX, but that games sucked big time. Now I think of it, this is also possible in Monster Arena in the Arc the Lad collection. That resulted to national tournements once that one came out in Japan.
Oh, and one final recall. Pokemon, anyone?
But all in all, I think it is a feauture that is under-exploited in console rpg's and when it's there it lets me combine my game-time with game-time with my wive. (Please fire away about better two player games you can play with your wive;)
I saw an interview with the creator of the original game wher he explained he had enough of making rpg's and wanted (or was obliged to by contract, i don't remember) to make one last, going out with a bang. Well it was. And about your question, as any brand or pr person can tell you... oh forget it.
In his autobiographic book "surely you'r joking mr. Feynman" he recalls how one day a guy came round when he did his research on the atomic bomb in Palo Alto. This clerk wanted to know what else could be done with nuclear power. Seeing it as a kind of silly question since he gathered anything that requeres power could benifit from it, he ranted a whole list, including a submarine. To his amazement he ended up with the patent on it.
For one kid the books got him to read, period.
on
Review: Harry Potter
·
· Score: 1
Are the Harry Potter books getting kids to read books or are they getting kids to read Harry Potter? One is great, the other is a fad. One will last them a lifetime, one will die shortly after the last book comes out. (I also submit that it is probably too early to tell the long lasting effects.)
For Scott. M. (http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/lifechange/ index.htm) the books got him to read, period.
While the Kolmogorov complexity of any string is NP-hard to compute, it does tell us something in this matter. A string can be defined truelly random if the length of the shortest possible program for a universal Turing Machine that can generate that string is equal or larger than the length of that string. In that case, given an infinite string, there is no program that does a beter job of predicting the continuation of a prefix of that string than coin flipping. To describe that string with a program would basically involve copying the string.
Now what does this tell us for Pi? Well, there are many small programs that compute its continuation. While those programs are probably not the shortets possible, they are much shorter than pi.
If you are referring to the Chinese Room argument, that was about consciousness. A person can appear to understand Chinese by just using a rule-book to mechanically compose answers to questions in Chinese, and not have a clue about what he is answering, even if he memorized the rule-book. Searle did not 'proof' with this argument that those answer could not be highly intelligent. If you ask me, he also did not prove that the system can not be conscious. You just end up with a schizophrenic with two independent minds that are divided by a language barrier.
Use that old fashioned off switch before it gets up to any dirty tricks. It does have an off switch, right? Even Data has an off switch...;-)
Well, no. In the film it was said that "we must destroy all disc drives..." Which implies that even the disc drives of the future will have more common sense than people.
The XYZ-language will become the default language of the world/culture where it is used most. At the moment the digital world has the most English speaking inhabitants, regardless of how many other speaking people are in the world in total. I don't see more than 470 million Mandarin speaking digital world users in the near future.
So how do you play this thing on the go, on your lap? And where do I plug in that AC adapter then? There is no mention of a battery. So how can this compete with a Gameboy Advance?
Miniaturisation is always nice. But does my cellphone needs to run W95? Or does my watch needs to run linux to tell the time? Do I need a webserver on the go? No, I need a damn good and reliable client that takes no more fuel than needed. I don't care where the server's at. I certainly don't want to carry extra power to run a server.
Oke, the point is that it could run it if you wanted to. But I don't see how running a portable power savy server could be marketable selling point for any other than a geek...;-)
First of all, they learned a lot since their earlier support blunders, given their excessive humble pleas for excuse in Japan. Second, support of Sega is not at issue, but if anything, support of developers. There are still Saturn games coming out in Japan. No games, no show. Sony is great with their 20 odd good games for the hardcore, and great with the rest for the rest. You (or at leat I) will buy console X if it has great game Y. MS realises that, that's why they would buy Square, Namco or Nintendo if they could. My two pennies is that since internet entered the arena, the rules of the game have changed. It will all depend on what the console offers for what price as an internet terminal. This will draw in the masses. That's why Sega is gonna giveg it away for free with a subscription. And that's why that X-thing is probabely going to be the commercial victor. And if there was anything more possible then speculation on this, then there wouldn't be this discussion...
Sega is no brand for the soft peripheral gamer/entertainment consumer. Sony is a TV, MS is a computer, so what is he gonna buy if he's looking for an internet computer for his TV? He is not going to buy Sega or Nintendo. The former because it's marketed as Games with Internet, the latter because it's still basically games. Those systems will be bought by the hard core gamer, say not more than 10% of the people who is going to buy into the next generation of entertainment set-top boxes.
It depends on what they are waiting for. Console gaming is all about the games. What can I play now. More power is always an argument, but I am not going to wait for a faster car if it will only drive me to Wallmart, or wait for a bigger screen TV if it only will show FOX. Sega has it's games that other's don't. And they have them now. So what are they waiting for? More polys?! Of course I want more atmosphere on my Metal Gear Solid 2. So I am waiting for just that, the game. I can play my Soul Caliber right now. It's a matter of consumer targets.
Exactly, so why do you put the weight on the power of the machines. Sega got its games that people want to play right now, plus the on-line network before anyone else. According to the latest report it already sold 2.5M consoles in the USA. And by the end of the year it will be free with a Sega network subscription. So their product is not inferior to the competion, it's ahead of it. Yet it will probably still lose because Joe Sixpack likes a familiar brand and more polys on his screen than pixels...
Tell that to e.g. companies involved in the human genome project. They own knowledge about YOUR DNA. Well, technically, they own the right to commercially exploit that knowledge, i.e. the patents. But that's what at issue here, to commercially exploit work legally owned by somebody else...
Slashdot Mirror
In Whipeout 2097, the advertising worked and fitted the context. Billboards with a hip energydrink brand where position next to the track, telling you you could up youre score with it, due to higher concentration.
I still think of it during a long drive cross the state. Ok, I bought it only once, but hey!
Well, for an obvious start: Sega's Phantasy Star Online. More than one player I would say. You can even play split screen on the Gamecube version.
;)
Less obvious, Arc the Lad Collection, by Working Designs. This is actually a feature I only discovered by looking at the credits to fan requests. The games where originally designed for one person, but Working Design made it possible to let the second psx controller to have control as well. In this way you can split up your party members during battle, and let each player control his or her own group! Well, the same can be achieved by passing the control umpteen times with any party based 1 player rpg, but anyway.
And now we also have a four player Link adventure as part of the re-release of Zelda: A Link to the Past in GBA! Hooray!
Oh now I think of it, in Ogre Tactics: The Knight of Lodis you can pitch your trained party with another GBA player. This was also possible in Kartia for PSX, but that games sucked big time. Now I think of it, this is also possible in Monster Arena in the Arc the Lad collection. That resulted to national tournements once that one came out in Japan.
Oh, and one final recall. Pokemon, anyone?
But all in all, I think it is a feauture that is under-exploited in console rpg's and when it's there it lets me combine my game-time with game-time with my wive. (Please fire away about better two player games you can play with your wive
I saw an interview with the creator of the original game wher he explained he had enough of making rpg's and wanted (or was obliged to by contract, i don't remember) to make one last, going out with a bang. Well it was. And about your question, as any brand or pr person can tell you... oh forget it.
In his autobiographic book "surely you'r joking mr. Feynman" he recalls how one day a guy came round when he did his research on the atomic bomb in Palo Alto. This clerk wanted to know what else could be done with nuclear power. Seeing it as a kind of silly question since he gathered anything that requeres power could benifit from it, he ranted a whole list, including a submarine. To his amazement he ended up with the patent on it.
Are the Harry Potter books getting kids to read books or are they getting kids to read Harry Potter? One is great, the other is a fad. One will last them a lifetime, one will die shortly after the last book comes out. (I also submit that it is probably too early to tell the long lasting effects.)
/ index.htm) the books got him to read, period.
For Scott. M. (http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/lifechange
Now what does this tell us for Pi? Well, there are many small programs that compute its continuation. While those programs are probably not the shortets possible, they are much shorter than pi.
I.e. Pi is not truely random, not even close.
If you are referring to the Chinese Room argument, that was about consciousness. A person can appear to understand Chinese by just using a rule-book to mechanically compose answers to questions in Chinese, and not have a clue about what he is answering, even if he memorized the rule-book. Searle did not 'proof' with this argument that those answer could not be highly intelligent. If you ask me, he also did not prove that the system can not be conscious. You just end up with a schizophrenic with two independent minds that are divided by a language barrier.
Use that old fashioned off switch before it gets up to any dirty tricks. It does have an off switch, right? Even Data has an off switch... ;-)
..." Which implies that even the disc drives of the future will have more common sense than people.
Well, no. In the film it was said that "we must destroy all disc drives
Well they could still track your IP. So to be totally anonymous you will need a dynamic IP as well.
The XYZ-language will become the default language of the world/culture where it is used most. At the moment the digital world has the most English speaking inhabitants, regardless of how many other speaking people are in the world in total. I don't see more than 470 million Mandarin speaking digital world users in the near future.
Hacking this card could just as well be the whole purpose of it, the SETI client being just a front to sell military hardware without the bad rep.
So how do you play this thing on the go, on your lap? And where do I plug in that AC adapter then? There is no mention of a battery. So how can this compete with a Gameboy Advance?
Miniaturisation is always nice. But does my cellphone needs to run W95? Or does my watch needs to run linux to tell the time? Do I need a webserver on the go? No, I need a damn good and reliable client that takes no more fuel than needed. I don't care where the server's at. I certainly don't want to carry extra power to run a server.
;-)
Oke, the point is that it could run it if you wanted to. But I don't see how running a portable power savy server could be marketable selling point for any other than a geek...
First of all, they learned a lot since their earlier support blunders, given their excessive humble pleas for excuse in Japan. Second, support of Sega is not at issue, but if anything, support of developers. There are still Saturn games coming out in Japan. No games, no show. Sony is great with their 20 odd good games for the hardcore, and great with the rest for the rest. You (or at leat I) will buy console X if it has great game Y. MS realises that, that's why they would buy Square, Namco or Nintendo if they could. My two pennies is that since internet entered the arena, the rules of the game have changed. It will all depend on what the console offers for what price as an internet terminal. This will draw in the masses. That's why Sega is gonna giveg it away for free with a subscription. And that's why that X-thing is probabely going to be the commercial victor. And if there was anything more possible then speculation on this, then there wouldn't be this discussion...
Sega is no brand for the soft peripheral gamer/entertainment consumer. Sony is a TV, MS is a computer, so what is he gonna buy if he's looking for an internet computer for his TV? He is not going to buy Sega or Nintendo. The former because it's marketed as Games with Internet, the latter because it's still basically games. Those systems will be bought by the hard core gamer, say not more than 10% of the people who is going to buy into the next generation of entertainment set-top boxes.
It depends on what they are waiting for. Console gaming is all about the games. What can I play now. More power is always an argument, but I am not going to wait for a faster car if it will only drive me to Wallmart, or wait for a bigger screen TV if it only will show FOX. Sega has it's games that other's don't. And they have them now. So what are they waiting for? More polys?! Of course I want more atmosphere on my Metal Gear Solid 2. So I am waiting for just that, the game. I can play my Soul Caliber right now. It's a matter of consumer targets.
Exactly, so why do you put the weight on the power of the machines. Sega got its games that people want to play right now, plus the on-line network before anyone else. According to the latest report it already sold 2.5M consoles in the USA. And by the end of the year it will be free with a Sega network subscription. So their product is not inferior to the competion, it's ahead of it. Yet it will probably still lose because Joe Sixpack likes a familiar brand and more polys on his screen than pixels...
Tell that to e.g. companies involved in the human genome project. They own knowledge about YOUR DNA. Well, technically, they own the right to commercially exploit that knowledge, i.e. the patents. But that's what at issue here, to commercially exploit work legally owned by somebody else...