What is a game console? it's a entertainment system.
Now what if I offered you in 1995, a choice of a PS3, or a NES, which would you take?
Many people probably have answered the PS3. And that would seem to be the right answer because it's a HELL of a machine.
Problem is that in 1995, PS3 had no games, hell 10 years later we don't have a Ps3 game, if you had the NES you'd have less power but you'd have a library of about 300 games for the last 10 years.
Now this question seems pointless, but there's a point. Simply that numbers mean NOTHING, XBox was much faster then the PS2, yet the PS2 trumped it easily. Why is that? Because the games. And it's not because it's japanese because the Gamecube was a good system, that didn't have games and had little support from third parties, and it lost to the PS2 also.
So basically numbers really don't mean anything, if you hear anything about them, ignore it, focus on the core issue, which system has the games I want to play.
It's a decent article but the site is obviously someone's love child for Microsoft. Sorry, but the site has an obvious biased playing up much of Windows positives but I don't see much claiming problems with the software.
As others have saide most of Windows Vista has been ripped from other software, (most noticably the interface from OSX's beauty) but claims that OSX is more advanced because it's had more revisions. He doesn't seem to realize that they've had this since XP, they deserve to be ahead of the game with Microsoft dragging it's feet here and deciding to rewrite most of the code in 2002.
And of course he skips meantioning those "features" that you'll have to accept for the stuff he does meantion (namely the big one? DRM, true he can't test it but it'll be enforced, not exactly my idea of a fair trade off)
basically lets list "facts" (opinions or misinformation obviously) and pretend we're defending Microsoft while obviously being for Macintosh computers. It's more like their comments which were sarcasm heavy tended to try to divert the readers attention to problematic facts (an obvious example is the amount of software for Windows that I can name and then I can name huge amounts of Freeware for windows as well, about the same amount for linux that I'd want to use.)
I mean this is an attempt at a humerous article, but it's some guy's attempt at sarcasm about this stuff. Honestly it's supposed to be humorous and the sarcastic comments are obviously humorous, but it would be funnier if the facts are wern't obviously lobsided.
If I wanted to listen to Linux Fanboys there's a lot easier ways.
I admit Linux is superior, but let's admit that there's differences and it's not 100 percent superior to Microsoft.
This article reminds me of the idiots who thought sarcasm was the way for the macintosh to beat the PC, guess what? They lost and this type of article doesn't help any, if anything it makes the linux users sound petty and childish and of course while it names a few things, it's technically incorrect on many of the assumptions it makes.
Yes Linux is cheaper, and less known bugs as well as safer from viruses, but there really IS less software for it, especially from the big development houses and most flavors are complicated, those flavors that are simplified don't hold any number of the market place to really make them the standard.
I just wish both sides of this arguement grew up and realized that there's never going to be harmony, just enjoy what you choose.
Let's say a saint came down and used a VERY strict EULA, but never prosecuted over it.
Then a... well let's go with Devil but I was thinking MS or RIAA had a very loose EULA but would prosecute EVERY time someone went over the line?
Notice that the EULA doesn't matter as long as the agency doesn't constantly come down hard on the people, I don't know of many times Macromedia really has come down hard, just having a rough EULA isn't enough to make me worry.
Include 11 games, at 60 bucks a game that would be 660 dollars. PLUS accessories.
Bundles from stores are always a huge amount of money but the company can immedately declare a profit off of that bundle, think if you need 4 games to declare a profit off a XBox, then you have Gamestop sell a bundle with 5 games it's a profit immediatly, even if you give a small discount.
It's just good business for Microsoft to push for bundles, however most of those games have no reviews yet, so any consumer buying the bundle is an optimist or a fanboy or a fool, either way I say hold off.
Sorry people who think Hot Coffee is "new" It's not.
Anyone who played old games and had access to decent source can name a little game called Softcore... It's a Porn Text Adventure. Those who REALLY know, know that it later became a little game called Leisure Suit Larry. Those who know what LSL was about, will enjoy that fact.
There was much more sexually orriented then anything in the mainstream in the last 5 years, the latest LSL game actually is so freaking lame compared to the originals.
There was many more pure sex games back there, the fact that people JUST realized that there sex in games, and game makers have those thoughts don't make it so that these games haven't been here ever since. The fact they just weren't as mainstream is. I mean hell they didn't even PUT this code in the actual game, it was unused, and people are blowing it out of proportion.
For every hundred or so games of any type, there's probably at least one or two sexual orriented games, there's a market for anything. In fact in japan there's a whole lineage of dating sims, the purpose is of course to get your "love" interest into bed with very sexy results. However that's more lust then love but who knows.:)
The fact is simply that people who have no idea where the past of games are, need to realize that GTA:SA isn't the first in ANY area. It's a very fine game, and a great fun, and I still play it on the PS2, but it didn't invent sex in games, we've had that since the begining of the easy to use programming languages and well done text parsers.
Seriously Google might be stifling to some competition, but it still produces a good final product to the consumer, who benefits. That's the bottom line of a Free Market, the consumer.
Microsoft however destroys companies in ways to increase it's profit margin for inferior product, stifling the market for the consumer and forcing people to shell out a large amount of money for a product that is outdated, trying to keep it to be the only product in the market.
I don't see how one can even compare the two. Google is a website, and hasn't even tried to be the only one (well they wish to be but they don't push out others).
Personal story upcoming. I liked Yahoo Maps, I typed in my work address and searched how to go to a claim service for my insurance (got my stereo stolen and window broken) well Yahoo had me going all these ways that were SO inefficent, and the starting point didn't even match my location. So I went to Google Maps, not only did i get a perfect route (the one I pieced together out of a couple Yahoo maps and 10 minutes). I got perfect directions, exact locations, and every position was perfectly marked.
Yahoo Maps and Mapquest is STILL there, and they are available to you if you want, but Google takes the idea of driving directions and doesn't just do it, they mastered it. What is the Satellite Imagery do? not much but it's a nice feature if you want to use even more advanced stuff (and it looks better to some)
There's a difference between that and what Microsoft has done in the past. Comparing Google to Microsoft in this time frame is just a joke. Microsoft has been doing evil stuff for years, Google is just trying to get more users and it's success is evident, I haven't seen them as "evil" rather they are just proactive, in improving themselves. However it hasn't damaged the market to do so (and they make mistakes... Atom over RSS? heh)
Kudos Googles, Boo Microsoft, and WTF New York Times (also get rid of the damm registration, please or we'll keep use bugmenot.com.)
I agree Doom is great, wolfenstein is genius (Who doesn't want to cap a few nazis.) but as others have meantioned there were at least a handful (actually a at least a couple score) that came out first. He literally could say he invent the current FPS and he really is one of the largest proponents of them but he hasn't let his ego go wild like others around him have (romero anyone?) is my point. He didn't invent the idea of a FPS, but he found a way to make it great.
Good points, I'm not saying he doesn't deserve recognition but if he puts down "space wars" and other unconvential games, that's one thing, same if he ignores them, but if someone wants to write a FULL history they should be giving everything, not ignoring them or undervaluing the originators.
That'd be like saying Wolfenstein wasn't a big step for development of current games or westwood did nothing for RTS.
It sounds to me that it's one of those "I invented the Internet" deals.
Sadly these guys were all beaten by a couple score of years by the table top gamers, and those beaten by centuries by Board games, and of course I'm sure there was cavemen who played "who can get hit the hardest" and they beat us all.
This book does sound interesting but the first chapter probably will throw most people, why don't people just accept they aren't the FIRST. There's only one, and it's likely to be an unstandardized and oddball chose, rather then a standardized idea. VMS and Unix easily predates Dos, tnd There's smaller OSes before that too, IBM is one of the first developers of computers, but hardly the first. Babbage is considered the creator of computers, but I'm sure even he stood on the shoulders of giants (while he was a giant himself too.)
I prefer my historians to be realistic, even if they do believe themselves to do great things, Carmack is a genius, and as long as he doesn't run around and say he single handly created the FPS (though he did a HELL of a lot for it) I'll applaud him, same thing with Gates admiting that he changed a fledgling OS into DOS, or helping to create Basic, no he didn't do it himself, but he did take a decent idea and make one of the first stardized "simplistic" programming languages.
Basically I just wish all these programmers or creators would just admit that they arn't the only person in the industry, admit what they did for the industry, and not they to make their accomplishment the only one in the industry, but then to make that wish I'd have to forget about human nature, and sadly I can't so I guess I understand the reasoning for it, but the wish will stay in my heart even if it's never spoken.
It had a decent controversy when it did come out, but politicians didn't give a rat's ass back then...
Of course let's remember Clinton's (Bill this time) famous speach after Columbine (1998 I believe) That "these" games MUST NOT BE SOLD! the games he pointed at? Mortal Kombat (yes the original) and Doom.
I don't have a clever comment for that.. It needs none.
ID, yes ID, back when they were under Apogee's label.
Obviously they have anything in Doom and Doom 2, quake and quake 2, but they also made a few games before that that was quite popular (commander Keen, and others)
I mean considering that at the begining of Keen you first see in the upper left ID in the first level of the first game if I remember right, which puzzled me for YEARS until I realized that's them.
Of course Apogee themselves made Duke Nukem with it's plethora of Easter Eggs.
I don't know if any of you played Commander Keen and Duke Nukem, as well as other from Apogee, but that company knew how to make little easter eggs that were worth finding. Some of them were barely hidden but I don't remember too many that were too frustrating to find them or not worth the time.
Kudos for a good list. However the Sephiroth fight isn't really an easter egg. C&C would be, Day of Tentacles is debatable, Wolfenstein levels is debatable as well.
One that you didn't meantions is "Dopefish" in Quake. As well as about a ton of stuff in the old Apogee games (good things)
Easter eggs are secrets that are almost impossible to find, and very few people know about at first. It's not something that should be hard to access, it's something that should be impossible to find unless you do EVERYTHING in the game. (Most people didn't know about the C&C stuff unless it was heard from others.)
I think a perfect example is Reptile. You'll NEVER find him unless you knew where to look or were a complete master at the game.
Btw Shuichi Shigeno's car in GT3 and GT4 is "tuned" as he likes if I remember right, if what I heard was right is it's a personal car that he owns himself which is why it can be included there. Which is of course the subject matter of his manga.
Except that's not an Easter egg, it's "worthless" code that wasn't supposed to be seen.
Some of the real controversial ones are the codes to allow blood into the Gensis and SNES games (MK for instance on the gensis had a code, the SNES version did not if I remember right)
Thank you for explaining it far better then I could. Most christian religions and more of those god based religions (I'm catholic not that it matters) seem to discuss reincarnation as an afterthought to death. Not as a "it's ok because..." but more of a "he's dead because god 'needed' him in heaven and God works in mysterious ways" type of view. Meaning there's something to strive for, but it's not to say that a death shouldn't be mourned because we may never see that person again.
That's not to say we can't remember people in this way, but I'm sure there'd be a couple raised eyebrows in a congregation or a cemetary, though I'm sure it can be tasteful.
But of course people's misinformation of other's religions isn't an unique thing, and I don't blame them for it, the little I know about Muslims, I have heard from people who have studied them more then me. (Not those in universities or such but those who actually use the information to discuss a topic, not make a point)
The problem is that its always hard to really ask a person about the beliefs and such because we feel it's a taboo, and gossip is the way most people learn about other's beliefs and that's what causes some of this misinformation. So any chance there is for someone to learn from anything is a good situation, and thanks for helping in that.
The only other thing I wish to say is that from what I understand is that Christians (and again I am one but might have this wrong) believe they will be taken care of after death if they were "good" but they may not immediatly reach Heaven, as they will have to wait for their time in places similar to our idea of purgatory.
Not new, but not bad.
on
Video Tombstones
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I have to say the more I see this idea the better it is. While I'm Christian, a group that is pretty solemn about death, some people want a little more flash to their tombstone and this is a great idea.
I mean if I could have the highlights of my life played it would make people remember the best moments of my life, rather then have a few words ingraved
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a moving picture should be worth a couple million. Of course it won't last as long as either but it'll be nice when it can go a hundred years, of course let's not forget that it'll increase the chance someone will vandalize your tombstone too.
I'd start him off with a linux or make him learn the dos window if he can. I learned it when I was around 4-5. It's not hard for basic commands and it allows me to drop into Dos shells in any Windows XP machine with out a second thought.
If you want to make it easier. Best thing to do is give him a good amount of learning games, even old Dos ones such as Super Solvers and such, and let them enjoy it. The typing games definatly will help no matter WHAT your kid wants to do. And games like Super Solvers definatly are enjoyable (They are my fondest memories of old Dos games)
Best thing to do is try a game yourself. If these games are fun but below your skill level, your kid will likely love them. Basically the best games I've played in any catagory especially educational software are fun games that teach, and can be enjoyed by anyone.
Good luck with your kid though but remember that computer games are good, but there's other areas they should use too, spending 1 hour with your son or daughter a night is probably more important then if he was able to spend 8 hours a day learning on a computer.
And of course remember that some games are just fun, and that's ok, not everything they do should be educational but it's better if there is a good percentage that they are learning something from.
We had many games that are "educational" the suprising thing though is these were well built games, and I believe the best ones came out of EGA (if I remember that company right) and EA. Carmen Sandiago anyone? I particularly liked the Super Solver series for their logic problems.
If EA is making games for children that'd be great, but Video games for homework only works when we deal with games for learning. Madden isn't going to teach anyone that much except hand and eye coordination and how not to get your QB completely sacked (then again I have yet to learn that).
All I hope is that they are as interesting and entertaining as the games in my youth, such as the typing games that had a car moving and the faster you typed the faster you went. Those games were entertaining to me, and kept my attention and taught me some spelling (though not that much) and typing.
Slashdot Mirror
What is a game console? it's a entertainment system.
Now what if I offered you in 1995, a choice of a PS3, or a NES, which would you take?
Many people probably have answered the PS3. And that would seem to be the right answer because it's a HELL of a machine.
Problem is that in 1995, PS3 had no games, hell 10 years later we don't have a Ps3 game, if you had the NES you'd have less power but you'd have a library of about 300 games for the last 10 years.
Now this question seems pointless, but there's a point. Simply that numbers mean NOTHING, XBox was much faster then the PS2, yet the PS2 trumped it easily. Why is that? Because the games. And it's not because it's japanese because the Gamecube was a good system, that didn't have games and had little support from third parties, and it lost to the PS2 also.
So basically numbers really don't mean anything, if you hear anything about them, ignore it, focus on the core issue, which system has the games I want to play.
It's a decent article but the site is obviously someone's love child for Microsoft. Sorry, but the site has an obvious biased playing up much of Windows positives but I don't see much claiming problems with the software.
As others have saide most of Windows Vista has been ripped from other software, (most noticably the interface from OSX's beauty) but claims that OSX is more advanced because it's had more revisions. He doesn't seem to realize that they've had this since XP, they deserve to be ahead of the game with Microsoft dragging it's feet here and deciding to rewrite most of the code in 2002.
And of course he skips meantioning those "features" that you'll have to accept for the stuff he does meantion (namely the big one? DRM, true he can't test it but it'll be enforced, not exactly my idea of a fair trade off)
We all remember the plans for the Ipod killer, and what's that? Ipod is still the standard? Wow!
basically lets list "facts" (opinions or misinformation obviously) and pretend we're defending Microsoft while obviously being for Macintosh computers. It's more like their comments which were sarcasm heavy tended to try to divert the readers attention to problematic facts (an obvious example is the amount of software for Windows that I can name and then I can name huge amounts of Freeware for windows as well, about the same amount for linux that I'd want to use.)
I mean this is an attempt at a humerous article, but it's some guy's attempt at sarcasm about this stuff. Honestly it's supposed to be humorous and the sarcastic comments are obviously humorous, but it would be funnier if the facts are wern't obviously lobsided.
Of course that's my opinion.
If I wanted to listen to Linux Fanboys there's a lot easier ways.
I admit Linux is superior, but let's admit that there's differences and it's not 100 percent superior to Microsoft.
This article reminds me of the idiots who thought sarcasm was the way for the macintosh to beat the PC, guess what? They lost and this type of article doesn't help any, if anything it makes the linux users sound petty and childish and of course while it names a few things, it's technically incorrect on many of the assumptions it makes.
Yes Linux is cheaper, and less known bugs as well as safer from viruses, but there really IS less software for it, especially from the big development houses and most flavors are complicated, those flavors that are simplified don't hold any number of the market place to really make them the standard.
I just wish both sides of this arguement grew up and realized that there's never going to be harmony, just enjoy what you choose.
Let's say a saint came down and used a VERY strict EULA, but never prosecuted over it.
Then a... well let's go with Devil but I was thinking MS or RIAA had a very loose EULA but would prosecute EVERY time someone went over the line?
Notice that the EULA doesn't matter as long as the agency doesn't constantly come down hard on the people, I don't know of many times Macromedia really has come down hard, just having a rough EULA isn't enough to make me worry.
And suggest they update their virus protection?
Include 11 games, at 60 bucks a game that would be 660 dollars. PLUS accessories.
Bundles from stores are always a huge amount of money but the company can immedately declare a profit off of that bundle, think if you need 4 games to declare a profit off a XBox, then you have Gamestop sell a bundle with 5 games it's a profit immediatly, even if you give a small discount.
It's just good business for Microsoft to push for bundles, however most of those games have no reviews yet, so any consumer buying the bundle is an optimist or a fanboy or a fool, either way I say hold off.
Sorry people who think Hot Coffee is "new" It's not.
:)
Anyone who played old games and had access to decent source can name a little game called Softcore... It's a Porn Text Adventure. Those who REALLY know, know that it later became a little game called Leisure Suit Larry. Those who know what LSL was about, will enjoy that fact.
There was much more sexually orriented then anything in the mainstream in the last 5 years, the latest LSL game actually is so freaking lame compared to the originals.
There was many more pure sex games back there, the fact that people JUST realized that there sex in games, and game makers have those thoughts don't make it so that these games haven't been here ever since. The fact they just weren't as mainstream is. I mean hell they didn't even PUT this code in the actual game, it was unused, and people are blowing it out of proportion.
For every hundred or so games of any type, there's probably at least one or two sexual orriented games, there's a market for anything. In fact in japan there's a whole lineage of dating sims, the purpose is of course to get your "love" interest into bed with very sexy results. However that's more lust then love but who knows.
The fact is simply that people who have no idea where the past of games are, need to realize that GTA:SA isn't the first in ANY area. It's a very fine game, and a great fun, and I still play it on the PS2, but it didn't invent sex in games, we've had that since the begining of the easy to use programming languages and well done text parsers.
Soon I'll be able to fulfill the dream with slightly changing wings, like the Arwing from Star Fox.
Yes yes, continue to work people, soon your work will become mine!! And then we'll see who has the sleakest badass plane around.
Seriously Google might be stifling to some competition, but it still produces a good final product to the consumer, who benefits. That's the bottom line of a Free Market, the consumer.
.)
Microsoft however destroys companies in ways to increase it's profit margin for inferior product, stifling the market for the consumer and forcing people to shell out a large amount of money for a product that is outdated, trying to keep it to be the only product in the market.
I don't see how one can even compare the two. Google is a website, and hasn't even tried to be the only one (well they wish to be but they don't push out others).
Personal story upcoming. I liked Yahoo Maps, I typed in my work address and searched how to go to a claim service for my insurance (got my stereo stolen and window broken) well Yahoo had me going all these ways that were SO inefficent, and the starting point didn't even match my location. So I went to Google Maps, not only did i get a perfect route (the one I pieced together out of a couple Yahoo maps and 10 minutes). I got perfect directions, exact locations, and every position was perfectly marked.
Yahoo Maps and Mapquest is STILL there, and they are available to you if you want, but Google takes the idea of driving directions and doesn't just do it, they mastered it. What is the Satellite Imagery do? not much but it's a nice feature if you want to use even more advanced stuff (and it looks better to some)
There's a difference between that and what Microsoft has done in the past. Comparing Google to Microsoft in this time frame is just a joke. Microsoft has been doing evil stuff for years, Google is just trying to get more users and it's success is evident, I haven't seen them as "evil" rather they are just proactive, in improving themselves. However it hasn't damaged the market to do so (and they make mistakes... Atom over RSS? heh)
Kudos Googles, Boo Microsoft, and WTF New York Times (also get rid of the damm registration, please or we'll keep use bugmenot.com
I agree Doom is great, wolfenstein is genius (Who doesn't want to cap a few nazis.) but as others have meantioned there were at least a handful (actually a at least a couple score) that came out first. He literally could say he invent the current FPS and he really is one of the largest proponents of them but he hasn't let his ego go wild like others around him have (romero anyone?) is my point. He didn't invent the idea of a FPS, but he found a way to make it great.
Good points, I'm not saying he doesn't deserve recognition but if he puts down "space wars" and other unconvential games, that's one thing, same if he ignores them, but if someone wants to write a FULL history they should be giving everything, not ignoring them or undervaluing the originators.
That'd be like saying Wolfenstein wasn't a big step for development of current games or westwood did nothing for RTS.
It sounds to me that it's one of those "I invented the Internet" deals.
Sadly these guys were all beaten by a couple score of years by the table top gamers, and those beaten by centuries by Board games, and of course I'm sure there was cavemen who played "who can get hit the hardest" and they beat us all.
This book does sound interesting but the first chapter probably will throw most people, why don't people just accept they aren't the FIRST. There's only one, and it's likely to be an unstandardized and oddball chose, rather then a standardized idea. VMS and Unix easily predates Dos, tnd There's smaller OSes before that too, IBM is one of the first developers of computers, but hardly the first. Babbage is considered the creator of computers, but I'm sure even he stood on the shoulders of giants (while he was a giant himself too.)
I prefer my historians to be realistic, even if they do believe themselves to do great things, Carmack is a genius, and as long as he doesn't run around and say he single handly created the FPS (though he did a HELL of a lot for it) I'll applaud him, same thing with Gates admiting that he changed a fledgling OS into DOS, or helping to create Basic, no he didn't do it himself, but he did take a decent idea and make one of the first stardized "simplistic" programming languages.
Basically I just wish all these programmers or creators would just admit that they arn't the only person in the industry, admit what they did for the industry, and not they to make their accomplishment the only one in the industry, but then to make that wish I'd have to forget about human nature, and sadly I can't so I guess I understand the reasoning for it, but the wish will stay in my heart even if it's never spoken.
It had a decent controversy when it did come out, but politicians didn't give a rat's ass back then...
Of course let's remember Clinton's (Bill this time) famous speach after Columbine (1998 I believe) That "these" games MUST NOT BE SOLD! the games he pointed at? Mortal Kombat (yes the original) and Doom.
I don't have a clever comment for that.. It needs none.
ID, yes ID, back when they were under Apogee's label.
Obviously they have anything in Doom and Doom 2, quake and quake 2, but they also made a few games before that that was quite popular (commander Keen, and others)
I mean considering that at the begining of Keen you first see in the upper left ID in the first level of the first game if I remember right, which puzzled me for YEARS until I realized that's them.
Of course Apogee themselves made Duke Nukem with it's plethora of Easter Eggs.
I don't know if any of you played Commander Keen and Duke Nukem, as well as other from Apogee, but that company knew how to make little easter eggs that were worth finding. Some of them were barely hidden but I don't remember too many that were too frustrating to find them or not worth the time.
Good stuff.
Thank you. Best easter egg from some of the best games ever. Of course Apogee had TONS of easter eggs in its games back then.
Kudos for a good list. However the Sephiroth fight isn't really an easter egg. C&C would be, Day of Tentacles is debatable, Wolfenstein levels is debatable as well.
One that you didn't meantions is "Dopefish" in Quake. As well as about a ton of stuff in the old Apogee games (good things)
Easter eggs are secrets that are almost impossible to find, and very few people know about at first. It's not something that should be hard to access, it's something that should be impossible to find unless you do EVERYTHING in the game. (Most people didn't know about the C&C stuff unless it was heard from others.)
I think a perfect example is Reptile. You'll NEVER find him unless you knew where to look or were a complete master at the game.
Btw Shuichi Shigeno's car in GT3 and GT4 is "tuned" as he likes if I remember right, if what I heard was right is it's a personal car that he owns himself which is why it can be included there. Which is of course the subject matter of his manga.
Except that's not an Easter egg, it's "worthless" code that wasn't supposed to be seen.
Some of the real controversial ones are the codes to allow blood into the Gensis and SNES games (MK for instance on the gensis had a code, the SNES version did not if I remember right)
Thank you for explaining it far better then I could. Most christian religions and more of those god based religions (I'm catholic not that it matters) seem to discuss reincarnation as an afterthought to death. Not as a "it's ok because..." but more of a "he's dead because god 'needed' him in heaven and God works in mysterious ways" type of view. Meaning there's something to strive for, but it's not to say that a death shouldn't be mourned because we may never see that person again.
That's not to say we can't remember people in this way, but I'm sure there'd be a couple raised eyebrows in a congregation or a cemetary, though I'm sure it can be tasteful.
But of course people's misinformation of other's religions isn't an unique thing, and I don't blame them for it, the little I know about Muslims, I have heard from people who have studied them more then me. (Not those in universities or such but those who actually use the information to discuss a topic, not make a point)
The problem is that its always hard to really ask a person about the beliefs and such because we feel it's a taboo, and gossip is the way most people learn about other's beliefs and that's what causes some of this misinformation. So any chance there is for someone to learn from anything is a good situation, and thanks for helping in that.
The only other thing I wish to say is that from what I understand is that Christians (and again I am one but might have this wrong) believe they will be taken care of after death if they were "good" but they may not immediatly reach Heaven, as they will have to wait for their time in places similar to our idea of purgatory.
I have to say the more I see this idea the better it is. While I'm Christian, a group that is pretty solemn about death, some people want a little more flash to their tombstone and this is a great idea.
I mean if I could have the highlights of my life played it would make people remember the best moments of my life, rather then have a few words ingraved
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a moving picture should be worth a couple million. Of course it won't last as long as either but it'll be nice when it can go a hundred years, of course let's not forget that it'll increase the chance someone will vandalize your tombstone too.
I'd start him off with a linux or make him learn the dos window if he can. I learned it when I was around 4-5. It's not hard for basic commands and it allows me to drop into Dos shells in any Windows XP machine with out a second thought.
If you want to make it easier. Best thing to do is give him a good amount of learning games, even old Dos ones such as Super Solvers and such, and let them enjoy it. The typing games definatly will help no matter WHAT your kid wants to do. And games like Super Solvers definatly are enjoyable (They are my fondest memories of old Dos games)
Best thing to do is try a game yourself. If these games are fun but below your skill level, your kid will likely love them. Basically the best games I've played in any catagory especially educational software are fun games that teach, and can be enjoyed by anyone.
Good luck with your kid though but remember that computer games are good, but there's other areas they should use too, spending 1 hour with your son or daughter a night is probably more important then if he was able to spend 8 hours a day learning on a computer.
And of course remember that some games are just fun, and that's ok, not everything they do should be educational but it's better if there is a good percentage that they are learning something from.
The only problem is they won't accept my Frequent Renter card. Come on, I've rented like 30 lions.
I deserve some free upgrades, like an elephant to knock down that ugly eyesore the neighbor has.
We had many games that are "educational" the suprising thing though is these were well built games, and I believe the best ones came out of EGA (if I remember that company right) and EA. Carmen Sandiago anyone? I particularly liked the Super Solver series for their logic problems.
If EA is making games for children that'd be great, but Video games for homework only works when we deal with games for learning. Madden isn't going to teach anyone that much except hand and eye coordination and how not to get your QB completely sacked (then again I have yet to learn that).
All I hope is that they are as interesting and entertaining as the games in my youth, such as the typing games that had a car moving and the faster you typed the faster you went. Those games were entertaining to me, and kept my attention and taught me some spelling (though not that much) and typing.
ahhh that's what was going on.. I remember they said 64 bit on the saturn even though it's technically not true.
:)
Good times. good times