The user is playing a game in a room, With a chest.
When They open the chest there is a minature room, which they enter. Then that room is connected to the room that had the chest, which has the minature room they were now in.
The left the minature room and re-entered the original room (now minature too?) that had a chest with another minature (minature) room.
It sounds merely like a gamespace realization of a usage-produced hypertext system, such as used with the softlinks over at Everything.
Well I say "merely," but this is actually a very powerful idea.
IMHO she did more for the 3D action genre than Mario too. She made 3D games ok for adults.
I'll spare you the usual (and, for the record, accurate) comment about Mario games not being specifically for kids but rather being kind of "age agnostic." (While Crash looked like someone was trying too hard.)
There was once a time when Lara Croft and Mario were seen as the two standard-bearers of the coming age of 3D gaming. Since then, Croft has become almost more well-known as an action movie character than game protagonist, while the basic control mechanic in Mario 64 has essentially defined what the term "3D platformers" means.
So I suppose this means I disagree with you about what the Tomb Raider games "did" for the 3D action genre. While the games may have had sterling puzzle design in places, Lara's breasts tend to be what people remember about the series these days. Which is kind of a shame, as it not only set back what could be seen as a real prototype of the kind of dungeon play later found in the N64 Zelda games, but also the cause of female protagonists in games.
Sony is actually fairly lacking in interesting characters, unless you count things like Ape Escape. Crash Bandicoot used to be well-identified with them, but not anymore, and anyway he was never owned by them.
Snake is more accurately a Konami character (and remember that one MGS game has appeared on the Gamecube), and Final Fantasy is obviously Squeenix (and they make Final Fantasy games, or at least games that contain the words "Final Fantasy" in the title, for Gamecube, and ports of older FFs for GBA, among other systems).
The maintainer of the wiki has passworded the ability to edit pages, as he says he wants the information put in to be accurate and verified;
A warning to other readers: what follows is a fairly pedantic and high-falutin' rant about what Wikis should and should not be.
But it sounds like what the maintainer of the site wants, then, is not a wiki, with all the fairly high-minded and somewhat risky factors which that entails. Or at least, he might not want to call it a wiki.
I agree that a site like this, which has only a very small number of real contributors each of which is performing experiments for the good of all, is probably best done without letting just anyone edit pages. There are only a handful of people with the equipment to figure this stuff out, and for practical reasons it's a bad idea to let their stuff be rewritten and deleted by random web people.
But I need to impress that the page I was trying to visit was not an uncreated page -- its link did not have the little "?" after it. Go to the sidebar on the site, click on the Hardware link, then check out the DS Protocol link there -- see? No question mark. Click on it and you get a password prompt.
But anyway, it's not really that important, I was just feeling antsy that day I suppose. My apologies.
It's cool that one of the linked sites (NDSWiki) is implemented as a Wiki. But at least one of the pages (here) requires a password, even though it seems to be a normal Wiki page. This is a fundamentally anti-wiki thing.
Yeah, I admit I'm being a bit curmudgeonly about this, but dammit, the Wiki philosophy means something! I'd like to at least know why they're doing this.
I disagree. The existance of development tools for the GBA for the cart prove substantial non-infringing uses for the device. Even if there were no Flash carts for the GBA, there'd still be GBA piracy (for play on emulators). I for one would not want to give up a Flash cart in order to stamp out piracy -- development uses override piracy concerns.
While the DS has a really slight launch line-up (Mr. Driller DS is the game I've been playing the most of), there's not on the PS launch list that engages my interest.
Of course, I own a Gamecube and not a PS2, and the differences in launch games between the DS and the PSP go along similar lines.
I've been thinking about picking a PS2 up in order to play Katamari Damacy, but the fact that I'd be paying $150 to play a $20 has given me uncomfortable flashbacks to the time I bought an X-Box just to play ToeJam & Earl III.
As for "karma"ing you, your article really needs to be voted up despite your request, because many users will never see a post scored at 1.
Seriously, the only games I've ever seen on non-Nintendo consoles that were remotely innovative were Katamari Damacy and Ico.
Those are the same ones I would have mentioned, heh. Though really Sony can only clame credit for Ico -- Katamari Damacy was produced by Namco.
If you're going to include all games release for that company's system, then the Grand Theft Auto games, while different iterations of the same basic idea, do at least present something new compared to most of the rest of the industry.
Microsoft has owned Rare for a couple of years now, while they were a Nintendo second-party for only a few months back at the beginning of the generation. So I don't see how fairness applies there -- Rare's been working for Microsoft for much longer, in this generation, than Nintendo.
On the other hand... Star Fox Adventures wasn't that great.
This is an abso-fucking-lutely gorgeous game (except for the big splatters of blood and squirrel vomit that end up on the TV)...
I'm not quite sure what this has to do with my point, but I'll give it a shot.
Let's see. Conker's Bad Fur Day. Isn't that the remake of the game we've all seen on the N64 a couple of years ago?
The gorgeousness of a game is not at all related to its quality as a game -- the game I've been playing the most of late has been venerable, almighty Nethack. And with none of these pansy VGA graphics either, but over Telnet!
So I'm afraid I am not as enthuised about it as you are.
Will MS let them work and make the games they want to make, which are not always commercially successful, even in Japan?
Bungie may seem to be instructive, but they're making Halo, arguably the system's saving grace -- it's easier to keep hands off of something which is extremely popular. Even so, I've seen people complain about Halo 2 that the story looks stretched out in order to make a Halo 3 possible. Also remember Rare, who's only released ONE, fairly lackluster, Xbox game since getting bought by Microsoft.
The temptation to meddle will be great for Microsoft's managers, but if they can overcome that then this is probably excellent news for their new system.
1. The eyes on the character are the giveaway. Nintendo's artists created a unique look for the characters in Wind Waker, but the focus of it all is the eyes on the three main characters, Link, Aryll and Tetra, which are like white footballs, topped with eyebrows, with a large black circle in the middle. The eyes are what, in my mind, defines the look of these characters, and this screenshot apes them pretty much exactly. But it is not the only thing it copies, which is telling in my mind.
2. The letter, I don't think it was a cease-and-desist, just a warning. Nintendo's lawyers aren't actually *that* overzealous concerning matters not related to people making illegal copies of their games. It'd be nice if they were more enlightened in regard to some of their older, forgotten properties, but large corporations are not particularly known for their Buddha natures.
3. Dudes, the game's called Wiki! Has anyone asked Ward Cunningham about this?
MS is not going to be a company to sue without good reason.
Well then, why don't they lobby to get software patents banned in the U.S.? If the only reason they want patents is to protect themselves from patent lawsuits, then why don't they lobby Congress to get all patents, both theirs and those of others, stricken invalid, levelling the playing field in one swoop?
Money drives Congress. Is it logical? Is it popular? Is it right? These things are usually given shorter shrift than whether some interest is willing to contribute to a campaign fund in support of it. By lobbying Congress against software patents, we could possibly get some real progress in this area with a lot less trouble than we face right now.
But they're not, are they? Thus we should view any and all software patents by them with suspecion.
(The same goes, by the way, for IBM and Apple. The only wholly positive approach to take here involves trying to get the law changed.)
The recent Gamecube Mario Kart has a setting in the options screen that allows you to tone down (or up) the items in the game in versus races, making this less (or more) of a factor.
I've played a fair amount of both Smash T.V. and its sequel, Total Carnage, both in arcades, on the SNES, and on Midway Arcade Treasures (1 and 2, respectively). These are excellent games, difficult without being impossible. There are some annoying bugs there (especially with Smash T.V.), but overall these are just about as good as any action games have ever been made.
The most interesting thing about them, besides returning the old dual-joystick, Robotron controls to the arcade, is the idea that there are extra, secret objectives to complete besides just winning (Smash T.V.: collecting keys, Total Carnage: collecting LOTS of keys, and many areas have subgoals to try to achieve). Both games also effectively have selectable difficulty, by offering alternate paths through levels and having optional rooms.
By the way, the SNES versions of both games, while generally very good, still differ in important ways from the arcade. (The secret rooms in the SNES version leap to mind -- the only secret roomsin the arcade version was the Pleasure Dome if you got ten keys, and it was only in the last revision of the game me thinks.)
APB (All Points Bulletin) is also the name of an Atari Games arcade release, circa 1990 or shortly after, which is readily playable on Midway Arcade Treasures 2 (and is indeed one of the high points of the collection). -THIS- APB is also recognized as having gameplay that harkens forward to the Grand Theft Auto games (having a huge simulated city to explore with special locations to keep track of, gameplay that focuses on driving, and being filled with secrets). While it is a "classic" game, the fact that Midway is making money off of it at the moment indicates it's still bankable, in some small way.
Thus, I predict a name change in the near future for these guys. Not that the name shouldn't be changed anyway -- the arcade APB is one of the better things Atari Games did IMHO, and should be respected for that.
From my perspective, they have given Firefox a huge head start
It's funny you should say that. In fact, Microsoft has a tremendous headstart over Firefox, considering that IE is much older.
Of course, you could then say that Netscape Navigator, upon which Firefox is ultimately based, had a headstart on IE. But in a lot of people's minds Firefox is a product separate from the old Netscape. (And is based on a rewrite of the code anyway.)
But my point, muddled as it may be, is that Firefox has had to really work for its marketshare. Just putting IE7 out there isn't going to attract many new customers over the ones who are already using Firefox, those are heavily entrenched, and at best can only slow the adoption rate of Firefox. IE7 is going to have to bring something really new to the table to overcome this. Knowing Microsoft, it'll probably be something spurious and cosmetic.
If it goes subscription another free/open online encyclopaedia will take its place, the same way that FreeDB came about after CDDB required buying a license to use in applications.
Even better: since anyone can currently download the Wikipedia database, its replacement could start at where it is now, at almost 500,000 articles.
P.S. I'm still pissed at Gracenote about the CDDB thing. I just had to say it. There.
Note how five completely distinct species are discovered every time California attempts to build a power plant, always conveniently existing only in the spot that the plant would occupy.
I take it you can back this up? It's not that I don't trust you, but because ancedotal evidence is the bane of public discourse, to such a degree, so many times have I heard agenda'd, "Did you know?" style factoids that turn out to be false later, that I tend to discount them out-of-hand these days.
I did quickie Google News searches for:
California species "power plant" California species "power plants"
Neither turned up large numbers of hits (9 for the first, 24 for the second), so I'm afraid if I'm going to believe you you're going to have to provide a link I can follow, or at least the name of an article, that I can get sufficently clued-in by.
Scientists are no more immune to external agendas than anyone else. That's what the peer review system is for.
I dispute this, the scientific process, if accurately followed, works against agendas. That's not to say you receive a free halo and wings when you get your doctorate, and there are certainly junk scientists out there, but the whole point of science is to discover things through observation instead of preconcieved notions.
I think what a lot of conservatives hate is that the views that tend to be held by a lot of scientists might actually have gotten to that place by holding merit, and that the procedures used to erect them are difficult to tear down logically (because science is nothing if not logical). Which may explain why there are so many unusually defensive posts in this discussion.
And "unprecedented" statements are generally incorrect: off the top of my head, Theodore Roosevelt's administration did a lot more "monkeying around with government agencies, especially over environmental concerns" than any current administration could probably accomplish.
1. You have to go that far back for a counter-example?
2. Actually I'm absolutely sure the current administration could do a lot more monkeying around. For starters, there's a lot more agencies that must be monkeyed with.
3. Conservation was less a matter of science back in those days, as demonstrated by the rapid decline of the Passenger Pigeon not long before.
4. In any case, you're going to have to back that up as well I'm afraid. A quicky Google search turned up these sites:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/tr/envir.html (T. Roosevelt as environmentalist.)
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm? co ntentid=2759 (Calls T. Roosevelt the nation's first conservationalist president.)
I wouldn't say those sites do much to support your argument, but maybe you're aware of something I am not; I didn't browse beyond the first page of results.
Well, they certainly make games like Nethack these days, since Nethack has never actually had its development ended (though the DevTeam is infamous for leaving multiple years between releases). Also note that recent versions of Nethack, themselves, contain an implementation of Sokoban.
But there are actually new classic games being made today, and even popular ones: Grand Theft Auto and Katamari Damacy, provided they don't wreck them in further sequels, may very well be destined for that same kind of longevity.
It's just that there are not a great many of these games, certainly not as many as there were back in the golden ages of arcade gaming.
Slashdot Mirror
A system that allows computer-generated presences to communicate with each other, with you able to watch the results?
All you have to do is open up emacs and start up psychoanalyze-pinhead and poof, there you go. Eliza meets Zippy the Pinhead!
(For more information, go here and scroll down a little.)
The user is playing a game in a room, With a chest.
When They open the chest there is a minature room, which they enter. Then that room is connected to the room that had the chest, which has the minature room they were now in.
The left the minature room and re-entered the original room (now minature too?) that had a chest with another minature (minature) room.
It sounds merely like a gamespace realization of a usage-produced hypertext system, such as used with the softlinks over at Everything.
Well I say "merely," but this is actually a very powerful idea.
It'd double the cost of the game, but it'd add very little to the cost of a memory drive with which it was bundled....
In any case: goooooooo Wright!
IMHO she did more for the 3D action genre than Mario too. She made 3D games ok for adults.
I'll spare you the usual (and, for the record, accurate) comment about Mario games not being specifically for kids but rather being kind of "age agnostic." (While Crash looked like someone was trying too hard.)
There was once a time when Lara Croft and Mario were seen as the two standard-bearers of the coming age of 3D gaming. Since then, Croft has become almost more well-known as an action movie character than game protagonist, while the basic control mechanic in Mario 64 has essentially defined what the term "3D platformers" means.
So I suppose this means I disagree with you about what the Tomb Raider games "did" for the 3D action genre. While the games may have had sterling puzzle design in places, Lara's breasts tend to be what people remember about the series these days. Which is kind of a shame, as it not only set back what could be seen as a real prototype of the kind of dungeon play later found in the N64 Zelda games, but also the cause of female protagonists in games.
Sony is actually fairly lacking in interesting characters, unless you count things like Ape Escape. Crash Bandicoot used to be well-identified with them, but not anymore, and anyway he was never owned by them.
Snake is more accurately a Konami character (and remember that one MGS game has appeared on the Gamecube), and Final Fantasy is obviously Squeenix (and they make Final Fantasy games, or at least games that contain the words "Final Fantasy" in the title, for Gamecube, and ports of older FFs for GBA, among other systems).
The maintainer of the wiki has passworded the ability to edit pages, as he says he wants the information put in to be accurate and verified;
A warning to other readers: what follows is a fairly pedantic and high-falutin' rant about what Wikis should and should not be.
But it sounds like what the maintainer of the site wants, then, is not a wiki, with all the fairly high-minded and somewhat risky factors which that entails. Or at least, he might not want to call it a wiki.
I agree that a site like this, which has only a very small number of real contributors each of which is performing experiments for the good of all, is probably best done without letting just anyone edit pages. There are only a handful of people with the equipment to figure this stuff out, and for practical reasons it's a bad idea to let their stuff be rewritten and deleted by random web people.
But I need to impress that the page I was trying to visit was not an uncreated page -- its link did not have the little "?" after it. Go to the sidebar on the site, click on the Hardware link, then check out the DS Protocol link there -- see? No question mark. Click on it and you get a password prompt.
But anyway, it's not really that important, I was just feeling antsy that day I suppose. My apologies.
It's cool that one of the linked sites (NDSWiki) is implemented as a Wiki. But at least one of the pages (here) requires a password, even though it seems to be a normal Wiki page. This is a fundamentally anti-wiki thing.
Yeah, I admit I'm being a bit curmudgeonly about this, but dammit, the Wiki philosophy means something! I'd like to at least know why they're doing this.
I disagree. The existance of development tools for the GBA for the cart prove substantial non-infringing uses for the device. Even if there were no Flash carts for the GBA, there'd still be GBA piracy (for play on emulators). I for one would not want to give up a Flash cart in order to stamp out piracy -- development uses override piracy concerns.
While the DS has a really slight launch line-up (Mr. Driller DS is the game I've been playing the most of), there's not on the PS launch list that engages my interest.
Of course, I own a Gamecube and not a PS2, and the differences in launch games between the DS and the PSP go along similar lines.
I've been thinking about picking a PS2 up in order to play Katamari Damacy, but the fact that I'd be paying $150 to play a $20 has given me uncomfortable flashbacks to the time I bought an X-Box just to play ToeJam & Earl III.
As for "karma"ing you, your article really needs to be voted up despite your request, because many users will never see a post scored at 1.
Seriously, the only games I've ever seen on non-Nintendo consoles that were remotely innovative were Katamari Damacy and Ico.
Those are the same ones I would have mentioned, heh. Though really Sony can only clame credit for Ico -- Katamari Damacy was produced by Namco.
If you're going to include all games release for that company's system, then the Grand Theft Auto games, while different iterations of the same basic idea, do at least present something new compared to most of the rest of the industry.
Microsoft has owned Rare for a couple of years now, while they were a Nintendo second-party for only a few months back at the beginning of the generation. So I don't see how fairness applies there -- Rare's been working for Microsoft for much longer, in this generation, than Nintendo.
On the other hand... Star Fox Adventures wasn't that great.
This is an abso-fucking-lutely gorgeous game (except for the big splatters of blood and squirrel vomit that end up on the TV)...
I'm not quite sure what this has to do with my point, but I'll give it a shot.
Let's see. Conker's Bad Fur Day. Isn't that the remake of the game we've all seen on the N64 a couple of years ago?
The gorgeousness of a game is not at all related to its quality as a game -- the game I've been playing the most of late has been venerable, almighty Nethack. And with none of these pansy VGA graphics either, but over Telnet!
So I'm afraid I am not as enthuised about it as you are.
Will MS let them work and make the games they want to make, which are not always commercially successful, even in Japan?
Bungie may seem to be instructive, but they're making Halo, arguably the system's saving grace -- it's easier to keep hands off of something which is extremely popular. Even so, I've seen people complain about Halo 2 that the story looks stretched out in order to make a Halo 3 possible. Also remember Rare, who's only released ONE, fairly lackluster, Xbox game since getting bought by Microsoft.
The temptation to meddle will be great for Microsoft's managers, but if they can overcome that then this is probably excellent news for their new system.
1. The eyes on the character are the giveaway. Nintendo's artists created a unique look for the characters in Wind Waker, but the focus of it all is the eyes on the three main characters, Link, Aryll and Tetra, which are like white footballs, topped with eyebrows, with a large black circle in the middle. The eyes are what, in my mind, defines the look of these characters, and this screenshot apes them pretty much exactly. But it is not the only thing it copies, which is telling in my mind.
2. The letter, I don't think it was a cease-and-desist, just a warning. Nintendo's lawyers aren't actually *that* overzealous concerning matters not related to people making illegal copies of their games. It'd be nice if they were more enlightened in regard to some of their older, forgotten properties, but large corporations are not particularly known for their Buddha natures.
3. Dudes, the game's called Wiki! Has anyone asked Ward Cunningham about this?
MS is not going to be a company to sue without good reason.
Well then, why don't they lobby to get software patents banned in the U.S.? If the only reason they want patents is to protect themselves from patent lawsuits, then why don't they lobby Congress to get all patents, both theirs and those of others, stricken invalid, levelling the playing field in one swoop?
Money drives Congress. Is it logical? Is it popular? Is it right? These things are usually given shorter shrift than whether some interest is willing to contribute to a campaign fund in support of it. By lobbying Congress against software patents, we could possibly get some real progress in this area with a lot less trouble than we face right now.
But they're not, are they? Thus we should view any and all software patents by them with suspecion.
(The same goes, by the way, for IBM and Apple. The only wholly positive approach to take here involves trying to get the law changed.)
The recent Gamecube Mario Kart has a setting in the options screen that allows you to tone down (or up) the items in the game in versus races, making this less (or more) of a factor.
Hmmm, interesting. Come to think of it, I think the developer interview on Midway Arcade Treasures 1 confirms this.
Ah well, is still good.
I've played a fair amount of both Smash T.V. and its sequel, Total Carnage, both in arcades, on the SNES, and on Midway Arcade Treasures (1 and 2, respectively). These are excellent games, difficult without being impossible. There are some annoying bugs there (especially with Smash T.V.), but overall these are just about as good as any action games have ever been made.
The most interesting thing about them, besides returning the old dual-joystick, Robotron controls to the arcade, is the idea that there are extra, secret objectives to complete besides just winning (Smash T.V.: collecting keys, Total Carnage: collecting LOTS of keys, and many areas have subgoals to try to achieve). Both games also effectively have selectable difficulty, by offering alternate paths through levels and having optional rooms.
By the way, the SNES versions of both games, while generally very good, still differ in important ways from the arcade. (The secret rooms in the SNES version leap to mind -- the only secret roomsin the arcade version was the Pleasure Dome if you got ten keys, and it was only in the last revision of the game me thinks.)
Hmm... I'll check Midway Arcade Treasures 2 to make sure.
But anyway, there _is_ a recent (emulated) port of it, if you count that compilation.
APB (All Points Bulletin) is also the name of an Atari Games arcade release, circa 1990 or shortly after, which is readily playable on Midway Arcade Treasures 2 (and is indeed one of the high points of the collection). -THIS- APB is also recognized as having gameplay that harkens forward to the Grand Theft Auto games (having a huge simulated city to explore with special locations to keep track of, gameplay that focuses on driving, and being filled with secrets). While it is a "classic" game, the fact that Midway is making money off of it at the moment indicates it's still bankable, in some small way.
Thus, I predict a name change in the near future for these guys. Not that the name shouldn't be changed anyway -- the arcade APB is one of the better things Atari Games did IMHO, and should be respected for that.
From my perspective, they have given Firefox a huge head start
It's funny you should say that. In fact, Microsoft has a tremendous headstart over Firefox, considering that IE is much older.
Of course, you could then say that Netscape Navigator, upon which Firefox is ultimately based, had a headstart on IE. But in a lot of people's minds Firefox is a product separate from the old Netscape. (And is based on a rewrite of the code anyway.)
But my point, muddled as it may be, is that Firefox has had to really work for its marketshare. Just putting IE7 out there isn't going to attract many new customers over the ones who are already using Firefox, those are heavily entrenched, and at best can only slow the adoption rate of Firefox. IE7 is going to have to bring something really new to the table to overcome this. Knowing Microsoft, it'll probably be something spurious and cosmetic.
If it goes subscription another free/open online encyclopaedia will take its place, the same way that FreeDB came about after CDDB required buying a license to use in applications.
Even better: since anyone can currently download the Wikipedia database, its replacement could start at where it is now, at almost 500,000 articles.
P.S. I'm still pissed at Gracenote about the CDDB thing. I just had to say it. There.
Note how five completely distinct species are discovered every time California attempts to build a power plant, always conveniently existing only in the spot that the plant would occupy.
? co ntentid=2759
I take it you can back this up? It's not that I don't trust you, but because ancedotal evidence is the bane of public discourse, to such a degree, so many times have I heard agenda'd, "Did you know?" style factoids that turn out to be false later, that I tend to discount them out-of-hand these days.
I did quickie Google News searches for:
California species "power plant"
California species "power plants"
Neither turned up large numbers of hits (9 for the first, 24 for the second), so I'm afraid if I'm going to believe you you're going to have to provide a link I can follow, or at least the name of an article, that I can get sufficently clued-in by.
Scientists are no more immune to external agendas than anyone else. That's what the peer review system is for.
I dispute this, the scientific process, if accurately followed, works against agendas. That's not to say you receive a free halo and wings when you get your doctorate, and there are certainly junk scientists out there, but the whole point of science is to discover things through observation instead of preconcieved notions.
I think what a lot of conservatives hate is that the views that tend to be held by a lot of scientists might actually have gotten to that place by holding merit, and that the procedures used to erect them are difficult to tear down logically (because science is nothing if not logical). Which may explain why there are so many unusually defensive posts in this discussion.
And "unprecedented" statements are generally incorrect: off the top of my head, Theodore Roosevelt's administration did a lot more "monkeying around with government agencies, especially over environmental concerns" than any current administration could probably accomplish.
1. You have to go that far back for a counter-example?
2. Actually I'm absolutely sure the current administration could do a lot more monkeying around. For starters, there's a lot more agencies that must be monkeyed with.
3. Conservation was less a matter of science back in those days, as demonstrated by the rapid decline of the Passenger Pigeon not long before.
4. In any case, you're going to have to back that up as well I'm afraid. A quicky Google search turned up these sites:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/tr/envir.html
(T. Roosevelt as environmentalist.)
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm
(Calls T. Roosevelt the nation's first conservationalist president.)
I wouldn't say those sites do much to support your argument, but maybe you're aware of something I am not; I didn't browse beyond the first page of results.
Well, they certainly make games like Nethack these days, since Nethack has never actually had its development ended (though the DevTeam is infamous for leaving multiple years between releases). Also note that recent versions of Nethack, themselves, contain an implementation of Sokoban.
But there are actually new classic games being made today, and even popular ones: Grand Theft Auto and Katamari Damacy, provided they don't wreck them in further sequels, may very well be destined for that same kind of longevity.
It's just that there are not a great many of these games, certainly not as many as there were back in the golden ages of arcade gaming.
two thousand, six hundred, and nintey two games for the palm....-- who are they for?
I've played a fair number of Palm games. I had a good opinion of very few of them.