How can they "have set their clocks for longer than they had existed"? How did they set their clocks before existing? It's not true for all VCRs, anyway. Mine doesn't do it (although he doesn't flash 12:00, but shows --:--). My older VCR did do it, but most of the people I know don't have VCRs that do it, and don't care about it, either.
So... You've got two games, at least one of which (The Longest Journey) is an Action Adventure, and the other came out in 2002 (and had a sequel in 2004). And you're telling me that Adventures don't need saving.
Come on. Admit it. You've never played the game. You don't even know how to spell Rayman, so I'm guessing you're just making crap up. Gears of War, by the way, may be a beautiful game, but it only takes a few hours to finish, and it's basically a third person shooter like with somewhat weird control (I hate the context sensitive button, I never know what is going to happen when I push it). Oblivion? Come on. It's a buggy online RPG without the online part. Okami should have won, though.
As evidenced by those games ported to Xbox, nothing about adventure games requires "point and click."
Yeah, and the GBA has a port of Broken Sword. It doesn't require point and click, it just sucks without it. Adventures without Point-and-Click usually either suck, or aren't real Adventures, but Action Adventures.
So, what games are you talking about? Psychonauts? How well did these Xbox Adventure games do?
For me, Zelda is a big offender. In several Zelda games, I've made it to the final boss, but wasn't able to beat him. Minish Cap was especially disturbing, because in order to get to the boss, you had to kill several pretty tough knights... I thought about trying to level up before trying again, but I then, a few more hearts wouldn't have made that big a difference.
Rocket Slime on the DS is another game that is very easy until the final battle.
What kind of idiot buys this stupid crap? Oh... that would be you.:/
I bought it because I collect handhelds. When I bought it, it had already failed. It cost me about 100US$. But thanks for needlessly insulting me, anyway.
The fact that Nokia has mentioned they're looking to EA Mobile and Gameloft to develop games indicates that the N-Gage is already doomed.
Correct. Nobody buys a console for Gameloft's games. The fact that they even had to mention them shows that they don't have any high-profile developers on the system, apart from EA. EA, by the way, already supported the original N-Gage (as did Gameloft), and it didn't help - maybe because their games were crap.
So basically, what Nokia is saying is, "We're trying the same thing again, with the same developers (minus some who jumped ship), but this time it will work."
It's possible that I misremember the PS2 brouhaha, and from the newer games, I've never seen target renders for Resistance or Killzone. I have, however, seen target renders and target render movies for Motorstorm, and the japanese version does most definitely not look like the targets (for example, check out the awesome dust behind the cars in the targets - that's simply not there in the real game). It is a good looking game, but it's not what we've seen in the movies.
Dunno what Sony will do about the controllers. Maybe they'll enable support for more than four controllers. The funny thing is that there are Wii games (Bomberman '93 comes to mind) which support five controllers (four Wii controllers and a GC controller). As I've said, supporting more than four controllers would have been a great feature for the PS3 to have, and it's a pity that they don't (currently) support it.
Are my mates and I doing something wrong? We *hate* Wii boxing, your character just seems to do as he pleases, and as far as I can tell your movements with the wiimote/nunchuku has very little bearing on your avatar
Yes, you're doing something wrong:-)
Most people, when starting to play Wii boxing, flail the controllers in every which way, trying to get as many hits as possible. That doesn't work. Here are a few things to keep in mind:
You don't control the punches. Once the Wii registers that you want to punch, it runs a punch animation which has nothing to do with the speed of your own punch. Don't start the next punch too quickly, wait until your Mii is done with the punch.
While it's possible to do right-left-right combinations, you can't do them too fast. You need to get the timing right, which takes some practise. If you're too fast, the second punch won't register at all. If you're too slow, you're giving the opponent an opening.
Block! Never forget to keep your hands in blocking position. You can block lower or higher (and punch lower or higher) by turning the controllers. If you point them towards the screen, it's low. If you point them towards yourself, it's high. The actual height of the controllers does not matter, although usually height and position correspond.
Move left and right! This is important. If you move quickly from side to side, it's hard for the opponent to hit you.
Uppercuts: Start with a low position (pointing towards the TV), then punch and go to a high position at the same time. This will create an uppercut.
"Side punch." Punch to the right while keeping your fist straght (i.e. move your hand sideways)
While both the Uppercut and the side punch are strong and often manage to go through the opponent's block, they also open your own block. If you're not careful, the opponent can easily hit you while you're attempting an uppercut or a side punch.
Slow motion. If the opponent punches and you manage to evade the punch, sometimes it throws him off. The game moves to slow motion and you can land a hard counterpunch.
Finally, Wii Boxing is a strategic game, not a game of force. If you start out playing Wii Boxing, try not to attack the opponent too much. Always block and duck to the sides. That way, it's easy to control your Mii, and it's hard for the opponent to land punches. Try to land a punch as soon as you see an opening, or as soon as the opponent misses and goes into slow motion. When land a punch, immediately follow with combinations, and then go back to blocking and ducking.
Keep these things in mind, and Wii Boxing will make a whole lot more sense and be a whole lot more fun.
First, during the PS2 era, they screwed with developers just as much as Nintendo did. Lots of Japanese games were not approved for release in the US, lots of 2D games had to be cancelled because Sony insisted on 3D. At least one developer even had to shut down because of it. Even funnier, during the PS2 time, the PS2 games were the most censored (compare BMX XXX on all three consoles)
Second, I don't buy the "the content division is a different company" or "the content division made me do it" excuses. If that's the case, it's Sony's job to clean this up, not ours.
Third, Sony did lie about the PS2 and (to a lesser degree) about the PS3. They lied about the tech specs, and they showed target renders which they must have known were not achievable with the final hardware (I have no yet seen games that look as good as the target renders, but admittedly, I'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt here - they may yet deliver this). Also: they promised WIFI standard, and (which I thought was most interesting) up to 7 controllers.
Finally, I agree. Sony is not as evil as Microsoft. I want Sony to do at least as well as MS. Right now, I just don't see how that could possibly happen - maybe if Bluray became the leading format, and everyone would buy PS3s since they are cheaper than Bluray players; maybe if Sony started to release some games which do not suck and do not look worse than 360 games.
As for the arrogance, I can only speak about those I've come in contact with, which is mainly here on slashdot. It seems that every post about OS X security or Apple's business practices ends with "but-but-but Windows!".
Yeah, well, same applies to posts about Linux, and about Windows. Newsflash: n% of all people are idiots. That applies to Mac users as well as to Linux or Windows users.
On the other hand, the people who end up calling tech support are quite often not the most adept when it comes to technology. So your sample is hardly representatory.
If high price and over-featured are the causes of falling PS3 sales, can we predict a similar result for Apple's iPhone?
One's a toy, the other's a tool. It's easy to justify spending 600 bucks on something you'll use dozens of times during the day; especially if the tool you're currently using is driving you insane each time you have to use it.
It's not quite so easy justifying spending 600 bucks for a toy you'll play with at most a few hours every week; especially if there are no good games available, and the competing products are more fun and cheaper.
Also, while the PS3 needs to be bought by "casual users" to be successful, the same doesn't apply to the iPhone. Apple targets 1% of the cell phone market, not 80% of the console market.
In case you can't tell: I'll probably get an iPhone to replace my maddening, frustrating P990i. I won't buy a PS3 though, I already own a Wii and may buy a 360 as soon as there are a few more non-FPS games for it.
Who knows---maybe it will work---but Nintendo isn't being nice because they're just a really nice company that's always been the warm fuzzy good guy.
Agreed. And hopefully, there will always be at least three major console manufacturers with roughly equal market share. Whoever wins will probably act like a jerk.
However, frankly, I can't see how anything Nintendo has ever done comes even close to what Microsoft (killing competitors by abusing their monopoly; lying under oath; forcing hardware manufacturers to not install any OS other than Windows) or Sony (installing rootkits on their customer's PCs; lying about the capabilities of their consoles; regularly updating the firmware in their consoles so homebrew becomes impossible unless you use their screwed up Linux version which runs through a hypervisor) have done.
Nintendo is evil, but they aren't even on the same scale as MS and Sony.
It's funny how Microsoft has basically taken control of Slashdot by converting the majority of Slashdotters into XBox 360 fanboys even when the Sony PS3 has Linux on it.
I wonder why that might be. Slashdot readers, usually Microsoft haters of the highest degree, usually mocking Nintendo's kiddy games, suddenly switch sides and start complaining about Sony. Why in the world might something like this happen? Maybe because lots of peopel genuinely believe that Sony's PS3 is an overpriced, underperforming piece of shit? Maybe because it really does not - by far - sell as well as Sony thought?
The DVD players were already pretty common and didn't cost that much more than CD players, hence no big diff
DVDs were already widely available, thus everyone could use a DVD player. It's not clear whether Bluray has a future at all
DVDs were better than VHS cassettes on all TVs, in all aspects
Games needed DVDS desperately. CDs were too small for lots of games, so they ended up with crappy cut scenes - this is not the case with DVDs. Almost no games use even a full DVD
So the Bluray drive - which is actually slower than a DVD drive for transfer rates - costs a lot more without having too many advantages.
Now they are stuck having to wait a little longer for everyone to buy PS3s. Waaaaaah.
Unfortunately for Sony, the console market is a sprint, not a marathon. Whoever sells the most consoles gets the most third-party support, which leads to more console sales, which leads to more support, and so on. There's a certain point where you simply can't catch up with the others anymore, and Sony is already getting close to that point.
The PS3 and the PSP are both exactly like Homer's Dream Car. They have all the stuff you could possibly want, but that just means that the end result is an ugly, overpriced, underperforming mess.
And I say that as a PSP owner, and as somebody who does definitely not want Microsoft to own even a small part of the console market.
Slashdot Mirror
How can they "have set their clocks for longer than they had existed"? How did they set their clocks before existing? It's not true for all VCRs, anyway. Mine doesn't do it (although he doesn't flash 12:00, but shows --:--). My older VCR did do it, but most of the people I know don't have VCRs that do it, and don't care about it, either.
So... You've got two games, at least one of which (The Longest Journey) is an Action Adventure, and the other came out in 2002 (and had a sequel in 2004). And you're telling me that Adventures don't need saving.
Come on. Admit it. You've never played the game. You don't even know how to spell Rayman, so I'm guessing you're just making crap up. Gears of War, by the way, may be a beautiful game, but it only takes a few hours to finish, and it's basically a third person shooter like with somewhat weird control (I hate the context sensitive button, I never know what is going to happen when I push it). Oblivion? Come on. It's a buggy online RPG without the online part. Okami should have won, though.
Yeah, and the GBA has a port of Broken Sword. It doesn't require point and click, it just sucks without it. Adventures without Point-and-Click usually either suck, or aren't real Adventures, but Action Adventures.
So, what games are you talking about? Psychonauts? How well did these Xbox Adventure games do?
For me, Zelda is a big offender. In several Zelda games, I've made it to the final boss, but wasn't able to beat him. Minish Cap was especially disturbing, because in order to get to the boss, you had to kill several pretty tough knights... I thought about trying to level up before trying again, but I then, a few more hearts wouldn't have made that big a difference.
Rocket Slime on the DS is another game that is very easy until the final battle.
The Wii and the DS are quite simply the only two consoles well-suited for "point and click" adventures.
I bought it because I collect handhelds. When I bought it, it had already failed. It cost me about 100US$. But thanks for needlessly insulting me, anyway.
Correct. Nobody buys a console for Gameloft's games. The fact that they even had to mention them shows that they don't have any high-profile developers on the system, apart from EA. EA, by the way, already supported the original N-Gage (as did Gameloft), and it didn't help - maybe because their games were crap.
So basically, what Nokia is saying is, "We're trying the same thing again, with the same developers (minus some who jumped ship), but this time it will work."
Dude... No, it won't.
It's great for games - compared to other cell phones. Compared to a real portable console, it sucks. And yes, I own a QD, too.
Phil Schiller, of course.
It's possible that I misremember the PS2 brouhaha, and from the newer games, I've never seen target renders for Resistance or Killzone. I have, however, seen target renders and target render movies for Motorstorm, and the japanese version does most definitely not look like the targets (for example, check out the awesome dust behind the cars in the targets - that's simply not there in the real game). It is a good looking game, but it's not what we've seen in the movies.
Dunno what Sony will do about the controllers. Maybe they'll enable support for more than four controllers. The funny thing is that there are Wii games (Bomberman '93 comes to mind) which support five controllers (four Wii controllers and a GC controller). As I've said, supporting more than four controllers would have been a great feature for the PS3 to have, and it's a pity that they don't (currently) support it.
Yes, you're doing something wrong :-)
Most people, when starting to play Wii boxing, flail the controllers in every which way, trying to get as many hits as possible. That doesn't work. Here are a few things to keep in mind:
Keep these things in mind, and Wii Boxing will make a whole lot more sense and be a whole lot more fun.
Three things about Sony:
First, during the PS2 era, they screwed with developers just as much as Nintendo did. Lots of Japanese games were not approved for release in the US, lots of 2D games had to be cancelled because Sony insisted on 3D. At least one developer even had to shut down because of it. Even funnier, during the PS2 time, the PS2 games were the most censored (compare BMX XXX on all three consoles)
Second, I don't buy the "the content division is a different company" or "the content division made me do it" excuses. If that's the case, it's Sony's job to clean this up, not ours.
Third, Sony did lie about the PS2 and (to a lesser degree) about the PS3. They lied about the tech specs, and they showed target renders which they must have known were not achievable with the final hardware (I have no yet seen games that look as good as the target renders, but admittedly, I'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt here - they may yet deliver this). Also: they promised WIFI standard, and (which I thought was most interesting) up to 7 controllers.
Finally, I agree. Sony is not as evil as Microsoft. I want Sony to do at least as well as MS. Right now, I just don't see how that could possibly happen - maybe if Bluray became the leading format, and everyone would buy PS3s since they are cheaper than Bluray players; maybe if Sony started to release some games which do not suck and do not look worse than 360 games.
Gates' claims are so absurd, they're not really worth refuting. So instead I'll go to bed and let Gruber do the job.
Good night.
Why am I suddenly thinking that you are the one being bribed here. But probably not by Microsoft. No logical reason? Jeez.
Yeah, well, same applies to posts about Linux, and about Windows. Newsflash: n% of all people are idiots. That applies to Mac users as well as to Linux or Windows users.
Yeah... Although I think it's mostly Artie MacStrawman who's responsible for the Mac community's bad image.
On the other hand, the people who end up calling tech support are quite often not the most adept when it comes to technology. So your sample is hardly representatory.
One's a toy, the other's a tool. It's easy to justify spending 600 bucks on something you'll use dozens of times during the day; especially if the tool you're currently using is driving you insane each time you have to use it.
It's not quite so easy justifying spending 600 bucks for a toy you'll play with at most a few hours every week; especially if there are no good games available, and the competing products are more fun and cheaper.
Also, while the PS3 needs to be bought by "casual users" to be successful, the same doesn't apply to the iPhone. Apple targets 1% of the cell phone market, not 80% of the console market.
In case you can't tell: I'll probably get an iPhone to replace my maddening, frustrating P990i. I won't buy a PS3 though, I already own a Wii and may buy a 360 as soon as there are a few more non-FPS games for it.
Agreed. And hopefully, there will always be at least three major console manufacturers with roughly equal market share. Whoever wins will probably act like a jerk.
However, frankly, I can't see how anything Nintendo has ever done comes even close to what Microsoft (killing competitors by abusing their monopoly; lying under oath; forcing hardware manufacturers to not install any OS other than Windows) or Sony (installing rootkits on their customer's PCs; lying about the capabilities of their consoles; regularly updating the firmware in their consoles so homebrew becomes impossible unless you use their screwed up Linux version which runs through a hypervisor) have done.
Nintendo is evil, but they aren't even on the same scale as MS and Sony.
I wonder why that might be. Slashdot readers, usually Microsoft haters of the highest degree, usually mocking Nintendo's kiddy games, suddenly switch sides and start complaining about Sony. Why in the world might something like this happen? Maybe because lots of peopel genuinely believe that Sony's PS3 is an overpriced, underperforming piece of shit? Maybe because it really does not - by far - sell as well as Sony thought?
Most of the criticisms of the iPhone revolve around stuff the iPhone is missing. I don't think it's that feature-packed compared to other smartphones.
I think there were some differences:
So the Bluray drive - which is actually slower than a DVD drive for transfer rates - costs a lot more without having too many advantages.
Unfortunately for Sony, the console market is a sprint, not a marathon. Whoever sells the most consoles gets the most third-party support, which leads to more console sales, which leads to more support, and so on. There's a certain point where you simply can't catch up with the others anymore, and Sony is already getting close to that point.
The PS3 and the PSP are both exactly like Homer's Dream Car. They have all the stuff you could possibly want, but that just means that the end result is an ugly, overpriced, underperforming mess.
And I say that as a PSP owner, and as somebody who does definitely not want Microsoft to own even a small part of the console market.