The Wii, however, is first on my list of these last two consoles -- if only for Zelda. That's always been a system maker for me, I'm just disappointed by the seeming lack of great titles at launch -- Nintendo usually has more.
Dunno... the Cube got Luigi's Mansion, the DS got Mario 64... The Wii's Zelda is awesome in comparison. But I agree, Nintendo needs to keep the good games coming until third-parties catch up.
Agreed. I don't play on consoles because they're cheaper (considering game prices, they aren't). I play on consoles because it's simple. And also because I like the genres and franchises on consoles better.
Hey, if you bought Pong, you need to buy the Wii and Wii Play. It contains a modern version of Pong, and probably doesn't cost much more than Pong cost when it came out:-)
It's not like RFoM is the only game you will have to play for the entire life of the system.
If the PS3 keeps selling like this, it very well might be the only game you will ever have to play for the entire life of the system.
Seriously though, you argument makes no sense. I these games ever materialize, and if they remain PS3 exclusive or are better on the PS3 than on other consoles, and if they end up being good games, I can still buy a PS3 and it'll be cheaper than buying one now. Possible future games are no reason to buy a console.
Where I live (Switzerland), Wiis still seem to be unavailable. I was at a big electronics retailer last week, and all they had was an empty box which said "sold out."
I have no clue how often new Wiis arrive here. Most of my friends who want one have been able to get one by now, but general demand still seems to be higher than availability.
So, how do you develop for the PS3? Using Linux? Doesn't that run through a hypervisor? You don't actually have access to the cells when you buy nothing but a PS3, do you?
Then the iPhone is not for you, at least in its current version. Apple is missing lots of markets with their phone. In my opinion, that's the only way to make compelling products: Don't try to make a product that hits every market.
What you fail to understand is that the iPhone's main feature is not "it does more." The iPhone's main feature is "it does it better." If you don't get this, you're not the target audience.
Please tell me how the iPhone is doing it right right now. That was the point of my posting.
If you don get this, then you indeed are the target audience.
Fanboys crack me up.
Actually, you wrote:
Once she saw waht it was capable of, she bought one too. She said she still will consider buying an iPhone in June when they're released, but frankly, if the iPhone doesn't offer significantly more than the smartphones already on the market, I don't see how it'll survive.
...totally missing the point of the iPhone. It won't offer significantly more than the smartphones already on the market, and that fact does not matter at all with regards to its survival.
If that is not what you intended to say, try to write something that conveys your intentions next time.
I guess Apple would haven given them money if that was what they wanted. According to Cisco, however, the only remaining issue was interoperability. Cisco wanted to influence the very feature set of the iPhone, and that's probably where the buck stopped at Apple.
What you fail to understand is that the iPhone's main feature is not "it does more." The iPhone's main feature is "it does it better." If you don't get this, you're not the target audience.
Kyokugenryu made that comparison, not the person you're replying to:
I mean, if MS were to do this, people would be up in arms! "Charging for something we have free already? Come on! This should be FREE to all users! They just want more money!"
MS already is doing exactly what Kyokugenryu said people would be up in arms about, and nobody is up in arms about it.
What are you talking about? That situation is already here. That's why people are looking for alternatives to the iPod now.
No. Those who are looking for alternatives are doing so because they need to be counter-culture at all costs. Of course, buying a Zune is the ultimate irony, then.
Apple's target audience is people who actually give a shit about tasteful design.
I'd mod you up if I could.
It's not even that these people are their target audience. Sometimes I think their target audience is only Jobs. I think they don't do focus groups and all that stuff other companies do to figure out what people want.
I think for Jobs, taste is really what's one of the driving points. There's this youtube video where Jobs talks about taste, and it sounds incredibly elitist and snobbish, but when you think about it, it's just true. Apple's products have taste. They care about the details, the fit and finish. They aren't perfect, but they pretty damn well try, and when they're done, they improve upon it, and improve again.
Just look at the Dock. Apple put a lot of work into making the Dock look good, into making the icons scale smoothly. Applications which need your attention "jump" up and down. Windows "slide" into the dock if minimized, and so on. Microsoft, on the other hand, just put whatever came to mind into the start bar. Show all windows! No room? Show all apps! We need some icons for drivers! Put them on the right! Quickstart icons? On the left! And some kind of menu! Let's just call it "Start," even though that makes no sense! Now let's ad some speech balloons! And some context menus! But some icons show the menu when clicked! Anod others open apps when clicked! And even others just display stuff! And let's make the whole thing green and blue!
I probably am missing something here concerning the American cell phone system, but couldn't they just sell it unlocked? Then you'd use whatever privider and whatever subscription you prefer.
My original guess was that they didn't do it because the iPhone would simply cost way too much without a two-year contract. I was mentally adding up numbers when I read the specs, and I expectet the iPhone to cost twice as much as it did, so I'm guessing it's heavily subsidized due to the two-year contract you agree to. So, is there anything preventing Apple from releasing it unlocked in the US?
Game X has a given budget of Y. People decide how to spend the money. Do you hire a more expensive writer? Maybe get more people to create new, innovative gameplay elements? Or maybe more programmers to optimize your engine so you can have more polygons on screen?
Looking at the games available for the Xbox[386] and the PS[2|3], I think there are more than enough "mature" games. I have nothing against these games, but resolving to make even more certainly won't fix any kind of issue.
but lets not forget that more 'serious' gamers need more serious games; with mature themes.
I think it's the other way around. It's mainly children who buy games for their "mature themes." A survey I recently read on Kotaku.com seems to come to the same conclusion: Children prefer the "mature" consoles.
According to a recent poll by Weekly Reader, kids prefer the Playstation 3 over the 360 or Wii. The poll asked kids 5 to 18 which gaming system, PS3, Nintendo Wii or Xbox 360, they would prefer to have.
This fits my personal experience. Adults never have an issue playing games like Super Monkey Ball, while kids complain that it's too childish. I think it's quite simple: Kids want to be like adults and thus prefer "adult" games, while adults already are adults and can stop pretending and start playing what they actually like.
In other words, Mario Kart is more mature than Doom. It's the Xbox that has childish games, not the Wii.
and I fully agree. The only issue is that multiplayer mode needs to be unlocked. Fortunately, I unlocked it when I quickly wanted to see how the game works, and inadvertently played it for four hours.
To you, it sucks. My girlfriend loves it, and I used to play it regularly, too. There's no grand goal (just some smaller things you can achieve). That doesn't bother me. I just liked to "hang out" and relax. Write letters and see how the animals react, try to breed fruit, search for paintings, make clothes, collect music, make stars... There's a lot to do. It did get boring after a few months, but it actually held up longer than most other games I own.
Animal Crossing is one of these love/hate games. Americans mostly seem to hate it, while the Japanese seem to love it. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean that it's a bad game. Just means that it's not for you.
Nintendogs is a great game, by the way. I played this for hours a day when it came out. Same applies to Animal Crossing, for that matter. Both very good games, but both not suited for everyone.
The DS has less high-profile 3D games. Those are the games that get the good ratings. Fun little time-wasters like Pac Pix, or "non-games" will score lower. It's just a bias which most game reviewers have.
Yes, the scroll wheel doesn't give you "force feedback." Interestingly, the older scroll wheel, which physically turned, actually did. Clearly, that older version was even more usable.
The newer scroll wheel needs a bit of getting used to, but at least for me, it's still way more efficient than any other device I've tried. Acceleration seems to be exponential, so it's easy to go really slow, but it's also easy to go real fast with not much effort.
The iPhone's scrolling seems to be interesting, too. I wonder how that holds up in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
Dunno... the Cube got Luigi's Mansion, the DS got Mario 64... The Wii's Zelda is awesome in comparison. But I agree, Nintendo needs to keep the good games coming until third-parties catch up.
...which are usually not made by Apple at all.
Agreed. I don't play on consoles because they're cheaper (considering game prices, they aren't). I play on consoles because it's simple. And also because I like the genres and franchises on consoles better.
Hey, if you bought Pong, you need to buy the Wii and Wii Play. It contains a modern version of Pong, and probably doesn't cost much more than Pong cost when it came out :-)
If the PS3 keeps selling like this, it very well might be the only game you will ever have to play for the entire life of the system.
Seriously though, you argument makes no sense. I these games ever materialize, and if they remain PS3 exclusive or are better on the PS3 than on other consoles, and if they end up being good games, I can still buy a PS3 and it'll be cheaper than buying one now. Possible future games are no reason to buy a console.
Where I live (Switzerland), Wiis still seem to be unavailable. I was at a big electronics retailer last week, and all they had was an empty box which said "sold out."
I have no clue how often new Wiis arrive here. Most of my friends who want one have been able to get one by now, but general demand still seems to be higher than availability.
So, how do you develop for the PS3? Using Linux? Doesn't that run through a hypervisor? You don't actually have access to the cells when you buy nothing but a PS3, do you?
You should go back to Kindergarten, or else I'll wage a Blitzkrieg on you, you little ersatz word Nazi :-P
Then the iPhone is not for you, at least in its current version. Apple is missing lots of markets with their phone. In my opinion, that's the only way to make compelling products: Don't try to make a product that hits every market.
Please tell me how the iPhone is doing it right right now. That was the point of my posting.
If you don get this, then you indeed are the target audience.
Fanboys crack me up.
Actually, you wrote:
...totally missing the point of the iPhone. It won't offer significantly more than the smartphones already on the market, and that fact does not matter at all with regards to its survival.
If that is not what you intended to say, try to write something that conveys your intentions next time.
Fanboys just crack me up, too.
I guess Apple would haven given them money if that was what they wanted. According to Cisco, however, the only remaining issue was interoperability. Cisco wanted to influence the very feature set of the iPhone, and that's probably where the buck stopped at Apple.
What you fail to understand is that the iPhone's main feature is not "it does more." The iPhone's main feature is "it does it better." If you don't get this, you're not the target audience.
Kyokugenryu made that comparison, not the person you're replying to:
MS already is doing exactly what Kyokugenryu said people would be up in arms about, and nobody is up in arms about it.
There are only two versions of the PS3, and both are priced similarly. Different situation with the iPod/iPhone.
No. Those who are looking for alternatives are doing so because they need to be counter-culture at all costs. Of course, buying a Zune is the ultimate irony, then.
I'd mod you up if I could.
It's not even that these people are their target audience. Sometimes I think their target audience is only Jobs. I think they don't do focus groups and all that stuff other companies do to figure out what people want.
I think for Jobs, taste is really what's one of the driving points. There's this youtube video where Jobs talks about taste, and it sounds incredibly elitist and snobbish, but when you think about it, it's just true. Apple's products have taste. They care about the details, the fit and finish. They aren't perfect, but they pretty damn well try, and when they're done, they improve upon it, and improve again.
Just look at the Dock. Apple put a lot of work into making the Dock look good, into making the icons scale smoothly. Applications which need your attention "jump" up and down. Windows "slide" into the dock if minimized, and so on. Microsoft, on the other hand, just put whatever came to mind into the start bar. Show all windows! No room? Show all apps! We need some icons for drivers! Put them on the right! Quickstart icons? On the left! And some kind of menu! Let's just call it "Start," even though that makes no sense! Now let's ad some speech balloons! And some context menus! But some icons show the menu when clicked! Anod others open apps when clicked! And even others just display stuff! And let's make the whole thing green and blue!
There's a real difference here.
(Disclaimer: I'm not American, I'm from Europe)
I probably am missing something here concerning the American cell phone system, but couldn't they just sell it unlocked? Then you'd use whatever privider and whatever subscription you prefer.
My original guess was that they didn't do it because the iPhone would simply cost way too much without a two-year contract. I was mentally adding up numbers when I read the specs, and I expectet the iPhone to cost twice as much as it did, so I'm guessing it's heavily subsidized due to the two-year contract you agree to. So, is there anything preventing Apple from releasing it unlocked in the US?
Game X has a given budget of Y. People decide how to spend the money. Do you hire a more expensive writer? Maybe get more people to create new, innovative gameplay elements? Or maybe more programmers to optimize your engine so you can have more polygons on screen?
Looking at the games available for the Xbox[386] and the PS[2|3], I think there are more than enough "mature" games. I have nothing against these games, but resolving to make even more certainly won't fix any kind of issue.
I think it's the other way around. It's mainly children who buy games for their "mature themes." A survey I recently read on Kotaku.com seems to come to the same conclusion: Children prefer the "mature" consoles.
Survey: Children Prefer PS3 Most, Wii Least
This fits my personal experience. Adults never have an issue playing games like Super Monkey Ball, while kids complain that it's too childish. I think it's quite simple: Kids want to be like adults and thus prefer "adult" games, while adults already are adults and can stop pretending and start playing what they actually like.
In other words, Mario Kart is more mature than Doom. It's the Xbox that has childish games, not the Wii.
and I fully agree. The only issue is that multiplayer mode needs to be unlocked. Fortunately, I unlocked it when I quickly wanted to see how the game works, and inadvertently played it for four hours.
To you, it sucks. My girlfriend loves it, and I used to play it regularly, too. There's no grand goal (just some smaller things you can achieve). That doesn't bother me. I just liked to "hang out" and relax. Write letters and see how the animals react, try to breed fruit, search for paintings, make clothes, collect music, make stars... There's a lot to do. It did get boring after a few months, but it actually held up longer than most other games I own.
I missed the Cube's NES games, though.
(I own both a DS and a PSP)
Animal Crossing is one of these love/hate games. Americans mostly seem to hate it, while the Japanese seem to love it. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean that it's a bad game. Just means that it's not for you.
Nintendogs is a great game, by the way. I played this for hours a day when it came out. Same applies to Animal Crossing, for that matter. Both very good games, but both not suited for everyone.
The DS has less high-profile 3D games. Those are the games that get the good ratings. Fun little time-wasters like Pac Pix, or "non-games" will score lower. It's just a bias which most game reviewers have.
Yes, the scroll wheel doesn't give you "force feedback." Interestingly, the older scroll wheel, which physically turned, actually did. Clearly, that older version was even more usable.
The newer scroll wheel needs a bit of getting used to, but at least for me, it's still way more efficient than any other device I've tried. Acceleration seems to be exponential, so it's easy to go really slow, but it's also easy to go real fast with not much effort.
The iPhone's scrolling seems to be interesting, too. I wonder how that holds up in the real world.