But if you've already got an NHL game or a madden game, there is no reason to buy a newer one.
So maybe a few of the dummies who rebuy the game every year finally realized the dumbness and decied to spend less money and try a game that might actually be a little bit different.
At $50 a pop, I'm inclined to agree with you, I only bought two NHL games, NHLPA '93 (Genesis) and NHL '98 (PS), and there was a major engine change there (2d to 3d). I only bought one Madden, John Madden Football '92 (Genesis).
But at $20 a pop? Different story. I bought, not just ESPN NFL 2k5 and ESPN NHL 2k5, but also ESPN NBA 2k5, and I plan on buying ESPN MLB 2k5 when it comes out. If the price stays the same for the 2k6 line, I'll probably pick up another 2 or 3 (NFL, NHL, and if 2k5 is good, MLB). While the roster updates are a reason for Sega to kick out another version, the online component is what will get me to upgrade. It's not a new or different game I'm looking for, I'll just want to keep playing online, and the price makes that easy. Over the long haul with this price scheme, Sega's gonna get a lot more money out of me, although I'm just a fairly casual sports gamer (although don't ask about my full 162 game Triple Play '02 season).
I'm not saying that ESPN is bug free, but in 3 online leagues and a ton of offline play, I've never experienced a freeze or crash. The only bug I've encountered is occasionly when starting an online game, the game thinks the controller is disconnected. Certainly, you've had your experience, but "full of bugs" to be a huge exageration. It's not dramatically buggier than Fatigue Madden.
Students learn about software piracy via this educational video done in rap style. Surpisingly popular. Lesson plans are included with the video to lead discussion on responsible software use.
I wonder if they realize why it's so popular? (Hint: Reefer Madness is popular for the same reason.)
we have to show web sites that forcing registration for marketing / tracking purposes leads to a reg database full of crap.
And you're a long time logged in user here...
I don't know about you, but I registered here because I wanted to (to get customization and non-anon posting.) The registration "requirement" here is both optional and serves a functional purpose. dynamo isn't being half as hypocritical as you think he is.
The whole concept of "loss leaders" is to build customer loyalty so that they return again in the future. Pissing the customer off with heavy-handed sales tactics causes the store to lose twice, the initial sale and the potential future sales. If they're so focused on the profitability of the initial sale, they're missing the forest for the trees.
Is it too much to ask that if you are doing something dangerous that you pay attention? Turn off the phone.
...and put out that cigarette. I once saw a guy on a motorcycle with a lit cigarette in his mouth open his tank, peer into it, and start fueling his bike all while sitting on it. It's a wonder of technology that we don't have morons making themselves briquettes every day.
Most early versions of BASIC didn't let you omit line numbers. 8-bit Commodores, Apples, and Ataris made you use line numbers. The Amiga was the first computer I remember that had a version of BASIC that didn't require them, but I'm sure there were others. A couple computers had an AUTO command that after you entered one line, would automatically put the next line number on the next line, and there were programs out there that would renumber your program, so you could make:
5 REM Hello World!
6 REM By ME!
10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD!"
13 GOTO 10
into:
10 REM Hello World!
20 REM By ME!
30 PRINT "HELLO WORLD!"
40 GOTO 30
OPEN DOOR
INVALID COMMAND ...
I'd get to the point where I'd throw the damn thing out the window, only to realize a day later I should have typed:
OPEN THE NORTH DOOR
*sigh* Damn Infocom.
I've played enough Infocom games to know that this is bullshit. Maybe you're thinking of some other IF developer, because had you been playing an Infocom-developed game, the exchange would've gone:
>OPEN DOOR
Which door do you want to open, the north door, or the south door?
How does this hold up though, the copyrighted works in question are in the public domain... PG can't assert any kind of copyright over it.
The copyright has expired from the public domain works, so technically, I don't think they're "copyrighted" any more. However, PG does assert copyright over their header text. The license to charge for distributing their copyrighted header text is to leave the header text as is (which clearly tells the reader that the text is available for free from PG) or strip all mention of Project Gutenberg from the file.
I won't pay this PG2 to find out, but my guess is that they leave the header text as is, so as far as the redistribution license is concerned, PG2 is in the clear.
Where they run into problems is that their name is confusingly similar to PG's trademarked name.
Well, "Designing Letter Mail" (USPS Pub 25) defines FIM as the "Facing Identification Mark". Indeed, it is the little barcode up by the postage area, but it's not there to tell the sorters the piece has a +4. It there, as the name implies, to let the automated sorters face (orient) the piece before it runs through the automated canceler, so that the stamp gets properly canceled.
There are a couple of variation of the FIM, but the Domestic Mail Manual indicates that they're all for facing mail that the machines can't find a stamp/metered postage on (ie Business Reply Mail, with the "No stamp needed yada yada yada" printed). The machines can face letters if they have a stamp or metered postage on them because the stamp and meter luminesce a little. So if you're using a stamp or postal meter, putting the FIM on is probably a waste of time and labels.
The DPBC (Delivery Point Bar Code, usually right above or below the address or in the lower right of the envelope) not only tells the machines there is a +4, the DPBC actually has the +4 embedded in it (and the zip and delivery point).
FYI - As of January of this year, the Post Office stopped accepting "-0000" and "-9999" as valid +4's, in case you've still got any as placeholders in your database.
Of course, if it's someone I regularly send mail to, then the 128, using a different application, prints the address, return address, ZIP+4 and FIM barcodes.
FIM barcode? Are you writing Reply Mail? Or did you mean the DPBC barcode?
What followed was an RPG game (of which the name slips my mind)and another game (which I believed involved tank warfare.)
The RPG would probably be Minotaur: The Labyrinths of Crete. The other game might be the Mac port of Abuse. Bungie's site has more details about their gamography. I never knew about GNOP before, looks like my Bungie collection is incomplete...
Based on what? What someone else says or suggests?
Exactly, which is why I said, "...as a list of games you should play at some point, it's bound to be subjective." I think that everyone should try SNES's Shadowrun, but Bob down the street thinks everyone should be playing Deer Hunter. But just because it's subjective doesn't mean such a list doesn't have value.
Just because a game is canon, doesn't mean you have to play it. But if you enjoy gaming as a hobby or profession, you'd be wise to at least know about the canon. I'll never play Doom extensively, but I concede that it should be part of game canon because of its tremendous impact on games, gamers, and developers. Barbie's Fashion Designer probably doesn't have that same impact.
A game canon, like a literary canon, isn't a list of game people like, it's a list of games that have significant value for some reason or another. There are libraries full of books that people like, but would never be considered canon. Dragonlance isn't part of the literary canon, but fans of that series could get value from it, if only to get their pimply heads out of their goth costumes enough to realize that there is other, possibly better, literature out there.
I don't need to have played and loved Street Fighter 2 to play Soul Calibur 2 and enjoy it.
I don't think anyone is saying that. These lists are an attempt to define a list of excellent games that you'd be better off having played. Just like a literay canon isn't saying that you need to have read and loved All Quiet on the Western Front in order to fully enjoy For Whom The Bell Tolls.
And as a list of games you should play at some point, it's bound to be subjective. FPS in general make me motion sick, I may gut my way through Halo or Half-Life because it's just so damn good, but I see no need to suffer through Doom, Quake, and Unreal. But as a RPG player, I'm disappointed that neither list mentions Planescape Torment or SNES's Shadowrun.
Really, one person can't decide canon like this. Instead, it's a 'group' decision. If everyone writes a list like these, you could look at many and see common strains. Virtually everyone will mention Doom, Warcraft, and Final Fantasy. Those are probably locks for canonization. But You Don't Know Jack, The Sims Online, Barbie's Fashion Designer will only get mentioned on a scarce few lists. They're probably games you could skip.
I know someone who wants to make a movie of Dan Gable's life story (a college/Olympic wrestler). After hearing the rough outline (wins every collegiate match except his last match, then wins Olympic gold medal), I knew that it would make a horrible movie, and the reasoning applies to games as well.
Basically, the premise for the movie is your run-of-the-mill zombie movie. (Maybe that's why it worked for Resident Evil.) Instead of one protagonist and one antagonist, you've got one protagonist and hundreds of antagonists. Even if you have a "boss" antagonist at the end, it still gets boring after the hundredth meaningless enemy.
To make a conversion work, use a game with a clear antagonist, concise plot, and obvious goal. Donkey Kong would make a better movie than Final Fantasy.
Oh no ! You would've lost a 40$ game after only 2 years of fun!
Count me among the MMO non-buyers. The reason isn't that you only get ~2 years of fun out of the game, but that once the company shuts down the server, you can never experience the fun again. Imagine publishers not just taking Lord of the Rings out of print after two years, but tracking down every copy and making them unreadable.
Not only will I not buy entertainment that can be turned off at the publisher/distributor's whims, but I honestly wonder why anyone would develop such project? Why dedicate yourself and your inspiration to a project that won't last? Paycheck? That's fine and all, but I sure wouldn't want to trudge through such an uninspired experience.
The particular work (in this case a phone book) IS copyrightable. Just because the information is public record and/or easily obtainable does not mean that the actual text is not copyrightable.
Is there way to play MtG single player? I know about the MicroProse edition of MtG, but it's out of print, and the Starter software plays only a very limited game. I'm looking for something like Apprentice that can expand with the game, but is smart enough to play on it's own. I'd like to play, but I know I'd get owned playing someone else, and that's no fun.
You seem to be drawing a lot of false assumptions here about what...my viewpoints will be.
So when the RIAA wins, will you:
See it as the RIAA buying off the government (as implied with "P2P will fall under distribution because the RIAA says it will."). Or...
Realize that individual sharers are responsible for their contributory copyright infringment and that your comments about the RIAA getting to define "distribution" for the lawsuit was just a knee jerk reaction?
You seem to be assuming a lot about the law that you don't have a clue about. And to be perfectly frank, your arguement will amount to exactly dick in court. In both cases, you're guilty of contributory infringement, and your friend is guilty of direct infringement. (Yeah, yeah, innocent until proven yada yada yada...) You might remember contributory infringement, it's what got Napster screwed. If the "sharing" is really just between you and your friend, you're small potatoes and shouldn't worry, but if your "friend" is really a thousand anonymous P2Pers, you're not so small potatoes anymore. You're giving away someone else's property. That's what "copyright" is, the right to copy, and guess what, you don't have it (noting fair use exceptions yada yada yada...).
But I have to ask, what ever gave you the idea that someone's blood, sweat, and tears could just be given away to your friend or "friends" by you just because it's easy? Hell, I agree with the most strident out there that copyright laws are a mess, but does that absolve you from doing the right fucking thing? Look, Kazaa = good, but you giving copyrighted material away because you want to = taking food off of Metallica's table (and don't even claim "they make enough as it is" or "it helps their promotion" because it's their creation, they own the distribution rights, they get to decide how to promote themselves, not you.) Take a close read of/. deity Prof. Lessing, you'll note that he argues that copyright shouldn't be extended, he doesn't promote giving away someone else's copyrighted work.
Sharing isn't distributing. I can share my music with my friends in many ways. I can't sell copies of it. P2P will fall under distribution because the RIAA says it will.
This is sad, it really is. It's sad because when the RIAA wins, you're going to take it as just another example of big business walking over the little guy just because they have all the money to buy off the government. But it's not. It'll be an example of the person who should win does.
Sharing is distributing. You're not loaning your friends your particular copy of the work, you're giving a thousand anonymous P2Pers an exact copy of your copy. Sure it's "sharing", but it's also distributing someone else's intellectual property.
I must disagree. The PUBLISHER was paid for a purchased copy. Not necessarily the creator.
Doesn't make a difference. Somewhere along the line the creator either gets paid or gives away his copyright to the publisher (usually in exchange for money.) Regardless, the creator determines distribution to some extent.
Sharing allows you to distribute an infinte number of copies.
Theoretically, a copy in a library is also able to be used an infinite number of times. Tho not at once.
"Tho not at once" that's the key difference. You share infinitely, and have no limitations to your sharing. That's distribution not sharing. And distribution rights is exclusive to the copyright holder.
You still have use of the file after someone else takes a copy from you.
And if I take notes, make personal use copies, aquire knowledge? I still retain that after the copy is placed back into circulation. Heaven help me if I learn the lyrics. As long as I do not seek to profit from or take credit for something that isn't my work why is there such an issue? Imagine if the instructions on making fire were copyrighted.
Your notes and knowledge are your own, and even the strictest interpretation of copyright law would absolutely find such uses to be "fair use." Knowledge isn't affected by copyright, distribution is. Learn all you want. Memorize all you want. Start sharing or selling, then you start infringing.
But if you copied an entire work while you had it on loan and kept the entire copy? Technically, you'd be infringing on the copyright to that work. And if the instructions to fire were copyrighted, not only would they have long since fallen out of protection, but it wouldn't prevent someone else from writing GPL'ed instructions.
The creator was only paid for your copy, not the 2, 20, or 2,000 copies you distributed.
Fair enough. Altho I have paid money to the recording industry on every recordable CD I have ever purchased on the grounds that they will be used for illicit music copying, whether or not music was ever recorded to them. And why do only major labels get a take of that tax? Does no one copy indy CD's?
That tax is bullshit, no ifs, ands, or buts. We get back to that whole "substantial noninfringing uses" argument." Regardless, I'd agree that the indies should get a slice of that bullshit tax pie if we're doomed to have it anyway.
In that situation, you're more akin to a broadcaster than a library. Broadcasters, such as TV and radio stations, either own the IP they broadcast or pay the creator for their IP. Are you paying for the right to broadcast?
If they would bring back the damn D class radio license I sure would but I don't have buckets of money you need for a broadcast license. Net radio and radio in general is a mess. I pay taxes to support a regulatory body that is supposed to fairly govern the PUBLIC airwaves. But back to the point, could I let my friend in Alaska listen to music hosted on my machine as a sample? It's not really "broadcasting" (narrowcasting?) He's really not going to find this stuff any other way.
If you're really talking about a non-capturable stream to a single person, I'd say you'd be flying low enough under the radar to not have to worry about any enforcement. That specific case could be debatable. I'm sure the RIAA would say that it is infringing, but I think there's a strong arguement to protect that usage (maybe not fair use.)
Irrelevant. Clear Channel doesn't force me to listen to their radio stations,
And it is impossible to listen to music in any format or medium without receiving a copy. The point is it only becomes illegal when you press record or save a file.
It becomes illegal when you make a copy and give that copy to someone else while you keep the original (and vice versa, you can't keep the copy if you give the original away.)
Under the prevailing logic behind this mess if I hear a song and memorize the lyrics then I and guilty of infringing on the copyright of he/she/it who holds the rights to those lyrics.
I can't even imagine how skewed your world view must be to even think this is the case.
Memorizing the lyrics, hell, memorizing the entire song, isn't a copyright infrigement. It's when you use your memorized song to distribute the song to others that you run into trouble.
Ever wonder why a cool song doesn't have the lyrics in the liner notes when all the other ones do? More than likely, it a cover song from another band, and the band you're listening to didn't purchase the rights to print the cover's lyrics.
Slashdot Mirror
But at $20 a pop? Different story. I bought, not just ESPN NFL 2k5 and ESPN NHL 2k5, but also ESPN NBA 2k5, and I plan on buying ESPN MLB 2k5 when it comes out. If the price stays the same for the 2k6 line, I'll probably pick up another 2 or 3 (NFL, NHL, and if 2k5 is good, MLB). While the roster updates are a reason for Sega to kick out another version, the online component is what will get me to upgrade. It's not a new or different game I'm looking for, I'll just want to keep playing online, and the price makes that easy. Over the long haul with this price scheme, Sega's gonna get a lot more money out of me, although I'm just a fairly casual sports gamer (although don't ask about my full 162 game Triple Play '02 season).
I'm not saying that ESPN is bug free, but in 3 online leagues and a ton of offline play, I've never experienced a freeze or crash. The only bug I've encountered is occasionly when starting an online game, the game thinks the controller is disconnected. Certainly, you've had your experience, but "full of bugs" to be a huge exageration. It's not dramatically buggier than Fatigue Madden.
The whole concept of "loss leaders" is to build customer loyalty so that they return again in the future. Pissing the customer off with heavy-handed sales tactics causes the store to lose twice, the initial sale and the potential future sales. If they're so focused on the profitability of the initial sale, they're missing the forest for the trees.
Actually, the plaintiff is the State of Colorado. It's a criminal case, not civil.
5 REM Hello World!
6 REM By ME!
10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD!"
13 GOTO 10
into:
10 REM Hello World!
20 REM By ME!
30 PRINT "HELLO WORLD!"
40 GOTO 30
I won't pay this PG2 to find out, but my guess is that they leave the header text as is, so as far as the redistribution license is concerned, PG2 is in the clear.
Where they run into problems is that their name is confusingly similar to PG's trademarked name.
Well, "Designing Letter Mail" (USPS Pub 25) defines FIM as the "Facing Identification Mark". Indeed, it is the little barcode up by the postage area, but it's not there to tell the sorters the piece has a +4. It there, as the name implies, to let the automated sorters face (orient) the piece before it runs through the automated canceler, so that the stamp gets properly canceled. There are a couple of variation of the FIM, but the Domestic Mail Manual indicates that they're all for facing mail that the machines can't find a stamp/metered postage on (ie Business Reply Mail, with the "No stamp needed yada yada yada" printed). The machines can face letters if they have a stamp or metered postage on them because the stamp and meter luminesce a little. So if you're using a stamp or postal meter, putting the FIM on is probably a waste of time and labels. The DPBC (Delivery Point Bar Code, usually right above or below the address or in the lower right of the envelope) not only tells the machines there is a +4, the DPBC actually has the +4 embedded in it (and the zip and delivery point). FYI - As of January of this year, the Post Office stopped accepting "-0000" and "-9999" as valid +4's, in case you've still got any as placeholders in your database.
Just because a game is canon, doesn't mean you have to play it. But if you enjoy gaming as a hobby or profession, you'd be wise to at least know about the canon. I'll never play Doom extensively, but I concede that it should be part of game canon because of its tremendous impact on games, gamers, and developers. Barbie's Fashion Designer probably doesn't have that same impact.
A game canon, like a literary canon, isn't a list of game people like, it's a list of games that have significant value for some reason or another. There are libraries full of books that people like, but would never be considered canon. Dragonlance isn't part of the literary canon, but fans of that series could get value from it, if only to get their pimply heads out of their goth costumes enough to realize that there is other, possibly better, literature out there.
And as a list of games you should play at some point, it's bound to be subjective. FPS in general make me motion sick, I may gut my way through Halo or Half-Life because it's just so damn good, but I see no need to suffer through Doom, Quake, and Unreal. But as a RPG player, I'm disappointed that neither list mentions Planescape Torment or SNES's Shadowrun.
Really, one person can't decide canon like this. Instead, it's a 'group' decision. If everyone writes a list like these, you could look at many and see common strains. Virtually everyone will mention Doom, Warcraft, and Final Fantasy. Those are probably locks for canonization. But You Don't Know Jack, The Sims Online, Barbie's Fashion Designer will only get mentioned on a scarce few lists. They're probably games you could skip.
I know someone who wants to make a movie of Dan Gable's life story (a college/Olympic wrestler). After hearing the rough outline (wins every collegiate match except his last match, then wins Olympic gold medal), I knew that it would make a horrible movie, and the reasoning applies to games as well. Basically, the premise for the movie is your run-of-the-mill zombie movie. (Maybe that's why it worked for Resident Evil.) Instead of one protagonist and one antagonist, you've got one protagonist and hundreds of antagonists. Even if you have a "boss" antagonist at the end, it still gets boring after the hundredth meaningless enemy. To make a conversion work, use a game with a clear antagonist, concise plot, and obvious goal. Donkey Kong would make a better movie than Final Fantasy.
Not only will I not buy entertainment that can be turned off at the publisher/distributor's whims, but I honestly wonder why anyone would develop such project? Why dedicate yourself and your inspiration to a project that won't last? Paycheck? That's fine and all, but I sure wouldn't want to trudge through such an uninspired experience.
Is there way to play MtG single player? I know about the MicroProse edition of MtG, but it's out of print, and the Starter software plays only a very limited game. I'm looking for something like Apprentice that can expand with the game, but is smart enough to play on it's own. I'd like to play, but I know I'd get owned playing someone else, and that's no fun.
But I have to ask, what ever gave you the idea that someone's blood, sweat, and tears could just be given away to your friend or "friends" by you just because it's easy? Hell, I agree with the most strident out there that copyright laws are a mess, but does that absolve you from doing the right fucking thing? Look, Kazaa = good, but you giving copyrighted material away because you want to = taking food off of Metallica's table (and don't even claim "they make enough as it is" or "it helps their promotion" because it's their creation, they own the distribution rights, they get to decide how to promote themselves, not you.) Take a close read of /. deity Prof. Lessing, you'll note that he argues that copyright shouldn't be extended, he doesn't promote giving away someone else's copyrighted work.
Sharing is distributing. You're not loaning your friends your particular copy of the work, you're giving a thousand anonymous P2Pers an exact copy of your copy. Sure it's "sharing", but it's also distributing someone else's intellectual property.
Doesn't make a difference. Somewhere along the line the creator either gets paid or gives away his copyright to the publisher (usually in exchange for money.) Regardless, the creator determines distribution to some extent.
"Tho not at once" that's the key difference. You share infinitely, and have no limitations to your sharing. That's distribution not sharing. And distribution rights is exclusive to the copyright holder.
Your notes and knowledge are your own, and even the strictest interpretation of copyright law would absolutely find such uses to be "fair use." Knowledge isn't affected by copyright, distribution is. Learn all you want. Memorize all you want. Start sharing or selling, then you start infringing.
But if you copied an entire work while you had it on loan and kept the entire copy? Technically, you'd be infringing on the copyright to that work. And if the instructions to fire were copyrighted, not only would they have long since fallen out of protection, but it wouldn't prevent someone else from writing GPL'ed instructions.
That tax is bullshit, no ifs, ands, or buts. We get back to that whole "substantial noninfringing uses" argument." Regardless, I'd agree that the indies should get a slice of that bullshit tax pie if we're doomed to have it anyway.
If you're really talking about a non-capturable stream to a single person, I'd say you'd be flying low enough under the radar to not have to worry about any enforcement. That specific case could be debatable. I'm sure the RIAA would say that it is infringing, but I think there's a strong arguement to protect that usage (maybe not fair use.)
Memorizing the lyrics, hell, memorizing the entire song, isn't a copyright infrigement. It's when you use your memorized song to distribute the song to others that you run into trouble.
Ever wonder why a cool song doesn't have the lyrics in the liner notes when all the other ones do? More than likely, it a cover song from another band, and the band you're listening to didn't purchase the rights to print the cover's lyrics.