Don't let me put you off - I've had a good time playing Kameo so far (though I'm just hitting the section of the game that annoys the hell out of most people - why oh why must there always be an underwater world?). Just pointing out the negatives that will be mentioned about the game. They're all mild irritations rather than gamebreakers, though.
IMO the sane point at which to start buying new hardware is when there's an official budget range for games. That means that there are good games to be had for half the price of a new game, and tends to be a sign that the new games will be making better use of the hardware.
That doesn't stop me from buying at launch, of course. I've never been a big fan of sanity.
You don't have to provide a CC number. Ever. You can buy your live subscription and marketplace points from your local gaming store, and enter a code to activate them on your 360. Speaking personally there's no way my credit card details are going onto the thing in its current form.
Partly because there's money to be made, partly because 50% of online gamers having a badly digitised picture of a penis as their gamer icon would become old very quickly.
The controls. The fact that it mostly doesn't give off a next-gen feel - seems very similar to the sort of thing you've seen already on the XBox. Typical Rare characters. Infuriating camera.
You can play most games without Live - I could quite happily have played all the games I picked up with the 360 offline. All the gameplay (except the online modes, obviously) is still there. Some of the achievements are unattainable without online play (particularly in PGR3) but then you'll never be going online so nobody will ever see that other than you. And you won't care.
That said, the one month free trial has made a believer of me, and despite the fact that I wasn't planning to, I'm now buying a subscription to Live.
Also worthy of note is the fact that you get limited Live functionality even without the subscription. Obviously MS want you to be able to spend money on downloading games and themes, so these features are available (I believe) on the 'silver' membership that you get by default.
So the impression so far is that the games don't require Live, but do a great job of taking advantage of it where present, even if they're fundamentally one-player offline games.
You can pick up a cheaper wireless adapter - or just use good old fashioned wires. With the official one you're paying an extortionate price for something that looks nice and clips neatly into place, and that's about it.
As for consoles 'finally' surpassing PCs, they do it pretty much every generation. And it takes the PC market a very short time to catch up - first with high-end graphics cards that cost more than your entire console, and later with cheap entry-level cards. Whatever console you buy (Revolution excepted, I guess) it'll be bleeding edge on day one and old hat when it reaches the end of its life.
XBox Live is well worth the investment. I feel dirty saying that, because I sound like a Microsoft viral marketeer, but it's the honest truth from my experience so far. I never went online with the XBox, but since I've got a wireless network in my house now I decided to give it a try with the 360 (the free one-month trial helped) and I'm picking up a 12-month subscription as soon as I can. The downloadable games on Live Arcade are great, both on the retro side of things (Robotron 2084 is the definite highlight so far) and in terms of newer games (Outpost Kaloki, Wik, Bejewelled and the suchlike...) The achievement points system is an inspired idea, bringing in a whole new level of competition even for single-player games - you can compare the achievements you've reached with any other player for a given game.
PGR3 takes on new life with online functionality added, too. It goes without saying that you get to race against real people, but the online experience goes further than that. You can watch top-ranked players or your friends racing online live. Every stage you complete you're ranked against everyone else who has played the game while connected to the internet. It's all-pervasive.
And as you say, there are the demos, both of the big commercial games and the Arcade games (which I generally prefer because of their more manageable download time). Throw in movie trailers, music, video demos of games, interviews and other features, and you're definitely on to a winner. And for less than it would cost to subscribe to an XBox 360 magazine.
I never really got into online gaming last generation, but as you can probably tell by the stomach-churning gushing over it, Live on the XBox 360 has made me a convert.
There were plenty of worthwhile XBox-exclusive titles last generation, along with the added bonus of generally getting the best version of games that were available across all platforms. Crimson Skies, the Knights of the Old Republic games, Project Gotham Racing (a very slick racer that actually dared to do something different), Psychonauts all spring to mind. There are plenty more decorating my shelves at home.
Speaking as someone who puts far too much time and money into gaming, the only way to get all the best games is to own all the consoles. If you're not that much of an obsessive, then any of the consoles offers enough in the way of great entertainment to suck up all your time. Sure, with an XBox only, you won't get to play Ratchet and Clank. You'll live. With a PS2 only, you'll miss out on Halo. You'll survive. With either of them you won't be playing Donkey Konga. You'll get over it.
Each of the platforms has a different set of unique games, and they'll appeal to a different type of gamer. It doesn't make sense to dismiss any of them. I can pretty much guarantee there will be some great XBox 360 exclusive titles coming along within the next year or so, and with just a PS3 you won't be playing them.
There's no Blackjack, and no lucky feelings, but the roulette wheel is (apparently) highly exploitable, and there's one slot machine with much higher payout rates than the others. Doesn't take long playing that to get some big wins.
I'm glad someone else had the common sense to ask this. It must be unique to those with AI degrees, or something.
When I was starting my AI degree, I found two definitions of Artificial Intelligence that I liked. The first is from Minsky, who defined AI as:
"...trying to get computers to do things that would be considered intelligent if done by people."
The second is from the great philosopher and scientist Anonymous, who defined AI as:
"...trying to get computers to act like the ones in movies."
By Minsky's definition, we've had 'true' AI for quite a long time now. I've seen plenty of cases of computers using AI techniques to do things that would be seen as requiring intelligence in humans. They're generally quite specialised, but there's nothing wrong with that.
Anonymous will probably have to wait until Kevin Warwick's predictions come true and the robots take over the world.
If only something would come along that would make SWT bearable for the majority of programmers. Working with tables in SWT is enough to make me want to hunt down and kill whoever designed them...
I think you're missing my point. I'm just arguing that the whole "we invented it so we have exclusive rights to control it and do what we want with it" line is inherently retarded. Besides, any such attempt to charge royalties for internet inventions will ultimately collapse when it comes to the question of who invented the computer, since everyone seems to want to claim that one, even if it requires revisionist history and/or cunnign redefinition of 'computer'.
Ah, the good old Beeb. Not only did I write text adventures on it, I wrote a program for writing text adventures - BAPS, it was called. Even had a couple of adventures on the Acorn User cover disc - first games I got real money for, I believe.
There have been some innovative games since then, but they're few and far between. What advancements would you like to see in the genre, though? I feel a lot of the things people think of as possible advancements would actually be detrimental to the game nature of the titles.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't let me put you off - I've had a good time playing Kameo so far (though I'm just hitting the section of the game that annoys the hell out of most people - why oh why must there always be an underwater world?). Just pointing out the negatives that will be mentioned about the game. They're all mild irritations rather than gamebreakers, though.
That's the other 50%.
The same holds true for the licenses you agree to on consoles.
You've clearly never owned a computer. Or if you have, you failed to read the license agreements. :P
IMO the sane point at which to start buying new hardware is when there's an official budget range for games. That means that there are good games to be had for half the price of a new game, and tends to be a sign that the new games will be making better use of the hardware.
That doesn't stop me from buying at launch, of course. I've never been a big fan of sanity.
You don't have to provide a CC number. Ever. You can buy your live subscription and marketplace points from your local gaming store, and enter a code to activate them on your 360. Speaking personally there's no way my credit card details are going onto the thing in its current form.
Partly because there's money to be made, partly because 50% of online gamers having a badly digitised picture of a penis as their gamer icon would become old very quickly.
The controls. The fact that it mostly doesn't give off a next-gen feel - seems very similar to the sort of thing you've seen already on the XBox. Typical Rare characters. Infuriating camera.
You can play most games without Live - I could quite happily have played all the games I picked up with the 360 offline. All the gameplay (except the online modes, obviously) is still there. Some of the achievements are unattainable without online play (particularly in PGR3) but then you'll never be going online so nobody will ever see that other than you. And you won't care.
That said, the one month free trial has made a believer of me, and despite the fact that I wasn't planning to, I'm now buying a subscription to Live.
Also worthy of note is the fact that you get limited Live functionality even without the subscription. Obviously MS want you to be able to spend money on downloading games and themes, so these features are available (I believe) on the 'silver' membership that you get by default.
So the impression so far is that the games don't require Live, but do a great job of taking advantage of it where present, even if they're fundamentally one-player offline games.
You can pick up a cheaper wireless adapter - or just use good old fashioned wires. With the official one you're paying an extortionate price for something that looks nice and clips neatly into place, and that's about it.
As for consoles 'finally' surpassing PCs, they do it pretty much every generation. And it takes the PC market a very short time to catch up - first with high-end graphics cards that cost more than your entire console, and later with cheap entry-level cards. Whatever console you buy (Revolution excepted, I guess) it'll be bleeding edge on day one and old hat when it reaches the end of its life.
XBox Live is well worth the investment. I feel dirty saying that, because I sound like a Microsoft viral marketeer, but it's the honest truth from my experience so far. I never went online with the XBox, but since I've got a wireless network in my house now I decided to give it a try with the 360 (the free one-month trial helped) and I'm picking up a 12-month subscription as soon as I can. The downloadable games on Live Arcade are great, both on the retro side of things (Robotron 2084 is the definite highlight so far) and in terms of newer games (Outpost Kaloki, Wik, Bejewelled and the suchlike...) The achievement points system is an inspired idea, bringing in a whole new level of competition even for single-player games - you can compare the achievements you've reached with any other player for a given game.
PGR3 takes on new life with online functionality added, too. It goes without saying that you get to race against real people, but the online experience goes further than that. You can watch top-ranked players or your friends racing online live. Every stage you complete you're ranked against everyone else who has played the game while connected to the internet. It's all-pervasive.
And as you say, there are the demos, both of the big commercial games and the Arcade games (which I generally prefer because of their more manageable download time). Throw in movie trailers, music, video demos of games, interviews and other features, and you're definitely on to a winner. And for less than it would cost to subscribe to an XBox 360 magazine.
I never really got into online gaming last generation, but as you can probably tell by the stomach-churning gushing over it, Live on the XBox 360 has made me a convert.
There were plenty of worthwhile XBox-exclusive titles last generation, along with the added bonus of generally getting the best version of games that were available across all platforms. Crimson Skies, the Knights of the Old Republic games, Project Gotham Racing (a very slick racer that actually dared to do something different), Psychonauts all spring to mind. There are plenty more decorating my shelves at home.
Speaking as someone who puts far too much time and money into gaming, the only way to get all the best games is to own all the consoles. If you're not that much of an obsessive, then any of the consoles offers enough in the way of great entertainment to suck up all your time. Sure, with an XBox only, you won't get to play Ratchet and Clank. You'll live. With a PS2 only, you'll miss out on Halo. You'll survive. With either of them you won't be playing Donkey Konga. You'll get over it.
Each of the platforms has a different set of unique games, and they'll appeal to a different type of gamer. It doesn't make sense to dismiss any of them. I can pretty much guarantee there will be some great XBox 360 exclusive titles coming along within the next year or so, and with just a PS3 you won't be playing them.
There's no Blackjack, and no lucky feelings, but the roulette wheel is (apparently) highly exploitable, and there's one slot machine with much higher payout rates than the others. Doesn't take long playing that to get some big wins.
That's quite unlikely. Wikipedia has an entirely separate article about how light travels through the medium of ether.
Look, please don't give them ideas like that...
275 million, but I'm not telling you which ones.
Perhaps that was the scandal.
I'm glad someone else had the common sense to ask this. It must be unique to those with AI degrees, or something.
When I was starting my AI degree, I found two definitions of Artificial Intelligence that I liked. The first is from Minsky, who defined AI as:
"...trying to get computers to do things that would be considered intelligent if done by people."
The second is from the great philosopher and scientist Anonymous, who defined AI as:
"...trying to get computers to act like the ones in movies."
By Minsky's definition, we've had 'true' AI for quite a long time now. I've seen plenty of cases of computers using AI techniques to do things that would be seen as requiring intelligence in humans. They're generally quite specialised, but there's nothing wrong with that.
Anonymous will probably have to wait until Kevin Warwick's predictions come true and the robots take over the world.
If only something would come along that would make SWT bearable for the majority of programmers. Working with tables in SWT is enough to make me want to hunt down and kill whoever designed them...
I think you're missing my point. I'm just arguing that the whole "we invented it so we have exclusive rights to control it and do what we want with it" line is inherently retarded. Besides, any such attempt to charge royalties for internet inventions will ultimately collapse when it comes to the question of who invented the computer, since everyone seems to want to claim that one, even if it requires revisionist history and/or cunnign redefinition of 'computer'.
Fair point.
Do you pay your HTTP royalties to Europe on a per-request basis, or have you gone for an annual fee basis?
Not impossible? I've got to get me one of those Turing test passing AIs you'll be using to manage the in-game characters. :)
Wait, you hit the start button to make the game stop? Whose crazy idea was that? :\
Ah, the good old Beeb. Not only did I write text adventures on it, I wrote a program for writing text adventures - BAPS, it was called. Even had a couple of adventures on the Acorn User cover disc - first games I got real money for, I believe.
There have been some innovative games since then, but they're few and far between. What advancements would you like to see in the genre, though? I feel a lot of the things people think of as possible advancements would actually be detrimental to the game nature of the titles.
...so that they don't send a copy of Spyro: A Hero's Tail to an already-sick child? That's just cruel and unusual punishment...
Meh. Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from science, so it works out the same anyway...