Did I state that Windows was exploit-free? No, I did not. I merely said that just because you're using Linux (or any other non-Windows OS) doesn't mean you can let your guard down. Computer security requires being diligent on all fronts, no matter what your system is running.
if you couldn't navigate the sarge installer, what the hell are you doing with linux in the first place.
Ignoring your baseless accusation, improving Linux usability will only come from clueless users using it. Seasoned computer users usually don't get very confused when it comes to interfaces. They just poke around. And wanting to see screenshots of something new doesn't make anyone a newbie. It shows they are curious, which is a much more-needed attribute in the free/open source world than being a dick.
Internet Explorer is not standards-compliant (well, the big thing is that they don't actively work to be standards-compliant), but I don't see "research firms" calling for a ban on that.
Dude, Zonk, if some guy from a website writes in with a blurb from their latest article, the least you could do is put " [linky]Someguy from blah.com[/linky] writes 'blurb' " in the writeup.
First of all, I should clarify what I was trying to say in my original post (this one). I was attempting to say (with some sarcasm, which often doesn't help clarity) that from my analysis of Xbox releases, press regarding Xbox games, experience playing Xbox games, and the announced Xbox 360 games, that there are not many games with gameplay that is either breaking new ground, or refining already existing gameplay.
With that said, you might now argue that I didn't "say" any of these thing in my original post. When I post on internet forums, I generally don't put a lot of thought into posts that are a large paragraph long or smaller. These "one-off" type posts are just my raw opinion and/or analysis of the issue I'm writing about, and my writing style in this mode often uses much sarcasm and generalization. I often imply many things, such as my assumptions or conclusions. Now, I'll move on to address your points.
Halo revolutionized console FPS. It was the first FPS since GoldenEye that showed, given a proper control scheme, the genre could be successful. It introduced thousands of new gamers to FPS that wouldn't have played them, do to a much smaller PC gaming market. Give MS some credit here -- it took balls to take a non-established genre and have it be your launch title.
We must have different ideas on what "revolutionizing" a genre means. My interpretation of this word in regards to the analysis of videogames is when a game introduces a radical new concept. The only thing, in my opinion, that Halo introduced that was radically new wasn't really radically new, and that was the LAN party. You could argue that this is radical because it was a console and not a computer, but consoles are computers. They're just a different form-factor.
I really don't understand how GoldenEye and Halo were successful because of their control schemes, or the more bizarre claim that good control schemes somehow validate the FPS genre on consoles. Certainly play control is an important part of whether or not a game is "good" and/or successful, but there are plenty of games that have good control and are not good games.
While it's true that Halo introduced the FPS genre to a much larger player-base (and I can say with some certainty you could probably claim *millions* more and not be wrong), this does not itself make a game revolutionary, in my definition of the word. I'm sure marketing teams think your usage (and application) is fine.
I don't think that the FPS genre was unestablished on consoles prior to Halo. PC FPS games have been ported to consoles since console specs were good enough, as an example Doom was ported to pretty much everything in the early-mid 90s, and there were many console FPS games as well, including one you mentioned, Goldeneye. So on the one hand, you state that the FPS genre on console was proved successful because of Goldeneye, and then state that Halo was released at a time when FPS on console was unproven. If I give MS any credit for Halo, it would be for their realizing that Halo would make a good launch title, not for having "balls", which I do not believe they have, at least in this sense.
The sequel argument is bunk. PS's biggest title was Final Fantasy VII. Nearly every game Nintendo makes is a sequel of a 20-year old series. Sequels drive the entire market, not just Xbox.
When I said "sequel", it was in response to your argument that JGR was a "good game". I was not arguing whether or not it was a good game. I was continuing my (now clarified) argument from my original post that the Xbox does not have many games that are groundbreaking in the gameplay area. Following my argument, calling out a game as a sequel is perfectly fine, because most sequels generally don't introduce very fresh concepts. Unless the JGR game on the Xbox introduced some radical new gameplay concept I've never heard of, it can't be considered a game that furthered or refin
... excitement in its developer and user base about KDE 4. If you don't believe me, take a look at how many more posts there are in KDE-Look than in Gnome-Look.
This is just wrong. Yeah, the two sites you mention have similar names. But unless you can come up with a damn good reason of how they both are representative of the "excitement of its developer and user base" of KDE and Gnome, you're just astroturfing for mindshare.
On the other hand we have a company like Valve. The ideas that Steam brings to the table are very interesting.
What you said:
blah blah problems with steam, blah blah
Your anecdotal evidence and opinion of a particular implementation of a technology does not counter the fact that said technology can fundamentally change the business model and distribution of media.
There were a lot of VERY good games for Xbox with VERY good gameplay...
This is your opinion.
Halo
Re-hashed FPS with decent multiplayer.
Jet Grind Radio
JGR was a Dreamcast game. Its sequel appeared on the XBox (read: sequel).
MechWarrior
According to gamefaqs.com, there is no game named "MechWarrior" for the Xbox.
As well, how can you judge 360 games? Have you played them? Or are we going to make the assumption that "systems from Microsoft suck", even though the Windows and Xbox divisions are so far apart they're almost like different companies?
Now you're just getting ridiculous. You're taking an opinion that some people might have and pushing it onto me. Never mind the fact that I never said anything like this. What I should've said is that there really hasn't been much (if any) innovation in gameplay on the XBox platform (Live doesn't count, PCs had good internet play first). The next generation looks to continue this, with shinier FPSes and such.
Yeah, I'm also having a hard time deciding whether to buy a freight train or a convertible. They can both do similar things (transport stuff), so I should consider them both and compare them directly, right?
I don't see why every media company...traditionally the most anti-computer bunch on the planet...can grudingly let go of their precious content when it's wrapped in DRM protections like Apple's FairPlay and Window's DRM...but computer game companies still dragging their feet. What if the game used FairPlay?
I think it's because the "media" companies are stupid when it comes to new technology, but the game companies aren't, because they're the ones on the cutting edge of PC tech and know WTF is going on. Already we are seeing the problems that the RIAA is having with Apple: they're tied down to one company that controls a large portion of the market, so they don't have much leverage (the can't for example threaten to go to Sony, because they would lose a significant portion of the legitimate sales they make to iPod users to piracy, and people won't dump their players just so they can be legit). I'm pretty sure most game developers already understand these problems, because they're programmers, the same people who write things like FairPlay.
On the other hand we have a company like Valve. The ideas that Steam brings to the table are very interesting. If more developers embraced this type of tech, some of the problems go away (definitely not all of them, I've been locked out of Steam twice because of stupid things), and we also lose some of the dependence on publishers.
Also, does anyone know how long developers have actually had *final* dev kits? I think it would be pretty hard to optimize for things like threading when you have beta hardware.
I guess I thought the place where most 360 (and Xbox) games cut corners, was, you know, gameplay. It's pretty easy to make a game with flashy graphics on hardware like this, and especially since your graphics programmers and artists are jizzing all over the place with their HD textures and such, but it's a lot harder to make a game that's actually good. I'm not saying this stuff won't sell, obviously it will (it's new and shiny, we love that), but the quality (and fun) will probably suffer until at least the 2nd generation of games.
Hell, think about playing FFX with Higher res/FSAA
Yeah, that's what I was hoping for. I guess I didn't really have much experience with the smoothing function of the PS2, seeing as I only have Castlevania SotN for it:D.
So turning on AA in the backwards-compatibility patch is a no-brainer.
Man, now that you mention it I hope Sony is doing this again with the PS3. Playing PS1 games with less jaggies was definitely a plus, but having to set the option manually every boot wasn't.:(
I wasn't commenting on your website, I was just merely saying I had checked it to see if there was info on where you lived.
I don't believe that this is an issue of "left and right", but more an issue between people who value freedom and privacy on one hand and those who wish to hold all the power themselves. Unfortunately, the latter group seems to be getting their way.
I read that as liberal AND environmentalist AND whacknuts.
Unfortunately, most people can't make the distinction. They see words together and don't realize that there might be shades of gray. ("You're either with us or against us")
Why not offer some helpful suggestions instead of acting the elitist? Of course, I could go on for 3 paragraphs attacking you and whether or not you've done "enough" (i.e. some bullshit measurement) to "protect" your freedom, but I chose to offer a helpful suggestion (recursively?).
Americans complain about the government and then don't do anything because it's like our fucking national pastime. There are those who think that in reality it's not that bad, and then there's the group that know it could get really bad but don't know where to start. It's really hard to know exactly how to change our government. Sure, you could work as hard as you could for your whole life toiling away at improving some part of the edifice, but the amount of people that just don't care far outweigh those that do. This just discourages the ones who want to affect real change, and allows the bullshit to continue.
I find it hard to believe you've ever lived in, or even heard of, the US (I stalked your website). Your ignorance is simply astounding.
If you aren't doing anything wrong whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the Patriot Act gives enormous powers to the FBI and other law enforcement organizations without any real oversight. There are provisions that allow these people to arrest citizens in the middle of the night and never tell their families what happenend to them. You can be held for years without a trial (Guantanamo), and I don't think any information ever has to be made public, so it doesn't really matter whether you're "really" a terrorist, does it? You might be an anti-war activist, an outspoken anarchist, a pornographer, or maybe the head of your local FBI branch lives next door and thinks your wife is hot. If you stand in the way of the bureacracy or any part of it, you might be forcibly moved out of the way.
The lack of transparency does not make something "outta sight, outta mind" (sic).
It kind of makes me wonder what all these people who feel their rights have been violated are hiding.
Dude, you just don't get it. Do you leave the stall door open when you take a dump in a public restroom? Why not? Is it because you want some PRIVACY? By your logic, anyone who locks the stall is "hiding" something. I know that I'm not "hiding" anything, but I do feel my rights are being violated because of the fact that the stormtroopers could come in here at any minute and take me away. This is the reality that your wonderful "security" measures have created. Can you live with it?
Slashdot Mirror
Did I state that Windows was exploit-free? No, I did not. I merely said that just because you're using Linux (or any other non-Windows OS) doesn't mean you can let your guard down. Computer security requires being diligent on all fronts, no matter what your system is running.
if you couldn't navigate the sarge installer, what the hell are you doing with linux in the first place.
Ignoring your baseless accusation, improving Linux usability will only come from clueless users using it. Seasoned computer users usually don't get very confused when it comes to interfaces. They just poke around. And wanting to see screenshots of something new doesn't make anyone a newbie. It shows they are curious, which is a much more-needed attribute in the free/open source world than being a dick.
Yeah, you don't need policy or diligence when you're the admin for a unix system!
PLEASE CREATE ROOT PASSWORD:
Hmmm....[ENTER]
Skype is not standards-compliant true
Internet Explorer is not standards-compliant (well, the big thing is that they don't actively work to be standards-compliant), but I don't see "research firms" calling for a ban on that.
This is one time I wish we did have some screenshots :(
PS
Dude, Zonk, if some guy from a website writes in with a blurb from their latest article, the least you could do is put " [linky]Someguy from blah.com[/linky] writes 'blurb' " in the writeup.
First of all, I should clarify what I was trying to say in my original post (this one). I was attempting to say (with some sarcasm, which often doesn't help clarity) that from my analysis of Xbox releases, press regarding Xbox games, experience playing Xbox games, and the announced Xbox 360 games, that there are not many games with gameplay that is either breaking new ground, or refining already existing gameplay.
With that said, you might now argue that I didn't "say" any of these thing in my original post. When I post on internet forums, I generally don't put a lot of thought into posts that are a large paragraph long or smaller. These "one-off" type posts are just my raw opinion and/or analysis of the issue I'm writing about, and my writing style in this mode often uses much sarcasm and generalization. I often imply many things, such as my assumptions or conclusions. Now, I'll move on to address your points.
Halo revolutionized console FPS. It was the first FPS since GoldenEye that showed, given a proper control scheme, the genre could be successful. It introduced thousands of new gamers to FPS that wouldn't have played them, do to a much smaller PC gaming market. Give MS some credit here -- it took balls to take a non-established genre and have it be your launch title.
We must have different ideas on what "revolutionizing" a genre means. My interpretation of this word in regards to the analysis of videogames is when a game introduces a radical new concept. The only thing, in my opinion, that Halo introduced that was radically new wasn't really radically new, and that was the LAN party. You could argue that this is radical because it was a console and not a computer, but consoles are computers. They're just a different form-factor.
I really don't understand how GoldenEye and Halo were successful because of their control schemes, or the more bizarre claim that good control schemes somehow validate the FPS genre on consoles. Certainly play control is an important part of whether or not a game is "good" and/or successful, but there are plenty of games that have good control and are not good games.
While it's true that Halo introduced the FPS genre to a much larger player-base (and I can say with some certainty you could probably claim *millions* more and not be wrong), this does not itself make a game revolutionary, in my definition of the word. I'm sure marketing teams think your usage (and application) is fine.
I don't think that the FPS genre was unestablished on consoles prior to Halo. PC FPS games have been ported to consoles since console specs were good enough, as an example Doom was ported to pretty much everything in the early-mid 90s, and there were many console FPS games as well, including one you mentioned, Goldeneye. So on the one hand, you state that the FPS genre on console was proved successful because of Goldeneye, and then state that Halo was released at a time when FPS on console was unproven. If I give MS any credit for Halo, it would be for their realizing that Halo would make a good launch title, not for having "balls", which I do not believe they have, at least in this sense.
The sequel argument is bunk. PS's biggest title was Final Fantasy VII. Nearly every game Nintendo makes is a sequel of a 20-year old series. Sequels drive the entire market, not just Xbox.
When I said "sequel", it was in response to your argument that JGR was a "good game". I was not arguing whether or not it was a good game. I was continuing my (now clarified) argument from my original post that the Xbox does not have many games that are groundbreaking in the gameplay area. Following my argument, calling out a game as a sequel is perfectly fine, because most sequels generally don't introduce very fresh concepts. Unless the JGR game on the Xbox introduced some radical new gameplay concept I've never heard of, it can't be considered a game that furthered or refin
... excitement in its developer and user base about KDE 4. If you don't believe me, take a look at how many more posts there are in KDE-Look than in Gnome-Look.
This is just wrong. Yeah, the two sites you mention have similar names. But unless you can come up with a damn good reason of how they both are representative of the "excitement of its developer and user base" of KDE and Gnome, you're just astroturfing for mindshare.
What I said:
On the other hand we have a company like Valve. The ideas that Steam brings to the table are very interesting.
What you said:
blah blah problems with steam, blah blah
Your anecdotal evidence and opinion of a particular implementation of a technology does not counter the fact that said technology can fundamentally change the business model and distribution of media.
There were a lot of VERY good games for Xbox with VERY good gameplay ...
This is your opinion.
Halo
Re-hashed FPS with decent multiplayer.
Jet Grind Radio
JGR was a Dreamcast game. Its sequel appeared on the XBox (read: sequel).
MechWarrior
According to gamefaqs.com, there is no game named "MechWarrior" for the Xbox.
As well, how can you judge 360 games? Have you played them? Or are we going to make the assumption that "systems from Microsoft suck", even though the Windows and Xbox divisions are so far apart they're almost like different companies?
Now you're just getting ridiculous. You're taking an opinion that some people might have and pushing it onto me. Never mind the fact that I never said anything like this. What I should've said is that there really hasn't been much (if any) innovation in gameplay on the XBox platform (Live doesn't count, PCs had good internet play first). The next generation looks to continue this, with shinier FPSes and such.
You could also try Fasterfox, which has some heavier-duty blocking.
Yeah, I'm also having a hard time deciding whether to buy a freight train or a convertible. They can both do similar things (transport stuff), so I should consider them both and compare them directly, right?
I don't see why every media company...traditionally the most anti-computer bunch on the planet...can grudingly let go of their precious content when it's wrapped in DRM protections like Apple's FairPlay and Window's DRM...but computer game companies still dragging their feet. What if the game used FairPlay?
I think it's because the "media" companies are stupid when it comes to new technology, but the game companies aren't, because they're the ones on the cutting edge of PC tech and know WTF is going on. Already we are seeing the problems that the RIAA is having with Apple: they're tied down to one company that controls a large portion of the market, so they don't have much leverage (the can't for example threaten to go to Sony, because they would lose a significant portion of the legitimate sales they make to iPod users to piracy, and people won't dump their players just so they can be legit). I'm pretty sure most game developers already understand these problems, because they're programmers, the same people who write things like FairPlay.
On the other hand we have a company like Valve. The ideas that Steam brings to the table are very interesting. If more developers embraced this type of tech, some of the problems go away (definitely not all of them, I've been locked out of Steam twice because of stupid things), and we also lose some of the dependence on publishers.
Also, does anyone know how long developers have actually had *final* dev kits? I think it would be pretty hard to optimize for things like threading when you have beta hardware.
This seems like the easiest place to cut corners.
I guess I thought the place where most 360 (and Xbox) games cut corners, was, you know, gameplay. It's pretty easy to make a game with flashy graphics on hardware like this, and especially since your graphics programmers and artists are jizzing all over the place with their HD textures and such, but it's a lot harder to make a game that's actually good. I'm not saying this stuff won't sell, obviously it will (it's new and shiny, we love that), but the quality (and fun) will probably suffer until at least the 2nd generation of games.
Dude, have you ever heard of a little project called the HURD? Threading increases complexity so very much.
Hell, think about playing FFX with Higher res/FSAA
:D.
Yeah, that's what I was hoping for. I guess I didn't really have much experience with the smoothing function of the PS2, seeing as I only have Castlevania SotN for it
So turning on AA in the backwards-compatibility patch is a no-brainer.
:(
Man, now that you mention it I hope Sony is doing this again with the PS3. Playing PS1 games with less jaggies was definitely a plus, but having to set the option manually every boot wasn't.
Hey, since this is totally on-topic, I'm going to ask any of you WoW players out there to go ahead and send me an invite. Um, yeah.
I can feel my karma burning already.
I wasn't commenting on your website, I was just merely saying I had checked it to see if there was info on where you lived.
I don't believe that this is an issue of "left and right", but more an issue between people who value freedom and privacy on one hand and those who wish to hold all the power themselves. Unfortunately, the latter group seems to be getting their way.
From my post: ... TurboGrafx-16/Turbo CD, Sega CD/32x/Saturn/Game Gear/Dreamcast, ...
I'm sure your percentage figures will comfort those whose family members have disappeared.
I read that as liberal AND environmentalist AND whacknuts.
Unfortunately, most people can't make the distinction. They see words together and don't realize that there might be shades of gray. ("You're either with us or against us")
Why not offer some helpful suggestions instead of acting the elitist? Of course, I could go on for 3 paragraphs attacking you and whether or not you've done "enough" (i.e. some bullshit measurement) to "protect" your freedom, but I chose to offer a helpful suggestion (recursively?).
Americans complain about the government and then don't do anything because it's like our fucking national pastime. There are those who think that in reality it's not that bad, and then there's the group that know it could get really bad but don't know where to start. It's really hard to know exactly how to change our government. Sure, you could work as hard as you could for your whole life toiling away at improving some part of the edifice, but the amount of people that just don't care far outweigh those that do. This just discourages the ones who want to affect real change, and allows the bullshit to continue.
I find it hard to believe you've ever lived in, or even heard of, the US (I stalked your website). Your ignorance is simply astounding.
If you aren't doing anything wrong whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the Patriot Act gives enormous powers to the FBI and other law enforcement organizations without any real oversight. There are provisions that allow these people to arrest citizens in the middle of the night and never tell their families what happenend to them. You can be held for years without a trial (Guantanamo), and I don't think any information ever has to be made public, so it doesn't really matter whether you're "really" a terrorist, does it? You might be an anti-war activist, an outspoken anarchist, a pornographer, or maybe the head of your local FBI branch lives next door and thinks your wife is hot. If you stand in the way of the bureacracy or any part of it, you might be forcibly moved out of the way.
The lack of transparency does not make something "outta sight, outta mind" (sic).
It kind of makes me wonder what all these people who feel their rights have been violated are hiding.
Dude, you just don't get it. Do you leave the stall door open when you take a dump in a public restroom? Why not? Is it because you want some PRIVACY? By your logic, anyone who locks the stall is "hiding" something. I know that I'm not "hiding" anything, but I do feel my rights are being violated because of the fact that the stormtroopers could come in here at any minute and take me away. This is the reality that your wonderful "security" measures have created. Can you live with it?