A second issue is that law demands us to sacrifice freedom for security. "I give up my freedom to kill people so that they don't kill me" (i.e. murder is illegal) seems to be an essential commandment in every society. Rephrasing it to "essential" fixes this issue.
Really? I thought the series was in decline especially with 9. Recycled the ability system from FF6 but crippling it (some items taught spells in FF6) with a stereotypical story and unchallenging battles. 10 wasn't as bad, since they at least took some risks with the formula. I loved 12 since they finally returned to a customizable ability system (most like tactics/FF5), got rid of random battles, and gave us characters that were serious most of the time rather than cheesy cliches.
In many of Nintendo's Wii games (Sports, Warioware, Play), you create the character you play. The nice thing is unlike other games, you don't need to recreate your character per game, it exists on the console and is used between games.
He's entitled to speak as a biased party, I was merely letting everyone know his inherent bias and possible political motivations to say what he said.
It's like having Green Mountain energy talk about renewable fuel sources or Chevron talk about the clean burning gasoline. It's the difference between an advertisement and a documentary.
In case no one can read between the lines, he's saying that platform exclusivity is a very good thing that needs to be saved....He's also an exclusive title developer for Sony.
I suppose he means the PS3 and the 360 for which there will be Halo and Final Fantasy as the exclusives. Nintendo doesn't really seem to have a problem with exclusive games (Mario Kart/Party/64/etc, Metroid, Zelda, Smash Bros) and I'd argue the biggest reason behind Nintendo's success is because of their first party games, especially since other than Capcom (Resident Evil 4, Viewtiful Joe), I can't think of any other company that even did GC exclusives (granted, these games were later ported to PS2). With the Wii, it's even more different. The vast majority of Wii games are ONLY on the Wii console. Ubisoft and other publishers are doing Wii-only games with no chance of a port.
So I don't know what this guy is talking about with lack of 1st party support or exclusives, unless he means Sony and MS.
I think what he's saying about min-maxing is that it's actually easiest to play through the game tagging all the skill you don't use as your primary ones. That way, you can still get better at them relative to enemies since you're no longer gaining levels.
Since no one cares about protecting digital content picture-wise of a gaming console, why not just use DVI instead (since all HD TVs are plasma/LCD and have those inputs anyway)? If not for the PS3 (since you can watch movies), why at least the not the Xbox360?
It's also nice for folk like me who don't own a TV and use a 20 inch LCD for console gaming (still no SVideo/DVI out for my Wii though....) but I'm the niche market.
There's already starcraft models in WC3. Update the graphics and I see nothing wrong with the engine itself persay as a starting point. Anyone who's programmed in it knows it only binds them to some relatively basic mechanics, which were themselves unchanged since starcraft. (Some annoying things to fix: update # of units selectable, etc)
I played WC3 yesterday and I must say, I really miss Blizzard's RTSs.
I'd really appreciate it if we could stop labelling people randomly. For some odd reason, people believe Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama to be the "easy-shots" for the presidency, but that's the tail wagging the dog. The media is so obsessed with covering them, that "lesser" candidates hardly get any coverage. We get polls with Obama and Clinton's name on them, and so they become recognized. It seems very little different than payola, except in music, there's no preconception of non-bias nor anything really at stake (U2 isn't running against REM for anything; you CAN go to both concerts.)
What kind of brainwashed bullcrap is that ? There is no way to "produce wealth for everyone", at least not in material form. Being wealthy essentially means having a lot more money than the average joe. If everyone were equally "wealthy" then the word would lose its meaning. You cannot truly create wealth out of thin air, you simply transfer value from one entity to another. There is no net gain.
Herbert Hoover talked about there being a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. This dream of wealth seemed impossible, and yet, as I look around today, I see this to be almost entirely fulfilled. All Americans except the very poorest have cars and can afford chicken (or Tofurkey if they'd prefer). This wasn't always the case. The entire point of industry is to increase the net wealth of a society. Where it backfires in the inadequate distribution of this created wealth between social groups.
Democracy itself is founded on the basis of a middle class who has enough free time and materials at their disposal to inform themselves of the happenings of the day during their leisure time to make informed electoral decisions. Once the majority ceases to be well-informed, propaganda will carry they day, and political parties will have as much distinction as professional sports teams. Some would argue, this has already come to pass.
See, that's a rational incentive, but a social one, not an economic one. Still, it seems like a good incentive to me.
But it IS economic. By increasing labor supply, I decrease labor cost. Economics 101 right? I want lower priced manufactured goods, so I should encourage people to enter that labor pool, who are well suited for it. I want to pay fewer taxes, so I want fewer people on welfare. I can assign dollar values to any or all of these. How is wanting my economy to be efficient not an economic incentive or economic goal? How are encourage to act in a way to achieve that goal not economically motivated?
Perhaps in treating this entire affair as a zero-sum game, the employer is being irrational.
Let's say you call a spade a spade, tell him he sucks, and should try something else. Rather than trying to be a codemonkey who couldn't pass for a code algae, he decides to become an elementary school teacher, a fire fighter, or assembly line worker. Even were I completely selfish, it's in MY self interest for things like teachers, fire fighters, and assembly line workers to exist because they benefit me by increasing the labor pool for those jobs and thus lowering their cost to ME. I could not say anything, have him wallow in the labor pool, eventually get welfare, and make me pay him MY tax dollars.
In order for any console to succeed in Japan, it needs to have the kind of games the Japanese play. Madden just won't sell, nor will Halo. (most of the people I know, bought their Xbox for Halo.)
However, Blue Dragon may seems to be having an impact. According to this article, it sold 80K copies in its first week and increased XBox360 sales over 500% that week vs the previous week. It's not that the XBox is American, it's that the XBox has Halo and the PS2 had Final Fantasy.
According to Gamerankings.com Zelda: Twilight Princess is the 6th highest rated game of the last 2 generations from an average of all reviewers. Next highest of any of the new consoles is gears of war at #16.
A few of my friends used to play monopoly every night, until we discovered Settlers.
In Monopoly, we found people largely traded once, built up, and crossed their fingers. If you made out in the deal-making frenzy you won, if not, it's a long slow ride to death.
In contrast, in Settlers, trades were made almost every turn and the last five minutes of the game are usually very close. In a race to 10 points, it wasn't uncommon to have 2 people with 8, one with 7 and one with 9 and have the 7 point person win on his/her next turn. Since the object is no longer to bankrupt anyone, trades are seen as mutually beneficial and a little less cut-throat.
Our group has since played one game of Monopoly. (For the record, I find settlers less complicated than Monopoly...the rules are certainly shorter.)
Scientific use of the word "natural" refers to man's activities as artificial or "non-natural". See Artificial Selection vs Natural Selection or natural climate change vs man-made climate change.
If everything were natural, "natural" would be meaningless (which I suppose, is what you're arguing).
Last comment, you accepted "man-made" as an arbitrary but useful definition of "unnatural". Why not just accept when people are talking about "unnatural", it means "man-made" (as this is a term we'd agreed as abitrary but useful (like "blue"))?
You say that one can not validly call something "natural" without implicit reference to deistic creation. I say that it's possible to refer call something "justice" without refering to similar deistic implications. In both cases, it's a reference to a definite object without a methodology of definition.
However, if you are trying to argue that the actions/creations of humans are natural because humans are natural, I would then ask you for an example of something "unnatural".
Then you would be substituting a ridiculous and ill-defined mythological term with an arbitrary, but entirely useful, definition.
Almost all definitions are arbitrary but useful=) There's no reason a spectrum of light between two certain wavelegnths ought to be called "blue". It's arbitrary, but useful. I don't see why this makes the word "unnatural" useless.
There's no rational basis for calling the actions or creations of human beings un-natural without recourse to superstition.
Want to try and define justice with the same restrictions? Euthyphro tried. By your logic, justice doesn't exist. If you're will to accept that, fine.
Also, my periodic table also has the word "natural" on it, referring to elements not occuring in nature. By your logic, my perdiodic table's is deistic or absurd.
Alternately, perhaps I can persuade you to use the term "man-made" instead. While crows use rocks and monkeys use sticks, there's no evidence that either of these specifically created tools to accomplish their tasks....
FF8 was much more mindless. A friend of mine would set a coffee cup on his controller and the cursor on memory and draw from an enemy whenever there was a new spell. FF8 had a crappy ability system that penalized magic use by making magic like throwing rocks at an enemy. If you drew 99 of most every spell when you found it, it was also trivially easy.
Also, it is very much part of the series as someone who started with FF1 in 1985;) Go play FF Tactics if you fail to see continuity (it's much less repetitive/more challenging). It's by the same team. I beat that without ever "leveling up" my first time through. This game is similar.
Slashdot Mirror
Your quote is innacurate. See:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin
A second issue is that law demands us to sacrifice freedom for security. "I give up my freedom to kill people so that they don't kill me" (i.e. murder is illegal) seems to be an essential commandment in every society. Rephrasing it to "essential" fixes this issue.
Really? I thought the series was in decline especially with 9. Recycled the ability system from FF6 but crippling it (some items taught spells in FF6) with a stereotypical story and unchallenging battles. 10 wasn't as bad, since they at least took some risks with the formula. I loved 12 since they finally returned to a customizable ability system (most like tactics/FF5), got rid of random battles, and gave us characters that were serious most of the time rather than cheesy cliches.
Where the character is Mii?
In many of Nintendo's Wii games (Sports, Warioware, Play), you create the character you play. The nice thing is unlike other games, you don't need to recreate your character per game, it exists on the console and is used between games.
And then he would be replaced....
By Cheney, the man for whom the constitution is not a piece of paper, it's toilet paper.
He's entitled to speak as a biased party, I was merely letting everyone know his inherent bias and possible political motivations to say what he said.
It's like having Green Mountain energy talk about renewable fuel sources or Chevron talk about the clean burning gasoline. It's the difference between an advertisement and a documentary.
In case no one can read between the lines, he's saying that platform exclusivity is a very good thing that needs to be saved. ...He's also an exclusive title developer for Sony.
No self-interest here.
I suppose he means the PS3 and the 360 for which there will be Halo and Final Fantasy as the exclusives. Nintendo doesn't really seem to have a problem with exclusive games (Mario Kart/Party/64/etc, Metroid, Zelda, Smash Bros) and I'd argue the biggest reason behind Nintendo's success is because of their first party games, especially since other than Capcom (Resident Evil 4, Viewtiful Joe), I can't think of any other company that even did GC exclusives (granted, these games were later ported to PS2). With the Wii, it's even more different. The vast majority of Wii games are ONLY on the Wii console. Ubisoft and other publishers are doing Wii-only games with no chance of a port.
So I don't know what this guy is talking about with lack of 1st party support or exclusives, unless he means Sony and MS.
I think what he's saying about min-maxing is that it's actually easiest to play through the game tagging all the skill you don't use as your primary ones. That way, you can still get better at them relative to enemies since you're no longer gaining levels.
Since no one cares about protecting digital content picture-wise of a gaming console, why not just use DVI instead (since all HD TVs are plasma/LCD and have those inputs anyway)? If not for the PS3 (since you can watch movies), why at least the not the Xbox360?
It's also nice for folk like me who don't own a TV and use a 20 inch LCD for console gaming (still no SVideo/DVI out for my Wii though....) but I'm the niche market.
There's already starcraft models in WC3. Update the graphics and I see nothing wrong with the engine itself persay as a starting point. Anyone who's programmed in it knows it only binds them to some relatively basic mechanics, which were themselves unchanged since starcraft. (Some annoying things to fix: update # of units selectable, etc)
I played WC3 yesterday and I must say, I really miss Blizzard's RTSs.
I'd really appreciate it if we could stop labelling people randomly. For some odd reason, people believe Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama to be the "easy-shots" for the presidency, but that's the tail wagging the dog. The media is so obsessed with covering them, that "lesser" candidates hardly get any coverage. We get polls with Obama and Clinton's name on them, and so they become recognized. It seems very little different than payola, except in music, there's no preconception of non-bias nor anything really at stake (U2 isn't running against REM for anything; you CAN go to both concerts.)
My favorite part of doom 2 was whenever I turned around, the corpses always had their feet facing me. Moving behind my back, sneaky undead....
What kind of brainwashed bullcrap is that ? There is no way to "produce wealth for everyone", at least not in material form. Being wealthy essentially means having a lot more money than the average joe. If everyone were equally "wealthy" then the word would lose its meaning. You cannot truly create wealth out of thin air, you simply transfer value from one entity to another. There is no net gain.
Herbert Hoover talked about there being a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. This dream of wealth seemed impossible, and yet, as I look around today, I see this to be almost entirely fulfilled. All Americans except the very poorest have cars and can afford chicken (or Tofurkey if they'd prefer). This wasn't always the case. The entire point of industry is to increase the net wealth of a society. Where it backfires in the inadequate distribution of this created wealth between social groups.
Democracy itself is founded on the basis of a middle class who has enough free time and materials at their disposal to inform themselves of the happenings of the day during their leisure time to make informed electoral decisions. Once the majority ceases to be well-informed, propaganda will carry they day, and political parties will have as much distinction as professional sports teams. Some would argue, this has already come to pass.
See, that's a rational incentive, but a social one, not an economic one. Still, it seems like a good incentive to me.
But it IS economic. By increasing labor supply, I decrease labor cost. Economics 101 right? I want lower priced manufactured goods, so I should encourage people to enter that labor pool, who are well suited for it. I want to pay fewer taxes, so I want fewer people on welfare. I can assign dollar values to any or all of these. How is wanting my economy to be efficient not an economic incentive or economic goal? How are encourage to act in a way to achieve that goal not economically motivated?
Perhaps in treating this entire affair as a zero-sum game, the employer is being irrational.
Let's say you call a spade a spade, tell him he sucks, and should try something else. Rather than trying to be a codemonkey who couldn't pass for a code algae, he decides to become an elementary school teacher, a fire fighter, or assembly line worker. Even were I completely selfish, it's in MY self interest for things like teachers, fire fighters, and assembly line workers to exist because they benefit me by increasing the labor pool for those jobs and thus lowering their cost to ME. I could not say anything, have him wallow in the labor pool, eventually get welfare, and make me pay him MY tax dollars.
But hey, I'm just conservative, not an ass.
The application in this screenshot appears to be GeoProbe. So according to the PDF, it does indeed work with Linux;)
In order for any console to succeed in Japan, it needs to have the kind of games the Japanese play. Madden just won't sell, nor will Halo. (most of the people I know, bought their Xbox for Halo.)
However, Blue Dragon may seems to be having an impact. According to this article, it sold 80K copies in its first week and increased XBox360 sales over 500% that week vs the previous week. It's not that the XBox is American, it's that the XBox has Halo and the PS2 had Final Fantasy.
Finally it has wireless and more space than a nomad! Truly unlame;)
(For those of you not in on the joke)
According to Gamerankings.com Zelda: Twilight Princess is the 6th highest rated game of the last 2 generations from an average of all reviewers. Next highest of any of the new consoles is gears of war at #16.
I suppose that doesn't make it a "big game".
A few of my friends used to play monopoly every night, until we discovered Settlers.
In Monopoly, we found people largely traded once, built up, and crossed their fingers. If you made out in the deal-making frenzy you won, if not, it's a long slow ride to death.
In contrast, in Settlers, trades were made almost every turn and the last five minutes of the game are usually very close. In a race to 10 points, it wasn't uncommon to have 2 people with 8, one with 7 and one with 9 and have the 7 point person win on his/her next turn. Since the object is no longer to bankrupt anyone, trades are seen as mutually beneficial and a little less cut-throat.
Our group has since played one game of Monopoly. (For the record, I find settlers less complicated than Monopoly...the rules are certainly shorter.)
Scientific use of the word "natural" refers to man's activities as artificial or "non-natural". See Artificial Selection vs Natural Selection or natural climate change vs man-made climate change.
If everything were natural, "natural" would be meaningless (which I suppose, is what you're arguing).
Last comment, you accepted "man-made" as an arbitrary but useful definition of "unnatural". Why not just accept when people are talking about "unnatural", it means "man-made" (as this is a term we'd agreed as abitrary but useful (like "blue"))?
You say that one can not validly call something "natural" without implicit reference to deistic creation. I say that it's possible to refer call something "justice" without refering to similar deistic implications. In both cases, it's a reference to a definite object without a methodology of definition.
However, if you are trying to argue that the actions/creations of humans are natural because humans are natural, I would then ask you for an example of something "unnatural".
Then you would be substituting a ridiculous and ill-defined mythological term with an arbitrary, but entirely useful, definition.
Almost all definitions are arbitrary but useful=) There's no reason a spectrum of light between two certain wavelegnths ought to be called "blue". It's arbitrary, but useful. I don't see why this makes the word "unnatural" useless.
There's no rational basis for calling the actions or creations of human beings un-natural without recourse to superstition.
Want to try and define justice with the same restrictions? Euthyphro tried. By your logic, justice doesn't exist. If you're will to accept that, fine.
Also, my periodic table also has the word "natural" on it, referring to elements not occuring in nature. By your logic, my perdiodic table's is deistic or absurd.
Alternately, perhaps I can persuade you to use the term "man-made" instead. While crows use rocks and monkeys use sticks, there's no evidence that either of these specifically created tools to accomplish their tasks....
You can't hate it that much, you finished it;)
FF8 was much more mindless. A friend of mine would set a coffee cup on his controller and the cursor on memory and draw from an enemy whenever there was a new spell. FF8 had a crappy ability system that penalized magic use by making magic like throwing rocks at an enemy. If you drew 99 of most every spell when you found it, it was also trivially easy.
Also, it is very much part of the series as someone who started with FF1 in 1985;) Go play FF Tactics if you fail to see continuity (it's much less repetitive/more challenging). It's by the same team. I beat that without ever "leveling up" my first time through. This game is similar.