Wow, Alan Emrich making MOO III, Peter Molyneux making another God-Simulator, Sid Meier working on Civilization 3, and Carmack remaking Doom/Wolfenstein it seems to be a good time to be alive.
On the other hand, Eidos is rumored to have given funding to another Romero project.
It seems that console games are entering a new era, with the death of Sega as a producer of systems (and the more than probable failure of the Nintendo Gamecube, which will likely be unable to compete with the well financed and more experienced Sony and Microsoft). It looks like the two most well-known game companies are going to take a back seat to, two non-gaming companies.
This is a bad thing.
The Playstation 2 has been a huge disapointment in Japan, and its owners in the US waiting for that killer bunch of post-launch games may be in for a rude awakening. Microsoft seems to be leading the battle, with the almost unbelievable X-Box (look for either the specs to go down or the price up by the time it is released.) Nintendo's Gamecube will have the same weakness of it's predcessor, the lack of third party developers. Nintendo has very little reason to release it at all, since it will likely lose money like Sega, and it will continue to ride high as long as the Pokemon cash cow, making about half as much in merchandising, games, TV shows, etc as the entire Console gaming industry.
Well, my point is that the way we play console games is gonna change. They will continue to get technically better and better, but will the quality also improve? I've noticed a very large lack of it in the 32/64-bit generation, and its no surprise that many choose to play 16-bit emulators while thier newer systems gather dust. The Gaming industry seems stuck in its conventions (you know the industry is in trouble if the most innovative title is a skateboarding game, a genre dating back to the 1980s), and due to the closed nature of console gaming, it is impossible that a small-developer wakeup call will spur console gaming developers to greater heights. (As Counter-strike and Serious Sam did for the PC games industry.)
Striking parallels are emerging between the console games industry and the 1950s comics publishers. The big bullies of the industry Marvel and DC (Nintendo and Sony, for the sake of analogy) forced out their innovative rival EC (Sega) by several means. Marvel and DC continued to turn out assembly line comics in a few profitable genres (as consoles now harbor mostly RPGs, Sports, Fighting, Driving and Third-Person action, and shunning genres like Strategy, Flight-Sim, Simulations, First Person Shooters, Adventure, and almost any exciting hybrid of genres.) Eventually, Marvel and DC faded away into near bankruptcy, making money mostly off of liscensing of characters like Batman, Spider-Man and Superman (think Pokemon, Tomb Raider, and Final Fantasy).
Well, it looks like things are may be pretty grim for console gaming, and Sony and Microsoft seem to act like they are pillaging a small village rather than moving into an industry. At least the capital of console gaming will stay in Redmond.
Why not just sell a service that lets users download Dreamcast games onto their PCs? Most PCs are vastly more powerful than the Dreamcast, most everyone has one, and there is already a large base of users with broadband connections.
Not saying this isnt a good idea, just wondering why.
This is an incredibly cool development (especially if Sega develops exclusively for the X-Box, lending legitimacy to the US-made system) but I doubt the Xbox will be compatible with my 4 Dreamcast controllers, 2 arcade sticks, broadband adapter -- though the Xbox is supposed to have a cable modem built in (so was PS2 however) -- and 6 VMUs? Will I have to buy Microsoft stuff? It's not like their controllers suck but Sidewinders are $50 each.
In other words, Sega, don't liscense the technology: think strategic partnership.
In other big M: if they don't want a partnership, do them a favor and buy them out.
So the only company from the 16-bit era (the Golden Age) that still produces consoles, is.... Nintendo. I'm not sure what large, uncreative, soul sucking, paranoid corporation to root for in the new system wars.
Why not just spend $50 and get a gameboy? I understand it's cool to be able to toy around on your cell phone, but really, this seems like its just dumb, like the people who loaded games onto graphic calculators back in school.
People like the believe that everyone's out to get them (like cell phones). That's why studies like this get so much press. Once the study is repeated I'm sure the rates will go down.
Hell, I never said they'd have a shortage of software. If Nintendo actually pulls a system out, I'll probably buy it just for the Mario game (I can still enjoy Mario 64 after all these years.)
You're right, it's not hard to make a system on par with Microsoft's, however, if Nintendo did it would probably cost them $800 since everything would be third party. Sony makes their own graphics chip (the second most expensive component, and since the PS2 has two maybe it's the first for them.) Microsoft's system is mostly third party, but Microsoft has deeper pockets than just about any corporation on Earth. They can afford (like Sony) to sell their system at a loss and recoup the loss on game sales.
Wow, I hope this eliminates the spam problem on the internet!
*Checks Inbox*
Apparently I could win $10,000,000 by emailing a reply to six friends, I can work from home in the real estate business making $200,000 a year AND for each time I forward this message 5 cents will be donated to a poor English boy without lungs.
Seriously, putting two spammers in jail is a good first step, but until all those bastards are rotting behind bars and worrying about dropping the soap, the world will continue to be annoyed.
Which is more likely? That India hired a bunch of very aggressive hackers, who know more about breaking firewalls than creating them, with the sole intention of "defense from rogue hackers" or that India is really using some of the most distructive forces of the internet against others (Pakistan perhaps?)
I sincerely doubt a government is dumb enough to hire a hacker to put up a firewall which he would be extremely interested in taking down.
Forget about the huge tests for Windows and IE. Testing an OS is way different than testing a game, or even game system. And OS has to run on just about every computer its been designed for. Compared to a standardized piece of equipment like a console, which does not have the same principle (it's not like Max Payne is gonna crash a certain set of X-boxes, it will crash them all or crash none.)
With IE, it's gonna be released free of charge anyway, and since they are just improvements on the previous version (i believe the last version of IE built from the ground up was 4) there aren't any serious bugs to work out. It's all tweaking.
Obviously they want people to see this, but not everyone (too late though, it's been slashdotted.) It was probably targeted toward members of the gaming press, and hardcore gamers (like ones who post of message boards. They want them to start saying "Xb0X 0\/\/Nz!" rather than "m1cR0s0Ft iz g4y!")
Hmmmmm, Microsoft a company notorious for looking internally for testing and Q/A, is looking outside for beta testers, "no experience nessesary". I'd be willing to bet this is more promotional than technical. I think they will bring in some kids for 15 minutes, show them the pretty lights, and let them run along home to tell all their friends.
Even the design of the site with bright colors and flashy catchphrases (* Get FREE stuff!) If they were really looking for quality testers they would probably take a much more lowkey approach (probably contacting previous testers before making an announcement like this).
As good as Microsoft is at software development, they are even better at promotion.
Trust me this probably isn't a real beta test, especially with the "*No Experience Nessesary*" thing, it seems more like something where you can go into Redmond for 15 mintues, see the funky visuals and go tell all your friends (and post on msg boards). Big M has a lot of expertise in software, but thats nothing compared to their expertise in marketing.
Opera? Crappy? It's the best browser on the market. Hell maybe you don't remember the days when ALL browsers cost money, but I do, so paying for browsers isn't odd. Nor is it pathetic! It shows they have confidence that people want their product. But this a conversation for a different board.
While Allgiance was a commercial failure, it was a critical success. So let's say every game Microsoft released did well either critically OR commercially. A console lauded by critics is a lot harder to overlook than a single game (especially one in such a niche genre like space flight sims).
Serves you right for using a browser like Netscape. Go get Opera (www.opera.com), its fast, comforms to HTML specs and isn't made by AOL or Microsoft! Though I doubt Opera works well either.
Evil Empires always have better stuff its a proven fact. Look at Star Wars for example. Rebels are running around in comfortable clothing for the most part, while the stormtroopers have that cool armor stuff. And who did Boba Fett work for? EVIL EMPIRE Evil Empires always have better stuff.
I am highly skeptical of the no experience nessesary tag since even open online beta tests prefer those who have previous beta experience.
But since this seems to be Microsoft's way of saying: "Come test the X-box for 15 minutes, see the pretty lights and go tell all your friends" no experience would be a plus.
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, Eidos is rumored to have given funding to another Romero project.
This is a bad thing.
The Playstation 2 has been a huge disapointment in Japan, and its owners in the US waiting for that killer bunch of post-launch games may be in for a rude awakening. Microsoft seems to be leading the battle, with the almost unbelievable X-Box (look for either the specs to go down or the price up by the time it is released.) Nintendo's Gamecube will have the same weakness of it's predcessor, the lack of third party developers. Nintendo has very little reason to release it at all, since it will likely lose money like Sega, and it will continue to ride high as long as the Pokemon cash cow, making about half as much in merchandising, games, TV shows, etc as the entire Console gaming industry.
Well, my point is that the way we play console games is gonna change. They will continue to get technically better and better, but will the quality also improve? I've noticed a very large lack of it in the 32/64-bit generation, and its no surprise that many choose to play 16-bit emulators while thier newer systems gather dust. The Gaming industry seems stuck in its conventions (you know the industry is in trouble if the most innovative title is a skateboarding game, a genre dating back to the 1980s), and due to the closed nature of console gaming, it is impossible that a small-developer wakeup call will spur console gaming developers to greater heights. (As Counter-strike and Serious Sam did for the PC games industry.)
Striking parallels are emerging between the console games industry and the 1950s comics publishers. The big bullies of the industry Marvel and DC (Nintendo and Sony, for the sake of analogy) forced out their innovative rival EC (Sega) by several means. Marvel and DC continued to turn out assembly line comics in a few profitable genres (as consoles now harbor mostly RPGs, Sports, Fighting, Driving and Third-Person action, and shunning genres like Strategy, Flight-Sim, Simulations, First Person Shooters, Adventure, and almost any exciting hybrid of genres.) Eventually, Marvel and DC faded away into near bankruptcy, making money mostly off of liscensing of characters like Batman, Spider-Man and Superman (think Pokemon, Tomb Raider, and Final Fantasy).
Well, it looks like things are may be pretty grim for console gaming, and Sony and Microsoft seem to act like they are pillaging a small village rather than moving into an industry. At least the capital of console gaming will stay in Redmond.
Not saying this isnt a good idea, just wondering why.
The Dreamcast is the only console I've ever seen running a MS OS and it is the most stable system I've ever used.
In other words, Sega, don't liscense the technology: think strategic partnership.
In other big M: if they don't want a partnership, do them a favor and buy them out.
So the only company from the 16-bit era (the Golden Age) that still produces consoles, is.... Nintendo. I'm not sure what large, uncreative, soul sucking, paranoid corporation to root for in the new system wars.
Why not just spend $50 and get a gameboy? I understand it's cool to be able to toy around on your cell phone, but really, this seems like its just dumb, like the people who loaded games onto graphic calculators back in school.
So let me see... Bill Gates complaining about a lack of competition. What part of this doesn't fit?
People like the believe that everyone's out to get them (like cell phones). That's why studies like this get so much press. Once the study is repeated I'm sure the rates will go down.
You're right, it's not hard to make a system on par with Microsoft's, however, if Nintendo did it would probably cost them $800 since everything would be third party. Sony makes their own graphics chip (the second most expensive component, and since the PS2 has two maybe it's the first for them.) Microsoft's system is mostly third party, but Microsoft has deeper pockets than just about any corporation on Earth. They can afford (like Sony) to sell their system at a loss and recoup the loss on game sales.
Friends? What friends?
*Checks Inbox*
Apparently I could win $10,000,000 by emailing a reply to six friends, I can work from home in the real estate business making $200,000 a year AND for each time I forward this message 5 cents will be donated to a poor English boy without lungs.
Seriously, putting two spammers in jail is a good first step, but until all those bastards are rotting behind bars and worrying about dropping the soap, the world will continue to be annoyed.
I sincerely doubt a government is dumb enough to hire a hacker to put up a firewall which he would be extremely interested in taking down.
With IE, it's gonna be released free of charge anyway, and since they are just improvements on the previous version (i believe the last version of IE built from the ground up was 4) there aren't any serious bugs to work out. It's all tweaking.
Obviously they want people to see this, but not everyone (too late though, it's been slashdotted.) It was probably targeted toward members of the gaming press, and hardcore gamers (like ones who post of message boards. They want them to start saying "Xb0X 0\/\/Nz!" rather than "m1cR0s0Ft iz g4y!")
It got a respectable 7.5 from gamespot, so it wasn't attrocious.
I think that what Diakatana is about.
Even the design of the site with bright colors and flashy catchphrases (* Get FREE stuff!) If they were really looking for quality testers they would probably take a much more lowkey approach (probably contacting previous testers before making an announcement like this).
As good as Microsoft is at software development, they are even better at promotion.
Microsoft has even MORE experience than Sony and even MORE money.
As the Atari Jaguar would tell us: Do the Math.
I think Microsoft is one of the only sites immune to the Slashdot effect (its either their massive servers or Big Evil Forcefield).
Trust me this probably isn't a real beta test, especially with the "*No Experience Nessesary*" thing, it seems more like something where you can go into Redmond for 15 mintues, see the funky visuals and go tell all your friends (and post on msg boards). Big M has a lot of expertise in software, but thats nothing compared to their expertise in marketing.
Opera? Crappy? It's the best browser on the market. Hell maybe you don't remember the days when ALL browsers cost money, but I do, so paying for browsers isn't odd. Nor is it pathetic! It shows they have confidence that people want their product. But this a conversation for a different board.
While Allgiance was a commercial failure, it was a critical success. So let's say every game Microsoft released did well either critically OR commercially. A console lauded by critics is a lot harder to overlook than a single game (especially one in such a niche genre like space flight sims).
Serves you right for using a browser like Netscape. Go get Opera (www.opera.com), its fast, comforms to HTML specs and isn't made by AOL or Microsoft! Though I doubt Opera works well either.
Evil Empires always have better stuff its a proven fact. Look at Star Wars for example. Rebels are running around in comfortable clothing for the most part, while the stormtroopers have that cool armor stuff. And who did Boba Fett work for? EVIL EMPIRE Evil Empires always have better stuff.
But since this seems to be Microsoft's way of saying: "Come test the X-box for 15 minutes, see the pretty lights and go tell all your friends" no experience would be a plus.