It's not that it was bad. It's that it's become bad by today's standards. Hell, by the standards set a few years later.
Super Mario Bros. was an amazing, huge game at the time. But it was buggy at times, and glitchy, and the control wasn't very well rounded out. You couldn't go backwards, etc, etc. You can make the argument that the lack of left scrolling was an artistic decision, but it wasn't. It was a technical limitation given the game's scope at that early era of the NES's lifetime.
Compare it to SMB 2 (USA) or SMB3. It's not just that you can do more (you can). It's not just that you can move more freely (you can). It's not just easier to see what's going on on screen (it is). It's that the game controls well on the newer ones. You really can't improve much over the level of control you had on SMB 2 & 3. That's why New Super Mario Bros controls like Mario 3 in most ways that matter. SMB1 was a great prototype. My problem is that it didn't age well. Other games have stood the test of time. I can still pick up Zelda 1 and play through it without feeling like something is missing. I can do that with SMB3. I cant' do it with SMB1, a game I adored when I got my NES.
I would say the same about Doom 1&2. Both helped to usher in a new era in gameplay (the FPS). But play anything released after Unreal or Quake, and then play Doom. Lack of a z axis, no mouse integration to speak of, and other factors make it an important historical footnote, but an unfun game once you play something a bit more evolved.
Super Mario Bros 1 suffers the same problem. Gaming history is littered with titles that broke new ground, and were later eclipsed by what would be considered mediocre titles a year later.
Depends. There's games that are compelx and terrible, and there are games that are complex and amazing (Supreme Commander, hopefully Spore) there were also simple games that were and are amazing (Tetris) and simple games that were just horrible (Amagon, Super Mario Bros. 1 by today's standards (I'll elaborate if anyone cares))
"Are you a story in games fan?"
Yes I am. But it depends on the story, and the game. I just picked up Wing Island last night for the Wii. If I had known about the story, I would probably have thought twice. Gameplay is okay, but it's no Pilotwings (what I was hoping for). On the other hand, I absolutly love Hotel Dusk. Maniac Mansion continues to be one of my all time favorites, and the Half-Life series are great because of not only the story, but how that story is told. Wing Commander showed that cinematic games can be fun, if done right.
There's lots of examples of good story driven games. Not all of them new. And there's lots of examples of games that are fun without much story (Super Mario Bros. 3 continues to be a favorite of mine) and even some examples of decent games *dammaged* by the inclusion of a story (Super Monkey Ball, Bomberman, Wario Ware, etc, etc.)
Anyone who reviews my post history or goosles me, and digs a little will find that I'm not exactly a proponent of wikipedia.
But there is no black or white here. Wikipedia is not apropriate for serious use, where it's important to be correct. But it's a massive quick and dirty database. If I want to know what X is and I've never heard of it, I can go to wikipedia and get an overview. If the authors did their due dilligence, I can find a decent collection of links off site that will tell me a bit abotu the subject matter.
Wikipedia can be a useful tool. Just not for most important applications.
Let's use a programming analogy. The "right" way to deploy a new application cross platform would be to code it in C or Java, or some other language apropriate to the task, and fine tune each version for each platform, and hunt for bugs on each platform. Annother, quick, relativly painless way, if it were an unimportant, trivial task, would be to just put together a web based Java applett, or perhaps even a flash object if it's simple enough. Hell, millions do this with YouTube, every day because it's "good enough". Even though an MPEG, MOV, AVI, or other video file played in a stand alone player would be "better".
Just because something is appropriate for children, does not make it "just for children".
I own a DS and I have a couple dozen games for it. I play it about two hours a day on the way to and from work on the train each day. Unlike posters who have mentioned similar activity, I can not report having seen anyone playing a DS or a PSP on the train. Maybe Philadelphia is a bit different, but I never see it.
A game like Barbie Horse Adventures, I'll agree. Probably just for kids. Kirby Squeak Squad, probably the same boat.
But what about New Super Mario Bros.? It's a new take on a classic. It's a great game. I'm 27, so it probably doesn't hurt that it panders directly to my age group, but still. My girlfriend reports she sees kids playing it at her work from time to time too. So that's a demographic with a roughly 20 year spread.
Brain Training is poster child for adult games on the DS. It's a system seller, not only for adults, but for adults who have never played video games! The 50 somethings and 60 somethings who do not have nostalgic memories of Super Mario or Sonic or Frogger, because when they were kids, they didn't exist. That's amazing to me.
Nintendogs is a cute Tomagotchi. Kids and girls love them. My girlfriend wanted one (but then never really mentioned it again, oddly). She's 25. I've never played it, because I don't need a time sink game like that (I already have Animal Crossing) and I just don't like dogs.
Animal Crossing. It's a cutesy little game. But it's FUN. At least for a while. It's fun to see all the things you can do in the little world they set up. It's fun to go after a certain style for your house and go to Nook's shop every day in hopes of finding whatever it was you were looking for.
Mario Kart. Again, it's a fun racing game. You could replace the characters with more futuristic hovercraft, and make the levels be more futuristic, call if F-Zero, and it would have sold less than half as much, because PEOPLE WANT MARIO KART, BECAUSE THEY KNOW MARIO KART TO BE FUN. I love me some F-Zero though.
Pokemon, I can't comment on. I've never played them. Not because it's Kiddy, but because I know what kind of game it is, and I don't want that kind of time sink when there are like 10 games or so in the series. I will agree though that this game is defiantly marketed at kids, not adults.
Warioware touched... I think Penny-Arcade said it: "Warioware games are the most fun you can have between breaths". Period. For the DS version, I was basically "Meh." I own it, but I couldn't get into it because the story is inane. And you can't skip any of it the first time through. I don't like skipping story in games. But Wario Ware should not HAVE a story to skip! I own WW:Twisted and WW:Smooth Moves for the GBA and Wii respectively, and they're excellent games. I don't see how you can put an age on these games. Non-gamers probably would not want to pick these up and play them, but they are a ton of fun.
Tetris is an amazing game for all ages. I have put far more hours into it than is healthy for anyone. Again, how can you put an age on this?
Yoshi's Island 2: Sequel to a game that is often heralded as one of the high points of the SNES. Unfortunately, it came out at the end of the SNES' lifetime. So the original did not sell that well. But I suspect that the majority of sales of the sequel are people who had at least played the original. It's as cutesy and sugary sweet as can be. That doesn't mean it's any less FUN for an adult.
Mario & Luigi 2: Partners in Time is great. It's a RPG in a Mario universe with slightly action oriented turn based combat. I've put it down for a while, but I'll probably return to it once I'm through with Hotel Dusk.
The rest I can't comment on, because they're either Japanese titles, or otherwise games I'm not familiar with.
I don't know how old you are, but I'm 27, and I think these titles are marketed squarely at me. I grew up with Mar
And other than the distinction of digital vs physical media, this is different than a library storing old newspapers how?
I can go in to my local library and see copies of the NY Times, or the Philadelphia Inquirer going back decades. Should that be stopped as well?
I think this is a case where copyright law is broken / not yet ready for this new digital world in which we live. Archive.org is a logical, (I would say obvious, but what do I know?) useful tool. It provides ways for anyone who wishes to to opt out, before OR after the fact. But by making it opt in, you would be negating it's usefulness. Just like search engines. The very concept works on a freedom of information exchange model. If you want something private, there are many mechanisms to do so. A poorly worded if-you-look-at-these-words-you-agree-to-my-terms contract is not one of them.
Not sure what you mean, so forgive me if you know what I'm trying to clarify.
When you say "I don't care if Sony got it" are you referring to the fact that if was ported to the PSP, or are you aware of the sad fact that Sony now owns Psygnosis, the company responsible for Lemmings?
I was truly sad when I realized this. But I found some small solice in Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis. It's described as like Lemmings. This is a lie. However if you are a Lemmings fan, there is gameplay you will probably enjoy here. Just don't expect it to be like Lemmings any more than Street Fighter II is like Double Dragon.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
I'll have to respectfully disagree. Windows is for work also. Linux is great as a hobiest OS, as it lets you play with the OS itself a great deal more than Windows does (and see the code, etc). Linux is also a wonderful, wonderful environment for a server, (Apache FTW!) but unofrtunatly it needs a good admin to truly shine.
But what if I want to create an Office Doc? Collaborate with my coworkers on a powerpoint presentation? Whare a virtual whiteboard? All these things either require Windows, or are made a great deal simpler by having Windows by virtue of the fact that the world runs on Windows.
Marketshare does so many things...
It makes Windows a defacto standard. It means that since most the people I know use it, I can use the same programs they do. With Linux I can try WiNE and pray it works right, or hope that a Linux equivelent program is "compatable enough". It means that if I have a problem that I've never run into before, and I'm not that computer saavy, I can find help online or IRL easily. With Linux, there is a true community that rallys around the OS, and this is one advantage it seems to have. But there's also an stigma of elitism that surrounds it. It's not for novices and if you didn't try x,y,and recompiling z, I'm not going to help you, becuase you're clearly too dumb. (I realize this will vary from person to person though, but I've never failed to been shocked at the nature of Linux people who want to grow the marketshare simultaniously having that elitist attitude.) It means that if there's something I want to do with my computer that I never thought of before (something perhaps obscure but specific) I can hit google, or download.com or any number of sites online and have a reasonable chance of finding a program (or perhaps dozens of programs to choose from) that already does what I want. If I want to turn flash animations into animated gifs, BOOM, DONE! If I want a program that'll let me track the chemistry of my aquariums, I'll find that too. If what I want to do involves a new piece of hardware, that'll have Windows drivers. Mac maybe. Linux maybe, but definatly Windows drivers.
So don't tell me Linux is for work. That's entirly subjective on what that work is. For a great many people, it would be nice to have their PC be flexible, so that if they do need to go get annother program or piece of hardware to add to what they already do, it'll be there for them, and won't be some terrible bugware sourceforge project that got a cool name, 2 months of effort put into it, and 1 update since 1998.
Playing on Windows is like using a pick-up truck to ride in Formula 1 race. Your analogy sucks. Are you saying that because a pickup is a jack of all trades, but not a master of that particular one? Are you saying that because you think Windows is slow? I'm not sure I even follow. In any rate, thre is no better gaming platform. I'll extend your bad analogy:
Playing on Windows is like using a pick-up truck to ride in Formula 1 race, when 99% of Formula 1 tracks are designed specificly for pick-up trucks. Playing on Linux is like trying to run a Formula 1 race in an experimental solar vehicle.
Just an aside - Why wouldn't you mod the post up because they're AC?
If the post has value, it should be modded up.
The moderation system isn't about rewarding people, (though that can be a happy side effect with the +1 posting ability and the -1 hit for negative Karma) it's about bringing the best posts to the top of the heap.
Browse at +5 and you should be able to see nothing but the creame of the crop of posts. Browse at -1 and you'll see everything. All the worst garbage and goatse trolls and gay nigger trolls and whatever other BS they're posting these days.
Now feel free to mod this as offtopic (since it is) but I see this a lot, and felt that well, I should reply to it.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
I was oplaying devil's advocate. But if you must know, I'd rather have something that's closed source with 95% market penetration than open with 1%. Once you have a disparity like that, openness is simply academic.
If you'd really like to know a bit more about why DirectX is the gaming monolith that it is, I'd suggest starting with a book called Renegades of the Empire: How Three Software Warriors Started a Revolution Behind the Walls of Fortress Microsoft. It chronicles how three guys in MS worked on the DX project secretly and without approval. They did so, because if you'll recall, back in the earlier Windows days (Pre 9x and early Win95) all PC gaming was done in DOS. Windows was considered a terrible platform for gaming. Then when 95 came around, it had native OpenGL support. You may recall it shipped with a few OpenGL based screen savers that were in various versions of Windows for years. As far as I can tell, this is about as far as OpenGL was utilized when 95 came out. Windows 95 was STILL considered a bad choice for a gaming platform because of all the overhead, etc. So games still ran in DOS. I remember games of the era. Wing Commander 3 for instance. A 9x version didn't ship until years later...
Then these three "renegades" decided that they needed to make Windows a platform which would be attractive for game developers. DirectX was their answer. Ease of development. Develop once for DX, and don't worry if the user has a Soundblaster, or Rolland, or AdLib or Herculees sound card. Let developers focus on a common interface. They did it in secret and by the time they let it loose upon the world, the executives at MS couldn't stop it. It was either embrace this thing that can only help Windows, or crush it and look bad in the process.
Obviously they chose to embrace it. Years later we're ten versions into it, and elements (such as audio) have changed a lot.
The point of this little story though is that developers were not embracing OpenGL. It was available to them. It was fully open. But they chose to ignore it, and developed games for DOS instead. Each game using it's own proprietary system for addressing memory, video, sound, etc.
DirectX may be a closed standard, but it is a standard. Almost every PC game that ships uses it. It works as long as your hardware is fast enough. I don't care that I can't see the code that runs it. I can develop for it. Right now if I choose. A hobiest with almost no programming experience. I can pick up an SDK and get going.
In every meaningful way, it's as good or better than the comparable open technologies that exist.
You could play Tux racer and Doom 3. Or you could have FEAR, Half-Life Half-Life 2, Max Payne, Starcraft, WoW, Flight Simulator, SWAT 4, Black & White, Company of Heros, and dozens of other games that come out for DirectX, and hence, for Windows.
If I want to play games (Among other things...) I choose Windows. I *do* want to play games, so I do choose Windows.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
That's correct-ish. DX10 does abandon support for DirectSound, the previous hardware acceleration standard for Windows sound. However they are doing so to embrace a more open standard OpenAL.
But I guess we'll put that aside and bash Microsoft anyway because that's what we do here. Never mind the fact that that the slashdot community as a whole crys for open source and bashes MS for keeping their software closed source.
Sometimes you have to abandon legacy to move on (not doing so is what is usually refered to as "code bloat". Perhaps you've heard of it?). This is just a bit more... abrupt than usual.
Really? Because cost is the only reason I wouldn't go with a mac notebook over a non apple one now that they've switched to Intel chips and can run windows. Well, that and the single mouse button thing, but I'm sure I could adapt to that...
Let's go down the list shall we? I'll gladly compare any Mac to PCs on Best Buy's web site. I'm only using the one retailer for the sake of ease of looking, and I don't think it'd be fair for me to troll the entire internet in the hopes of finding some obscure seller liquidating PCs cheaper than is reasonable. For that same reason, I will only use the MSRP listed on Best Buy's site, as the sale prices are often below cost. I acknowlege ahead of time that there are features you'll find on the Macs that you usually won't on the PC (some Mac screen sizes tend to be uncommon for PCs) the breakaway power connector, built in bluetooth, and obviously OSX. However this *IS* an apples and oranges comparison after all.
For $1,099.00 I can get either
* 13" White MacBook
* 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 512MB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 60GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* Combo drive (meaning it will read and write CDs, but only read DVDs)
Let's start with the first, most comprable PC I found:
* Lenovo 3000 N Series
* 15.4" Widescreen
* 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 80GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL drive
Oh, and it's only $950 If the OS is not a consideration for you, then the Lenovo will be a better buy unless it's too physically big. (13 inch is an odball size, so if you need that, the advantage is to apple). The bluetooth can be added for well under the premium apple charges for their machine. To say nothing of the extras you get in the Lenovo for less money.
If processor speed is not the most important factor, the field opens up considerably:
for $1100 (same price as the base macbook) you can also get
* Gateway MT6821
* 15.4" Widescreen
* 1.6GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 2GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 160GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL drive Same issue with the screen. The mac is probably cheapest deal in that size class. But if other factors matter, you can get a whole lot more form a PC. the Mac's chip is a bit quicker though, but the PC comes with four times the RAM out of the box, and almost three times the drive space.
Next up for $1299.00:
* 13" White MacBook
* 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 80GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* Double-layer SuperDrive (Dual Layer DVD+-RW)
or for the same price: ($1299.99) you can get:
* Toshiba U205-S5057
* 1.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-4200)
* 160GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL
This is more of a toss-up. Very similar, but the PC has more drive space and a smaller form factor (and screen). The Mac has a faster CPU and faster RAM.
Basicly, from what I'm seeing, if you want a small screen, or a faster CPU, Apple may be a better deal. But otherwise, go with someone else. to say nothing of the fact that other manufacturers machines can go on sale. Apple won't allow that. You pay the same all the time.
Personally, I'm still looking at apple, because I want a sub 14" machine for my commute. But we'll see what pans out.
It's not a rose. It's like a balloon or something. When you vote, it changes the color of your Mii's shirt to the color of the section you voted for. When you predict the direction of a vote, your Mii pulls out a balloon matching that color. In this case, the person recording the video voted green, and then predicted red, hence the red balloon (which I suppose could easily be mistaken for a rose all things considered).
So it's really not all that involved on Nintendo's part.
They're fucking links. You click them, and the page loads. Only takes a few seconds. Even with dialup. Is it to trying for you? You're breaking my heart.
Would YOU want to explain to someone that their product burned down your house because of their product if they couldn't speak a lick of English? I'm not talking King's English here, I just mean and version of English that could be understood without having to guess at what's being said.
Companies should consider it an act of courtesy by the company towards the consumer that the individuals who the consumer will be dealing with can speak English to a degree of conversation that is much higher that the current standard of "Hi Sir, my name is Joe Average." Customers have enough problems-That is why they are calling Tech Support in the first place. Customers also know there is little to no chance of fixing their problem when they can't understand the person on the other end.
Masterful.
What about people who can't write English?
What about when they try to post on mostly English speaking forums (like Slashdot)?
You think it will make any signifigant difference? What is "a lot"? They already sell them as fast as they make them, what difference do you see a mod chip making?
They do though! But they planned much better for it.
The Cell processor uses 7 cores, but each one has 8 physical cores on it.
The reason for this is that they expect a roughly 1 in 8 failure rate of the cores (or close to it). By having 8 cores, many chip yields will have one bad core, but it's okay. They test them, disable the bad core, and ship the chip with the dead portion disabled.
When they happen to have a good chip with all cores good, it'e either used for other applications, or it has a random core disabled anyway and goes into a ps3.
When there's more than one core dead, I'm not sure what they do. I'd guess they either scrap it, or use it in less demanding applications.
It's a somewhat clever model. But it makes me wonder if they're releasing chips with cores that might me marginal into the market.
Surely you're trolling, but I'll take the chance that you;re ignorant.
1) Bitlocker has been named as an example. I won't go further into it. 2) User account control. - No more running as root by default! This has long been one of the biggest criticisms of Windows, and rightfully so. It doesn't fix it completly, but it's a step in the right direction. 3) Shadow Copy - Data integrity can be a major concern. MAny people don't do backups, especially those who aren't tech saavy. With shadow copy, you can just restore the origional proposal that your boss overwrote with a memo reminding you to please file the TPS reports on time. 4) Windows Meeting Space (I think that's what it's called) - A collaborative program that lets users log in and share documents / white board space, etc. If I host the meeting, I own the document, so there's only one copy having changes made to it. Once we're done, I can choose to push it out to you, or keep the only copy myself. This should make remote project managment easier (in some instances).
Nothing would stop TPM from being adopted by Linux, Mac OS, etc. Form a standards body to govern it. Perhaps make it an ieee project. Compete with Microsoft's on even ground. (Unless this isn't strictly a MS project, I could be mistaken there).
This is a feature. It's a feature that you and many of the slashdot crowd don't like, however nothing, short of your attitudes would keep Linux, etc. from adopting this type of technology.
The problems I see are that the type of people who go to linux do so because they don't like this. So it wouldn't be adopoted if implemented. Therefore there's no reason to develop it, unless someone does it because "they can".
I could see IBM or someone doing something with this. I just don't see it getting any traction.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not that it was bad. It's that it's become bad by today's standards. Hell, by the standards set a few years later.
Super Mario Bros. was an amazing, huge game at the time. But it was buggy at times, and glitchy, and the control wasn't very well rounded out. You couldn't go backwards, etc, etc. You can make the argument that the lack of left scrolling was an artistic decision, but it wasn't. It was a technical limitation given the game's scope at that early era of the NES's lifetime.
Compare it to SMB 2 (USA) or SMB3. It's not just that you can do more (you can). It's not just that you can move more freely (you can). It's not just easier to see what's going on on screen (it is). It's that the game controls well on the newer ones. You really can't improve much over the level of control you had on SMB 2 & 3. That's why New Super Mario Bros controls like Mario 3 in most ways that matter. SMB1 was a great prototype. My problem is that it didn't age well. Other games have stood the test of time. I can still pick up Zelda 1 and play through it without feeling like something is missing. I can do that with SMB3. I cant' do it with SMB1, a game I adored when I got my NES.
I would say the same about Doom 1&2. Both helped to usher in a new era in gameplay (the FPS). But play anything released after Unreal or Quake, and then play Doom. Lack of a z axis, no mouse integration to speak of, and other factors make it an important historical footnote, but an unfun game once you play something a bit more evolved.
Super Mario Bros 1 suffers the same problem. Gaming history is littered with titles that broke new ground, and were later eclipsed by what would be considered mediocre titles a year later.
"Was simple gaming better?"
Depends. There's games that are compelx and terrible, and there are games that are complex and amazing (Supreme Commander, hopefully Spore)
there were also simple games that were and are amazing (Tetris) and simple games that were just horrible (Amagon, Super Mario Bros. 1 by today's standards (I'll elaborate if anyone cares))
"Are you a story in games fan?"
Yes I am. But it depends on the story, and the game. I just picked up Wing Island last night for the Wii. If I had known about the story, I would probably have thought twice. Gameplay is okay, but it's no Pilotwings (what I was hoping for). On the other hand, I absolutly love Hotel Dusk. Maniac Mansion continues to be one of my all time favorites, and the Half-Life series are great because of not only the story, but how that story is told. Wing Commander showed that cinematic games can be fun, if done right.
There's lots of examples of good story driven games. Not all of them new. And there's lots of examples of games that are fun without much story (Super Mario Bros. 3 continues to be a favorite of mine) and even some examples of decent games *dammaged* by the inclusion of a story (Super Monkey Ball, Bomberman, Wario Ware, etc, etc.)
Anyone who reviews my post history or goosles me, and digs a little will find that I'm not exactly a proponent of wikipedia.
But there is no black or white here. Wikipedia is not apropriate for serious use, where it's important to be correct. But it's a massive quick and dirty database. If I want to know what X is and I've never heard of it, I can go to wikipedia and get an overview. If the authors did their due dilligence, I can find a decent collection of links off site that will tell me a bit abotu the subject matter.
Wikipedia can be a useful tool. Just not for most important applications.
Let's use a programming analogy. The "right" way to deploy a new application cross platform would be to code it in C or Java, or some other language apropriate to the task, and fine tune each version for each platform, and hunt for bugs on each platform. Annother, quick, relativly painless way, if it were an unimportant, trivial task, would be to just put together a web based Java applett, or perhaps even a flash object if it's simple enough. Hell, millions do this with YouTube, every day because it's "good enough". Even though an MPEG, MOV, AVI, or other video file played in a stand alone player would be "better".
Just because something is appropriate for children, does not make it "just for children".
I own a DS and I have a couple dozen games for it. I play it about two hours a day on the way to and from work on the train each day. Unlike posters who have mentioned similar activity, I can not report having seen anyone playing a DS or a PSP on the train. Maybe Philadelphia is a bit different, but I never see it.
A game like Barbie Horse Adventures, I'll agree. Probably just for kids. Kirby Squeak Squad, probably the same boat.
But what about New Super Mario Bros.? It's a new take on a classic. It's a great game. I'm 27, so it probably doesn't hurt that it panders directly to my age group, but still. My girlfriend reports she sees kids playing it at her work from time to time too. So that's a demographic with a roughly 20 year spread.
Brain Training is poster child for adult games on the DS. It's a system seller, not only for adults, but for adults who have never played video games! The 50 somethings and 60 somethings who do not have nostalgic memories of Super Mario or Sonic or Frogger, because when they were kids, they didn't exist. That's amazing to me.
Nintendogs is a cute Tomagotchi. Kids and girls love them. My girlfriend wanted one (but then never really mentioned it again, oddly). She's 25. I've never played it, because I don't need a time sink game like that (I already have Animal Crossing) and I just don't like dogs.
Animal Crossing. It's a cutesy little game. But it's FUN. At least for a while. It's fun to see all the things you can do in the little world they set up. It's fun to go after a certain style for your house and go to Nook's shop every day in hopes of finding whatever it was you were looking for.
Mario Kart. Again, it's a fun racing game. You could replace the characters with more futuristic hovercraft, and make the levels be more futuristic, call if F-Zero, and it would have sold less than half as much, because PEOPLE WANT MARIO KART, BECAUSE THEY KNOW MARIO KART TO BE FUN. I love me some F-Zero though.
Pokemon, I can't comment on. I've never played them. Not because it's Kiddy, but because I know what kind of game it is, and I don't want that kind of time sink when there are like 10 games or so in the series. I will agree though that this game is defiantly marketed at kids, not adults.
Warioware touched... I think Penny-Arcade said it: "Warioware games are the most fun you can have between breaths". Period. For the DS version, I was basically "Meh." I own it, but I couldn't get into it because the story is inane. And you can't skip any of it the first time through. I don't like skipping story in games. But Wario Ware should not HAVE a story to skip! I own WW:Twisted and WW:Smooth Moves for the GBA and Wii respectively, and they're excellent games. I don't see how you can put an age on these games. Non-gamers probably would not want to pick these up and play them, but they are a ton of fun.
Tetris is an amazing game for all ages. I have put far more hours into it than is healthy for anyone. Again, how can you put an age on this?
Yoshi's Island 2: Sequel to a game that is often heralded as one of the high points of the SNES. Unfortunately, it came out at the end of the SNES' lifetime. So the original did not sell that well. But I suspect that the majority of sales of the sequel are people who had at least played the original. It's as cutesy and sugary sweet as can be. That doesn't mean it's any less FUN for an adult.
Mario & Luigi 2: Partners in Time is great. It's a RPG in a Mario universe with slightly action oriented turn based combat. I've put it down for a while, but I'll probably return to it once I'm through with Hotel Dusk.
The rest I can't comment on, because they're either Japanese titles, or otherwise games I'm not familiar with.
I don't know how old you are, but I'm 27, and I think these titles are marketed squarely at me. I grew up with Mar
Now the question is what will happen going forward, when AmErIcAnIdOl62614 logs on to ITMS, and sees the following choice:
Artist Title DRM Price DRM-free Price
Justin Timberlake Something $.99(click here) $1.29(click here)
Justin Timberlake Some Song $.99(click here) $1.29(click here)
Where is the average joe and jane six pack going to click?
Okay, now look at what an MP3 Player AND a phone would cost you.
Now factor in the extra functionality that the iPhone will have.
I think you oversimplify things quite a bit. They are different products with some overlap.
Already been done.
Well, I don't know about the RAM.
And other than the distinction of digital vs physical media, this is different than a library storing old newspapers how?
I can go in to my local library and see copies of the NY Times, or the Philadelphia Inquirer going back decades. Should that be stopped as well?
I think this is a case where copyright law is broken / not yet ready for this new digital world in which we live. Archive.org is a logical, (I would say obvious, but what do I know?) useful tool. It provides ways for anyone who wishes to to opt out, before OR after the fact. But by making it opt in, you would be negating it's usefulness. Just like search engines. The very concept works on a freedom of information exchange model. If you want something private, there are many mechanisms to do so. A poorly worded if-you-look-at-these-words-you-agree-to-my-terms contract is not one of them.
Not sure what you mean, so forgive me if you know what I'm trying to clarify.
When you say "I don't care if Sony got it" are you referring to the fact that if was ported to the PSP, or are you aware of the sad fact that Sony now owns Psygnosis, the company responsible for Lemmings?
I was truly sad when I realized this. But I found some small solice in Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis. It's described as like Lemmings. This is a lie. However if you are a Lemmings fan, there is gameplay you will probably enjoy here. Just don't expect it to be like Lemmings any more than Street Fighter II is like Double Dragon.
I'll have to respectfully disagree. Windows is for work also. Linux is great as a hobiest OS, as it lets you play with the OS itself a great deal more than Windows does (and see the code, etc). Linux is also a wonderful, wonderful environment for a server, (Apache FTW!) but unofrtunatly it needs a good admin to truly shine.
But what if I want to create an Office Doc? Collaborate with my coworkers on a powerpoint presentation? Whare a virtual whiteboard? All these things either require Windows, or are made a great deal simpler by having Windows by virtue of the fact that the world runs on Windows.
Marketshare does so many things...
It makes Windows a defacto standard.
It means that since most the people I know use it, I can use the same programs they do. With Linux I can try WiNE and pray it works right, or hope that a Linux equivelent program is "compatable enough".
It means that if I have a problem that I've never run into before, and I'm not that computer saavy, I can find help online or IRL easily. With Linux, there is a true community that rallys around the OS, and this is one advantage it seems to have. But there's also an stigma of elitism that surrounds it. It's not for novices and if you didn't try x,y,and recompiling z, I'm not going to help you, becuase you're clearly too dumb. (I realize this will vary from person to person though, but I've never failed to been shocked at the nature of Linux people who want to grow the marketshare simultaniously having that elitist attitude.)
It means that if there's something I want to do with my computer that I never thought of before (something perhaps obscure but specific) I can hit google, or download.com or any number of sites online and have a reasonable chance of finding a program (or perhaps dozens of programs to choose from) that already does what I want. If I want to turn flash animations into animated gifs, BOOM, DONE! If I want a program that'll let me track the chemistry of my aquariums, I'll find that too. If what I want to do involves a new piece of hardware, that'll have Windows drivers. Mac maybe. Linux maybe, but definatly Windows drivers.
So don't tell me Linux is for work. That's entirly subjective on what that work is. For a great many people, it would be nice to have their PC be flexible, so that if they do need to go get annother program or piece of hardware to add to what they already do, it'll be there for them, and won't be some terrible bugware sourceforge project that got a cool name, 2 months of effort put into it, and 1 update since 1998.
Playing on Windows is like using a pick-up truck to ride in Formula 1 race.
Your analogy sucks. Are you saying that because a pickup is a jack of all trades, but not a master of that particular one? Are you saying that because you think Windows is slow? I'm not sure I even follow. In any rate, thre is no better gaming platform. I'll extend your bad analogy:
Playing on Windows is like using a pick-up truck to ride in Formula 1 race, when 99% of Formula 1 tracks are designed specificly for pick-up trucks. Playing on Linux is like trying to run a Formula 1 race in an experimental solar vehicle.
Just an aside - Why wouldn't you mod the post up because they're AC?
If the post has value, it should be modded up.
The moderation system isn't about rewarding people, (though that can be a happy side effect with the +1 posting ability and the -1 hit for negative Karma) it's about bringing the best posts to the top of the heap.
Browse at +5 and you should be able to see nothing but the creame of the crop of posts. Browse at -1 and you'll see everything. All the worst garbage and goatse trolls and gay nigger trolls and whatever other BS they're posting these days.
Now feel free to mod this as offtopic (since it is) but I see this a lot, and felt that well, I should reply to it.
I was oplaying devil's advocate. But if you must know, I'd rather have something that's closed source with 95% market penetration than open with 1%. Once you have a disparity like that, openness is simply academic.
If you'd really like to know a bit more about why DirectX is the gaming monolith that it is, I'd suggest starting with a book called Renegades of the Empire: How Three Software Warriors Started a Revolution Behind the Walls of Fortress Microsoft . It chronicles how three guys in MS worked on the DX project secretly and without approval. They did so, because if you'll recall, back in the earlier Windows days (Pre 9x and early Win95) all PC gaming was done in DOS. Windows was considered a terrible platform for gaming. Then when 95 came around, it had native OpenGL support. You may recall it shipped with a few OpenGL based screen savers that were in various versions of Windows for years. As far as I can tell, this is about as far as OpenGL was utilized when 95 came out. Windows 95 was STILL considered a bad choice for a gaming platform because of all the overhead, etc. So games still ran in DOS. I remember games of the era. Wing Commander 3 for instance. A 9x version didn't ship until years later...
Then these three "renegades" decided that they needed to make Windows a platform which would be attractive for game developers. DirectX was their answer. Ease of development. Develop once for DX, and don't worry if the user has a Soundblaster, or Rolland, or AdLib or Herculees sound card. Let developers focus on a common interface. They did it in secret and by the time they let it loose upon the world, the executives at MS couldn't stop it. It was either embrace this thing that can only help Windows, or crush it and look bad in the process.
Obviously they chose to embrace it. Years later we're ten versions into it, and elements (such as audio) have changed a lot.
The point of this little story though is that developers were not embracing OpenGL. It was available to them. It was fully open. But they chose to ignore it, and developed games for DOS instead. Each game using it's own proprietary system for addressing memory, video, sound, etc.
DirectX may be a closed standard, but it is a standard. Almost every PC game that ships uses it. It works as long as your hardware is fast enough. I don't care that I can't see the code that runs it. I can develop for it. Right now if I choose. A hobiest with almost no programming experience. I can pick up an SDK and get going.
In every meaningful way, it's as good or better than the comparable open technologies that exist.
You could play Tux racer and Doom 3. Or you could have FEAR, Half-Life Half-Life 2, Max Payne, Starcraft, WoW, Flight Simulator, SWAT 4, Black & White, Company of Heros, and dozens of other games that come out for DirectX, and hence, for Windows.
If I want to play games (Among other things...) I choose Windows. I *do* want to play games, so I do choose Windows.
That's correct-ish. DX10 does abandon support for DirectSound, the previous hardware acceleration standard for Windows sound. However they are doing so to embrace a more open standard OpenAL.
But I guess we'll put that aside and bash Microsoft anyway because that's what we do here. Never mind the fact that that the slashdot community as a whole crys for open source and bashes MS for keeping their software closed source.
Sometimes you have to abandon legacy to move on (not doing so is what is usually refered to as "code bloat". Perhaps you've heard of it?). This is just a bit more... abrupt than usual.
Really? Because cost is the only reason I wouldn't go with a mac notebook over a non apple one now that they've switched to Intel chips and can run windows. Well, that and the single mouse button thing, but I'm sure I could adapt to that...
Let's go down the list shall we?
I'll gladly compare any Mac to PCs on Best Buy's web site. I'm only using the one retailer for the sake of ease of looking, and I don't think it'd be fair for me to troll the entire internet in the hopes of finding some obscure seller liquidating PCs cheaper than is reasonable. For that same reason, I will only use the MSRP listed on Best Buy's site, as the sale prices are often below cost. I acknowlege ahead of time that there are features you'll find on the Macs that you usually won't on the PC (some Mac screen sizes tend to be uncommon for PCs) the breakaway power connector, built in bluetooth, and obviously OSX. However this *IS* an apples and oranges comparison after all.
For $1,099.00 I can get either
* 13" White MacBook
* 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 512MB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 60GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* Combo drive (meaning it will read and write CDs, but only read DVDs)
Let's start with the first, most comprable PC I found:
* Lenovo 3000 N Series
* 15.4" Widescreen
* 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 80GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL drive
Oh, and it's only $950
If the OS is not a consideration for you, then the Lenovo will be a better buy unless it's too physically big. (13 inch is an odball size, so if you need that, the advantage is to apple). The bluetooth can be added for well under the premium apple charges for their machine. To say nothing of the extras you get in the Lenovo for less money.
If processor speed is not the most important factor, the field opens up considerably:
for $1100 (same price as the base macbook) you can also get
* Gateway MT6821
* 15.4" Widescreen
* 1.6GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 2GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 160GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL drive
Same issue with the screen. The mac is probably cheapest deal in that size class. But if other factors matter, you can get a whole lot more form a PC. the Mac's chip is a bit quicker though, but the PC comes with four times the RAM out of the box, and almost three times the drive space.
Next up for $1299.00:
* 13" White MacBook
* 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-5300)
* 80GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* Double-layer SuperDrive (Dual Layer DVD+-RW)
or for the same price: ($1299.99) you can get:
* Toshiba U205-S5057
* 1.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* 1GB memory (DDR2-4200)
* 160GB hard drive (5400 RPM SATA)
* DVD+-RW/DL
This is more of a toss-up. Very similar, but the PC has more drive space and a smaller form factor (and screen). The Mac has a faster CPU and faster RAM.
Basicly, from what I'm seeing, if you want a small screen, or a faster CPU, Apple may be a better deal. But otherwise, go with someone else. to say nothing of the fact that other manufacturers machines can go on sale. Apple won't allow that. You pay the same all the time.
Personally, I'm still looking at apple, because I want a sub 14" machine for my commute. But we'll see what pans out.
Wow, you bring an aweful lot ot this conversation, don't you?
Why are you even reading / posting to a thread like this then?
So what's this "very compelling" reason? You've got me on the edge of my seat.
It's not a rose. It's like a balloon or something. When you vote, it changes the color of your Mii's shirt to the color of the section you voted for. When you predict the direction of a vote, your Mii pulls out a balloon matching that color. In this case, the person recording the video voted green, and then predicted red, hence the red balloon (which I suppose could easily be mistaken for a rose all things considered).
So it's really not all that involved on Nintendo's part.
Jesus Christ, why don't you cry about it?
They're fucking links. You click them, and the page loads. Only takes a few seconds. Even with dialup. Is it to trying for you? You're breaking my heart.
In short, no.
Their computer division is hardly the reason. The ipod is.
Masterful.
What about people who can't write English?
What about when they try to post on mostly English speaking forums (like Slashdot)?
You think it will make any signifigant difference? What is "a lot"? They already sell them as fast as they make them, what difference do you see a mod chip making?
It IS way high. So I double checked.
The actual numbers are even higher though. 10-20% yields.
This is a big reason the cell chip costs so much.
They do though! But they planned much better for it.
The Cell processor uses 7 cores, but each one has 8 physical cores on it.
The reason for this is that they expect a roughly 1 in 8 failure rate of the cores (or close to it). By having 8 cores, many chip yields will have one bad core, but it's okay. They test them, disable the bad core, and ship the chip with the dead portion disabled.
When they happen to have a good chip with all cores good, it'e either used for other applications, or it has a random core disabled anyway and goes into a ps3.
When there's more than one core dead, I'm not sure what they do. I'd guess they either scrap it, or use it in less demanding applications.
It's a somewhat clever model. But it makes me wonder if they're releasing chips with cores that might me marginal into the market.
Surely you're trolling, but I'll take the chance that you;re ignorant.
1) Bitlocker has been named as an example. I won't go further into it.
2) User account control. - No more running as root by default! This has long been one of the biggest criticisms of Windows, and rightfully so. It doesn't fix it completly, but it's a step in the right direction.
3) Shadow Copy - Data integrity can be a major concern. MAny people don't do backups, especially those who aren't tech saavy. With shadow copy, you can just restore the origional proposal that your boss overwrote with a memo reminding you to please file the TPS reports on time.
4) Windows Meeting Space (I think that's what it's called) - A collaborative program that lets users log in and share documents / white board space, etc. If I host the meeting, I own the document, so there's only one copy having changes made to it. Once we're done, I can choose to push it out to you, or keep the only copy myself. This should make remote project managment easier (in some instances).
Nothing would stop TPM from being adopted by Linux, Mac OS, etc. Form a standards body to govern it. Perhaps make it an ieee project. Compete with Microsoft's on even ground. (Unless this isn't strictly a MS project, I could be mistaken there).
This is a feature. It's a feature that you and many of the slashdot crowd don't like, however nothing, short of your attitudes would keep Linux, etc. from adopting this type of technology.
The problems I see are that the type of people who go to linux do so because they don't like this. So it wouldn't be adopoted if implemented. Therefore there's no reason to develop it, unless someone does it because "they can".
I could see IBM or someone doing something with this. I just don't see it getting any traction.