yes, i can see your point. having to be careful what applications you select is often the mark of a superior, or even adequate, system.
And blindly using whatever Apple thinks is best without making a choice is better somehow? Spare me.
again, being required to think follow specific procedures to remain safe is obviously superior to not having to worry about it.
Heaven forbid we have to actually think while using our machines. To get the other benefits PCs have over Macs, i'll gladly spend the 2 seconds to delete a message when I get something suspicious.
And 99% of the time such messages have their virus-laden attachments stripped by my mail provider automatically anyway.
so why do you, and millions of others, have to run ad-aware and spybot all those times? why don't similar programs exist for the mac?
Because Windows has a vastly bigger market share and properties that make it easier to get malware on. Thus it is targeted more than Apple.
As I said, though, I hardly ever find anything on such scans, and when I do, it's usually just a couple cookies or something.
Oh, and just so you know, the scans don't take all that long, and can be scheduled to run in the middle of the night or somesuch, just like a lot of other routine security checks.
The whole "OMG you have to actually do something to secure your computer, Windows sux0rs!" line Mac zealots love to spout is just plain wrong.
It isn't hard work, it doesn't take a lot of time, and I consider actually having to think a little far preferable to being a zombie Mac zealot like you. People like you are the ones that give decent Mac users a bad name.
hmmm... not worrying about basic security procedures or good sense, creates a mess on one platform but not another. yet this doesn't make either superior in that aspect? something certainly is damned stupid.
The idiocy of this statement just astounds me. If ever the day comes when a virus/worm on the scale of some of the Windows nasties is developed for Apples, the vast majority of the community is going to have absolutely no idea how to deal with it.
This is what perplexes me. How are consoles so popular when they run at grotesquely low resolution?
Have you actually played any games on a modern console? In my experience, the lower resolution does not have anywhere near the effect you seem to be think it does, unless the game is horribly programed or otherwise badly made.
I happen to think that my time is kinda valuable and if by using a mac I can surf the web and not have to spend lots of my time cleaning off spyware etc every week/month then I say, its absolutely fucking 'superior'
So, the Windows version of Firefox i'm using that lets me avoid 99% of the spyware out there doesn't exist or something? Are all the times i've run Ad-aware and Spybot and come up with nothing just figments of my imagination?
Same arguement can also be made here..oh wait, when was my Mac infected with an email borne virus.....oh thats right, it hasn't So again, the lack of downtime, is a huge plus, thereby gaining my approval of the 'superior' tag..
Yeah, it's not like anyone could use a non-Outlook email client and not stupidly open unknown attachments, etc., right? Funny, i've been using Windows ever since 3.1, and have never gotten an email virus. Or a virus of any other kind, for that matter.
Please, i'm not saying Windows doesn't have its share of problems. But refusing to follow basic security procedures or good sense when you're using it, and using the mess that results to claim another platform as superior is just damned stupid.
but I don't think anybody will hold back on buying a Mac just because there aren't enough games for it.
Well, count me as one person against that statement. If the Mac had the level of game support Windows PC's do, i'd seriously think about getting one - my Windows box is very usable at this point, but I will admit a lot of stuff Apple does is attractive.
Same with Linux - it's great and all, but unless you want to play FPS games and a relatively small number of other crossplatform games, you're out of luck in that area. And not to mention all the non-gaming Windows software that has no true equal under Linux.
And yes, I know about Transgaming. Tried it for 6 months using both the binary package and compiling it myself, couldn't get a single game to work like it did under Windows, cancelled my subscription.
Well usually, if you're one of the only ones who's having major problems, and everyone else is perfectly fine, something's going wrong.
Since apparently you're not abusing your stuff after all, there's another factor there somewhere. Maybe your friend is doing stuff when you're not there. I see that you're (apparently) a college student - maybe someone is abusing your stuff while you're out. Maybe you're just pissed off and don't feel like admitting anything. Maybe you're just incredibly unlucky, I don't know.
When was the last time *you* did that?
Last weekend. Every weekend, usually.
Hell, you're the one that repeatedly drops your consoles from the dresser to the floor, and you're accusing *me* of not taking care of my gear?
Perhaps I should have been more specific. The PS1 took 3 flights off a dresser at various times during my first year of college, 4 years ago, while I was still stuck in a crowded dorm room.
These days, my consoles get lifted up so I can dust under them, and that's it.
In short, I'm in a bad mood, so fuck you. Sony makes cheap consumer electronics, and you're full of shit.
I was going to apologize and say that maybe I was in a bad mood myself, and assumed too much, but after that - forget it. Funny though. I have to wonder why you kept buying Sony products at all if they "mysteriously" failed without you doing anything.
You sound like the people I deal with on tech support calls, who swear up and down that they never touched anything, the inanimate computer/OS just decided to self-destruct all by itself on a whim.
So, fuck you as well, my friend, and may the mysterious force destroying your Sony equipment murder all the rest of your stuff as well.
Actually, this geek now associates "Nintendo" with "sleazebag company that I won't ever buy from again." There is no fury like that of a geek scorned.
How you know that, i'd love to know. The mentality around here of "If I don't like something, everyone else must hate it too" gets really annoying sometimes.
No, I'm asking you because I've looked and found nothing, and you're purporting to be some sort of authority on the subject.
No, i can read big lists of games at GameFAQs. An authority I am not. You're the one that keeps mentioning Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon games as if they somehow make the entire library worthless.
Metroid Prime has about 10 hours of gameplay, and which point it sits and collects dust. Great game, but terrible value.
Depends what you like in replay value, I suppose. There's different difficulty levels, trying to get 100% items collected, doing speed runs, low item collection runs, sequence breaking, using the whole GBA connectivity thing to play the original Metroid on the Cube, etc. etc.
Super Monkey Ball, Wario Ware, and Donkey Conga are more gimmicky crap at best. Especially Donkey Conga.
You are not in the majority here, except perhaps on Donkey Konga. Even that one has still gotten halfway decent reviews from most people, though.
And then there's Baiten Kaitos - a card game.
No, actually it's an RPG that uses cards as part of the battle system. What is it with you and cards, anyway?
Harvest Moon - you'll have to forgive me if playing a game based on a young kid on a farm isn't exciting.
That's a matter of personal preference. I don't like it much either, but many people love the series, and it is an exclusive that doesn't involve Mario/Link/Pokemon.
And FF:CC was hands-down the biggest upset I've ever had over a game. I've been waiting for a solid Secret of Mana successor for years. Then, they release that pile of shit... *ugh* There was nothing redeeming about that game.
You expected it to be something it wasn't and was never claimed to be? Golly gee, it really must suck then! No doubt you never tried playing it with more than one person, either, when it was heavily portrayed as a multiplayer-centric game.
Look, I never said every game on the systems were bad. I said the library sucks. There are games on the GCN I like, but one or two isn't enough to make having the system worthwhile. The GBA on the other hand... *shudder*
Okay...You said "I love my Gamecube and GBA for the hardware,", so i'm assuming you own at least one of each. Why did you buy them, when there's so much information out there on the available games, and you seem to hate about 95% of the current titles?
If you bought them at launch, risking that you might or might not like their libraries, then it's your own fault.
Where's the epic RPG? How about some mech combat, or some turn-based strategy that doesn't look like Pokemon with guns and swords?
It's been widely known for quite some time now that the GC is a very weak system RPG and strategy-wise. If all you play is RPGs and other such games, you should have done your research before you bought one. If you don't already own one, go buy a PS2 or XBox, it sounds like you'd be a lot happier.
Christ, if the GBA had more ports, I'd probably be happier - the SNES had probably the best library of any console ever
Okay, you'd be happier with more ports. Why, then, did you ask me " So, do me a favor then - name one RPG title on the GBA or GCN that doesn't play like the ones I've mentioned, isn't cross-platform, and isn't a card game."
Which is it? Either you like cross-platform games/ports or you don't.
they choose to port tired, old SNES games with minor graphic updates (Sword of Mana, River City Ransom), Mario Bros. 3
Umm, Sword of Mana was actually a heavily remade version of Final Fantasy Adventure, a Gameboy game, River City Ransom was an NES game, and Mario 3 was an NES game updated to an SNES game updated to the GBA.
That's why I'm so bitter about the system and think the DS will suck. Because Nintendo's style of games don't appeal to me, and they don't have the sense to get any decent 3rd party support.
So don't farking buy one. Ignore it completely and refuse to give Nintendo your money for it.
Nintendo won't give a damn, you'll be happier, and the rest of us will be happier not listening to you rant about how much you hate it.
So, do me a favor then - name one RPG title on the GBA or GCN that doesn't play like the ones I've mentioned, isn't cross-platform, and isn't a card game.
So you want me to find a title that doesn't fall within your gigantic range of biases? Hey, I can't help it if you want to limit yourself like that.
Just to humor you, though, Tales of Symphonia might count. The two main characters are not little kids, and there's a large amount of relatively complex dialogue that's wordy without reaching the insanity level of, say, Xenogears.
No doubt you'll probably think of some reason ToS doesn't fit your criteria either, though.
There's a lot of Japanese-only (at the moment) games out there that would possibly fit as well...But I don't know Japanese myself, so can't really evaluate them.
but the exclusive game lineup on both systems is complete and utter shit for anyone that doesn't like Mario, Pokemon, or Link to the Past clones.
Ikaruga Metroid Prime Pikmin Super Monkey Ball Donkey Konga Wario Ware Baten Kaitos Harvest Moon FF: Crystal Chronicles
There's a few I can think of from memory. Again, i'm sure you could come up with some more if you actually took the time to look.
Further, the fact that you're asking me to come up with titles only further illustrates how little you know about what's available, outside the narrow range that you think constitutes Nintendo's entire library.
Nintendo's portable systems are dominated by games like, say, Golden Sun, Megaman: Battle Network, and Pokemon. In each instance, the main character is extremely young, the dialogue is insultingly simple and/or convoluted
Oh, so you think Nintendo's the only one putting out simple, kid-friendly games? Go browse the PS1 and PS2 title lists at GameFAQs sometime.
And that's to say nothing about all the games for Nintendo systems which don't fit your "kiddie" criteria in any way, shape, or form. I notice you didn't bother to list anyofthose
and Nintendo pulls all sorts of crap like this.
I quote, from the page you linked to -
"Today, Nintendo does not actively censor the games it releases. Games such as the infamous Conker's Bad Fur Day, which include swearing, blood, and sex are now openly published under the Nintendo banner, as long as they carry with them a "M for Mature Gamers" rating."
"Upon the advent of the ESRB video game ratings system in 1994, the censorship practices were lessened. However, minor changes to games being localized for the U.S. and European markets are still made on occasion; these are largely left to the individual developer's discretion."
_______
I didn't say anything about violence in games.
've said it a dozen times on Slashdot: when I want a more mature game, I want a game that isn't insultingly simple to play, or where the main character doesn't act like a little kid, not blood and guts.
As said, Nintendo has tons of such games for their systems. Obviously, though, you haven't even bothered looking for any of them, and you're determined to paint a few titles/series as being indicative of their entire library.
Yeah, I've got a couple friends with broken/glitchy PS2s as well. My PS1 started stuttering badly on audio/video streams after about 3 months of light use (and this was a model bought in '99). A friend of mine went through 4 (four) PS1s over 5 years.
Wow. I have a PS1 I bought June of 2000, and it's still working perfectly today after 3 moves and several 4 foot falls from a dresser to the floor.
And this is why my boycott won't work. Too many people are content with the idea of disposable hardware, and just accept the fact that they'll have to buy several of the same machine.
Here's a hint: if people would QUIT BUYING CRAP, maybe Sony would be forced to meet some quality standards. Or, maybe if people bought from Nintendo or Microsoft instead, developers would switch to those platforms.
No, you need to look at how you're treating your equipment and the conditions you're keeping it in. With all these failures, you're obviously doing something very wrong. Don't blame Sony if their stuff can't survive the undue abuse you're putting on it.
but who can compete with Microcash when they spend billions (yes, billions with a B) to break the back of the video game market?
They're not going to last forever.
With the way the XBox division is losing them money, and rumors that the next XBox might not be backwards compatible, I wouldn't be suprised to see them take more than a little downturn in that area in a few years.
And meanwhile Nintendo is still hanging in there with the console market, and absolutely owns the handheld market. I get the feeling that they're just going to bide their time while Sony and Microsoft battle it out, quietly improving all the while.
Rock on, Nintendo.
Indeed. They were there 15 years ago when I started playing games, and there's no reason to believe they won't be there for another 15 and beyond.
The reality is that Sony makes great TVs, and uses the name recognition from that to cover up the fact that all their other stuff is crap.
My original Playstation has lasted through 5 years and 3 moves so far - still runs perfectly. The PS2 I bought back in April has been fine so far as well, though I guess there were tons of problems with the earlier models.
... then again, how many M$ products can you name that DO work ?:)
Gawd, don't you get tired of that after a while? Yes, Microsoft's software has problems. Yes, I disapprove of their business practices.
But it can be quite passably stable if you have half a clue about (i'm assuming you're really thinking of Windows here) how to secure and tweak it a little.
All the constant bashing and pithy commenting accomplishes is to make you look almost as bad as they do.
Their website says very clearly that the purpose of the charity is to combat negative stereotypes of gamers. Its the first thing you see on the About page, and its repeated in various forms throughout the site. Its hard to claim that I'm misinterpreting their mission.
It also says several times around the site that the goal of the charity is to help sick kids stuck in the hospital, and some lines about using the numbers of the gamer community to do good in the world.
I guess the point is moot, anyhow, as you seem to be pretty well biased against non-anonymous charity, and I doubt i'll change your mind.
In the end though, even if it annoys the hell out of you, a lot of sick kids have had their lives made happier because of PA's work and organizing, and that's what really counts.
Its tempting to reply to this question, but as I said before, I believe that virtue is its own reward and you shouldn't trumpet your charitable deeds. Let it suffice to say that I have no deficiency in this area.
I'm not really sure how this really improves the image of gamers. To me, it says that gamers want people to think they are good people, and willing to invest some cash to prove it. I don't think there's anything horribly wrong with that, but the number of times they repeat their PR goals reveals just how focused they are on that part of it. There's nothing wrong with spending money to make yourself look better, but that's not particularly noteworthy, nor is it really charity when its designed around return on investment. There's something wrong with being so blatant about it.
In conclusion, a quote: "When you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward."
If you truly look at all the good their project has done and will do, and all you can see is gamers spending money to make themselves look better...I pity you.
And i'm curious - they and everyone that donated raised ~$250,000 in toys and cash to give away last year...What have you done lately to have the right to complain so?
wasn't throwing any theories out there. Just asking a question.
Fair enough. Like I said before, though, do a little research before commenting - took me maybe 15 seconds to look at the page and find the appropriate section in their FAQ. Shouldn't have even been a need to ask that question.
do they radio up some of that index to their main search engine for the world to see?
Why would you think they'd do that in the first place? What would it gain them to be exposing people's personal documents to the outside web?
I doubt they would do this but has anyone found any text proving (or disproving ) this?
http://desktop.google.com/about.html#privacy
"9. What about my privacy? Does Google Desktop Search share my content with anyone?
We treat your privacy with the utmost respect. The Google Desktop Search program does not make your computer's content accessible to Google or anyone else. You can learn more by reading the Desktop Search privacy policy. "
Please, i'm not saying Google can do no wrong (and I don't work for them), but do some digging before you start throwing theories like that out there.
do you actually think that anybody in the Slashdot community would use Office if it were ported over to Linux?
I would. Say what you will about it being bloated and whatnot, but 99% of the time, Office (except for Outlook, which has been replaced by my GMail account atm) works perfectly well for me.
because it would look sort of silly asking a 30 year old to show you an ID to obtain a game. Shouldn't they do it like they way they do cigar purchases? if the selling thinks you're too young he asks for an id
It's to prevent any possible liability, in my experience. For example, my local grocery store chain now requires ID for 100% of alcohol and tobacco purchases, no matter how old you look.
Repeat after me, WE DON'T KNOW ENOUGH about genetics to do the kind of things we do these days.
Not knowing enough doesn't seem to stop people like you from ranting about how GM food is going to kill us all, though. Maybe you should take your own advice and wait for some facts (or read the stuff already out there) before passing judgement.
Slashdot Mirror
Following the links in the article is too much work, eh? It's a new Nintendo handheld, which you'd know if you actually read a paragraph or two.
yes, i can see your point. having to be careful what applications you select is often the mark of a superior, or even adequate, system.
And blindly using whatever Apple thinks is best without making a choice is better somehow? Spare me.
again, being required to think follow specific procedures to remain safe is obviously superior to not having to worry about it.
Heaven forbid we have to actually think while using our machines. To get the other benefits PCs have over Macs, i'll gladly spend the 2 seconds to delete a message when I get something suspicious.
And 99% of the time such messages have their virus-laden attachments stripped by my mail provider automatically anyway.
so why do you, and millions of others, have to run ad-aware and spybot all those times? why don't similar programs exist for the mac?
Because Windows has a vastly bigger market share and properties that make it easier to get malware on. Thus it is targeted more than Apple.
As I said, though, I hardly ever find anything on such scans, and when I do, it's usually just a couple cookies or something.
Oh, and just so you know, the scans don't take all that long, and can be scheduled to run in the middle of the night or somesuch, just like a lot of other routine security checks.
The whole "OMG you have to actually do something to secure your computer, Windows sux0rs!" line Mac zealots love to spout is just plain wrong.
It isn't hard work, it doesn't take a lot of time, and I consider actually having to think a little far preferable to being a zombie Mac zealot like you. People like you are the ones that give decent Mac users a bad name.
hmmm... not worrying about basic security procedures or good sense, creates a mess on one platform but not another. yet this doesn't make either superior in that aspect? something certainly is damned stupid.
The idiocy of this statement just astounds me. If ever the day comes when a virus/worm on the scale of some of the Windows nasties is developed for Apples, the vast majority of the community is going to have absolutely no idea how to deal with it.
This is what perplexes me. How are consoles so popular when they run at grotesquely low resolution?
Have you actually played any games on a modern console? In my experience, the lower resolution does not have anywhere near the effect you seem to be think it does, unless the game is horribly programed or otherwise badly made.
I happen to think that my time is kinda valuable and if by using a mac I can surf the web and not have to spend lots of my time cleaning off spyware etc every week/month then I say, its absolutely fucking 'superior'
So, the Windows version of Firefox i'm using that lets me avoid 99% of the spyware out there doesn't exist or something? Are all the times i've run Ad-aware and Spybot and come up with nothing just figments of my imagination?
Same arguement can also be made here..oh wait, when was my Mac infected with an email borne virus.....oh thats right, it hasn't So again, the lack of downtime, is a huge plus, thereby gaining my approval of the 'superior' tag..
Yeah, it's not like anyone could use a non-Outlook email client and not stupidly open unknown attachments, etc., right? Funny, i've been using Windows ever since 3.1, and have never gotten an email virus. Or a virus of any other kind, for that matter.
Please, i'm not saying Windows doesn't have its share of problems. But refusing to follow basic security procedures or good sense when you're using it, and using the mess that results to claim another platform as superior is just damned stupid.
but I don't think anybody will hold back on buying a Mac just because there aren't enough games for it.
Well, count me as one person against that statement. If the Mac had the level of game support Windows PC's do, i'd seriously think about getting one - my Windows box is very usable at this point, but I will admit a lot of stuff Apple does is attractive.
Same with Linux - it's great and all, but unless you want to play FPS games and a relatively small number of other crossplatform games, you're out of luck in that area. And not to mention all the non-gaming Windows software that has no true equal under Linux.
And yes, I know about Transgaming. Tried it for 6 months using both the binary package and compiling it myself, couldn't get a single game to work like it did under Windows, cancelled my subscription.
Well usually, if you're one of the only ones who's having major problems, and everyone else is perfectly fine, something's going wrong.
Since apparently you're not abusing your stuff after all, there's another factor there somewhere. Maybe your friend is doing stuff when you're not there. I see that you're (apparently) a college student - maybe someone is abusing your stuff while you're out. Maybe you're just pissed off and don't feel like admitting anything. Maybe you're just incredibly unlucky, I don't know.
When was the last time *you* did that?
Last weekend. Every weekend, usually.
Hell, you're the one that repeatedly drops your consoles from the dresser to the floor, and you're accusing *me* of not taking care of my gear?
Perhaps I should have been more specific. The PS1 took 3 flights off a dresser at various times during my first year of college, 4 years ago, while I was still stuck in a crowded dorm room.
These days, my consoles get lifted up so I can dust under them, and that's it.
In short, I'm in a bad mood, so fuck you. Sony makes cheap consumer electronics, and you're full of shit.
I was going to apologize and say that maybe I was in a bad mood myself, and assumed too much, but after that - forget it. Funny though. I have to wonder why you kept buying Sony products at all if they "mysteriously" failed without you doing anything.
You sound like the people I deal with on tech support calls, who swear up and down that they never touched anything, the inanimate computer/OS just decided to self-destruct all by itself on a whim.
So, fuck you as well, my friend, and may the mysterious force destroying your Sony equipment murder all the rest of your stuff as well.
Actually, this geek now associates "Nintendo" with "sleazebag company that I won't ever buy from again." There is no fury like that of a geek scorned.
How you know that, i'd love to know. The mentality around here of "If I don't like something, everyone else must hate it too" gets really annoying sometimes.
No, I'm asking you because I've looked and found nothing, and you're purporting to be some sort of authority on the subject.
No, i can read big lists of games at GameFAQs. An authority I am not. You're the one that keeps mentioning Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon games as if they somehow make the entire library worthless.
Metroid Prime has about 10 hours of gameplay, and which point it sits and collects dust. Great game, but terrible value.
Depends what you like in replay value, I suppose. There's different difficulty levels, trying to get 100% items collected, doing speed runs, low item collection runs, sequence breaking, using the whole GBA connectivity thing to play the original Metroid on the Cube, etc. etc.
Super Monkey Ball, Wario Ware, and Donkey Conga are more gimmicky crap at best. Especially Donkey Conga.
You are not in the majority here, except perhaps on Donkey Konga. Even that one has still gotten halfway decent reviews from most people, though.
And then there's Baiten Kaitos - a card game.
No, actually it's an RPG that uses cards as part of the battle system. What is it with you and cards, anyway?
Harvest Moon - you'll have to forgive me if playing a game based on a young kid on a farm isn't exciting.
That's a matter of personal preference. I don't like it much either, but many people love the series, and it is an exclusive that doesn't involve Mario/Link/Pokemon.
And FF:CC was hands-down the biggest upset I've ever had over a game. I've been waiting for a solid Secret of Mana successor for years. Then, they release that pile of shit... *ugh* There was nothing redeeming about that game.
You expected it to be something it wasn't and was never claimed to be? Golly gee, it really must suck then! No doubt you never tried playing it with more than one person, either, when it was heavily portrayed as a multiplayer-centric game.
Look, I never said every game on the systems were bad. I said the library sucks. There are games on the GCN I like, but one or two isn't enough to make having the system worthwhile. The GBA on the other hand... *shudder*
Okay...You said "I love my Gamecube and GBA for the hardware,", so i'm assuming you own at least one of each. Why did you buy them, when there's so much information out there on the available games, and you seem to hate about 95% of the current titles?
If you bought them at launch, risking that you might or might not like their libraries, then it's your own fault.
Where's the epic RPG? How about some mech combat, or some turn-based strategy that doesn't look like Pokemon with guns and swords?
It's been widely known for quite some time now that the GC is a very weak system RPG and strategy-wise. If all you play is RPGs and other such games, you should have done your research before you bought one. If you don't already own one, go buy a PS2 or XBox, it sounds like you'd be a lot happier.
Christ, if the GBA had more ports, I'd probably be happier - the SNES had probably the best library of any console ever
Okay, you'd be happier with more ports. Why, then, did you ask me " So, do me a favor then - name one RPG title on the GBA or GCN that doesn't play like the ones I've mentioned, isn't cross-platform, and isn't a card game."
Which is it? Either you like cross-platform games/ports or you don't.
they choose to port tired, old SNES games with minor graphic updates (Sword of Mana, River City Ransom), Mario Bros. 3
Umm, Sword of Mana was actually a heavily remade version of Final Fantasy Adventure, a Gameboy game, River City Ransom was an NES game, and Mario 3 was an NES game updated to an SNES game updated to the GBA.
That's why I'm so bitter about the system and think the DS will suck. Because Nintendo's style of games don't appeal to me, and they don't have the sense to get any decent 3rd party support.
So don't farking buy one. Ignore it completely and refuse to give Nintendo your money for it.
Nintendo won't give a damn, you'll be happier, and the rest of us will be happier not listening to you rant about how much you hate it.
So, do me a favor then - name one RPG title on the GBA or GCN that doesn't play like the ones I've mentioned, isn't cross-platform, and isn't a card game.
So you want me to find a title that doesn't fall within your gigantic range of biases? Hey, I can't help it if you want to limit yourself like that.
Just to humor you, though, Tales of Symphonia might count. The two main characters are not little kids, and there's a large amount of relatively complex dialogue that's wordy without reaching the insanity level of, say, Xenogears.
No doubt you'll probably think of some reason ToS doesn't fit your criteria either, though.
There's a lot of Japanese-only (at the moment) games out there that would possibly fit as well...But I don't know Japanese myself, so can't really evaluate them.
but the exclusive game lineup on both systems is complete and utter shit for anyone that doesn't like Mario, Pokemon, or Link to the Past clones.
Ikaruga
Metroid Prime
Pikmin
Super Monkey Ball
Donkey Konga
Wario Ware
Baten Kaitos
Harvest Moon
FF: Crystal Chronicles
There's a few I can think of from memory. Again, i'm sure you could come up with some more if you actually took the time to look.
Further, the fact that you're asking me to come up with titles only further illustrates how little you know about what's available, outside the narrow range that you think constitutes Nintendo's entire library.
Nintendo's portable systems are dominated by games like, say, Golden Sun, Megaman: Battle Network, and Pokemon. In each instance, the main character is extremely young, the dialogue is insultingly simple and/or convoluted
Oh, so you think Nintendo's the only one putting out simple, kid-friendly games? Go browse the PS1 and PS2 title lists at GameFAQs sometime.
And that's to say nothing about all the games for Nintendo systems which don't fit your "kiddie" criteria in any way, shape, or form. I notice you didn't bother to list any of those
and Nintendo pulls all sorts of crap like this.
I quote, from the page you linked to -
"Today, Nintendo does not actively censor the games it releases. Games such as the infamous Conker's Bad Fur Day, which include swearing, blood, and sex are now openly published under the Nintendo banner, as long as they carry with them a "M for Mature Gamers" rating."
And also, from a Wikipedia article -
"Upon the advent of the ESRB video game ratings system in 1994, the censorship practices were lessened. However, minor changes to games being localized for the U.S. and European markets are still made on occasion; these are largely left to the individual developer's discretion."
_______
I didn't say anything about violence in games.
've said it a dozen times on Slashdot: when I want a more mature game, I want a game that isn't insultingly simple to play, or where the main character doesn't act like a little kid, not blood and guts.
As said, Nintendo has tons of such games for their systems. Obviously, though, you haven't even bothered looking for any of them, and you're determined to paint a few titles/series as being indicative of their entire library.
The Nintendo DS rings in at $149
Still about $50 cheaper than the PSP's announced price. No doubt that will figure into people's choices somewhere.
I don't understand why everything has to graphical.
People want things to be graphical because, if done well, they can be much more pleasing to the eye and easy to use without sacrificing functionality.
And yes, some GUIs can be less functional than their text counterparts. That's no reason to deride all things graphical as useless, though.
I like a textbased variants, also because they needs less ressources.
A valid reason, though it's a reason for offering a choice between interface types to fit the situation, not for eschewing a GUI entirely.
They do their job as good as their graphical pendants.
Depending on your level of skill and time available, this is either completely true or totally false. You can't make blanket statements like that.
Yeah, I've got a couple friends with broken/glitchy PS2s as well. My PS1 started stuttering badly on audio/video streams after about 3 months of light use (and this was a model bought in '99). A friend of mine went through 4 (four) PS1s over 5 years.
Wow. I have a PS1 I bought June of 2000, and it's still working perfectly today after 3 moves and several 4 foot falls from a dresser to the floor.
And this is why my boycott won't work. Too many people are content with the idea of disposable hardware, and just accept the fact that they'll have to buy several of the same machine.
Here's a hint: if people would QUIT BUYING CRAP, maybe Sony would be forced to meet some quality standards. Or, maybe if people bought from Nintendo or Microsoft instead, developers would switch to those platforms.
No, you need to look at how you're treating your equipment and the conditions you're keeping it in. With all these failures, you're obviously doing something very wrong. Don't blame Sony if their stuff can't survive the undue abuse you're putting on it.
So 3 years for them to start profiting on it, while the other 2 giants in the market are making money the whole time?
I guess they can afford it, being the company that they are, but 6 years without turning a profit on a product line is pretty bad.
Gotta wonder if the whole cycle will start again with their next console, or if they'll have actually learned something by then.
but who can compete with Microcash when they spend billions (yes, billions with a B) to break the back of the video game market?
They're not going to last forever.
With the way the XBox division is losing them money, and rumors that the next XBox might not be backwards compatible, I wouldn't be suprised to see them take more than a little downturn in that area in a few years.
And meanwhile Nintendo is still hanging in there with the console market, and absolutely owns the handheld market. I get the feeling that they're just going to bide their time while Sony and Microsoft battle it out, quietly improving all the while.
Rock on, Nintendo.
Indeed. They were there 15 years ago when I started playing games, and there's no reason to believe they won't be there for another 15 and beyond.
The reality is that Sony makes great TVs, and uses the name recognition from that to cover up the fact that all their other stuff is crap.
My original Playstation has lasted through 5 years and 3 moves so far - still runs perfectly. The PS2 I bought back in April has been fine so far as well, though I guess there were tons of problems with the earlier models.
... then again, how many M$ products can you name that DO work ? :)
Gawd, don't you get tired of that after a while? Yes, Microsoft's software has problems. Yes, I disapprove of their business practices.
But it can be quite passably stable if you have half a clue about (i'm assuming you're really thinking of Windows here) how to secure and tweak it a little.
All the constant bashing and pithy commenting accomplishes is to make you look almost as bad as they do.
**prepares to be flamed**
Their website says very clearly that the purpose of the charity is to combat negative stereotypes of gamers. Its the first thing you see on the About page, and its repeated in various forms throughout the site. Its hard to claim that I'm misinterpreting their mission.
It also says several times around the site that the goal of the charity is to help sick kids stuck in the hospital, and some lines about using the numbers of the gamer community to do good in the world.
I guess the point is moot, anyhow, as you seem to be pretty well biased against non-anonymous charity, and I doubt i'll change your mind.
In the end though, even if it annoys the hell out of you, a lot of sick kids have had their lives made happier because of PA's work and organizing, and that's what really counts.
Its tempting to reply to this question, but as I said before, I believe that virtue is its own reward and you shouldn't trumpet your charitable deeds. Let it suffice to say that I have no deficiency in this area.
Well, can't say I didn't expect that.
I'm not really sure how this really improves the image of gamers. To me, it says that gamers want people to think they are good people, and willing to invest some cash to prove it. I don't think there's anything horribly wrong with that, but the number of times they repeat their PR goals reveals just how focused they are on that part of it. There's nothing wrong with spending money to make yourself look better, but that's not particularly noteworthy, nor is it really charity when its designed around return on investment. There's something wrong with being so blatant about it.
In conclusion, a quote:
"When you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward."
If you truly look at all the good their project has done and will do, and all you can see is gamers spending money to make themselves look better...I pity you.
And i'm curious - they and everyone that donated raised ~$250,000 in toys and cash to give away last year...What have you done lately to have the right to complain so?
wasn't throwing any theories out there. Just asking a question.
Fair enough. Like I said before, though, do a little research before commenting - took me maybe 15 seconds to look at the page and find the appropriate section in their FAQ. Shouldn't have even been a need to ask that question.
do they radio up some of that index to their main search engine for the world to see?
Why would you think they'd do that in the first place? What would it gain them to be exposing people's personal documents to the outside web?
I doubt they would do this but has anyone found any text proving (or disproving ) this?
http://desktop.google.com/about.html#privacy
"9. What about my privacy? Does Google Desktop Search share my content with anyone?
We treat your privacy with the utmost respect. The Google Desktop Search program does not make your computer's content accessible to Google or anyone else. You can learn more by reading the Desktop Search privacy policy. "
Please, i'm not saying Google can do no wrong (and I don't work for them), but do some digging before you start throwing theories like that out there.
do you actually think that anybody in the Slashdot community would use Office if it were ported over to Linux?
I would. Say what you will about it being bloated and whatnot, but 99% of the time, Office (except for Outlook, which has been replaced by my GMail account atm) works perfectly well for me.
I don't work there, but yes, they would. 100% proof, no exceptions. There's a bazillion signs at the entrance and at every register saying so.
because it would look sort of silly asking a 30 year old to show you an ID to obtain a game. Shouldn't they do it like they way they do cigar purchases? if the selling thinks you're too young he asks for an id
It's to prevent any possible liability, in my experience. For example, my local grocery store chain now requires ID for 100% of alcohol and tobacco purchases, no matter how old you look.
Repeat after me, WE DON'T KNOW ENOUGH about genetics to do the kind of things we do these days.
Not knowing enough doesn't seem to stop people like you from ranting about how GM food is going to kill us all, though. Maybe you should take your own advice and wait for some facts (or read the stuff already out there) before passing judgement.