First, the processing power needed to render that pocket universe is immense.
You're aware the PC versions are ports and the games originally ran on the PS2, right? The console the PSP is approximately the same as, in terms of specs?
But what really makes me skeptical is the difficulty of playing this kind of game on a very small screen. There's an incredible amount of detail, and I just don't see any way of scaling it down.
Maybe we're playing different games here. GTA:SA has pretty crappy graphics, low-res models and textures, and while there's often a lot of "junk" on the screen (like papers on the ground in GTA3), there draw-depth is very visible and there aren't all that many "useful" (active, interactive, etc.) objects on the screen.
I doubt this will be anything near the scale of GTA:SA either, especially given UMD's are a fraction of a DVD, but still... the PSP should easily be able ot handle it.
You can't prepare for every eventuality, but you can handle the situation with grace.
You can also write software that doesn't suck. You can write programs that don't crash. You can make things that are secure. These are things you can control.
Things like mics breaking, lamps burning out, and other physical things happen, yes. Physical things break down, and you can swap them out during a presentation. But software is not one of these things.
Everyone who is making excuses needs to face it: the software is what they were presenting, and it broke down in the middle of a big presentation. Not someone else's hardware. The software. Their software.
Even if it was hardware, would it be excusable? If Intel was presenting their latest chip, and it melted during the presentation, wouldn't you be worried about its viability? If a manufacturer of hospital IV machines did a presentation, and in the middle their hardware died and stopped delivering IV fluid, would you consider purchase? Why then, with something that's not hardware, that's more fully controllable, do we make excuses?
We shouldn't. This is just another problem in a long line of problems from a vendor who is notorious for problematic software.
Don't make excuses.
Re:Xbox 1 price history
on
Xbox 2 for $400?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
So a price of $399 isn't that unreasonable, and we can expect similar price cuts over a three-year product lifespan.
Hardly matters. The PS3 will probably be no more than $299, and Sony is not likely to let the XBOX2 specs trump the PS3 this time around. Without that edge, what are people willing to pay $100 more for? And ending to Halo 2?
The speculation is probably just speculation; if the PS3 is $299, I doubt MS will dare to charge $399. They'd end up going the way of the Saturn (if they don't end up going the way of the Dreamcast).
Now, if it cost $399 to make, that wouldn't be much of a suprise, would it?
I have one of these as well, and would like to add a blurb about pdaXrom, which is an alternate ROM that uses X instead of a modified Qtopia.
While it currently doesn't do anything for handwriting recognition (why bother with a full and excellent keyboard), and the UI works pretty well for touch input. Not only that, while your buddies are using slimmed-down feature-light software, you'll have a full word processor (abiword), spreadsheet (gnumeric), email program (pick one), browser (firefox, konqueror), graphics program (gimp), compiler (native gcc!), editor (vim, etc.), games (quake, doom, nethack, angband, dosbox, frozen bubble, scummvm, snes9x, etc.), and the list goes on.
While these are expensive, i can't imagine using anything else... a full suite of software in my pocket, with GPRS for internet-anywhere, is very, very useful.
Before too long, there will be hostile (or just poorly designed and self-replicating) nanobots that will kill us when they get into our bodies.
I dunno. I don't see a big difference between this and a biological weapon, except that biological agents are cheaper and easier to develop. Why bother with nanotechnology when a simple plague will do? Or for the individual, just a well-placed bullet?
I was slightly skeptical about this, until I realized that I actually followed this path, more or less. Back in the day when OS/2 was still around, I was using that over DOS/Win3.1, and eventually NT, as I couldn't afford a box that would run that, but it turned out for the better. I had tried Linux once, and found it too hard to get anything done with (remember this was like 92-93, and I had never used anything *nix before): it was interesting, but I wasn't familiar with any of the applications, so I couldn't do much.
Of course, if OS/2 is remembered for one thing, it's the overflowing of native applications, by which I mean there were few.
So eventually, I started using "EMX" (iirc) ports of *nix applications: emacs, gcc, (La)TeX, bash, ghostscript. After awhile (and putting up with some deficiencies), I realized that I was no longer really using OS/2. I was trying to use Linux. So, I got that infomagic set of "modern" distros (like redhat 4, debian something ancient, slackware, and a copy of sunsite and tsx). I've never looked back.
It's been interesting over the years to see the application base grow by leaps and bounds; the open culture for Free Software is really what Linux has created, and what has in turn driven its success. OS/2 never had it. HURD was too idealist to gather momentum. The BSD's seem to have a different focus. All the other OS's drive a purely commercial culture: Windows, MacOS, PalmOS, Symbian, the commercial Unices, etc.
So perhaps... perhaps... if you transform the other OS's into a semblance of Linux (or other "Free" OS, I guess, but let's be realistic here), once people are familiar with the software, you can switch the OS and give them the full experience, and not only will they fall right in, they'll be happier, because everything works as it should.
This, I believe, is what Microsoft should truly fear.
Yes, and the version after that they'll have one that even writes the document for you.
Is it too much to ask to be literate enough to write a grammatically correct sentence? And even---shock---a coherent, well-written one?
Spellcheckers are fine, to an extent; everyone makes typos. However, there is no excuse (besides being a small child who's learning) for being unable to compose a coherent, grammatically-correct thought, and for something important, take time to edit.
Not only that the real money isn't made off the consoles anyway... it's made off the games.
Try looking at the right numbers... console sales (positive or negative) plus games. It is a multi-billion-dollar industry; maybe the numbers aren't quite as high as others, but it's spreading, the industry is growing, and it's not going away anytime soon.
It still looks bad for ANY linux distro to have high pricing. If Linux is evet to get a decent foothold in any market, it has to appear to have both a low TCO and a low initial purchase price. Managers do not look at what it can do, just what it costs. The take up, and major market share has no bearing on stability or operability, we all know that already.
Bad? To who? You don't understand how people at the level RedHat is playing think. If it doesn't cost a lot, it looks bad. If you're not forking over thousands for something, that means it's not serious. How can you expect to get serious support and put pressure on a vendor to pay attention to you if you payed $10 for a CD? You can't.
TCO isn't how much you pay for a distro. It's total cost. It's the number at the end, the sum of all the other little ones. That's what the cost of RHEL is... just a little number along the way.
In short, Linux is much further ahead in the commercial market because we have high-priced distros like RHEL.
Also keep in mind that this time, Microsoft is trying to get the first-mover advantage, something that the PS2 had and enjoyed quite a bit of success from.
Actually, that's not true at all. Remember the Dreamcast? Oh yeah, the Dreamcast. It was first to market by far... and lost.
Same here! In fact, it wasn't until I just read your comment and looked back at the title, carefully, that I realized the word wasn't "Hacked". Here I thought there was some fancy reverse-engineering going on, and I just didn't see it in the blurb.
Bland?Bland? Compared to what, Mario and Metroid? We could consider those "bland": just another franchise release, right?
Armored Core? Ridge Racers? Vampire Chronicles? One of those has to appeal on opening day. (Or maybe Golf or Mahjong, but those seem like obviously low-end titles.) Then there's Dynasty Warriors, Metal Gear, Puzzle Bobble, Puyo Puyo, NFSU, and Tiger Woods. Those are big names we recognize over here; some of the Japanese titles might be big names over there, too. Add on top of that other PSP originals Ren Goku and The Gagharv, both of which look to be awesome, and you've got a killer lineup. Compared to the PS2's US launch, that's amazing.
Nintendo isn't a monopoly of much anymore. Handheld consoles, maybe, but that's not much of a monopoly... more like an aspect of a market. Plus, they're about to get some long-overdue competition there, too. Which brings me to your second point:
Let's be honest here, they've got a more rabid fanbase than apple.
Criminy yes. Nintendo fanboys (as opposed to most of us mere loyal fans) will probably mod me down just for linking to "that other console", not to mention 5 comments with FUD, 3 flames, and some excellent trolls. I love Nintendo like anyone else (who really doesn't?), but geesh... they're not perfect, and competition is good for everyone. Having a good product and a large market with lots of nostalgia brings out the crazies though.
Why is it in every review they make the point to emphasize "this is not full of revolutionary new gameplay"? If I get a Metroid game, I don't want revolutionary new gameplay: I want Metroid. Metroid Prime was good despite the new 3D stuff, because it was still essentially Metroid.
What we should be asking is "is this game a new Metroid game with good story, level design, secrets, etc.", and it sounds like it is. After all, the first thing we asked about MP1 was not "does this have revolutionary new gameplay", rather "is this still the Metroid we love?"
Anyhow, point made. I hope this one has more secrets and stuff than the last. Sounds like it does, but that's one of the few things I thought the original (Prime) lacked.
This doesn't really dismiss what you said---the opposite, really: it says even this guy found it blindingly obvious what MS was after.
I'm not sure why anyone is suprised though. This is MS. They have a history of fighting dirty and using their wallet to get their way. However, people need to see that it's not the government or the courts that are going to stop the problem, or they probably already would have. It's a competitor who also plays by different rules, ones against which MS can't compete. This has been said repeatedly as well.
Yeah. This has some irony involved here obviously, because MS Bob is considered one of their original inventions, yet agents were hardly a new concept.
Maybe it gets "original invention" status because they didn't buy it from someone else.
Peripherals for consoles never achieve any decent amount of sell-through. This is because developers will never support it. They can either develop a game that works on 100% of the installed base of consoles or develop a game that woks on n% of the installed base, where n is a sufficiently small number. The XBoxHD will offer increased functionality but probably not things that are of any dramatic benefit to gamers. Yeah, it might alleviate the need for a memory card or allow for some limited downloadable content. More than likely, though, it will offer TiVO like functionality and a way to store and playback media files.
To emphasize your point (I believe), this is going to have the same problem... either it will annoy users to no end ("oh, sorry son, this version doesn't work on your XBOX") or just not be used to any great extent.
It's a dumb move, and I hope Microsoft makes it.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I believe this only happens if you cross the beams. Don't do that.
You're aware the PC versions are ports and the games originally ran on the PS2, right? The console the PSP is approximately the same as, in terms of specs?
Maybe we're playing different games here. GTA:SA has pretty crappy graphics, low-res models and textures, and while there's often a lot of "junk" on the screen (like papers on the ground in GTA3), there draw-depth is very visible and there aren't all that many "useful" (active, interactive, etc.) objects on the screen.
I doubt this will be anything near the scale of GTA:SA either, especially given UMD's are a fraction of a DVD, but still... the PSP should easily be able ot handle it.
Except Sony doesn't make Grand Theft Auto, Rockstar Games does.
Just like the dreamcast.
You can also write software that doesn't suck. You can write programs that don't crash. You can make things that are secure. These are things you can control.
Things like mics breaking, lamps burning out, and other physical things happen, yes. Physical things break down, and you can swap them out during a presentation. But software is not one of these things.
Everyone who is making excuses needs to face it: the software is what they were presenting, and it broke down in the middle of a big presentation. Not someone else's hardware. The software. Their software.
Even if it was hardware, would it be excusable? If Intel was presenting their latest chip, and it melted during the presentation, wouldn't you be worried about its viability? If a manufacturer of hospital IV machines did a presentation, and in the middle their hardware died and stopped delivering IV fluid, would you consider purchase? Why then, with something that's not hardware, that's more fully controllable, do we make excuses?
We shouldn't. This is just another problem in a long line of problems from a vendor who is notorious for problematic software.
Don't make excuses.
Hardly matters. The PS3 will probably be no more than $299, and Sony is not likely to let the XBOX2 specs trump the PS3 this time around. Without that edge, what are people willing to pay $100 more for? And ending to Halo 2?
The speculation is probably just speculation; if the PS3 is $299, I doubt MS will dare to charge $399. They'd end up going the way of the Saturn (if they don't end up going the way of the Dreamcast).
Now, if it cost $399 to make, that wouldn't be much of a suprise, would it?
I have one of these as well, and would like to add a blurb about pdaXrom, which is an alternate ROM that uses X instead of a modified Qtopia.
While it currently doesn't do anything for handwriting recognition (why bother with a full and excellent keyboard), and the UI works pretty well for touch input. Not only that, while your buddies are using slimmed-down feature-light software, you'll have a full word processor (abiword), spreadsheet (gnumeric), email program (pick one), browser (firefox, konqueror), graphics program (gimp), compiler (native gcc!), editor (vim, etc.), games (quake, doom, nethack, angband, dosbox, frozen bubble, scummvm, snes9x, etc.), and the list goes on.
While these are expensive, i can't imagine using anything else... a full suite of software in my pocket, with GPRS for internet-anywhere, is very, very useful.
I dunno. I don't see a big difference between this and a biological weapon, except that biological agents are cheaper and easier to develop. Why bother with nanotechnology when a simple plague will do? Or for the individual, just a well-placed bullet?
I was slightly skeptical about this, until I realized that I actually followed this path, more or less. Back in the day when OS/2 was still around, I was using that over DOS/Win3.1, and eventually NT, as I couldn't afford a box that would run that, but it turned out for the better. I had tried Linux once, and found it too hard to get anything done with (remember this was like 92-93, and I had never used anything *nix before): it was interesting, but I wasn't familiar with any of the applications, so I couldn't do much.
Of course, if OS/2 is remembered for one thing, it's the overflowing of native applications, by which I mean there were few. So eventually, I started using "EMX" (iirc) ports of *nix applications: emacs, gcc, (La)TeX, bash, ghostscript. After awhile (and putting up with some deficiencies), I realized that I was no longer really using OS/2. I was trying to use Linux. So, I got that infomagic set of "modern" distros (like redhat 4, debian something ancient, slackware, and a copy of sunsite and tsx). I've never looked back.
It's been interesting over the years to see the application base grow by leaps and bounds; the open culture for Free Software is really what Linux has created, and what has in turn driven its success. OS/2 never had it. HURD was too idealist to gather momentum. The BSD's seem to have a different focus. All the other OS's drive a purely commercial culture: Windows, MacOS, PalmOS, Symbian, the commercial Unices, etc.
So perhaps... perhaps... if you transform the other OS's into a semblance of Linux (or other "Free" OS, I guess, but let's be realistic here), once people are familiar with the software, you can switch the OS and give them the full experience, and not only will they fall right in, they'll be happier, because everything works as it should.
This, I believe, is what Microsoft should truly fear.
Yes, and the version after that they'll have one that even writes the document for you.
Is it too much to ask to be literate enough to write a grammatically correct sentence? And even---shock---a coherent, well-written one?
Spellcheckers are fine, to an extent; everyone makes typos. However, there is no excuse (besides being a small child who's learning) for being unable to compose a coherent, grammatically-correct thought, and for something important, take time to edit.
No, clearly, gamers are pirates, stealing money from the pockets and food from the plates of Hollywood executives!!
Now if I could have my PDA draw power from the wifi card, I wouldn't even need a battery!
Not only that the real money isn't made off the consoles anyway... it's made off the games.
Try looking at the right numbers... console sales (positive or negative) plus games. It is a multi-billion-dollar industry; maybe the numbers aren't quite as high as others, but it's spreading, the industry is growing, and it's not going away anytime soon.
Bad? To who? You don't understand how people at the level RedHat is playing think. If it doesn't cost a lot, it looks bad. If you're not forking over thousands for something, that means it's not serious. How can you expect to get serious support and put pressure on a vendor to pay attention to you if you payed $10 for a CD? You can't.
TCO isn't how much you pay for a distro. It's total cost. It's the number at the end, the sum of all the other little ones. That's what the cost of RHEL is... just a little number along the way.
In short, Linux is much further ahead in the commercial market because we have high-priced distros like RHEL.
Actually, that's not true at all. Remember the Dreamcast? Oh yeah, the Dreamcast. It was first to market by far... and lost.
And they'd be wrong. I have one of these pads, and they're far better than the arcade.
Same here! In fact, it wasn't until I just read your comment and looked back at the title, carefully, that I realized the word wasn't "Hacked". Here I thought there was some fancy reverse-engineering going on, and I just didn't see it in the blurb.
Bland? Bland? Compared to what, Mario and Metroid? We could consider those "bland": just another franchise release, right?
Armored Core? Ridge Racers? Vampire Chronicles? One of those has to appeal on opening day. (Or maybe Golf or Mahjong, but those seem like obviously low-end titles.) Then there's Dynasty Warriors, Metal Gear, Puzzle Bobble, Puyo Puyo, NFSU, and Tiger Woods. Those are big names we recognize over here; some of the Japanese titles might be big names over there, too. Add on top of that other PSP originals Ren Goku and The Gagharv, both of which look to be awesome, and you've got a killer lineup. Compared to the PS2's US launch, that's amazing.
Compared to the DS launch, that's amazing.
Nintendo isn't a monopoly of much anymore. Handheld consoles, maybe, but that's not much of a monopoly... more like an aspect of a market. Plus, they're about to get some long-overdue competition there, too. Which brings me to your second point:
Criminy yes. Nintendo fanboys (as opposed to most of us mere loyal fans) will probably mod me down just for linking to "that other console", not to mention 5 comments with FUD, 3 flames, and some excellent trolls. I love Nintendo like anyone else (who really doesn't?), but geesh... they're not perfect, and competition is good for everyone. Having a good product and a large market with lots of nostalgia brings out the crazies though.
Why is it in every review they make the point to emphasize "this is not full of revolutionary new gameplay"? If I get a Metroid game, I don't want revolutionary new gameplay: I want Metroid. Metroid Prime was good despite the new 3D stuff, because it was still essentially Metroid.
What we should be asking is "is this game a new Metroid game with good story, level design, secrets, etc.", and it sounds like it is. After all, the first thing we asked about MP1 was not "does this have revolutionary new gameplay", rather "is this still the Metroid we love?"
Anyhow, point made. I hope this one has more secrets and stuff than the last. Sounds like it does, but that's one of the few things I thought the original (Prime) lacked.
Not that I disagree in general, but:
This doesn't really dismiss what you said---the opposite, really: it says even this guy found it blindingly obvious what MS was after.
I'm not sure why anyone is suprised though. This is MS. They have a history of fighting dirty and using their wallet to get their way. However, people need to see that it's not the government or the courts that are going to stop the problem, or they probably already would have. It's a competitor who also plays by different rules, ones against which MS can't compete. This has been said repeatedly as well.
Yeah. This has some irony involved here obviously, because MS Bob is considered one of their original inventions, yet agents were hardly a new concept.
Maybe it gets "original invention" status because they didn't buy it from someone else.
Did they?
Microsoft releases "Bob"
From the laugh-it's-funny Dept.
To emphasize your point (I believe), this is going to have the same problem... either it will annoy users to no end ("oh, sorry son, this version doesn't work on your XBOX") or just not be used to any great extent.
It's a dumb move, and I hope Microsoft makes it. :-)
Were? Still are. I picked up one of these a few months back, and let me tell you, I have one regret: I didn't pick up two.
DDRMAX 3 was recently released for the PS2, and it even uses the eyetoy if you have one.