Nonsense. It's true that there was a controversy when Justin Timberlake ripped off Janet Jackson's clothing on prime time television, but that doesn't mean that there would have been a lesser reaction if Justin had pulled out a gun and shot her dead instead.
If you want to make a more accurate anology, what reaction there be if he had a staged fight with her? Same idea, they didn't have sex on stage, just some staged flashing. There would be little to no reaction to a staged fight.
Build a straw man argument, knock it down, and people somehow think you proved your point.
What planet do you live on? There has been PLENTY of effort to censor games like GTA in recent years. We had US presidential candidates speaking about the game during the 2000 & 2004 elections. Joe Lieberman made it part of his Presidential platform.
GTA is one of the reasons why the ESRB ratings have become so important. Even the FIRST game is banned in a number of regions throughout the world because of the violence and prostitution, and that game came out years ago.
This HotCoffee incident is only the latest in a long string of controversy.
I have no sympathy for Rockstar. They asked for it.
He may have used a stawman arguement but his premise is sound, the authorities react quicker to displays of sex then to violence. this points to a fundemental flaw in the morality of the american public.
Yes, that would definately qualify as a very poor matchmaking system.
The best ones I've seen are based around an ELO ranking, where your rank increases/decreases relative to who you beat (base don their ranking) and how badly you beat them.
The matchmaking system selects people with a similar ELO ranking (there is an acceptable range) and throws them into a match together.
BNET is partially based on that. It takes into account lvl which is based on who you beat, and your win / lose % and games played. It is fairly accurate. The only severly lopesided games occur late at night when there are fewer available players, it had a preference of matching +- 6 levels for 1v1 or a team difference of +- X depending on if it's 2v2, 3v3 or 4v4. The next preference is win lose %, it will try to match you with someone with a similair %. The next match making set up is games played, it will try to match with people with equivilent # of games played.
It works for moderatly skilled players and up, It's been refined for 3 years and altered. The added features of the ranking system is used to combat "smurphing". Having a higher skilled player start over so he can play newbies. But comparing win % and games played it pit less newbies against these sharks.
It also does match ups based on #wins and #losses. But the social aspect of having a lot of losses drove people to start over which messes up the rankings. If enough people don't mind losing 100 times, they'd be paired with people who also lost 100 times.
The lvl 47 player I played was very mediochre but he apparently played a lot. This meant his level was high but was correctly paired with me. Sometimes you see match ups liek that and thinkt he system is broken but it compares games played vs level vs win %. high win% + few games played means you will be paired with higher level guys. It's meant to have better players rise faster (my partner and I hit lvl 38 and #17 in only 50 games). Most people only look at level but is a lvl 47 with a 500/800 record all that good? You get xp for every win and lose a little, but the current system also rewards for playing a lot. Most of my accounts are 20+ in under 100 games. I get some tough match ups and that okay.
Bnet doesn't make any attempt to solve the social aspect. If bnet also throws people who can't finish the 1p campaign into a game with a top ranked person, their matchmaking system is broken as well. As I've said, these are solvable problems. Bnet, from what you describe, has not solved them -- hence your poor experience.
what exactly doens't bnet do, it has a ranking system and it generally works. But the minimium skill level required is far high then most nubies have even for lvl 1 play. I play lvl 25-45 players, I beat a 47 once. Most my games are filled with 20+ players. It seems to work. still lvl 1 skill is still greater then my friends.
Again, all things that a good online service takes care of for you. You should spend no time "looking" for a good game -- a good online service ought to just give you one. A good line service also builds a social aspect into it, forming a community of players.
*shrug* As I said before, I think these are solvable problems.
Bnet is such a service. I have no problems getting games against players of similiar skill, but "MY FRIENDS" don't play online so I miss that social element. For online play the social interaction amounts to "check expo" "pwned b00b" ect... I don't have enough time for a "clan" and I dislike dealing with those 14 and 15 years olds who do. I have been petitioned a lot, I am ranked world wide.
IT's not the game matchs, some people just aren't good. They have difficulty finishing the 1p campeign so online play is so far beyond them they don't want to try. Even 3v1 my friends can't take me. So online is not for them.
These aren't solvable problems, the problems are the players not the service. They see no value in goign online. even one of the best FPS players I know, who loves Halo and works for Bioware, doesn't subscribe to live. He just doesn't see a point. IF he wants online, he plays a PC-FPS(Counter Strike), halo is for pwning his friends.
I don't have any knowledge of "Super VCD's", nor how people perceived that format, so I can't counter your arguement. Given my lack of knowledge of the existance of that format, however, I would suggest that it probably wasn't well supported in the first place...
Actually, super VCD and VCD's in general are the prefered format of movies in asia still. DVD's are gaining a foothold but it took a while before the hardware came down in price so everyone can get it. The reason you don't have any info on that format is because it was not promoted as a format in north america but you will find it all over asia and europe. If you have nero, you will notice it has a VCD burning encoding format as well as super VCD. The format is actually very very common and well supported but the Consumer electronics companies in NA didn't think people wanted it.
In Japan a PS2 is the most common DVD player. Sony is positioning this for Japan first since the market there is more forgiving then here for technical problems.
I rarely lose, and I rarely win, err... does that mean the majority of your games end in a draw?
I don't find any of the arguements you've posed particularly convincing, as I feel that your arguements "dooming" online play are all solvable. I suspect you feel the exact opposite, so I doubt there is much more light we can shed on the topic.
I loev online play, I was a competative warcraft 3 player. I was ranked #17 for 2v2 us west and east. However most of my friends who own a copy, all play use maps (defence games ect..). Their fairly representaive. Most people can't find any extra appeal for online play. It might help to let you know my demographic, Males 18-25. We work, we go to school, we have GF's and a social life. If we have time for games, it mostly offline and we don't crave online play very much, I wish it weren't so myself. Finding good friendly Warcraft 3 matches is hard since all my friends don't play (well, some do but just not against me). I still play bnet, but without the social aspect it's nto as fun.
Would the "green"/"sustainable"/"quality of life" innovations of living in this city happen to include not being beaten when taken into police custody?
Just curious...
Hmm.... China is bad for such things. But generally you have as much a chance of being beaten by the police in the US as in china. In china, if you follow the rules generally nothign happens to you. Very much the same for the states, except for the crime is worse.
I recently came back from China on a business trip... I stayed in a expensive hotel... and they warned me at the front desk that I should use bottled water for everything. Not just drinking, but brushing my teeth, washing my face etc..
If I needed more water for such activities all I had to do was call the front desk and they provide it free of charge.
I also recently came back from a visit to china. The only reason you do this is to prevent travellers diahria. Even brushing your teeth introduces foreign bacteria. The water quality was generally good everywhere I was, Beijing, Ghoung zhou, Toa San, and Xin Vua.
There is a difference this time around: Blu-ray isn't "the" established standard. People aren't going to be purchasing them because they want both a next gen movie format + game box -- they don't know which format will come on top. This means that only people who are convinced that blu-ray will come out on top will consider this a good deal.
Actually, at the time DVD was a new standard and it was competeing with Super VCD's. In asia VCD are still common. The PS2 was often bought as a cheap DVD player for a format that was new. In a very similiar way Blu-ray is.
People used to say the same thing about cable. Look where it's at now. Once people try online gaming, they're hooked. If you assume an even distribution of gamers for Xbox & PS2 are interested in online gaming, then this would yield a significant increase in market share and initial sales for the Xbox360.
The problem with online play is the same with PC's as they are with Live, the relative skill level of people are low, and people don't like to lose. MMORPG's do alright because skill isn't such a huge factor, but see how many people play Warcraft 3 in ladder compared to how many play in usemaps. It's about 20% of the players play ladder, the rest play use map settings. The appeal of online play is playing against people, the draw back is unless you've played online a bit everyone will be better then you. Most people would prefer to play offline. There just isn't any appeal to losing, and they dont' want to develope their skill. It's nto like cable. Cable (television or internet) doesn't require you to do anythign but pay. It will reach a saturation point of 10-20% of console gamers, and unless they come out with a full proof way of skill matching, it will peak there. even with good matching, many just don't see a need to go online.
1.4 million subscribers... 20 million consoles. Yeah, 7% definately isn't the vast majority. But it is definately a significant number. The rate at which that number is growing is also not something that should be ignored.
Your numbers betray you, indeed it grows but most people are content with offlien play. As for your example of MMORPG's, they have relatively small user bases when you compare it against the size of the whole market. 3-4 million is pretty much all the MMORPG players in North america/europe/japan. Korea/China ect have many more but some of that is inflated by people having more then one accounts and the companies count the accounts.
As for paying for it, you may but you and I aren't the whole gaming community, we're nto even representative. The gaming community consists of mostly men, 12-30. a little under half of them cannot pay anything a month.
This is something I don't get... why the hell would you use a game console like this? The DVD player for the PS2 was the most god-aweful thing I'd ever used. The video quality wasn't great either. I don't know how bad the xbox's player was, but I'm sure it wasn't anything special.
But when it came out, it was the cheapest (or close to) thing in Japan that played DVD's. You are forgetting when the machiens firts came out $500 for a panasonic DVd player was par for the course, for the same price you could get a PS2. Thats why PS2 has such a huge install base and that's why sony waited until blu-ray to make the PS3. Their gambling on a similiar effect.
They've got a triple core PPC processor clocked 4-5 times higher than the celeron in the original Xbox. They've got more memory. More bandwidth. And much more powerful hardware on the graphics side. Backwards compat through emulation and dynamic recompilation is entirely possible; just look at VPC on a Mac -- current macs can certainly exceed the performance of a 700mhz celeron via Virtual PC. Of course, in the end only time will tell.
You also have a GPU whose instruction sets and design are IP of a company that wants nothing to do with the box. They could just obstract it back into pure Direct X and nto the xbox variant but they will nee dgame specific hacks.
Have you ever run an emulator? Generally every game varies, some are 100% other have graphic glitches ect.. The PS2 incorporated the PS1 chip as a IO processor and it even had glitches. Now a 100% software solution is possible, but you need unique software hacks for a lot of games. Ever see Bleem, it could emu most games but required a hack for 40% of the other games. PSXemu too, ZSNES had unique hacks for maybe 10% of the SNES games, and the SNES is bloody simple. You see the problem? Pure software emu isn't goign to be likly. And if MS is going to be Backwards compatable they would have trumpetted it as a feature. I hear very little buzz about that.
I'm fairly neutral about it all, I don't mind there being 3 good consoles out. Nintendo for parties/GF to play. PS3 for what ever Japanese imports and major titles. And a 360 for Bioware games, because the boys down on the southside (I live in edmonton and know some of them) have sworn off ever programming for the PS2 or PS2 like architecture again. I think money form MS had something to do with it too. Although it will have to wait until there is 3 or 4 bioware games before I'd buy one. Halo doesn't appeal to me and ont he xbox very little else does.
The only technical "feature" the PS3 has over the xbox is the blu-ray drive
Neither machines specs have been nailed down. The PS3 will come out after the xbox 360, which means 100% that in many areas it will be technically better. If we can see it or not is another issue. Your speculating that sony won't responde at all to anything Microsoft does.
Live is probably one of the few things Microsoft got REALLY right with the first gen Xbox
Live is great. However the vast majority of Xbox owners aren't on live. So while it's great, online gamign is not that much of an attraction, expecially pay for play online.
Personally, if I'm looking at the $100 tradeoff, Sony isn't a winner. Blu-ray isn't worth an extra $100 to me. Factor in needing to purchase some storage device to store your save games, and it looks even worse.
Again your speculating, blu-ray may be worth he 100$, DVD was worth the 100$ for the PS2. You might have the same phenomenon where everybody grabs one as a cheap blu-ray player. Like all the japanese did for the PS2.
It's an open race, both competitors look strong, Sony has the inertia of it's past success. Microsoft has it's recent successes and a solid game plan. But Lack of backwards capatability will hurt MS, they need Halo3 out asap(you would have to be an idiot to beleive they can swing Backwards capatability with a different GPU and CPU ).
One of the main problems with this, in my OPINION, is that corporations can't keep up with individuals. It is sort of like how Geurrilas, from the time of the US colonies to Vietnam, have been able to put a hurting on huge armies.
The miconception of vietnam was that the soldiers were beaten by geurilla tactics, they were harassed and had losses but it was the lack of will from the american public to fight the war that lost it. The American army was beaten by a public that didn't support the war.
I'm sick of people trying to find ways to punish others for the way they want to live. At least in America, it's obvious that millions of people want to be spread out and don't want to live on top of each other in cities. The 'American Dream' of owning a home is still valid even as prices skyrocket so fewer young people can get there.
I think the problem with suburbs is not that the population is so spread out, but actually that there are not -enough- downtown centers. As the formerly rural space between towns starts to fill up with McMansions, it's too bad that zoning boards don't allow (and perhaps encourage) new commercial centers to form at the town borders. Then, those comfy suburbanites would not have to fill up the overburdened roads leading to the 'old' town center just for a gallon of milk or a trip to the post office.
Way way back when towns were founded, a distance of 5 to 10 miles from town to town probably made sense. Even into the late 20th century, the population on the outskirts of a town was fairly low, so there weren't that many people driving long distances to the town center. Now, the towns where I live are facing the prospect of 100% build-out of developable land (at least I hope people realize that's where we're headed). Since so many people just don't want to move to the commerce, I think the solution is to move the commerce out to them.
By the way, I happen to be somebody who has never commuted into a city to work. I live in the suburbs and work in the suburbs. No it's not ideal for finding a public transit solution, but it means that I neither suffer from nor contribute to the congestion of the city. I don't understand why the people who scream about sprawl seem to assume that all jobs are in the cities, and that every last surburbanite is stuck in traffic at rush hour. There are alternatives.
The problem is, everybody wants to live in a suburb/rural life style but want to have urban services. this causes a lot of infrastructure costs and pollution because of communing. More towns and less suburbs would help. But splintering them off is hard. your arguement abotu influencing the way people want to live is somewhat illogical. I would like to act and paint and live in a palatial mansion and sip bourbon next to my hot trouphy wife, but those unfair prices for mansions, and trophy wives are getting int he way.... If they want to spread out, let them pay a prmeium. Fund the money to pollution clean up efforts and r&d for lower emissions (not likly, but that would eb the logical thing to do). The money would at least alleviate infrastructure pressures.
Want to make suburbs less popular? 1) Clamp down hard on drink driving 2) Encourage house prices to rocket so you can only rent not buy 3) Allow lots of pubs and clubs to open in the town centre and discourage them in the outskirts. 4) Allow development of trendy apartments near the trendy new-town.
Watch as suckers like myself move into the town centre to have a social life. Job done. Sorry this is/. so:
5) Profit!
Actually if you want to stop urban sparl and not premote it you'll slowly pattern US cities after cities in Europe and Asia. Have everythign available wihtin 10 blocks of you, so the nearest pub is 5 min walk away, and food markets are too. This reduces the need for cars. Centralizing everything just prompts people to get cars to get there whiel they live far away.
1) The most densely-populated cities (where X would likely provide the greatest benefit) have already been built. Retrofitting features to implement X would very likely be hideously expensive and impractical, e.g. where X == bike paths in a major city.
2) Are new cities founded/designed/built at such a rate that changing the designs to accommodate X would provide any substantial benefit?
Zoning laws and long term urban planning can reduce the need for cars by making urban sparl less desirable for developers. Say put a constuction surcharge of X dollars on developement and have X grow as the distance from downtown increases, make incentives for residentual reclamation of parts of the downtown areas ect... All these things can reduce emission by making distant suburbs less desirable.
How is Guantanamo "not better"? Please compare the number of people who died in each. Do you believe that there have been large-scale massacres at Guantanamo?
Do you beleive that the loss of liberty of either the students in tiananmen or muslims in Guantanamo differ? The deaths don't occur directly in Guantanamo, having already happened in afganistan and Iraq. They are equivilent.
Pulling it apart is probably the best thing you could do with it.
You see, the thing that many people in the US completely miss is that the breweing of coffee was perfected in 1855 and it is senseless to mess with it. A shot of espresso made with freshly roasted / ground beans and on a well maintained machine by a well trained barrista is the apex of coffee perfection and cannot be improved upon. There is no substitute, and it cannot be put in an can.
Why the hell such abominations as the Wolfgang Puck Gourmet Latte and just about everything they serve at Starbacks are permitted to exist is beyond me.
To make great coffee:
1. put coffee grinds* into cafetier 2. add boiling hto water 3. stir 4. pour 5. add cream and sugar to taste
I read recently China has 26 million rural peasants living in poverty The 2008 Olympics will be in Tianenmen Square...and I will not watch.
Chalupa
Thats fine, The 26 million number is likly true. The pverty rate in china is hovering at 10%. The US at 12%. So before you get all high and mighty, the US has not moral ground to stand on. The poor rural folk aren't as much an issue, since they do have food. Which make those poor rural folk better off then a large slice of the world. Tienimen was bad, Gautnonamo is not better. Terror and oppression are tools of the state, they are tools we wish to avoid here, but we do a piss poor job in atcually doing it. The chinese gov. commit some pretty horrible acts, so does the US and the USSR. This doesn't justify them. But you also then boycott any olympics in any of those countries as well to avoid being a hypocrite.
China, especially because its economy is so closely tied to its manufacturing prowess, is desperately in need of renewed electrical infrastructure, a benevolent relationship with oil suppliers, etc. In other words... despite their economic growth... they are so dependent on the rest of the world for essentials that they have less power on the world stage than they should have. "Feeding" billions of people is still tough for them to do.
Their population has almost stabilized. Their not growing much. The projected growth from 1995 is higher then actual growth. Their policies are working. India ont he otherhand...
This project is a cover for military operations in space. Maybe they're researching how to divert a planetoid into the Earth, potentially more powerful than any nuclear weapon. Maybe they're just launching weapons into Earth or Solar orbit.
The Chinese government is oppressive and agressive, their not evil and insane. They won't do anythign that so dumb. Their a conservative authoratarian regime that does want prosperity for it's people and occasionally curshes any opposition. The Us does the same but in different ways. The chinese assasinate, the Us character assasinates.
Real "Loser pays"-type systems usually have the judge deciding who pays how much, based on things like, was this a reasonable action (even if you didn't win), did you introduce frivolous motions just to waste time and money, etc.
I'm advocating the candian system. This "REAL" system you speak of isn't the one I'm suggesting.
So the fat cats can sue everyone who can't defend themselves for FREE? I must not be understanding how the law works.
Only if they win. Canada doens't have a problem with stupid lawsuit, neither does it have a problem with corps getting away with murder. So your assertion that they get away free is stupid. They do so only if they win. This will discourage frivilous lawsuits. Look up north, do the corps defend for free?
To fix this, you should have a law liek Canada's where the loser pays the legal bills for both sides in a law suit. This ensure frivilous law suits have to think twice. While a suit with a legitimate chance of suceeding won't be unduly impeded.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense. It's true that there was a controversy when Justin Timberlake ripped off Janet Jackson's clothing on prime time television, but that doesn't mean that there would have been a lesser reaction if Justin had pulled out a gun and shot her dead instead.
If you want to make a more accurate anology, what reaction there be if he had a staged fight with her? Same idea, they didn't have sex on stage, just some staged flashing. There would be little to no reaction to a staged fight.
Build a straw man argument, knock it down, and people somehow think you proved your point.
What planet do you live on? There has been PLENTY of effort to censor games like GTA in recent years. We had US presidential candidates speaking about the game during the 2000 & 2004 elections. Joe Lieberman made it part of his Presidential platform.
GTA is one of the reasons why the ESRB ratings have become so important. Even the FIRST game is banned in a number of regions throughout the world because of the violence and prostitution, and that game came out years ago.
This HotCoffee incident is only the latest in a long string of controversy.
I have no sympathy for Rockstar. They asked for it.
He may have used a stawman arguement but his premise is sound, the authorities react quicker to displays of sex then to violence. this points to a fundemental flaw in the morality of the american public.
Yes, that would definately qualify as a very poor matchmaking system.
The best ones I've seen are based around an ELO ranking, where your rank increases/decreases relative to who you beat (base don their ranking) and how badly you beat them.
The matchmaking system selects people with a similar ELO ranking (there is an acceptable range) and throws them into a match together.
You can read about it here, if you're curious: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELO_rating_system
BNET is partially based on that. It takes into account lvl which is based on who you beat, and your win / lose % and games played. It is fairly accurate. The only severly lopesided games occur late at night when there are fewer available players, it had a preference of matching +- 6 levels for 1v1 or a team difference of +- X depending on if it's 2v2, 3v3 or 4v4. The next preference is win lose %, it will try to match you with someone with a similair %. The next match making set up is games played, it will try to match with people with equivilent # of games played.
It works for moderatly skilled players and up, It's been refined for 3 years and altered. The added features of the ranking system is used to combat "smurphing". Having a higher skilled player start over so he can play newbies. But comparing win % and games played it pit less newbies against these sharks.
It also does match ups based on #wins and #losses. But the social aspect of having a lot of losses drove people to start over which messes up the rankings. If enough people don't mind losing 100 times, they'd be paired with people who also lost 100 times.
The lvl 47 player I played was very mediochre but he apparently played a lot. This meant his level was high but was correctly paired with me. Sometimes you see match ups liek that and thinkt he system is broken but it compares games played vs level vs win %. high win% + few games played means you will be paired with higher level guys. It's meant to have better players rise faster (my partner and I hit lvl 38 and #17 in only 50 games). Most people only look at level but is a lvl 47 with a 500/800 record all that good? You get xp for every win and lose a little, but the current system also rewards for playing a lot. Most of my accounts are 20+ in under 100 games. I get some tough match ups and that okay.
Bnet doesn't make any attempt to solve the social aspect. If bnet also throws people who can't finish the 1p campaign into a game with a top ranked person, their matchmaking system is broken as well. As I've said, these are solvable problems. Bnet, from what you describe, has not solved them -- hence your poor experience.
what exactly doens't bnet do, it has a ranking system and it generally works. But the minimium skill level required is far high then most nubies have even for lvl 1 play. I play lvl 25-45 players, I beat a 47 once. Most my games are filled with 20+ players. It seems to work. still lvl 1 skill is still greater then my friends.
Again, all things that a good online service takes care of for you. You should spend no time "looking" for a good game -- a good online service ought to just give you one. A good line service also builds a social aspect into it, forming a community of players.
*shrug* As I said before, I think these are solvable problems.
Bnet is such a service. I have no problems getting games against players of similiar skill, but "MY FRIENDS" don't play online so I miss that social element. For online play the social interaction amounts to "check expo" "pwned b00b" ect... I don't have enough time for a "clan" and I dislike dealing with those 14 and 15 years olds who do. I have been petitioned a lot, I am ranked world wide.
IT's not the game matchs, some people just aren't good. They have difficulty finishing the 1p campeign so online play is so far beyond them they don't want to try. Even 3v1 my friends can't take me. So online is not for them.
These aren't solvable problems, the problems are the players not the service. They see no value in goign online. even one of the best FPS players I know, who loves Halo and works for Bioware, doesn't subscribe to live. He just doesn't see a point. IF he wants online, he plays a PC-FPS(Counter Strike), halo is for pwning his friends.
I don't have any knowledge of "Super VCD's", nor how people perceived that format, so I can't counter your arguement. Given my lack of knowledge of the existance of that format, however, I would suggest that it probably wasn't well supported in the first place ...
Actually, super VCD and VCD's in general are the prefered format of movies in asia still. DVD's are gaining a foothold but it took a while before the hardware came down in price so everyone can get it. The reason you don't have any info on that format is because it was not promoted as a format in north america but you will find it all over asia and europe. If you have nero, you will notice it has a VCD burning encoding format as well as super VCD. The format is actually very very common and well supported but the Consumer electronics companies in NA didn't think people wanted it.
In Japan a PS2 is the most common DVD player. Sony is positioning this for Japan first since the market there is more forgiving then here for technical problems.
I rarely lose, and I rarely win,
err... does that mean the majority of your games end in a draw?
I don't find any of the arguements you've posed particularly convincing, as I feel that your arguements "dooming" online play are all solvable. I suspect you feel the exact opposite, so I doubt there is much more light we can shed on the topic.
I loev online play, I was a competative warcraft 3 player. I was ranked #17 for 2v2 us west and east. However most of my friends who own a copy, all play use maps (defence games ect..). Their fairly representaive. Most people can't find any extra appeal for online play. It might help to let you know my demographic, Males 18-25. We work, we go to school, we have GF's and a social life. If we have time for games, it mostly offline and we don't crave online play very much, I wish it weren't so myself. Finding good friendly Warcraft 3 matches is hard since all my friends don't play (well, some do but just not against me). I still play bnet, but without the social aspect it's nto as fun.
Would the "green"/"sustainable"/"quality of life" innovations of living in this city happen to include not being beaten when taken into police custody?
Just curious...
Hmm.... China is bad for such things. But generally you have as much a chance of being beaten by the police in the US as in china. In china, if you follow the rules generally nothign happens to you. Very much the same for the states, except for the crime is worse.
I recently came back from China on a business trip... I stayed in a expensive hotel... and they warned me at the front desk that I should use bottled water for everything. Not just drinking, but brushing my teeth, washing my face etc..
If I needed more water for such activities all I had to do was call the front desk and they provide it free of charge.
I also recently came back from a visit to china. The only reason you do this is to prevent travellers diahria. Even brushing your teeth introduces foreign bacteria. The water quality was generally good everywhere I was, Beijing, Ghoung zhou, Toa San, and Xin Vua.
There is a difference this time around: Blu-ray isn't "the" established standard. People aren't going to be purchasing them because they want both a next gen movie format + game box -- they don't know which format will come on top. This means that only people who are convinced that blu-ray will come out on top will consider this a good deal.
Actually, at the time DVD was a new standard and it was competeing with Super VCD's. In asia VCD are still common. The PS2 was often bought as a cheap DVD player for a format that was new. In a very similiar way Blu-ray is.
People used to say the same thing about cable. Look where it's at now. Once people try online gaming, they're hooked. If you assume an even distribution of gamers for Xbox & PS2 are interested in online gaming, then this would yield a significant increase in market share and initial sales for the Xbox360.
The problem with online play is the same with PC's as they are with Live, the relative skill level of people are low, and people don't like to lose. MMORPG's do alright because skill isn't such a huge factor, but see how many people play Warcraft 3 in ladder compared to how many play in usemaps. It's about 20% of the players play ladder, the rest play use map settings. The appeal of online play is playing against people, the draw back is unless you've played online a bit everyone will be better then you. Most people would prefer to play offline. There just isn't any appeal to losing, and they dont' want to develope their skill. It's nto like cable. Cable (television or internet) doesn't require you to do anythign but pay. It will reach a saturation point of 10-20% of console gamers, and unless they come out with a full proof way of skill matching, it will peak there. even with good matching, many just don't see a need to go online.
1.4 million subscribers ... 20 million consoles. Yeah, 7% definately isn't the vast majority. But it is definately a significant number. The rate at which that number is growing is also not something that should be ignored.
... why the hell would you use a game console like this? The DVD player for the PS2 was the most god-aweful thing I'd ever used. The video quality wasn't great either. I don't know how bad the xbox's player was, but I'm sure it wasn't anything special.
Your numbers betray you, indeed it grows but most people are content with offlien play. As for your example of MMORPG's, they have relatively small user bases when you compare it against the size of the whole market. 3-4 million is pretty much all the MMORPG players in North america/europe/japan. Korea/China ect have many more but some of that is inflated by people having more then one accounts and the companies count the accounts.
As for paying for it, you may but you and I aren't the whole gaming community, we're nto even representative. The gaming community consists of mostly men, 12-30. a little under half of them cannot pay anything a month.
This is something I don't get
But when it came out, it was the cheapest (or close to) thing in Japan that played DVD's. You are forgetting when the machiens firts came out $500 for a panasonic DVd player was par for the course, for the same price you could get a PS2. Thats why PS2 has such a huge install base and that's why sony waited until blu-ray to make the PS3. Their gambling on a similiar effect.
They've got a triple core PPC processor clocked 4-5 times higher than the celeron in the original Xbox. They've got more memory. More bandwidth. And much more powerful hardware on the graphics side. Backwards compat through emulation and dynamic recompilation is entirely possible; just look at VPC on a Mac -- current macs can certainly exceed the performance of a 700mhz celeron via Virtual PC. Of course, in the end only time will tell.
You also have a GPU whose instruction sets and design are IP of a company that wants nothing to do with the box. They could just obstract it back into pure Direct X and nto the xbox variant but they will nee dgame specific hacks.
Have you ever run an emulator? Generally every game varies, some are 100% other have graphic glitches ect.. The PS2 incorporated the PS1 chip as a IO processor and it even had glitches. Now a 100% software solution is possible, but you need unique software hacks for a lot of games. Ever see Bleem, it could emu most games but required a hack for 40% of the other games. PSXemu too, ZSNES had unique hacks for maybe 10% of the SNES games, and the SNES is bloody simple. You see the problem? Pure software emu isn't goign to be likly. And if MS is going to be Backwards compatable they would have trumpetted it as a feature. I hear very little buzz about that.
I'm fairly neutral about it all, I don't mind there being 3 good consoles out. Nintendo for parties/GF to play. PS3 for what ever Japanese imports and major titles. And a 360 for Bioware games, because the boys down on the southside (I live in edmonton and know some of them) have sworn off ever programming for the PS2 or PS2 like architecture again. I think money form MS had something to do with it too. Although it will have to wait until there is 3 or 4 bioware games before I'd buy one. Halo doesn't appeal to me and ont he xbox very little else does.
PS1 -> DC was a much bigger step than DC -> PS2; I'd say about 3:1, though that's an inherently subjective number.)
err... DC was the same "generation" as the PS2. IT's liek saying, NES-> Genesis was much bigger step then genesis -> SNES.
The only technical "feature" the PS3 has over the xbox is the blu-ray drive
Neither machines specs have been nailed down. The PS3 will come out after the xbox 360, which means 100% that in many areas it will be technically better. If we can see it or not is another issue. Your speculating that sony won't responde at all to anything Microsoft does.
Live is probably one of the few things Microsoft got REALLY right with the first gen Xbox
Live is great. However the vast majority of Xbox owners aren't on live. So while it's great, online gamign is not that much of an attraction, expecially pay for play online.
Personally, if I'm looking at the $100 tradeoff, Sony isn't a winner. Blu-ray isn't worth an extra $100 to me. Factor in needing to purchase some storage device to store your save games, and it looks even worse.
Again your speculating, blu-ray may be worth he 100$, DVD was worth the 100$ for the PS2. You might have the same phenomenon where everybody grabs one as a cheap blu-ray player. Like all the japanese did for the PS2.
It's an open race, both competitors look strong, Sony has the inertia of it's past success. Microsoft has it's recent successes and a solid game plan. But Lack of backwards capatability will hurt MS, they need Halo3 out asap(you would have to be an idiot to beleive they can swing Backwards capatability with a different GPU and CPU ).
One of the main problems with this, in my OPINION, is that corporations can't keep up with individuals. It is sort of like how Geurrilas, from the time of the US colonies to Vietnam, have been able to put a hurting on huge armies.
The miconception of vietnam was that the soldiers were beaten by geurilla tactics, they were harassed and had losses but it was the lack of will from the american public to fight the war that lost it. The American army was beaten by a public that didn't support the war.
I'm sick of people trying to find ways to punish others for the way they want to live. At least in America, it's obvious that millions of people want to be spread out and don't want to live on top of each other in cities. The 'American Dream' of owning a home is still valid even as prices skyrocket so fewer young people can get there.
I think the problem with suburbs is not that the population is so spread out, but actually that there are not -enough- downtown centers. As the formerly rural space between towns starts to fill up with McMansions, it's too bad that zoning boards don't allow (and perhaps encourage) new commercial centers to form at the town borders. Then, those comfy suburbanites would not have to fill up the overburdened roads leading to the 'old' town center just for a gallon of milk or a trip to the post office.
Way way back when towns were founded, a distance of 5 to 10 miles from town to town probably made sense. Even into the late 20th century, the population on the outskirts of a town was fairly low, so there weren't that many people driving long distances to the town center. Now, the towns where I live are facing the prospect of 100% build-out of developable land (at least I hope people realize that's where we're headed). Since so many people just don't want to move to the commerce, I think the solution is to move the commerce out to them.
By the way, I happen to be somebody who has never commuted into a city to work. I live in the suburbs and work in the suburbs. No it's not ideal for finding a public transit solution, but it means that I neither suffer from nor contribute to the congestion of the city. I don't understand why the people who scream about sprawl seem to assume that all jobs are in the cities, and that every last surburbanite is stuck in traffic at rush hour. There are alternatives.
The problem is, everybody wants to live in a suburb/rural life style but want to have urban services. this causes a lot of infrastructure costs and pollution because of communing. More towns and less suburbs would help. But splintering them off is hard. your arguement abotu influencing the way people want to live is somewhat illogical. I would like to act and paint and live in a palatial mansion and sip bourbon next to my hot trouphy wife, but those unfair prices for mansions, and trophy wives are getting int he way.... If they want to spread out, let them pay a prmeium. Fund the money to pollution clean up efforts and r&d for lower emissions (not likly, but that would eb the logical thing to do). The money would at least alleviate infrastructure pressures.
Want to make suburbs less popular?
/. so:
1) Clamp down hard on drink driving
2) Encourage house prices to rocket so you can only rent not buy
3) Allow lots of pubs and clubs to open in the town centre and discourage them in the outskirts.
4) Allow development of trendy apartments near the trendy new-town.
Watch as suckers like myself move into the town centre to have a social life.
Job done.
Sorry this is
5) Profit!
Actually if you want to stop urban sparl and not premote it you'll slowly pattern US cities after cities in Europe and Asia. Have everythign available wihtin 10 blocks of you, so the nearest pub is 5 min walk away, and food markets are too. This reduces the need for cars. Centralizing everything just prompts people to get cars to get there whiel they live far away.
1) The most densely-populated cities (where X would likely provide the greatest benefit) have already been built. Retrofitting features to implement X would very likely be hideously expensive and impractical, e.g. where X == bike paths in a major city.
2) Are new cities founded/designed/built at such a rate that changing the designs to accommodate X would provide any substantial benefit?
Zoning laws and long term urban planning can reduce the need for cars by making urban sparl less desirable for developers. Say put a constuction surcharge of X dollars on developement and have X grow as the distance from downtown increases, make incentives for residentual reclamation of parts of the downtown areas ect... All these things can reduce emission by making distant suburbs less desirable.
How is Guantanamo "not better"? Please compare the number of people who died in each. Do you believe that there have been large-scale massacres at Guantanamo?
Do you beleive that the loss of liberty of either the students in tiananmen or muslims in Guantanamo differ? The deaths don't occur directly in Guantanamo, having already happened in afganistan and Iraq. They are equivilent.
Pulling it apart is probably the best thing you could do with it.
You see, the thing that many people in the US completely miss is that the breweing of coffee was perfected in 1855 and it is senseless to mess with it. A shot of espresso made with freshly roasted / ground beans and on a well maintained machine by a well trained barrista is the apex of coffee perfection and cannot be improved upon. There is no substitute, and it cannot be put in an can.
Why the hell such abominations as the Wolfgang Puck Gourmet Latte and just about everything they serve at Starbacks are permitted to exist is beyond me.
To make great coffee:
1. put coffee grinds* into cafetier
2. add boiling hto water
3. stir
4. pour
5. add cream and sugar to taste
* for best results, use 100% arabica beans.
I read recently China has 26 million rural peasants living in poverty
The 2008 Olympics will be in Tianenmen Square...and I will not watch.
Chalupa
Thats fine, The 26 million number is likly true. The pverty rate in china is hovering at 10%. The US at 12%. So before you get all high and mighty, the US has not moral ground to stand on. The poor rural folk aren't as much an issue, since they do have food. Which make those poor rural folk better off then a large slice of the world. Tienimen was bad, Gautnonamo is not better. Terror and oppression are tools of the state, they are tools we wish to avoid here, but we do a piss poor job in atcually doing it. The chinese gov. commit some pretty horrible acts, so does the US and the USSR. This doesn't justify them. But you also then boycott any olympics in any of those countries as well to avoid being a hypocrite.
China, especially because its economy is so closely tied to its manufacturing prowess, is desperately in need of renewed electrical infrastructure, a benevolent relationship with oil suppliers, etc. In other words... despite their economic growth... they are so dependent on the rest of the world for essentials that they have less power on the world stage than they should have. "Feeding" billions of people is still tough for them to do.
Their population has almost stabilized. Their not growing much. The projected growth from 1995 is higher then actual growth. Their policies are working. India ont he otherhand...
This project is a cover for military operations in space. Maybe they're researching how to divert a planetoid into the Earth, potentially more powerful than any nuclear weapon. Maybe they're just launching weapons into Earth or Solar orbit.
The Chinese government is oppressive and agressive, their not evil and insane. They won't do anythign that so dumb. Their a conservative authoratarian regime that does want prosperity for it's people and occasionally curshes any opposition. The Us does the same but in different ways. The chinese assasinate, the Us character assasinates.
Real "Loser pays"-type systems usually have the judge deciding who pays how much, based on things like, was this a reasonable action (even if you didn't win), did you introduce frivolous motions just to waste time and money, etc.
I'm advocating the candian system. This "REAL" system you speak of isn't the one I'm suggesting.
So the fat cats can sue everyone who can't defend themselves for FREE? I must not be understanding how the law works.
Only if they win. Canada doens't have a problem with stupid lawsuit, neither does it have a problem with corps getting away with murder. So your assertion that they get away free is stupid. They do so only if they win. This will discourage frivilous lawsuits. Look up north, do the corps defend for free?
Actually, lawsuits by crackpots are not uncommon.
To fix this, you should have a law liek Canada's where the loser pays the legal bills for both sides in a law suit. This ensure frivilous law suits have to think twice. While a suit with a legitimate chance of suceeding won't be unduly impeded.