That sounds a bit narrow-sighted to me, if not overly biased. Let's avoid the "next-gen/previous-gen" feature debate - the Wii really is drawing in audiences based on the motion-sensing party games. That's what's selling the system right now. To throw out motion-sensing just because it might not pertain to your field right now is wrong, IMO. What he says and what he does are two separate things, and he might make a motion sensing RPG down the line, but the guy makes his money off the 360 so he needs to sell it well. He does give Microsoft a little criticism, namely about the marketing campaign in Japan, but I think this statement was pretty wrong in the long run.
Motion sensing is a bit of a gimmicky right now. In both Wii and Ps3 games it seems tacted on in most titles. With notable exceptions (Wii: wii sports, Rayman Rabbits. PS3: Flow) they all seem to tack it on (Wii: Zelda PS3: Motostorm). they will problably have to intergrate it better and design around it more.
it succinctly makes the point that Sony thinks it's consumers are idiots and that they would buy a turd with the Sony brand stamped on it.
If you've played with the PS3, you'd know that the hardware is good. But not good enough for most people to justify the price tag yet. the masses or hardware failure both the xbox/360/Ps2 had don't seem to be effecting the PS3. the features are nice and well integrated but they need a compelling reason to get one aside from blu-ray. Right now all they got is a couple good games, a couple third stringers and blu ray. Your vitrol at their product is undeserved. It's not a bad product, just not one with a niche yet.
I understand the strategy of never announcing price drops until they're imminent, but the PS3 is not even on many people's radar at the moment, because of the staggering price. The Neo Geo consumer hardware followed a similar price model. Are you even considering price drops on the PS3 hardware?
Ryan Fenton
In Canada, the PS3 20gb is $50 more then the launch PS2 when you factor inflation. The Neo-Geo was $649.99 USD in 1990. which is about $777.71 CND 1990 money and about $1,109.92 CND right now. The PS3 is $599 or $699. It's not int he same range. Its int he same range as the PS2. At least in Canada. The Us dollar is at a decades low compared to other currencies. so part of the price is that. It canada is seems more reasonable.
Do you really think you can compete with XBox Live?
Online play is almost a non feature for consoles. 6 mil have logged onto the free trial, only fraction have stayed and payed for the service. The Xbox already targetted the online play crowd and the majority of console gamers are not also onlien gamers. Online play only offers anythign to "hardcore" players. Pleayers with enough skill to hold their own or with enough friends online to have private games. Also, they need to be able to pay.
Given how small the online attach rate is it's not a compellign feature for most. And thos who found it compelling already have a 360/xbox.(even for PC online games the online portion was often under utilized. single player or local multiplayer is still the cominant way to play.)
Do you mean when the tarrif that was put in place because canada was subsidising their lumber industry and allowing them to undersell american mills like the chinese and japanese did witht he steal industry durring the previous decade when it colapsed?
On this particular point you are wrong. WTO ruled there was no subsidy. The difference between the two industries aren't government subsidies but entirely different models. Canadian logging companys pay less to log on crown land then US logging do for a similiar area BUT they are responsible to plant new trees and must pay for ecological surveys. When you calculate it they pay the generally same amount in total. WTO agreed.
Art is subjective. Motivation isn't the only justifcation for calling something are. The collected works of shakespeare were created likely soley for the sake of money. Shakespeare plagarized ideas from others but he was good at it. It's like Zack Snyder and his remake of dawn of the dead. Art is a retroactive label on things we find pleasing or having some merit.
The conditions that caused the loss of the original atmosphere are still present, and even presuming you could start melting the water somehow, and then put some sort of hardy organisms on there to make an Earth-like atmosphere, it would only last until you ran out of water, then you would be back in the same boat, except now all the water would be gone.
You do realize that'd likely be in the order of several thousand years.
We can be fairly certain that the disciples died proclaiming the message of the New Testament and that the manuscripts we currently have accurately reflect the original gospels and letters. We can therefore be fairly certain that these people died proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead. If he didn't, then they died for what they knew to be a lie, which would be bizarre. If he didn't, then his body was still around somewhere, yet none of the many groups with an interest in squashing Christianity were able to produce the body to silence them. It seems more likely that people couldn't produce a body because there was no body and the disciples died for what they knew to be true: that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven.
I can't prove this, but it seems the most reasonable explanation.
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompatance. Remember that the gospels were written by leading church figures at least 70 years after the death of Jesus. Just look back at accounts of events 70 years ago to see how information can be distorted through time and retelling. For instance a large number of people beleive and have written about how JFK was not assasinated by oswald. Or that the moon landings did not occur. Now imagine 300 years from now a group of historians selected only "fake" moon landing accounts to include in their definative 20th century history. The bible is the same. The new testiment was written by a biased third partys after the fact, editoralized by another biased third party to form the bible. There are numerous surviving account of Jesus that do not describe his ressurection. they only cannonized those that agreed with the dogma of the early church.
Even modern news stories are hearsay and third/second party reporting which is often wrong on the details. If you have ever been involved in a local or national news story, it's ridicoulous at how many detail they can get wrong. Drug dealer described as innocent by standards, innocent bystanders painted as gang related, or a perfectly correct statement played up to be a some farcical claim (Al gore's claim to have been instrimental in the creation of the internet is true, it was twisted to say he invesnted it and used as a mark against his character). It's ridicoulous to think that ancient religious scholars/church heads were any better at getting the details right and the bar for belief was a lot lower. Someone like uri geller claims super natural powers and performs some party tricks and today we disect his methods and expose him. If he did so back in new testiment palastine and he might either be considered a evil sorceror or a prophet.
As well, your logic would also mean you must beleive the koran is 100% true since it had a similiar situation. written by thrid parties about a holy person after his death with miraculous events attributed to him. As well as numerous third party account as the romance of the three kingdoms.
You need a more critical eye when evaluating ancient works. You cannot give a book a free pass because you assume the author beleived what he was writting.
Academic research has a much greater chance of being widely distributed and public domain then corprate research. So someone will do it eventually. I'd prefer it to be a university who will at least share their findings thena propriatary research group which would hoard their results much tighter.
How can we be sure it's unknowable? We can't. we can only say that at the moment we cannot deduce anything, and according to our current model we may not. but never say it's impossible.
it's implicit in all science. any supported theory is "best explanation so far accodring to data at hand" and all unsupported theories are "might be, but we have no support yet", while theories that have been disproven are implicitly "to our knowledge this is untrue".
What do you call Christianity then? It as after all routed in historical events and as Paul said, regarding the resurrection, if it never happened then Christians are to be pitied because they are trusting in a lie.
You can be reasonably certain that a man in ancient palastine and egypt went around teaching people. via historical texts and what not. You cannot use the same texts to say he came back from life. You can prove CaoCao likely existed in the era of the romance of the three kingdoms via historical texts. You cannot prove he could fly and execute massive AOE attacks with his mace. You can prove a swordsmith who used masamune as a "brand" exissted through historical texts. You cannot prove his swords were eternally peaceful and calm.
As I read it, the exact same problem has been reached again - and Religion and Science both require a leap of perfect faith over the gap that is The Beginning of It All.
Not really. One can say "We don't know yet." While the other has stuck with "an ancient person who is important to me said...".
Every person gets invested into the choices they make. GM vs toyota, LV vs Prada, Xbox vs PS3 vs Wii, Mac vs PC, Vi vs Emacs, etc.. any place where people have a choice lead to those people investing some personal weight in that choice. It's human nature. It gets even worse is someone switches because now they need to justify their switch.
Except that neither DVD-Audio or SACD gives appreciably better sound quality for an undiscerning ear, whereas the picture from a Blu-Ray disc is instantly recognised as better than the incumbant (DVD) by any Joe Sixpack with more than zero eyes.
I'm guessing you've never actually seen Blu-Ray content displayed on an HD TV yet.
It should also have better menu customization options vs DVD. However it's entirely up to the content provider to use the expanded abilities.
The porn industry has already gone with HD-DVD so I think that clearly tells us where everything else is going. Either that or any decent player will support both and we'll just have two standards that are equally available and distributed.
The stories of Blu-rays porn free reputation is undeserved. There are porn blu-rays coming. The difference is the blu-ray group is not helping the porn producers hook up with Blu-ray pressers while HD-DVD is mroe proactive. So the big boys who have cotnracts with pressers who can do blu-ray will get them out while the others need to work out deals. For HD-DVd the group is actively helping them.
kung fu hustle was an awesome improvement over the DVD version however the copy of Superman returns had a atrocious one screen menu. Oeverall the quality of the films I have is a great video quality improvement but menus are often nothing much to write hoem about. I have about 10 Blu-rays.
As with most products, they will charge what people will pay. Games have been roughly keeping up with inflation. I remember my copy of dragon warrior II was $50 CND at zellers. That was 1990. Adjusted for inflation thats 71.36 CND now. As with all things value is relative but the prices have stayed roughly the same with inflation.
There is also the non-trivial problem of portable and emergency reception. There are times when television can communicate more effectively than radio. There are times when the cable service will go down.
However in most circumstance where it'd be needed, power would likely be out. Do you have a portable TV? how about a portable radio? Majority of peopel do nto have a battery powered portable TV so the point is moot.
If anyone actually still wants one but can't find one, last time I was at a Walmart I saw two, and at Costco, I saw over 21 of them (I did a conservative count)
Depends on locality. Took me 4 weeks of looking in my town to find a 60gb ps3. Only because I had info on a EB's shipping/recieving. the Ps3 seems popular here in the Canadian hinterland.
The funny thing is, if many programmers get a PS3 for that purpose and don't buy any games, Sony's losing a heck of a lot of money.
Less then most would think. I doubt sony will take a permanant loss for each machine. Remember they fab almost the entire machine in house. Any improvement in yeild or raw cost reducation goes striaght into their pocket. The Ps2 lost a little money initially and was profitable a few months after launch (according to sony). Given how much deja vu we all have of their current launch (hype, slightly underwhelming product, high price, no games of merit, strong compitition with a head start), I doubt they've shifted strategy much.
some later gambit can allow you to kill one wihtout switching targets like
attack->foe lowest str
or
attack->foe lowest max hp
any of the foe stat conditions almost garentee single target action.
attacking nearest often gives you the best results since there is a slight lag between leader actions and the others. The later gambits help you taylor your behavior much better. At some points you really long for a certain condition then 5 min later you can buy it fromt he shop. it's pretty comprehensive.
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds a bit narrow-sighted to me, if not overly biased. Let's avoid the "next-gen/previous-gen" feature debate - the Wii really is drawing in audiences based on the motion-sensing party games. That's what's selling the system right now. To throw out motion-sensing just because it might not pertain to your field right now is wrong, IMO. What he says and what he does are two separate things, and he might make a motion sensing RPG down the line, but the guy makes his money off the 360 so he needs to sell it well. He does give Microsoft a little criticism, namely about the marketing campaign in Japan, but I think this statement was pretty wrong in the long run.
Motion sensing is a bit of a gimmicky right now. In both Wii and Ps3 games it seems tacted on in most titles. With notable exceptions (Wii: wii sports, Rayman Rabbits. PS3: Flow) they all seem to tack it on (Wii: Zelda PS3: Motostorm). they will problably have to intergrate it better and design around it more.
it succinctly makes the point that Sony thinks it's consumers are idiots and that they would buy a turd with the Sony brand stamped on it.
If you've played with the PS3, you'd know that the hardware is good. But not good enough for most people to justify the price tag yet. the masses or hardware failure both the xbox/360/Ps2 had don't seem to be effecting the PS3. the features are nice and well integrated but they need a compelling reason to get one aside from blu-ray. Right now all they got is a couple good games, a couple third stringers and blu ray. Your vitrol at their product is undeserved. It's not a bad product, just not one with a niche yet.
I understand the strategy of never announcing price drops until they're imminent, but the PS3 is not even on many people's radar at the moment, because of the staggering price. The Neo Geo consumer hardware followed a similar price model. Are you even considering price drops on the PS3 hardware?
Ryan Fenton
In Canada, the PS3 20gb is $50 more then the launch PS2 when you factor inflation. The Neo-Geo was $649.99 USD in 1990. which is about $777.71 CND 1990 money and about $1,109.92 CND right now. The PS3 is $599 or $699. It's not int he same range. Its int he same range as the PS2. At least in Canada. The Us dollar is at a decades low compared to other currencies. so part of the price is that. It canada is seems more reasonable.
Do you really think you can compete with XBox Live?
Online play is almost a non feature for consoles. 6 mil have logged onto the free trial, only fraction have stayed and payed for the service. The Xbox already targetted the online play crowd and the majority of console gamers are not also onlien gamers. Online play only offers anythign to "hardcore" players. Pleayers with enough skill to hold their own or with enough friends online to have private games. Also, they need to be able to pay.
Given how small the online attach rate is it's not a compellign feature for most. And thos who found it compelling already have a 360/xbox.(even for PC online games the online portion was often under utilized. single player or local multiplayer is still the cominant way to play.)
Next study! People who date teenage girls are risky drivers!
Damn.. they'll ahve to reraise my insurance.
Do you mean when the tarrif that was put in place because canada was subsidising their lumber industry and allowing them to undersell american mills like the chinese and japanese did witht he steal industry durring the previous decade when it colapsed?
On this particular point you are wrong. WTO ruled there was no subsidy. The difference between the two industries aren't government subsidies but entirely different models. Canadian logging companys pay less to log on crown land then US logging do for a similiar area BUT they are responsible to plant new trees and must pay for ecological surveys. When you calculate it they pay the generally same amount in total. WTO agreed.
Art is subjective. Motivation isn't the only justifcation for calling something are. The collected works of shakespeare were created likely soley for the sake of money. Shakespeare plagarized ideas from others but he was good at it. It's like Zack Snyder and his remake of dawn of the dead. Art is a retroactive label on things we find pleasing or having some merit.
The conditions that caused the loss of the original atmosphere are still present, and even presuming you could start melting the water somehow, and then put some sort of hardy organisms on there to make an Earth-like atmosphere, it would only last until you ran out of water, then you would be back in the same boat, except now all the water would be gone.
You do realize that'd likely be in the order of several thousand years.
We can be fairly certain that the disciples died proclaiming the message of the New Testament and that the manuscripts we currently have accurately reflect the original gospels and letters. We can therefore be fairly certain that these people died proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead. If he didn't, then they died for what they knew to be a lie, which would be bizarre. If he didn't, then his body was still around somewhere, yet none of the many groups with an interest in squashing Christianity were able to produce the body to silence them. It seems more likely that people couldn't produce a body because there was no body and the disciples died for what they knew to be true: that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven.
I can't prove this, but it seems the most reasonable explanation.
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompatance. Remember that the gospels were written by leading church figures at least 70 years after the death of Jesus. Just look back at accounts of events 70 years ago to see how information can be distorted through time and retelling. For instance a large number of people beleive and have written about how JFK was not assasinated by oswald. Or that the moon landings did not occur. Now imagine 300 years from now a group of historians selected only "fake" moon landing accounts to include in their definative 20th century history. The bible is the same. The new testiment was written by a biased third partys after the fact, editoralized by another biased third party to form the bible. There are numerous surviving account of Jesus that do not describe his ressurection. they only cannonized those that agreed with the dogma of the early church.
Even modern news stories are hearsay and third/second party reporting which is often wrong on the details. If you have ever been involved in a local or national news story, it's ridicoulous at how many detail they can get wrong. Drug dealer described as innocent by standards, innocent bystanders painted as gang related, or a perfectly correct statement played up to be a some farcical claim (Al gore's claim to have been instrimental in the creation of the internet is true, it was twisted to say he invesnted it and used as a mark against his character). It's ridicoulous to think that ancient religious scholars/church heads were any better at getting the details right and the bar for belief was a lot lower. Someone like uri geller claims super natural powers and performs some party tricks and today we disect his methods and expose him. If he did so back in new testiment palastine and he might either be considered a evil sorceror or a prophet.
As well, your logic would also mean you must beleive the koran is 100% true since it had a similiar situation. written by thrid parties about a holy person after his death with miraculous events attributed to him. As well as numerous third party account as the romance of the three kingdoms.
You need a more critical eye when evaluating ancient works. You cannot give a book a free pass because you assume the author beleived what he was writting.
Academic research has a much greater chance of being widely distributed and public domain then corprate research. So someone will do it eventually. I'd prefer it to be a university who will at least share their findings thena propriatary research group which would hoard their results much tighter.
Don't forget CA icewine. We're drowning our German competitors in cheaper and better quality on average wine.
How can we be sure it's unknowable? We can't. we can only say that at the moment we cannot deduce anything, and according to our current model we may not. but never say it's impossible.
it's implicit in all science. any supported theory is "best explanation so far accodring to data at hand" and all unsupported theories are "might be, but we have no support yet", while theories that have been disproven are implicitly "to our knowledge this is untrue".
What do you call Christianity then? It as after all routed in historical events and as Paul said, regarding the resurrection, if it never happened then Christians are to be pitied because they are trusting in a lie.
You can be reasonably certain that a man in ancient palastine and egypt went around teaching people. via historical texts and what not. You cannot use the same texts to say he came back from life. You can prove CaoCao likely existed in the era of the romance of the three kingdoms via historical texts. You cannot prove he could fly and execute massive AOE attacks with his mace. You can prove a swordsmith who used masamune as a "brand" exissted through historical texts. You cannot prove his swords were eternally peaceful and calm.
As I read it, the exact same problem has been reached again - and Religion and Science both require a leap of perfect faith over the gap that is The Beginning of It All.
Not really. One can say "We don't know yet." While the other has stuck with "an ancient person who is important to me said...".
There is a difference.
Every person gets invested into the choices they make. GM vs toyota, LV vs Prada, Xbox vs PS3 vs Wii, Mac vs PC, Vi vs Emacs, etc.. any place where people have a choice lead to those people investing some personal weight in that choice. It's human nature. It gets even worse is someone switches because now they need to justify their switch.
Except that neither DVD-Audio or SACD gives appreciably better sound quality for an undiscerning ear, whereas the picture from a Blu-Ray disc is instantly recognised as better than the incumbant (DVD) by any Joe Sixpack with more than zero eyes.
I'm guessing you've never actually seen Blu-Ray content displayed on an HD TV yet.
It should also have better menu customization options vs DVD. However it's entirely up to the content provider to use the expanded abilities.
The porn industry has already gone with HD-DVD so I think that clearly tells us where everything else is going. Either that or any decent player will support both and we'll just have two standards that are equally available and distributed.
The stories of Blu-rays porn free reputation is undeserved. There are porn blu-rays coming. The difference is the blu-ray group is not helping the porn producers hook up with Blu-ray pressers while HD-DVD is mroe proactive. So the big boys who have cotnracts with pressers who can do blu-ray will get them out while the others need to work out deals. For HD-DVd the group is actively helping them.
kung fu hustle was an awesome improvement over the DVD version however the copy of Superman returns had a atrocious one screen menu. Oeverall the quality of the films I have is a great video quality improvement but menus are often nothing much to write hoem about. I have about 10 Blu-rays.
As with most products, they will charge what people will pay. Games have been roughly keeping up with inflation. I remember my copy of dragon warrior II was $50 CND at zellers. That was 1990. Adjusted for inflation thats 71.36 CND now. As with all things value is relative but the prices have stayed roughly the same with inflation.
expensive? It was $59.95 for resistance.
There is also the non-trivial problem of portable and emergency reception. There are times when television can communicate more effectively than radio. There are times when the cable service will go down.
However in most circumstance where it'd be needed, power would likely be out. Do you have a portable TV? how about a portable radio? Majority of peopel do nto have a battery powered portable TV so the point is moot.
If anyone actually still wants one but can't find one, last time I was at a Walmart I saw two, and at Costco, I saw over 21 of them (I did a conservative count)
Depends on locality. Took me 4 weeks of looking in my town to find a 60gb ps3. Only because I had info on a EB's shipping/recieving. the Ps3 seems popular here in the Canadian hinterland.
The funny thing is, if many programmers get a PS3 for that purpose and don't buy any games, Sony's losing a heck of a lot of money.
Less then most would think. I doubt sony will take a permanant loss for each machine. Remember they fab almost the entire machine in house. Any improvement in yeild or raw cost reducation goes striaght into their pocket. The Ps2 lost a little money initially and was profitable a few months after launch (according to sony). Given how much deja vu we all have of their current launch (hype, slightly underwhelming product, high price, no games of merit, strong compitition with a head start), I doubt they've shifted strategy much.
some later gambit can allow you to kill one wihtout switching targets like
attack->foe lowest str
or
attack->foe lowest max hp
any of the foe stat conditions almost garentee single target action.
attacking nearest often gives you the best results since there is a slight lag between leader actions and the others. The later gambits help you taylor your behavior much better. At some points you really long for a certain condition then 5 min later you can buy it fromt he shop. it's pretty comprehensive.