If you have to go to Latin to figure out that "terror" is a synonym for "fear", then I suspect you're either not a native English speaker or your education was woefully inadequate.
Yeah, GBA compatibility on the DS was always a "bonus" in my mind, and considering the age of the GBA platform at this point (what, 10 years?) people are willing to give it a pass.
Don't forget, the original DS also "dropped" GB/GBC compatibility that the GBA had (also a 10 year old platform by that time).
Having said that, I don't think the PSP Go is really aimed at existing PSP customers. I think it's aimed at cashing in on the growing handheld market the App Store has created on the iPhone. Sony has seen people are willing to pay to download games to a portable device, and publishers recognize they get a lot more money per game sold when they don't have to pay for packaging, storage devices, and shelf space, with the added benefit of eliminating the secondary market.
Like the article says, if you already have a slimline PSP, the PSP Go simply is not for you. Personally, I thought having an optical disc-based media on a portable device was kind of a stupid idea anyway. Solid state all the way.
MS's target market would not be able to identify with or recognize a "new band on the upswing". Picking a song from 1981 that the majority of their target demographic (35+ males, the ones who make purchasing decisions for their company's IT department) could immediately identify with or recognize was a good choice for Windows 95, not a bad one.
Quit being pedantic. You know when I said "server" I meant what Blizzard defines as a "realm"... and EQ defines as "servers", UO defines as "shards", and every other MMO has its own inconsistent nomenclature for.
I hope Blizzard's CEO sleeps soundly knowing that instead of making a better product he gave up the profits that could have been used to improve the product to Activision instead (though I'm sure his larger paycheck helps).
I'm pretty sure he's content with being the best on earth.
Whatever they changed was a bit more complex than that, because they were also laying the groundwork for the future cross-server LFG/dungeon system. For example, since they fixed the "additional instances could not be launched" issue, you can no longer share the daily heroic quest with your group while inside the zone. The reason being is that in the near future the people in your instance may not be on the same server as you, and may have a different daily heroic quest than you.
Those are definitely not revenue streams. The costs of server transfers, name changes, and factions changes exist to discourage abuse and to recoup sunk costs in designing and supporting the systems that allow those features, all of which were added based on player demand.
Hell the article even specifically mentions Blizzcon as a massive loss for them that they consider a marketing cost.
Blizzard actually kind of "solved" this by accident. Greens are garbage level-up quest rewards, blues are good level-up quest rewards and "starter" dungeon gear, purples are "standard" max level gear. At max level, anyone who's put any time or effort into the game (and many who haven't) has epic items in every slot already.
It's been like this since at least half-way through Burning Crusade. In fact, I thought most players had gotten over the "everyone has epics" thing already, and that even the vocal minority had given up on complaining about it. Maybe my perception is skewed.
There's two possible situations here. The first is that the raid leader is being a douche and insisting on unreasonable gear requirements for easy encounters. The solution to that is not to raid with that douche and to find another group.
The other possible situation is that you yourself are attempting to participate in raids that you simply do not have the right gear level to contribute meaningfully to. The solution to this problem is to shoot for lower end raids. Do Naxx 10 or 25, Sartharion 10 or 25, or even Ulduar 10 man pickup groups until your gear improves.
I have a feeling, based on your description, that you are specifically complaining about not being able to do Vault of Archavon, since this is the only consistently pugged raid with a steep gear requirement (because Blizzard keeps adding a new boss every content patch which requires a somewhat "current" gear level). If you can find a group willing to skip Koralon, you can go with that group. Or if you wait long enough, eventually all the "geared" players will have done it and you can give it a try with the rest of the leftover players on Sunday/Monday, and you'll understand more clearly why the groups earlier in the week are so insistent that people have good gear.
Anyway, ignoring all this, it's easier now than it's ever been to catch up in gear level just from doing 5 man heroic dungeons and checking the auction house. And if you're having trouble getting into pickup raids, my advice would be to find a guild that raids on a schedule compatible with yours. I'm not talking about a bleeding edge end game progression guild. I'm talking about a guild that does Naxx25 on Saturday nights and can only clear the entrance of Ulduar. This will get you gear and badges to buy gear faster than running 5 mans and crying about not being invited to pug raids because your gear level is too low.
I found the part where he compared the names to be completely objective. Especially because he compared OS X 10.6's code name with Windows 7's official name.
You know, it kinds of sends mixed messages when you first admit that you haven't thought through the issue very much, and then go on and preemptively characterize any criticism as being based on your critics' "religion".
The big problem I see is that you're going to spend the majority of your time playing against a computer-controlled opponent when it comes to micromanagement and unit control. That takes away a lot of the draw of multiplayer RTS games for me.
Slashdot Mirror
If you have to go to Latin to figure out that "terror" is a synonym for "fear", then I suspect you're either not a native English speaker or your education was woefully inadequate.
Yeah, GBA compatibility on the DS was always a "bonus" in my mind, and considering the age of the GBA platform at this point (what, 10 years?) people are willing to give it a pass.
Don't forget, the original DS also "dropped" GB/GBC compatibility that the GBA had (also a 10 year old platform by that time).
Having said that, I don't think the PSP Go is really aimed at existing PSP customers. I think it's aimed at cashing in on the growing handheld market the App Store has created on the iPhone. Sony has seen people are willing to pay to download games to a portable device, and publishers recognize they get a lot more money per game sold when they don't have to pay for packaging, storage devices, and shelf space, with the added benefit of eliminating the secondary market.
Like the article says, if you already have a slimline PSP, the PSP Go simply is not for you. Personally, I thought having an optical disc-based media on a portable device was kind of a stupid idea anyway. Solid state all the way.
You should watch this movie.
Disappointingly unfunny.
Eh? I've been playing team-based FPS games since Quake deathmatch in 1996. We took the games seriously enough. Am I a jock now?
MS's target market would not be able to identify with or recognize a "new band on the upswing". Picking a song from 1981 that the majority of their target demographic (35+ males, the ones who make purchasing decisions for their company's IT department) could immediately identify with or recognize was a good choice for Windows 95, not a bad one.
If you don't want notes in the margins quit being cheap and buy new instead of used.
Regression tests must be fun where you work.
Quit being pedantic. You know when I said "server" I meant what Blizzard defines as a "realm"... and EQ defines as "servers", UO defines as "shards", and every other MMO has its own inconsistent nomenclature for.
I'm saying they're probably a net loss (at least at first).
I'm pretty sure he's content with being the best on earth.
Whatever they changed was a bit more complex than that, because they were also laying the groundwork for the future cross-server LFG/dungeon system. For example, since they fixed the "additional instances could not be launched" issue, you can no longer share the daily heroic quest with your group while inside the zone. The reason being is that in the near future the people in your instance may not be on the same server as you, and may have a different daily heroic quest than you.
Those are definitely not revenue streams. The costs of server transfers, name changes, and factions changes exist to discourage abuse and to recoup sunk costs in designing and supporting the systems that allow those features, all of which were added based on player demand.
Hell the article even specifically mentions Blizzcon as a massive loss for them that they consider a marketing cost.
You don't "currently" track closed/fixed/wontfix/invalid bugs.
I was surprised recently when a website tried to tell me my birthdate of 1/1/1900 was "invalid". It seemed to take 1/1/1910 just fine, though.
Blizzard actually kind of "solved" this by accident. Greens are garbage level-up quest rewards, blues are good level-up quest rewards and "starter" dungeon gear, purples are "standard" max level gear. At max level, anyone who's put any time or effort into the game (and many who haven't) has epic items in every slot already.
It's been like this since at least half-way through Burning Crusade. In fact, I thought most players had gotten over the "everyone has epics" thing already, and that even the vocal minority had given up on complaining about it. Maybe my perception is skewed.
There's two possible situations here. The first is that the raid leader is being a douche and insisting on unreasonable gear requirements for easy encounters. The solution to that is not to raid with that douche and to find another group.
The other possible situation is that you yourself are attempting to participate in raids that you simply do not have the right gear level to contribute meaningfully to. The solution to this problem is to shoot for lower end raids. Do Naxx 10 or 25, Sartharion 10 or 25, or even Ulduar 10 man pickup groups until your gear improves.
I have a feeling, based on your description, that you are specifically complaining about not being able to do Vault of Archavon, since this is the only consistently pugged raid with a steep gear requirement (because Blizzard keeps adding a new boss every content patch which requires a somewhat "current" gear level). If you can find a group willing to skip Koralon, you can go with that group. Or if you wait long enough, eventually all the "geared" players will have done it and you can give it a try with the rest of the leftover players on Sunday/Monday, and you'll understand more clearly why the groups earlier in the week are so insistent that people have good gear.
Anyway, ignoring all this, it's easier now than it's ever been to catch up in gear level just from doing 5 man heroic dungeons and checking the auction house. And if you're having trouble getting into pickup raids, my advice would be to find a guild that raids on a schedule compatible with yours. I'm not talking about a bleeding edge end game progression guild. I'm talking about a guild that does Naxx25 on Saturday nights and can only clear the entrance of Ulduar. This will get you gear and badges to buy gear faster than running 5 mans and crying about not being invited to pug raids because your gear level is too low.
Your (lack of) spelling and grammar angers and confuse me.
Human brain lag and input lag don't overlap, they add on to each other. So it's kind of moot for this discussion.
I found the part where he compared the names to be completely objective. Especially because he compared OS X 10.6's code name with Windows 7's official name.
Can't even take a little joke. :(
You don't deduct losses on income you don't report for taxation. Unless you want to end up like Capone.
And we shall call this theory "Government". We'll make millions.
Actually, WoW is designed with the ability to solo play in mind, especially for leveling. Which is a huge part of its success.
The big problem I see is that you're going to spend the majority of your time playing against a computer-controlled opponent when it comes to micromanagement and unit control. That takes away a lot of the draw of multiplayer RTS games for me.