However, seeing as many of the capabilities of this console, including the graphics blow Sony and Microsoft out of the water, it might just push them to release earlier than they wanted to in much the same way the 360 did. What it comes down to is how much of a head start Nintendo gets. 1-2 years, they are the first to market the generation and get the advantages that come with it. However, If the other players can afford to wait them out for more than 2 years, the Wii U can be seen as last generations tech and suffer the same reputation as the Wii--a gimmicky toy that no "real gamer" will touch.
What sucks is that its potential will never be fully realized (at least by any third party). All development is done for either a PS3 or 360 and then ported. To make it worse, by releasing in the middle of a console generation games will not look much better than any other console, but when the new generation comes out the new consoles will probably have way more horsepower. So either Nintendo will have to release a new console to keep up (doubtful) or the Wii U will be dismissed in the same vein as the Wii, last-gen tech disguised as a next-gen console.
I want Nintendo to succeed. I am excited and want to get the Wii U. However, I have a feeling that it will have too much against it. It will have the problem of crappy ports that PC's have (what is the point of having a Mid-high graphics card and great input devices if everything is designed for 360s and then sloppily ported) plus it will still have the Wii's problem with crappy Waggleware because of the use of Wiimotes and the existing mind-set that Nintendo is only for young kids and Grandma.
It depends on what's being programmed. If you are doing something you have passion for or even something cool and challenging, great. However if you are just maintaining some crusty old database system hooked into old DOS program written in PASCAL by some high school-dropout who interned there in the 80's because it is "too expensive" to port the data and rewrite it in a more modern language then it is probably not as creative, fun, or flexible.
As for game programming, from all the horror stories I hear about the game industry, there is no way anyone would get me near any major developer. Smaller or independent developers maybe but not the big boys.
Tell me when I can go back to the days of plugging the cable line directly into the TV without the need for set top boxes and multiple remotes. Wasn't CableCARD supposed to come and fix everything?
Was it ever supposed to be the end-all-be-all launch tool on OS X? I always saw it as the combination of the quick launch and the taskbar. In that respect, it works great. For everything else there was the Applications folder and later Spotlight (as well as many third party launchers).
I have used Windows 7 for over a year and I have no problem with the start menu. I actually like the start menu. You keep saying about the "Windows XP"-style menu, and this seems to be exactly like it with the exception that it is more glossy and has search as a text box and not a link. In fact, I remember people hating the XP-style menu when it first came out. That is why most people switched it to the Windows 98/2000 version.
As for the function, I find it more intuitive than the Win2k version. The 10 programs that I constantly use are pinned to the dock. The 10 other most commonly run programs are on the start menu and my library folders (videos, documents, downloads, control panel, and computer) on the side menu. For everything else, I can either use the search bar or the "All Programs" option which is no different to organize than the classic start menu as in on "All Programs" and click or .
Say what you want about MacOS 9, but IMO one thing they got right was the Menu bar. Window Menu at the top, Apple menu at the left corner with a simple and customizable drop down list of programs, a window selector on the right, and the system clock. It wasn't the end-all-be-all of user interface designs, but it was simple and elegant.
The primary purpose of humans (and life in general) is reproduction and self-perpetuation. Would it not be logical that a society (being a collection of humans with certain shared beliefs) would have the same primary goal of self-preservation?
...there are 1000 greedy workers with less 'power' but just as much greed, and they'll do things to balance it out... like vote.
Communism pretends humans aren't humans.
Capitalism uses human nature against human nature as a moderator.
While Communism assumes greed doesn't exist, capitalistic democracies assumes that everyone is intelligent and well informed. This is an even worse assumption than greed. Give enough disinformation and propaganda and a sizable portion of the population will vote against their own interests. The Tea-baggers are a prime example.
I shall throw my hat into the ring as well. There are two Star Wars games in the Starfighter series, Starfighter and the sequel Jedi Starfighter. Having playing the first, I decided to buy the second during a used game sale at GameStop. I got home, only to find that they have given me the first game instead. It would have just been a simple misunderstanding but the douche-bag at the counted decided to give me a hard time about it, including repeatedly asking the question, "what's the difference?" Eventually we had to get the manager involved.
Another time, I decided to buy a copy of The X-Files: Resist or Serve. I picked up a used copy for ~$15. When I got up to the counter, the guy pushed the new copy and upon seeing the price, gave it to me. The new copy was $5 cheaper than the used one! One would think that new games would be worth more than a used ones.
Also, on many occasions, they don't really care if the disc (or game) is new or used. I have picked up used games with nearly pristine discs and new ones with look like they have been in an accident with a belt sander. Some clerks will pick the first disc they see, some nicer ones will find the one that looks the best (especially when there are only a few) No disc is seems tied to a specific copy. If it is, I have never seen it enforced. It becomes especially funny (or questionable) when two nearly identical copies have different prices.
I didn't say it was not challenging. It just was not hard for the sake of being hard. It required thinking about the situation at hand, minding your surroundings and adjusting your strategy accordingly. It also never felt like the game was being unfair but that I was failing to see the solution. The major difference is that the former leads to frustration at failure the other leads to wanting to keep trying. The best part was that it discouraged the brute force solution and encouraged exploration and finding more creative solutions.
There are reasons that people play games other than just pure difficulty. Story is one. Feel is another. Some people play Halo because it makes you feel like a badass space marine. Ghostbusters: The Game made you feel like you were hanging out with the ghostbusters trapping some evil spirits. Batman: AA made you feel like you were the Batman - a badass vigilante that hides in the darkness and takes out baddies one by one using his wits and his wonderful toys.
It depends on the game, really. Dungeon crawlers like Diablo and Torchlight, that is the main game. It doesn't usually feel like grinding unless you get to a part and are completely inadequate to fight the monsters. It is just going from one end of dungeon to the other, upgrade your weapons and go to the next. Then you have games that have grinding for the sake of grinding, usually as a way to extend the play time. The problem is when just completing the quests aren't enough to progress you have to randomly seek out and kill baddies for only the sake of increasing your stats. What it comes down to, is if it feels like you are progressing while grinding it is fine, but when the grinding is independent of progress it just comes off as repetitive and boring.
They do this because PEOPLE STEAM THEIR GAMES, plain and simple.
When they outlaw steaming of games, only outlaws will steam games. I for one enjoy placing my game discs in my Veggie steamer. It gives my broccoli a nice tangy flavor. A copy of StarCraft is the only way to make good Sushi rice.
I believe that it is a bad design choice. However, as someone posted above, a compromise to that would be to give an option when you create a character to have it be an online or offline character. Choose offline, and you can play the game without the anti-cheat constant connection requirement but without all the advantages that come with it. That way, those who want the online stuff can have it, those who want to play the game offline still can.
When it comes to a single player game, who cares if I cheat? If the game gets hard in a place, I have nothing against cheating. I can't stand endless grinding in single player RPGs so I cheat. If anything, I would rather have games that make it so I do not need to cheat. Batman: Arkham Asylum was, for me, the perfect game. There was no grinding, no real difficulty spikes, and never did I feel that any boss or puzzle was impossible.
For multiplayer, fine. put cheat detection, require Battle.NET, whatever. If I am playing with other people I want to feel that the games are fair. But don't restrict what I can do on single player. If what I do in single player impacts multiplayer so much that it requires these kind of measures, then that is just plain bad game design. Also, until I have broadband internet access everywhere I take my laptop, constant internet requirements are going to guarantee I will not buy the game.
It's a shame because we need an organization that is what they used to be to the first amendment: watchdogs and defenders. Only we need them in the modern day and for the entire constitution rather than just the first amendment.
What we need is a billionaire industrialist with a defense company and a strange obsession with fighting crime. A man who hides in the shadows and strikes fear into the hearts of criminals. Perhaps he could be a symbol the people could rally around, maybe some sort of winged mammal.
You know, that would be a great idea for a comic book. I wonder if anyone has trademarked "Flying-Squirrel-Man."
Please, Batboy is in his early twenties, can we start calling him Batman now? As we all know, the recession is hurting everyone so Batman is just rooming with Aquaman for a little while. Something about taxes on the richest 1% going up in Gotham.
With a vow to never spend over $15 and some patience (maybe as long as a couple of years), there is no reason why you can't get any game on there for cheap as hell. Usually by waiting for a major holiday.
However, for non-sale prices, Amazon (new and used) is usually cheaper, sooner.
This is just a bunch of nerds ranting in a forum. This is nothing.
It's a fucking luxury. It's not gasoline or corn or even fucking McDonalds.
If it was McDonalds, I would expect looting and rioting in the street. That isn't a crappy restaurant, it is a (crappy) religion! I know quite a few people that eat it for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and midnight snack!
Well it's funny you should say that. The current generation of iPod Nano is basically a small touchscreen watch without a band that plays music. It even has an analog clock app. That is why quite a few companies are now making watch band cases for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the specs were released by Nintendo.
Information on the GPU was released on Engadget.
Touché. It really depends on how much of a threat Sony and Microsoft believe the Wii U to be and how early they decide to hold off the next generation. A few years ago, I remember people started to ask the question of what was next with many responses being that there was no reason to even begin to think about the next generation until at least 2014-15. Others were that Kinect and Move were the next generation. In which case, by the time the PS4 and Xbox 3 come out, the Wii U could start to look dated.
However, seeing as many of the capabilities of this console, including the graphics blow Sony and Microsoft out of the water, it might just push them to release earlier than they wanted to in much the same way the 360 did. What it comes down to is how much of a head start Nintendo gets. 1-2 years, they are the first to market the generation and get the advantages that come with it. However, If the other players can afford to wait them out for more than 2 years, the Wii U can be seen as last generations tech and suffer the same reputation as the Wii--a gimmicky toy that no "real gamer" will touch.
What sucks is that its potential will never be fully realized (at least by any third party). All development is done for either a PS3 or 360 and then ported. To make it worse, by releasing in the middle of a console generation games will not look much better than any other console, but when the new generation comes out the new consoles will probably have way more horsepower. So either Nintendo will have to release a new console to keep up (doubtful) or the Wii U will be dismissed in the same vein as the Wii, last-gen tech disguised as a next-gen console.
I want Nintendo to succeed. I am excited and want to get the Wii U. However, I have a feeling that it will have too much against it. It will have the problem of crappy ports that PC's have (what is the point of having a Mid-high graphics card and great input devices if everything is designed for 360s and then sloppily ported) plus it will still have the Wii's problem with crappy Waggleware because of the use of Wiimotes and the existing mind-set that Nintendo is only for young kids and Grandma.
I only hope I am wrong.
It depends on what's being programmed. If you are doing something you have passion for or even something cool and challenging, great. However if you are just maintaining some crusty old database system hooked into old DOS program written in PASCAL by some high school-dropout who interned there in the 80's because it is "too expensive" to port the data and rewrite it in a more modern language then it is probably not as creative, fun, or flexible.
As for game programming, from all the horror stories I hear about the game industry, there is no way anyone would get me near any major developer. Smaller or independent developers maybe but not the big boys.
Better yet, they can set up a new website that has all the projects that haven't been updated. It could be called...Deadmeat!
Tell me when I can go back to the days of plugging the cable line directly into the TV without the need for set top boxes and multiple remotes. Wasn't CableCARD supposed to come and fix everything?
My problem with using the Xbox is it's so bloody noisy. Fix that first Microsoft and I'll happily cancel the TV part of my cable package.
Are you using the 360 fat or 360 slim, because I have the slim and noise is not a problem.
Was it ever supposed to be the end-all-be-all launch tool on OS X? I always saw it as the combination of the quick launch and the taskbar. In that respect, it works great. For everything else there was the Applications folder and later Spotlight (as well as many third party launchers).
I have used Windows 7 for over a year and I have no problem with the start menu. I actually like the start menu. You keep saying about the "Windows XP"-style menu, and this seems to be exactly like it with the exception that it is more glossy and has search as a text box and not a link. In fact, I remember people hating the XP-style menu when it first came out. That is why most people switched it to the Windows 98/2000 version.
As for the function, I find it more intuitive than the Win2k version. The 10 programs that I constantly use are pinned to the dock. The 10 other most commonly run programs are on the start menu and my library folders (videos, documents, downloads, control panel, and computer) on the side menu. For everything else, I can either use the search bar or the "All Programs" option which is no different to organize than the classic start menu as in on "All Programs" and click or .
Say what you want about MacOS 9, but IMO one thing they got right was the Menu bar. Window Menu at the top, Apple menu at the left corner with a simple and customizable drop down list of programs, a window selector on the right, and the system clock. It wasn't the end-all-be-all of user interface designs, but it was simple and elegant.
The primary purpose of humans (and life in general) is reproduction and self-perpetuation. Would it not be logical that a society (being a collection of humans with certain shared beliefs) would have the same primary goal of self-preservation?
Communism pretends humans aren't humans.
Capitalism uses human nature against human nature as a moderator.
While Communism assumes greed doesn't exist, capitalistic democracies assumes that everyone is intelligent and well informed. This is an even worse assumption than greed. Give enough disinformation and propaganda and a sizable portion of the population will vote against their own interests. The Tea-baggers are a prime example.
Seriously, It's a Streetlight
I Want To Believe
I shall throw my hat into the ring as well. There are two Star Wars games in the Starfighter series, Starfighter and the sequel Jedi Starfighter. Having playing the first, I decided to buy the second during a used game sale at GameStop. I got home, only to find that they have given me the first game instead. It would have just been a simple misunderstanding but the douche-bag at the counted decided to give me a hard time about it, including repeatedly asking the question, "what's the difference?" Eventually we had to get the manager involved.
Another time, I decided to buy a copy of The X-Files: Resist or Serve. I picked up a used copy for ~$15. When I got up to the counter, the guy pushed the new copy and upon seeing the price, gave it to me. The new copy was $5 cheaper than the used one! One would think that new games would be worth more than a used ones.
Also, on many occasions, they don't really care if the disc (or game) is new or used. I have picked up used games with nearly pristine discs and new ones with look like they have been in an accident with a belt sander. Some clerks will pick the first disc they see, some nicer ones will find the one that looks the best (especially when there are only a few) No disc is seems tied to a specific copy. If it is, I have never seen it enforced. It becomes especially funny (or questionable) when two nearly identical copies have different prices.
I didn't say it was not challenging. It just was not hard for the sake of being hard. It required thinking about the situation at hand, minding your surroundings and adjusting your strategy accordingly. It also never felt like the game was being unfair but that I was failing to see the solution. The major difference is that the former leads to frustration at failure the other leads to wanting to keep trying. The best part was that it discouraged the brute force solution and encouraged exploration and finding more creative solutions.
There are reasons that people play games other than just pure difficulty. Story is one. Feel is another. Some people play Halo because it makes you feel like a badass space marine. Ghostbusters: The Game made you feel like you were hanging out with the ghostbusters trapping some evil spirits. Batman: AA made you feel like you were the Batman - a badass vigilante that hides in the darkness and takes out baddies one by one using his wits and his wonderful toys.
It depends on the game, really. Dungeon crawlers like Diablo and Torchlight, that is the main game. It doesn't usually feel like grinding unless you get to a part and are completely inadequate to fight the monsters. It is just going from one end of dungeon to the other, upgrade your weapons and go to the next. Then you have games that have grinding for the sake of grinding, usually as a way to extend the play time. The problem is when just completing the quests aren't enough to progress you have to randomly seek out and kill baddies for only the sake of increasing your stats. What it comes down to, is if it feels like you are progressing while grinding it is fine, but when the grinding is independent of progress it just comes off as repetitive and boring.
They do this because PEOPLE STEAM THEIR GAMES, plain and simple.
When they outlaw steaming of games, only outlaws will steam games. I for one enjoy placing my game discs in my Veggie steamer. It gives my broccoli a nice tangy flavor. A copy of StarCraft is the only way to make good Sushi rice.
I believe that it is a bad design choice. However, as someone posted above, a compromise to that would be to give an option when you create a character to have it be an online or offline character. Choose offline, and you can play the game without the anti-cheat constant connection requirement but without all the advantages that come with it. That way, those who want the online stuff can have it, those who want to play the game offline still can.
When it comes to a single player game, who cares if I cheat? If the game gets hard in a place, I have nothing against cheating. I can't stand endless grinding in single player RPGs so I cheat. If anything, I would rather have games that make it so I do not need to cheat. Batman: Arkham Asylum was, for me, the perfect game. There was no grinding, no real difficulty spikes, and never did I feel that any boss or puzzle was impossible.
For multiplayer, fine. put cheat detection, require Battle.NET, whatever. If I am playing with other people I want to feel that the games are fair. But don't restrict what I can do on single player. If what I do in single player impacts multiplayer so much that it requires these kind of measures, then that is just plain bad game design. Also, until I have broadband internet access everywhere I take my laptop, constant internet requirements are going to guarantee I will not buy the game.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!
It's a shame because we need an organization that is what they used to be to the first amendment: watchdogs and defenders. Only we need them in the modern day and for the entire constitution rather than just the first amendment.
What we need is a billionaire industrialist with a defense company and a strange obsession with fighting crime. A man who hides in the shadows and strikes fear into the hearts of criminals. Perhaps he could be a symbol the people could rally around, maybe some sort of winged mammal.
You know, that would be a great idea for a comic book. I wonder if anyone has trademarked "Flying-Squirrel-Man."
Please, Batboy is in his early twenties, can we start calling him Batman now? As we all know, the recession is hurting everyone so Batman is just rooming with Aquaman for a little while. Something about taxes on the richest 1% going up in Gotham.
With a vow to never spend over $15 and some patience (maybe as long as a couple of years), there is no reason why you can't get any game on there for cheap as hell. Usually by waiting for a major holiday.
However, for non-sale prices, Amazon (new and used) is usually cheaper, sooner.
This is just a bunch of nerds ranting in a forum. This is nothing.
It's a fucking luxury. It's not gasoline or corn or even fucking McDonalds.
If it was McDonalds, I would expect looting and rioting in the street. That isn't a crappy restaurant, it is a (crappy) religion! I know quite a few people that eat it for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and midnight snack!
behave like a sphere like this.
Are you talking shit about Dr. Ball M.D.? He's a doctor not a savage. That was a flu shot! Good Day Sir!
In fact, maybe an iWatch wouldn't be a bad idea.
Well it's funny you should say that. The current generation of iPod Nano is basically a small touchscreen watch without a band that plays music. It even has an analog clock app. That is why quite a few companies are now making watch band cases for them.
Google "iPod Nano Watch"