Oasis would be the perfect portable game. A bit like a Minesweeper meets Civilization, it uses the simple control system the DS stylus would provide, a complex strategy system, random levels so games are never the same twice, and rounds rarely last longer than 15-20 minutes. Add in a multiplayer mode, and this would be sweet!
Common Wii review: Pros: Fun for all ages, lots of replayability Cons: Control scheme takes some getting used to, outdated graphics, no blood
Common PS3 review: Pros: Amazing Photorealism, Super Ultra Deadly Combat 9 almost as good as Super Ultra Deadly Combat 7 (Super Gore Edition) Cons: Didn't we play this last year? (And every year for the past 8 years?)
What they're trying to design isn't smarter systems, or better systems -- hell, it's not difficult to beat a system that will beat a human player every time. The computer has faster reflexes then you, better aim then you, better environmental awareness than you, and can compute the most efficient methods of taking you down.
What is trying to be done is to make the computer more "Human" -- more unpredictable. Balance their strengths with artificial handicaps that the player is forced to endure: line of sight, reaction time, and compasson for teammates.
It isn't that the system isn't smart. It's that it's too smart.
It says "Assist Vader in an attempt on the Emperor's Life." I'm guessing you're assisting him to *protect* the Emperor from the assassins, not playing the role yourself. That would be more in character with the story... until, well...
Ever since Gamestop started this stupid policy of only selling new releases to pre-orders, they've not only cracked down on underage buyers but those of legitimate age as well. I refuse to give them any interest-free loans when they can't even guarantee availability.
Thanks to online rental companies I'm not reliant on their stores to get my video game fix. I just can't wait until digital distribution ends this madness for PC titles once and for all.
The soundtrack to Rygar was always one of my favorites. Actraiser had some good themes too, even though the Kasandora song tribute sounds suspiciously like Richard Marx's "Hazard".
And Castlevania -- just listen to Bloody Hell from Ailsean and Kaijin over at OCRemix. Damn, I dare you to try that on Expert!
What bothers me most are retailers (Gamestop/EB, I'm looking at you) that only sell new releases to preorders. You mean I have to pay before I even get the game to get a copy? Do I get interest on this loan I'm giving you? And then you can't even guarantee you'll have enough in stock to give me my copy from the first shipment! If I'm in your store willingly, chances are I'll buy something else I want on a whim. If I'm preordering, I already know what I want and I'm not going to browse.
Requiring preorders to *maybe* get what you want on the first day is just wrong. Luckily there are enough retailers around me that don't require (or accept) preorders that I can get my game from elsewhere. But I can't wait for digital distribution to put these scam artists out of business.
Jaffe and Trip Hawkins should go and develop the next generation 3DO platform. After all, why make games for proprietary consoles when you can license a common design to whoever wants to make consoles based on it? And if they make it in bright colors, I bet even Nintendo will follow right along too? Right?
In other words, we care less about how much money we have than we do about how much money we have relative to everyone else. In a fascinating survey, Cornell economist Robert Frank found that a majority of Americans would prefer to earn $100,000 while everyone else earns $85,000, rather than earning $110,000 while everyone else earns $200,000.
Because, in an economy where there is less money available, that money is *worth* more and can buy things at a lower price than an economy where everyone has twice as much money. Consider the hypothetical "numbers pulled out of my butt" scenario:
If everyone has $85,000, an average car could sell for $20,000. If we double the amount of money to $200,000, that same car would now cost as much as $47,000. Having a few dollars more than the average in the first example is *always* going to be better than having half as much in the second. That hundred grand isn't worth as much! Consider that the "cost of living:" health care, transportation, even groceries are all going to increase by more than double.
It's not about how much money you have, but how much you can get with it. We can't assume that market prices stay the same when the amount of money available is doubled. It's why having a million dollars today isn't enough to be considered rich anymore -- too many people have a million dollars, and the luxuries attributed to "millionaires" in the past are now reserved for "billionaires". Meanwhile the price of necessities climbs faster than the average income, leaving our money worth less and less, until those on the bottom rungs are forced to choose, not between comforts, but between the basics. When the only food Grandma can buy with her Social Security after paying for her prescriptions necessary to stay alive has a picture of a cat on it, that's intolerable.
Slashdot Mirror
Le Ray Est Mort ... Vive Le Ray!
...Malcom McDowell whistles innocently, and tries to slip out the backdoor and through Nexus unnoticed.
"Instead they should do things that you can only do while you are in college."
Translation: Take lots of acid. Then you too can create the next Mushroom Kingdom.
Oasis would be the perfect portable game. A bit like a Minesweeper meets Civilization, it uses the simple control system the DS stylus would provide, a complex strategy system, random levels so games are never the same twice, and rounds rarely last longer than 15-20 minutes. Add in a multiplayer mode, and this would be sweet!
Obviously the guy's a moron -- I mean, no one I know of even uses his bass-ackwards keyboard layouts!
Will they be competing against Gronk and Glunk?
The real travesty was when Michael and Germane didn't get credit on Rockwell's Somebody's Watching Me.
Where would they be today if they had gotten publicity from such a groundbreaking smash hit?
Common Wii review:
Pros: Fun for all ages, lots of replayability
Cons: Control scheme takes some getting used to, outdated graphics, no blood
Common PS3 review:
Pros: Amazing Photorealism, Super Ultra Deadly Combat 9 almost as good as Super Ultra Deadly Combat 7 (Super Gore Edition)
Cons: Didn't we play this last year? (And every year for the past 8 years?)
James Brown didn't invent soul, either.
If you can't spend the 349$ on a new HDTV, how could you spend 600$ on a new console?
Now they can move on to their next task, understanding why anyone would drink V8.
No, someone just implanted that memory in your head.
All you need to do is threaten some brainy college kids, and boom: five-megawatt laser by mid-may, capable of vaporizing a human target from space.
Simple!
--files this comment under K for "toy"
What they're trying to design isn't smarter systems, or better systems -- hell, it's not difficult to beat a system that will beat a human player every time. The computer has faster reflexes then you, better aim then you, better environmental awareness than you, and can compute the most efficient methods of taking you down.
What is trying to be done is to make the computer more "Human" -- more unpredictable. Balance their strengths with artificial handicaps that the player is forced to endure: line of sight, reaction time, and compasson for teammates.
It isn't that the system isn't smart. It's that it's too smart.
I call Construx!
It says "Assist Vader in an attempt on the Emperor's Life." I'm guessing you're assisting him to *protect* the Emperor from the assassins, not playing the role yourself. That would be more in character with the story ... until, well...
Maybe you're spotting Vader lifting weights?
Ever since Gamestop started this stupid policy of only selling new releases to pre-orders, they've not only cracked down on underage buyers but those of legitimate age as well. I refuse to give them any interest-free loans when they can't even guarantee availability.
Thanks to online rental companies I'm not reliant on their stores to get my video game fix. I just can't wait until digital distribution ends this madness for PC titles once and for all.
The soundtrack to Rygar was always one of my favorites. Actraiser had some good themes too, even though the Kasandora song tribute sounds suspiciously like Richard Marx's "Hazard".
And Castlevania -- just listen to Bloody Hell from Ailsean and Kaijin over at OCRemix. Damn, I dare you to try that on Expert!
What bothers me most are retailers (Gamestop/EB, I'm looking at you) that only sell new releases to preorders. You mean I have to pay before I even get the game to get a copy? Do I get interest on this loan I'm giving you? And then you can't even guarantee you'll have enough in stock to give me my copy from the first shipment! If I'm in your store willingly, chances are I'll buy something else I want on a whim. If I'm preordering, I already know what I want and I'm not going to browse.
Requiring preorders to *maybe* get what you want on the first day is just wrong. Luckily there are enough retailers around me that don't require (or accept) preorders that I can get my game from elsewhere. But I can't wait for digital distribution to put these scam artists out of business.
Woot! Here's hoping for a Lost Vikings MMO!
Eric, Olaf and Baleog for the win!
Jaffe and Trip Hawkins should go and develop the next generation 3DO platform. After all, why make games for proprietary consoles when you can license a common design to whoever wants to make consoles based on it? And if they make it in bright colors, I bet even Nintendo will follow right along too? Right?
Right?
Get his ass back in the office, chain him to the desk, and tell him to finish Mario Galaxy!
Two Nintendo consoles in a row without a Mario launch title?! Who's in charge there?
Perhaps this one? Can't get more kick arse than going to space.
We're spending all this money so we can spot a lost robot millions of miles away, so why can't we point it back at earth and help me find my KEYS!
GAAAAH!
In other words, we care less about how much money we have than we do about how much money we have relative to everyone else. In a fascinating survey, Cornell economist Robert Frank found that a majority of Americans would prefer to earn $100,000 while everyone else earns $85,000, rather than earning $110,000 while everyone else earns $200,000.
Because, in an economy where there is less money available, that money is *worth* more and can buy things at a lower price than an economy where everyone has twice as much money. Consider the hypothetical "numbers pulled out of my butt" scenario:
If everyone has $85,000, an average car could sell for $20,000. If we double the amount of money to $200,000, that same car would now cost as much as $47,000. Having a few dollars more than the average in the first example is *always* going to be better than having half as much in the second. That hundred grand isn't worth as much! Consider that the "cost of living:" health care, transportation, even groceries are all going to increase by more than double.
It's not about how much money you have, but how much you can get with it. We can't assume that market prices stay the same when the amount of money available is doubled. It's why having a million dollars today isn't enough to be considered rich anymore -- too many people have a million dollars, and the luxuries attributed to "millionaires" in the past are now reserved for "billionaires". Meanwhile the price of necessities climbs faster than the average income, leaving our money worth less and less, until those on the bottom rungs are forced to choose, not between comforts, but between the basics. When the only food Grandma can buy with her Social Security after paying for her prescriptions necessary to stay alive has a picture of a cat on it, that's intolerable.