One thing about consoles is they should NEVER crash for any reason. If this gets pushed out too early it will be crash friendly like the early x-box I believe?
Towards the end of my NES console's life, getting a game to run for more than an hour was an effort. There was even a procedure: blow in it twice, blow in the console, wipe the contacts with alcohol, allow to dry, PRAY, then turn the console on. If the screen wasn't totally garbage, you could get a few levels into a game like SMB3 before either the picture corrupted or the game just froze. And even worse, there was a chance it would corrupt your save games (remember to hold in the reset button while turning off your console!)
Don't get me started on the phonebooks I had to put on top of the RF Adapter to keep that working. I've stripped and spliced enough of those buggers to figure out this neat little trick: if you get one of those old Atari GAME/ANTENNA RF adapters with the composite port on the bottom (the kind with the tines you screw into the TV, or attach to a Coax converter), you can use a plain jane $.99 composite cable from the back of the NES and it'll work fine. Much easier then shelling out 10-15 bucks for the Nintendo RF adapter!
The only solution to such rampant disregard for originality is obvious: we need stronger intellectual property laws and more protection for software patents. Obviously, the current laws provide no incentive for Microsoft to innovate at all, and therefore we must protect Apple's ideas and creations by giving them a guaranteed mononpoly for a limited time - perhaps as long as 70 years - to force competitors to develop new and alterantive solutions.
Raise your hand if this has ever happened to you. Ever buy a car? A house? Can someone point me to the reimbursement department; I have some items I've bought in my life that have devalued.
Devaluation through wear is to be expected and implied in all physical property, but I'm not talking about a car that loses a quarter of it's resale value when it's driven off the lot. When I own a physical item, it's worth is the higher of either by combined value of it's components, or value of it's implied usefulness. If an item *has* no physical value, then what's protecting the implied value? Sony is assuming the position that the contents of it's game database is worth real money to real people. But under what obligation are they to protect the value of those contents? What property rights are implied by such a transaction? There's only one place that those kinds of legal challenges can be answered. That means, lawsuits.
From a legal standpoint, there are many many many laws protecting compensation from an employer to an employee.
Exactly my point -- to my knowledge, there are no laws protecting items in such an exchange. All of your "property" exists on Sony's hardware, and they are accountable to no one to maintain accurate or fair records of their own database. In essence, you're putting real cash into their casino, on the bet that they're not going to pack up and leave or change the rules before you get a chance to cash back out.
In my opinion, by honoring a value to the items they offer, they should be legally obligated to protect the integrity of the system that offers those items. Not only that, but there needs to be some physical "evidence" of these items as well; deeds, titles, etc. When it comes to items with actual physical values, proof of ownership is critical to resolving any disputes.
And that doesn't already happen? You haven't spent much time with mmorpgs have you?
I have, and I have first hand knowledge of how frustrating it is when popular and important items are dominated by cheaters and bots. My accepting an active position, they're doing more than accepting inflation. They're taking an active interest in the market values of the virtual property contained in their database, which they already have complete control over. They have no responsibility to maintain free trade, and are thus just as likely to interfere with market trends than they are to let them run rampant.
There are two issues with Sony actually doing something like this:
1) They are accepting responsibility for the value of in-game items. This might not seem like a big deal, but god forbid a server rollback takes a big-ticket item out of your inventory. Or worse, balance adjustments devalue rare/valuable items. How many lawsuits can you imagine will come from people who want to be reimbursed for their "virtual" property's market value? To be sure, the items in question are really just bits on a computer. But really, how different is that from most banking done today? Would you like to be told by your bank that your last direct deposit doesn't exist anymore because they needed to rollback their database?
2) Officially putting a value to in-game items gives new incentive to all those gold and item harvesting shops to work extra hard, not only to eat up as much of those resources as possible, but to hoard and control market fluxuations. If you think spawn camping is bad now, imagine when you're competing with people who are doing it for a living! Yes, it's already happening now, but this will just take it to levels untold of before. Will there be an SEC to make sure collusion doesn't take place between harvesters and GMs who spawn an extra rare or two for a few bucks?
There was a possibilty of turning AR into an online MMO (appropriately called, ARO) but that got canned by Monolith. Ironicly, a lot of the features they were planning on implementing found their way into another franchise...Matrix Online.
There was actually a game, somewhere in between the FMV and scripted cinematic sequences? Damn, I know I saw it from start to finish, but I didn't realize there was anything in between.
Sorry guys, but after the heartbreaks that were DX:IW and T:DS, I simply can't jump back on the bandwagon so easily.
I *really* need to see some proof that the man hasn't lost his touch before coming back to the Chapel of Spector. Proof as in a playable demo to something truly innovative, and doesn't show any compromises in either Art Design or Play Dynamics.
Show me what you promised the world when you made the greatest games on the crappiest hardware, and I'll be there along with the rest of those who still think LGS are the holiest letters in the alphabet.
Show me you're not washed up, as your latest work seems to indicate. I've been fooled twice in a row. Only Peter Molyneux has gotten me worse. And that won't happen again, ever.
The problem being that once you rebid you're giving up your "Early Bird" status, which gives the other person the $50.00 bid. It's now the second bid that has the "Early Bird", because you gave it up in order to bid higher.
In order to counteract the other person's bid now, your new bid has to beat theirs...essentially, raising your bid to $51.00
Just like standing in line back in grade school...if you get out of line to try and cut in front, there's no cutbacks allowed.
If they have thousands of auctions going every day over the period of a couple years, the small percentage they get from the extra $1.50 or so can start adding up if they are affecting a large number of bidders.
Which of these eight songs we play over and over does the public like the best? That artist will be allowed to have an entry in next week's Wheel of Songs. The rest have already been termed 'One hit wonders'.
VH1 is already producing their "Where are they now?" specials. Because it's not like they play music videos anymore.
That's only a good thing if you're not a bun vendor. Not everyone can be Sausage vendors. Some may make it in the condiments business, but is that.02 cents/sausage a real compromise over the.50 you were making before? How long before someone comes up with a free Mustard? Free Katchup? Free Relish? Or, because it's now obvious and trivial, a free copy of your custom "Mustard Relish Mix" that you were selling at a premium?
When it's *your* livelyhood that's being replaced with a free alternative, is it really that attractive?
If an artist is nothing more than the means by which information is transformed into a new medium (thought->paper, emotion->sound, random data->JPG) then why should anyone or anything be rewarded for what is essentially performing the function of a tool?
Why should the work of Michaelangelo be "Priceless", yet the sketchings of an NYC street artist fixed at $15? Surely the provenance is different, but beyond the origins there should be no discernable difference in importance.
So then why should we pay "Artists" for producing their art? If the expression "Writers Write. Painters Paint. Singers Sing" holds true, then these tools are simply performing their function and thus shouldn't be singled out for deserving praise or reward above any other.
So what if a particular tool is adept at producing a result you find either pleasing or revolting? Is your subjective taste, or the taste of a majority, enough to qualify Art as Art? If I am the only person who sees the beauty in an object, am I all the more rich for holding a truly unique perspective? Is my perspective then, itself an art?
Slashdot Mirror
How about making a game that doesn't rely on cheap special effects and ugly-looking "eyecandy" as a marketing ploy? There are still good games out there on the consoles, bargin games that are loads of fun to play.
Heck, games even ten years old would surive in this market with a little boost for the next gen consoles. The problem is the developers rely more on sequels of previous hits that don't get the full development time they deserve and end up bombing, when fans would much rather see innovation and fun elements.
I thought we've been down this road before.
One thing about consoles is they should NEVER crash for any reason. If this gets pushed out too early it will be crash friendly like the early x-box I believe?
You ever seen SMB3 crash? Heck no!
I'm making the point that, YES, I have seen consoles crash. Specificly, I HAVE seen SMB3 crash, due to the flawed combo of a weak-72 pin connector and a sensitive Lockout chip.
Relevant line from that link: Unfortunately, inadequate testing of this design prior to release resulted in one of the NES's most infamous problems
I believe these kinds of "rush-to-market" flaws are exactly what the GP is complaining about, so an NES game was probably the worst example.
Yes. I've seen EVERY NES title crash.
Towards the end of my NES console's life, getting a game to run for more than an hour was an effort. There was even a procedure: blow in it twice, blow in the console, wipe the contacts with alcohol, allow to dry, PRAY, then turn the console on. If the screen wasn't totally garbage, you could get a few levels into a game like SMB3 before either the picture corrupted or the game just froze. And even worse, there was a chance it would corrupt your save games (remember to hold in the reset button while turning off your console!)
Don't get me started on the phonebooks I had to put on top of the RF Adapter to keep that working. I've stripped and spliced enough of those buggers to figure out this neat little trick: if you get one of those old Atari GAME/ANTENNA RF adapters with the composite port on the bottom (the kind with the tines you screw into the TV, or attach to a Coax converter), you can use a plain jane $.99 composite cable from the back of the NES and it'll work fine. Much easier then shelling out 10-15 bucks for the Nintendo RF adapter!
Gamecube. PS2. Xbox.
I own them all.
So which category do I fall into?
Great. Now it really is starting to feel like the universe is just one big version of Conway's Game of Life?
I haven't been this excited about 3D on a Nintendo console since Square released RAD RACER back in 1987.
r .html
http://www.flyingomelette.com/reviews/nes/radrace
The only solution to such rampant disregard for originality is obvious: we need stronger intellectual property laws and more protection for software patents. Obviously, the current laws provide no incentive for Microsoft to innovate at all, and therefore we must protect Apple's ideas and creations by giving them a guaranteed mononpoly for a limited time - perhaps as long as 70 years - to force competitors to develop new and alterantive solutions.
/sarcasm tag.
Oh, I almost forgot to close my
Raise your hand if this has ever happened to you. Ever buy a car? A house? Can someone point me to the reimbursement department; I have some items I've bought in my life that have devalued.
Devaluation through wear is to be expected and implied in all physical property, but I'm not talking about a car that loses a quarter of it's resale value when it's driven off the lot. When I own a physical item, it's worth is the higher of either by combined value of it's components, or value of it's implied usefulness. If an item *has* no physical value, then what's protecting the implied value? Sony is assuming the position that the contents of it's game database is worth real money to real people. But under what obligation are they to protect the value of those contents? What property rights are implied by such a transaction? There's only one place that those kinds of legal challenges can be answered. That means, lawsuits.
From a legal standpoint, there are many many many laws protecting compensation from an employer to an employee.
Exactly my point -- to my knowledge, there are no laws protecting items in such an exchange. All of your "property" exists on Sony's hardware, and they are accountable to no one to maintain accurate or fair records of their own database. In essence, you're putting real cash into their casino, on the bet that they're not going to pack up and leave or change the rules before you get a chance to cash back out.
In my opinion, by honoring a value to the items they offer, they should be legally obligated to protect the integrity of the system that offers those items. Not only that, but there needs to be some physical "evidence" of these items as well; deeds, titles, etc. When it comes to items with actual physical values, proof of ownership is critical to resolving any disputes.
And that doesn't already happen? You haven't spent much time with mmorpgs have you?
I have, and I have first hand knowledge of how frustrating it is when popular and important items are dominated by cheaters and bots. My accepting an active position, they're doing more than accepting inflation. They're taking an active interest in the market values of the virtual property contained in their database, which they already have complete control over. They have no responsibility to maintain free trade, and are thus just as likely to interfere with market trends than they are to let them run rampant.
There are two issues with Sony actually doing something like this:
1) They are accepting responsibility for the value of in-game items. This might not seem like a big deal, but god forbid a server rollback takes a big-ticket item out of your inventory. Or worse, balance adjustments devalue rare/valuable items. How many lawsuits can you imagine will come from people who want to be reimbursed for their "virtual" property's market value? To be sure, the items in question are really just bits on a computer. But really, how different is that from most banking done today? Would you like to be told by your bank that your last direct deposit doesn't exist anymore because they needed to rollback their database?
2) Officially putting a value to in-game items gives new incentive to all those gold and item harvesting shops to work extra hard, not only to eat up as much of those resources as possible, but to hoard and control market fluxuations. If you think spawn camping is bad now, imagine when you're competing with people who are doing it for a living! Yes, it's already happening now, but this will just take it to levels untold of before.
Will there be an SEC to make sure collusion doesn't take place between harvesters and GMs who spawn an extra rare or two for a few bucks?
There was a possibilty of turning AR into an online MMO (appropriately called, ARO) but that got canned by Monolith. Ironicly, a lot of the features they were planning on implementing found their way into another franchise...Matrix Online.
e VideoG.html
You can read more about the strange coincidences between the two franchises here: http://www.marktaw.com/reviews/AlternateRealityTh
There was actually a game, somewhere in between the FMV and scripted cinematic sequences? Damn, I know I saw it from start to finish, but I didn't realize there was anything in between.
Smart money is on Eggshell White with brushed aluminum trim.
And maybe an LCD with multicolor backlites. But I could be wrong about that.
Smart money is on Eggshell White with brushed aluminum trim.
And maybe an LCD with multicolor backlites. But I could be wrong about that.
What this means to me:
Pixar: Adult Video division.
Hmm...the Jobs conspiracy continues...
Sorry guys, but after the heartbreaks that were DX:IW and T:DS, I simply can't jump back on the bandwagon so easily.
I *really* need to see some proof that the man hasn't lost his touch before coming back to the Chapel of Spector. Proof as in a playable demo to something truly innovative, and doesn't show any compromises in either Art Design or Play Dynamics.
Show me what you promised the world when you made the greatest games on the crappiest hardware, and I'll be there along with the rest of those who still think LGS are the holiest letters in the alphabet.
Show me you're not washed up, as your latest work seems to indicate. I've been fooled twice in a row. Only Peter Molyneux has gotten me worse. And that won't happen again, ever.
Oooh, shame on you! I had my hopes lifted for a moment, before being ripped to shreds by cruel reality.
Damn. RIP, Looking Glass Studios.
The problem being that once you rebid you're giving up your "Early Bird" status, which gives the other person the $50.00 bid. It's now the second bid that has the "Early Bird", because you gave it up in order to bid higher.
In order to counteract the other person's bid now, your new bid has to beat theirs...essentially, raising your bid to $51.00
Just like standing in line back in grade school...if you get out of line to try and cut in front, there's no cutbacks allowed.
It's not complicated. Really, it's not.
If they have thousands of auctions going every day over the period of a couple years, the small percentage they get from the extra $1.50 or so can start adding up if they are affecting a large number of bidders.
This sounds just like Superman III!
Underrated movie, actually.
...that is, unless the washing machine somehow interefered with FCC Part 15 regulations by virtue of having a DC motor and all.
No offense meant to anything you said, but that just caused a flashback to "You forgot about Poland!"
I think that's become the new definition for "Using omitted insignificant details as a strawman."
BTW, anyone who reads this post owes me $20, that's my TOS.
That's okay, I'll just subtract it from the $350 "Proofreading Fee" you owe me for reading your post.
And yet...if the name of the search engine was "Frogle", and an American court ruled the same way, there'd be rioting in every major E.U. city.
Which is another way of saying:
Which of these eight songs we play over and over does the public like the best? That artist will be allowed to have an entry in next week's Wheel of Songs. The rest have already been termed 'One hit wonders'.
VH1 is already producing their "Where are they now?" specials. Because it's not like they play music videos anymore.
That's only a good thing if you're not a bun vendor. Not everyone can be Sausage vendors. Some may make it in the condiments business, but is that .02 cents/sausage a real compromise over the .50 you were making before? How long before someone comes up with a free Mustard? Free Katchup? Free Relish? Or, because it's now obvious and trivial, a free copy of your custom "Mustard Relish Mix" that you were selling at a premium?
When it's *your* livelyhood that's being replaced with a free alternative, is it really that attractive?
See also: Outsourcing.
If an artist is nothing more than the means by which information is transformed into a new medium (thought->paper, emotion->sound, random data->JPG) then why should anyone or anything be rewarded for what is essentially performing the function of a tool?
Why should the work of Michaelangelo be "Priceless", yet the sketchings of an NYC street artist fixed at $15? Surely the provenance is different, but beyond the origins there should be no discernable difference in importance.
So then why should we pay "Artists" for producing their art? If the expression "Writers Write. Painters Paint. Singers Sing" holds true, then these tools are simply performing their function and thus shouldn't be singled out for deserving praise or reward above any other.
So what if a particular tool is adept at producing a result you find either pleasing or revolting? Is your subjective taste, or the taste of a majority, enough to qualify Art as Art? If I am the only person who sees the beauty in an object, am I all the more rich for holding a truly unique perspective? Is my perspective then, itself an art?