Rockstar North is in Edinburgh, Scotland. Rockstar Games and Take Two are in NYC. Developer in Scotland, Publisher/Owners in NYC. Still supports my point of being outside Japan.
If you don't get why Japan is where the console wars will be won or lost, let me point it out to you.
The market in Japan for video games is shrinking. Even Satoru Iwata was quoted as saying the same. The Japanese market is not as signifigant as it once was. What is important, however, is Japanese developers. If they can get enough Japanese developers to sign on to Xbox, even if its only outside of Japan, they'll be fine.
99% of all successful console games in the past 20 years have been from Japan.
I dunno where you get your numbers, but thats certainly a -little- high. Tetris is the #2 best selling game of all time. And theres this little game called Grand Theft Auto from some American studio. Then theres all the Rare games. And Tomb Raider sold pretty well.
Yes, the cell processor is a gimmick and a scam, and will fall flat
True.
However. Nintendo would be far more likely to capitulate on this than Microsoft
Nintendo is doing fine. They have tons of money and are in a very good financial situation.
There's no room for some silly spoiled foreigner brat of a company to try and push their way in.
As I said, the Japanese video game market is going down. Japan is where a lot of the games come from but America is where the real money is made. Xbox can do well in Japan if they tried, but it might not be worth it in sales.
They are using a different CPU(IBM RISC), a new GPU(ATI) adding there own microcode to the CPU to stop people doing what they have been doing to the current XBox. Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?
and then there is Live I would say there will have to re-write most of that as well. Why would they have to do that? Nothing that runs on the servers needs to change very much.
MS has never writen software for RISC in the past and I think that the time frame they have set themself is very unrealistic. They wrote Windows NT for the DEC Alpha (a 64 bit RISC processor) and supported it until NT 4, and they have Windows CE which runs on ARM's RISC processors.
they have partnered up with some good people to bring the PS 3 to life Microsoft has "partnered up" with IBM and ATI. Are they not "good people"?
Have you watched one entire episode from the original series?
We fans have to realize that when the writers generated the orginal stories back in the 1960s, they had to take into mind the current politics in the US, what advertisers wanted, what the network wanted, what budget they had, last seasons ratings, etc
The writers wanted to be controversial, to have stories that tied into the issues of the day, and to be exciting and entertaining. The network worried about that other stuff.
Or what about that really stupid episode where Kirk and et. al. find some planet full of American Indians who worship the US flag or something? I think we'd all agree that one ought to be dropped out of the story arc.
That was a really good episode, if you'd sit down and watch it. Sure, having the American flag appear somewhere else seems a little far-fetched, but put that aside and watch the rest of it. Another poster had a pretty good synopsis of it.
Another thing is StarFleet itself. The 60s show had a mostly all white, crew-cut, "Right Stuff", NASA with bigger ships ethic.
Lets see... A black woman (Uhura), an Asian (Sulu), a Russian (Chekov), a fat scottish guy (Scotty), an Alien (Spock). Kirk and McCoy were the only two white American males of the main characters. In the pilot, the first officer was a woman. But the network demanded that it be changed. Having a black woman and a Russian were highly controversial, and Star Trek had the first interracial kiss on TV. Half of the potential audience at the time was offended by these things, thats part of what made the show great. I'm sorry, but you're dead wrong on that point.
I'm not a fan of Greenpeace, but don't you think that a wooden sailing ship would be just a -little- impractical? Even in people with the most extreme point of view, there comes a point where practicality will prevail.
But, however, at least one of their ships, the Rainbow Warrior II, is a dual sailing/motor ship.
And because of their previous experience in having their ships sunk by foreign governments, I don't blame them for not investing too heavily in a single ship.
Those who were truely not involved in stealing DirecTV's signal should have allowed the lawsuit to go forward, let DirecTV put on their case, and then move for dismissal immediately after that case before even needing to put on a defense
The problem there is, it still costs money to defend yourself in court, even if its rediculously in your favor. You not only need to pay your lawyer, and miss work, you also need to travel to wherever DirecTV decided to sue you. They use every legal trick to drag it out and make it as expensive for you as possible.
They won't typicly sue people that have the means or the will to defend themselves.
You didn't make it very clear that you were referring to first party titles. So, of the titles I mentioned, they'll have Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, Jade Empire, and Sudeki. This is not enough for the next 6 months? In addition to that, they'll have:
Unreal Championship 2 (yes, from Epic, but Microsoft is the publisher) Forza Motorsport Conker Live and Reloaded BC Kingdom Under Fire Kameo Perfect Dark Zero, but god knows when that'll come out.
So, lets say that of the 11 games I mentioned, 4 or 5 will be very good (Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, Jade Empire, BC) 4 will probably be average to somewhat good (Unreal, Conker, Forza Motorsport, Kingdom Under Fire) and 2 might suck (Sudeki, Kameo). Thats really not that bad. In fact, its pretty good. Saying "Ok, they have Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, and Jade Empire coming out soon, but what else do they have?" is like saying "Bill Gates has 80 billion dollars, but what else does he have?" 4 potential blockbusters in 1 holiday season, let alone 3rd party titles, is a ton.
I was looking foreward to True Fantasy Live Online though. But it must not have been very good if they cancelled it. It's true that the MMORPG market is saturated right now, but it would have had no competition on Xbox Live.
I don't see the value in using 1200 Macintoshes for simple data entry applications which could be accomplished by dumb terminals. Nothing against Apple or the Macintosh, but this is like replacing the Fords and Chevys at the public works with 1200 brand new Mercedes-Benzes.
They have to be regulated because they are a government authorized monopoly. Cable subscriptions are taxed, so don't give me that crap about your tax dollars being wasted.
Cable TV is a luxury product for most. For some it is a necessity, if they can not recieve broadcast TV.
Any company abusing its monopoly, no matter what their product is, needs to be stopped or regulated. Especially a monopoly that the government handed them. Telephone service was once considered a luxury. And AT&T abused their monopoly, and then it was broken up and regulated.
This is about consumer protection. The consumers are getting screwed by the cable companies right now, and theres not much of an alternative because of their monopoly. It is the government's responsibility to protect the consumer from a monopoly they created.
Have we no bigger problems in the world than ensuring that people can get access to cable channels without having to buy entire packages, or keeping the world safe from telemarketers. These do not seem like Earth-shattering issues.
We can't always focus on the great problems of the world. Hunger, world peace, poverty, they are all important and admirable issues to take up. But you can't just ignore the little things. Where do you draw the line on what doesn't get addressed before the big things get solved? Is tax reform too small? Is the media ownership limit bill too small? Sure, legislating Cable TV regulations seems a bit trivial compared to, oh, peace in Israel and Palestine, or even the prescription drug bill. But if all you focus on are the "important issues", then nothing will ever get done.
He said at least one previous transplant patient has lived ten years and others are doing well.
Did that patient only last 10 years, or are they currently alive after 10 years? Would be very sad if 10 years is all this baby Alessia has to hope for.
Do you honestly think that this new telescope will actually launch in 2012? It won't even be fully designed by then. The Hubble is not some old, obsolete piece of equipment. It's the best we've ever had, and will still be the best at what it does, even if the Webb telescope goes as planned.
The Webb telescope only sees infrared. It can't see what the Hubble can and never will. There will be no pictures from the Webb that can show what the human eye can see. The Webb telescope is intended to augment Hubble, not replace it.
"Look and feel" and generic terms can't be copyrighted or trademarked. Logos and names can be. Big difference. Plus if you don't protect your trademarks, you lose them.
It's in everyones best interest for Mozilla.org to assert its trademarks. Except for people who'd sell Mozilla merchandise without paying royalties. And for those that would call their own product "Mozilla".
Whichever way the patent goes, I do hope they go that route. And not some silly thing like swiping cards on your GBA.
I'd like to see them sell the rom and let you use it on whatever device you'd like, but they'll probably tie it in to one of their consoles. Which is fine. What I wonder is if they even have the rights to distribute some of these titles anymore, which could be why they don't sell them. Do they still have the right to sell Final Fantasy 1? Or does Square? These issues can make it impossible for even Nintendo to distribute certain titles.
Sorry for biting your head off earlier though, I thought you were making a different point than you were.
But I don't think companies should be taking advantage of a clearly broken system, just because they can. Yes, I do blame Nintendo for doing this. It's yet another one of their anti competitive practices.
I think Nintendo should do all it can to protect the Gameboy platform, I agree with you there. But theres other things you can do. In the case of a 3rd party handheld (which I don't see happening), use your brand name and marketing to your advantage, and make a better product.
In the case of copyright infringement, it is their right to go after people and I don't blame them for it. Emulation right now does promote piracy, but why is that? Is it because people don't want to pay for new games? (yes, there are plenty of these people, and they can and should go after them). Or is it that old cartridges are hard to find, and that there is currently no legal way to purchase roms? I think iTunes has demonstrated that there is a market for legally purchasing content online. Why doesn't Nintendo pursue this? They could sell their entire catalog of games going back to the stone age online, or sell their own emulation platform...
Sorry, went way off on a tangent there. But back to my point, Nintendo protecting its interests is fine, it should. But not through anti-competitive practices, and not through abusing the patent system. Just because you can, does not mean you should.
So you are conceding the point that (notwithstanding the patent) it is not illegal to emulate or make compatible devies to the Gameboy. Because of the precedent with IBM and Compaq in the 80s and reverse engineering being expressly allowed for the purposes of interoperability etc.
Your point is that since its legal to do that, then Nintendo should do what it can to protect itself. Of course it should, but without abusing the law and the patent system. Have you read the patent? It's clearly bogus. If it were seriously challenged it would not stand up in court. You and I both know that there is a ton of prior art. Nintendo has a long history of violating the law and using pressure tactics to 'protect' itself from competition. This is just another example.
Imagine for a second that I started up a company that made Gameboys, compatible 100% with the Nintendo Gameboy. Essentially I'd be profiting of the design of the Gameboy without paying any money to Nintendo. This would be wrong. Right?
(I know you're just trolling, but you got modded up somehow.)
You mean like how companies like Compaq made PC's that were 100% compatible with IBM's in the 80's?
As long as you are not violating any copyrights by using Nintendo software, and are not deceiving people into thinking it is a Nintendo product, why shouldn't you be able to make a device that plays Gameboy games? What law says I can't?
I'm not even going to bother addressing your other points.
Slashdot Mirror
Rockstar North is in Edinburgh, Scotland. Rockstar Games and Take Two are in NYC. Developer in Scotland, Publisher/Owners in NYC. Still supports my point of being outside Japan.
If you don't get why Japan is where the console wars will be won or lost, let me point it out to you.
The market in Japan for video games is shrinking. Even Satoru Iwata was quoted as saying the same. The Japanese market is not as signifigant as it once was. What is important, however, is Japanese developers. If they can get enough Japanese developers to sign on to Xbox, even if its only outside of Japan, they'll be fine.
99% of all successful console games in the past 20 years have been from Japan.
I dunno where you get your numbers, but thats certainly a -little- high. Tetris is the #2 best selling game of all time. And theres this little game called Grand Theft Auto from some American studio. Then theres all the Rare games. And Tomb Raider sold pretty well.
Yes, the cell processor is a gimmick and a scam, and will fall flat
True.
However. Nintendo would be far more likely to capitulate on this than Microsoft
Nintendo is doing fine. They have tons of money and are in a very good financial situation.
There's no room for some silly spoiled foreigner brat of a company to try and push their way in.
As I said, the Japanese video game market is going down. Japan is where a lot of the games come from but America is where the real money is made. Xbox can do well in Japan if they tried, but it might not be worth it in sales.
They are using a different CPU(IBM RISC), a new GPU(ATI) adding there own microcode to the CPU to stop people doing what they have been doing to the current XBox.
Sony is using a different CPU (Cell), and probably a different GPU, why doesn't the same argument apply to them?
and then there is Live I would say there will have to re-write most of that as well.
Why would they have to do that? Nothing that runs on the servers needs to change very much.
MS has never writen software for RISC in the past and I think that the time frame they have set themself is very unrealistic.
They wrote Windows NT for the DEC Alpha (a 64 bit RISC processor) and supported it until NT 4, and they have Windows CE which runs on ARM's RISC processors.
they have partnered up with some good people to bring the PS 3 to life
Microsoft has "partnered up" with IBM and ATI. Are they not "good people"?
Whats kind of freaky is that guy's website still exists... Its as if its frozen in time. http://www.subterrane.com/~dfeussner/
Have you watched one entire episode from the original series?
We fans have to realize that when the writers generated the orginal stories back in the 1960s, they had to take into mind the current politics in the US, what advertisers wanted, what the network wanted, what budget they had, last seasons ratings, etc
The writers wanted to be controversial, to have stories that tied into the issues of the day, and to be exciting and entertaining. The network worried about that other stuff.
Or what about that really stupid episode where Kirk and et. al. find some planet full of American Indians who worship the US flag or something? I think we'd all agree that one ought to be dropped out of the story arc.
That was a really good episode, if you'd sit down and watch it. Sure, having the American flag appear somewhere else seems a little far-fetched, but put that aside and watch the rest of it. Another poster had a pretty good synopsis of it.
Another thing is StarFleet itself. The 60s show had a mostly all white, crew-cut, "Right Stuff", NASA with bigger ships ethic.
Lets see... A black woman (Uhura), an Asian (Sulu), a Russian (Chekov), a fat scottish guy (Scotty), an Alien (Spock). Kirk and McCoy were the only two white American males of the main characters. In the pilot, the first officer was a woman. But the network demanded that it be changed. Having a black woman and a Russian were highly controversial, and Star Trek had the first interracial kiss on TV. Half of the potential audience at the time was offended by these things, thats part of what made the show great. I'm sorry, but you're dead wrong on that point.
I'm not a fan of Greenpeace, but don't you think that a wooden sailing ship would be just a -little- impractical? Even in people with the most extreme point of view, there comes a point where practicality will prevail.
But, however, at least one of their ships, the Rainbow Warrior II, is a dual sailing/motor ship.
And because of their previous experience in having their ships sunk by foreign governments, I don't blame them for not investing too heavily in a single ship.
Info on their ships here
Yeah, because all religous people so abhore violence, they'd never make something as excessively gruesome as Passion of the Christ.
Yes, shame on all of us non-religous types.
Those who were truely not involved in stealing DirecTV's signal should have allowed the lawsuit to go forward, let DirecTV put on their case, and then move for dismissal immediately after that case before even needing to put on a defense
The problem there is, it still costs money to defend yourself in court, even if its rediculously in your favor. You not only need to pay your lawyer, and miss work, you also need to travel to wherever DirecTV decided to sue you. They use every legal trick to drag it out and make it as expensive for you as possible.
They won't typicly sue people that have the means or the will to defend themselves.
You didn't make it very clear that you were referring to first party titles. So, of the titles I mentioned, they'll have Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, Jade Empire, and Sudeki. This is not enough for the next 6 months? In addition to that, they'll have:
Unreal Championship 2 (yes, from Epic, but Microsoft is the publisher)
Forza Motorsport
Conker Live and Reloaded
BC
Kingdom Under Fire
Kameo
Perfect Dark Zero, but god knows when that'll come out.
So, lets say that of the 11 games I mentioned, 4 or 5 will be very good (Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, Jade Empire, BC) 4 will probably be average to somewhat good (Unreal, Conker, Forza Motorsport, Kingdom Under Fire) and 2 might suck (Sudeki, Kameo). Thats really not that bad. In fact, its pretty good. Saying "Ok, they have Halo 2, Fable, Mechassault 2, and Jade Empire coming out soon, but what else do they have?" is like saying "Bill Gates has 80 billion dollars, but what else does he have?" 4 potential blockbusters in 1 holiday season, let alone 3rd party titles, is a ton.
I was looking foreward to True Fantasy Live Online though. But it must not have been very good if they cancelled it. It's true that the MMORPG market is saturated right now, but it would have had no competition on Xbox Live.
What does that leave in Microsoft's pocket for the US after Fable and Halo 2? Mechassault 2?
Halo 2
Fable
Mechassault 2
Doom 3
Jade Empire
Full Spectrum Warrior
Star Wars: Republic Commando
KOTOR 2
Starcraft: Ghost
Sudeki
Xbox has plenty of titles in the pipeline.
If you're going to troll, do it right... It's official; Netcraft confirms: Xbox is dying.
Giving their users another reason to switch to Gmail.
Though, trying to drive away as many users as possible has worked for them in the past.
I don't see the value in using 1200 Macintoshes for simple data entry applications which could be accomplished by dumb terminals. Nothing against Apple or the Macintosh, but this is like replacing the Fords and Chevys at the public works with 1200 brand new Mercedes-Benzes.
Has Netcraft confirmed this?
...My state (Massachusetts) taxes all embezzlements and otherwise illegally obtained funds.
So if you want to do some embezzling, money laundering, or just a little misappropriation, don't come to Taxachusetts.
They have to be regulated because they are a government authorized monopoly. Cable subscriptions are taxed, so don't give me that crap about your tax dollars being wasted. Cable TV is a luxury product for most. For some it is a necessity, if they can not recieve broadcast TV. Any company abusing its monopoly, no matter what their product is, needs to be stopped or regulated. Especially a monopoly that the government handed them. Telephone service was once considered a luxury. And AT&T abused their monopoly, and then it was broken up and regulated. This is about consumer protection. The consumers are getting screwed by the cable companies right now, and theres not much of an alternative because of their monopoly. It is the government's responsibility to protect the consumer from a monopoly they created.
Have we no bigger problems in the world than ensuring that people can get access to cable channels without having to buy entire packages, or keeping the world safe from telemarketers. These do not seem like Earth-shattering issues.
We can't always focus on the great problems of the world. Hunger, world peace, poverty, they are all important and admirable issues to take up. But you can't just ignore the little things. Where do you draw the line on what doesn't get addressed before the big things get solved? Is tax reform too small? Is the media ownership limit bill too small? Sure, legislating Cable TV regulations seems a bit trivial compared to, oh, peace in Israel and Palestine, or even the prescription drug bill. But if all you focus on are the "important issues", then nothing will ever get done.
How did you manage to get modded up +4 anyway?
1. Slashdot is an American site. 2. Get a sense of humor.
$US13.5 million ($17.99 million)
$US25 million ($33.32 million)
Whats this value in the parentheses? Is this Paul Allen's money's performance rating?
Or are we looking at what he actually gave, and what he'll claim he gave on his taxes?
He said at least one previous transplant patient has lived ten years and others are doing well.
Did that patient only last 10 years, or are they currently alive after 10 years? Would be very sad if 10 years is all this baby Alessia has to hope for.
Hopefully she'll live a long and happy life.
How long did we wait after Skylab for the ISS?
How many times was it delayed and scaled back?
Do you honestly think that this new telescope will actually launch in 2012? It won't even be fully designed by then. The Hubble is not some old, obsolete piece of equipment. It's the best we've ever had, and will still be the best at what it does, even if the Webb telescope goes as planned.
The Webb telescope only sees infrared. It can't see what the Hubble can and never will. There will be no pictures from the Webb that can show what the human eye can see. The Webb telescope is intended to augment Hubble, not replace it.
"Look and feel" and generic terms can't be copyrighted or trademarked. Logos and names can be. Big difference. Plus if you don't protect your trademarks, you lose them.
It's in everyones best interest for Mozilla.org to assert its trademarks. Except for people who'd sell Mozilla merchandise without paying royalties. And for those that would call their own product "Mozilla".
Whichever way the patent goes, I do hope they go that route. And not some silly thing like swiping cards on your GBA.
I'd like to see them sell the rom and let you use it on whatever device you'd like, but they'll probably tie it in to one of their consoles. Which is fine. What I wonder is if they even have the rights to distribute some of these titles anymore, which could be why they don't sell them. Do they still have the right to sell Final Fantasy 1? Or does Square? These issues can make it impossible for even Nintendo to distribute certain titles.
Sorry for biting your head off earlier though, I thought you were making a different point than you were.
Oh, I do blame the USPTO, they're horrible.
But I don't think companies should be taking advantage of a clearly broken system, just because they can. Yes, I do blame Nintendo for doing this. It's yet another one of their anti competitive practices.
I think Nintendo should do all it can to protect the Gameboy platform, I agree with you there. But theres other things you can do. In the case of a 3rd party handheld (which I don't see happening), use your brand name and marketing to your advantage, and make a better product. In the case of copyright infringement, it is their right to go after people and I don't blame them for it. Emulation right now does promote piracy, but why is that? Is it because people don't want to pay for new games? (yes, there are plenty of these people, and they can and should go after them). Or is it that old cartridges are hard to find, and that there is currently no legal way to purchase roms? I think iTunes has demonstrated that there is a market for legally purchasing content online. Why doesn't Nintendo pursue this? They could sell their entire catalog of games going back to the stone age online, or sell their own emulation platform...
Sorry, went way off on a tangent there. But back to my point, Nintendo protecting its interests is fine, it should. But not through anti-competitive practices, and not through abusing the patent system. Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Legal competition is a good thing.
So you are conceding the point that (notwithstanding the patent) it is not illegal to emulate or make compatible devies to the Gameboy. Because of the precedent with IBM and Compaq in the 80s and reverse engineering being expressly allowed for the purposes of interoperability etc. Your point is that since its legal to do that, then Nintendo should do what it can to protect itself. Of course it should, but without abusing the law and the patent system. Have you read the patent? It's clearly bogus. If it were seriously challenged it would not stand up in court. You and I both know that there is a ton of prior art. Nintendo has a long history of violating the law and using pressure tactics to 'protect' itself from competition. This is just another example.
Imagine for a second that I started up a company that made Gameboys, compatible 100% with the Nintendo Gameboy. Essentially I'd be profiting of the design of the Gameboy without paying any money to Nintendo. This would be wrong. Right?
(I know you're just trolling, but you got modded up somehow.)
You mean like how companies like Compaq made PC's that were 100% compatible with IBM's in the 80's?
As long as you are not violating any copyrights by using Nintendo software, and are not deceiving people into thinking it is a Nintendo product, why shouldn't you be able to make a device that plays Gameboy games? What law says I can't?
I'm not even going to bother addressing your other points.