RTS's, Turn Based Strategy, Flight sims (with use of a joystick) and who can go past the text adventures of old. Almost all genre's perform better on a PC
That's three genres, one of which is archaic, and another is mindnumbingly dull. I'm not interested in strategy games either, civ 4 is pretty much civ 2 with impossible system requirements and some gameplay gimmicks.
I was considering upgrading my computer to play games, but then I realised there are hardly any games I'd actually be able to play. And it'd cost about twice as much as just buying a console.
If you've got the TV/monitor and internet connection, why use the console?
Because all the games you want to play are console-exclusive. Oh, and you want to play in the living room on the big TV rather than in the dark cramped computer room.
I'm not really interested in RTS, that's a dead genre as far as I'm concerned. FPSes are on the way out as well, they've really been milked for too long. Before long, the only games on the PC will be MMORPGs and simulators.
There's a reason more and more games are being released console-only.
That doesn't make sense. Some math subjects are esoteric. There is no way one can explain it simply without first explaining five years' worth of math theory. No way. If you want a simplistic article on an esoteric subject, you are asking the article to be 500 pages long. That would simply be redundant.
In which case, that topic should not be in an encyclopaedia, it should be in a maths book.
But the concise technical description must remain in a prominent position. Wikipedia is first and foremost a reference source. The precise technical information is more important than the "How Stuff Works" version.
No it isn't. It's an encylopaedia, which is never meant to be a reference source. The whole point is to provide information for laymen, not to provide technical information for experts.
Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopaedia. Encyclopaedias are aimed at lay people, not experts. An article on particle physics that only be understood by particle physicists has no use in an encyclopaedia. Many articles on wikipedia are very badly written and hard to read.
It may be more inaccurate with a controller, but at least it's comfortable. Keyboard and mouse is completely unergonomic, and WASD must be the most braindead control scheme ever invented, I don't think it could be any more awkward, having to use one finger for two keys above each other means you can't even rest your hand.
chicken wire fences do a good job of keeping the little guys where they belong.
Doesn't stop them shitting on the part of the garden they're fenced into though does it? My garden isn't big enough to dedicate half of it to chickens. And they'd probably be eaten by foxes or cats, or the eggs stolen by neighbours.
With the added benefit that they can cut costs by cutting quality (reality is as cheap as it can get and sports, while expensive to secure a deal, is mostly profitable) and they will barely notice.
Sport is often not profitable but used as a hook to get people to subscribe to cable/satellite.
The Simpsons was better in the early days when Homer spent all his time either bowling or at Moe's Tavern. Nowadays, he seems to exist soley to go around having 'zany' adventures meeting celebrities. Even the rough around the edges first series is better than the shit they've been putting out for the last ten years.
Notice how when people quote the Simpsons, it's always the old episodes, and not the new ones?
Many people cycle in Europe even when it's rainy. They just wear raincoats, or on rainy days they take public transport instead.
Raincoats don't keep the rain out, especially if you're cycling. You can't decide to use the car or public transport on rainy days as you don't know whether it's going to rain or not. I've cycled to work in the sun, and come home in a storm.
The Hollywood trend is to secure money by rehashing proven hits of the past
The trend of any business is to make the most of your successful products. After all, you never know when you'll need the money, your next product might bomb and cost you millions.
I don't see how film franchises are any worse than TV shows that drag on for years and years, or comics that go on for decades. Just because a film uses old characters and an old premise doesn't mean it can't be entertaining.
Due to being knocked over by vehicles. Cycling is a very dangerous form of transportation.
Regular exercise also helps with depression (physically and psychologically confidence)
On the other hand, having to cycle everywhere would cause depression, especially in areas with poor weather and short days. When I cycled to work, rain pretty much made my entire day a misery.
while economically peoples productivity would increase.
No, cycling accidents, punctures, broken chains and people just not wanting to go to work because it's pitch black and in the middle of a thunderstorm would lead to a decrease in productivity as people get to work late or not at all.
The longer you take to move up, the more traffic backs up at the back, and the more people who obstructed who are trying to get on/off the road. But at least you save 5 cents on your petrol bill...
Prices are going up because kids have more disposable income than ever, it's basic economics. Anyway downloads are cheaper than CDs. Would you rather pay 99 cents per song or £3 for a CD?
How is this any worse than the 5% of the population who are young, male drivers who have to pay through the nose for car insurance? If they're going to ban genetic discrimination, then they should also ban all discrimination.
If rugby was interesting, more people would bother watching it. Rugby is played entirely by fat-jawed, private-school thugs, watched by barbour-jacket wearing toffs.
As a big soccer/football fan myself (forza juventus!) sometimes YouTube is the only way I can watch the premiership or international football games in the US. None of the major networks broadcast it, it's rarely if ever available on cable, and it's impossible to find games on the internet.
There are plenty of European games on TV in the US, ever heard of Fox Soccer Channel, Gol TV or Setanta? You can see more Premiership games in the US than you can in England!
So, Harvard fighting the RIAA, if publicized correctly by the media, will get the attention of everyone around the world. Take the MIT dean issue that came up recently, for example. That was splashed all across the news channels everywhere in the world!
If Magazine 1 stays true/honest and reviews when the games come out, and Magazine 2 'sells out' and gets the game far ahead, and publishes months in advance about the games, which one will you buy when you see both magazines at the newsstand?
You go to a newsstand, see two magazines, one reviewing the hottest, newest games, the other reviewing the stale games from last month. Which do you buy? 'You' being most people, not you personally.
Slashdot Mirror
I was considering upgrading my computer to play games, but then I realised there are hardly any games I'd actually be able to play. And it'd cost about twice as much as just buying a console.
I'm not really interested in RTS, that's a dead genre as far as I'm concerned. FPSes are on the way out as well, they've really been milked for too long. Before long, the only games on the PC will be MMORPGs and simulators.
There's a reason more and more games are being released console-only.
Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopaedia. Encyclopaedias are aimed at lay people, not experts. An article on particle physics that only be understood by particle physicists has no use in an encyclopaedia. Many articles on wikipedia are very badly written and hard to read.
The control benefits of a PC only really apply to FPSes, for most other genres, a controller is better.
It may be more inaccurate with a controller, but at least it's comfortable. Keyboard and mouse is completely unergonomic, and WASD must be the most braindead control scheme ever invented, I don't think it could be any more awkward, having to use one finger for two keys above each other means you can't even rest your hand.
Maybe people don't want chicken shit all over their back garden?
The Simpsons was better in the early days when Homer spent all his time either bowling or at Moe's Tavern. Nowadays, he seems to exist soley to go around having 'zany' adventures meeting celebrities. Even the rough around the edges first series is better than the shit they've been putting out for the last ten years.
Notice how when people quote the Simpsons, it's always the old episodes, and not the new ones?
I don't see how film franchises are any worse than TV shows that drag on for years and years, or comics that go on for decades. Just because a film uses old characters and an old premise doesn't mean it can't be entertaining.
The longer you take to move up, the more traffic backs up at the back, and the more people who obstructed who are trying to get on/off the road. But at least you save 5 cents on your petrol bill...
Yes, overpopulation problems for a start as the death rate soars.
Prices are going up because kids have more disposable income than ever, it's basic economics. Anyway downloads are cheaper than CDs. Would you rather pay 99 cents per song or £3 for a CD?
How is this any worse than the 5% of the population who are young, male drivers who have to pay through the nose for car insurance? If they're going to ban genetic discrimination, then they should also ban all discrimination.
If rugby was interesting, more people would bother watching it. Rugby is played entirely by fat-jawed, private-school thugs, watched by barbour-jacket wearing toffs.
Rugby's cheaper? Ever tried getting into an England game at Twickenham? And what about those Friday night games?
So what if rugby is cheaper, it's boring.