If that's what you believe, then just because you haven't been playing the more innovative titles doesn't mean that they aren't out there.
Off the top of my head, from the Gamecube generation, Nintendo developed and/or published:
Luigi's Mansion Pikmin Metroid Prime Eternal Darkness Geist Zelda: 4 Swords Pac Man Vs.
I'm sure there are others I've forgotten. And I'll be the first to admit that Wave Race, Smash Bros: Melee, Mario Sunshine, Zelda: Wind Waker, 1080 Avalanche, the Mario Party line, F Zero GX, and Mario Kart, along with anything else I failed to list, are basically updated rehashes. In addition to the update, they generally make substantial improvements and refinements to the genres (Mario Party excepted. Fun, but seriously, bleh. I don't need detailed instructions and hand-holding every time I try to get through the MENU system -- Hudson Soft needs to be fired.)
And how many original genres did Microsoft invent last gen? Sony?
It's impossible to make every game completely original, and unreasonable to expect it of a publisher like Nintendo. However, they do regularly give us a good dose of new things to try.
Metroid Prime is most certainly an adventure game.
Exploration? Check.
Puzzle solving? Check.
New abilities discovered during process of adventure? Check.
Story? Check.
Even Mario World has elements of exploration and puzzle solving, but I would agree that calling it an adventure game is a stretch. However, Metroid games have *always* been adventure games, they've just been presented in whatever medium has been most popular at the time (side-scroller/1st person).
Just because you shoot stuff doesn't make it a shooter. A shooter is something where you pretty much *only* shoot stuff and try to stay alive. Think Doom/Quake, or shoot-'em-ups (shmups) like Gradius/Parodius/Ikaruga/Einhander.
--Jeremy (who still thinks that Super Metroid is the best game ever made)
Your rebuttal reeks of as much optimism as the original poster's did of pessimism.
There are numerous, deep flaws with the PS3 and with Sony's strategy over the last year. No amount of rationalization changes that.
Yes, I'm a Nintendo fan. Despite my poor experience with the PS1, I was also very excited about the PS2 -- until I saw that Sony was lying about it. This time around they're just being even more blatant.
I've already posted something similar to this in response to some other moron in this story, but this is yet another reason I'm ashamed of my country.
No, not so much because of the police brutality. That's to be expected any time you get someone with a controlling personality coupled with an inferiority complex in a position of authority. The system is supposed to be able to handle these troglodites and get rid of them.
What I'm ashamed me is the number of people defending these thugs' actions. They are effectively breaking our immune system to these things. There is absolutely no conceivable justification for repeatedly shocking someone who is clearly not a threat to anyone. I don't care what he yelled at the police (I'd be yelling at them too in this situation), I don't care that he wasn't leaving as quickly as the officers wanted him to. I don't care that he was "guilty" of criminal trespass. The use of a taser was not an acceptable response!
If you believe that their actions made that library a safer place, or that the student deserved what he got, please move somewhere that already has a police state. Or, alternatively, seek euthanasia. The United States of America and the ideal of individual liberty can't afford any more of you sheep fucking everything up.
It's not trespass, though. He was a student (grad student, no less). He had every right to be there.
I couldn't find any information in the ABC article about it, but was he being disruptive before being carded? Why did the librarian ask him to leave?
Would you be saying the same thing if this had happened to some blonde sorority chick?
The really sad thing is that he behaved exactly like a true American should behave -- if someone in an a position of authority asks you to comply with some bullshit request (in this case, to present a piece of ID), you should tell them to fuck off -- but there are tons of people in this forum saying that "he should've known better, and got what he deserved."
Fuck that. This guy has my respect. If you want to be a sheep because you're too much of a pussy to stand up for yourself, that's your right. I don't plan on being in a situation like this any time soon, but rest assured that if I am, I won't put up with nonsense like this from the police. Sometimes it takes personal sacrifices (something that we Americans have grown very averse to) to keep the system in check.
The bible has been subjected to numerous literary and historical tests, and stands up to that. To my knowledge there have been no internal or external inconsistencies found.
Then you haven't looked very hard.
So I am a Christian.
But of course -- any rational person would come to the same conclusion, right? I mean, obviously, all those people (you know, like 80% of them) in the rest of the world are just irrational, because they haven't chosen Christianity.
Just curious -- but have you actually studied any other religious texts and applied your same rigorous selection process? Or was it just that when you were young, Christianity was the only thing you were exposed to, and thus made your "rational" choice of beliefs before you even knew of the other choices? Or before you even knew you were making a "choice"?
I thought so.
Just once in my life, I'd love to hear a "Christian" admit that "yeah, it's just what I grew up with. I never really thought about it that much." I find it galling that these people (not necessarily the parent poster) see fit to tell others how to live based on a decision that they made with about as much conscious thought as their 'decision' to like whatever foods their parents prepared for them as children. Instead, it's always some rationalizing bullshit posturing about how and why they came to be enlightened.
Maybe that's true for the mouth breather demographic that you advertisers primarily target, but for the rest of us, we find your 'skits' to be an uninteresting, often insulting, waste of time.
--Jeremy
Re:People don't always want what they say.
on
The Lameness of Warcraft
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I think that you are completely wrong. I've played WoW quite a lot. I found the trip to level 60 to be quite enjoyable, with multiple characters.
Once you hit 60, though, what else is there to do *besides* grind or start another character? Want better gear? Better run through that instance/raid/battleground about 20 times to get it. Want that epic quest reward from the Argent Dawn? Better start grinding skeletons, crypt fiends, dark iron dwarves, and all kinds of other crap for weeks to get it. Want to buy that epic mount? Better start grinding for cash. It'll probably take you several weeks, if that's all you do.
Almost nothing in the end-game instances require any skill whatsoever, and that includes raid encounters. Either you have the gear and the people and you know how to do it (note: following instructions != skill), or you don't. PvP requires a marginal amount of skill, but it's far too gear-dependent. Getting killed (or killing someone) in 2 hits, before there's even a chance to react, isn't fun, nor is it skillful play.
Unfortunately, Blizzard hasn't addressed any of this. I think it's surprising that they haven't -- because by requiring these insane grinds, they *force* people to play *all the time* to achieve their goals, otherwise they'd take years to complete. If they just made everything take less insane amounts of work to do, they could actually lighten the load on their servers.
Of course, maybe that's what they're partially afraid of -- if people have extra time, they might try other games. Those other games might show them that, at its core, WoW is really not very innovative. I mean, just look at what they had players do to for the supposed "world-changing" event when the gates of AQ opened. It wasn't a series of quests designed to be extremely challenging to even the best players. It wasn't even a massive battle that would require dozens of people working together to win. No, instead it was a massive, server-wide farm-fest. You can change the world by bringing 100 million linen cloth to Generic Alliance NPC Smith! Gee, how exciting is that?
Yeah, I don't see the problem either...you end up with 3 happy people. The homeless guy gets paid for standing in line... The middle man makes a nice little profit... The end user with lots of money gets one of the first units without having to stand in line...
So I guess by your logic, it'd be alright if middle-men were able to corner any market and then gouge the real customers? So as long as you have the resources to set up a scam like this, it's fair game?
Sorry, but middle-men, whether they're scalping consoles or whatever else, don't deserve shit. They contribute absolutely nothing to the process -- they merely prey on those with too little sense to not play their game.
I spent a couple years as an admin (one of 4) for a 700+ computer, Windows-based lab system, during the transition from Win95 to NT 4.
I'd just like to say, I think it would be fun to live in your reality for a day or two. Also, I might want try some of what the person who hired you was smoking.
You have a funny definition of 'nickel and dime'. Every system has always had extra accessories -- that's nothing special about the Wii. The on-line capabilities will be free. The virtual console games will cost something, but you don't exactly have to buy those if you don't want them, do you?
No, nickel and dime-ing can be illustrated quite well by XBox Live -- Bought a game? Ok, now you probably want to buy all these additional modes and levels (Lumines) and skins (Oblivion), right?
And I could be completely wrong about this, but I seem to recall something about having to buy cars for Gran Turismo 4 via Sony's on-line service.
The second I have to send Nintendo an extra $.50 to unlock the next "star challenge" in Mario Universe or $5 to unlock the next speed class in Mario Kart, then I'll agree with you. Until then, I see nothing wrong with Nintendo's current pricing scheme.
If you're a real Christian -- now let me say this slowly and carefully, so you'll be sure to understand -- it doesn't matter at all what other people think of your "invisible friend."
When you (and all the other Christians out there) understand that, we'll all finally be able to move on and start discussing things that matter.
MS says no, we don't want to sell the game for that price, publisher says okay, we'll just take it elsewhere, any traffic associated with our game will now go elsewhere. MS says okay, you win, sell it at that price....
Yes, poor helpless Microsoft -- totally at the mercy of the publishers who take advantage of their Live service.
Or, maybe what would really happen in that situation -- if Microsoft said "no" and the publisher said "too bad" -- the game would never be sold *anywhere*.
Or, most likely, if Microsoft said "no," the publisher would say "oh shit. Well, what do you want us to do? We've already got this thing ready to sell and we'd still rather make some slightly smaller amount of money off of it, rather than bag it and make $0."
Not that I really care either way. Whether it's the publisher's fault or Microsoft's, any customer foolish enough to get roped into Live! service is just a frog that willingly jumped into a kettle of (currently) lukewarm water. Welcome to the world of never owning *anything*. (Note: I'm also skeptical of Nintendo's future on-line service. They aren't Microsoft or Sony, but they're still a large multi-national corporation that only cares about its own interests.)
Yeah, except that in the 2nd game, his 'dark and brooding' attitude just made him a tool. At least in the first one, you could pity him because he was naive and reckless.
"You should be honored to die by my sword!"... yeah, that right there's some brilliant, creative, original writing.
One side effect of all this is that when you end up with extremely specific wording for a law -- or, say, contract -- that is buried in tomes of legalese that a layperson can't possibly follow or understand, you end up with a system that requires a lawyer's involvement for even the simplest of things.
Otherwise, you end up with people buying "flood insurance" (seems like a simple-enough definition, right?) that doesn't cover *wind* damage, and "hurricane insurance" (again, simple enough) that doesn't cover *water* damage... And a clusterfuck of lawyers arguing over technicalities of what you actually paid for, and why, exactly, they don't have to give you any money.
Being extremely specific is useful for things like building codes and city planning. Otherwise, a reasonable judge and a jury of your peers should be able to come up with something reasonable on a case-by-case basis for a more general law.
My memory is fuzzy, but I can't recall any use for the L button in Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask. They could easily map Z to the L trigger on the 'Cube controller, if that's the case.
In fact, the way the N64 controller was designed, you were pretty much always using either the L button or the Z button -- very rarely would you use both, and even in those cases they made sure that both buttons weren't important (such as the taunt button in Smash Bros).
The entire point of the game was the 3 day 'cutoff'! It was an absolutely brilliant device that added a ton of urgency to the game.
That said, the so-called "time limit" wasn't even much of a factor for most things. It was mainly used for repeating certain events so that you can figure out peoples schedules, and get some of the optional masks or heart pieces. Did you miss an event? Oops, reset the timer, fast-forward to where you want to be, and do it again. 30 seconds lost.
My guess is that you never even tried it. Just like most of the people who think that Wind Waker sucks have never even played it. (IMO, Wind Waker has one of the most believable, cohesive worlds ever presented in a video game. Sure, there are flaws, but no game except Tetris is perfect.)
We must have been watching a separate set of PS2 launches. All I remember was a general frothing-at-the-mouth anticipation despite the fact that there were no decent games for the thing for the first 12 months of its lifespan.
How do you know that he didn't have an agreement with Hillary that allowed him to receive blowjobs from interns? I mean, he'd already cheated before, and she hadn't divorced him yet.
You really have no idea what sort of relationship they had, or whether or not they had any 'oaths' between them. They may very well have decided to keep an open relationship of sorts. Hell, their wedding vows may have included "and feel free to sleep with as many other people as you want."
The oath I'm more concerned about is Bush's sworn oath to uphold the US Constitution. I'm not convinced that he meant (or maybe understood?) a single word of it when being sworn in.
Slashdot Mirror
If that's what you believe, then just because you haven't been playing the more innovative titles doesn't mean that they aren't out there.
Off the top of my head, from the Gamecube generation, Nintendo developed and/or published:
Luigi's Mansion
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Eternal Darkness
Geist
Zelda: 4 Swords
Pac Man Vs.
I'm sure there are others I've forgotten. And I'll be the first to admit that Wave Race, Smash Bros: Melee, Mario Sunshine, Zelda: Wind Waker, 1080 Avalanche, the Mario Party line, F Zero GX, and Mario Kart, along with anything else I failed to list, are basically updated rehashes. In addition to the update, they generally make substantial improvements and refinements to the genres (Mario Party excepted. Fun, but seriously, bleh. I don't need detailed instructions and hand-holding every time I try to get through the MENU system -- Hudson Soft needs to be fired.)
And how many original genres did Microsoft invent last gen? Sony?
It's impossible to make every game completely original, and unreasonable to expect it of a publisher like Nintendo. However, they do regularly give us a good dose of new things to try.
--Jeremy
Metroid Prime is most certainly an adventure game.
Exploration? Check.
Puzzle solving? Check.
New abilities discovered during process of adventure? Check.
Story? Check.
Even Mario World has elements of exploration and puzzle solving, but I would agree that calling it an adventure game is a stretch. However, Metroid games have *always* been adventure games, they've just been presented in whatever medium has been most popular at the time (side-scroller/1st person).
Just because you shoot stuff doesn't make it a shooter. A shooter is something where you pretty much *only* shoot stuff and try to stay alive. Think Doom/Quake, or shoot-'em-ups (shmups) like Gradius/Parodius/Ikaruga/Einhander.
--Jeremy (who still thinks that Super Metroid is the best game ever made)
Wait ... is there something wrong with that?
--Jeremy
Except that it's really sad that we, as a society, consider a naked female breast (it actually wasn't even naked) to be objectionable.
So either way you look at it, we're still not that much better.
--Jeremy
Your rebuttal reeks of as much optimism as the original poster's did of pessimism.
There are numerous, deep flaws with the PS3 and with Sony's strategy over the last year. No amount of rationalization changes that.
Yes, I'm a Nintendo fan. Despite my poor experience with the PS1, I was also very excited about the PS2 -- until I saw that Sony was lying about it. This time around they're just being even more blatant.
--Jeremy
I don't really think that Bill O'Reilly is in any position to accuse someone else of being "divorced from reality."
--Jeremy
I've already posted something similar to this in response to some other moron in this story, but this is yet another reason I'm ashamed of my country.
No, not so much because of the police brutality. That's to be expected any time you get someone with a controlling personality coupled with an inferiority complex in a position of authority. The system is supposed to be able to handle these troglodites and get rid of them.
What I'm ashamed me is the number of people defending these thugs' actions. They are effectively breaking our immune system to these things. There is absolutely no conceivable justification for repeatedly shocking someone who is clearly not a threat to anyone. I don't care what he yelled at the police (I'd be yelling at them too in this situation), I don't care that he wasn't leaving as quickly as the officers wanted him to. I don't care that he was "guilty" of criminal trespass. The use of a taser was not an acceptable response!
If you believe that their actions made that library a safer place, or that the student deserved what he got, please move somewhere that already has a police state. Or, alternatively, seek euthanasia. The United States of America and the ideal of individual liberty can't afford any more of you sheep fucking everything up.
--Jeremy
It's not trespass, though. He was a student (grad student, no less). He had every right to be there.
I couldn't find any information in the ABC article about it, but was he being disruptive before being carded? Why did the librarian ask him to leave?
Would you be saying the same thing if this had happened to some blonde sorority chick?
The really sad thing is that he behaved exactly like a true American should behave -- if someone in an a position of authority asks you to comply with some bullshit request (in this case, to present a piece of ID), you should tell them to fuck off -- but there are tons of people in this forum saying that "he should've known better, and got what he deserved."
Fuck that. This guy has my respect. If you want to be a sheep because you're too much of a pussy to stand up for yourself, that's your right. I don't plan on being in a situation like this any time soon, but rest assured that if I am, I won't put up with nonsense like this from the police. Sometimes it takes personal sacrifices (something that we Americans have grown very averse to) to keep the system in check.
--Jeremy
The bible has been subjected to numerous literary and historical tests, and stands up to that. To my knowledge there have been no internal or external inconsistencies found.
Then you haven't looked very hard.
So I am a Christian.
But of course -- any rational person would come to the same conclusion, right? I mean, obviously, all those people (you know, like 80% of them) in the rest of the world are just irrational, because they haven't chosen Christianity.
Just curious -- but have you actually studied any other religious texts and applied your same rigorous selection process? Or was it just that when you were young, Christianity was the only thing you were exposed to, and thus made your "rational" choice of beliefs before you even knew of the other choices? Or before you even knew you were making a "choice"?
I thought so.
Just once in my life, I'd love to hear a "Christian" admit that "yeah, it's just what I grew up with. I never really thought about it that much." I find it galling that these people (not necessarily the parent poster) see fit to tell others how to live based on a decision that they made with about as much conscious thought as their 'decision' to like whatever foods their parents prepared for them as children. Instead, it's always some rationalizing bullshit posturing about how and why they came to be enlightened.
--Jeremy
Maybe that's true for the mouth breather demographic that you advertisers primarily target, but for the rest of us, we find your 'skits' to be an uninteresting, often insulting, waste of time.
--Jeremy
I think that you are completely wrong. I've played WoW quite a lot. I found the trip to level 60 to be quite enjoyable, with multiple characters.
Once you hit 60, though, what else is there to do *besides* grind or start another character? Want better gear? Better run through that instance/raid/battleground about 20 times to get it. Want that epic quest reward from the Argent Dawn? Better start grinding skeletons, crypt fiends, dark iron dwarves, and all kinds of other crap for weeks to get it. Want to buy that epic mount? Better start grinding for cash. It'll probably take you several weeks, if that's all you do.
Almost nothing in the end-game instances require any skill whatsoever, and that includes raid encounters. Either you have the gear and the people and you know how to do it (note: following instructions != skill), or you don't. PvP requires a marginal amount of skill, but it's far too gear-dependent. Getting killed (or killing someone) in 2 hits, before there's even a chance to react, isn't fun, nor is it skillful play.
Unfortunately, Blizzard hasn't addressed any of this. I think it's surprising that they haven't -- because by requiring these insane grinds, they *force* people to play *all the time* to achieve their goals, otherwise they'd take years to complete. If they just made everything take less insane amounts of work to do, they could actually lighten the load on their servers.
Of course, maybe that's what they're partially afraid of -- if people have extra time, they might try other games. Those other games might show them that, at its core, WoW is really not very innovative. I mean, just look at what they had players do to for the supposed "world-changing" event when the gates of AQ opened. It wasn't a series of quests designed to be extremely challenging to even the best players. It wasn't even a massive battle that would require dozens of people working together to win. No, instead it was a massive, server-wide farm-fest. You can change the world by bringing 100 million linen cloth to Generic Alliance NPC Smith! Gee, how exciting is that?
--Jeremy
Yeah, I don't see the problem either...you end up with 3 happy people. The homeless guy gets paid for standing in line... The middle man makes a nice little profit... The end user with lots of money gets one of the first units without having to stand in line...
So I guess by your logic, it'd be alright if middle-men were able to corner any market and then gouge the real customers? So as long as you have the resources to set up a scam like this, it's fair game?
Sorry, but middle-men, whether they're scalping consoles or whatever else, don't deserve shit. They contribute absolutely nothing to the process -- they merely prey on those with too little sense to not play their game.
--Jeremy
I spent a couple years as an admin (one of 4) for a 700+ computer, Windows-based lab system, during the transition from Win95 to NT 4.
I'd just like to say, I think it would be fun to live in your reality for a day or two. Also, I might want try some of what the person who hired you was smoking.
--Jeremy
You have a funny definition of 'nickel and dime'. Every system has always had extra accessories -- that's nothing special about the Wii. The on-line capabilities will be free. The virtual console games will cost something, but you don't exactly have to buy those if you don't want them, do you?
No, nickel and dime-ing can be illustrated quite well by XBox Live -- Bought a game? Ok, now you probably want to buy all these additional modes and levels (Lumines) and skins (Oblivion), right?
And I could be completely wrong about this, but I seem to recall something about having to buy cars for Gran Turismo 4 via Sony's on-line service.
The second I have to send Nintendo an extra $.50 to unlock the next "star challenge" in Mario Universe or $5 to unlock the next speed class in Mario Kart, then I'll agree with you. Until then, I see nothing wrong with Nintendo's current pricing scheme.
--Jeremy
If you're a real Christian -- now let me say this slowly and carefully, so you'll be sure to understand -- it doesn't matter at all what other people think of your "invisible friend."
When you (and all the other Christians out there) understand that, we'll all finally be able to move on and start discussing things that matter.
--Jeremy
Too bad there are none in politics willing (or able) to stick up for their decent Christian values.
--Jeremy
MS says no, we don't want to sell the game for that price, publisher says okay, we'll just take it elsewhere, any traffic associated with our game will now go elsewhere. MS says okay, you win, sell it at that price....
Yes, poor helpless Microsoft -- totally at the mercy of the publishers who take advantage of their Live service.
Or, maybe what would really happen in that situation -- if Microsoft said "no" and the publisher said "too bad" -- the game would never be sold *anywhere*.
Or, most likely, if Microsoft said "no," the publisher would say "oh shit. Well, what do you want us to do? We've already got this thing ready to sell and we'd still rather make some slightly smaller amount of money off of it, rather than bag it and make $0."
Not that I really care either way. Whether it's the publisher's fault or Microsoft's, any customer foolish enough to get roped into Live! service is just a frog that willingly jumped into a kettle of (currently) lukewarm water. Welcome to the world of never owning *anything*. (Note: I'm also skeptical of Nintendo's future on-line service. They aren't Microsoft or Sony, but they're still a large multi-national corporation that only cares about its own interests.)
--Jeremy
Yeah, except that in the 2nd game, his 'dark and brooding' attitude just made him a tool. At least in the first one, you could pity him because he was naive and reckless.
... yeah, that right there's some brilliant, creative, original writing.
"You should be honored to die by my sword!"
--Jeremy
One side effect of all this is that when you end up with extremely specific wording for a law -- or, say, contract -- that is buried in tomes of legalese that a layperson can't possibly follow or understand, you end up with a system that requires a lawyer's involvement for even the simplest of things.
Otherwise, you end up with people buying "flood insurance" (seems like a simple-enough definition, right?) that doesn't cover *wind* damage, and "hurricane insurance" (again, simple enough) that doesn't cover *water* damage... And a clusterfuck of lawyers arguing over technicalities of what you actually paid for, and why, exactly, they don't have to give you any money.
Being extremely specific is useful for things like building codes and city planning. Otherwise, a reasonable judge and a jury of your peers should be able to come up with something reasonable on a case-by-case basis for a more general law.
--Jeremy
Believe it or not, designing a game console requires *slightly* more planning than a typical PC upgrade. Of course they're getting started early.
--Jeremy
I would argue that Nintendo is the one that first tapped into the "Casual Gamer" market when they released Tetris on the Gameboy 10 years ago.
... it was 20 years ago.
Except
Yes, we're that old. Sigh.
--Jeremy
My memory is fuzzy, but I can't recall any use for the L button in Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask. They could easily map Z to the L trigger on the 'Cube controller, if that's the case.
In fact, the way the N64 controller was designed, you were pretty much always using either the L button or the Z button -- very rarely would you use both, and even in those cases they made sure that both buttons weren't important (such as the taunt button in Smash Bros).
--Jeremy
The entire point of the game was the 3 day 'cutoff'! It was an absolutely brilliant device that added a ton of urgency to the game.
That said, the so-called "time limit" wasn't even much of a factor for most things. It was mainly used for repeating certain events so that you can figure out peoples schedules, and get some of the optional masks or heart pieces. Did you miss an event? Oops, reset the timer, fast-forward to where you want to be, and do it again. 30 seconds lost.
My guess is that you never even tried it. Just like most of the people who think that Wind Waker sucks have never even played it. (IMO, Wind Waker has one of the most believable, cohesive worlds ever presented in a video game. Sure, there are flaws, but no game except Tetris is perfect.)
--Jeremy
We must have been watching a separate set of PS2 launches. All I remember was a general frothing-at-the-mouth anticipation despite the fact that there were no decent games for the thing for the first 12 months of its lifespan.
--Jeremy
How do you know that he didn't have an agreement with Hillary that allowed him to receive blowjobs from interns? I mean, he'd already cheated before, and she hadn't divorced him yet.
You really have no idea what sort of relationship they had, or whether or not they had any 'oaths' between them. They may very well have decided to keep an open relationship of sorts. Hell, their wedding vows may have included "and feel free to sleep with as many other people as you want."
The oath I'm more concerned about is Bush's sworn oath to uphold the US Constitution. I'm not convinced that he meant (or maybe understood?) a single word of it when being sworn in.
--Jeremy