I find the results of this survey suspect. The audience is obviously self-selected of people who prefer to read mindless garbage and post on fanboy-war forums. They probably like self-inflicted pain, too.
I mean, those are the only reasons I can think of to reaad IGN.
... Another 25% or so are home machines owned by people in the third world who have pirated the copy and don't even have credit cards.
Mac users, on the other hand, are people who shelled out big bucks for a high-end machine.
This is where I quit reading.
A 'commercial' worm author doesn't give a shit about what you have on your PC, how much money the PC's owners have. Generally, all it cares about is that your PC is connected to the internet and that it can use the connection to send spam. That's it. They aren't trying to steal your secret family recipes or wedding photos.
Nice try on the whole "Mac users spend big bucks, so they're more valuable targets!" argument though. I wonder if you made any other irrelevant, probably incorrect generalizations in your post.
--Jeremy
Re:A long historical tradition of dumb names
on
Both Sides of Wii
·
· Score: 1
Seriously? You don't see how your original post was subjective?
Do you even know the differences between subjective vs objective/qualitative vs quantitative?
And for the record, I thought the N64 logo was cool, and the names Super NES (or "Super" as most people called it in my area), Nintendo 64, and Gamecube were all fine names.
Notice: this post is subjective and without merit for the same reason that your original one was.
Oh, and one last (subjective) point... I initially thought that 'Nintendo Wii' was an alright name -- and it's already started to grow on me.
Another reality check -- not only was the original poster referring to the XBox, not the XBox 360, but you seem to forget that there are other costs associated with selling these machines.
Advertising in every medium possible so that they can give potential customers the impression (illusion) that your product is cool isn't free. Paid award shows (informercials for people too stupid to realize they're watching an infomercial) on SpikeTV and MTV aren't free. They have to ship the boxes from the factories (though, admittedly, that might be included in the cost of manufacturing). They have to pay management types like the ex-Seamus Blackley tons of money to do whatever it is they do. They have to pay R&D costs, licensing fees for any technology they don't own (DVD playback), and god knows what else.
There are tons of ways to lose money besides selling something at a loss.
The controler for the Revolution is a solution in search of a problem.
Exactly.
When someone comes up with 'problems' that the Revolution controller solves, that's where we'll have interesting new games. Same as with the DS.
If all you can think of is "I can already play these games well enough with my existing controller," well, duh. Games have been limited by those controllers, so *obviously* existing games will work well enough. It's not interesting or insightful in the least to point that out.
"Windows Fanboys"? How about people who just want a single, functional program that does what they want it to and doesn't insist on holding your hand through every step?
I've been using Winamp and its media library for years. It's a great, solid app (managed to resist much of the bloat that AOL apps tend to carry) with a nice, modular interface. With plugins, it's able to manage my iPod library as well. I can let it do all sorts of auto-playlist-generation crap, or I can put the music I want on the iPod all by myself. It's powerful and flexible.
iTunes is sort of able to do some of what Winamp does, plus it can connect to iTMS. Oh boy.
Further down, I read someone talking about how they'd tried "Windows Media Player, Real Jukebox, Musicmatch, etc... but iTunes is the best." That's not surprising -- they tried a bunch of shitty media players, and iTunes certainly is the least-shitty player in that list. But that definitely doesn't mean that it's better than everything else.
Actually, Hudson develops Mario Party, but I don't think that they're a subsidiary of Nintendo, so they're sort of a 2.5th party title. I think Camalot is in this same category. HAL and Intelligent Systems are both names of internal teams within Nintendo, so they're both first party. Retro Studios is a wholly-owned subsidiary, so they're a 2nd party.
But yes, that's where 2nd party games come into play. Technically, you'd call any game developed for Nintendo by someone else, and published by Nintendo as a 2nd party game.
Not that any of it matters as long as the games are good -- and the overwhelming majority are.
I can't think of a game for the 'Cube (except perhaps ports) that reference only the button name and don't indicate its location and shape somehow. At worst, there will be some controller configuration, and then the game will just tell you to press "fire" (whatever button it happens to be mapped to), but even those aren't any worse than their counterparts on the PS2 or XBox.
It's a simple thing to do, and pretty much every developer has adopted it. It's pretty much gotten to the point where I expect it now, and anything else would feel cheap and unprofessional. (Of course, I'm also of the opinion that noticeable load-times are cheap and unprofessional, too, so maybe I'm just too demanding of my games.)
You (and a lot of other people) seem to have a really funny definition of hardcore gamer, in my mind.
I've been playing video games for over 20 years. I've played systems from the Atari 2600 and Intellivision era through the current console generation. I've been playing PC games since my first 8088. I've played every genre. I am very good at games. I consider myself as hardcore as they come.
But I'm bored to tears with what most people consider 'hardcore' games. Seriously, fuck every FPS from now until infinity until someone introduces something *new*. Fuck every sports and racing sim out there. Fuck every "line up 3 and they disappear'" puzzle game. Stealth action games can go to hell -- new ways to hide and/or be detected ain't a new game, nor is a new (usually stupid, tired, cliched -- thank you Tom Clancy!) story. 1-on-1 Fighting games are getting extremely tired (I pumped hundreds of dollars into Mortal Kombat machines over 10 years ago).
In the last generation, I could probably count the number of unique, interesting games on my fingers. All these moron 10-18 year olds who think they're "so hardcore!" are just playing new versions of the same stuff that I mastered in the '80s and '90s.
I think that any truly hardcore gamer is probably as bored as I am with what's out there and wants something new to try. I'm not talking about high resolution or 5.1 surround, either -- those are nice, and I certainly enjoy a polished presentation as much as the next guy -- but the only next-gen system I'm really interested in (and that includes my gaming PC) is the Revolution. Everything else is just more of the same.
To paraphrase you: With 2 speakers, you can attempt to simulate reverb and 3d positioning, but it's very tricky and has a very small sweet spot where your head has to be for it to work.
Here's the point of multi-channel audio: With more speakers you can attempt to simulate reverb and 3d positioning, but multi-channel output makes it less tricky and gives you a much, much larger sweet spot.
And Republicans need to learn that if they feel uncomfortable about something (say, gay marriage), they can't just inject something into the constitution to protect them.
Seriously, though, what the hell does your comment even mean?
By that definition, anything anyone does in a public space is "pushing their moral standards" on everyone else in the area.
E3 is not a public venue.
If the organizers of E3 want to clean up the image of the event, they can impose whatever restrictions they want. I applaud them for ruling out the least-common-denominator approach that advertising has resorted to.
To compete with the used game channel for older titles, why not just make their back catalogues available for cheaper prices? If a title is selling for $20 used, drop the new price to $20-$25. The negligible price difference will probably prompt all but the most frugal (cheap?) customers to buy the new copy instead of the used one.
Besides that, the paltry cost of producing a box, disc, and manual is nothing compared to the $x that they could make from selling another new (reduced-price) copy. Yes, they spent a lot of money on development, and they need to earn it back somehow. So do they choose to not compete with used copies -- and earn $0 in the process -- or instead choose to make money by giving people an incentive to buy a new copy?
Nintendo, Sony, and MS already do this for a lot of their older titles. Any publisher that doesn't is either stupid, stubborn, or both.
I'll second that. Herzog Zwei was the first thing that popped into my mind when reading the summary. Someone else has already mentioned StarCraft 64 as well.
It's a pretty sad state when the current game houses have so little historical perspective on their own industry that they have to keep reinventing things -- and then, even better, call it 'innovation.'
If you can actually get 7 people around your TV. Maybe good for people with big-screen media rooms.
I've seen a couple of Microsoft-supporters throw this "yeah, like anyone will ever need 7 controllers" argument around now. This has to be the worst use yet.
The 360's biggest selling point, right now, is the HD capability. Are you trying to tell us that people with a widescreen/HDTV setup aren't going to have enough space to accomodate 7 viewers/players?
Personally, I think that the extra controllers are a great idea. I'd love to have games that allowed enough players that *everyone* could get involved. With a wireless connection, what reason is there to *not* allow more controllers?
After reading the how the XBox 360 works, I checked out a couple other systems.
None of them had any details about how any of the systems actually worked; it was just a list of marketing bullet-points and features published by the manufacturers.
How does knowing the system's launch lineup help me know how it works, anyway?
As for things that were flat out wrong about the 360...
9 billion dot products per second? Are they claiming that each core can compute a dot product at nearly every cycle? And if so, how is that number helpful? You still have a ton of other stuff to do in a game engine besides just computing dot products.
1 teraflop? Each thread on each core can calculate 166 billion FLOPS? Oh wait, you mean that you're also counting GPU performance in that number, which accounts for probably.999 teraflops?
500 million triangles per second... With how many textures applied? How many light sources? Oh, zero textures, using flat shading, with no light sources? And all 500 million triangles are part of a single triangle strip and are each 1 pixel in size? And that's just the theoretical maximum anyway?
What a worthless site. I feel dumber for having read it.
The N64 had 3D hardware capable of trilinear mip-mapping, texture anti-aliasing, perspective correction, and z-buffering. It was released for $200 in 1996.
This was at a time when nearly every installed video card was only a 2D accelerator, and most rendering (say, Quake) was done in software.
Are you just not old enough to remember this? Or were you a beta tester for 3dfx?
No, he's saying that he wants a game that rewards skill over time spent. There's a difference.
The way it works now, let's say a good player with '100' skill spends 2 hours per day playing, vs a crappy player with '20' skill spends 12 hours per day playing. The crappy player will get more rewards.
I've seen this personally on my server. The #1 alliance PvP player is easily one of the worst mages I've ever played with, but she spends close to 16 hours per day playing.
There simply aren't enough rewards (or challenges, even) for skilled players.
--Jeremy
Re:about this potential X-Box failure...
on
XBOX 360=Dreamcast 2.0?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I think Microsoft and Sony both realize that the average age of gamers is not in the teens, but more in the twenties and will likely increase as time goes by. Just like the movies industry where there are movies for adults and for children, I think the games industry will need to fulfill both markets.
Can you please name some of these adult-oriented games? I mean, seriously, name some games that have a storyline (not just a theme) that an intelligent, educated adult would actually find engaging. Or hell, name some with puzzles that are more challenging than "put gold key in gold lock" or "push box onto switch to hold it down."
I would add to this that MMOs, as they exist now, aren't suited to keeping skilled players entertained either. There is no reward for being a good player.
All of the content that has been added to WoW, with the exception of Dire Maul, has been geared toward large raids which take little skill for individual players to complete -- instead, it's just a matter of getting enough people together and then getting them to do their jobs. A large group of very average players with a couple skilled individuals at the key positions can handle the raid instances easily.
Because of this, the only way to get the best gear in the game is to repeatedly farm a raid dungeon until you get lucky and get something you need. Or to repeatedly farm the PvP battlegrounds until you gain enough rank to get the best stuff. Absolutely none of the best rewards in the game have any skill requirement attached to them.
I can go 5-man the Baron in Stratholme (something that most people can *not* do) and get my Argent Crusader, but it's junk compared to that epic that someone happened to get in Molten Core.
That's what's got me bored to tears with WoW -- where's the challenge? The logistics of coordinating 40 people to just get them to do what they're supposed to do isn't an interesting challenge. Where are my 5-man-only quests that are extremely difficult to complete that yield worthwhile rewards?
I have no interest in competing with people that have no lives for "most time played" -- and, unfortunately, that is the *only* measure that WoW actually rewards you for.
The point of Rob was *not* as an alternate input device. The point was to make the NES seem unlike any of the previous video game consoles. They added him, even though they *knew* it was crap, to distinguish themselves from the 'competition,' which at that point was mainly customers' distaste for video game consoles. Read Game Over or (IIRC) High Score. They both talk about this.
Rob was an investment. He was smoke and mirrors. You'll notice that they didn't sell it in anything but the first NES packages.
And, as someone else already pointed out, Mattel made the power glove, not Nintendo. The only alternate input devices that Nintendo provided for the NES were the Advantage and the NES Max, which were both good controllers.
As more and more average Americans start playing video games in their spare time, the lucrative market video game creators will target will also change.
Uhh, hate to break it to you, but that has already happened. Mainstream consumers flock to buy the next (sport-name)(year) or (war-name)(sequel-number) while the rest of us will sift through to find the good stuff.
It's no different than music, books, TV, and movies. Crap is cheap easy to produce and enough people like it that the publishers can make money off of it. Get used to it.
Personally, I blame Sony and EA for taking my hobby from primarily an enthusiast market to a global mainstream market in less than a decade.
That expertise in one area is transferrable. Being a first rate physicist does not mean you know jack about philosophy, politics or economics.
Neither does being uneducated. I'll take the opinion of someone who has spent time actively educated themselves in one field over that of Joe Random Ignorant Masses.
But they shouldn't be running the world
Yeah. Choosing rich, connected daddy's failure for a son is a much better method of finding leadership.
Slashdot Mirror
I find the results of this survey suspect. The audience is obviously self-selected of people who prefer to read mindless garbage and post on fanboy-war forums. They probably like self-inflicted pain, too.
I mean, those are the only reasons I can think of to reaad IGN.
--Jeremy (ex-IGN reader)
... Another 25% or so are home machines owned by people in the third world who have pirated the copy and don't even have credit cards.
Mac users, on the other hand, are people who shelled out big bucks for a high-end machine.
This is where I quit reading.
A 'commercial' worm author doesn't give a shit about what you have on your PC, how much money the PC's owners have. Generally, all it cares about is that your PC is connected to the internet and that it can use the connection to send spam. That's it. They aren't trying to steal your secret family recipes or wedding photos.
Nice try on the whole "Mac users spend big bucks, so they're more valuable targets!" argument though. I wonder if you made any other irrelevant, probably incorrect generalizations in your post.
--Jeremy
Seriously? You don't see how your original post was subjective?
... I initially thought that 'Nintendo Wii' was an alright name -- and it's already started to grow on me.
Do you even know the differences between subjective vs objective/qualitative vs quantitative?
And for the record, I thought the N64 logo was cool, and the names Super NES (or "Super" as most people called it in my area), Nintendo 64, and Gamecube were all fine names.
Notice: this post is subjective and without merit for the same reason that your original one was.
Oh, and one last (subjective) point
--Jeremy
Another reality check -- not only was the original poster referring to the XBox, not the XBox 360, but you seem to forget that there are other costs associated with selling these machines.
Advertising in every medium possible so that they can give potential customers the impression (illusion) that your product is cool isn't free. Paid award shows (informercials for people too stupid to realize they're watching an infomercial) on SpikeTV and MTV aren't free. They have to ship the boxes from the factories (though, admittedly, that might be included in the cost of manufacturing). They have to pay management types like the ex-Seamus Blackley tons of money to do whatever it is they do. They have to pay R&D costs, licensing fees for any technology they don't own (DVD playback), and god knows what else.
There are tons of ways to lose money besides selling something at a loss.
--Jeremy
The controler for the Revolution is a solution in search of a problem.
Exactly.
When someone comes up with 'problems' that the Revolution controller solves, that's where we'll have interesting new games. Same as with the DS.
If all you can think of is "I can already play these games well enough with my existing controller," well, duh. Games have been limited by those controllers, so *obviously* existing games will work well enough. It's not interesting or insightful in the least to point that out.
--Jeremy
"Windows Fanboys"? How about people who just want a single, functional program that does what they want it to and doesn't insist on holding your hand through every step?
I've been using Winamp and its media library for years. It's a great, solid app (managed to resist much of the bloat that AOL apps tend to carry) with a nice, modular interface. With plugins, it's able to manage my iPod library as well. I can let it do all sorts of auto-playlist-generation crap, or I can put the music I want on the iPod all by myself. It's powerful and flexible.
iTunes is sort of able to do some of what Winamp does, plus it can connect to iTMS. Oh boy.
Further down, I read someone talking about how they'd tried "Windows Media Player, Real Jukebox, Musicmatch, etc... but iTunes is the best." That's not surprising -- they tried a bunch of shitty media players, and iTunes certainly is the least-shitty player in that list. But that definitely doesn't mean that it's better than everything else.
--Jeremy
Actually, Hudson develops Mario Party, but I don't think that they're a subsidiary of Nintendo, so they're sort of a 2.5th party title. I think Camalot is in this same category. HAL and Intelligent Systems are both names of internal teams within Nintendo, so they're both first party. Retro Studios is a wholly-owned subsidiary, so they're a 2nd party.
But yes, that's where 2nd party games come into play. Technically, you'd call any game developed for Nintendo by someone else, and published by Nintendo as a 2nd party game.
Not that any of it matters as long as the games are good -- and the overwhelming majority are.
--Jeremy
I can't think of a game for the 'Cube (except perhaps ports) that reference only the button name and don't indicate its location and shape somehow. At worst, there will be some controller configuration, and then the game will just tell you to press "fire" (whatever button it happens to be mapped to), but even those aren't any worse than their counterparts on the PS2 or XBox.
It's a simple thing to do, and pretty much every developer has adopted it. It's pretty much gotten to the point where I expect it now, and anything else would feel cheap and unprofessional. (Of course, I'm also of the opinion that noticeable load-times are cheap and unprofessional, too, so maybe I'm just too demanding of my games.)
--Jeremy
You (and a lot of other people) seem to have a really funny definition of hardcore gamer, in my mind.
I've been playing video games for over 20 years. I've played systems from the Atari 2600 and Intellivision era through the current console generation. I've been playing PC games since my first 8088. I've played every genre. I am very good at games. I consider myself as hardcore as they come.
But I'm bored to tears with what most people consider 'hardcore' games. Seriously, fuck every FPS from now until infinity until someone introduces something *new*. Fuck every sports and racing sim out there. Fuck every "line up 3 and they disappear'" puzzle game. Stealth action games can go to hell -- new ways to hide and/or be detected ain't a new game, nor is a new (usually stupid, tired, cliched -- thank you Tom Clancy!) story. 1-on-1 Fighting games are getting extremely tired (I pumped hundreds of dollars into Mortal Kombat machines over 10 years ago).
In the last generation, I could probably count the number of unique, interesting games on my fingers. All these moron 10-18 year olds who think they're "so hardcore!" are just playing new versions of the same stuff that I mastered in the '80s and '90s.
I think that any truly hardcore gamer is probably as bored as I am with what's out there and wants something new to try. I'm not talking about high resolution or 5.1 surround, either -- those are nice, and I certainly enjoy a polished presentation as much as the next guy -- but the only next-gen system I'm really interested in (and that includes my gaming PC) is the Revolution. Everything else is just more of the same.
--Jeremy
To paraphrase you: With 2 speakers, you can attempt to simulate reverb and 3d positioning, but it's very tricky and has a very small sweet spot where your head has to be for it to work.
Here's the point of multi-channel audio: With more speakers you can attempt to simulate reverb and 3d positioning, but multi-channel output makes it less tricky and gives you a much, much larger sweet spot.
--Jeremy
Interesting post, but completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
If any of those quotes noted a decrease in students' writing skill that accompanied use of a new technology, then it'd be close to relevant.
--Jeremy
And Republicans need to learn that if they feel uncomfortable about something (say, gay marriage), they can't just inject something into the constitution to protect them.
Seriously, though, what the hell does your comment even mean?
--Jeremy
By that definition, anything anyone does in a public space is "pushing their moral standards" on everyone else in the area.
E3 is not a public venue.
If the organizers of E3 want to clean up the image of the event, they can impose whatever restrictions they want. I applaud them for ruling out the least-common-denominator approach that advertising has resorted to.
--Jeremy
Completely OT, however:
Humanitarian efforts have nothing to do with logic, unless you count "maybe if I help them now, they'll turn around and help me later if I need it."
--Jeremy
To compete with the used game channel for older titles, why not just make their back catalogues available for cheaper prices? If a title is selling for $20 used, drop the new price to $20-$25. The negligible price difference will probably prompt all but the most frugal (cheap?) customers to buy the new copy instead of the used one.
Besides that, the paltry cost of producing a box, disc, and manual is nothing compared to the $x that they could make from selling another new (reduced-price) copy. Yes, they spent a lot of money on development, and they need to earn it back somehow. So do they choose to not compete with used copies -- and earn $0 in the process -- or instead choose to make money by giving people an incentive to buy a new copy?
Nintendo, Sony, and MS already do this for a lot of their older titles. Any publisher that doesn't is either stupid, stubborn, or both.
--Jeremy
I'll second that. Herzog Zwei was the first thing that popped into my mind when reading the summary. Someone else has already mentioned StarCraft 64 as well.
It's a pretty sad state when the current game houses have so little historical perspective on their own industry that they have to keep reinventing things -- and then, even better, call it 'innovation.'
--Jeremy
If you can actually get 7 people around your TV. Maybe good for people with big-screen media rooms.
I've seen a couple of Microsoft-supporters throw this "yeah, like anyone will ever need 7 controllers" argument around now. This has to be the worst use yet.
The 360's biggest selling point, right now, is the HD capability. Are you trying to tell us that people with a widescreen/HDTV setup aren't going to have enough space to accomodate 7 viewers/players?
Personally, I think that the extra controllers are a great idea. I'd love to have games that allowed enough players that *everyone* could get involved. With a wireless connection, what reason is there to *not* allow more controllers?
--Jeremy
After reading the how the XBox 360 works, I checked out a couple other systems.
.999 teraflops?
None of them had any details about how any of the systems actually worked; it was just a list of marketing bullet-points and features published by the manufacturers.
How does knowing the system's launch lineup help me know how it works, anyway?
As for things that were flat out wrong about the 360...
9 billion dot products per second? Are they claiming that each core can compute a dot product at nearly every cycle? And if so, how is that number helpful? You still have a ton of other stuff to do in a game engine besides just computing dot products.
1 teraflop? Each thread on each core can calculate 166 billion FLOPS? Oh wait, you mean that you're also counting GPU performance in that number, which accounts for probably
500 million triangles per second... With how many textures applied? How many light sources? Oh, zero textures, using flat shading, with no light sources? And all 500 million triangles are part of a single triangle strip and are each 1 pixel in size? And that's just the theoretical maximum anyway?
What a worthless site. I feel dumber for having read it.
--Jeremy
The N64 had 3D hardware capable of trilinear mip-mapping, texture anti-aliasing, perspective correction, and z-buffering. It was released for $200 in 1996.
This was at a time when nearly every installed video card was only a 2D accelerator, and most rendering (say, Quake) was done in software.
Are you just not old enough to remember this? Or were you a beta tester for 3dfx?
--Jeremy
No, he's saying that he wants a game that rewards skill over time spent. There's a difference.
The way it works now, let's say a good player with '100' skill spends 2 hours per day playing, vs a crappy player with '20' skill spends 12 hours per day playing. The crappy player will get more rewards.
I've seen this personally on my server. The #1 alliance PvP player is easily one of the worst mages I've ever played with, but she spends close to 16 hours per day playing.
There simply aren't enough rewards (or challenges, even) for skilled players.
--Jeremy
I think Microsoft and Sony both realize that the average age of gamers is not in the teens, but more in the twenties and will likely increase as time goes by. Just like the movies industry where there are movies for adults and for children, I think the games industry will need to fulfill both markets.
Can you please name some of these adult-oriented games? I mean, seriously, name some games that have a storyline (not just a theme) that an intelligent, educated adult would actually find engaging. Or hell, name some with puzzles that are more challenging than "put gold key in gold lock" or "push box onto switch to hold it down."
There aren't very many. For any system.
--Jeremy
I would add to this that MMOs, as they exist now, aren't suited to keeping skilled players entertained either. There is no reward for being a good player.
All of the content that has been added to WoW, with the exception of Dire Maul, has been geared toward large raids which take little skill for individual players to complete -- instead, it's just a matter of getting enough people together and then getting them to do their jobs. A large group of very average players with a couple skilled individuals at the key positions can handle the raid instances easily.
Because of this, the only way to get the best gear in the game is to repeatedly farm a raid dungeon until you get lucky and get something you need. Or to repeatedly farm the PvP battlegrounds until you gain enough rank to get the best stuff. Absolutely none of the best rewards in the game have any skill requirement attached to them.
I can go 5-man the Baron in Stratholme (something that most people can *not* do) and get my Argent Crusader, but it's junk compared to that epic that someone happened to get in Molten Core.
That's what's got me bored to tears with WoW -- where's the challenge? The logistics of coordinating 40 people to just get them to do what they're supposed to do isn't an interesting challenge. Where are my 5-man-only quests that are extremely difficult to complete that yield worthwhile rewards?
I have no interest in competing with people that have no lives for "most time played" -- and, unfortunately, that is the *only* measure that WoW actually rewards you for.
--Jeremy
The point of Rob was *not* as an alternate input device. The point was to make the NES seem unlike any of the previous video game consoles. They added him, even though they *knew* it was crap, to distinguish themselves from the 'competition,' which at that point was mainly customers' distaste for video game consoles. Read Game Over or (IIRC) High Score. They both talk about this.
Rob was an investment. He was smoke and mirrors. You'll notice that they didn't sell it in anything but the first NES packages.
And, as someone else already pointed out, Mattel made the power glove, not Nintendo. The only alternate input devices that Nintendo provided for the NES were the Advantage and the NES Max, which were both good controllers.
--Jeremy
As more and more average Americans start playing video games in their spare time, the lucrative market video game creators will target will also change.
Uhh, hate to break it to you, but that has already happened. Mainstream consumers flock to buy the next (sport-name)(year) or (war-name)(sequel-number) while the rest of us will sift through to find the good stuff.
It's no different than music, books, TV, and movies. Crap is cheap easy to produce and enough people like it that the publishers can make money off of it. Get used to it.
Personally, I blame Sony and EA for taking my hobby from primarily an enthusiast market to a global mainstream market in less than a decade.
--Jeremy
That expertise in one area is transferrable. Being a first rate physicist does not mean you know jack about philosophy, politics or economics.
Neither does being uneducated. I'll take the opinion of someone who has spent time actively educated themselves in one field over that of Joe Random Ignorant Masses.
But they shouldn't be running the world
Yeah. Choosing rich, connected daddy's failure for a son is a much better method of finding leadership.
--Jeremy