But this IS trivial...ambient volume goes up...it's exciting...volume goes down, boring
Ah, but in your example, it is the crowd (ergo, people) who determine when the game is exciting and when it is not. You'd only be measuring noise level.
Now, an AI that can watch the game and determine on its own whether it is exciting or not... that's pretty much as non-trivial as it gets.
(If MS's patent is about the former, then I apologize. I really can't be bothered right now to go check on the actual patent... in other words, no, I didn't RTFP).
You are obviously missing the point. There is a wider question here than "the sex minigame in GTA3".
The question is, shoul the ESRB rate all the content in a given game, or only whatever is "likely" to be experienced by the player? And in the latter case, who is supposed to determine what is "likely" to be found and what not?
In other words, the minigame, however hard it was to find, WAS in the game disk. So, why shouldn't it be included in the rating?
I guess the ESRB just needs to clarify exactly what it is they are rating. I don't try to shield my son from the world (if anything, I tend to give him more freedom than his mom/grandpas would like).
On the other hand, if I'm buying a game labeled "K", it would be nice to be able to trust that rating (otherwise, the ratings would quickly become meaningless and ignored)
I stand corrected. It was certainly a non-trivial hack. Still, I have to believe that Rockstar expected someone to find it, or they wouldn't have put it in there --the amount of work put in the minigame was also non-trivial. And with internet, it only takes one person.
So, should a minigame this hard to find merit a change in rating? I posit that maybe the debate has merit. As the ratings stand now, this loophole would allow, let's say, including the same minigame in Mario Bros, as it would be really hard to find, right?
If you place that content in the game, and there is a way --however convoluted-- to access it, you have absolutely no control over it once the game is sold. You cannot guarantee that users won't experience it during gameplay, so you should disclose its existence.
Let me put it another way: If Animal Crossing had a convoluted way to access a GTA-like minigame, as a parent, wouldn't you like to know about it? Or would you be satisfied that "probably your 3-years old will never find it"?.
And, if the minigame was never supposed to be accessed, why put it there in the first place?
I'd say that a sheet of paper with some text on it would be all it takes. I don't think that "put memoty card in, turn on game, pause, take out memory card, unpause" is as hard as you think it is. And the reviewers REVIEW GAMES for a living, for chrissakes. You'd think they'd know how to operate a console.
It's not like you need to take a soldering iron to the console; its more of an "Up Down Up Down A B" hack.
Yeah, but the sex game was never meant to be found by anyone
I take issue with that. If the sex game is never meant to be found, why put it in the first place? Easter eggs ARE meant to be found; it may take a long time, it maybe hard, but you put it knowing someone will find it.
I agree with all your points, except for a minor quibble:
Does this asshat REALLY expect the ESRB to go through this trouble to find easter eggs (for lack of a better term) like this and rate THEM as well? People had to go through A LOT of trouble in order to get their games to have these scenes in it, you can hardly hold the ratings board accountable for people doing things like this. This guy is absolutely ridiculous.
Since the certification is a voluntary process, you'd expect Rockstar to volunteer that kind of information voluntarily. I think they're no blasting the ESRB, but Rockstar.
Their relatively large size make them easier to work with than other types of roaches, and their tendency to hiss when they are upset lets him know if it's time to give one a break
And we all know, of course, this is how many horror films begin, right?
Generally speaking, I would tend to agree with you. I post on Slashdot mostly to vent or to joke, with no expectations or illusions as to who will read it. But mostly, I post for those rare, rare ocasions (such as, I shuld say, this one) when a post turns into intelligent dialog. I really get a kick out of that. And for that, I think, it is worth it to craft a nice post. And, based on yout literate response, I suspect that deep down you do too.
Mind you, I don't advocate spellchecking or agonizing over a post. But proofreading is not hard at all (just reread what you wrote before hitting submit), and will catch over 90 percent of mistakes. And I have nothing but contempt for those who make it a matter of pride to be incomprehensible.
As I said, I tend to joke a lot, and many jokes on Slashdot are a matter of finely tuned phrasing, where a typo can kill your joke. Maybe that's why I'm extra careful on my postings (the fact that I write for a living also has something to do with it).
You might consider yourself an expert and you might be, but the fact of the matter is English pronunciation is completely arbitrary.
You obviously have no idea what "completely arbitrary" means.
near, wear/bear? Yeah, theres a small difference, mostly caused by uses. Buy you'd never see "bear" and pronounce "fish". Now, THAT would be completely arbitrary.
Good thing too, because now I have a 1.5 year old and he *loves* it. Wrote a little program to draw XOR'd circles on the screen any time he hits a key.
Whoa. For a second there i thought that HE had written that program. As the father of a 1.66 year old who has barely mastered the TV remote, I was deciding whether to have you killed or return my kid as defective;)
You know what would be reallt cool? If you tried to fill a VW Bug with Mac Minis and discovered that you can fit exactly one thousand of them. Because then you'd have 1 MM = 1 mVWB, and that would be, you know, metric.
Slashdot Mirror
But this IS trivial...ambient volume goes up...it's exciting...volume goes down, boring
Ah, but in your example, it is the crowd (ergo, people) who determine when the game is exciting and when it is not. You'd only be measuring noise level.
Now, an AI that can watch the game and determine on its own whether it is exciting or not... that's pretty much as non-trivial as it gets.
(If MS's patent is about the former, then I apologize. I really can't be bothered right now to go check on the actual patent... in other words, no, I didn't RTFP).
nnnnnnnnkay.....
You forgot the part about SCOoping SCOres of SCOnes up Darl's SCOass.
What, you mean like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft and company?
May I remind you that the only man in the Cabinet with an actual military trajectory, Colin Powell, was extremely opposed to the war?
You are obviously missing the point. There is a wider question here than "the sex minigame in GTA3".
The question is, shoul the ESRB rate all the content in a given game, or only whatever is "likely" to be experienced by the player? And in the latter case, who is supposed to determine what is "likely" to be found and what not?
In other words, the minigame, however hard it was to find, WAS in the game disk. So, why shouldn't it be included in the rating?
I guess the ESRB just needs to clarify exactly what it is they are rating. I don't try to shield my son from the world (if anything, I tend to give him more freedom than his mom/grandpas would like).
On the other hand, if I'm buying a game labeled "K", it would be nice to be able to trust that rating (otherwise, the ratings would quickly become meaningless and ignored)
I stand corrected. It was certainly a non-trivial hack. Still, I have to believe that Rockstar expected someone to find it, or they wouldn't have put it in there --the amount of work put in the minigame was also non-trivial. And with internet, it only takes one person.
So, should a minigame this hard to find merit a change in rating? I posit that maybe the debate has merit. As the ratings stand now, this loophole would allow, let's say, including the same minigame in Mario Bros, as it would be really hard to find, right?
If you place that content in the game, and there is a way --however convoluted-- to access it, you have absolutely no control over it once the game is sold. You cannot guarantee that users won't experience it during gameplay, so you should disclose its existence.
Let me put it another way: If Animal Crossing had a convoluted way to access a GTA-like minigame, as a parent, wouldn't you like to know about it? Or would you be satisfied that "probably your 3-years old will never find it"?.
And, if the minigame was never supposed to be accessed, why put it there in the first place?
If you go to the movies and walk into The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, you darn well know what you're going to find.
It still is rated R, NC-17, or whatever the hell it is rated. That is informative, and doing it systematically is a Good Thing.
What is wrong with rating things accurately, acording to its contents?
I'd say that a sheet of paper with some text on it would be all it takes. I don't think that "put memoty card in, turn on game, pause, take out memory card, unpause" is as hard as you think it is. And the reviewers REVIEW GAMES for a living, for chrissakes. You'd think they'd know how to operate a console.
It's not like you need to take a soldering iron to the console; its more of an "Up Down Up Down A B" hack.
Yeah, but the sex game was never meant to be found by anyone
I take issue with that. If the sex game is never meant to be found, why put it in the first place? Easter eggs ARE meant to be found; it may take a long time, it maybe hard, but you put it knowing someone will find it.
I agree with all your points, except for a minor quibble:
Does this asshat REALLY expect the ESRB to go through this trouble to find easter eggs (for lack of a better term) like this and rate THEM as well? People had to go through A LOT of trouble in order to get their games to have these scenes in it, you can hardly hold the ratings board accountable for people doing things like this. This guy is absolutely ridiculous.
Since the certification is a voluntary process, you'd expect Rockstar to volunteer that kind of information voluntarily. I think they're no blasting the ESRB, but Rockstar.
Why assume a Christian did it? I'd put my money on a Windows user.... ;)
Their relatively large size make them easier to work with than other types of roaches, and their tendency to hiss when they are upset lets him know if it's time to give one a break
And we all know, of course, this is how many horror films begin, right?
Generally speaking, I would tend to agree with you. I post on Slashdot mostly to vent or to joke, with no expectations or illusions as to who will read it. But mostly, I post for those rare, rare ocasions (such as, I shuld say, this one) when a post turns into intelligent dialog. I really get a kick out of that. And for that, I think, it is worth it to craft a nice post. And, based on yout literate response, I suspect that deep down you do too.
Mind you, I don't advocate spellchecking or agonizing over a post. But proofreading is not hard at all (just reread what you wrote before hitting submit), and will catch over 90 percent of mistakes. And I have nothing but contempt for those who make it a matter of pride to be incomprehensible.
As I said, I tend to joke a lot, and many jokes on Slashdot are a matter of finely tuned phrasing, where a typo can kill your joke. Maybe that's why I'm extra careful on my postings (the fact that I write for a living also has something to do with it).
Maybe being lazy is his learning disability?
*ducks*
But sometimes I don't because a post on Slashdot is, when you get right down to it, worthless.
If you really believe that, why even post? Seriously. Think about it.
If you need to proofread "FP", you have deeper, more troubling issues...
You might consider yourself an expert and you might be, but the fact of the matter is English pronunciation is completely arbitrary.
You obviously have no idea what "completely arbitrary" means.
near, wear/bear? Yeah, theres a small difference, mostly caused by uses. Buy you'd never see "bear" and pronounce "fish". Now, THAT would be completely arbitrary.
Good thing too, because now I have a 1.5 year old and he *loves* it. Wrote a little program to draw XOR'd circles on the screen any time he hits a key.
;)
Whoa. For a second there i thought that HE had written that program. As the father of a 1.66 year old who has barely mastered the TV remote, I was deciding whether to have you killed or return my kid as defective
Nope. They tend to say "meesa" a lot, not "Hullo Mate".
You know what would be reallt cool? If you tried to fill a VW Bug with Mac Minis and discovered that you can fit exactly one thousand of them. Because then you'd have 1 MM = 1 mVWB, and that would be, you know, metric.
That's Ubuntu GNU/Linux, you insensitive clod!
(We can still make "insensitive clod" jokes, right? I never get the memos...).
Dunno how you'd hijack a plane with a freaking knife after 9-11.
I'm so totally turned on right now.
Please, please, please, Rude Turnip, be a girl...