Yes it was all rendered using the in-game engine, but it wasn't GAMEPLAY. How does the camo system work? Is there going to be a percentage system in the corner like in MGS3? How has the game adapted to the new PS3 controller (aka the Sixaxis)? Are different weapons going to have different recoil effects? (Aiming in the previous MGS games, sans MGS1 for PS1, was far too easy) How is the choking sneak attack going to work? Is Snake going to be able to roll around on the ground or in a barrel in game? Etc, etc, etc.
Last year, at the launch of Microsoft's Xbox 360, GameStop accepted more pre-orders before Christmas than it was able to satisfy.
And who's fault was that?
You'd think that after the horrible PS2 launch (faulty hardware, long lines, too many pre-orders not enough units...) retailers would be a bit more cautious about pre-orders. Instead we STILL see them shoving pre-order offers in our faces. They have no one to blame but themselves.
No, the point was that when given a choice between answering a question with no right answer or turning the focus of attention to something they DO know, majority will focus on something else.
Initially, graphics > gameplay. The mass market is just too easily fooled at first.
After about 2 or 3 years though, you see a big drop in trust. Any video game fan knows what I'm talking about. After the "it'll get better when the second and third gen games come out" and the "those defects are just a fluke, the next batches will be perfect" the market just gets fed up. (And no, I'm not just picking on Sony. The Gamecube was criticized for its lack of good/notable second gen games (remember Mario Sunshine?) and the Xbox/Xbox360 suffered hardware problems for years on and off.)
In the long run, if the company can last that long, gameplay > graphics. Nintendo has long mastered this skill while Sony has never really picked up the ball after 2 systems (remember The Legend of Dragoon?). Microsoft has (arguably) begun to learn (Halo 2 was an unarguable success) but isn't quite there yet (Halo 2, yay! Now what else is there...?)
No, now you're oversimplifying. Instead of an essay question, you just asked a basic short answer question. From the essay question used by the survey takers:
Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.
And thats not necessarily a bad answer to an essay question. What does Joe Average SAT taker care or know about the best text editor is? What does Eric Exceptional care or know about McDonald's fatty foods if he's never eaten there? What does George Geeky know or care about the social influence the NFL has on American society? Anyone who's taken a "standardized" essay question knows you have to leave room for flexibility. You can't pigeonhole everyone or you're going to end up failing a vast majority of test takers.
And you know what? I don't know jack shit about text editors. By your logic, I just failed the essay portion of SAT. As did hundreds of Slashdot readers who commented on this news report. You know why? Because the question was "Bloggers or High Schoolers, Where is the Literary Talent?" We all went off-topic. As did you.
Or vice versa, you are grading them based on their ability to strictly answer opinionated essay questions rather than what they actually felt like. This is from the essay question :
What is your opinion on the idea that struggle is a more important measure of success than accomplishment?
Bolding mine.
If you ask someone their opinion on something, of course people are going to not going to follow directions and write 'whatever they actually felt like'. Lemme put it to you another way.
What is your opinion on the idea that failure is a more important measure of maturity than success? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations. Do so in 20 minutes. Go.
Would you refuse to hire someone that got caught shoplifting as a kid?
If the kid shoplifted thousands/millions of dollars worth of merchandise, hell yeah I'd refuse to hire the person. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
And you can't exactly compare "doing something dumb as a kid" with hacking/nuking/blackmailing a corporation/company.
Considering Russia lost about 10 million uniformed soldiers (according to Wikipedia) over the course of almost 4 years in World War II; the only way 5 million people would ever be killed in a single day, if the U.S. invaded North Korea, is if nuclear weapons were used.
Would you like to pull some Vietnam comparisons out of your ass while you're at it? Oh and bombing campaigns typically kill in the thousands at most (the most imfamous, the firebombing of Tokyo killed an estimated 100,000 a far cry from your 5,000,000.)
And how exactly to you propose to objectively measure the "level of suckage"?
Seriously, what you say is not true. What sucks is the music that's played on the radio, not modern music. This is mostly a result of the deregulation of radio that occurred in the 90s, paving the way for a few giants to own just about everything.
True the "level of suckage" is subjective, but the very fact that a few giants can own just about everything in the deregulated 90's simply supports the argument that the "level of suckage" has increased. While its true that majority of "garage bands" suck, its also true that in the long run the cream of the crop would eventually rise to the top.
On the other hand, if only a minority rules (the major brands largely controlling the radio stations) then you'll get extremely few "good" bands that cater to the masses and then the rest are simply supported due to lack of supply and high demand. In the long run, overall sales decline as the market wises up the scheme ('Most music sucks so I might as well pirate it to try-and-buy!') and you end up with the music business and the RIAA resorting to extreme measures to protect themselves. 'Sales are down! It must be those pirates stealing our sub-par, unpopular music! Sue sue sue!'
Walk through the malls and high school halls in America, and you'll quickly notice that kids in the US could use a few good workouts.
Um, maybe thats because PE (Physical education)/Gym has been in decline for years? I don't know how it is in other high schools but when I was in high school 4 years ago, we only had to take 1 year of PE/Gym. Oh and that 1 mile timed run we were 'required' to be 'tested' on? Most of us failed or didn't even finish.
If you have a problem with a bully at a COLLEGE you get the police involved and they fix it,
I knew kids in high school with death lists, complete with reasons and methods of murder. One even got called in to talk about it and showed it to the officials. Punishment? "Hes an angry kid but harmless." True story. Even happened after Columbine. My friends and I used to joke about how much extra 'protection' was put into place after Columbine especially after this 'incident.'
Actually I think the biggest news is actually two things. One, the sheer lack of surprise from the tech-savvy/. audience. Second, the level of technology and military aid Hezbollah recieved from Iran.
I also find interesting how you compare Hezbollah, a guerilla army with the German professional army of WWII. Lets get something straight. If Hezbollah is going to act as if its the under-equipped, under-armed, poor underdogs, they can't be launching HUNDREDS of rockets EACH DAY. They can't be hacking MILTARY COMMUNICATIONS. They can't be recieving cutting edge technology military aid for DECADES. By your logic, given the sheer ease and availability of firearms, body armor, explosives, training and auto shops to build technicals in the U.S., every citizen is, at minimum, in the National Guard.
Thats a step in the right direction but still a reason for concern. What are 'verifiable sources'? Online there are always websites with little to no contact information or if there is any sources to prove that whats posted on the site is true. Offline sources are even worse, unless you're a hardcore researcher, theres no way anyone can ever "verify" if a certain offline source is accurately cited or even exists. Books might not be translated, translation errors may lead to confusion, different editions are always a pain in the ass, certain publishers/countries/school systems may be blantly bias and demand a certain 'revision' of a book.
Ultimately, when push comes to shove, the only way to come close to an 'accurate' wiki entry (for major topic) is to have accountability. Its too easy to throw a wrench into the system right now and too hard to remove it. For less popular/controversal topics though, its a different ball game. Obviously, less concern would be needed there.
Yeah but Napster also failed in the sense that the sheer bulk of content shared through the program was copywrited material. YouTube has the benefit of the doubt.
Like other posters have pointed out, the only reason why YouTube APPEARS to violate so many copyright laws is because the best-of-the-best videos (which of course use copywrited music because you don't get to be the best while going half-assed) are viewed the most and therefore they get the most publicity.
There are thousands of worthless, waste of time videos of people trying to impress others of their 'skillz', but no one ever watchs those because they suck. Badly. (Remember the glut of Blair Witch Project and Jackass knockoffs that appeared years before?) Think of YouTube as the video equal to Geocities 10 years ago, and you've get the same image. The cream of the crop eventually staking a claim on their own webpages and the rest fading off in forgotten corners of the internet.
Thats true, but what do you do when you have literally millions of people sending in information to be added into (whats basically) an encyclopedia? Theres no requirement to contribute, theres no accountability, theres no requirement to cite sources (offline and online) and then of course, theres plaguarism.
At the least, someone with a PhD is more cautious about what he posts/writes publicly because theres always the risk of it coming back to destroy his career later. Names can be tracked, colleges can be informed, and heads will roll. Currently, people are untouchable, almost literally. Unless you want to go through the mess of tracking people down through IP address (which can be tricked with dynamic IP addresses), the only real way Wikipedia can stop the flow of misinformation is by partially or completely locking entries (which defeats the purpose of a wiki in the first place).
The bottom line, though, is that a good article is a good article whether it is written by a PhD or a "bored 17-year-old". The expert is more likely to be able to write an article off-the-cuff,
Someone with a PhD assumes that his voice has merit over those who do not possess a PhD in the topic because he has spent the time and dedication to becoming an expert in that field. Whether or not that knowledge has merit (there are always debunked theories), when in Rome, do as the Romans do and don't bitch when they don't let you into their private clubs because you don't speak Roman.
while the 17-year-old is going to have to do more research to write the same article, but either way, the end result stands or falls on its own merits.
Um... says who? The same legions of idiots that don't do their own research and simply support it to pad their own egos? Democracy in its purest form! People with the PhDs will always be in the minority and will always be squelched in the end.
Microsoft is not the most pro-patent. That award belongs to the legions of patent trolls, delusional companies such as SCO and IBM which ACTUALLY has valid aging patents.
The site itself is worthless. Other than maybe the name (which would be destroyed once they win), YouTube is worthless. It makes no profit (the bandwidth used to stream videos on the front page alone is mind boggling) and lets be serious, the moment they win, every OTHER group will demand the site more or less be brought down completely.
This is more or less the same way Napster was destroyed and why is never reclaimed the crown as a music distributing software. By the time Napster was re-released it was too little, too late. And then of course there would be the copycat sites, the backlash against the industry and the grassroots attempt to stop this. (Remember the publicity Napster got before they brought it down?)
The launch price is not as important as how easily they can afford to drop the price subsequently, and how quickly. People thought the PS2 launch price was outrageous, and it was
What are you smoking? The PS2 launch price of $300 was 'normal' by electronic standards. And Sony doesn't have a good record when it comes to cutting hardware prices. The PS2 is almost 6 years old now and it still hasn't hit the $100 mark (not counting Used or "Refurbished" ones.)
You seem to have to idealist view that Sony would suddenly drop the price within less than a year. Get real. Sony is in for the money, they're not going to drop prices just to prove their fanboys right.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm waiting for the Hot Dog patch.
Yes it was all rendered using the in-game engine, but it wasn't GAMEPLAY. How does the camo system work? Is there going to be a percentage system in the corner like in MGS3? How has the game adapted to the new PS3 controller (aka the Sixaxis)? Are different weapons going to have different recoil effects? (Aiming in the previous MGS games, sans MGS1 for PS1, was far too easy) How is the choking sneak attack going to work? Is Snake going to be able to roll around on the ground or in a barrel in game? Etc, etc, etc.
And who's fault was that?
You'd think that after the horrible PS2 launch (faulty hardware, long lines, too many pre-orders not enough units...) retailers would be a bit more cautious about pre-orders. Instead we STILL see them shoving pre-order offers in our faces. They have no one to blame but themselves.
No, the point was that when given a choice between answering a question with no right answer or turning the focus of attention to something they DO know, majority will focus on something else.
After about 2 or 3 years though, you see a big drop in trust. Any video game fan knows what I'm talking about. After the "it'll get better when the second and third gen games come out" and the "those defects are just a fluke, the next batches will be perfect" the market just gets fed up. (And no, I'm not just picking on Sony. The Gamecube was criticized for its lack of good/notable second gen games (remember Mario Sunshine?) and the Xbox/Xbox360 suffered hardware problems for years on and off.)
In the long run, if the company can last that long, gameplay > graphics. Nintendo has long mastered this skill while Sony has never really picked up the ball after 2 systems (remember The Legend of Dragoon?). Microsoft has (arguably) begun to learn (Halo 2 was an unarguable success) but isn't quite there yet (Halo 2, yay! Now what else is there...?)
Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.
And thats not necessarily a bad answer to an essay question. What does Joe Average SAT taker care or know about the best text editor is? What does Eric Exceptional care or know about McDonald's fatty foods if he's never eaten there? What does George Geeky know or care about the social influence the NFL has on American society? Anyone who's taken a "standardized" essay question knows you have to leave room for flexibility. You can't pigeonhole everyone or you're going to end up failing a vast majority of test takers.
And you know what? I don't know jack shit about text editors. By your logic, I just failed the essay portion of SAT. As did hundreds of Slashdot readers who commented on this news report. You know why? Because the question was "Bloggers or High Schoolers, Where is the Literary Talent?" We all went off-topic. As did you.
What is your opinion on the idea that struggle is a more important measure of success than accomplishment?
Bolding mine.
If you ask someone their opinion on something, of course people are going to not going to follow directions and write 'whatever they actually felt like'. Lemme put it to you another way.
What is your opinion on the idea that failure is a more important measure of maturity than success? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations. Do so in 20 minutes. Go.
If the kid shoplifted thousands/millions of dollars worth of merchandise, hell yeah I'd refuse to hire the person. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
And you can't exactly compare "doing something dumb as a kid" with hacking/nuking/blackmailing a corporation/company.
Laurence Britt's novel, June, 2004, depicts a future America dominated by right-wing extremists.
On the other hand, SquareEnix hasn't made any announcements or even hinted at a Chrono Trigger 2 (or 3 if you count Chrono Cross).
Oh and according to About.com, North Korea only has a little over 1 million troops in active service. http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/currentconflic ts/a/koreanmilitary_2.htm/
Would you like to pull some Vietnam comparisons out of your ass while you're at it? Oh and bombing campaigns typically kill in the thousands at most (the most imfamous, the firebombing of Tokyo killed an estimated 100,000 a far cry from your 5,000,000.)
Seriously, what you say is not true. What sucks is the music that's played on the radio, not modern music. This is mostly a result of the deregulation of radio that occurred in the 90s, paving the way for a few giants to own just about everything.
True the "level of suckage" is subjective, but the very fact that a few giants can own just about everything in the deregulated 90's simply supports the argument that the "level of suckage" has increased. While its true that majority of "garage bands" suck, its also true that in the long run the cream of the crop would eventually rise to the top.
On the other hand, if only a minority rules (the major brands largely controlling the radio stations) then you'll get extremely few "good" bands that cater to the masses and then the rest are simply supported due to lack of supply and high demand. In the long run, overall sales decline as the market wises up the scheme ('Most music sucks so I might as well pirate it to try-and-buy!') and you end up with the music business and the RIAA resorting to extreme measures to protect themselves. 'Sales are down! It must be those pirates stealing our sub-par, unpopular music! Sue sue sue!'
Um, maybe thats because PE (Physical education)/Gym has been in decline for years? I don't know how it is in other high schools but when I was in high school 4 years ago, we only had to take 1 year of PE/Gym. Oh and that 1 mile timed run we were 'required' to be 'tested' on? Most of us failed or didn't even finish.
And then he sees the price tag...
"Woah! I can't afford that!"
The animals kill you!
Thats a big "IF" there...
I knew kids in high school with death lists, complete with reasons and methods of murder. One even got called in to talk about it and showed it to the officials. Punishment? "Hes an angry kid but harmless." True story. Even happened after Columbine. My friends and I used to joke about how much extra 'protection' was put into place after Columbine especially after this 'incident.'
I also find interesting how you compare Hezbollah, a guerilla army with the German professional army of WWII. Lets get something straight. If Hezbollah is going to act as if its the under-equipped, under-armed, poor underdogs, they can't be launching HUNDREDS of rockets EACH DAY. They can't be hacking MILTARY COMMUNICATIONS. They can't be recieving cutting edge technology military aid for DECADES. By your logic, given the sheer ease and availability of firearms, body armor, explosives, training and auto shops to build technicals in the U.S., every citizen is, at minimum, in the National Guard.
Ultimately, when push comes to shove, the only way to come close to an 'accurate' wiki entry (for major topic) is to have accountability. Its too easy to throw a wrench into the system right now and too hard to remove it. For less popular/controversal topics though, its a different ball game. Obviously, less concern would be needed there.
Like other posters have pointed out, the only reason why YouTube APPEARS to violate so many copyright laws is because the best-of-the-best videos (which of course use copywrited music because you don't get to be the best while going half-assed) are viewed the most and therefore they get the most publicity.
There are thousands of worthless, waste of time videos of people trying to impress others of their 'skillz', but no one ever watchs those because they suck. Badly. (Remember the glut of Blair Witch Project and Jackass knockoffs that appeared years before?) Think of YouTube as the video equal to Geocities 10 years ago, and you've get the same image. The cream of the crop eventually staking a claim on their own webpages and the rest fading off in forgotten corners of the internet.
At the least, someone with a PhD is more cautious about what he posts/writes publicly because theres always the risk of it coming back to destroy his career later. Names can be tracked, colleges can be informed, and heads will roll. Currently, people are untouchable, almost literally. Unless you want to go through the mess of tracking people down through IP address (which can be tricked with dynamic IP addresses), the only real way Wikipedia can stop the flow of misinformation is by partially or completely locking entries (which defeats the purpose of a wiki in the first place).
Someone with a PhD assumes that his voice has merit over those who do not possess a PhD in the topic because he has spent the time and dedication to becoming an expert in that field. Whether or not that knowledge has merit (there are always debunked theories), when in Rome, do as the Romans do and don't bitch when they don't let you into their private clubs because you don't speak Roman.
while the 17-year-old is going to have to do more research to write the same article, but either way, the end result stands or falls on its own merits.
Um... says who? The same legions of idiots that don't do their own research and simply support it to pad their own egos? Democracy in its purest form! People with the PhDs will always be in the minority and will always be squelched in the end.
Microsoft is not the most pro-patent. That award belongs to the legions of patent trolls, delusional companies such as SCO and IBM which ACTUALLY has valid aging patents.
This is more or less the same way Napster was destroyed and why is never reclaimed the crown as a music distributing software. By the time Napster was re-released it was too little, too late. And then of course there would be the copycat sites, the backlash against the industry and the grassroots attempt to stop this. (Remember the publicity Napster got before they brought it down?)
What are you smoking? The PS2 launch price of $300 was 'normal' by electronic standards. And Sony doesn't have a good record when it comes to cutting hardware prices. The PS2 is almost 6 years old now and it still hasn't hit the $100 mark (not counting Used or "Refurbished" ones.)
You seem to have to idealist view that Sony would suddenly drop the price within less than a year. Get real. Sony is in for the money, they're not going to drop prices just to prove their fanboys right.