The question that's coming in the spring, when the PS3 might actually be available in quantity, is what kind of demand will exist once all the hardcore types already have theirs.
Wow. Really, just wow. What part of "opening weekend" didn't you read? I wasn't invoking the 360's launch, I was saying that its available. Now. In great quantities. It is also 2/3 the price of the PS3 and there is only 1 non-sucky game available only on the PS3. All the rest you can already play on the 360. Cheaper.
So is that 1 exclusive game worth shelling out the $600+ entry fee OPENING WEEKEND? That's the interesting question in a discussion about the games available for a console's launch.
His point is that there are only two games exclusive games being released contemporaneously with the PS3, one of which is said to suck. So that's 1 exclusive game. Whether you in particular have a console or not really isn't the point. The point is that for the cost of a PS3 you can get a 360 and a couple of the same games. So the question posed is whether or not that 1 non-sucky, exclusive game is worth the $600+ you're going to need to shell out to play it opening weekend. Which does, IMHO, make for an interesting question.
Any thoughts on making the DB publicly accessable other than through teh Dot? Not sure what I'd do with all that data, but I'm sure these's a grad student somewhere who'd love the opportunity...
Just remember that I'm the only one taking pre-orders for the PS3. Really. And due to demand you're going to need to send me at $1000 to get one. No, $2000! Yes $5000 is all it takes. Order now, and I'll even provide an extra bonnus 7th axis on your controller!
True, but what would have happened if the Halo weren't an Xbox exclusive? My guess is it would have failed miserably. If the PS3 doesn't ahve that, then it could very well have a long, long battle on its hands. I'm not going to say that the PS# will die, or that Sony's going away, but I doubt very much whether it will be as dominating this time around as it was last time.
The window for Sony to win, however, is extremely small. the 360 and Wii are both well positioned tot ake advantage of that short window. If the PS3 doesn't get sold in large enough numbers to justify the large development costs for it, it could very well end up on the outside looking in. Hardware is only the first part of the equation. Games are the second, and more important part of the equation. No games, no system.
A friend in the Government once told me that after the Pollard spy scandal the Government rethought the way it handled clearances. So now there is a discreet pool of clearances. There's no reason why a company, new, mature, huge, or small shouldn't be able to institute a similar policy in terms of access.
You would be correct if the Judge had actually issued a ruling against Rockstar. All he's said is that he'd like to see the game. That can also be for an appeal so that when Jeck loses and appeals it, the lower court can demonstrate how fair it was to Jack's case.
You can believe, argue, and hold dear whatever you like. If you are trying to sway public opinion of something, however, being an extremist will typically work against you. If you want to, great, go for it. I'm not telling you to sell your ideology short, I'm just telling the reality of its effectiveness. Women's suffrage was an extreme position at one time, but, as society changed. it became less of an extremist position, and so was finally adopted.
When it coems to Free Speech, however, the extremist position has always stayed relatively extreme. If you cannot punish, under any circumstance, what someone says (the extremist of extreme positions), then, as an extreme example, you couldn't prosecute somone for calling in a bomb threat. It would be Free Speech.
I don't think you're going to find many people who will support that, indeed I highly doubt that you would. So what that means is that there has to be a line a somewhere between Speech that is allowed and Speech which is punishable (civilly or criminally). The true argument then is not whether there ought to be limits on Free Speech, but where those limits should be. If you're over in the corner arguing that there shouldn't be a line then, whatever you may have to say about its placement is also going to be ignored. That's reality.
I'm not trying to tell you what to believe or how to pursue it, but I am telling you that the gap between ideology and reality can be extremely difficult to overcome.
If the argument is that all speech, saying essentially whatever you want, ought to be garaunteed by the First Amendment, then yes that hurts you cause. The Supreme Court has always held that there is a boundry outside of which speech is not protected. Even average Joe Citizen can understand why blatantly lying about someone to harm them should not be OK. So if you take that extremist position then you will be written off as an extremist and the rest of your arguments, no matter how good, will simply be ignored. Once you're labeled a crackpot or extremist or fringewing, then you've already lost. At least that's the way it works according to what I have seen and read.
Slashdot Mirror
PS3: 1 unit
The question that's coming in the spring, when the PS3 might actually be available in quantity, is what kind of demand will exist once all the hardcore types already have theirs.
Let's just say that that wasn't water flowing around the parking lot afte the storm...
I still have my A1200 from college but haven't touched in a couple years. This winter I'll hopefully have time to get it out, up, and running again.
*sniff* I miss Amigas.
All the more ironic since he crashed while trying to reach the fuel selector knob...
They are soo sharking Congress on that one.
Right around the time PS3's might actually be available in quantity. Huh. Funny that...
So is that 1 exclusive game worth shelling out the $600+ entry fee OPENING WEEKEND? That's the interesting question in a discussion about the games available for a console's launch.
His point is that there are only two games exclusive games being released contemporaneously with the PS3, one of which is said to suck. So that's 1 exclusive game. Whether you in particular have a console or not really isn't the point. The point is that for the cost of a PS3 you can get a 360 and a couple of the same games. So the question posed is whether or not that 1 non-sucky, exclusive game is worth the $600+ you're going to need to shell out to play it opening weekend. Which does, IMHO, make for an interesting question.
Was he supposed to know what human flesh tastes like? 'Cause once they get the taste, there's no going back!
Any thoughts on making the DB publicly accessable other than through teh Dot? Not sure what I'd do with all that data, but I'm sure these's a grad student somewhere who'd love the opportunity...
From Nerdenthals? Yes.
Which comes with a PS3.
The Rubik's Cube exploding is pretty cool, but the crying doll is just... whack.
Just remember that I'm the only one taking pre-orders for the PS3. Really. And due to demand you're going to need to send me at $1000 to get one. No, $2000! Yes $5000 is all it takes. Order now, and I'll even provide an extra bonnus 7th axis on your controller!
True, but what would have happened if the Halo weren't an Xbox exclusive? My guess is it would have failed miserably. If the PS3 doesn't ahve that, then it could very well have a long, long battle on its hands. I'm not going to say that the PS# will die, or that Sony's going away, but I doubt very much whether it will be as dominating this time around as it was last time.
The window for Sony to win, however, is extremely small. the 360 and Wii are both well positioned tot ake advantage of that short window. If the PS3 doesn't get sold in large enough numbers to justify the large development costs for it, it could very well end up on the outside looking in. Hardware is only the first part of the equation. Games are the second, and more important part of the equation. No games, no system.
-Schroedinger's Cat
A friend in the Government once told me that after the Pollard spy scandal the Government rethought the way it handled clearances. So now there is a discreet pool of clearances. There's no reason why a company, new, mature, huge, or small shouldn't be able to institute a similar policy in terms of access.
Now that Anna Nicole Smith has replaced Paris Hilton as Cortana the project is back on track.
Unless your a Replicant.
Once they named Paris Hilton to play Cortana I knew the movie wouldn't make it.
You would be correct if the Judge had actually issued a ruling against Rockstar. All he's said is that he'd like to see the game. That can also be for an appeal so that when Jeck loses and appeals it, the lower court can demonstrate how fair it was to Jack's case.
When it coems to Free Speech, however, the extremist position has always stayed relatively extreme. If you cannot punish, under any circumstance, what someone says (the extremist of extreme positions), then, as an extreme example, you couldn't prosecute somone for calling in a bomb threat. It would be Free Speech.
I don't think you're going to find many people who will support that, indeed I highly doubt that you would. So what that means is that there has to be a line a somewhere between Speech that is allowed and Speech which is punishable (civilly or criminally). The true argument then is not whether there ought to be limits on Free Speech, but where those limits should be. If you're over in the corner arguing that there shouldn't be a line then, whatever you may have to say about its placement is also going to be ignored. That's reality.
I'm not trying to tell you what to believe or how to pursue it, but I am telling you that the gap between ideology and reality can be extremely difficult to overcome.
If the argument is that all speech, saying essentially whatever you want, ought to be garaunteed by the First Amendment, then yes that hurts you cause. The Supreme Court has always held that there is a boundry outside of which speech is not protected. Even average Joe Citizen can understand why blatantly lying about someone to harm them should not be OK. So if you take that extremist position then you will be written off as an extremist and the rest of your arguments, no matter how good, will simply be ignored. Once you're labeled a crackpot or extremist or fringewing, then you've already lost. At least that's the way it works according to what I have seen and read.