But in most cases the young and elderly do NOT get free filing -- the free-file-eligible age range is usually from 20 to 57 (with the upper age limit varying from 50 to 70) and if you're older or younger than that, you have to pay.
Ahh, the lower limit is probably due to students being claimed on their parents returns on not making enough money to have to file. The upper limit is probably due to some states having free tax services for senior citizens. Looooong before Illinois offered e-filing or before that phone filing they offered free tax services for older folks. They could take their forms and info down to a location and get them done.
The IRS wanted everyone to free file. They even made the software to do so themselves, then the tax preparers got wind of it and lobbied Congress to prevent hte IRS from offering free tax preparation software and services.
They later made a deal with the tax prepares to offer free filing but only through them. Dont' blame the IRS, blame Intuit, HR Block, Jackson Hewitt etc.
The states are under no such restrictions, I guess the tax preparers didn't get around to buying them off.
It's not really a sweetheart deal, more of a deal with the devil. The IRS wanted to offer free software and e-filing to everyone through their own software that they developed. But the tax preparers got wind of it and lobbied congress to pass a law forbidding the IRS from offering free tax services.
But the IRS wanted at least some people to free file and eventually negotated the deal.
The states are under no such restrictions, so here in Illinois if you free file your federal, and they offer to file the state form for a fee, you can ignore the vultures and just go to the state website.
Though the fed should just buy own of these systems and provide it for free.
There is no need to for them to buy one, they had one they made themselves, they were going to release it to the wild until the tax prep companies lobbied congress to forbid them from doing so. The states are under no such restrictions, which is why things like calfile and the Illinois version of same exist.
IMHO tax preparers are vultures, producing anti-government rhetoric every year with their ads, and then making money of that
Some companies have restrictions based on your age, why I have no idea.
It's part of the deal the IRS made with the tax prep people. Originally, the IRS wanted to release their own software and alllow everyone to file for free using free software/website. But the tax prep companies got wind of it and did their whole "private sector is better than the gubment" and bribed Congress to stop them and the IRS is now forbidden from doing their own software or offering their own free filing service.
Then the tax prep companies could keep making lots of money to do something that saves the government money. I remember at one time to e-file (in the early days) you had to pay $200. Well that pissed the IRS off and after finger pointing and whatnot, "some" people get to file free, but only by going through the IRS website and getting redirected to the tax preparers website. as you posted. So the IRS at least gets some people (senior citizens and low wage folks) free e-filing and the tax preparers still get to make money of the more well off folks they scare with their ads (If you let us do your taxes you'll be less likely to get audited and you'll get more money)
I wish that law would get repealed so the IRS could put HR block out of business. Government hatred bankrolled by corporations.
It's too complicated and I waste too much time on it.
It's complicated for you because your circumstances are complicated. You have the benefit of being your own boss, having a more complex tax situation is one of the drawbacks of that.
My situation is simple so I get to use the 1040EZ.
Similar things can happen to anyone from any poor/small/rural school.
You can go to from being the #1 computer geek at your school to being around a bunch of guys from what essentially is "Shermer Illinois" who's dads got them shell accounts on their companies Unix boxes when they were 6. Or their schools had more and higher tech machines so they got exposed to more than just a smattering of BASIC and how to use a word processor.
Gifted programs, what gifted programs? And if you're poor forget about ACT/SAT preparation clases or books and AP tests.
Course, in the schools I attended, the developmentally disabled kids were exploited for cheap/free labor on the lunch line, even down to the junior high aged kids. Yes it was "work skills training" but I still think it was a bad idea to use a group of kids who were already separated from the rest and put them to work in front of the rest, when the rest never worked on the lunch line.
It's not a rigid mindset. Using a mouse for a console is just not comfortable. I'm far from being the only one who thinks that.
How do you know? You said you're a PC gamer. Have you done it? It's fine, all you need is a flat surface for a ball mouse or anything for optical. TV tray, hardback book, seat of the couch.
Two things. HDTV still doesn't touch PC resolutions,
It doesn't? 1080P is 1920x1080. Lets check Gateway's website. Hmm they only have one monitor that supports that resolution, all the rest are lower. Their entry level monitor is a 1024x768 one. That's the same resolution as my Windows machine. The majority of desktops out there in the home are running with displays less than 1080P.
while completely forgetting to include things like the TV that they dropped 2 grand on, or their surround system, etc.
You can get nice 1080i sets for under 400 these days. I've seen a 1080p for around 600. Those aren't the super huge monsters, but normal size screens.
Yeah, you can use those for other things as well, but I can use my PC for a LOT of other things as well.
You're forgetting one thing and I'm surprised considering how low your slashdot user number is: Linux. The PS3 runs it, so does the PS2, its officially supported, not some hack.
I've met all your objections, but I'll never change your mind. You've got that FPS/RTS fan mindset, and I've got my loathing for WASD.
Every time I've read a review of a console RTS game, they always talk about how the controls suck.
Yes, but most of the online reviews I have seen of console RTS's have been by PC gamers comparing the games (and the controls) to the PC version. To someone not used to how the PC version controls, having different controls wouldn't bother them.
Yeah, the PSone mouse might have helped the 3 people that actually owned one,
Plenty of people had PSone mice, they're desirable items for certain games.
but really, who uses a mouse in the living room?
Again with the rigid mind set, why not use a mouse in the living room. Mice come in optical and wireless varieties now. just sit the thing on the couch beside you.
Sometimes it seems to me that when PC gamers complaints are met, they just find some other "problem" that isn't a problem to justify their dislikes on consoles. Complain about mice and then when you can use them, say that no one wants to. Complain about lack of online gaming and then when it happens say that no one has internet in the living room and wants to string wires over the house. (Why not put the cable modem in the living room next to the cable, and use a wireless router and bridge?) Or in the past year when consoles supported high resolution displays they say that no one has them or wants to pay money for them, or that they don't have a tV because they're sitting at their PC all the time.
Why not just go play on the PC if you're gonna do that and get an all-around much better experience?
Because it isn't better. The UI sucks, just because the keyboard has a lot of keys doesn't mean you should use them all. Keyboard controls sucked for action games in 1987 and they still suck in 2007. And it costs too much money to keep up with the hardware, not to mention the Windows annoyances.
I'd rather have a box I can just slap a disk in and play and not have to worry that my video card is up to snuff of if my drivers need upgrading or whether I have enough space for the install. And I want good games, not just from some FPS developer with embarassingly low output that does one game every 5 years, but every year. I don't want to be stuck playing low budget games from Eastern Europe with crappy voice acting for my action/RPG fix. (The PC game market is slowly but surely turning into the Amiga market. Ports and games European devs too cheap or to shortsighted to go console) I also want lots of games OTHER than FPS's, RTS's or MMORPG's.
Oh come on. Hurts developers? More like it makes them work a little harder and try some new things. Every time some modder creates something new and different, it expands our choices in general.
I guess you think we should just be able to shell out money for the next Madden update every year instead of getting anything fresh?
I don't play Madden, but I do know they add new stuff and tweak the gameplay/graphcis every year and it's not just new rosters. And it does come out every year, it's not like they're wating for John Madden Football Forever 1998 to be released in 2007. That's the way it works in the console world, they make money, they release often. Game series do gradual evolution over their releases rather than big jumps once every 5 years.
It's not snobbery when the consoles haven't shown that they can do games just as well as a PC. When they step up and actually start doing what you claim they can do, then maybe you'll have an argument. Let me know when that happens.
But they have proven it, over and over again, can't you see?
It really is a breed apart from anything else that you will find.
It is? I don't think so. You may not know this but all those Final Fantasies and Dragon Quests were originally inspired by the Wizardrys, Ultimas and Might & Magics Which explains all the PC RPG ports on the NES/SNES
The "Persona" games as well were heavily influenced by PC RPG's. And don't forget all those crazily complex Tactical RPG's like Ogre Battle, Final Fantasy Tactics or some of the recent games from Nippon Ichi.
And it happens the other way too, KOTOR and Anachronox were influenced by console RPG's Neither type is better or worse, they're just different, cousins in a way and I wish that PC RPG developers would port their games that I could play alongside Square-Enix's output.
RTS's have been tried before. I don't remember the names of the games that have done it, but the controls sucked horribly compared to mouse/keyboard control.
Does the Command & Conquer series, Warcraft, Starcraft (N64 only), Dune 2000, and Warzone 2100 ring a bell? The controls aren't bad, combo buttons help, and on the PSone there's also mouse if you want it, which every RTS on the thing supports.
The main drawback for RTS games is really the resolution issues. It's not as bad as it used to be as long as you have an HDTV and a console that can both do 1080, but how many people have that? Even then it's still lower res than you get with a PC, and a high resolution can make those games much nicer to play since you get a better view of what's going on.
you're saying that 1080p (that's 1920x1080) is STILL not good enough to play an RTS on? That's higher res that my windows machine! That's a higher res that the classic Starcraft required, one of the most popular RTS's of all time.
The Wii probably has the most potential for giving you good control over it,
You just mentioned how RTS's "need" mice and keyboards and you don't mention the PS2/PS3 with their USB ports?
This is the straitjacket mindset I was referring to, all the problems that you mention have been solved for years (why do you think the PS2 has 1080i, the capability to add a hard drive, and USB ports) and yet people like you still say you can't do RTS's on a console. I'm beginning to think that some PC gamers just don't want to admit that consoles could play their obsessively beloved RTS's/FPS, and play them well, if developers just did them.
I remember how PC gamers said things like "oh you'll never play a game like DOOM on a kiddie console" Then it became "oh you'll never have online play on a console" and then it became "oh you'll never play an MMORPG on a console" And now it's oh you can't play RTS/FPS on a console because of the keyboard and mouse. Or they use the "I can download a mod and keep playing the same game for 5 years and not have to buy new ones" argument. (Which actually hurts developers) Or if there a little more aware they'll try the "oh my computer is more versatile and does more for the money", but that doesn't work either not with the PS3's ability to run Linux.
I just want the PC snobbery to end, it was old in 93, and it's old now. There isn't a single game or genre that couldn't be done and done well on a modern console if the devlopers of said game put their minds to it. That includes flight sims for those hard core Tom Clancy/Dan Brown lovin greybeards (USB HOTAS)
It also includes things like Fallout or NWN, Planescape Torment etc.
The parent was implying that going cross-platform/console on a game would render it incapable of having that M rating, and also stated Oblivion didn't have an M rating when it does. I proved him wrong. That was my point.
"Can not" isn't a good phrase to use, it's not that they can't especially these days because those limitations you talk about are pretty much gone. It's just that they don't. Kind of like how it would be possible to do a character based platformer for the PC but no one does. It's a stratijacket of a mindset that does no one any good. It would be nice to seem some strategy, RTS or american style RPG's on a console. I know it's possible to make the controls workable.with just a dual shock/sixaxis. These days they could even leave keyboard and mouse controls in for those who might want to play that way. But they just don't do it.
for such highly regarded games, they didn't sell very well which is one reason why Black Isle is no more. Though they had a rabid fanbase they were just a touch too niche as a developer.
The last Fallout game to be released, Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel , was an expliotation film turned video game. To quote the Wikipedia article:
Films made with little or no attention to quality or artistic merit but with an eye to a quick profit, usually via high-pressure sales and promotion techniques emphasizing some sensational aspect of the product.
High pressure sales or sensationalism over BOS? Nonsens, the game got very little promotion at all. It's an enjoyable Diablo clone using Snowblinds Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance engine.
They'll convert it and change the gameplay so that they can mass produce it. They'll want to have it on the PC and all the consoles.
Of course they'l want to mass produce it, they want to sell lots of copies and make money! Of course they'll want it on all the consoles, they want to sell lots of copies and make money.
They won't make combat turn-based, because in spite of legions of screaming fans, turn based combat is too "niche" and won't appeal to the masses enough.
Apparently the masses outnumber the rabid Fallout fans then. But I wouldn't call it niche, plenty of console RPG's are turn based.
Gone will be Fallout's mature content. Drugs, hookers, swearing? Gone. We'll get a watered down Fallout universe which is nice and PG-13 friendly. Remember, this was the company that took all the blood out of their own game, Oblivion, because they didn't want an M rating.
I have Fallout BOS for my PS2 and do you know what rating it has? M, for Blood and Gore, Strong Sexual Themes, Strong Language and Violence. One of the first characters you meet is a hooker.
As for Oblivion, doesn't it have an M rating, why yes, yes it does.
So going cross-platform won't prevent a Fallout game from having that M rating
First thing, Second Life isnt' like WoW. WoW is a game, SL is a virtual environment, so you don't play SL.
Right now SL has 5,430,814 registered accounts.When I joined in July of last year it was around 700000. 1,648,38 of those accounts have logged in in the last 6 days.
They wanted a format that had the advantages of a DVD but smaller and with a built in protective case, what else would you recommend?
UMD's can hold 1.8 GB
Nintendo DS carts hold 128 MB.
a 1.8 GB ROM would too expensive. a flash chip with some kind of write protect would be another option but would stil lmake games cost too much, Do you want to pay $70 for games again, like some of the more ROM heavy 16 bit titles?
He's still a columnist at CPU, he's like CPU's John C. Dvorak, the guy everyone loves to hate.
But as I stated elsewhere, a few years ago his columns were very pro-microsoft. I figured that would come back to bite him sooner or later.
As for Wild Tangents games, Fate is fun little Diablo clone, It's not worth paying $20 for though, it's a $10 game. I suggested to "The Saint" back in 2005 that he contact SOE, borrow the Snowblind engine and port Fate to the PS2/PS3, since there's a pretty good sized market for Diablo clones on the PS2 and Wild Tangent could probably make some pretty good money that way.
But at that time Alex was very anti-console, except for the Xbox of course.
What's funny is that his columns a few years ago were all about:
1. How great Microsoft was 2. How he was the father of DirectX and how awesome DirectX was. 3. How Microsoft understood gaming better than Sony did and that the Xbox would rule!
Back then I considered him nothing more than a Microsoft astroturfer.
I remember the bad old days of the original Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gamegear. When portable versions of NES/SNES/Genesis games might be nothing like the original because they were extremely cut down to work on the portables of the day. Remember that isometric sprite based spyro game? Or that 2D Tomb Raider?
Using your logic, Links Awakening for the Gameboy is a port. But we both know that it's an original game set in the Zelda univese with Zelda style gameplay, similar to SOCOM, et al for the PSP.
In other words, NOT a PC-style MMORPG. Got it. Had to have all the content ahead of time, they could add new NPCs on the server, but new content had to be added by a new DVD.
If you mean PC style as in downloading tons of expansions (or buying them at the store) no. If you mean PC style meaning gameplay, yes.
They could do interesting things with the assets on the disk, mix them up in varous ways, tweak them (like they do with spells, abilities and items constantly)), make changes to UI, they could put a LOT of tweaks in those small downloads. Check out the history of changes on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EverQuest_Online_Adve ntures Besides, I'm still not convinced FFXI is truly a PC-style game. It's never mentioned along with other PC MMORPGs that everyone's heard of like EverQuest, Star Wars Galaxy, Runescape, Ragnarok Online, City of Heroes/Villians, World of Warcraft, EVE, or even Second Life. I could list even more that are better known than FFXI. If FFXI was truly a PC-style MMORPG, people would know about it.
Let me guess, you're from Europe? They never released FFXI for the PS2 there. But it most certainly is a full PC style MMORPG, especially since there's a PC version (and again, players of all versions in all territories play together on the same servers)
Given that the PS2 memory card only holds 8MB, EQOA can't have had much added content, so it can hardly count.
Shows what you know. The DVD the game came on had tones of unused content, so all they had to do was basically turn it on. Adding new quests and NPC's was also possible. For big stuff, they just released a new DVD, that was EQOA: Frontiers. Which is the version still in use.
As for FFXI, given that the PS2 hasn't supported a hard drive for at least the last three years, I think it's safe to ignore it too.
The game came out in 2004, the full size PS2's were still available. It came out earlier in Japan where it is the preferred platform for playing it. It also can be installed on a PS3 in a partition on the HD setup for PS2 games that support the HD, that's a new feature in the PS3 firmware. Full size PS2's are still available in the used market too, anyone who wants one can get one.
But we can rephrase it to be "name a popular MMORPG". Next-gen consoles might be capable of supporting a full PC-style MMORPG, but it's clear the PS2 gen wasn't.
So, why do you get to decide what to ignore. I pointed out two full PC style MMORPG's on a past generation console (FFXI has a PC version too, all players on all versions play on the same servers) and you say they can be ignored?
the "MMORPG" style games on consoles don't have the subscription and continued updates that the article is suggesting stops piracy.
That was the original quote, and I proved it wrong, both EQOA and FFXI have updates to this day and subscription fees.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh, the lower limit is probably due to students being claimed on their parents returns on not making enough money to have to file. The upper limit is probably due to some states having free tax services for senior citizens. Looooong before Illinois offered e-filing or before that phone filing they offered free tax services for older folks. They could take their forms and info down to a location and get them done.
sigh, how many times am I going to say this:
The IRS wanted everyone to free file. They even made the software to do so themselves, then the tax preparers got wind of it and lobbied Congress to prevent hte IRS from offering free tax preparation software and services.
They later made a deal with the tax prepares to offer free filing but only through them. Dont' blame the IRS, blame Intuit, HR Block, Jackson Hewitt etc.
The states are under no such restrictions, I guess the tax preparers didn't get around to buying them off.
It's not really a sweetheart deal, more of a deal with the devil. The IRS wanted to offer free software and e-filing to everyone through their own software that they developed. But the tax preparers got wind of it and lobbied congress to pass a law forbidding the IRS from offering free tax services.
But the IRS wanted at least some people to free file and eventually negotated the deal.
The states are under no such restrictions, so here in Illinois if you free file your federal, and they offer to file the state form for a fee, you can ignore the vultures and just go to the state website.
There is no need to for them to buy one, they had one they made themselves, they were going to release it to the wild until the tax prep companies lobbied congress to forbid them from doing so. The states are under no such restrictions, which is why things like calfile and the Illinois version of same exist.
IMHO tax preparers are vultures, producing anti-government rhetoric every year with their ads, and then making money of that
It's part of the deal the IRS made with the tax prep people. Originally, the IRS wanted to release their own software and alllow everyone to file for free using free software/website. But the tax prep companies got wind of it and did their whole "private sector is better than the gubment" and bribed Congress to stop them and the IRS is now forbidden from doing their own software or offering their own free filing service.
Then the tax prep companies could keep making lots of money to do something that saves the government money. I remember at one time to e-file (in the early days) you had to pay $200. Well that pissed the IRS off and after finger pointing and whatnot, "some" people get to file free, but only by going through the IRS website and getting redirected to the tax preparers website. as you posted. So the IRS at least gets some people (senior citizens and low wage folks) free e-filing and the tax preparers still get to make money of the more well off folks they scare with their ads (If you let us do your taxes you'll be less likely to get audited and you'll get more money)
I wish that law would get repealed so the IRS could put HR block out of business. Government hatred bankrolled by corporations.
It's too complicated and I waste too much time on it.
It's complicated for you because your circumstances are complicated. You have the benefit of being your own boss, having a more complex tax situation is one of the drawbacks of that.
My situation is simple so I get to use the 1040EZ.
Similar things can happen to anyone from any poor/small/rural school.
You can go to from being the #1 computer geek at your school to being around a bunch of guys from what essentially is "Shermer Illinois" who's dads got them shell accounts on their companies Unix boxes when they were 6. Or their schools had more and higher tech machines so they got exposed to more than just a smattering of BASIC and how to use a word processor.
Gifted programs, what gifted programs? And if you're poor forget about ACT/SAT preparation clases or books and AP tests.
Course, in the schools I attended, the developmentally disabled kids were exploited for cheap/free labor on the lunch line, even down to the junior high aged kids. Yes it was "work skills training" but I still think it was a bad idea to use a group of kids who were already separated from the rest and put them to work in front of the rest, when the rest never worked on the lunch line.
How do you know? You said you're a PC gamer. Have you done it? It's fine, all you need is a flat surface for a ball mouse or anything for optical. TV tray, hardback book, seat of the couch.
It doesn't? 1080P is 1920x1080. Lets check Gateway's website. Hmm they only have one monitor that supports that resolution, all the rest are lower. Their entry level monitor is a 1024x768 one. That's the same resolution as my Windows machine. The majority of desktops out there in the home are running with displays less than 1080P.
You can get nice 1080i sets for under 400 these days. I've seen a 1080p for around 600. Those aren't the super huge monsters, but normal size screens. You're forgetting one thing and I'm surprised considering how low your slashdot user number is: Linux. The PS3 runs it, so does the PS2, its officially supported, not some hack.
I've met all your objections, but I'll never change your mind. You've got that FPS/RTS fan mindset, and I've got my loathing for WASD.
Yes, but most of the online reviews I have seen of console RTS's have been by PC gamers comparing the games (and the controls) to the PC version. To someone not used to how the PC version controls, having different controls wouldn't bother them.
Plenty of people had PSone mice, they're desirable items for certain games.
Again with the rigid mind set, why not use a mouse in the living room. Mice come in optical and wireless varieties now. just sit the thing on the couch beside you.
Sometimes it seems to me that when PC gamers complaints are met, they just find some other "problem" that isn't a problem to justify their dislikes on consoles. Complain about mice and then when you can use them, say that no one wants to. Complain about lack of online gaming and then when it happens say that no one has internet in the living room and wants to string wires over the house. (Why not put the cable modem in the living room next to the cable, and use a wireless router and bridge?) Or in the past year when consoles supported high resolution displays they say that no one has them or wants to pay money for them, or that they don't have a tV because they're sitting at their PC all the time.
Because it isn't better. The UI sucks, just because the keyboard has a lot of keys doesn't mean you should use them all. Keyboard controls sucked for action games in 1987 and they still suck in 2007. And it costs too much money to keep up with the hardware, not to mention the Windows annoyances.
I'd rather have a box I can just slap a disk in and play and not have to worry that my video card is up to snuff of if my drivers need upgrading or whether I have enough space for the install. And I want good games, not just from some FPS developer with embarassingly low output that does one game every 5 years, but every year. I don't want to be stuck playing low budget games from Eastern Europe with crappy voice acting for my action/RPG fix. (The PC game market is slowly but surely turning into the Amiga market. Ports and games European devs too cheap or to shortsighted to go console) I also want lots of games OTHER than FPS's, RTS's or MMORPG's.
I guess you think we should just be able to shell out money for the next Madden update every year instead of getting anything fresh?
I don't play Madden, but I do know they add new stuff and tweak the gameplay/graphcis every year and it's not just new rosters. And it does come out every year, it's not like they're wating for John Madden Football Forever 1998 to be released in 2007. That's the way it works in the console world, they make money, they release often. Game series do gradual evolution over their releases rather than big jumps once every 5 years.
But they have proven it, over and over again, can't you see?
It is? I don't think so. You may not know this but all those Final Fantasies and Dragon Quests were originally inspired by the Wizardrys, Ultimas and Might & Magics Which explains all the PC RPG ports on the NES/SNES
The "Persona" games as well were heavily influenced by PC RPG's. And don't forget all those crazily complex Tactical RPG's like Ogre Battle, Final Fantasy Tactics or some of the recent games from Nippon Ichi.
And it happens the other way too, KOTOR and Anachronox were influenced by console RPG's
Neither type is better or worse, they're just different, cousins in a way and I wish that PC RPG developers would port their games that I could play alongside Square-Enix's output.
Does the Command & Conquer series, Warcraft, Starcraft (N64 only), Dune 2000, and Warzone 2100 ring a bell? The controls aren't bad, combo buttons help, and on the PSone there's also mouse if you want it, which every RTS on the thing supports.
you're saying that 1080p (that's 1920x1080) is STILL not good enough to play an RTS on? That's higher res that my windows machine! That's a higher res that the classic Starcraft required, one of the most popular RTS's of all time.
You just mentioned how RTS's "need" mice and keyboards and you don't mention the PS2/PS3 with their USB ports?
This is the straitjacket mindset I was referring to, all the problems that you mention have been solved for years (why do you think the PS2 has 1080i, the capability to add a hard drive, and USB ports) and yet people like you still say you can't do RTS's on a console. I'm beginning to think that some PC gamers just don't want to admit that consoles could play their obsessively beloved RTS's/FPS, and play them well, if developers just did them.
I remember how PC gamers said things like "oh you'll never play a game like DOOM on a kiddie console" Then it became "oh you'll never have online play on a console" and then it became "oh you'll never play an MMORPG on a console" And now it's oh you can't play RTS/FPS on a console because of the keyboard and mouse. Or they use the "I can download a mod and keep playing the same game for 5 years and not have to buy new ones" argument. (Which actually hurts developers) Or if there a little more aware they'll try the "oh my computer is more versatile and does more for the money", but that doesn't work either not with the PS3's ability to run Linux.
I just want the PC snobbery to end, it was old in 93, and it's old now. There isn't a single game or genre that couldn't be done and done well on a modern console if the devlopers of said game put their minds to it. That includes flight sims for those hard core Tom Clancy/Dan Brown lovin greybeards (USB HOTAS)
It also includes things like Fallout or NWN, Planescape Torment etc.
The parent was implying that going cross-platform/console on a game would render it incapable of having that M rating, and also stated Oblivion didn't have an M rating when it does. I proved him wrong. That was my point.
"Can not" isn't a good phrase to use, it's not that they can't especially these days because those limitations you talk about are pretty much gone. It's just that they don't. Kind of like how it would be possible to do a character based platformer for the PC but no one does. It's a stratijacket of a mindset that does no one any good. It would be nice to seem some strategy, RTS or american style RPG's on a console. I know it's possible to make the controls workable.with just a dual shock/sixaxis. These days they could even leave keyboard and mouse controls in for those who might want to play that way. But they just don't do it.
for such highly regarded games, they didn't sell very well which is one reason why Black Isle is no more. Though they had a rabid fanbase they were just a touch too niche as a developer.
High pressure sales or sensationalism over BOS? Nonsens, the game got very little promotion at all. It's an enjoyable Diablo clone using Snowblinds Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance engine.
Of course they'l want to mass produce it, they want to sell lots of copies and make money! Of course they'll want it on all the consoles, they want to sell lots of copies and make money.
Apparently the masses outnumber the rabid Fallout fans then. But I wouldn't call it niche, plenty of console RPG's are turn based.
I have Fallout BOS for my PS2 and do you know what rating it has? M, for Blood and Gore, Strong Sexual Themes, Strong Language and Violence. One of the first characters you meet is a hooker.
As for Oblivion, doesn't it have an M rating, why yes, yes it does.
So going cross-platform won't prevent a Fallout game from having that M rating
Yes, it is.
http://secondlife.com/developers/opensource/
First thing, Second Life isnt' like WoW. WoW is a game, SL is a virtual environment, so you don't play SL.
Right now SL has 5,430,814 registered accounts.When I joined in July of last year it was around 700000. 1,648,38 of those accounts have logged in in the last 6 days.
They wanted a format that had the advantages of a DVD but smaller and with a built in protective case, what else would you recommend?
UMD's can hold 1.8 GB
Nintendo DS carts hold 128 MB.
a 1.8 GB ROM would too expensive. a flash chip with some kind of write protect would be another option but would stil lmake games cost too much, Do you want to pay $70 for games again, like some of the more ROM heavy 16 bit titles?
He's still a columnist at CPU, he's like CPU's John C. Dvorak, the guy everyone loves to hate.
But as I stated elsewhere, a few years ago his columns were very pro-microsoft. I figured that would come back to bite him sooner or later.
As for Wild Tangents games, Fate is fun little Diablo clone, It's not worth paying $20 for though, it's a $10 game. I suggested to "The Saint" back in 2005 that he contact SOE, borrow the Snowblind engine and port Fate to the PS2/PS3, since there's a pretty good sized market for Diablo clones on the PS2 and Wild Tangent could probably make some pretty good money that way.
But at that time Alex was very anti-console, except for the Xbox of course.
What's funny is that his columns a few years ago were all about:
1. How great Microsoft was
2. How he was the father of DirectX and how awesome DirectX was.
3. How Microsoft understood gaming better than Sony did and that the Xbox would rule!
Back then I considered him nothing more than a Microsoft astroturfer.
And that's a bad thing?
I remember the bad old days of the original Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gamegear. When portable versions of NES/SNES/Genesis games might be nothing like the original because they were extremely cut down to work on the portables of the day. Remember that isometric sprite based spyro game? Or that 2D Tomb Raider?
Using your logic, Links Awakening for the Gameboy is a port. But we both know that it's an original game set in the Zelda univese with Zelda style gameplay, similar to SOCOM, et al for the PSP.
You keep using the word "port". I do not think it means what you think it means.
A port is a duplicate of a game to another platform.
Might and Magic I for the NES was a port
DOOM for the SNES was a port
Diablo for the PSone was a port
Deus Ex for the PS2 was a port
SOCOM for the PSP is not a port, but an original game for the PSP set in the "SOCOM" universe and having "SOCOM" style gameplay.
Similar statements apply to the other games you consider to be "ports"
If you mean PC style as in downloading tons of expansions (or buying them at the store) no. If you mean PC style meaning gameplay, yes.
They could do interesting things with the assets on the disk, mix them up in varous ways, tweak them (like they do with spells, abilities and items constantly)), make changes to UI, they could put a LOT of tweaks in those small downloads. Check out the history of changes on:
http://everquestonlineadventures.station.sony.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EverQuest_Online_Adv
Besides, I'm still not convinced FFXI is truly a PC-style game. It's never mentioned along with other PC MMORPGs that everyone's heard of like EverQuest, Star Wars Galaxy, Runescape, Ragnarok Online, City of Heroes/Villians, World of Warcraft, EVE, or even Second Life. I could list even more that are better known than FFXI. If FFXI was truly a PC-style MMORPG, people would know about it.
Let me guess, you're from Europe? They never released FFXI for the PS2 there. But it most certainly is a full PC style MMORPG, especially since there's a PC version (and again, players of all versions in all territories play together on the same servers)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFXI
Shows what you know. The DVD the game came on had tones of unused content, so all they had to do was basically turn it on. Adding new quests and NPC's was also possible. For big stuff, they just released a new DVD, that was EQOA: Frontiers. Which is the version still in use.
The game came out in 2004, the full size PS2's were still available. It came out earlier in Japan where it is the preferred platform for playing it. It also can be installed on a PS3 in a partition on the HD setup for PS2 games that support the HD, that's a new feature in the PS3 firmware. Full size PS2's are still available in the used market too, anyone who wants one can get one.
So, why do you get to decide what to ignore. I pointed out two full PC style MMORPG's on a past generation console (FFXI has a PC version too, all players on all versions play on the same servers) and you say they can be ignored?
That was the original quote, and I proved it wrong, both EQOA and FFXI have updates to this day and subscription fees.