I really hate those. I end up using all my consumables trying to stay alive and win, only to be meant to lose, and end up wasting all my potions. While it's frustrating, I think it makes for a far move believable experience. I mean, if this were real life, you'd do your best to stay alive, right? Personnally, I just accept the outcome after realizing I was fooled. I don't think you'd go : ok, well, this guy is probably unbeatable, so I'll let him pound at me in real-life.
Internet connectivity on the XBox360 is primarily for online games.
Actually, no, the biggest thing about the free Live service is downloadable demos, wallpapers and trailers and access to arcade-like games on XBL Arcade. I'd say this is a huge incentive to connect the 360 to the web too.
While a lot of old games have been bought from the Virtual Console, I'd love to see how many customers they have. If it turns out 250,000 people are buying everything, this would be very dissapointing I think, since that's about 1/8th of the user base, probably even less, maybe 1/10th. That's probably more or less a subset of their hardcore users. Not good.
Nintendo can keep throwing out little updates like this that will keep the Wii's slot blinking blue, people are going to keep it out and ready to find out what the next new thing is. This should help sustain people's interest until the next wave of AAA titles starts hitting the console.
Well, no. With just half of the Xbox 360 users having connected their 360 to the Internet and used Xbox Live Silver or Gold in any form, I doubt the Wii has even half of it's users connected to the Internet and taking advantage of the channels. So what's going to keep the majority who haven't connected their consoles online happy if there is a dearth of new or interresting titles?
Those updates only help people who have connected their console, which is probably far from the majority, if the 360 is any indication. Especially since the 360 has very strong incentives to connect your console to the free Live service. Free demos, trailers and XboxLive Arcade games, which the Wii doesn't have, except classic game downloads, which I admit is pretty cool, but priced too high if you ask me.
If you watch last week's The 1up Show, there a feature on Oblivion for the PS3 if I recall correctly. They talked in there that the PS3 version's rendering engine was completely rewritten (engine+shaders) for the PS3 and while doing that they figured out to fix the shaders for the montains in the distance. So they fixed it for the PS3 version. Since it's only a shader, it is apparently going to ship with the 360 version too.
Now, given that the 360 version shipped at the same time as the PC version, it's reasonable to assume that the 360 version didn't have it's own version of the rendering engine which took advantage of the 360's hardware. In this case, I'm not surprised that the PS3 version looks better, since they had maybe a year to tweak the rendering.
In essence, this means nothing of the 360's or PS3's horsepower, only that when optimized for, the PS3 can generate better visuals than the 360. Shock! Gasp!
Microsoft has huge machinery for games production. If a team of 80 voice actors are needed from the States, they can provide it. Their test laboratory is also fantastic. If those voice actors are the same as Microsoft must have hired for the english version of 99 Nights, a game made by Q Entertainment but mostly funded by Microsoft and published exclusively for the 360, then I'll suddenly become a lot less interested in Alan Wake. As for testing...
This guy didn't just wake up one morning and get hit by an Atari 2600 Actually, that's only part of the story. He was forced to play afterwards with the copy of ET that came with it. That is really what pushed him over the edge.
On the list of unsolved problems, there's N = NP . I'm browsing at +3 here, so I don't know if someone already made the joke and it has been modded down to oblivion because it has been told so many times before, but I'll always remember when the teacher asked in class "Is P = NP" and some guy who probably read the joke online said "Yes, P = NP if N = 1".
outsell expensive systems with no games... Except, you know, for the fact that the 360 has a lot of really great games right now, if you don't consider RPGs.
Yeah, right. Broadcast monitors are 720x486 pixels. That's interlaced, of course. PAL is 576 lines IIRC. Interlaced too.
The reason why you are not getting an image as clear on your TV is simply signal degradation and broadcasters trimming the quality so they can fit more channel in the analog space, exactly like they do with some HD streams that get downsamples to something like 1400x1080.
But I assure you, NTSC is 720x486, not 320 lines of resolution. Anyone who told you otherwise is a liar.
It's not because it's not illegal that it makes it right.
By not supporting the CD sales of an artist you are not supporting the label who invests in them. If the label doesn't see a profit, they won't renew the contract. Congratulations, you've just killed a band. People fail to see this when downloading music. They think they are sticking it to the man, when in fact they are also hurting the band itself.
The 360 version of GH2 is coming out in about two months and Red Octane confirmed there would be downloadable content. Ever since this has been announced, there has been rumor and speculation that they would release all the songs of the original GH on marketplace to use in GH2, with all the new bells and whistles. If you own a 360 and don't own these two games for your PS2 (if you had one in the first place), this ought to be a real treat for you.
And dammit people, you haven't even seen a screenshot yet and you are already making comparisons to DDR or saying it's a rippof from another game. Just because it's EA doesn't mean it's going to suck. That brief description alone got me interrested in the game.
Sadly, the biggest lie circulating is that these changes will somehow better promote "Quebec culture". Seriously? I mean, no offense, but if there's one culture that needs protection, it's the rest of the Canadian culture. The music and movie industry in Quebec is going great (not as great this year as last year tough). Quebecers actually go and see movies from Quebec. It's not the majority, but it's a non negligible portion. The rest of Canada don't watch a lot of movies from Quebec, but then, they hardly watch their own either.
I hate Internet arguments like these beecuse they always degenerate with one person not understanding what the other meant.
Breaking one's word is not theft. I know that. You seem to be assuming that I always assume theft, which is not the case. Back to my example, the fact is, you gave your word to a friend. When you rent a movie, there's that annoying license that plays at the beginning. It's stating that you don't have the right to distribute the movie in a non "fair use" way. By continuing watching and keeping the item, you are basically giving your word, sort of. I mean, they are not making you sign a contract. Just like a friend would assume from you, they assume that you will keep your word not copying and distributing the media in unfair ways to them.
No, people can't call it what they want. Words have meaning. I was referring to "stealing" vs "violating copyright". Sure, they are not the same, but the end result is the same : you didn't pay for something you now own. I call that stealing. It's just a spin on words I guess.
That's correct, because I haven't "stolen" anything from Netflix.. That's debatable. I mean, by copying the movie, you are stating that you desire to continue watching a given movie, but you refuse to pay anymore for it. The fees that you pay with Netflix don't give you the right to copy the movie. Maybe they should, but that's not the case right now, so copying a movie from Netflix is almost as bad as downloading it from the web : well, you did pay a small amount. It's not clear who are you exactly "refusing profit" to. But you are indeed doing just that. If you think the current laws are unfair fine, but this doesn't make it right to violate them because you think they are outdated.
If I record "Rome" or "The Sopranos," off HBO, then lend the DVDs to a friend, that's a violation of HBO's terms of service. I don't know about HBO's term of service, so I can't pass judgment on that. From my limited knowledge of copyright law, I would assume that fair use would grant you the right to lend it to a friend, as long as you don't distribute it on massive scale and/or sell it.
People can call this what they want. It doesn't change the fact that the owner hasn't given their approval in duplicating their media, and your doing so violates the terms of the agreement.
As for Netflix, their are not going to bother, I mean, not a lot of people are going to rent a movie multiple times, so for them if you copy the movie, they don't care, it's not as if you would have probably rented it again.
If a friend asked you to keep your word on something, you would do it. Why is it different with a media company?
We have laws that apply to everyone because we all have different morals. The service contract that you have with HBO allows you to. I'm pretty sure the video store doesn't.
WHAT? The majority of people who break CSS are not Linux users or people with problems playing a movie on their "el cheapo DVD player", it's the people renting stuff and then ripping it. I couldn't care less about these people, they're thieves, period.
The fact that fair uses allows you to rip your own copy for personal use is good. I just think a little too many people are pretending to be fighting for fair use when in fact they just don't want to pay for stuff.
I understand the reason for breaking these schemes under Linux, but I'd rather have the community force the industry to release the spec to Linux developers so we don't have to care about the fact that the movie is protected. I mean, if every HD-DVD under the sun can play HD-DVDs, who really cares, except people who want free stuff, that you can't copy them? Teachers and other people who cite fair use. But as far as other people, no I don't care at all what they think.
Besides, what's the rationale behind making a backup copy of something you bought? It's not because you CAN that it means it's ok. If you break something, you broke it, period. You should cared for it better. If I wreck my car, I buy another one. Why should movies and CDs be any different? Because they are so simple to copy? When are people going to cite fair use with books? I mean, they can catch fire! Let's scan them as we buy them!
Seriously, the more and more I read about "fair use" on Slashdot in conjonction with DRM for DVDs, HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray, the more I can't help but think that it's an euphemism for "piracy". Seriously, stop kidding yourselves. The majority of people who rip and burn movies are pirating them, not practicing their fair use right to show clips in schools or make backup copies.
Slashdot Mirror
I really hate those. I end up using all my consumables trying to stay alive and win, only to be meant to lose, and end up wasting all my potions.
While it's frustrating, I think it makes for a far move believable experience. I mean, if this were real life, you'd do your best to stay alive, right? Personnally, I just accept the outcome after realizing I was fooled. I don't think you'd go : ok, well, this guy is probably unbeatable, so I'll let him pound at me in real-life.
Internet connectivity on the XBox360 is primarily for online games.
Actually, no, the biggest thing about the free Live service is downloadable demos, wallpapers and trailers and access to arcade-like games on XBL Arcade. I'd say this is a huge incentive to connect the 360 to the web too.
While a lot of old games have been bought from the Virtual Console, I'd love to see how many customers they have. If it turns out 250,000 people are buying everything, this would be very dissapointing I think, since that's about 1/8th of the user base, probably even less, maybe 1/10th. That's probably more or less a subset of their hardcore users. Not good.
Nintendo can keep throwing out little updates like this that will keep the Wii's slot blinking blue, people are going to keep it out and ready to find out what the next new thing is. This should help sustain people's interest until the next wave of AAA titles starts hitting the console.
Well, no. With just half of the Xbox 360 users having connected their 360 to the Internet and used Xbox Live Silver or Gold in any form, I doubt the Wii has even half of it's users connected to the Internet and taking advantage of the channels. So what's going to keep the majority who haven't connected their consoles online happy if there is a dearth of new or interresting titles?
Those updates only help people who have connected their console, which is probably far from the majority, if the 360 is any indication. Especially since the 360 has very strong incentives to connect your console to the free Live service. Free demos, trailers and XboxLive Arcade games, which the Wii doesn't have, except classic game downloads, which I admit is pretty cool, but priced too high if you ask me.
So, I would wager your own race is Munchkin, is that it?
Funny, cause I actually play tennis in real-life. So I guess the joke is on you.
Long answer is no.
Seriously tough, while a fun game is a fun game, a fun game with great graphics is even better.
If you watch last week's The 1up Show, there a feature on Oblivion for the PS3 if I recall correctly. They talked in there that the PS3 version's rendering engine was completely rewritten (engine+shaders) for the PS3 and while doing that they figured out to fix the shaders for the montains in the distance. So they fixed it for the PS3 version. Since it's only a shader, it is apparently going to ship with the 360 version too.
Now, given that the 360 version shipped at the same time as the PC version, it's reasonable to assume that the 360 version didn't have it's own version of the rendering engine which took advantage of the 360's hardware. In this case, I'm not surprised that the PS3 version looks better, since they had maybe a year to tweak the rendering.
In essence, this means nothing of the 360's or PS3's horsepower, only that when optimized for, the PS3 can generate better visuals than the 360. Shock! Gasp!
Microsoft has huge machinery for games production. If a team of 80 voice actors are needed from the States, they can provide it. Their test laboratory is also fantastic.
If those voice actors are the same as Microsoft must have hired for the english version of 99 Nights, a game made by Q Entertainment but mostly funded by Microsoft and published exclusively for the 360, then I'll suddenly become a lot less interested in Alan Wake. As for testing...
This guy didn't just wake up one morning and get hit by an Atari 2600
Actually, that's only part of the story. He was forced to play afterwards with the copy of ET that came with it. That is really what pushed him over the edge.
On the list of unsolved problems, there's N = NP . I'm browsing at +3 here, so I don't know if someone already made the joke and it has been modded down to oblivion because it has been told so many times before, but I'll always remember when the teacher asked in class "Is P = NP" and some guy who probably read the joke online said "Yes, P = NP if N = 1".
outsell expensive systems with no games ...
Except, you know, for the fact that the 360 has a lot of really great games right now, if you don't consider RPGs.
Yeah, right. Broadcast monitors are 720x486 pixels. That's interlaced, of course. PAL is 576 lines IIRC. Interlaced too.
The reason why you are not getting an image as clear on your TV is simply signal degradation and broadcasters trimming the quality so they can fit more channel in the analog space, exactly like they do with some HD streams that get downsamples to something like 1400x1080.
But I assure you, NTSC is 720x486, not 320 lines of resolution. Anyone who told you otherwise is a liar.
It's not because it's not illegal that it makes it right.
By not supporting the CD sales of an artist you are not supporting the label who invests in them. If the label doesn't see a profit, they won't renew the contract. Congratulations, you've just killed a band. People fail to see this when downloading music. They think they are sticking it to the man, when in fact they are also hurting the band itself.
Given there's already agamer rating system on Xbox Live, this would seem like the perfect solution to your problem.
Two words : job security.
Thought, I read once that the surest way to get yourself fired is being irreplaceable, at least when you are a programmer.
games would at least offer some degree of conclusion because the next installment would be a few years away. ;)
You obviously haven't played Halo 2.
The 360 version of GH2 is coming out in about two months and Red Octane confirmed there would be downloadable content. Ever since this has been announced, there has been rumor and speculation that they would release all the songs of the original GH on marketplace to use in GH2, with all the new bells and whistles. If you own a 360 and don't own these two games for your PS2 (if you had one in the first place), this ought to be a real treat for you.
Actually, EA has multiple projects in the pipeline for XBLA, according to this article (4th paragraph, starting from the end).
And dammit people, you haven't even seen a screenshot yet and you are already making comparisons to DDR or saying it's a rippof from another game. Just because it's EA doesn't mean it's going to suck. That brief description alone got me interrested in the game.
Sadly, the biggest lie circulating is that these changes will somehow better promote "Quebec culture".
Seriously? I mean, no offense, but if there's one culture that needs protection, it's the rest of the Canadian culture. The music and movie industry in Quebec is going great (not as great this year as last year tough). Quebecers actually go and see movies from Quebec. It's not the majority, but it's a non negligible portion. The rest of Canada don't watch a lot of movies from Quebec, but then, they hardly watch their own either.
I hate Internet arguments like these beecuse they always degenerate with one person not understanding what the other meant.
Breaking one's word is not theft.
I know that. You seem to be assuming that I always assume theft, which is not the case. Back to my example, the fact is, you gave your word to a friend. When you rent a movie, there's that annoying license that plays at the beginning. It's stating that you don't have the right to distribute the movie in a non "fair use" way. By continuing watching and keeping the item, you are basically giving your word, sort of. I mean, they are not making you sign a contract. Just like a friend would assume from you, they assume that you will keep your word not copying and distributing the media in unfair ways to them.
No, people can't call it what they want. Words have meaning.
I was referring to "stealing" vs "violating copyright". Sure, they are not the same, but the end result is the same : you didn't pay for something you now own. I call that stealing. It's just a spin on words I guess.
That's correct, because I haven't "stolen" anything from Netflix..
That's debatable. I mean, by copying the movie, you are stating that you desire to continue watching a given movie, but you refuse to pay anymore for it. The fees that you pay with Netflix don't give you the right to copy the movie. Maybe they should, but that's not the case right now, so copying a movie from Netflix is almost as bad as downloading it from the web : well, you did pay a small amount. It's not clear who are you exactly "refusing profit" to. But you are indeed doing just that. If you think the current laws are unfair fine, but this doesn't make it right to violate them because you think they are outdated.
If I record "Rome" or "The Sopranos," off HBO, then lend the DVDs to a friend, that's a violation of HBO's terms of service.
I don't know about HBO's term of service, so I can't pass judgment on that. From my limited knowledge of copyright law, I would assume that fair use would grant you the right to lend it to a friend, as long as you don't distribute it on massive scale and/or sell it.
People can call this what they want. It doesn't change the fact that the owner hasn't given their approval in duplicating their media, and your doing so violates the terms of the agreement.
As for Netflix, their are not going to bother, I mean, not a lot of people are going to rent a movie multiple times, so for them if you copy the movie, they don't care, it's not as if you would have probably rented it again.
If a friend asked you to keep your word on something, you would do it. Why is it different with a media company?
We have laws that apply to everyone because we all have different morals. The service contract that you have with HBO allows you to. I'm pretty sure the video store doesn't.
Actually, I think I read somewhere that prices on SED would drop faster than LCDs. They are cheaper to make apparently.
WHAT? The majority of people who break CSS are not Linux users or people with problems playing a movie on their "el cheapo DVD player", it's the people renting stuff and then ripping it. I couldn't care less about these people, they're thieves, period.
The fact that fair uses allows you to rip your own copy for personal use is good. I just think a little too many people are pretending to be fighting for fair use when in fact they just don't want to pay for stuff.
I understand the reason for breaking these schemes under Linux, but I'd rather have the community force the industry to release the spec to Linux developers so we don't have to care about the fact that the movie is protected. I mean, if every HD-DVD under the sun can play HD-DVDs, who really cares, except people who want free stuff, that you can't copy them? Teachers and other people who cite fair use. But as far as other people, no I don't care at all what they think.
Besides, what's the rationale behind making a backup copy of something you bought? It's not because you CAN that it means it's ok. If you break something, you broke it, period. You should cared for it better. If I wreck my car, I buy another one. Why should movies and CDs be any different? Because they are so simple to copy? When are people going to cite fair use with books? I mean, they can catch fire! Let's scan them as we buy them!
Seriously, the more and more I read about "fair use" on Slashdot in conjonction with DRM for DVDs, HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray, the more I can't help but think that it's an euphemism for "piracy". Seriously, stop kidding yourselves. The majority of people who rip and burn movies are pirating them, not practicing their fair use right to show clips in schools or make backup copies.