Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't every wireless router/access point on the market today come equipped with default settings to make it "wide open?"
So the original news was that platinum titles would MSRP for $35. So what? Is this a big discount? If it is, it's more of a correction than an initiative. I can't speak for Microsoft, but Nintendo's Players' Choice line has had lower prices (if I recall, $40 or less) for years. In fact, this IGN article from nearly two years ago talks about some popular Gamecube titles being discounted to $30 and even $20.
MS and Nintendo "won't go budget?" Go look at a game rack, buddy. Nintendo's been acquainted with budget pricing longer than either of the other Big Three, and Microsoft has its own Platinum Hits campaign from several years back. We're supposed to be siding with Sony for cutting the high-end budget price by a fiver? Give me a break.
Where were these arguments during the Playstation 2, Playstation 1, or even the Super NES days? Certainly it wasn't a rare sight then to see a company like Square make a game dozens of times longer than the norm. While numeric hours of gameplay have gone up, I don't think that's the problem at all. Personally, I think that the problem now is that there are just too many games.
With that in mind, making games that are un-fun will just shrink the market and solve this, right?
This happens every four or five years. New consoles come out, they shine for a while. PC games begin to rise again the next year. The year after that, the big-ticket console titles have finally had enough time to bake and it's a console year. Next year dwindles, and PC games "fight back" with more big sequels and releases. About a year later new consoles come out and the cycle continues.
Although it stands to reason that if Microsoft has its way, within a few cycles consoles and PCs will both be replaced by Microsoft Home Entertainment products.
To me, and to most of my friends who have similarly been playing since before most of us agree it went "mass market," Final Fantasy was done some years ago. But with their impressive visuals and trashy teen romance plotlines, Squenix is well aware that if they make a Final Fantasy game, ridiculous amounts of people will buy it. Many of today's gamers consider FF one of the defining standards of RPGs, if not the entire industry.
And if there's money, they'll make it. An ironic twist of fate I think considering the series' beginning.
Wasn't me. I'd say that by using ad-blocking technology, we're letting webmasters and advertisers know that the contract they're propositioning us with is a no-go. Some websites have tried writing new ones (watch an ad once a day for instance), with notable success.
I'm all for doing whatever I can to prevent the SpikeTV game awards from ever happening again - but uniting the game media for a common goal? It's not difficult to see how "joining forces" could easily turn into a single, unchallenged view of video games in the media's reviews, furthering tunnel-vision in hit titles and encouraging the sequel syndrome that much more.
A better solution is probably to just not watch shitty television.
The above posters have fallen completely into the "equal sides" trap. For some reason modern citizens are shepherded into thinking that everything and everyone, no matter how moronic, should have an equal say. Yeah, there are grey areas, but sometimes there is a right and wrong, especially, and most notably, in the field of science. And if you think there's no consensus on global warming, you've obviously bought into the very PR machine that michael's posting about.
Of course, whether or not you believe that is up to you. But in this case at least, one opinion is much less idiotic than the other.
EA is paying exclusive prices to be labeled monopolistic and become singlehandedly responsible for the inevitable downfall of the sports game market. That money doesn't sound too smart to me.
The anti-innovation point would have been good, had it been made before the wildly innovative Nintendo DS, and before the announcement that the next Nintendo console will have a completely new control scheme. Even if they use the same characters in upcoming games, they're going to have to be used in entirely new ways.
I've been using the X11 port for a long time now, and I was hoping Neo/J would offer some performance boost over the sluggish OOo/X11 system. While the interface is snappy and responsive, the program consumes a ridiculous amount of system resources. Over 100 MB of my physical memory? And I thought the kernel was a memory hog.
I like the fact that I can use the Apple command key instead of ctrl, but unless the devs are willing to give me a free 512 MB or Gig DIMM, I think I'll wait for something with a smaller memory footprint.
This is like watching a kid argue with his parents that he should be allowed to eat dessert first. All his points are either universal (which one commenter, his blog of course hosted on ASP.net, suggested was a good reason for total OS lockdown), or petty and childish "It doesn't work like I expect it to work" issues.
I'm not sure if he's desperate or if he's really bought into the white whale that is Microsoft's imagination of what IE is. Either way, if the only arguments against FireFox are coming from Microsoft blogs, I'll trust it just fine, thanks.
Screw the oceans, make them WiMax repeaters and build a global wireless network.
Doesn't 'piracy' imply illegality?
on
TV Piracy is Next
·
· Score: 1
I can't see how TV sharing is illegal by any stretch of the imagination. You could record stuff you wanted to watch later (or again) decades ago, and though the equipment has changed, you could also easily edit out commercials.
The only even remotely relevant argument I can see is that people who don't pay for cable/satellite can get cable/satellite programs anyway. Frankly, I think this problem lies in the lap of the service providers. Cable a la carte anyone?
Have these people played video games from before 1999?
Trade shows follow console life cycles, naturally because game development follows console life cycles.
Last year was the year of utmost stagnation for the current generation, while the years before it were still "prime" and the years following will be where companies try to hype the next machine.
Ever wanted to pick up trash in exchange for points to play mundane minigames?
Of course, if you really wanted, you could also just wander around the park in a dazed attempt to figure out where you're going or how to get somewhere else. Humanity has yet to accept this ultimate challenge.
"So why the obsession in video game media with quantifying gameplay time"
Because some of us want good time for our money. We don't want to spend $50 on a game just to forget about it a week later.
If you don't like long games, don't buy them. Hell, if you're talking about GTA: San Andreas, you shouldn't even be concerned - it's an open-ended game, you can play as little or as much as you want. But I, for one, prefer games that last.
I'm a Mac user, and somehow I still get suckered into helping a bunch of dumb people with their Windows problems. Hell, I'm the IT manager at my workplace in all but title and paycheck.
But the "political speeches will become shorter" idea scares the hell out of me. Hiding behind an "artificially" intelligent program would be the perfect way for someone to censor broadcasted information to their own ends.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah yeah. I know. I've read practically 40 hours' worth of these articles in the past few months.
Can we post something else yet, please?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't every wireless router/access point on the market today come equipped with default settings to make it "wide open?"
So the original news was that platinum titles would MSRP for $35. So what? Is this a big discount? If it is, it's more of a correction than an initiative. I can't speak for Microsoft, but Nintendo's Players' Choice line has had lower prices (if I recall, $40 or less) for years. In fact, this IGN article from nearly two years ago talks about some popular Gamecube titles being discounted to $30 and even $20.
MS and Nintendo "won't go budget?" Go look at a game rack, buddy. Nintendo's been acquainted with budget pricing longer than either of the other Big Three, and Microsoft has its own Platinum Hits campaign from several years back. We're supposed to be siding with Sony for cutting the high-end budget price by a fiver? Give me a break.
No logical way to organize?
They must be mistaken. Instead of RSS, they're probably thinking of what they will eventually create to compete with RSS.
Yeah. That's great.
Where were these arguments during the Playstation 2, Playstation 1, or even the Super NES days? Certainly it wasn't a rare sight then to see a company like Square make a game dozens of times longer than the norm. While numeric hours of gameplay have gone up, I don't think that's the problem at all. Personally, I think that the problem now is that there are just too many games.
With that in mind, making games that are un-fun will just shrink the market and solve this, right?
This happens every four or five years. New consoles come out, they shine for a while. PC games begin to rise again the next year. The year after that, the big-ticket console titles have finally had enough time to bake and it's a console year. Next year dwindles, and PC games "fight back" with more big sequels and releases. About a year later new consoles come out and the cycle continues.
Although it stands to reason that if Microsoft has its way, within a few cycles consoles and PCs will both be replaced by Microsoft Home Entertainment products.
To me, and to most of my friends who have similarly been playing since before most of us agree it went "mass market," Final Fantasy was done some years ago. But with their impressive visuals and trashy teen romance plotlines, Squenix is well aware that if they make a Final Fantasy game, ridiculous amounts of people will buy it. Many of today's gamers consider FF one of the defining standards of RPGs, if not the entire industry.
And if there's money, they'll make it. An ironic twist of fate I think considering the series' beginning.
Wasn't me. I'd say that by using ad-blocking technology, we're letting webmasters and advertisers know that the contract they're propositioning us with is a no-go. Some websites have tried writing new ones (watch an ad once a day for instance), with notable success.
I'm all for doing whatever I can to prevent the SpikeTV game awards from ever happening again - but uniting the game media for a common goal? It's not difficult to see how "joining forces" could easily turn into a single, unchallenged view of video games in the media's reviews, furthering tunnel-vision in hit titles and encouraging the sequel syndrome that much more.
A better solution is probably to just not watch shitty television.
The above posters have fallen completely into the "equal sides" trap. For some reason modern citizens are shepherded into thinking that everything and everyone, no matter how moronic, should have an equal say. Yeah, there are grey areas, but sometimes there is a right and wrong, especially, and most notably, in the field of science. And if you think there's no consensus on global warming, you've obviously bought into the very PR machine that michael's posting about.
Of course, whether or not you believe that is up to you. But in this case at least, one opinion is much less idiotic than the other.
EA is paying exclusive prices to be labeled monopolistic and become singlehandedly responsible for the inevitable downfall of the sports game market. That money doesn't sound too smart to me.
The anti-innovation point would have been good, had it been made before the wildly innovative Nintendo DS, and before the announcement that the next Nintendo console will have a completely new control scheme. Even if they use the same characters in upcoming games, they're going to have to be used in entirely new ways.
I've been using the X11 port for a long time now, and I was hoping Neo/J would offer some performance boost over the sluggish OOo/X11 system. While the interface is snappy and responsive, the program consumes a ridiculous amount of system resources. Over 100 MB of my physical memory? And I thought the kernel was a memory hog.
I like the fact that I can use the Apple command key instead of ctrl, but unless the devs are willing to give me a free 512 MB or Gig DIMM, I think I'll wait for something with a smaller memory footprint.
This is like watching a kid argue with his parents that he should be allowed to eat dessert first. All his points are either universal (which one commenter, his blog of course hosted on ASP.net, suggested was a good reason for total OS lockdown), or petty and childish "It doesn't work like I expect it to work" issues.
I'm not sure if he's desperate or if he's really bought into the white whale that is Microsoft's imagination of what IE is. Either way, if the only arguments against FireFox are coming from Microsoft blogs, I'll trust it just fine, thanks.
Screw the oceans, make them WiMax repeaters and build a global wireless network.
I can't see how TV sharing is illegal by any stretch of the imagination. You could record stuff you wanted to watch later (or again) decades ago, and though the equipment has changed, you could also easily edit out commercials.
The only even remotely relevant argument I can see is that people who don't pay for cable/satellite can get cable/satellite programs anyway. Frankly, I think this problem lies in the lap of the service providers. Cable a la carte anyone?
I like how he complains about the GBA's 'antiquated' technology, then displays his laughable 12-battery $500+ novelty item.
Seriously, I got a big kick out of the whole thing.
Have these people played video games from before 1999?
Trade shows follow console life cycles, naturally because game development follows console life cycles.
Last year was the year of utmost stagnation for the current generation, while the years before it were still "prime" and the years following will be where companies try to hype the next machine.
Ever wanted to pick up trash in exchange for points to play mundane minigames?
Of course, if you really wanted, you could also just wander around the park in a dazed attempt to figure out where you're going or how to get somewhere else. Humanity has yet to accept this ultimate challenge.
Even with 800 delegates, if even one of them is Pauly Shore, the whole thing is buggered.
Note to moderators: I'm not sure myself if this is an insight or a cheap joke.
s/countries/Microsoft/g;
Because some of us want good time for our money. We don't want to spend $50 on a game just to forget about it a week later.
If you don't like long games, don't buy them. Hell, if you're talking about GTA: San Andreas, you shouldn't even be concerned - it's an open-ended game, you can play as little or as much as you want. But I, for one, prefer games that last.
I'm a Mac user, and somehow I still get suckered into helping a bunch of dumb people with their Windows problems. Hell, I'm the IT manager at my workplace in all but title and paycheck.
Automatically picking out highlights? Cool.
But the "political speeches will become shorter" idea scares the hell out of me. Hiding behind an "artificially" intelligent program would be the perfect way for someone to censor broadcasted information to their own ends.
Lieberman already dropped out of the race, he doesn't need more haphazard reasons to blame all the ills of sociey on video games.