given that I've had a couple problems with my gamecube, I looked into getting it fixed, since it's still under warranty, I don't have to pay a dime. offtopic, but in looking into getting my gamecube repaired, I discovered that nintendo still supports the original NES and carts for it. You have to pay for repairs, but they are fairly cheap, it's about $40 to repair an NES system, and about $10 to fix a non-working cart.
I can't say the same for any other console manufacturers, but I thought this was pretty cool.
Why would NASA kill it?
I would think if private companies put something worthwhile into space, NASA would probably just make a deal with them..
there may be some political pressures, but I would assume that NASA's main purpose these days is science, and if someone else has a better solution as to how to make it into space, they would jump on it as it saves them years of research and spending into new launch methods/vehicles.
that's just my thoughts anyway, and since i don't know what NASA's actual relationships are, or their motivations, i could and am probably severly wrong.
FPS type games i typically go with qwak, killwhity, or cracker (if i'm drunk, i just tack the word drunk in front of my name)
RPG's i tend to find an adjective that best describes the character
when playing MMORPG's i usually go with something thats in german, japanese, or spanish.
as for pokemon... well let's just say half my pokemon have the word 'fuck' in their name. I'm guilty =/
I admit I didn't think everything through when posting the above (hence the stupid thoughts and drunken opinion).
Admittedly, I do think half-life is a better game than say asteroids (was only using that game as an example, since i still enjoy playing it). The gameplay in half-life is excellent, and it's storyline was tied into the game very well, making for a very enjoyable experience.
I can also only draw from games i've had the experience of playing to base my opinions, as for doom 3, I havent checked out the alpha yet, and have only seen 1 of the earliest videos available, so I haven't seen much to make me thing it will be anything than another doom game (though I do enjoy doom/doom2 more than the quake series, so i'm hoping doom3 will blow me away) you can blame all those devs who pop on the net and hype games up only to have those games be complete garbage when released, so i don't trust anything anyone says until i've had a chance to at least play a demo or the final product)
I didn't necessarily mean that modern games renounce gameplay in favor of graphics (if thats what i said, it's not what i meant) often it seems as if the gameplay takes a lower priority in development than such things as graphics, complexity, etc.
I don't think simplicity or complexity are really the issue, as both can be good or bad, sometimes the game is made too simple (say, evil dead: a fistful of boomstick) or too complex (final fantasy 9's weapon/armor system, which fairly necessary to get through the game, but rather obnoxious)
I am not a casual gamer, however I do want the time I spend playing games to be enjoyable.
I find that the games I enjoy most tend to be simple in concept, but draw you in and challenge you as you progress. (half-life, tony hawk, metroid, ssbm, etc)
I hope I explained myself a bit better, but given that I just got out of bed, probably not;)
focuses around some geek sitting in front of 4 or 5 monitors, all running different OS's.
he spends his/her day reading news sites, posting on forums, playing games, making runs to the kitchen/bathroom (all of which are in complete disorder), and is haunted by RIAA lawyers.
I think a few more cliches could be worked in somewhere.
Re:Red Rag at a Bull....
on
Pac-Man Reloaded
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I don't think storyline is as important as gameplay, I enjoy a good "kiddie game" just as much as a more "adult themed game". It all depends on how good the gameplay is, IMO a higher proportion of early games were enjoyable than many modern games, I think this is because developers of early games had to focus more on gameplay to keep a player hooked than on story/graphics/etc. FFVII and later are a good example of this, generally not to challenging, and rehashed gameplay, but for many people great storylines (even if semi-rehashed) and great artwork.
I suppose the entire discussion of retro vs. modern in terms of games is rather inane. A good game is a good game, gameplay i think is most important, but even if the gameplay is nothing new or not too impressive as long as it is enjoyable is all that really matters.
the gameplay in half-life wasnt anything new or special, but they way they worked the story into it was, and that made for a more enjoyable experience than say quake. The final fantasy series as of late are typically interactive movies, but they do a great job of drawing the player into the story that's being told.
I think the amount of adult oriented games on the market now stems from people that got hooked on games in the 80's/early 90's are often now the ones making games, hence they cater more to themselves and their peers in terms of what kinds of games they want to play.
sorry for the fairly fragmented ideas, i'm getting ready for bed.
all the EB's around here still have atari, nes, and snes carts available...
picked up the original metroid recently for about $6, contra i think for $3
my stupid thoughts
on
Pac-Man Reloaded
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I think older games are being recognized more for their typically good gameplay as opposed to a 'retro' movement, as at least american culture tends to obsess over all things retro (just as the years progress which retro phase is chic changes, sometimes its the 70's, sometimes the 80's, sometimes the 50's etc)
many games today seem to be showing off what our technology is capable of, and often ignoring what makes a game good (I'm not saying every game to come out in modern times has poor gameplay, just that often the gameplay seems to take a sidestep to the technology used, as much as i'm looking forward to doom 3, at the moment it still looks like the original doom in terms of gameplay).
early games didnt have as much to show off technologically, people didnt play asteroids because it looked incredible or was completely immersive, they played it because it was simple fun.
then again, maybe i just didnt notice any of the really crappy games back in the early 80's because i was too young to notice them/shrug
though I think the signifigance of gaming is different now than it was then, more and more we're moving to online games, be they MMOG's, or simple match based games (quake, counter-strike, etc) where the human element is often more important than the game itself.
Slashdot Mirror
given that I've had a couple problems with my gamecube, I looked into getting it fixed, since it's still under warranty, I don't have to pay a dime. offtopic, but in looking into getting my gamecube repaired, I discovered that nintendo still supports the original NES and carts for it. You have to pay for repairs, but they are fairly cheap, it's about $40 to repair an NES system, and about $10 to fix a non-working cart. I can't say the same for any other console manufacturers, but I thought this was pretty cool.
Why would NASA kill it? I would think if private companies put something worthwhile into space, NASA would probably just make a deal with them.. there may be some political pressures, but I would assume that NASA's main purpose these days is science, and if someone else has a better solution as to how to make it into space, they would jump on it as it saves them years of research and spending into new launch methods/vehicles. that's just my thoughts anyway, and since i don't know what NASA's actual relationships are, or their motivations, i could and am probably severly wrong.
FPS type games i typically go with qwak, killwhity, or cracker (if i'm drunk, i just tack the word drunk in front of my name) RPG's i tend to find an adjective that best describes the character when playing MMORPG's i usually go with something thats in german, japanese, or spanish. as for pokemon... well let's just say half my pokemon have the word 'fuck' in their name. I'm guilty =/
I admit I didn't think everything through when posting the above (hence the stupid thoughts and drunken opinion). Admittedly, I do think half-life is a better game than say asteroids (was only using that game as an example, since i still enjoy playing it). The gameplay in half-life is excellent, and it's storyline was tied into the game very well, making for a very enjoyable experience. I can also only draw from games i've had the experience of playing to base my opinions, as for doom 3, I havent checked out the alpha yet, and have only seen 1 of the earliest videos available, so I haven't seen much to make me thing it will be anything than another doom game (though I do enjoy doom/doom2 more than the quake series, so i'm hoping doom3 will blow me away) you can blame all those devs who pop on the net and hype games up only to have those games be complete garbage when released, so i don't trust anything anyone says until i've had a chance to at least play a demo or the final product) I didn't necessarily mean that modern games renounce gameplay in favor of graphics (if thats what i said, it's not what i meant) often it seems as if the gameplay takes a lower priority in development than such things as graphics, complexity, etc. I don't think simplicity or complexity are really the issue, as both can be good or bad, sometimes the game is made too simple (say, evil dead: a fistful of boomstick) or too complex (final fantasy 9's weapon/armor system, which fairly necessary to get through the game, but rather obnoxious) I am not a casual gamer, however I do want the time I spend playing games to be enjoyable. I find that the games I enjoy most tend to be simple in concept, but draw you in and challenge you as you progress. (half-life, tony hawk, metroid, ssbm, etc) I hope I explained myself a bit better, but given that I just got out of bed, probably not ;)
focuses around some geek sitting in front of 4 or 5 monitors, all running different OS's. he spends his/her day reading news sites, posting on forums, playing games, making runs to the kitchen/bathroom (all of which are in complete disorder), and is haunted by RIAA lawyers. I think a few more cliches could be worked in somewhere.
I don't think storyline is as important as gameplay, I enjoy a good "kiddie game" just as much as a more "adult themed game". It all depends on how good the gameplay is, IMO a higher proportion of early games were enjoyable than many modern games, I think this is because developers of early games had to focus more on gameplay to keep a player hooked than on story/graphics/etc. FFVII and later are a good example of this, generally not to challenging, and rehashed gameplay, but for many people great storylines (even if semi-rehashed) and great artwork. I suppose the entire discussion of retro vs. modern in terms of games is rather inane. A good game is a good game, gameplay i think is most important, but even if the gameplay is nothing new or not too impressive as long as it is enjoyable is all that really matters. the gameplay in half-life wasnt anything new or special, but they way they worked the story into it was, and that made for a more enjoyable experience than say quake. The final fantasy series as of late are typically interactive movies, but they do a great job of drawing the player into the story that's being told. I think the amount of adult oriented games on the market now stems from people that got hooked on games in the 80's/early 90's are often now the ones making games, hence they cater more to themselves and their peers in terms of what kinds of games they want to play. sorry for the fairly fragmented ideas, i'm getting ready for bed.
need a mod for this where you find bites on your body and apply ointment to them... still working on treating the mass of bites i got earlier today.
all the EB's around here still have atari, nes, and snes carts available... picked up the original metroid recently for about $6, contra i think for $3
I think older games are being recognized more for their typically good gameplay as opposed to a 'retro' movement, as at least american culture tends to obsess over all things retro (just as the years progress which retro phase is chic changes, sometimes its the 70's, sometimes the 80's, sometimes the 50's etc)
/shrug
many games today seem to be showing off what our technology is capable of, and often ignoring what makes a game good (I'm not saying every game to come out in modern times has poor gameplay, just that often the gameplay seems to take a sidestep to the technology used, as much as i'm looking forward to doom 3, at the moment it still looks like the original doom in terms of gameplay).
early games didnt have as much to show off technologically, people didnt play asteroids because it looked incredible or was completely immersive, they played it because it was simple fun.
then again, maybe i just didnt notice any of the really crappy games back in the early 80's because i was too young to notice them
though I think the signifigance of gaming is different now than it was then, more and more we're moving to online games, be they MMOG's, or simple match based games (quake, counter-strike, etc) where the human element is often more important than the game itself.
at least thats my drunken opinion.