Me speak english good (teaches me to post while working). I meant to say: Between hardware and software, they've got a potentially HUGE cash cow on their hands."
UMD was all but stillborn as a format. They've got no real reason to keep supporting it, especially considering that doing so with a standalone player will just add competition for Blu-Ray discs.
It's been obvious the PS3 is Sony's trojan horse for Blu-Ray since they accounced that the it will use the format. Gaming may be profitable, but becoming the standard format for movies and possibly data is several orders of magnitude more profitable. Between hardware and HUGE cash cow on their hands.
You can do that? By this point I think I'd shrivel up and die, since there's probably more caffiene than blood in my body.
Re:Nintendo's Wii akin to Chevrolet's Nova?
on
Both Sides of Wii
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Note that the article you linked to says that the Power Glove was made by Mattel not Nintendo. Also note that almost two decades of technological advancements separate the Power Glove and the Wii (ugh- I like the idea of the system, but the name still sounds dumb to me). The Power Glove had limited potential largely because of technology: first off, a 3D controller doesn't make sense on a system with only 2D capabilities; secondly, RF and motion sensing technology has come a long way since then. Things should be a lot more interesting this time around.
That's your average game-obsessed message board dork in a nutshell: the petty tyrant of a tiny little niche of the Internet but a failure in real life.
Says the man who A) reviews 7 year-old games B) uses them to insult people.
One would argue that if you had gone with an AMD system, the processor would've been cheap enough for you to have just bought the better processor in the first place.
Contrary to polular belief, Nintendo did not make the Power Glove. That was Mattel. Also the Zapper and R.O.B. were part of an effort to make people think of the NES as something other than a video game system. Nintendo needed to disassociate itself from the all too recent video game crash.
BUT Nintendo is notorius for taking an old concept and revamping.
Nintendo's also known for innovation in its hardware. With the Game & Watch Nintendo invented the D-pad, and introduced it to the home console with the NES/Famicom. Then they introduced the analog stick with the N64 (albeit in a bizarrey shaped controller). With the Gamecube they created the "digital click" which, though largely unused, was a very nice compromise between digital and analog shoulder buttons (for a good use of this feature see Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes). And now, with the DS, they've introduced all kinds of interesting possibilitied with the touchscreen (not their invention, but it's a first in consoles). There are games for the DS that simply CAN NOT be reroduced with a standard controller, such as Yoshi Touch & Go and Kirby's Canvas Curse. Then there are interesting side-notes, like the gyroscopic controls in Kirby Tilt & Tumble.
Furthermore, you complain all you want about Nintendo's stable of franchises, but they do innovate a lot within the confines of said IP. For a classic example, look at Mario 64- it's basically the template from which all other 3D platformers are drawn. Also take a look at Super Smash Bros.- character-wise it's the epitome of Nintendo's franchise-itis: it's nothing but old Nintendo franchises stuffed into a fighting game. Pokemon, But, when you look beyond that, you'll find a fighting game that's hugely different from just about any other on the market. Pokemon, hated as it is by insecure teens, is another great example of innovation. It's a variation on the standard RPG formula, but it veers sharply from mand of the standards/cliches of the genre with wildly entertaining results. Finally, the Kirby titles in the previous paragraph also serve as a good example- the little puffball's had at least 4 different control schemes.
I wouldn't say that Nintendo's reliance on fanchises is a case of laziness. It demonstrates an understanding of the power and recognizability that such old standards can have. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that it's a testament to the power of Nintendo's innovation. You don't create such strong brands by simply doing the same thing over. You do it by making something new and different that sticks with people.
Aside from making the game prettier, how much would physics actually help the game? All those calculations are expensive (be it in CPU power, or in actual dollers in the case of a dedicated physics unit) for the fact that they don't do much for the game itself. Sure it'd help with the sense of immersion, but we just had a story ealier today about how much better HL was than HL2 despite its lack of gee whiz physics or the latest in graphics technology. You have to think in terms of how much bang you get for your buck.
If you want a clear cut example of technology over substance, take a look at Deus Ex versus its sequel. I loved Deus Ex, but I'll be the first to admit that it's one hell of an ugly game. But that's made up for in spades by huge environments, innovative gameplay, and fantastic level design. By comparison, Deus Ex 2 was a veritable tour de force of technology- realtime shadows and physics made the game quite nice to look at (provided you had the horsepower to run it at higher than 800x600). The game, though, was a pale shadow of its predecessor- the levels were tiny, the gameplay had been oversimplified, and the level design was nowhere near as good. The basiscs made the first game great, not the extras.
Oblivion is by all accounts (I haven't played it myself) a great game. I've seen it played, and it doesn't look like physics would actually change the gameplay all that much, just add extra eye candy. Would all kinds of real time physics make the game better? Maybe. Would the difference be enough to account for the extra cost in both hardware and development time? Probably not.
Virtualization won't help any more than dual booting- especially if gaming is the killer app of gaming on a Mac. The performance hit of running not only two OSes, but a virtual environment would be too much, especially considering how demanding modern games are.
"I was the longest holdout for the crank being on the laptop. I was wrong," he said, adding, "If you're a 10-year-old, maybe you can get your four-year-old to pedal for you."
Kids are getting pregnant younger and younger these days...
Not really. Microsoft Games is trying to disentangle itself from the idea that the Xbox is just a PC that you can hook up to your TV (which is 100% true with the original, as we all know, but not quite so much with the 360). Ironically enough, though, Sony is striving for exact image MS Games has divorced itself from, and has failed just as thoroughly in that aim- perhaps even moreso. The Xbox has some cachet as a gaming system now, but Sony's PC-like addons for the PS2 have largely flopped (the Linux kit excluded, because it's such a niche product).
It's not so much activism, as realizing the slippery slope that censorship like this creates. As soon as you declare one medium as exempt from free speech protection, it becomes that much easier to extend the restriction to others.
Slashdot Mirror
Me speak english good (teaches me to post while working). I meant to say: Between hardware and software, they've got a potentially HUGE cash cow on their hands."
UMD was all but stillborn as a format. They've got no real reason to keep supporting it, especially considering that doing so with a standalone player will just add competition for Blu-Ray discs.
It's been obvious the PS3 is Sony's trojan horse for Blu-Ray since they accounced that the it will use the format. Gaming may be profitable, but becoming the standard format for movies and possibly data is several orders of magnitude more profitable. Between hardware and HUGE cash cow on their hands.
I gave up caffine a few months ago
You can do that? By this point I think I'd shrivel up and die, since there's probably more caffiene than blood in my body.
Note that the article you linked to says that the Power Glove was made by Mattel not Nintendo. Also note that almost two decades of technological advancements separate the Power Glove and the Wii (ugh- I like the idea of the system, but the name still sounds dumb to me). The Power Glove had limited potential largely because of technology: first off, a 3D controller doesn't make sense on a system with only 2D capabilities; secondly, RF and motion sensing technology has come a long way since then. Things should be a lot more interesting this time around.
That's your average game-obsessed message board dork in a nutshell: the petty tyrant of a tiny little niche of the Internet but a failure in real life.
Says the man who A) reviews 7 year-old games B) uses them to insult people.
One would argue that if you had gone with an AMD system, the processor would've been cheap enough for you to have just bought the better processor in the first place.
Is it really worth it to be an AMD processor with a DDR2 memory controller?
Well, it's certainly easier than my old dream of being an astronaut...
Yes, ripping off Taito with ugly graphics took loads of creativity.
Not yet. Microsoft's DRM is akin to trusted computing- only signed code runs, so there's no way to get a virus to run.
Contrary to polular belief, Nintendo did not make the Power Glove. That was Mattel. Also the Zapper and R.O.B. were part of an effort to make people think of the NES as something other than a video game system. Nintendo needed to disassociate itself from the all too recent video game crash.
Are you a slashdotter, or just a little I-curious?
Let my post be a lesson to you, kids: always proofread before you hit "submit".
BUT Nintendo is notorius for taking an old concept and revamping.
Nintendo's also known for innovation in its hardware. With the Game & Watch Nintendo invented the D-pad, and introduced it to the home console with the NES/Famicom. Then they introduced the analog stick with the N64 (albeit in a bizarrey shaped controller). With the Gamecube they created the "digital click" which, though largely unused, was a very nice compromise between digital and analog shoulder buttons (for a good use of this feature see Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes). And now, with the DS, they've introduced all kinds of interesting possibilitied with the touchscreen (not their invention, but it's a first in consoles). There are games for the DS that simply CAN NOT be reroduced with a standard controller, such as Yoshi Touch & Go and Kirby's Canvas Curse. Then there are interesting side-notes, like the gyroscopic controls in Kirby Tilt & Tumble.
Furthermore, you complain all you want about Nintendo's stable of franchises, but they do innovate a lot within the confines of said IP. For a classic example, look at Mario 64- it's basically the template from which all other 3D platformers are drawn. Also take a look at Super Smash Bros.- character-wise it's the epitome of Nintendo's franchise-itis: it's nothing but old Nintendo franchises stuffed into a fighting game. Pokemon, But, when you look beyond that, you'll find a fighting game that's hugely different from just about any other on the market. Pokemon, hated as it is by insecure teens, is another great example of innovation. It's a variation on the standard RPG formula, but it veers sharply from mand of the standards/cliches of the genre with wildly entertaining results. Finally, the Kirby titles in the previous paragraph also serve as a good example- the little puffball's had at least 4 different control schemes.
I wouldn't say that Nintendo's reliance on fanchises is a case of laziness. It demonstrates an understanding of the power and recognizability that such old standards can have. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that it's a testament to the power of Nintendo's innovation. You don't create such strong brands by simply doing the same thing over. You do it by making something new and different that sticks with people.
This is a brave new world you describe, sir.
[...]who needs to seriously curb the usage of his hands.
Lest they... *ahem* wander.
Aside from making the game prettier, how much would physics actually help the game? All those calculations are expensive (be it in CPU power, or in actual dollers in the case of a dedicated physics unit) for the fact that they don't do much for the game itself. Sure it'd help with the sense of immersion, but we just had a story ealier today about how much better HL was than HL2 despite its lack of gee whiz physics or the latest in graphics technology. You have to think in terms of how much bang you get for your buck.
If you want a clear cut example of technology over substance, take a look at Deus Ex versus its sequel. I loved Deus Ex, but I'll be the first to admit that it's one hell of an ugly game. But that's made up for in spades by huge environments, innovative gameplay, and fantastic level design. By comparison, Deus Ex 2 was a veritable tour de force of technology- realtime shadows and physics made the game quite nice to look at (provided you had the horsepower to run it at higher than 800x600). The game, though, was a pale shadow of its predecessor- the levels were tiny, the gameplay had been oversimplified, and the level design was nowhere near as good. The basiscs made the first game great, not the extras.
Oblivion is by all accounts (I haven't played it myself) a great game. I've seen it played, and it doesn't look like physics would actually change the gameplay all that much, just add extra eye candy. Would all kinds of real time physics make the game better? Maybe. Would the difference be enough to account for the extra cost in both hardware and development time? Probably not.
Virtualization won't help any more than dual booting- especially if gaming is the killer app of gaming on a Mac. The performance hit of running not only two OSes, but a virtual environment would be too much, especially considering how demanding modern games are.
"I was the longest holdout for the crank being on the laptop. I was wrong," he said, adding, "If you're a 10-year-old, maybe you can get your four-year-old to pedal for you."
Kids are getting pregnant younger and younger these days...
You forgot the "Laugh, it's funny" logo.
Not really. Microsoft Games is trying to disentangle itself from the idea that the Xbox is just a PC that you can hook up to your TV (which is 100% true with the original, as we all know, but not quite so much with the 360). Ironically enough, though, Sony is striving for exact image MS Games has divorced itself from, and has failed just as thoroughly in that aim- perhaps even moreso. The Xbox has some cachet as a gaming system now, but Sony's PC-like addons for the PS2 have largely flopped (the Linux kit excluded, because it's such a niche product).
UK £739 million = US $1.28586 billion = ¥151.229965 billion.
Weird as that is, you can't blame this currency cornucopia on the author of the write-up. Those are the numbers quoted in the article.
It's not so much activism, as realizing the slippery slope that censorship like this creates. As soon as you declare one medium as exempt from free speech protection, it becomes that much easier to extend the restriction to others.
or Granny's Panties 7
Remind me to stay the hell away from your DVD collection.