He was also likely a Jew. That was what made his crusade to purge the world of anyone that wasn't blonde haired and blue eyed so ironic. You might wanna look that word up. Rather than objecting to it, he started it, and then just excluded himself from the list of people to be shot.
As a former register monkey, I was the one moving the product. Do you think the store manager of BestBuy or Circuit City has time to discuss gaming with customers? They have a store to run. GameStop or EB, sure, the store is the games, but the bigger stores live and die by their register monkeys in the games departments. My store, and the game publishers, benefit a lot more by me being excited about a game coming out than by the store manager being excited. I'm the one who answers the "What's new? What's good? What should I buy questions?" If I like your product, I'll reccomend it.
I went to E3 in a different capacity, though, and I will say that if you haven't made plans in advance (which the whiner in the article obviously hadn't), there isn't much to E3. This was my first one, and aside from a stack of useful business cards, I didn't get to really accomplish anything I thought I might be able to do. At the same time, it was my own fault. It's the busiest time of the year for the marketing and promotional people who I needed to talk to, and I never once expected that I could just walk up to a booth and talk to the bigwigs.
Advice to the author/whiner: Plan ahead next time, dipshit.
He didn't buy it. Or if he did, he didn't bother to delete the pirated copy on his hard drive. Check out screenshot 2 in the article.
Re:lack of backwards compatibility?
on
EA's Plans for Xbox 2
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Exactly. That's probably one of the dumbest statements I've read in the teasers. The real reason they're going to make new games for both Xbox and Xbox 2 is that, (here's a shocker) not everyone is going to buy an Xbox 2 at launch. Imagine that! The thing'll probably be $300-400 at launch, possibly more if they think they can get away with it, and I know I'm not going to buy it untill a couple of price drops happen.
So don't pay it. If they have to charge $70 for (what will probably be no more than) a roster update to make their money back, and consumers say "Hell no, I'm not paying that," then EA, the NFL, ESPN and all the rest lose money on their ridiculous licensing deals. If that happens, I guarantee ESPN and the NFL will be looking for loopholes in their contracts. I doubt it will, though, because consumers have just gotta have their new sports games, even if it means nothing more than a few name changes.
1. Burgare > Burglar > Burglarize definitely seems the simpler progression to me. Adding -ize or -ise to a word is a common way of creating new verbs, whether humorous or otherwise. To create burgle from burglar, you're having to rework the word into a form that does not sound natural, considering it's origins. Since "burglar" came first, the easiest way to connect the noun to the verb is to add a common suffix to the word which can be easily recognized, not to remove letters, changing the entire word.
2. I only used the resource that you originally quoted, namely Dictionary.com. You ignored the reference to the OED, and instead went with a website's offerings instead, and so, to ensure fair comparisons, I used your same source. Unlike you, I also included the actual dictionary's names for further reference points, as well. If you don't like that Dictionary.com is American-centric, then 1) point to another web reference, and I'll use that instead, and 2) don't complain when your original reference site turns against you.
3. As already mentioned to you, but ignored, the OED has burgle appearing the year after burglarize, in 1872. Whatever the reason for burgle's rise to popularity, be it anti-American sentiment at the time or whatever, it's had more than 130 years to take hold as common usage. Consequently, no, -ise vs. -ize has no place in this argument, except as an attempt to divert from the real point.
And to respond to a later argument, Canada gained independence in 1867, burgle appeared in 1872. I hardly think 5 years is enough time to honestly allow for a country to complete shed all ties to it's former homeland. I mean, Canadian money still has the Queen on it. They may be independent, but that doesn't mean they're completely seperate. The same goes for Australia, especially considering the region of the world it's in.
As for the last line of your comment, I'll quote you twice.
Quote 1:And, yes, I did just write "spelt",: it's like "slept", "dreamt", "felt", etc; only Americans insist on using "spelled".
Quote 2:(Funny but it's not me who's blowing someone off with pithy comments or one-liners here, is it?)
Hypocritize much?
(Notice, how by adding -ize to hypocrite, I made it a verb, albeit a poor one, not in the dictionary. According to your logic (i.e. remove the part of the word which makes it a noun and replace that with the verb forming silent -e), it would be easier, and make more sense, to say "Hypocre much." Right.)
From (US-centric) Dictionary.com's entry for burglar..... from burgare, to commit burglary in
In other words, "burgle" is not a back-formation of burglar, as your originally wrote, but is derived from the Medieval Latin verb "burgare".
No, burgle is not a derivation of burgare, burglar is. Your quote states that. Consequently, if burgare became burglar then burglarize is just as likely to have developed before hand than burgle.
Now, if you look up burgle on Dictionary.com, you will find this:
burgle(bûrgl)
tr. & intr.v. burgled, burgling, burgles
To burglarize.
[Back-formation from burglar.]
It's the first definition, from the American Heritage Dictionary. The second definition, from Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, does not even give a definition, it just references to burglarize.
Also, your -ize vs. -ise has about as much relevance to the conversation as whether color should have a u in it.
he and his crew played the shit out of Halo multiplayer
You just invalidated your point. The PA crew did play the shit out of multiplayer, but as the parent post stated, they didn't like the single player campaign. Hyperbole or not, they didn't even enjoy the co-op campaign (which is the point of the comic).
My biggest beef with all the fanboyism and rave reviews about Halo, and now Halo 2 is that they're almost always entirely based upon multiplayer. There are a few people now and again that claim to love the single player campaign, and that's fine, and there are also those people that openly admit they only play games for the multiplayer aspect, and that's fine as well, but all of the hype around the Halo series is WAY out of hand.
This game is hyped as being the best ever, but a title only deserves that moniker if all aspects of it's execution are pulled off flawlessly, and both Halos are not flawless.
On a side note, what about the other huge game release of the season: GTA:SA? I read that first WEEK sales were expected to top 5 million. Why do we hear constant updates on Halo's progress, but nothing about the competition. I find it odd that the Halo series, having sold 10 million copies in two years is somehow trumpeted as proof that videogames have come into their own, while the first two GTAs have sold more than twice that, with only one extra year, and no data on San Andreas's sales, and the only thing that series gets is shit from all sides about objectionable content.
If one isn't planning to use any of that, it offers them zero value.
If one isn't planning to use any of that, then why would one decide to buy a PowerMac in the first place? And if one bought it solely for the G5 inside, then one shouldn't complain that one's not making full use of one's computer.
I find it ironic that the "odd maternity theme" comic was originally about eating too much Japanese candy. Add in the fact that the remake has a decidedly Jerry Springer feel to it, and you've got some funky coincidences riding around out there in the ether.
Your face isn't scanned by the EyeToy. You have to take a picture of yourself with a digital camera and then e-mail that to Activision. They make a map for the game, and then you download it using the network adapter. THUG released before the EyeToy.
There's a game out already that does this sort of thing, only I believe the technology is all built by the developer, no third party economic software. It's called Second Life, and people create content and can then sell it for game money, although last I looked into it, they're actually implementing a system that will translate game money in real money, if you choose.
I can see EverQuest, or FFXI making use of something like this. Instead of just trading items, or dealing constantly with NPC shop keepers, you'd have a real time system in place for buying and selling from other players, using the game's money (be it gold, gil, credits, whatever). That way, time you invest in the game (thus time you pay for by way of the monthly fee) doesn't entirely go to waste. That twelve bucks a month, if used properly, can get you exclusive stuff, and while this is more of a hardcore player option, the people that really get into MMORPGs are weighted to the hardcore side anyway.
All in all, not a terrible idea, provided there's not some kind of real money fee attached to its use.
all you had to do was squeeze it, and it would break the cell phone's connection.
I was wondering about this... about the feasability of some kind of intermittent jammer. This seems like it would be a kind of halfway point between no action and "shove it where the sun don't shine" tactics. If you could turn it on, kill the connection, and then turn it off, seems like it'd be nigh-untraceable. Plus, most people I've seen, when the connection dies, They go elsewhere in search of better reception.
At that point, the movie theater or dinner or (heaven help us all) funeral problems would be solved. At the same time, doctors, lawyers and "gotta be available for fear the world might end if I'm not" sysadmins would still be able to see who's calling and take appropriate action.
Ahhhhh.... but the problem is, this man doesn't have that much money lying around..... You'd be surprised how easily one can survive without food.... Those aren't hunger pangs, they're- Look! A flying three legged pig! Now what were we talking about?
Mmmmmm.... Calvinball.... We need a game based on Calvinball.... Dynamic rules management, malleable environments, a variety stuffed animals and fight scenes.... Oh yeah....
I bit my tongue and held out for the extended Fellowship set, then couldn't wait any longer for Two Towers and bought the theatrical version on DVD as soon as it came out. I also then bought the extended version as well. I'm actually looking forward to buying both versions of Return of the King and have this aching need to buy the theatrical Fellowship, and the thought of one giant compilation is a prospect too fascinating to pass up. Since I'm not whining, what does that make me?
And yet look at those titles that got lost like Beyond Good & Evil that still got lost in the shuffle and didn't sell until companies started clearing them out at 10 bucks a pop. Granted, that's when I bought it, though had I had fifty bucks when it came out, I would have bought it.
You don't suppose this could be because of the Christmas glut, do you? How many good games come out in those months? By April, the games that released before Christmas have all sold down, and those (potentially) good ones that couldn't make the mid-December ship date have been pushed back their customary month or two (Baldur's Gate 2, Bond: Everything or Nothing, Rise to Honor, etc.) have also sold down. Of course April, May and June will be slow months.
I mean, even Hollywood's six month cycle (summer action blockbusters and winter Oscar contenders) is a better model than three or four months of insanity broken up by eight or nine months of comparatively nothing.
You don't actually put items on the dock. When you drag something to the dock, it makes an alias, instead of putting the actual file or app on the dock. So, to have items from the dock put on the desktop or elsewhere, you're just putting the alias there, not the file.
It's not so much that it doesn't hold a thousand songs as it's really not worth the price. The typical MP3 file in my collection is compressed at 128 kbps, which works out to a meg a minute. So, for a hundred bucks, you get 2 hours of music. I don't see the benefit. Even if you don't go with a more expensive MP3 player, get an MP3 CD player. Fifty bucks for the player, twenty bucks for fifty CDs. 700 Megs a CD, 35000 megs total, and all you're sacrificing is a bit of size and the potential for skippage. There are just better options out there in terms of storage capacity and value.
As much of a Mac zealot as I am, I can't help but feel that they're charging way too much for the iPod mini. $250??? Working retail, I know people don't really pay attention to anything but price. I can't count the number of times I've had to explain to people why they really don't want to pay $100 for 128Mb of MP3 player. And while I reccomend iPods, even if they buy some other hard drive based player, I feel I've accomplished something. The idea of breaking into the lower end spectrum of players is great, but "Look, it's only $50 more" is not competitive.
Of course, even as I say this, the green one has enamored my wife (who already ones a 10 Gb iPod) and I've no doubt that the size will attract many. I just think that Apple could have blown the market away by at least going down to $200. That would have left a distinguishable, consumer-noticeable difference between their products.
The key here is that it's been going on for years. If something bad was really going to come of all this, I'm sure Leiberman would have managed to get something pushed through when he was on his soap box back when. What these legislators and reporters and everyone else who jumps on this bandwagon fails to realize is that gaming is no longer a niche thing. It's not some kind of nerd's only area with no voice. The industry makes more money than Hollywood, and if it doesn't have a voice yet, it will, and will as soon as one of these quits being an idle threat and attention getter and starts being taken seriously, which I don't think this will be. I mean, if Columbine couldn't cause any major shifts in the way games are sold, even just in Colorado (where I live), it'll take a lot for me to believe this will do much.
Slashdot Mirror
He was also likely a Jew. That was what made his crusade to purge the world of anyone that wasn't blonde haired and blue eyed so ironic. You might wanna look that word up. Rather than objecting to it, he started it, and then just excluded himself from the list of people to be shot.
I went to E3 in a different capacity, though, and I will say that if you haven't made plans in advance (which the whiner in the article obviously hadn't), there isn't much to E3. This was my first one, and aside from a stack of useful business cards, I didn't get to really accomplish anything I thought I might be able to do. At the same time, it was my own fault. It's the busiest time of the year for the marketing and promotional people who I needed to talk to, and I never once expected that I could just walk up to a booth and talk to the bigwigs.
Advice to the author/whiner: Plan ahead next time, dipshit.
He didn't buy it. Or if he did, he didn't bother to delete the pirated copy on his hard drive. Check out screenshot 2 in the article.
Exactly. That's probably one of the dumbest statements I've read in the teasers. The real reason they're going to make new games for both Xbox and Xbox 2 is that, (here's a shocker) not everyone is going to buy an Xbox 2 at launch. Imagine that! The thing'll probably be $300-400 at launch, possibly more if they think they can get away with it, and I know I'm not going to buy it untill a couple of price drops happen.
So don't pay it. If they have to charge $70 for (what will probably be no more than) a roster update to make their money back, and consumers say "Hell no, I'm not paying that," then EA, the NFL, ESPN and all the rest lose money on their ridiculous licensing deals. If that happens, I guarantee ESPN and the NFL will be looking for loopholes in their contracts. I doubt it will, though, because consumers have just gotta have their new sports games, even if it means nothing more than a few name changes.
2. I only used the resource that you originally quoted, namely Dictionary.com. You ignored the reference to the OED, and instead went with a website's offerings instead, and so, to ensure fair comparisons, I used your same source. Unlike you, I also included the actual dictionary's names for further reference points, as well. If you don't like that Dictionary.com is American-centric, then 1) point to another web reference, and I'll use that instead, and 2) don't complain when your original reference site turns against you.
3. As already mentioned to you, but ignored, the OED has burgle appearing the year after burglarize, in 1872. Whatever the reason for burgle's rise to popularity, be it anti-American sentiment at the time or whatever, it's had more than 130 years to take hold as common usage. Consequently, no, -ise vs. -ize has no place in this argument, except as an attempt to divert from the real point.
And to respond to a later argument, Canada gained independence in 1867, burgle appeared in 1872. I hardly think 5 years is enough time to honestly allow for a country to complete shed all ties to it's former homeland. I mean, Canadian money still has the Queen on it. They may be independent, but that doesn't mean they're completely seperate. The same goes for Australia, especially considering the region of the world it's in.
As for the last line of your comment, I'll quote you twice.
Quote 1:And, yes, I did just write "spelt",: it's like "slept", "dreamt", "felt", etc; only Americans insist on using "spelled".
Quote 2:(Funny but it's not me who's blowing someone off with pithy comments or one-liners here, is it?)
Hypocritize much?
(Notice, how by adding -ize to hypocrite, I made it a verb, albeit a poor one, not in the dictionary. According to your logic (i.e. remove the part of the word which makes it a noun and replace that with the verb forming silent -e), it would be easier, and make more sense, to say "Hypocre much." Right.)
In other words, "burgle" is not a back-formation of burglar, as your originally wrote, but is derived from the Medieval Latin verb "burgare".
No, burgle is not a derivation of burgare, burglar is. Your quote states that. Consequently, if burgare became burglar then burglarize is just as likely to have developed before hand than burgle.
Now, if you look up burgle on Dictionary.com, you will find this:
It's the first definition, from the American Heritage Dictionary. The second definition, from Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, does not even give a definition, it just references to burglarize.Also, your -ize vs. -ise has about as much relevance to the conversation as whether color should have a u in it.
You just invalidated your point. The PA crew did play the shit out of multiplayer, but as the parent post stated, they didn't like the single player campaign. Hyperbole or not, they didn't even enjoy the co-op campaign (which is the point of the comic).
My biggest beef with all the fanboyism and rave reviews about Halo, and now Halo 2 is that they're almost always entirely based upon multiplayer. There are a few people now and again that claim to love the single player campaign, and that's fine, and there are also those people that openly admit they only play games for the multiplayer aspect, and that's fine as well, but all of the hype around the Halo series is WAY out of hand.
This game is hyped as being the best ever, but a title only deserves that moniker if all aspects of it's execution are pulled off flawlessly, and both Halos are not flawless.
On a side note, what about the other huge game release of the season: GTA:SA? I read that first WEEK sales were expected to top 5 million. Why do we hear constant updates on Halo's progress, but nothing about the competition. I find it odd that the Halo series, having sold 10 million copies in two years is somehow trumpeted as proof that videogames have come into their own, while the first two GTAs have sold more than twice that, with only one extra year, and no data on San Andreas's sales, and the only thing that series gets is shit from all sides about objectionable content.
If one isn't planning to use any of that, then why would one decide to buy a PowerMac in the first place? And if one bought it solely for the G5 inside, then one shouldn't complain that one's not making full use of one's computer.
I got a key right away, and I used a free login that I'd forgotten I had.
I find it ironic that the "odd maternity theme" comic was originally about eating too much Japanese candy. Add in the fact that the remake has a decidedly Jerry Springer feel to it, and you've got some funky coincidences riding around out there in the ether.
Your face isn't scanned by the EyeToy. You have to take a picture of yourself with a digital camera and then e-mail that to Activision. They make a map for the game, and then you download it using the network adapter. THUG released before the EyeToy.
I can see EverQuest, or FFXI making use of something like this. Instead of just trading items, or dealing constantly with NPC shop keepers, you'd have a real time system in place for buying and selling from other players, using the game's money (be it gold, gil, credits, whatever). That way, time you invest in the game (thus time you pay for by way of the monthly fee) doesn't entirely go to waste. That twelve bucks a month, if used properly, can get you exclusive stuff, and while this is more of a hardcore player option, the people that really get into MMORPGs are weighted to the hardcore side anyway.
All in all, not a terrible idea, provided there's not some kind of real money fee attached to its use.
I was wondering about this... about the feasability of some kind of intermittent jammer. This seems like it would be a kind of halfway point between no action and "shove it where the sun don't shine" tactics. If you could turn it on, kill the connection, and then turn it off, seems like it'd be nigh-untraceable. Plus, most people I've seen, when the connection dies, They go elsewhere in search of better reception.
At that point, the movie theater or dinner or (heaven help us all) funeral problems would be solved. At the same time, doctors, lawyers and "gotta be available for fear the world might end if I'm not" sysadmins would still be able to see who's calling and take appropriate action.
Ahhhhh.... but the problem is, this man doesn't have that much money lying around..... You'd be surprised how easily one can survive without food.... Those aren't hunger pangs, they're- Look! A flying three legged pig! Now what were we talking about?
Mmmmmm.... Calvinball.... We need a game based on Calvinball.... Dynamic rules management, malleable environments, a variety stuffed animals and fight scenes.... Oh yeah....
I bit my tongue and held out for the extended Fellowship set, then couldn't wait any longer for Two Towers and bought the theatrical version on DVD as soon as it came out. I also then bought the extended version as well. I'm actually looking forward to buying both versions of Return of the King and have this aching need to buy the theatrical Fellowship, and the thought of one giant compilation is a prospect too fascinating to pass up. Since I'm not whining, what does that make me?
Gigli might be good, although nobody has even shoplifted a copy from my store.
And yet look at those titles that got lost like Beyond Good & Evil that still got lost in the shuffle and didn't sell until companies started clearing them out at 10 bucks a pop. Granted, that's when I bought it, though had I had fifty bucks when it came out, I would have bought it.
You don't suppose this could be because of the Christmas glut, do you? How many good games come out in those months? By April, the games that released before Christmas have all sold down, and those (potentially) good ones that couldn't make the mid-December ship date have been pushed back their customary month or two (Baldur's Gate 2, Bond: Everything or Nothing, Rise to Honor, etc.) have also sold down. Of course April, May and June will be slow months.
I mean, even Hollywood's six month cycle (summer action blockbusters and winter Oscar contenders) is a better model than three or four months of insanity broken up by eight or nine months of comparatively nothing.
You don't actually put items on the dock. When you drag something to the dock, it makes an alias, instead of putting the actual file or app on the dock. So, to have items from the dock put on the desktop or elsewhere, you're just putting the alias there, not the file.
It's not so much that it doesn't hold a thousand songs as it's really not worth the price. The typical MP3 file in my collection is compressed at 128 kbps, which works out to a meg a minute. So, for a hundred bucks, you get 2 hours of music. I don't see the benefit. Even if you don't go with a more expensive MP3 player, get an MP3 CD player. Fifty bucks for the player, twenty bucks for fifty CDs. 700 Megs a CD, 35000 megs total, and all you're sacrificing is a bit of size and the potential for skippage. There are just better options out there in terms of storage capacity and value.
There is no Boston Expo. Apple officially pulled out of it months ago.
As much of a Mac zealot as I am, I can't help but feel that they're charging way too much for the iPod mini. $250??? Working retail, I know people don't really pay attention to anything but price. I can't count the number of times I've had to explain to people why they really don't want to pay $100 for 128Mb of MP3 player. And while I reccomend iPods, even if they buy some other hard drive based player, I feel I've accomplished something. The idea of breaking into the lower end spectrum of players is great, but "Look, it's only $50 more" is not competitive. Of course, even as I say this, the green one has enamored my wife (who already ones a 10 Gb iPod) and I've no doubt that the size will attract many. I just think that Apple could have blown the market away by at least going down to $200. That would have left a distinguishable, consumer-noticeable difference between their products.
The key here is that it's been going on for years. If something bad was really going to come of all this, I'm sure Leiberman would have managed to get something pushed through when he was on his soap box back when. What these legislators and reporters and everyone else who jumps on this bandwagon fails to realize is that gaming is no longer a niche thing. It's not some kind of nerd's only area with no voice. The industry makes more money than Hollywood, and if it doesn't have a voice yet, it will, and will as soon as one of these quits being an idle threat and attention getter and starts being taken seriously, which I don't think this will be. I mean, if Columbine couldn't cause any major shifts in the way games are sold, even just in Colorado (where I live), it'll take a lot for me to believe this will do much.