Re:To point out the obvious (not a conspiracy theo
on
Star Wars on DVD
·
· Score: 1
Yes. I like the cleaned up special effects, and I couldn't give a damn if Greedo shot first or not. If they'd changed it so that Han blew up the Death Star, or C3PO defeated Darth Vader, then that would be one thing, but these are utterly utterly trivial things that the artist who created them preferred in his own vision of how the films should be. I must admit to a certain amount of incredulity as to just how tragically vehement people are about this. Do any of you understand the irony of the Comic Book Guy in The Simpsons?
I'm not sure about anyone else but I can't think of anything that I'd want to do on a small machine like that that requires any more power than that. My only 'Wintel' PC is a 533Mhz C3 Mini-ITX Via box, and it runs Windows XP nicely with 512MB of Ram (minus a bit for shared graphics!).
I now present Nintendo's new first party Gamecube products list, as authored in Japan. Remember this does not include stuff like F-Zero and Metroid that they've farmed out:
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
Animal Crossing
Pikmin
Mario Kart: Double Dash!!
The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
Super Mario Sunshine
Wario Ware Inc. Mega Party Game$
Luigi's Mansion
Pokemon Channel
Ta-da! Two great titles, one really good, three only 'good' and two that are poor. Frankly, I'm disappointed in the extreme with the output of Nintendo HQ since its release nearly three years ago, and I fear it's far too late for them to remedy it. Not a patch on the N64.
I tell you what I would like to see on my iPod, the ability to receive pages. I often take my iPod out because I want to listen to music, and at the same time leave the cellphone because I don't want to be disturbed, but I'd still like to be contactable in an emergency. Some kind of pager facility (perhaps tied in with.Mac, allowing full internet access to messages, the ability to respond to them as mails, or just find a phone booth or something?) would be nice.
Two kinds of save, I think many PC games do this already, but in reverse. Quicksaving waypoints that incrementally add to your major waypoints, but reverse the usual behaviour, so that if you die etc., you restart from the start of the level or an appropriate position, but if you just switch the thing off and come back to it later, you get to start at a much more recent position. It would allow a much more incremental progression through the game without allowing for quicksave cheating.
Might be a problem with the PS2's dog slow memory cards of course.
A bit of both really. Windows' requirements in the past have been of significant jumps that help to justify that purchase of a new gaming machine - that 300mhz processor laptop will still need to meet the minimum memory and hard drive requirements, which were a large leap over Windows 98 (probably what it shipped with), and even then it will be an unpleasant experience (I found XP an unpleasant experience on a K6-2-500). Clearly there is some complicity between Windows and its hardware manufacturers to continue selling hardware, and Microsoft are not necessarily a fine example of efficient coding, but surely there are limits.
I'm envisioning a day when the average PC has an 8Ghz processor whose average use is about 1% when not playing a game.
If so then they're targetting the wrong people. Linux is held back in many server disciplines simply because it's not something that is ever going to be written 'in the bedroom' as it were. There are many companies competing in the business apps space that just don't consider Linux; financial, resource management, messaging middleware, collaboration, business process, workflow, enterprise management, enterprise reporting. Any pro-M$ Gartner analyst will tell you this.
Sure Apache rocks and M$ can only move the goalposts so much against Samba, but there is still a large chunk of actual business software, as opposed to just business-enabling software out there that Linux isn't going to naturally get, which is where companies will come in and port their products of course; but we've seen no large or aggressive moves by Microsoft or their puppets in this respect.
On the contrary, where's gnu/biztalk, where's a serious server-side answer to exchange (ie. not the web-based openexchange), where's the SAP and Oracle financials competitor. Servers are unfortunately often about much more than a web server and fileshares.
Is it all over and Linux has won then? Or do we believe the Google zeitgeist figures that still show Linux at 1%. They're not going to use these things one at a time, and litigation certainly isn't "the only thing they've got left".
What were the Xbox 2 specs supposed to be again? Seriously, how long can this sustain itself, can't we reach a level where we decide the hardware is good enough, and allow it to trickle down so enough people have it and it starts to become viable to make original games again?
PC gaming died when GL code was added to Quake, it's a one-trick pony. Now consoles are eating its lunch (you can see it in the sales). Expect further fragmentation if Linux continues to make inroads. Is there a killer app on the horizon that will come into its own when this kind of power becomes available? I can't even see Longhorn needing this kind of ridiculous power.
Most iPaq owners that I know, thick enough to spend £400 on something that doesn't do anything more practical than an £80 Zire, wouldn't have a clue they could even do that, let alone follow instructions that they'd probably screw up and lobotomise their precious new toy.
If it is MS behind this, why don't they just concentrate on the lack of cohesive desktop, interoperable office suite, analyst confidence, financial, business-to-business, seriously supported messaging middleware and administration costs and ease-of-use arguments? There's plenty more mileage, FUD or otherwise in all of those areas.
I really don't think we've seen a tenth of Redmond's answer to Linux yet, simply because it's a tiny threat compared in reality to their customer base as opposed to what the average slashdot poster seems to think about it.
This was probably just them dipping a toe in the water. Hell, they've destroyed SCO (who had an old Unix and their own version of Linux), cost IBM plenty (those lawyers have to be paid), discredited Novell (what exactly do they own?) and made a lot of people think twice. Sure fills the gap between SP2 and Longhorn.
"2D games handle collision detection (or the interaction between two characters or objects) better than 3D games do..."
I haven't really noticed this; in some cases games use a larger transparent brush instead of the actual model, because otherwise games like FPS would become too difficult. I've never noticed a problem in any reasonable recent driving game, and in other circumstances it just doesn't apply. If I look at something like Tony Hawk's 3-onwards on the PS2, I see a wonderful example of some of the best collision detection ever (not counting the stupid online player to player collision stuff), whereas back in the day collision detection used to be everything the 2D gamer would whinge about. One could hardly say that SFII's collision detection is good, and that's one of the better examples. Games like the old mario side scrollers cheat, by using simple large blocks, hardly a masterpiece of the art of good collision detection, just removing the problem.
Are we still in year of the laptop (or was that last year) ?
Either way, there is precious little software taking advantage of this supposed boom in laptop sales, where the common-or-garden FPS need not apply (ever tried an FPS on a trackpad?).
There are also a lot more 'lifestyle' PC's around these days, like Sony's VAIO stuff. Is the platform changing too quickly for the developers to notice/react?
I must admit I've 'got out' of PC gaming mainly due to a general malaise about the state of games on there. There just isn't the macroscopic innovation anymore on the PC side of things, probably because the market is shrinking, whether this is because of the consoles or the lack of variety, I'm unsure, but it seems to be locked into a downward cycle now.
If a developer comes along with something unique but which may be considered a risk, there's practically no incentive to go for PC over PS2, unless there is some hardware/interface requirement; why limit sales? I found there was only so much Unreal/Half Life/id stuff I could take, and most other games work much better on joypads (IMO), and/or with multiple people (one PC is expensive enough to maintain!).
I can't see as many people upgrading this time just for Doom 3 or Half-Life, usually an upgrade is justified by something other than games at the same time, maybe a new version of Windows or some other significant requirement, but it's becoming more and more obvious that the only reason the average home user needs anything more than a bargain basement PC is for games.
On the bright side though, I don't think it will ever disappear, we're just seeing it find its natural shape. I don't think anyone can seriously believe that the PC game market as it is currently defined, with cutting edge hardware and requirements, could ever seriously compete with consoles on a unit or sales basis, in the same way that Mercedes don't compete with Honda (to use the old worn out automotive analogy).
I find it ironic that PC people claim console games are dumbed down and then argue that FPS are better on PC's in the same breath. It's only fighting games that could possibly be considered dumber than this mentally challenged genre, so this is the example they choose to use as a means of belittling consoles.
Personally I like playing games like Beyond Good & Evil, Zelda, Metroid Prime, Full Spectrum Warrior, Ninja Gaiden, Rez, Ico, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, Prince of Persia and Viewtiful Joe on my consoles. Maybe a few driving games and Tony Hawk style games too.
You know, variety. Or maybe you don't. Go back to your rocket jumps, ignorami.
Divided still means certain groups want it. Unfortunately the "don't wants" (mostly Nintendo apologists it has to be said) seem to think it's all or nothing. Can't we all just have what we want?
Also, you can't make such a sweeping statement when the result is so close. I'm starting to get a bit sick of people who think it's so black and white. The ability to play online is still more popular as a commodity than many single titles, and if charged as such can compete and be profitable.
Nintendo apologists seem to be toeing some kind of 'party line' spouted by President Iwata, claiming that "no-one" wants it, which is pretty annoying. I'm happy with and enjoy the ability to play online, along with the 2 million plus other PS2 and Xbox owners, and many many more PC owners. More than anything I appreciate the choice. I really don't understand the agenda of people who create articles saying no-one wants it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. I like the cleaned up special effects, and I couldn't give a damn if Greedo shot first or not. If they'd changed it so that Han blew up the Death Star, or C3PO defeated Darth Vader, then that would be one thing, but these are utterly utterly trivial things that the artist who created them preferred in his own vision of how the films should be. I must admit to a certain amount of incredulity as to just how tragically vehement people are about this. Do any of you understand the irony of the Comic Book Guy in The Simpsons?
I'm not sure about anyone else but I can't think of anything that I'd want to do on a small machine like that that requires any more power than that. My only 'Wintel' PC is a 533Mhz C3 Mini-ITX Via box, and it runs Windows XP nicely with 512MB of Ram (minus a bit for shared graphics!).
Worked for EA.
The answer is of course, working, looking after children, in the pub.
I put them in order of my opinion of their quality. I could blame my maths on pokemon channel being not much of a game at all....
- The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
- Animal Crossing
- Pikmin
- Mario Kart: Double Dash!!
- The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures
- Super Mario Sunshine
- Wario Ware Inc. Mega Party Game$
- Luigi's Mansion
- Pokemon Channel
Ta-da! Two great titles, one really good, three only 'good' and two that are poor. Frankly, I'm disappointed in the extreme with the output of Nintendo HQ since its release nearly three years ago, and I fear it's far too late for them to remedy it. Not a patch on the N64.From what I've read in various posts, would someone like to show the main character how to duct tape his torch to his gun?
I tell you what I would like to see on my iPod, the ability to receive pages. I often take my iPod out because I want to listen to music, and at the same time leave the cellphone because I don't want to be disturbed, but I'd still like to be contactable in an emergency. Some kind of pager facility (perhaps tied in with .Mac, allowing full internet access to messages, the ability to respond to them as mails, or just find a phone booth or something?) would be nice.
Millions of people wonder how they will cope with IE and Outlook being as slow as they are on their current 3Ghz chips.
Might be a problem with the PS2's dog slow memory cards of course.
I'm envisioning a day when the average PC has an 8Ghz processor whose average use is about 1% when not playing a game.
Sure Apache rocks and M$ can only move the goalposts so much against Samba, but there is still a large chunk of actual business software, as opposed to just business-enabling software out there that Linux isn't going to naturally get, which is where companies will come in and port their products of course; but we've seen no large or aggressive moves by Microsoft or their puppets in this respect.
On the contrary, where's gnu/biztalk, where's a serious server-side answer to exchange (ie. not the web-based openexchange), where's the SAP and Oracle financials competitor. Servers are unfortunately often about much more than a web server and fileshares.
Is it all over and Linux has won then? Or do we believe the Google zeitgeist figures that still show Linux at 1%. They're not going to use these things one at a time, and litigation certainly isn't "the only thing they've got left".
PC gaming died when GL code was added to Quake, it's a one-trick pony. Now consoles are eating its lunch (you can see it in the sales). Expect further fragmentation if Linux continues to make inroads. Is there a killer app on the horizon that will come into its own when this kind of power becomes available? I can't even see Longhorn needing this kind of ridiculous power.
Not that they know what Linux is.
I really don't think we've seen a tenth of Redmond's answer to Linux yet, simply because it's a tiny threat compared in reality to their customer base as opposed to what the average slashdot poster seems to think about it.
This was probably just them dipping a toe in the water. Hell, they've destroyed SCO (who had an old Unix and their own version of Linux), cost IBM plenty (those lawyers have to be paid), discredited Novell (what exactly do they own?) and made a lot of people think twice. Sure fills the gap between SP2 and Longhorn.
I don't understand. These things are so obvious, unless the code is exactly the same or something? Can the copyright be enforced then?
Either way, there is precious little software taking advantage of this supposed boom in laptop sales, where the common-or-garden FPS need not apply (ever tried an FPS on a trackpad?).
There are also a lot more 'lifestyle' PC's around these days, like Sony's VAIO stuff. Is the platform changing too quickly for the developers to notice/react?
If a developer comes along with something unique but which may be considered a risk, there's practically no incentive to go for PC over PS2, unless there is some hardware/interface requirement; why limit sales? I found there was only so much Unreal/Half Life/id stuff I could take, and most other games work much better on joypads (IMO), and/or with multiple people (one PC is expensive enough to maintain!).
I can't see as many people upgrading this time just for Doom 3 or Half-Life, usually an upgrade is justified by something other than games at the same time, maybe a new version of Windows or some other significant requirement, but it's becoming more and more obvious that the only reason the average home user needs anything more than a bargain basement PC is for games.
On the bright side though, I don't think it will ever disappear, we're just seeing it find its natural shape. I don't think anyone can seriously believe that the PC game market as it is currently defined, with cutting edge hardware and requirements, could ever seriously compete with consoles on a unit or sales basis, in the same way that Mercedes don't compete with Honda (to use the old worn out automotive analogy).
Personally I like playing games like Beyond Good & Evil, Zelda, Metroid Prime, Full Spectrum Warrior, Ninja Gaiden, Rez, Ico, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, Prince of Persia and Viewtiful Joe on my consoles. Maybe a few driving games and Tony Hawk style games too.
You know, variety. Or maybe you don't. Go back to your rocket jumps, ignorami.
Divided still means certain groups want it. Unfortunately the "don't wants" (mostly Nintendo apologists it has to be said) seem to think it's all or nothing. Can't we all just have what we want?
Or maybe the stop/start/stop/start/stop/start of going through locks?
Actually, it must be the capacity of the network you're talking about!
300 people != reasonable test group
Also, you can't make such a sweeping statement when the result is so close. I'm starting to get a bit sick of people who think it's so black and white. The ability to play online is still more popular as a commodity than many single titles, and if charged as such can compete and be profitable.
Nintendo apologists seem to be toeing some kind of 'party line' spouted by President Iwata, claiming that "no-one" wants it, which is pretty annoying. I'm happy with and enjoy the ability to play online, along with the 2 million plus other PS2 and Xbox owners, and many many more PC owners. More than anything I appreciate the choice. I really don't understand the agenda of people who create articles saying no-one wants it.