Yes, I realize that that was the name of that war originally, since obviously one wouldn't call the first instance of something I, unless you were sure a second was coming. But, and I have been doing this for quite some time, WW I was a war that did not have the moral undertones that WW II had. It was not a great battle of good versus evil but more of a war of attrition. So long ago I hijacked the phrase and, while I believe it is rather fitting, your comment shows the type of queries I have to constantly answer. Do you disagree with my assessment and my reasons for referring to WW II as the Great War? If so I would like to hear why.
But you may have informed others, so kudos to you. I already knew the information you posted.
Ah, the typical myth that's been pushed around the Internet for years now because Sega once accused Sony of dumping PS1's due to a change in the exchange rate - and people are still using it...and even extending it to the handheld market!
EDUCATE YOURSELF: How do you know that they are not making a profit on the hardware? Do you even know what is inside one of these things? The widespread myth that all consoles are sold at a loss (and apparently you've extended this belief to the handheld market as well) is simply not true. Nintendo is not selling the Gamecube at a loss. Sony is not selling the PS2 at a loss. Nintendo did not sell the SNES at a loss. Sega did not sell the Genesis at a loss. I can go on and on.
Furthermore, how does a hardware manufacturer make money on the product? Is it solely by making games? No, there is also licensing money to be made. If a company has a successful piece of hardware, they make money on the hardware (although it is usually a slim profit margin) and they make money on any games they make and they make money on licenses to other companies. Honestly, yes, it's more "safe" to sell educational games for the GBA but the possible returns on this would be significantly less. Did you not even read the story blurb? This is an untapped market meaning that no parents are buying their young children GBAs. Leapfrog has a chance to bring in a piece of hardware that will cement them in place. It also helps the Leapfrog brandname if they sell the actual device rather than just games for the GBA.
I can't believe you got modded up as insightful. Show me ANY EVIDENCE that a handheld console is being sold at a loss (with the obvious exception of a company trying to dump stock in order to get out of the business). Come on, any bit of evidence - please. That search will fail BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY!!!
Yeah, that little Gold Box thing on Amazon usually gives me kids toys and kitchen-ware. I think that it's not so much targetted at you but just a way of getting people to look at merchandise they're trying to move out. Even when I see electronics, they're not usually related to anything I've shown an interest in. On the other hand, have you tried the recommendations script that Amazon has? I find that actually works fairly well - especially for books - and has led me to some very good reads.
Problem with that argument is that you can actually make games for 10 year olds forever. Much to your surprise, humans are turning 10 every day. Are you familiar with the toy company Fisher Price? They target a rather young demographic and have been doing so for quite some time. You may have even had some Fisher Price toys as a child. Interestingly enough, I bet you don't buy any of their products anymore since they didn't grow up with you. But guess what - they're still making a profit! Just like Nintendo.
So not only is your argument flawed - a company can survive by just selling to a young demographic - but it's also wrong in assuming that Nintendo only makes games for 10 year olds. Super Smash Brothers, Mario Golf, Metroid Prime, and Zelda all appeal to gamers over the age of 10. I own GTA III but don't need to be able to shoot hookers in order to enjoy a video game - sometimes just rescuing the princess is enough. I always find that the mature gamers who say that Nintendo has kiddie games and they will only play GTA III-like games are the least mature gamers.
You want to inform the authors and the producers who are also continuing to churn out books and movies based on WW II? Let's face it - World War II was on such a grand scale and had such drama and subtexts throughout it that the subject is fascinating for many people and will continue to be for quite awhile.
I think sales of Battlefield 1942 show that they haven't "beat the life out of this showboat" and that most people still find the Great War engaging and exciting, unlike you obviously. And what do you care anyway? No one is forcing you to buy games revolving around WWII. The developers will move on when sales are no longer strong and they can't make a profit. People are still buying the products. You sound quite close to one of the people who say, "People shouldn't be allowed to make GTA." Let everyone making games decide what type of games they want to make ON THEIR OWN. You don't have the right to tell people what subject matter they should and should not use. Leave people alone and just buy the games that appeal to you.
If Walmart is going to sell any kind of FPS, it's going to be this one. The bans Walmart has put in place have always revolved around either crude language or badmouthing Walmart. I think the fact that Walmart sells a great number of U.S. flags would probably lead to them being quite happy with selling this game. I mean, Walmart customers are typically the members of society who have supported the war effort and the heads of Walmart know this. I don't see anything for them to get hung up on.
Why shouldn't women want all to know that they are in the business of producing eggs? I, for one, like to know which women are producing eggs as it's much more likely that they are viable hosts for one of my soldiers. Furthermore, if they're producing eggs and not buying some type of device to handle eggs which are not fertilized, well then - that's a dirty girl of another color. Frankly, society seems to have a problem with tampons, et al but I love them. It's technology in action!
Have you seen the new Pearl(c) tampons? They're awesome!
You bring up some interesting concepts for a game. You could have the whole game revolve around bin Laden (and also make the main character diabetic as well), rather than just one level. One level you could be in a race with bin Laden to get down the mountain into town where a dialysis machine is waiting. You could have another level where bin Laden is sleeping and you're on a ledge outside his window. The objective is to drop candy into his opening and closing mouth without waking him. AWESOME!
"O'Reilly & Associates maintain the trademark on the use of camel in association with Perl."
It appears that Perl doesn't have anything. O'Reilly has got a nice little logo for their Perl books and the fact that people believe the camel is the logo, can only help sales.
Yeah, this statement, "They wanted to 'address the needs of the largest percentage of owners of digital cameras and iPods,' because -- and let's be honest -- when you want to transfer 128 megs of pictures from your $200 digital camera, you think '$600 worth of iPod and media reader please!,'" doesn't parse too well for me. The company is saying that they wanted to address the needs of people who own digital camera and iPods. I understand that that is what the company stated. But why then does the submitter make the remark concerning having a $200 digital camera and then considering buying both an iPod and the reader? It seems pretty clear in the company line that they're going after people who already have both an iPod and a digital camera. I am quite confused.
I'm unsure of whether I should be getting annoyed that such blatant editorial comments were included in a submission WHEN I can't really figure out what opinion the submitter has.
But after losing weight, screaming at others about how pathetic and awful they are for not losing weight is simply foolish. It's nice to be proud of one's accomplishments but I doubt that anyone who reads the original poster's comment will feel like because some guy on Slashdot basically called them stupid for not losing weight, they have to lose weight.
I've met a number of people who have lost significant amounts of weight in their life. Some of them are proud of it but not condescending about it to others. They don't see obese people and say to them, "You're disgusting." since they remember when they were just as obese. Others, the original poster for instance, become so proud of themselves that they forget what they went through and that they were once overweight. I think you missed the meaning of my comment based on your response.
"Speaking as someone who has lost 40 lbs", now you're going to criticize everyone else who is in the state you once were? Obviously you didn't follow your own advice for a significant period of time if you let yourself get to a point where losing 40 lbs would not drop you into a position of being underweight. So instead of criticizing people in a rude tone about how they are idiots for living Lifestyle X (when you yourself obviously lived Lifestyle X), why not offer encouragement and tell people how you were able to accomplish your weight loss?
By the way, I am in great shape and have never been at the point where I could lose 40 lbs so don't e-mail me with your life story.
It's not really that odd. Especially since stocks are bought and sold on the whims of the total market view - if the market has a bad day, chances are most stocks went down. Stock prices go up and down in groups, especially if they serve similar customer groups. You might also want to note the size of the drops.
Google does not cache images. Notice how all of those images are still coming from www.physics.uq.edu.au? The parent to which you replied noted that the mirror he was providing was "with images."
I am not sure that this server is being slashdotted, it seems to be fine for me, BUT in the future if a page has many images and the server is dying a slow death, a google cache of the page does not help.
A Google cache does help in the case where the main brunt of the page is simple text.
But saying that because they are offering to sell you tokens within the game is the same as having a license to print money is completely incorrect. The reason that printing money has always been an attractive business venture is because everything you produce is guaranteed to net you profit - after the costs of ink and machines are covered by printing money, all the product you churn out is instant profit. With virtual shoes, you're not guaranteed that people will buy them at all so it's clearly not anywhere close to being a "license to print money."
Your statement was obviously wrong. Given that notice, you can begin to cope with being wrong.
More interesting than that is the fact that if a game is charging per play BUT you need to play X number of hours in order to get a great enough HP to take on the mighty dragon to get the unattainable staff of power is very similar to charging for virtual shoes. In the latter, I just don't have to invest hours AND money - I only have to give them money and it's an immediate payoff. Whereas with the unattainable staff, I have to dump hours and money into the pursuit.
But anyway, I don't care - I would never buy virtual shoes.
Assuming that by referencing "Hell", you are believing the tenants of a religion that has such a concept - please point me to where in any of the basic religious texts of religions with the concept of hell, there is a statement concerning software which behaves badly. I do not believe such a provision exists.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here. In New York State, in the US, which was the cell phone ban I was making reference to, it is illegal to talk on a cell phone (unless you have a hands-free kit) while operating a motor vehicle. You don't have to get into an accident in order to be ticketed for a violation - a cop merely needs to see you using your cell phone while driving.
"if you're driving while you're focusing 100% on the driving you are ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW in most countries"
Why would focusing on driving 100% be against the law?
And there are laws against "killing hobos", they're people too you know?
I have never heard of a law ON THE BOOKS that states that it is illegal to put your makeup on or read the newspaper while driving. I believe an arresting officer can cite you for reckless endangerment but there's no statement in the law about outlawed activities. The only laws governing what you may or may not do while driving are the ones involving cell phone use. As long as you are driving reasonably well and obeying traffic law, you can read the newspaper or the collected works of Kafka to your heart's delight.
No, they balance out AND since my argument has a much greater level of correctness - I win. The only reason I brought up number of comments posted was to negate his argument that I didn't know how things were done around here. In fact, I do understand how the operation proceeds and I am tired of the same old Penny Arcade links being modded up as +3 Funny. Look at every article concerning the NGage and you'll probably find the same one or two Penny Arcade links. It's just silly. Do you see my point buddy?
The Penny Arcade links are overdone. Everytime there is a story on the N-Gage, some Slashbot links to the one where they're having the release party and no one comes or the one from E3 where PA picks the N-Gage as the worst piece of hardware. It's tired and old. They're not really relevant to the stories and everyone has already seen them - yet they still get modded up. It's the Penny Arcade link karma whore trick and I'm tired of it.
Honestly, I've posted quite a few more comments than you so why don't you sit down and accept the request.
Slashdot Mirror
But you may have informed others, so kudos to you. I already knew the information you posted.
EDUCATE YOURSELF: How do you know that they are not making a profit on the hardware? Do you even know what is inside one of these things? The widespread myth that all consoles are sold at a loss (and apparently you've extended this belief to the handheld market as well) is simply not true. Nintendo is not selling the Gamecube at a loss. Sony is not selling the PS2 at a loss. Nintendo did not sell the SNES at a loss. Sega did not sell the Genesis at a loss. I can go on and on.
Furthermore, how does a hardware manufacturer make money on the product? Is it solely by making games? No, there is also licensing money to be made. If a company has a successful piece of hardware, they make money on the hardware (although it is usually a slim profit margin) and they make money on any games they make and they make money on licenses to other companies. Honestly, yes, it's more "safe" to sell educational games for the GBA but the possible returns on this would be significantly less. Did you not even read the story blurb? This is an untapped market meaning that no parents are buying their young children GBAs. Leapfrog has a chance to bring in a piece of hardware that will cement them in place. It also helps the Leapfrog brandname if they sell the actual device rather than just games for the GBA.
I can't believe you got modded up as insightful. Show me ANY EVIDENCE that a handheld console is being sold at a loss (with the obvious exception of a company trying to dump stock in order to get out of the business). Come on, any bit of evidence - please. That search will fail BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY!!!
So not only is your argument flawed - a company can survive by just selling to a young demographic - but it's also wrong in assuming that Nintendo only makes games for 10 year olds. Super Smash Brothers, Mario Golf, Metroid Prime, and Zelda all appeal to gamers over the age of 10. I own GTA III but don't need to be able to shoot hookers in order to enjoy a video game - sometimes just rescuing the princess is enough. I always find that the mature gamers who say that Nintendo has kiddie games and they will only play GTA III-like games are the least mature gamers.
I think sales of Battlefield 1942 show that they haven't "beat the life out of this showboat" and that most people still find the Great War engaging and exciting, unlike you obviously. And what do you care anyway? No one is forcing you to buy games revolving around WWII. The developers will move on when sales are no longer strong and they can't make a profit. People are still buying the products. You sound quite close to one of the people who say, "People shouldn't be allowed to make GTA." Let everyone making games decide what type of games they want to make ON THEIR OWN. You don't have the right to tell people what subject matter they should and should not use. Leave people alone and just buy the games that appeal to you.
If Walmart is going to sell any kind of FPS, it's going to be this one. The bans Walmart has put in place have always revolved around either crude language or badmouthing Walmart. I think the fact that Walmart sells a great number of U.S. flags would probably lead to them being quite happy with selling this game. I mean, Walmart customers are typically the members of society who have supported the war effort and the heads of Walmart know this. I don't see anything for them to get hung up on.
Have you seen the new Pearl(c) tampons? They're awesome!
You bring up some interesting concepts for a game. You could have the whole game revolve around bin Laden (and also make the main character diabetic as well), rather than just one level. One level you could be in a race with bin Laden to get down the mountain into town where a dialysis machine is waiting. You could have another level where bin Laden is sleeping and you're on a ledge outside his window. The objective is to drop candy into his opening and closing mouth without waking him. AWESOME!
THUG is not exclusive to the XBox so why did you bring that up?
Leave it to a liberal to make a statement that a leader who gassed his own people was loved.
It appears that Perl doesn't have anything. O'Reilly has got a nice little logo for their Perl books and the fact that people believe the camel is the logo, can only help sales.
I'm unsure of whether I should be getting annoyed that such blatant editorial comments were included in a submission WHEN I can't really figure out what opinion the submitter has.
Perhpas this will help:
Massive Small Form Factor Preview From Computex.
Better?
I've met a number of people who have lost significant amounts of weight in their life. Some of them are proud of it but not condescending about it to others. They don't see obese people and say to them, "You're disgusting." since they remember when they were just as obese. Others, the original poster for instance, become so proud of themselves that they forget what they went through and that they were once overweight. I think you missed the meaning of my comment based on your response.
By the way, I am in great shape and have never been at the point where I could lose 40 lbs so don't e-mail me with your life story.
It's not really that odd. Especially since stocks are bought and sold on the whims of the total market view - if the market has a bad day, chances are most stocks went down. Stock prices go up and down in groups, especially if they serve similar customer groups. You might also want to note the size of the drops.
I am not sure that this server is being slashdotted, it seems to be fine for me, BUT in the future if a page has many images and the server is dying a slow death, a google cache of the page does not help.
A Google cache does help in the case where the main brunt of the page is simple text.
Nice reply. I win!
Your statement was obviously wrong. Given that notice, you can begin to cope with being wrong.
More interesting than that is the fact that if a game is charging per play BUT you need to play X number of hours in order to get a great enough HP to take on the mighty dragon to get the unattainable staff of power is very similar to charging for virtual shoes. In the latter, I just don't have to invest hours AND money - I only have to give them money and it's an immediate payoff. Whereas with the unattainable staff, I have to dump hours and money into the pursuit.
But anyway, I don't care - I would never buy virtual shoes.
Wasn't that a creation of Dante's rather than being written in the Torah?
And there are laws against "killing hobos", they're people too you know?
I have never heard of a law ON THE BOOKS that states that it is illegal to put your makeup on or read the newspaper while driving. I believe an arresting officer can cite you for reckless endangerment but there's no statement in the law about outlawed activities. The only laws governing what you may or may not do while driving are the ones involving cell phone use. As long as you are driving reasonably well and obeying traffic law, you can read the newspaper or the collected works of Kafka to your heart's delight.
No, they balance out AND since my argument has a much greater level of correctness - I win. The only reason I brought up number of comments posted was to negate his argument that I didn't know how things were done around here. In fact, I do understand how the operation proceeds and I am tired of the same old Penny Arcade links being modded up as +3 Funny. Look at every article concerning the NGage and you'll probably find the same one or two Penny Arcade links. It's just silly. Do you see my point buddy?
The Penny Arcade links are overdone. Everytime there is a story on the N-Gage, some Slashbot links to the one where they're having the release party and no one comes or the one from E3 where PA picks the N-Gage as the worst piece of hardware. It's tired and old. They're not really relevant to the stories and everyone has already seen them - yet they still get modded up. It's the Penny Arcade link karma whore trick and I'm tired of it.
Honestly, I've posted quite a few more comments than you so why don't you sit down and accept the request.