So on your moral compass having sex with a hooker is significantly worse than shooting someone in the face? You're an interesting character.
And you're going to restrict a 19 year old from playing GTA? Hmm, they're old enough to go to war and shoot real people and sample hookers from around the world but simulating these acts is too much. I'm all for the ratings system so that parents can know what their children are doing but I also believe that there are some people under the age of 18, who are mature enough to handle the content of a game like GTA. It's something that can only be done on a case by case basis and that's why it has to be the parent's responsibility.
I mean, you say that most kids in high school are not mature enough to handle a game like GTA - but you previously said you wouldn't let anyone under the age of 18 play the game. So you're saying that there are some kids, the minority, who can handle GTA but you still won't let them play? That seems quite unfair.
I was around 15 when the whole stink was being made over Mortal Kombat and Night Trap and let me tell you, I was mature enough to play and enjoy Mortal Kombat. I was also mature enough to understand that Night Trap was not a good game and had no interest in playing it.
Yes, I am familiar with the word editorial. Why would you start your comment like that? If you want me to come around to your way of thinking, being snide about it right off the bat isn't going to do it.
Now, I believe that the slogan of this site is "News for Nerds" - as an organization that claims to be involved with the news, everyone at Slashdot should know that in real news organizations, editorials are clearly marked as editorials and are usually placed in the "Editorial" section. On Slashdot, the area where opinions (and therefore the most natural editorial section) are voiced, is in the comments section. To place an obvious editorial on the front page makes the idea of this site presenting "news" laughable.
Why can't michael leave the comments for the comment section? I thought that Decaffinated Jedi did a nice job of summarizing the issue at hand (without the need to insult CNN - which is an opinion and should be reserved for the comments section) without making his personal opinion known either way.
I mean, Slashdot stories have a comments section attached to them so that opinions may be voiced. But I guess michael's opinions are more important than the readers, right?
Chief, if you were to look into the sky, the region of space they have documented covers the same amount of space as the amount of space covered by the moon's diameter. They do not mean that that is the actual size of the galaxy. Do you need a hug?
Ha Ha! You're silly. Of course it is to scale. I think what you mean is that you're wondering if it is to a 1-1 scale because as long as there is a correlation between the real world distances and the distances in the assembled work, there's a scale. So, no - it's not to a 1-1 scale. High resolution photographs, such as the ones that can be produced using Hubble, are pretty big - although, not that big. I bet there's a great compression scheme just waiting to happen on these photos though - lots and lots of black space.
Probably the people at MIT said P2P and the journalist put P2P into a form that people know - Napster is the name for that type of sharing that most people understand.
Yes, if the company is informed that it is a cell phone - they have to remove you and cannot call you again. Of course, if you receive a single call from them - I believe you are due reimbursement at that point, not just if they call back after being told it was a cell phone.
I would pay for them. Even if they're not quite up to the graphical, sound, or dialogue snuff of some major releases (although, given the glut of rushed-to-market products [Hi Eidos!], some of these homebrewed games are better than games produced with a much larger budget), these people are making these games out of a real respect and love for the games. Those types of people are great for the industry and it would be better that they sold their own games really well and got noticed by a big company and snatched up as a developer than if they couldn't make any money and had to get a job completely unrelated to video games. People are best at doing what they are passionate about - these people are obviously passionate about video games and that is exactly what any commercial industry needs.
Uh, why can't they get the vacuum cleaner for 3 payments of $20? Are you insinuating that a company that uses telemarketers to sell vacuum cleaners will quote one price and then charge a different one?
I think the reason telemarketing continues to exist is because there are people who decide that they like the sales pitch enough to ignore the rude and unwanted interuption and actually buy the product from the person calling. I wouldn't call these people "low-IQ morons", as it is rather rude. I myself merely hang up if a telemarketer calls but someone people are too polite for their own good and listen to the pitch - and sometimes they actually agree to buy, in the strange hope that that will get the company to leave them alone. Obviously this is incorrect, but why attack these people in the way you have? The companies are the bad guys in this situation - not the people who buy from them.
Please enlighten me about why if you buy a vacuum cleaner over the phone for 3 payments of $20, you don't actually get the vacuum cleaner - as you implied.
PS2 ($179) + 5 games ($49 a piece) = $424. Add in sales tax (7 percent) and we get a bill of $453
The new pricing
PS2 ($99) + 5 games ($49 a piece) = $344. Add in sales tax (7 percent) and we get a bill of $368.
That's more like 20% savings.
Furthermore, many of the games people who don't yet have a PS2 can be had for less than $49.
Let's suppose I decide on the following games (all prices coming from ebgames.com)
PS2 ($99) + Crazy Taxi ($15) + Devil May Cry ($15) + Final Fantasy X ($15) + GTAIII ($15) + GTA: VC ($25) + 2nd controller ($20) + Memory Card ($20) = $224. We'll ignore tax for this one. Now, with the old PS2 price...
PS2 ($179) + the above = $304. There's a savings of 25%. You see, it's a substantial price cut. Anyone who tries to tell you that a drop from $179 to $99 isn't a substantial price cut, is silly.
You're completely correct in your assessment of the situation. The only point I want to add that if this were the X-Box 2, then it would be in Microsoft's best interests to not interfere with this type of development, much. Certainly they need to keep people from pirating games but if people are buying X-Boxes and putting Linux on them, Microsoft isn't getting game sales BUT in the early days of any console, the sales numbers of the console are very important. Perceived market success by the consumer, drives further market success. If Microsoft sold 2 million X-Box 2's within the first two months of release and a quarter of those were solely for Linux - Microsoft is still in a decent spot because even without the game sales, they've got firm market share.
Of course, you could argue that the number of people who are doing this type of project isn't significant enough to play a role, as I've outlined. That may be true BUT once you introduce the idea of clustering, you can quickly get a big effect if people are buying multiple boxes. Just my two cents.
"Your "important point" had absolutely nothing to do with arguing against what I said. I said "until the next generation of consoles" -- feel free to go back and read it. You're now claiming that you said that Nintendo might pull ahead post-GC. This is agreeing with what I said. Yes, and? If I say that water is blue, and then you say "no, it's definitely *BLUE*", you haven't made any useful point."
Well, you started you original comment by saying "Exactly" - which was agreeing with the original claim that increased GC sales would be only a short term gain. I was merely trying to point out that it would not be a short term gain and that it would help Nintendo in the long run. Nowhere in any of your posts do I see you saying that Nintendo would be helped in the next generation of consoles with this recent sales success. You made the veiled phrase "until the next generation of consoles", which does not make a point about how this "short term gain" is going to help them in that round.
And since you chose to ignore this: Now, you start your comment by quoting my post. And then you say, "That's not true."What wasn't true about my statement? A GC game does have a more prominent place on the display shelf - simple fact. You go on to offer no explanation for why my statement was not true but instead try to clarify your original point. Even if I did not correctly interpret what you said (and you're not just trying to backpedal because people have realized that you are wrong), my statement still stands as being true. I was talking about individual game titles and you offered nothing more than a response that wasn't a reply to my statement.
Oh, by the way - I never asked why you had marked me as a foe. Maybe you want to go back and read what I wrote?
You ignored the important point of my post regarding customer perception of Nintendo's success and the fact that increased sales will be greater than a short term gain - which you obviously fail to realize or consider - or at this point you realize it but can't simply stand corrected and instead have to nit-pick.
Well yes, if you are talking about absolute sales and if GC has 5% of the market in hardware, then it is likely that the total GC software sales will account for 5% of total software sales. Of course, this isn't a definite as GC owners may purchase more games than other console owners. I know there has been discussions before about how the casual gamer will buy a PS2 and get Madden, GTA, and then use it as a DVD player. But without any firm numbers from EB, I can't comment one way or another.
Now, you start your comment by quoting my post. And then you say, "That's not true." What wasn't true about my statement? A GC game does have a more prominent place on the display shelf - simple fact. You go on to offer no explanation for why my statement was not true but instead try to clarify your original point. Even if I did not correctly interpret what you said (and you're not just trying to backpedal because people have realized that you are wrong), my statement still stands as being true. I was talking about individual game titles and you offered nothing more than a response that wasn't a reply to my statement.
So basically if my game gets a scratch in it, the game becomes useless to me? That's great - take a medium with error protection and get rid of that error protection. One of the nice things about a CD is that if you get a scratch in it, the medium is supposed to be fault tolerant. Way to go guys!
Well then, there it comes from the horse's mouth. Regardless though, you still told a lie, as based on the second definition which I cited. My argument holds.
And your statement that I assume the worst about everyone is based on your knowledge of me gathered from any and all Slashdot posts of mine that you have read - this amuses me to no end. Good luck with being a male.
Yes. I have two video cards (a Voodoo3 PCI and an nVidia GeForce 2 AGP) and Windows XP Pro. Windows handles this fine without any problems - very little to setup other than plugging the monitors in.
Why is that silly? The situation now is that you can get the Gamecube for $99 and select whatever game you want out of the entire lineup - many of the big names are now around the $30 range, so you still save $20 which you can use to get a controller or a memory card. I'm sick of all the comments saying how the price is the same. The price is not the same because what you spend on the game varies AND you've also got some choice in the game.
Titles will sell accordingly? You mean according to the installed user base? Check the sales figures on Soul Calibur II, the GC version outsold the other two - so installed user base does not dictate how titles sell. In fact, since not as many games are released on the Gamecube, titles tend to sell better. If you release a PS2 game, it's just a drop in a crowded barrel. If you release a GC game, it's got a prominent place on the display shelf. And while you're correct that the positions are going to remain fixed (although if you're talking globally, Nintendo is ahead of Microsoft), momentum and customer perception is an important fact to consider. Sega began to falter when they released the SegaCD and the 32X. Both of these were seen as failed systems, which, in turn hampered sales of the Saturn - IN PART (yes, there were other factors involved). Likewise, part of the reason the SNES sold so well is because people were so happy with the NES that they owned that they waited for Nintendo's next offering. Likewise, the PS2 was awaited with open arms by many because the PS1 had been such a success. So if the Gamecube can win this holiday season, that positive perception will help Nintendo when they roll out the next console.
So I think there's more than just a short term gain here BUT the possible gain is not a guaranteed one - there are still many factors that could doom Nintendo's next launch but having the GC sell well has more ramifications than you seem to believe. (But then again, you've marked me as a foe so your judgement must be a bit off.)
I've seen plenty of worthwhile games under $30 for the Gamecube at EB. There's a vast amount of old PS2 games for $20 but from my casual check of the bins, it seems like there are similar amounts of cheap games for the XBox and Gamecube.
Speaking as an early adopter of the PS2, I can tell you that to me the Gamecube is a great choice for that second console. There's an exciting lineup of games that I can only get on the Gamecube and which offer me gameplay dynamics that are significantly different than what I can have with the PS2. On the other hand, the XBox doesn't interest me in the least. It seems like I get very similar games with an XBox (with no stand out game that's really unique compared to the games on the PS2) and have to pay extra to get it to play DVDs. In short, as a consumer, the Gamecube's lineup seems to compliment the PS2's lineup better than the XBox's lineup compliements the PS2's lineup. And since Sony has already won this round of consoles, that's a really great selling point and I think, an indication of what kind of sales I expect to see over the holidays - especially with the new price point.
And note that I understand that games look better on the XBox than on the PS2 but I've already got a PS2 so the next time I buy a console because the graphics are better won't be until the next round of consoles.
Having multiple desktops is an option that Windows users have with a minimum of hassle. In fact, the video card I bought to facilitate my two-monitor setup came with the software to allow this to happen. What I think you fail to realize that multiple desktops have their place and multiple monitors have their place. The situation you describe is all well and good but when working, I often need to work on multiple files at the same time, or at least have a file open for reference, and being able to view that file while working on another is useful. Your statement about maximizing and minimizing windows is merely a suggestion that the employees you speak of don't know how to best utilize a multiple monitor setup.
Tell me which is quicker. I am working on file_A, which is dependent on some work in file_B. I can either:
A) Constantly switch back and forth between virtual desktops everytime I need to check something in file_B, process that information, and then switch back to the desktop with file_A to begin work on that file again. OR
B) Have both file_A and file_B open at the same time on different monitors where if I need to check a dependency in file_B, all that's required is a slight headturn.
So which is faster? Multiple monitors and multiple desktops is what I use and I find they compliment each other nicely BUT if I had to choose one, I'd take multiple monitors.
The micro-printing on bills means that they cannot be adequately reproduced on a laser printer so I'm not sure what your point is. Were you trying to be funny?
How do you know what his intentions were? Saige was attempting to make a statement about how great the Gamecube is by naming quality games available for it. It is well within the realm of possibility that he was padding this list in order to get people to buy Gamecubes, at which point it doesn't matter if Soul Caliber I is available or not - because he's already lured the person in. You have no proof that there was no deceit involved.
Furthermore, you should never link to dictionary.com with a definition because they offer alternate definitions. A secondary definition for lie is "To convey a false image or impression:" - which is exactly what Saige did. Thanks for playing but, YOU LOSE.
That's snotty? You told a lie. I was telling you (more of a suggestion really, although I did not phrase it that way) that you should not tell lies. The implication was that lying is bad. Good luck with overcoming your penchant for lying!
That's because such a document does not exist. You boldly stated the the American courts have made verdicts where a link between video games and violence has been established. This is false. Do not make unresearched statements where you attack the U.S. legal system in the future. I find them quite disgusting and am feeling rather sickened by your comments.
Slashdot Mirror
And you're going to restrict a 19 year old from playing GTA? Hmm, they're old enough to go to war and shoot real people and sample hookers from around the world but simulating these acts is too much. I'm all for the ratings system so that parents can know what their children are doing but I also believe that there are some people under the age of 18, who are mature enough to handle the content of a game like GTA. It's something that can only be done on a case by case basis and that's why it has to be the parent's responsibility.
I mean, you say that most kids in high school are not mature enough to handle a game like GTA - but you previously said you wouldn't let anyone under the age of 18 play the game. So you're saying that there are some kids, the minority, who can handle GTA but you still won't let them play? That seems quite unfair.
I was around 15 when the whole stink was being made over Mortal Kombat and Night Trap and let me tell you, I was mature enough to play and enjoy Mortal Kombat. I was also mature enough to understand that Night Trap was not a good game and had no interest in playing it.
Now, I believe that the slogan of this site is "News for Nerds" - as an organization that claims to be involved with the news, everyone at Slashdot should know that in real news organizations, editorials are clearly marked as editorials and are usually placed in the "Editorial" section. On Slashdot, the area where opinions (and therefore the most natural editorial section) are voiced, is in the comments section. To place an obvious editorial on the front page makes the idea of this site presenting "news" laughable.
I mean, Slashdot stories have a comments section attached to them so that opinions may be voiced. But I guess michael's opinions are more important than the readers, right?
Ha Ha! You're silly. Of course it is to scale. I think what you mean is that you're wondering if it is to a 1-1 scale because as long as there is a correlation between the real world distances and the distances in the assembled work, there's a scale. So, no - it's not to a 1-1 scale. High resolution photographs, such as the ones that can be produced using Hubble, are pretty big - although, not that big. I bet there's a great compression scheme just waiting to happen on these photos though - lots and lots of black space.
Probably the people at MIT said P2P and the journalist put P2P into a form that people know - Napster is the name for that type of sharing that most people understand.
Yes, if the company is informed that it is a cell phone - they have to remove you and cannot call you again. Of course, if you receive a single call from them - I believe you are due reimbursement at that point, not just if they call back after being told it was a cell phone.
I would pay for them. Even if they're not quite up to the graphical, sound, or dialogue snuff of some major releases (although, given the glut of rushed-to-market products [Hi Eidos!], some of these homebrewed games are better than games produced with a much larger budget), these people are making these games out of a real respect and love for the games. Those types of people are great for the industry and it would be better that they sold their own games really well and got noticed by a big company and snatched up as a developer than if they couldn't make any money and had to get a job completely unrelated to video games. People are best at doing what they are passionate about - these people are obviously passionate about video games and that is exactly what any commercial industry needs.
I think the reason telemarketing continues to exist is because there are people who decide that they like the sales pitch enough to ignore the rude and unwanted interuption and actually buy the product from the person calling. I wouldn't call these people "low-IQ morons", as it is rather rude. I myself merely hang up if a telemarketer calls but someone people are too polite for their own good and listen to the pitch - and sometimes they actually agree to buy, in the strange hope that that will get the company to leave them alone. Obviously this is incorrect, but why attack these people in the way you have? The companies are the bad guys in this situation - not the people who buy from them.
Please enlighten me about why if you buy a vacuum cleaner over the phone for 3 payments of $20, you don't actually get the vacuum cleaner - as you implied.
The new pricing
PS2 ($99) + 5 games ($49 a piece) = $344. Add in sales tax (7 percent) and we get a bill of $368.
That's more like 20% savings.
Furthermore, many of the games people who don't yet have a PS2 can be had for less than $49.
Let's suppose I decide on the following games (all prices coming from ebgames.com)
PS2 ($99) + Crazy Taxi ($15) + Devil May Cry ($15) + Final Fantasy X ($15) + GTAIII ($15) + GTA: VC ($25) + 2nd controller ($20) + Memory Card ($20) = $224. We'll ignore tax for this one. Now, with the old PS2 price...
PS2 ($179) + the above = $304. There's a savings of 25%. You see, it's a substantial price cut. Anyone who tries to tell you that a drop from $179 to $99 isn't a substantial price cut, is silly.
Of course, you could argue that the number of people who are doing this type of project isn't significant enough to play a role, as I've outlined. That may be true BUT once you introduce the idea of clustering, you can quickly get a big effect if people are buying multiple boxes. Just my two cents.
And since you chose to ignore this: Now, you start your comment by quoting my post. And then you say, "That's not true." What wasn't true about my statement? A GC game does have a more prominent place on the display shelf - simple fact. You go on to offer no explanation for why my statement was not true but instead try to clarify your original point. Even if I did not correctly interpret what you said (and you're not just trying to backpedal because people have realized that you are wrong), my statement still stands as being true. I was talking about individual game titles and you offered nothing more than a response that wasn't a reply to my statement.
Oh, by the way - I never asked why you had marked me as a foe. Maybe you want to go back and read what I wrote?
Well yes, if you are talking about absolute sales and if GC has 5% of the market in hardware, then it is likely that the total GC software sales will account for 5% of total software sales. Of course, this isn't a definite as GC owners may purchase more games than other console owners. I know there has been discussions before about how the casual gamer will buy a PS2 and get Madden, GTA, and then use it as a DVD player. But without any firm numbers from EB, I can't comment one way or another.
Now, you start your comment by quoting my post. And then you say, "That's not true." What wasn't true about my statement? A GC game does have a more prominent place on the display shelf - simple fact. You go on to offer no explanation for why my statement was not true but instead try to clarify your original point. Even if I did not correctly interpret what you said (and you're not just trying to backpedal because people have realized that you are wrong), my statement still stands as being true. I was talking about individual game titles and you offered nothing more than a response that wasn't a reply to my statement.
So basically if my game gets a scratch in it, the game becomes useless to me? That's great - take a medium with error protection and get rid of that error protection. One of the nice things about a CD is that if you get a scratch in it, the medium is supposed to be fault tolerant. Way to go guys!
And your statement that I assume the worst about everyone is based on your knowledge of me gathered from any and all Slashdot posts of mine that you have read - this amuses me to no end. Good luck with being a male.
Yes. I have two video cards (a Voodoo3 PCI and an nVidia GeForce 2 AGP) and Windows XP Pro. Windows handles this fine without any problems - very little to setup other than plugging the monitors in.
Why is that silly? The situation now is that you can get the Gamecube for $99 and select whatever game you want out of the entire lineup - many of the big names are now around the $30 range, so you still save $20 which you can use to get a controller or a memory card. I'm sick of all the comments saying how the price is the same. The price is not the same because what you spend on the game varies AND you've also got some choice in the game.
So I think there's more than just a short term gain here BUT the possible gain is not a guaranteed one - there are still many factors that could doom Nintendo's next launch but having the GC sell well has more ramifications than you seem to believe. (But then again, you've marked me as a foe so your judgement must be a bit off.)
I've seen plenty of worthwhile games under $30 for the Gamecube at EB. There's a vast amount of old PS2 games for $20 but from my casual check of the bins, it seems like there are similar amounts of cheap games for the XBox and Gamecube.
And note that I understand that games look better on the XBox than on the PS2 but I've already got a PS2 so the next time I buy a console because the graphics are better won't be until the next round of consoles.
Having multiple desktops is an option that Windows users have with a minimum of hassle. In fact, the video card I bought to facilitate my two-monitor setup came with the software to allow this to happen. What I think you fail to realize that multiple desktops have their place and multiple monitors have their place. The situation you describe is all well and good but when working, I often need to work on multiple files at the same time, or at least have a file open for reference, and being able to view that file while working on another is useful. Your statement about maximizing and minimizing windows is merely a suggestion that the employees you speak of don't know how to best utilize a multiple monitor setup.
Tell me which is quicker. I am working on file_A, which is dependent on some work in file_B. I can either:
A) Constantly switch back and forth between virtual desktops everytime I need to check something in file_B, process that information, and then switch back to the desktop with file_A to begin work on that file again. OR
B) Have both file_A and file_B open at the same time on different monitors where if I need to check a dependency in file_B, all that's required is a slight headturn.
So which is faster? Multiple monitors and multiple desktops is what I use and I find they compliment each other nicely BUT if I had to choose one, I'd take multiple monitors.
The micro-printing on bills means that they cannot be adequately reproduced on a laser printer so I'm not sure what your point is. Were you trying to be funny?
Furthermore, you should never link to dictionary.com with a definition because they offer alternate definitions. A secondary definition for lie is "To convey a false image or impression:" - which is exactly what Saige did. Thanks for playing but, YOU LOSE.
That's snotty? You told a lie. I was telling you (more of a suggestion really, although I did not phrase it that way) that you should not tell lies. The implication was that lying is bad. Good luck with overcoming your penchant for lying!
That's because such a document does not exist. You boldly stated the the American courts have made verdicts where a link between video games and violence has been established. This is false. Do not make unresearched statements where you attack the U.S. legal system in the future. I find them quite disgusting and am feeling rather sickened by your comments.