In a related situation, I've often wanted to record AM radio shows here in the U.S. While there's plenty of software out there [mostly commercial stuff] that can handle automated recording and it's simple enough to run a line from the radio to the line-in, I've found that I get interferance from the computer, which results in a low buzz in all my recordings. This product seems to offer the radio and software in one package. Does anyone know what type of cable is used in this? Is this the single time when I need to listen to the guys at RadioShack and buy the expensive cord?
No it is not.
Just because a company is not selling a copy of their product doesn't mean that theft has taken place. The reason that downloading a game is not theft is because the owner of the IP has not had a loss of inventory [i.e. a real world object] without compensation. The reason that buying a secondhand game is not theft is because the owner of the IP has been compensated for their loss of inventory.
In one example, there is a transfer of a physical object from owner to consumer [you're probably getting confused because of the added layer of the middleman in between]. In the other example, no physical object is transferred. The company still retains all of their CDs or whatnot.
If a company has 50,000 units when a theft has occurred the company will have 49,999 units. You should be able to see that downloading does not lead to this situation and that the buying of a second hand game does lead to a loss of inventory but that the company is compensated.
It is stupid to attempt to lump people who are committing copyright infringement in with people who buy secondhand games. One is wrong and the other is completely acceptable. I'll let you figure out the difference. Oh, and I won't be replying to this thread again. You've already wasted enough of my time.
No, that's not the reason at all. Theft involves restriction to access.
First of all, your example is stupid because in the downloading example, the person is not paying while a secondhand purchase clearly involves a transaction of cash. The reason that downloading games is not theft is because you are not restricting access. The original copy is still in the same place and you merely have your own copy now.
If I take your car, that's theft. If I take the plans for your car and replicate it, that's copyright infringement.
This doesn't surprise me much. I own both ESPN Baseball and ESPN Basketball and the online component is simply awful. The servers are slow, the login process is tedious, and [probably because of these two problems] no one is ever online to play. Contrast that to Tiger Woods 2004 and Madden 2004 where the servers are very fast, people are abundant, and logging in can take as little as 10-15 seconds.
My disappointment with the online components of previous Sega games led me not to purchase NFL 2K5 and wait for Madden.
From the final link, "The only "gameplay time" statistic that really matters is how much time you're willing to keep playing the game, and therein lies the problem. Despite the seemingly straightforward and absolute definition given above, most "gameplay time" statistics end up reflecting how much time the reviewer was willing to spend with the game -- an inherent value judgement that is largely invisible to the reader. If one reviewer blazes through a game he hates in five hours to get the review done, and another spends 20 hours engrossed in what he considers a deeply moving experience, who's to say which number is the correct measure of "gameplay time?" And who's to say which one will be closer to the amount of time a player actually spends on the game?"
I very rarely see reviews of games that cite hours played by the reviewer. Based on the knowledge and quality of most reviews, the reviewers rarely play the game for more than 1 or 2 hours. These game play times are generated by the company that is releasing the game, not by people reviewing the game. I mean, look at the cite that is provided - Rockstar games' co-founder Dan Houser is talking about number of hours of play, not an independent third party. The whole rant in Kyle Orland's blog is built on a false premise.
The premise is that these statistics are cropping up in reviews of games. This is not the case. They are cropping up in the marketing of games. And so why bother with a critique? What the marketing firms say about the game is entirely subjective and not even worth noting in evaluating a game.
"I'd be a little worried with this "game released every month" thing. I've got a feeling games are going to be rushed, especially near the end. If a game has to come out on a certain date there is a large chance that it wont be at its full potential.
Here's the thing - for most games released these days, they are rushed. You've got to have a guaranteed best seller like Half Life 2 or Doom 3 in order to delay release dates. I don't think that such a release schedule is going to lead to any more of a rush than what game developers currently suffer through.
"Not to mention the short time for development. Assuming they have 6 teams (probably high for a company the size of Stardock) developing games, thats a game every six months!"
There's also no reason that games developed by third parties could not be licensed in order to keep up with this schedule for releases and, unless it's in some type of end user agreement, they don't have to stick to this release schedule. There are plenty of recent [1-2 years] games selling little to no units [if they're even still available at retail] that could be licensed for a relatively low cost in order to keep the 1 game a month schedule on pace.
You want to see "them" being thrown out of the country? Who is "them"? The execs? Everyone who works for SCO? What about share holders? They may not be pushing for lawsuits but the execs are trying to keep them happy enough not to start dumping the stock. And what country are you going to send "them" to?
There's no need to put quotation marks around justice there. Justice is being served. These are meritless lawsuits and they are being dismissed from court. These people are capitalists trying to make a dishonest buck - they're not illegal aliens so deportation really isn't a reasonable expectation here.
If [and I believe this will happen] the MMORPG market continues to grow and attract a larger audience, there will have to be the inclusion of better writing. Of course, since this is a medium unlike most others, there are added wrinkles. The storyline that encompasses the entire universe must be interesting but it must also encourage the individual player to try to influence the overall arc of the story. This is why some of the MMORPG that are tied to existing franchises may have more trouble than a newly created franchise. In Star Wars [and I haven't played Galaxies so this is not a direct comment on that], there is a huge backstory of movies, novels, and cartoons that already dictate the order of events. Luke blows up the Death Star. There's no room in a game involving this universe for some unknown player to jump into the situation and take control. The other wrinkle added in a video game setting is the side quests. The motivation for these should be something more than just trying to level up - they should be guided by the larger picture of the universe and have some sort of effect.
With all that being said, I think that if the writing comes up in terms of quality, these games are poised to take off in popularity far greater than they currently enjoy.
Why not just write a simple script to populate your database? You might not want pure nonsense in there so you could use a dictionary file or something like that to grab random words. You could also use a fortune file to fill your DB. The way I see your need is that you just want a large dataset to see how your application will perform - this can easily be automated and manual data entry is clearly not needed since I see no reason you would need to have 'real' data.
If this isn't down to earth enough, write a simple application to fill your database with products from Ebay or Amazon - just change the product id and grab the resulting html, parsing out some identifying features and placing them in your DB.
" If I bought a toaster and it only toasted half the time, I'd return it to the store and get a new one with an apology. Yet if it's software, why does consumer protection go right out the window?"
I think this is the case for a couple of reasons. Typically, to get consumer protection, it usually takes negative publicity to force the company and/or government intervention. Both of these take a motivated consumer group that is going to push for reform and has the power/money to make it happen. Also, a news story on 60 Minutes where some old grandma buys a toaster, it doesn't work as advertised, and the company won't make it right is a public relations nightmare. Some male between the age of 15 and 40 who can't play his computer game isn't going to receive much sympathy from the viewing public, if such a story were to even make it onto 60 Minutes.
Another issue that I see is the fact that most people have a very limited understanding of computers and the software running on them. Sure, you knew that the copy protection scheme was what was causing the problem. How many other people can figure that out? A lot of people don't know that copy protection schemes are leading to these problems and will instead blame it on their own computer instead of the company for including a mechanism to prevent theft.
So I guess we just need to get some old ladies playing KOTOR, call 60 Minutes, and start a rally to get some change.
" Right, but you fail to realize that there must be a reason that companies began using the *.99 marketing. They can't all be doing it because everyone else is doing it, because then where would it have begun? Your argument, if you don't mind my saying so, is somewhat illogical."
Actually, I do mind. I don't fail to realize - I simply failed to state. Another poster took care of this issue and proved that you are the one that is mistaken, so I won't waste any time with you on that point.
" I don't really see your point. I know that 19.99 + 0.01 = 20.00, and so does the average shopper; that doesn't mean that we, as shoppers, aren't psychologically affected by pricing."
It doesn't mean that shoppers are psychologically affected either. You've offered no proof.
" I don't doubt that. But is it significant enough to warrant sales suddenly doubling? I was not sure about that, and so therefore in my original post I ruminated on the psychological devices that would cause the average shopper to perceive the PS2 as dirt-cheap."
Actually, yes - especially considering that the price drop had been hinted at so before the price drop went into effect, sales would have dropped. It's easier to double sales once sales drop off.
"I apologize, this is pretty much off on a tangent, but...how many good games are there in the cheap bin at EB? Be honest, now.
Pretty easy to pick out good games in the cheap bin. If I were to open up my search to games less than $20, I could provide even more.
"Or they may not. Anyway, the issue is moot; the lower to middle class consumer is perfectly capable of saving money from month to month. Hell, I do that. I have a good understanding of the middle class, considering that I'm in it."
Again, you missed the point completely. Anyone who has not bought a console, specifically a PS2 - the best selling console for this hardware generation, is not a very hardcore gamer. At this point in the PS2's life cycle, the purchases are coming from casual gamers. These are not the types of people who want to save money for a console. If the price point is lowered to the point where no saving has to be done, obviously sales are going to increase. Your intuition about how people think is sorely lacking.
"No, I believe that the function of government is to serve its citizens, to keep them healthy, and to provide a safety net to those who need it. How stupid people are is entirely irrelevant.
It's amusing how much disdain you, as a typical liberal, have for the general public. You were quite prepared to call them stupid cows in your original post yet you want to provide a safety net for them, why? You obviousl
" Well, yes, I was indeed exaggerating about the economy's collapsing. And of course I've not really got any numbers to back up my assertions. I will say, though, that I believe people think "within the boundaries of price points." $19.99 is "under" $20, so it's okay, but something that actually costs $20 is not. It's a psychological thing that stores try to exploit by pricing everything one cent below its actual price: you look at the numbers and your mind immediately sees those nines and equates it as something less expensive than $20. Why would stores do it if it had no effect? If anything, they'd save ink by just writing "$20" instead of "$19.99" but, no, they price everything this way. It must work on some level. Probably not on as dramatic a level as I've intimated, but there's something in our subconscious..."
Oh so now it's "our subconscious"??? In your original post you were lambasting the sheep-like behavior of the American consumer - without any actual proof. Just because marketing is done a certain way, does not mean that that is because there is the effect that you conclude. Perhaps it's just because every other company does the *.99 marketing. Instead of saying things like "How stupid is the average shopper?" and "A very large segment of the population considers $19.99 to be a hell of a lot cheaper than $20.", why don't you just enjoy the fact that you're so intellectually superior to the average shopper and that you know that 19.99 + 0.01 = 20.00?
Furthermore, this statement: "On the PS2 front, these same people are ecstatic about the gigantic price drop and buy twice as many of the things as they bought before." clearly has no credibility. A $30 price drop is significant, whether you want to admit it or not. With the glut of PS2 games in the cheap bin at EB, that's at least two more games people can now buy with the same amount of cash as before. You might also make yourself aware of the fact that the average American consumer, i.e. the lower to middle class consumer, [which you, as a liberal, should be a champion of and have a good understanding of] may have a certain amount of liquid income per month that is equal to $150 but not $180. I can see exactly why you're a liberal. You believe that you are better than the common American and so you want government to provide services to these people because they can't provide for themselves, right? Because, after all, you believe the average American consumer is pretty stupid, right?
You make me sick and have now made my foes list. You are justification for hating liberals.
Well, your comparison to the Gamecube is wrong. The deal was that you could buy a Gamecube and get a game for free from a very short list. If the game you wanted was on that list, great. If not, tough shit. Also of note is the fact that most of the games that were on that list were had for less than $50 at that point in time. I picked up my Gamecube for $80 as part of a Walmart special and got the Zelda collector's disc with four games on it - so I didn't get anything for free? Furthermore, yes - if you get the Gamecube package for $100 that doesn't include a game, you have to buy a game to play on it. That being said, there are plenty of great games out for the Cube that are less than $50. So it's going to be a less expensive purchase.
"This makes sense to me--and it made sense to him, but I imagine that a lot of people wouldn't be able to handle it. The economy would collapse. A very large segment of the population considers $19.99 to be a hell of a lot cheaper than $20."
I'll call bullshit on that. Where's your evidence? Have you taken any surveys to back that up? Furthermore, your assertion that the economy would collapse is simply foolish.
""The Four Horsemen concept is cool because it is based on the most popular book in history, the Bible," Mendheim said. "Our fear factor isn't about zombies walking around. It's about plagues and torment. It's scary because of the realism. Everyday, people see and read about miracles happening, plagues, the devastation of famine or even a statue bleeding. Our concept is scary, because it just might be true."
What now? Sure, people "see miracles" but usually they're poor and despondent and in need of something to get them through their miserable lives. I'd say that a government-created plague [i.e. Resident Evil] is quite a bit more likely than Revelations coming to pass any time too soon. But in the end, the storyline only adds so much to a game. The folks at 3D0 weren't exactly producing great games when the company folded. Perhaps it was mismanagement of talent but before I get excited about the upcoming toy line/tv shows/animated features/clothing line/ and, oh yeah, video game - I'll wait to see if there's any gameplay to note. I'm always concerned when a single video game hasn't been made yet and there's already talk of an entire franchise. Make one good game before you try to cash in.
Well, you could call a graphic novel a comic book but you wouldn't call all comic books, graphic novels. The statement is probably meaning that comic books, around 28-32 pages or so, will be released in perhaps a monthly or semi-monthly schedule. A single graphic novel may also be released which would be of a greater size, at least 100 pages and without advertisements. Those are some of the typical differences between a comic book and a graphic novel.
Do you normally get your product reviews from the company you are considering buying the product from?
Guess what - a company advertising their product extends the truth and bends the rules for truth in advertising all the time. Is it "scummy" [as you put it]? I suppose but why would you rely on the manufacturer/retailer in the first place? There's a reason organizations like Consumer Reports exist and they didn't just crop up overnight after this whole Lindows report came to light. This has been going on a long, long time.
Mp3 support? The flash animation has the row "Play mp3 files?" and all 3 distributions have the green check mark. I think you looked a little too quickly.
Leaving that aside, it's just a marketing list. If you use a narrow enough definition of popup blocking, I suppose you could somehow figure out a way that only Lindows has it. I don't use Lindows so I can't begin to theorize as to why Lindows has it but Fedora and Mandrake don't, in the marketing department's eyes.
EA's 2004 lineup is composed of last year's games. The upcoming Madden 2005 will be the game that ESPN Football [the game which is being released at 19.95] will be competing against, not Madden 2004 - which you would have seen at Fry's.
Obviously you don't buy any EA Sports games so why are you posting in this story? You don't have any idea what you are talking about. Yes, Madden 2004 is cheap right now but it has been out for almost a year. This is quite different than it being released at $20. Go post somewhere else.
Slashdot Mirror
In a related situation, I've often wanted to record AM radio shows here in the U.S. While there's plenty of software out there [mostly commercial stuff] that can handle automated recording and it's simple enough to run a line from the radio to the line-in, I've found that I get interferance from the computer, which results in a low buzz in all my recordings. This product seems to offer the radio and software in one package. Does anyone know what type of cable is used in this? Is this the single time when I need to listen to the guys at RadioShack and buy the expensive cord?
Just because a company is not selling a copy of their product doesn't mean that theft has taken place. The reason that downloading a game is not theft is because the owner of the IP has not had a loss of inventory [i.e. a real world object] without compensation. The reason that buying a secondhand game is not theft is because the owner of the IP has been compensated for their loss of inventory.
In one example, there is a transfer of a physical object from owner to consumer [you're probably getting confused because of the added layer of the middleman in between]. In the other example, no physical object is transferred. The company still retains all of their CDs or whatnot.
If a company has 50,000 units when a theft has occurred the company will have 49,999 units. You should be able to see that downloading does not lead to this situation and that the buying of a second hand game does lead to a loss of inventory but that the company is compensated.
It is stupid to attempt to lump people who are committing copyright infringement in with people who buy secondhand games. One is wrong and the other is completely acceptable. I'll let you figure out the difference. Oh, and I won't be replying to this thread again. You've already wasted enough of my time.
First of all, your example is stupid because in the downloading example, the person is not paying while a secondhand purchase clearly involves a transaction of cash. The reason that downloading games is not theft is because you are not restricting access. The original copy is still in the same place and you merely have your own copy now.
If I take your car, that's theft. If I take the plans for your car and replicate it, that's copyright infringement.
My disappointment with the online components of previous Sega games led me not to purchase NFL 2K5 and wait for Madden.
Thank you for marking me as a foe. It appears you are stupid.
Here is a nice story from the Guardian that might clue you in a little bit.
Oh, co-workers who correct colleagues on points of grammar and/or spelling are, in fact, annoying.
Post MS console makers: Nintendo, Sony, MS
2 to 3, huh?
I very rarely see reviews of games that cite hours played by the reviewer. Based on the knowledge and quality of most reviews, the reviewers rarely play the game for more than 1 or 2 hours. These game play times are generated by the company that is releasing the game, not by people reviewing the game. I mean, look at the cite that is provided - Rockstar games' co-founder Dan Houser is talking about number of hours of play, not an independent third party. The whole rant in Kyle Orland's blog is built on a false premise.
The premise is that these statistics are cropping up in reviews of games. This is not the case. They are cropping up in the marketing of games. And so why bother with a critique? What the marketing firms say about the game is entirely subjective and not even worth noting in evaluating a game.
There's no need to put quotation marks around justice there. Justice is being served. These are meritless lawsuits and they are being dismissed from court. These people are capitalists trying to make a dishonest buck - they're not illegal aliens so deportation really isn't a reasonable expectation here.
the poster is not attempting to discuss the licensing of these games but is rather trying to incite people who enjoy football to reply.
also, it should be noted that slashdot is american-centric and this has been stated many times.
With all that being said, I think that if the writing comes up in terms of quality, these games are poised to take off in popularity far greater than they currently enjoy.
If this isn't down to earth enough, write a simple application to fill your database with products from Ebay or Amazon - just change the product id and grab the resulting html, parsing out some identifying features and placing them in your DB.
Another issue that I see is the fact that most people have a very limited understanding of computers and the software running on them. Sure, you knew that the copy protection scheme was what was causing the problem. How many other people can figure that out? A lot of people don't know that copy protection schemes are leading to these problems and will instead blame it on their own computer instead of the company for including a mechanism to prevent theft.
So I guess we just need to get some old ladies playing KOTOR, call 60 Minutes, and start a rally to get some change.
Actually, I do mind. I don't fail to realize - I simply failed to state. Another poster took care of this issue and proved that you are the one that is mistaken, so I won't waste any time with you on that point.
It doesn't mean that shoppers are psychologically affected either. You've offered no proof.
Actually, yes - especially considering that the price drop had been hinted at so before the price drop went into effect, sales would have dropped. It's easier to double sales once sales drop off.
Oh yeah? Here's games below $10.
Metal Gear Solid 2: Metacritic score of 96
Maximo: Ghosts to Glory: Metacritic score of 84
Max Payne: Metacritic score of 80
Grand Theft Auto III: Metacritic score of 97
Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec: Metacritic score of 95
Devil May Cry: Metacritic score of 95
Pretty easy to pick out good games in the cheap bin. If I were to open up my search to games less than $20, I could provide even more.
Again, you missed the point completely. Anyone who has not bought a console, specifically a PS2 - the best selling console for this hardware generation, is not a very hardcore gamer. At this point in the PS2's life cycle, the purchases are coming from casual gamers. These are not the types of people who want to save money for a console. If the price point is lowered to the point where no saving has to be done, obviously sales are going to increase. Your intuition about how people think is sorely lacking.
It's amusing how much disdain you, as a typical liberal, have for the general public. You were quite prepared to call them stupid cows in your original post yet you want to provide a safety net for them, why? You obviousl
Furthermore, this statement: "On the PS2 front, these same people are ecstatic about the gigantic price drop and buy twice as many of the things as they bought before." clearly has no credibility. A $30 price drop is significant, whether you want to admit it or not. With the glut of PS2 games in the cheap bin at EB, that's at least two more games people can now buy with the same amount of cash as before. You might also make yourself aware of the fact that the average American consumer, i.e. the lower to middle class consumer, [which you, as a liberal, should be a champion of and have a good understanding of] may have a certain amount of liquid income per month that is equal to $150 but not $180. I can see exactly why you're a liberal. You believe that you are better than the common American and so you want government to provide services to these people because they can't provide for themselves, right? Because, after all, you believe the average American consumer is pretty stupid, right?
You make me sick and have now made my foes list. You are justification for hating liberals.
I don't have a 3 year old.
Well, you could call a graphic novel a comic book but you wouldn't call all comic books, graphic novels. The statement is probably meaning that comic books, around 28-32 pages or so, will be released in perhaps a monthly or semi-monthly schedule. A single graphic novel may also be released which would be of a greater size, at least 100 pages and without advertisements. Those are some of the typical differences between a comic book and a graphic novel.
If it's the latter, you're an asshole. If it's the former, you're stupid. Either way, I'm done reading your posts. Have a shitty life.
Guess what - a company advertising their product extends the truth and bends the rules for truth in advertising all the time. Is it "scummy" [as you put it]? I suppose but why would you rely on the manufacturer/retailer in the first place? There's a reason organizations like Consumer Reports exist and they didn't just crop up overnight after this whole Lindows report came to light. This has been going on a long, long time.
Leaving that aside, it's just a marketing list. If you use a narrow enough definition of popup blocking, I suppose you could somehow figure out a way that only Lindows has it. I don't use Lindows so I can't begin to theorize as to why Lindows has it but Fedora and Mandrake don't, in the marketing department's eyes.
Obviously you don't buy any EA Sports games so why are you posting in this story? You don't have any idea what you are talking about. Yes, Madden 2004 is cheap right now but it has been out for almost a year. This is quite different than it being released at $20. Go post somewhere else.