So let me try to figure out your logic. People are losing interest in gaming so they will all go to Nintendo now because Nintendo doesn't make games. Oh wait, they do make games! Ok ok, so you mean that Nintendo doesn't have anything out right now that gamers could play and the Revolution is about to come out. Oh wait, they have something called the "GameCube"!
Seriously...how can an article saying that less people are gaming going to help Nintendo. Unless you believe they are gaming less because of the other consoles games...in which case they could have bought a game cube right now. The Revolution is still going to play games..even if it uses a remote control for a controller now. If people are less interested in gaming, that is just going to hurt the industry.
If you want all the games, you play on Windows. This isn't a Windows vs Mac thing, they are both fine OSs. But the number of gamers on Macs often does not justify the costs to port and support another OS. You have no idea how many Mac users it would pull in. They have people to crunch those numbers and if they could make some huge profit (like you seem to think) they would already have a Mac port. If you are a gamer, get a PC...otherwise, don't be surprised if most companies don't port games for you. It's like going to a $.99 store and being pissed off that every is more expensive that a quarter...you knew what you were getting in to.
He speaks very highly of Serenity. Maybe it was his intention to talk about his book (I doubt it), but if people are reading his reviews, they probably have already read it anyways. The reason why I like Ender's Game and other OSC books so much is that he actually writes interesting characters with interesting interaction. Most sci fi is more about the science than developing interesting characters. OSC puts the characters first (in my mind) and that's what make his books moving.
The movie is already being made, so it's not some pitch to do that. Anyways, everyone has their opinion but it seems like you have some personal bias based on who he is. Just read the books...you don't have to love the person to love the books.
*clap clap clap* I'm sorry if I doubt your sincerity. My main problem with your post is that I am tired of reading comments like this. If you find things so objectionable, just move. Don't post about it, just do it. I think we probably have a similar view on things, though. I would go nuts if people were talking about teaching intelligent design to my children. You must live in a very conservative part of the country. I don't, so it doesn't seem as much of a problem for me.
My problem with what you posted is more that you decided to take this thread (Jack Thompson writing a law) to say you are moving out of the country. Based on something that isn't even written or close to a law, it's now time to move out of the country...ok. Same thing with your DNA thing. Is it a law yet? Are people doing it? Would they actually do it on a traffic stop? You don't know! Yet just because it is suggested, you want to pack up shop and leave. If you are going to leave, leave because you don't like things that are actually happening. There are a lot of crazy ideas out there that you aren't going to agree with...but until they are actually implemented, you can't count that against the country.
You have been around a lot longer than I have..so I think you would have experienced the political pendulum more. Things go back and fourth in our country. Right now it has been swinging to the right...I think it is too far right now and it makes me uncomofortable. But once it gets too far, then there is a backlash and things swing back to the left. It's been doing this for a long time.
Ok, so an article about Jack Thompson (that might not even be true) has been asked to write a law on video games has finally pushed you to moving out of the country. It's not like the law has been a) written b) actually applied in any state. Yeah, I am frustrated with other people who can't understand why I don't want their morals made in to laws. But how is running away from the problem going to solve it? Why don't you start a pro-gaming platform? Why don't you try to stir people up? Why don't you assemble like minded people to write letters to your congressman?
It's just pathetic to me see people say they are moving out of the country. I really wish they would make a law that states anyone who posts on Slashdot that they are moving out of the country would be deported within a month. Seriously, what have you learned by being in the military and in this country for 43 years? To run away when things happen that you don't like? Fine, then go, just don't cry about it on here.
Not really a fair comparison, though, is it? Tetris is a puzzle game that is something meant to be played over and over again. Compare this to say an rpg which is fairly linear. Once you know the story it is probably going to collect dust. You can try to put fun mini-games in it (like Chocobo racing) but most people are just going to sell it back. It can be the best game on the face of the planet, but you are going to sell it back anyways because there is no need/time to play it again. It's effect may be reduced for first tier titles of the puzzle genre...but not so much for other types of games.
Yeah, this is just a troll. FFXI made SE a lot of money and is quite successful for its genre. Some people may dislike it, but saying it is "widely hearlded" is an exaggeration to say the least. Whoever modded this up and whoever posted it are both idiots.
Bah, that's a load of crap. The whole MTV mainstream gaming is more recent than the release of the PSX. Why did I switch to Sony? I followed the Final Fantasy series. The console had good games made by good companies. They went with a disc based system rather than carts which allowed them to have larger games with cut scenes and better graphics (with the draw back that load times were longer and you needed a memory disc for saved games).
You come off as a bitter fan boy. You could market the living crap out of Gigli and it will still be a terrible movie with mediocre box office sales. The PS was a solid system and had good marketing as well. Marketing alone can't make you displace the former market leader.
Video games have grown up a lot. You can still get the same type of games as you could in the past. True, a lot of games now target a different group of people, but guess what, people don't have to like the kind of games you like. Maybe some people base their manliness on their console, but that is a really terrible generalization and I really doubt the majority of new gamers feel that way.
Gaming is not in a decline. There are still great games being made. Some games don't target you. Some games are bad. People look at the past with rose colored glasses. There were terrible games made in the past as well. This is usually when someone says "but games are less innovative". This is such a stupid comment. Games were a NEW MEDIUM...anything you did was innovative. Games that were popular defined the genres that we have today. There are more good games out there than you would be able to play. If you can't find them, you are too lazy to look. Yeah, you have to sift through garbage to find gems sometimes, but they are out there! Have you beaten all the great games of the past? If that era was so good, just keep playing those games. But no, everyone is going to buy their revolution, 360, or ps3. Because good games are still coming out and this will always be true. Get over your bias. Competition is a good thing.
If he would have stuck to his convictions the game still would have been made, it just would have been worse. He didn't want them to tarnish the series by not having him involved. He did the right thing.
Just because game designers let go of their ideals has nothing to do with games being taken seriously as a form of art. The only reason it gets less respect is that it is a new medium that a lot of people aren't familiar with. Painters might want to paint a certain style but that style may not put food on the table. So they paint what people want. Now is painting no longer an artistic experession? Of course not. It's still art. Of for an easier anaolgy...look at the third matrix. If movies are still a form of artistic expression after that pile of crap, selling out on a sequel has nothing to do with artistic expression.
Yeah, everyone thought katamari was great. I thought it was fairly boring to be honest. It was interesting at first, but it didn't pull me in. It remains in my game library unbeaten and collecting dust.
While it isn't always the case, game sequels tend to be better than their originals. If you really loved the game, having new levels to conquer and explore would be a huge plus.
This is just the typical whiny crap that we have to see on a daily basis at games.slashdot.org. Listen, it is very easy to innovate games in the past because it was a brand new medium. Do you see new, innovative movies coming out all the time? New genres? Games are maturing. It is the best time in history to be a gamer. If you don't like current gen games, go play through all the games from the past. It may be 8/16 bit, but it's still new to you. If you can't find anything you enjoy, you aren't really trying.
Listen, Nintendo is great...but you really don't get it. The casual gamer likes the games that the other consoles have more than the games on Nintendo. They want the Maddens and the Halos and the Final Fantasies. Nintendo will stay profitable and keep their niche. Smart consumers will buy the console with the games they want. To you and many others, Nintendo is a smart choice. But seriously, quit placing your values on other people though just because of your bias.
You don't need dual screens for something to be big. Take Halo for example. The X-Box didn't have something special...they just hit a game that was popular to a lot of people and sales took off. It wasn't long ago that the DS had fairly crappy titles and ports out. They are starting to come out with a few innovative games...but a puppy simulator might appeal to a lot of people, but it doesn't do much for me. The PSP needs more games...and good ones if it is really going to compete. I am not going to argue with you there. But the Revolution has a very slim chance of becoming the top dog. Nintendo appeals to the classic gamer. The real market is now in the casual gamer..the EA and Halo players. I would rather Nintendo stay the same (just pick up some dang rpgs!) and not buy in to the MTV version of gaming.
#5 Stop posting top 5 lists
#4 Stop hiring morons who can't write
#3 Stop hiring writers who don't know games
#2 Don't take yourself so seriously
#1 Don't invent problems. Gaming is not dying. It is more popular than even. Whoever wrote this should be smacked around with a trout.
It will be tough for games to ever be taken seriously as sports. Sports are something we are all taught in PE. You are guaranteed to learn the basic rules of football, baseball, and soccer. And square dancing, but I seriously think that is just a form of punishment...or at the very least something the teachers make us do to laugh at us. There is no class that teaches the rules of Quake, Counter Strike, or UT. So the general public is not introduced to gaming at the scale that sports is.
Another difference is that games are constantly coming out and changing. Sports on the other hand, except for a few minor rule changes, stays fairly static.
FPS's are also very hard to watch...particularly live. Because action is happening all over the place. Maybe if someone edited all the video and showed all the action it would be fairly interesting...but you can't see the whole playing field like in sports.
I'd see televised Madden 2005 tournaments drawing a larger audience because of these reasons. You can see the whole game/field. A large popluation of people play these games (compared to FPS's). And even if you don't play the game, you are familiar with the rules.
But to me, games are more fun to play than watch...but then again, I am pretty good at them.
Your question confuses me a lot. Have you just been playing single player fps? It's pretty obvious if you play multiplayer there are "clans". They all wear their little tags. If you impress them, usually they will bug you to join..or you can bug them. A lot of these people play on ladders (like cal for cs). There are different levels for each ladder. You will learn who the good clans are and where they are play. So yes, you can work your way up. But if you were really that good, a clan probably would have already scooped you up, so this doesn't make sense to me.
Geeks aren't the only people playing games these days. There are people who watch sports and are stats freaks. There are people who watch sports to see the amazing big plays. Stat pages for servers wouldn't be up if people didn't care about stats. Some people's stats make them celebrities. So the person with the best frags per round in the league would probably be seen as a valuable player...just as much as the person with the most receptions would be valuable in football. Sort of goes hand in hand.
It's like someone took all the insightful comments on games.slashdot.org and put it together in an article to try to make everyone just nod their heads because it's a popular opinion. But it really is just trash and absolutely the opposite of insightful. Oh no...that game industry is dying! It sure is, look, gaming companies are making more than ever in history. Oh god, all the games are sequels! While that is not even close to the truth, a lot of game sequels are better than the first one. Sometimes people really enjoy playing a game so if the new one is similar enough with better graphics and a new story, it makes an excellent game because it is still fun. And there are plenty of innovative games out there, you just have to stop looking at what everyone else is buying and look a little deeper. It's not the game companies fault you can't put a little effort in to looking in to games other than just noticing that everyone is buying halo. There is really just as much innovation going on today as there was before if not more. How can I possibly say that? Because innovation is inevitable in a brand new field. It was impossible not to be innovative in games because there was nothing else out there.
Right now there are more good games than any one person should play in their life time. You don't care about graphics? Then buy all the old consoles and play through every great game on those systems. You all are such hypocrites saying you don't care about graphics. I bet there are hundreds of great games you haven't played...still, you sit there and wait for the new systems and bitch and moan about lack of innovation on those systems. All the old games are still out there for you to play...if it was so good back then, then go back to those systems. You will find you are just looking at the past through rose colored glasses.
They don't make games...so what else are they going to push? Duh...good games make a console more desirable. We know already...why do people feel so insightful saything the same thing over and over again...maybe beause they get modded up. But seriously, a more capable console can be appealing to people who make games (though the complexity can be a deterrant as well). But of course they are going to push specs...you can't push games on a system that doesn't exist yet. Be realistic people.
That's a load of crap. Time limits are what parents do to kids to make them get outside and do other things so they don't fail school and get fat. And if they are doing a good job parenting, it works. If you can put a limit on something, it could stop a lot of people from going overboard with these games. While I don't really think it can/will/should be done...your arguments are contradicting themselves. On one hand you say they should let people play as long as they want and that is how they get bored, on the other you say you have "seen" people lost their jobs and custody battles over the thing. Obviously, giving them unlimited access isn't solving the problem, is it? There really isn't a good solution to solving the problem of game addiction other than good friends and family stepping in (like any addiction problem) and refusing to let someone ruin their life over something. But if they try time limits and it helps some people...how is that bad? (other than all the people crying because they have to go play a different game)
I am betting that they will release the server code when they shut down so that people can still enjoy the game. Fans have a way of keeping these things alive if they want to. Blizzard.net servers are not down...they are alive and supported. So your analogy is flawed. It would be like be running my own WoW server...and yeah, I would probably sue if someone was doing that.
Actually, he is just plain right and your point (I use that term loosely, since you don't really have one) doesn't make any sense. You fail to note prices of consoles drop. You fail to provide any evidence. A "decent" gaming rig today costs $2000+ if you want to stay current with games because PC games are constantly pushing the edge of systems. If you want to make some sort of point, here's a tip. You figure out the prices. You present the data. You give your sources. Go ahead and do it now.
The price point of consoles over PCs is still there. But there is so much more to it than just that. It's easier for developers because they have one target platform (or 2 or 3 if they aren't exclusive) to develop and test for. Consoles are more social so people can play with their friend all while in the same room. Games on consoles (normally) just work. No new video drivers or weird issues...you just can concentrate on playing games. You really miss the point.
I play on both platforms, so I am not trying to say consoles are better than PCs. I will always rather play strategy and FPSs on PC. Hooking up a keyboard to a console to get my mouse rate limited is dumb...plus, I don't want to hunch over a coffee table to play a game...i want to kick back in a recliner with a controller. You just need to drop your biased attitude about consoles. Both have advantages and disadvantages and both will be healthy markets in the future.
Ok...where to start with this. You are going to get modded up here, but your post is far from insightful. Maybe one of the two non-Nintendo consoles will be bust, but I guarantee you both of them won't. Those are consoles that appeal to the mainstream gamer. Slashdot is not mainstream, the Nintendo is much more appealing because most of us are old gamers. Gaming is not the niche activity it used to be. The market is huge for Sports games, FPSs, and RPGs. These (currently) aren't games that Nintendo offers. I know some of you will retort "yeah, but Nintendo games are fun". They sure are, but their image and games don't appeal to a lot of people. It is very hard to predict Nintendo taking over. Parents buying for their kids don't drive the market anymore, it's the 20 something year old male...and they do not choose Nintendo.
Games can't stay cheap forever. People expect games to cost the same, but the problem is that there is this thing called inflation. People don't tolerate prices going up mid-console well, so it makes sense that prices increase with the new console.
Using the PSP is a stupid example. It's a handheld and no one has been able to break in to that market and de-throne the king. This is not the case with consoles. The PS2 has always been more expensive than the Gamecube and the gap between the two in terms of sales (yes, yes, numbers not profit) is huge.
Your other point of how long it will take to produce is just utter bull shit that you are making up. You can't predict that sort of thing and to say that the timetables will double is just garbage.
I'll probably end up with all 3 consoles...but I'll wait for prices to drop. My age has brought patience. But really, I sincerely hope the Revolution is more than you state. New controller != revolution (I liked the GCs controller the least out of the 3 consoles and doubt they can bring anything that will blow my mind), backward compatability was done before...not a revolution. It would be cool to play classic games but it really isn't a revolution because I can still do that with old consoles and emulators. Emulators would then be the real revolution in gaming (obviously, it would still be nice to have it on the console though).
Not true. As long as people get updated rosters and they focus on making minor improvements, people are happy with these sort of games. They don't expect new rules or the ability to cybernetically enhance their players or something strange like that. This game took elements of the old game and changed them for the worse...that's the only problem.
Slashdot Mirror
So let me try to figure out your logic. People are losing interest in gaming so they will all go to Nintendo now because Nintendo doesn't make games. Oh wait, they do make games! Ok ok, so you mean that Nintendo doesn't have anything out right now that gamers could play and the Revolution is about to come out. Oh wait, they have something called the "GameCube"!
Seriously...how can an article saying that less people are gaming going to help Nintendo. Unless you believe they are gaming less because of the other consoles games...in which case they could have bought a game cube right now. The Revolution is still going to play games..even if it uses a remote control for a controller now. If people are less interested in gaming, that is just going to hurt the industry.
If you want all the games, you play on Windows. This isn't a Windows vs Mac thing, they are both fine OSs. But the number of gamers on Macs often does not justify the costs to port and support another OS. You have no idea how many Mac users it would pull in. They have people to crunch those numbers and if they could make some huge profit (like you seem to think) they would already have a Mac port. If you are a gamer, get a PC...otherwise, don't be surprised if most companies don't port games for you. It's like going to a $.99 store and being pissed off that every is more expensive that a quarter...you knew what you were getting in to.
What a weird comment. By your math it is more expensive to own a GameCube since it has 100s of games. Who buys all the games???
But yes, waiting for prices to drop and reading game reviews is a good way to save money.
Except they showed his face. Before...and after. Personally, I preferred after.
He speaks very highly of Serenity. Maybe it was his intention to talk about his book (I doubt it), but if people are reading his reviews, they probably have already read it anyways. The reason why I like Ender's Game and other OSC books so much is that he actually writes interesting characters with interesting interaction. Most sci fi is more about the science than developing interesting characters. OSC puts the characters first (in my mind) and that's what make his books moving.
The movie is already being made, so it's not some pitch to do that. Anyways, everyone has their opinion but it seems like you have some personal bias based on who he is. Just read the books...you don't have to love the person to love the books.
*clap clap clap* I'm sorry if I doubt your sincerity. My main problem with your post is that I am tired of reading comments like this. If you find things so objectionable, just move. Don't post about it, just do it. I think we probably have a similar view on things, though. I would go nuts if people were talking about teaching intelligent design to my children. You must live in a very conservative part of the country. I don't, so it doesn't seem as much of a problem for me.
My problem with what you posted is more that you decided to take this thread (Jack Thompson writing a law) to say you are moving out of the country. Based on something that isn't even written or close to a law, it's now time to move out of the country...ok. Same thing with your DNA thing. Is it a law yet? Are people doing it? Would they actually do it on a traffic stop? You don't know! Yet just because it is suggested, you want to pack up shop and leave. If you are going to leave, leave because you don't like things that are actually happening. There are a lot of crazy ideas out there that you aren't going to agree with...but until they are actually implemented, you can't count that against the country.
You have been around a lot longer than I have..so I think you would have experienced the political pendulum more. Things go back and fourth in our country. Right now it has been swinging to the right...I think it is too far right now and it makes me uncomofortable. But once it gets too far, then there is a backlash and things swing back to the left. It's been doing this for a long time.
Ok, so an article about Jack Thompson (that might not even be true) has been asked to write a law on video games has finally pushed you to moving out of the country. It's not like the law has been a) written b) actually applied in any state. Yeah, I am frustrated with other people who can't understand why I don't want their morals made in to laws. But how is running away from the problem going to solve it? Why don't you start a pro-gaming platform? Why don't you try to stir people up? Why don't you assemble like minded people to write letters to your congressman?
It's just pathetic to me see people say they are moving out of the country. I really wish they would make a law that states anyone who posts on Slashdot that they are moving out of the country would be deported within a month. Seriously, what have you learned by being in the military and in this country for 43 years? To run away when things happen that you don't like? Fine, then go, just don't cry about it on here.
Not really a fair comparison, though, is it? Tetris is a puzzle game that is something meant to be played over and over again. Compare this to say an rpg which is fairly linear. Once you know the story it is probably going to collect dust. You can try to put fun mini-games in it (like Chocobo racing) but most people are just going to sell it back. It can be the best game on the face of the planet, but you are going to sell it back anyways because there is no need/time to play it again. It's effect may be reduced for first tier titles of the puzzle genre...but not so much for other types of games.
Yeah, this is just a troll. FFXI made SE a lot of money and is quite successful for its genre. Some people may dislike it, but saying it is "widely hearlded" is an exaggeration to say the least. Whoever modded this up and whoever posted it are both idiots.
Bah, that's a load of crap. The whole MTV mainstream gaming is more recent than the release of the PSX. Why did I switch to Sony? I followed the Final Fantasy series. The console had good games made by good companies. They went with a disc based system rather than carts which allowed them to have larger games with cut scenes and better graphics (with the draw back that load times were longer and you needed a memory disc for saved games).
You come off as a bitter fan boy. You could market the living crap out of Gigli and it will still be a terrible movie with mediocre box office sales. The PS was a solid system and had good marketing as well. Marketing alone can't make you displace the former market leader.
Video games have grown up a lot. You can still get the same type of games as you could in the past. True, a lot of games now target a different group of people, but guess what, people don't have to like the kind of games you like. Maybe some people base their manliness on their console, but that is a really terrible generalization and I really doubt the majority of new gamers feel that way.
Gaming is not in a decline. There are still great games being made. Some games don't target you. Some games are bad. People look at the past with rose colored glasses. There were terrible games made in the past as well. This is usually when someone says "but games are less innovative". This is such a stupid comment. Games were a NEW MEDIUM...anything you did was innovative. Games that were popular defined the genres that we have today. There are more good games out there than you would be able to play. If you can't find them, you are too lazy to look. Yeah, you have to sift through garbage to find gems sometimes, but they are out there! Have you beaten all the great games of the past? If that era was so good, just keep playing those games. But no, everyone is going to buy their revolution, 360, or ps3. Because good games are still coming out and this will always be true. Get over your bias. Competition is a good thing.
Way to review the music before you even know what it is...brilliant!
If he would have stuck to his convictions the game still would have been made, it just would have been worse. He didn't want them to tarnish the series by not having him involved. He did the right thing.
Just because game designers let go of their ideals has nothing to do with games being taken seriously as a form of art. The only reason it gets less respect is that it is a new medium that a lot of people aren't familiar with. Painters might want to paint a certain style but that style may not put food on the table. So they paint what people want. Now is painting no longer an artistic experession? Of course not. It's still art. Of for an easier anaolgy...look at the third matrix. If movies are still a form of artistic expression after that pile of crap, selling out on a sequel has nothing to do with artistic expression.
Yeah, everyone thought katamari was great. I thought it was fairly boring to be honest. It was interesting at first, but it didn't pull me in. It remains in my game library unbeaten and collecting dust.
While it isn't always the case, game sequels tend to be better than their originals. If you really loved the game, having new levels to conquer and explore would be a huge plus.
This is just the typical whiny crap that we have to see on a daily basis at games.slashdot.org. Listen, it is very easy to innovate games in the past because it was a brand new medium. Do you see new, innovative movies coming out all the time? New genres? Games are maturing. It is the best time in history to be a gamer. If you don't like current gen games, go play through all the games from the past. It may be 8/16 bit, but it's still new to you. If you can't find anything you enjoy, you aren't really trying.
Listen, Nintendo is great...but you really don't get it. The casual gamer likes the games that the other consoles have more than the games on Nintendo. They want the Maddens and the Halos and the Final Fantasies. Nintendo will stay profitable and keep their niche. Smart consumers will buy the console with the games they want. To you and many others, Nintendo is a smart choice. But seriously, quit placing your values on other people though just because of your bias.
You don't need dual screens for something to be big. Take Halo for example. The X-Box didn't have something special...they just hit a game that was popular to a lot of people and sales took off. It wasn't long ago that the DS had fairly crappy titles and ports out. They are starting to come out with a few innovative games...but a puppy simulator might appeal to a lot of people, but it doesn't do much for me. The PSP needs more games...and good ones if it is really going to compete. I am not going to argue with you there. But the Revolution has a very slim chance of becoming the top dog. Nintendo appeals to the classic gamer. The real market is now in the casual gamer..the EA and Halo players. I would rather Nintendo stay the same (just pick up some dang rpgs!) and not buy in to the MTV version of gaming.
#5 Stop posting top 5 lists #4 Stop hiring morons who can't write #3 Stop hiring writers who don't know games #2 Don't take yourself so seriously #1 Don't invent problems. Gaming is not dying. It is more popular than even. Whoever wrote this should be smacked around with a trout.
It will be tough for games to ever be taken seriously as sports. Sports are something we are all taught in PE. You are guaranteed to learn the basic rules of football, baseball, and soccer. And square dancing, but I seriously think that is just a form of punishment...or at the very least something the teachers make us do to laugh at us. There is no class that teaches the rules of Quake, Counter Strike, or UT. So the general public is not introduced to gaming at the scale that sports is.
Another difference is that games are constantly coming out and changing. Sports on the other hand, except for a few minor rule changes, stays fairly static.
FPS's are also very hard to watch...particularly live. Because action is happening all over the place. Maybe if someone edited all the video and showed all the action it would be fairly interesting...but you can't see the whole playing field like in sports.
I'd see televised Madden 2005 tournaments drawing a larger audience because of these reasons. You can see the whole game/field. A large popluation of people play these games (compared to FPS's). And even if you don't play the game, you are familiar with the rules.
But to me, games are more fun to play than watch...but then again, I am pretty good at them.
Your question confuses me a lot. Have you just been playing single player fps? It's pretty obvious if you play multiplayer there are "clans". They all wear their little tags. If you impress them, usually they will bug you to join..or you can bug them. A lot of these people play on ladders (like cal for cs). There are different levels for each ladder. You will learn who the good clans are and where they are play. So yes, you can work your way up. But if you were really that good, a clan probably would have already scooped you up, so this doesn't make sense to me.
Geeks aren't the only people playing games these days. There are people who watch sports and are stats freaks. There are people who watch sports to see the amazing big plays. Stat pages for servers wouldn't be up if people didn't care about stats. Some people's stats make them celebrities. So the person with the best frags per round in the league would probably be seen as a valuable player...just as much as the person with the most receptions would be valuable in football. Sort of goes hand in hand.
It's like someone took all the insightful comments on games.slashdot.org and put it together in an article to try to make everyone just nod their heads because it's a popular opinion. But it really is just trash and absolutely the opposite of insightful. Oh no...that game industry is dying! It sure is, look, gaming companies are making more than ever in history. Oh god, all the games are sequels! While that is not even close to the truth, a lot of game sequels are better than the first one. Sometimes people really enjoy playing a game so if the new one is similar enough with better graphics and a new story, it makes an excellent game because it is still fun. And there are plenty of innovative games out there, you just have to stop looking at what everyone else is buying and look a little deeper. It's not the game companies fault you can't put a little effort in to looking in to games other than just noticing that everyone is buying halo. There is really just as much innovation going on today as there was before if not more. How can I possibly say that? Because innovation is inevitable in a brand new field. It was impossible not to be innovative in games because there was nothing else out there.
Right now there are more good games than any one person should play in their life time. You don't care about graphics? Then buy all the old consoles and play through every great game on those systems. You all are such hypocrites saying you don't care about graphics. I bet there are hundreds of great games you haven't played...still, you sit there and wait for the new systems and bitch and moan about lack of innovation on those systems. All the old games are still out there for you to play...if it was so good back then, then go back to those systems. You will find you are just looking at the past through rose colored glasses.
They don't make games...so what else are they going to push? Duh...good games make a console more desirable. We know already...why do people feel so insightful saything the same thing over and over again...maybe beause they get modded up. But seriously, a more capable console can be appealing to people who make games (though the complexity can be a deterrant as well). But of course they are going to push specs...you can't push games on a system that doesn't exist yet. Be realistic people.
That's a load of crap. Time limits are what parents do to kids to make them get outside and do other things so they don't fail school and get fat. And if they are doing a good job parenting, it works. If you can put a limit on something, it could stop a lot of people from going overboard with these games. While I don't really think it can/will/should be done...your arguments are contradicting themselves. On one hand you say they should let people play as long as they want and that is how they get bored, on the other you say you have "seen" people lost their jobs and custody battles over the thing. Obviously, giving them unlimited access isn't solving the problem, is it? There really isn't a good solution to solving the problem of game addiction other than good friends and family stepping in (like any addiction problem) and refusing to let someone ruin their life over something. But if they try time limits and it helps some people...how is that bad? (other than all the people crying because they have to go play a different game)
I am betting that they will release the server code when they shut down so that people can still enjoy the game. Fans have a way of keeping these things alive if they want to. Blizzard.net servers are not down...they are alive and supported. So your analogy is flawed. It would be like be running my own WoW server...and yeah, I would probably sue if someone was doing that.
Actually, he is just plain right and your point (I use that term loosely, since you don't really have one) doesn't make any sense. You fail to note prices of consoles drop. You fail to provide any evidence. A "decent" gaming rig today costs $2000+ if you want to stay current with games because PC games are constantly pushing the edge of systems. If you want to make some sort of point, here's a tip. You figure out the prices. You present the data. You give your sources. Go ahead and do it now.
The price point of consoles over PCs is still there. But there is so much more to it than just that. It's easier for developers because they have one target platform (or 2 or 3 if they aren't exclusive) to develop and test for. Consoles are more social so people can play with their friend all while in the same room. Games on consoles (normally) just work. No new video drivers or weird issues...you just can concentrate on playing games. You really miss the point.
I play on both platforms, so I am not trying to say consoles are better than PCs. I will always rather play strategy and FPSs on PC. Hooking up a keyboard to a console to get my mouse rate limited is dumb...plus, I don't want to hunch over a coffee table to play a game...i want to kick back in a recliner with a controller. You just need to drop your biased attitude about consoles. Both have advantages and disadvantages and both will be healthy markets in the future.
Ok...where to start with this. You are going to get modded up here, but your post is far from insightful. Maybe one of the two non-Nintendo consoles will be bust, but I guarantee you both of them won't. Those are consoles that appeal to the mainstream gamer. Slashdot is not mainstream, the Nintendo is much more appealing because most of us are old gamers. Gaming is not the niche activity it used to be. The market is huge for Sports games, FPSs, and RPGs. These (currently) aren't games that Nintendo offers. I know some of you will retort "yeah, but Nintendo games are fun". They sure are, but their image and games don't appeal to a lot of people. It is very hard to predict Nintendo taking over. Parents buying for their kids don't drive the market anymore, it's the 20 something year old male...and they do not choose Nintendo.
Games can't stay cheap forever. People expect games to cost the same, but the problem is that there is this thing called inflation. People don't tolerate prices going up mid-console well, so it makes sense that prices increase with the new console.
Using the PSP is a stupid example. It's a handheld and no one has been able to break in to that market and de-throne the king. This is not the case with consoles. The PS2 has always been more expensive than the Gamecube and the gap between the two in terms of sales (yes, yes, numbers not profit) is huge.
Your other point of how long it will take to produce is just utter bull shit that you are making up. You can't predict that sort of thing and to say that the timetables will double is just garbage.
I'll probably end up with all 3 consoles...but I'll wait for prices to drop. My age has brought patience. But really, I sincerely hope the Revolution is more than you state. New controller != revolution (I liked the GCs controller the least out of the 3 consoles and doubt they can bring anything that will blow my mind), backward compatability was done before...not a revolution. It would be cool to play classic games but it really isn't a revolution because I can still do that with old consoles and emulators. Emulators would then be the real revolution in gaming (obviously, it would still be nice to have it on the console though).
Not true. As long as people get updated rosters and they focus on making minor improvements, people are happy with these sort of games. They don't expect new rules or the ability to cybernetically enhance their players or something strange like that. This game took elements of the old game and changed them for the worse...that's the only problem.