I don't understand how the maturity level of the user base has anything to do with how a company reacts. Eve has always been heavy in to banning and suppressing information. Eve also claims to boast a more "mature" player base (which I find a bit laughable). In a game with such mature players, CCP bans more than any other company. I played Eve for awhile and didn't like it very much. The corruption from within the game company made me go from thinking they made a boring game with jerks as a player base to just flat out disliking the game. Don't get me wrong, Eve has its strong points...but fun isn't a part of that.
Eve banning people and deleting forum posts isn't ruling with an iron fist. It is a desperation move to hold on to customers who may not know what is going on. If they ruled with an iron fist they would actually come down on the people who cheated with the devs. That's the problem, the game should be as cut throat as possible in game...but CCP not only plays the game, but leaks inside knowledge of the game to organizations that are already overpowered. Maybe they are totally clean now (I doubt it) but the game will forever be tainted by the past.
The reason they ban is because they have too much to hide and would rather do that than address the issue and fix their game.
As I say to my students 'if you had to have brain surgery would you prefer someone who has been through medical school, trained and researched in the field, or the student next to you who has read Wikipedia'?
Would you like to have someone operate on your brain based on his own opinion of what is wrong, or on many brain surgeons all over the world opinions of what is wrong? That would be a better analogy. Just because an article can be edited by someone next to you doesn't mean that articles aren't edited by experts in the field as well. 100%, know your sources, verify accuracy, do real research.
People are unwittingly trusting the information they find on Wikipedia, yet experience has shown it can be wrong, incomplete, biased, or misleading
And these so called experts can found to be wrong, misleading, biased, and incomplete as well. Sounds like Sharman Lichtenstein is being biased and misleading himself.
The game isn't for grown ups. It is a game for griefers. There are plenty of those in any age group. The problem with Eve is that it is complex. Not in a good way...mostly in a poorly designed interface way. People would complain if CCP made any changes to the UI to make things simpler or more logical. They would cry that it was WoWifcation of their game and make a big deal since the advantage they had of being willing to click through 80 menus to get to something was now gone. The most common expression in that game is "can I have your stuff". That sort of attitude permeates through the game. Like they captured the whole asshole on the internet demographic. The only things interesting about the game is its skill system (nice idea) and PvP. Unfortunately, PvE is terribly boring and you have to do a lot of it to afford to get blown up. The single shard idea is nice but the servers can't handle the load of large battles and certain popular trade areas are always overly congested. I understand why some people like it...but it will always be a niche game compared to WoW. I find it funny that the Eve players like to put down WoW and the WoW players don't even know the Eve players exist.
You say that if it is bad. It's not the guy's fault a video game is more enjoyable than their wives. Maybe wives need to work a little harder to be enjoyable. (I promise, I am kidding...mostly)
God, you are a moron. People don't watch weight lifting because it is a freaking boring sport to watch. It has NOTHING to do with doping. People are upset at Bonds because he is BREAKING THE RULES. Not because he is doing drugs. They all are on drugs that have yet to be banned. If Bonds was doing a drug that wasn't banned in the game, and then it become banned and he quit (going to another unbanned drug), then no one would care.
Your "psychology" that you keep touting is not scientific. It is your personal opinion. Advil helps me work better when I have a headache. Do I feel my work is diminished because of this? The achievement is only diminished if I were to do something that broke what society considers to be the rules (and then only in others eyes).
I find it amusing that you are even hypocritical about this. It is ok to do drugs to relax and lower inhibitions (of course it is, since it is considered socially acceptable) but using them to improve yourself or your life means you are less of a person?
Some people's "true self" is suicidal or a danger to society. Should we deny them the medication to function? I don't know what psych 101 books you read to come up with your theories, but your arguments don't hold any water.
I don't know why baseball is appealing...personally I find it to be boring and pointless unless I am there live. But that really is irrelevant to your point.
People watch sports because they want to see the best people in the world compete against each other an the highest level. They want to cheer on their home team. They want to get attached to an amazing player and see them do amazing things in effort for their team to win. These guys take all kinds of vitamins and have personal trainers and are on all these dies that I don't "self-identify" with. You are just making that up. I don't self identify with John Elway or Joe Sakic...I just think they are amazing athletes in sports I like to watch.
All these guys are enhancing...if you don't believe it, you are naive or stupid. They are just doing it with substances that haven't been banned. The ones that get caught doing the banned ones get vilified, but that is only because they are seen as breaking the rules to get ahead. But all these guys are on special "shakes" that have all kinds of stuff in them to make them perform optimally. You are deluding yourself with this idea of "self-identification". People want to see their team beat the crap out of the other team. That's it.
Sorry, I don't buy it, not a bit. The only reason Barry Bonds loses stature is because he was breaking the rules. If everyone was allowed to enhance their performance or if this was more accepted in our culture, no one would even care. Obviously the guy had talent beyond the drugs...just by taking that drug I won't get in to the MLB. So I really don't see what the big deal. I currently don't take any drugs (other than caffeine), but if I wanted to, why is this a problem? It doesn't diminish myself or my achievements...these are all still mine. If it helps me do a better job, than what really is the problem?
I think that is the perfect point. You don't complain about people having caffeine because it is available to all...yet it enhances performance (to a lesser degree maybe, but it is the same thing). Do I look down on people who drink a lot of caffeine now? Are their accomplishments not their own? That's BS. But when it is a prescription drug, now it is unfair? Your argument just doesn't hold up to logic. Maybe if you took performance enhancing drugs you could capitalize the first words in sentences.
Those "flash cards" can hold millions of books. In any case, please list the education software you have looked at. You don't have to answer it because I know it would be little if any. This is just your knee jerk reaction...I don't know why...because you didn't have it growing up? you only see games as a waste?
The funny thing is that you really don't get much out of school other than how to be successful in a school setting. Degrees show more that you are willing to work and learn something rather than teaching exactly what you need to know anymore (you learn that on the job and over the years as things change quickly). The most useful educational part of computer games isn't really the game part, it is the ability to use the computer which is integral to doing anything in our society. Kids that come from third world countries do not have an advantage because they lack computers, that is just stupid. They do well in our school systems because they came from a place that really sucked and jump on the opportunity to better their lives. American kids are well off so they don't feel the need to work so hard.
Uhh, isn't that obvious? The line is drawn when you pay money for it. It doesn't matter what you call the transfer method, if you are paying for it, then you get taxed.
Why would you suggest Paris Hilton is smart? Because she is famous? Is it that she acts so incredibly stupid because she is secretly smart and knows that sells or could it just be that she is legitimately stupid?
Instead of actually bringing up any reasonable points, you use the lame debate tactic of belittling the person who disagrees with you. Oh, all people who think Paris is dumb is intimidated or manipulated by good looking blondes? Give me a break. If she only acted stupid on her shows then I could understand. But when she does interviews on talk shows and still comes off as dumb and superficial, then you just have to think that is how she is. It isn't like she needs the money. Who really wants fame if it means everyone thinks that you have the mental capacity of an air-headed 13 year old girl?
And what kind of crap do you read to know that someone is "rumoured to be dubbed" in a record book? Why don't you make a youtube video "Leave Paris alone!" and get it over with.
Uh....nothing? I played WoW for awhile and I got way too involved in it. Didn't like the fact I was gaining weight and taking a game so seriously so I uninstalled it from my computer and was happy. There is no chemical dependence so your analogy doesn't apply. As far as taking something away from people...yeah, if you took away something I enjoyed doing I would probably be pretty pissed. If you said I couldn't play soccer anymore or watch the Daily Show I would probably become violent. But that has to do with you being a jerk and telling me what to do, not from the lack of that activity.
I think you make good points. It is just when you get to the end of what you are saying that bothers me. What you said reminds me of the old "slippery slope" argument. In other words, if you allow any laws to be placed on something, then more laws will become easier and then that things will be banned forever. This is a load of crap. Certain gun laws are good and using the "slippery slope" argument is dishonest and vile. There are plenty of loopholes that need to be fixed and some anti-gun laws can be good. I don't think you mind the fact that citizens are banned from having rocket launchers. Obviously, it is where the line is drawn that is important. That is where I didn't agree with Heston...his line was way too far over on the irrational side of things.
It isn't so cut and dry as you try to make it out. We don't live in a world where everyone is educated on the proper use of guns. Someone in your family is more likely to be shot than anyone else when you own a gun. I am not saying take away the right to own a gun. I am just saying be realistic about it and understand that some gun laws are good. You can be highly educated and still not like guns. Calling people names is rather pathetic and doesn't help sway anyone to your side.
People are saying that this code is not malicious. I completely disagree. It is one thing to create a crowbar. It has multiple purposes and can be used for legal and illegal tasks. On the other hand, it is illegal to make keys of someone else's house and then sell them to people who want to break in to the house and steal stuff. Gilder is a tool specifically made to break the EULA, that uses up resources, and degrades the experience for other players. If you look and understand it that way, it is malicious and should be considered malware. There is no legitimate purpose for this application to exist. I don't know how anyone can defend it.
You and the post you compliment just don't get it. So let's implement your little accumulate wealth/XP thing. Well then, what is the point in playing the game? Eve is an example of doing the XP training offline yet it is rampant with bots to grind out making the ISK (eve money). If characters generate gold offline, it will just cause mass inflation making everything cost more thus negating any effect that would have. It isn't that people don't like playing WoW. It is that they are cheating so that they can get ahead of others. WoW is nothing like FF11 grindwise...so if you are basing your experience of MMORPGs from that game, you truly have no idea what you are talking about.
There is always one of these stupid posts modded up in a WoW thread. Why stupid? Because even if the game was the most fun ever, there are still going to be people who want to get ahead of others by any means possible. The game could be fun, but a person can't play 24/7 so they use a bot to play. But WoW is probably the most stunning success in gaming history and you sit here and pompously claim the it is crappy game design. Why don't you design it better if it is so crappy? Big surprise, you can't and anything you came up with wouldn't be 1/1000000000 as popular as WoW. Because WoW is a fun game that is well designed. There are just some people who have to be the highest level with the best gear so they decide to cut corners.
Oh, give me a break. Blizzard creates a fantastic game and offers free online play (which they have supported for an incredibly long time) and I am supposed to hate them from stopping a group of people creating their own multiplayer servers for people who do not want to pay for the game. You can give some stupid example of how you didn't like the way battle.net did X and so bnetd was for things other piracy but it is weak at best. bnetd=piracy. That is what it was created for no matter how they tried to dress it up. They didn't hurt them out of spite, they did so to protect the effort they put in to their game. If you can't see why what bnetd was doing was wrong than you are acting like a 6 year old with your fingers in your ears saying "la la la la".
I have no idea what your point is. Despite the fact that there is a 360 elite, it doesn't doom the core or premium versions. They still play the same games and only someone who has to have the best need to waste their money on it. The backward-compatible PS3s gave plenty of notice that they were being phased out so that is your fault that you didn't get it. As far as lack of hard drive space on the 360s, you can always buy extra hard drive space. And it isn't PC hard drives you should be comparing it to since they are better compared to laptop drives. It sure would be nice if you could just hook up a normal hard drive to the things (and I am sure there are hacks to do that) but it really isn't a big deal unless you download things like crazy.
Have you heard of XNA? That's MS's package that can cross-compile for PC and 360. Of course, a game designed to be portable for either system is most likely going to be sub-optimal on either system...particularly the more advanced one.
*sigh* You don't even get the summary part right. What the summary is saying (incorrectly) that to game with a PC, you have to spend a boat load of money. We all know graphics on the PC are better. It used to be that consoles would be graphically superior to PCs when they first came out, but that is no longer true. This generation has PCs keeping up just fine. So you are right in the sense that the graphics aren't the be all and end all of gaming.
But if you don't think people appreciate graphical improvements then you are completely off your rocker. Gameplay is king, but better graphics allow you to have a better, more interactive experience. Yeah, duh, gameplay>graphics but ignoring graphics doesn't work either.
Saying one game is better than another is all personal opinion. I found Morrowind to be dull and I didn't come anywhere to finishing it. Oblivion was much more enjoyable to me and I beat it along with all the other major side quests.
As far as the Wii/PS2 goes, you are vastly over simplifying things. If the Wii cost the same as the PS3 or 360 I would say you have a point. But in todays economy, people want to game and save money. The PS2 is cheap and has a fantastic library of games where the PS3 has essentially no games. The Wii is cheap and targets a wider audience of casual gamers. It isn't that people see the crappier graphics and think it must have great gameplay...it is a lot because it is cheaper and the new control scheme is interesting. There are fantastic games on the 360 that have great gameplay and great graphics. The price of entry is just higher.
In short, the final nail in your argument's coffin is that the Wii is exactly what they are talking about. How can PCs compete when video cards cost 12k and you can get a wii for a few hundred bucks? In any case, the summary should be modded flamebait or troll (a very successful one too).
I think you speak too much in absolutes. You say Tetris is more art than FF. But FF7 actually drew real emotion out of me when I was younger. I will forever remember that moment. But I couldn't care less how many times I beat tetris at whatever skill level. In any case, art is in the eye of the beholder. You shouldn't be so dismissive.
And I have to ask you this...what's with your attitude towards competitive online games? Just because someone likes it they become "jockish" to you. I know that is the Slashdot group think...but come on. Some people realize that AI is no where near human intelligence and that it is fun to compete at a higher level. Just because you aren't good at it, doesn't make everyone who dominates a 15 year old. I have always been good at FPS's and still can be one of the best players at whatever new FPS comes out and I am 30. I also enjoy playing RPGs and loved the old King/Space Quest games. I guess I am just tired of seeing the stupid stereotypes on here. I don't judge you for the games you like...why belittle those of us that enjoy different games?
Slashdot Mirror
I think you need to go look up the definition of the word 'all'.
Not that I disagree with your point or agree with the GP's...but age often has nothing to do with maturity. Particularly in Eve.
I don't understand how the maturity level of the user base has anything to do with how a company reacts. Eve has always been heavy in to banning and suppressing information. Eve also claims to boast a more "mature" player base (which I find a bit laughable). In a game with such mature players, CCP bans more than any other company. I played Eve for awhile and didn't like it very much. The corruption from within the game company made me go from thinking they made a boring game with jerks as a player base to just flat out disliking the game. Don't get me wrong, Eve has its strong points...but fun isn't a part of that.
Eve banning people and deleting forum posts isn't ruling with an iron fist. It is a desperation move to hold on to customers who may not know what is going on. If they ruled with an iron fist they would actually come down on the people who cheated with the devs. That's the problem, the game should be as cut throat as possible in game...but CCP not only plays the game, but leaks inside knowledge of the game to organizations that are already overpowered. Maybe they are totally clean now (I doubt it) but the game will forever be tainted by the past.
The reason they ban is because they have too much to hide and would rather do that than address the issue and fix their game.
But maybe someone can pull it down and improve their horrible UI!
As I say to my students 'if you had to have brain surgery would you prefer someone who has been through medical school, trained and researched in the field, or the student next to you who has read Wikipedia'?
Would you like to have someone operate on your brain based on his own opinion of what is wrong, or on many brain surgeons all over the world opinions of what is wrong? That would be a better analogy. Just because an article can be edited by someone next to you doesn't mean that articles aren't edited by experts in the field as well. 100%, know your sources, verify accuracy, do real research.
People are unwittingly trusting the information they find on Wikipedia, yet experience has shown it can be wrong, incomplete, biased, or misleading
And these so called experts can found to be wrong, misleading, biased, and incomplete as well. Sounds like Sharman Lichtenstein is being biased and misleading himself.
The game isn't for grown ups. It is a game for griefers. There are plenty of those in any age group. The problem with Eve is that it is complex. Not in a good way...mostly in a poorly designed interface way. People would complain if CCP made any changes to the UI to make things simpler or more logical. They would cry that it was WoWifcation of their game and make a big deal since the advantage they had of being willing to click through 80 menus to get to something was now gone. The most common expression in that game is "can I have your stuff". That sort of attitude permeates through the game. Like they captured the whole asshole on the internet demographic. The only things interesting about the game is its skill system (nice idea) and PvP. Unfortunately, PvE is terribly boring and you have to do a lot of it to afford to get blown up. The single shard idea is nice but the servers can't handle the load of large battles and certain popular trade areas are always overly congested. I understand why some people like it...but it will always be a niche game compared to WoW. I find it funny that the Eve players like to put down WoW and the WoW players don't even know the Eve players exist.
You say that if it is bad. It's not the guy's fault a video game is more enjoyable than their wives. Maybe wives need to work a little harder to be enjoyable. (I promise, I am kidding...mostly)
God, you are a moron. People don't watch weight lifting because it is a freaking boring sport to watch. It has NOTHING to do with doping. People are upset at Bonds because he is BREAKING THE RULES. Not because he is doing drugs. They all are on drugs that have yet to be banned. If Bonds was doing a drug that wasn't banned in the game, and then it become banned and he quit (going to another unbanned drug), then no one would care.
Your "psychology" that you keep touting is not scientific. It is your personal opinion. Advil helps me work better when I have a headache. Do I feel my work is diminished because of this? The achievement is only diminished if I were to do something that broke what society considers to be the rules (and then only in others eyes).
I find it amusing that you are even hypocritical about this. It is ok to do drugs to relax and lower inhibitions (of course it is, since it is considered socially acceptable) but using them to improve yourself or your life means you are less of a person?
Some people's "true self" is suicidal or a danger to society. Should we deny them the medication to function? I don't know what psych 101 books you read to come up with your theories, but your arguments don't hold any water.
I don't know why baseball is appealing...personally I find it to be boring and pointless unless I am there live. But that really is irrelevant to your point.
People watch sports because they want to see the best people in the world compete against each other an the highest level. They want to cheer on their home team. They want to get attached to an amazing player and see them do amazing things in effort for their team to win. These guys take all kinds of vitamins and have personal trainers and are on all these dies that I don't "self-identify" with. You are just making that up. I don't self identify with John Elway or Joe Sakic...I just think they are amazing athletes in sports I like to watch.
All these guys are enhancing...if you don't believe it, you are naive or stupid. They are just doing it with substances that haven't been banned. The ones that get caught doing the banned ones get vilified, but that is only because they are seen as breaking the rules to get ahead. But all these guys are on special "shakes" that have all kinds of stuff in them to make them perform optimally. You are deluding yourself with this idea of "self-identification". People want to see their team beat the crap out of the other team. That's it.
Sorry, I don't buy it, not a bit. The only reason Barry Bonds loses stature is because he was breaking the rules. If everyone was allowed to enhance their performance or if this was more accepted in our culture, no one would even care. Obviously the guy had talent beyond the drugs...just by taking that drug I won't get in to the MLB. So I really don't see what the big deal. I currently don't take any drugs (other than caffeine), but if I wanted to, why is this a problem? It doesn't diminish myself or my achievements...these are all still mine. If it helps me do a better job, than what really is the problem?
I think that is the perfect point. You don't complain about people having caffeine because it is available to all...yet it enhances performance (to a lesser degree maybe, but it is the same thing). Do I look down on people who drink a lot of caffeine now? Are their accomplishments not their own? That's BS. But when it is a prescription drug, now it is unfair? Your argument just doesn't hold up to logic. Maybe if you took performance enhancing drugs you could capitalize the first words in sentences.
Those "flash cards" can hold millions of books. In any case, please list the education software you have looked at. You don't have to answer it because I know it would be little if any. This is just your knee jerk reaction...I don't know why...because you didn't have it growing up? you only see games as a waste?
The funny thing is that you really don't get much out of school other than how to be successful in a school setting. Degrees show more that you are willing to work and learn something rather than teaching exactly what you need to know anymore (you learn that on the job and over the years as things change quickly). The most useful educational part of computer games isn't really the game part, it is the ability to use the computer which is integral to doing anything in our society. Kids that come from third world countries do not have an advantage because they lack computers, that is just stupid. They do well in our school systems because they came from a place that really sucked and jump on the opportunity to better their lives. American kids are well off so they don't feel the need to work so hard.
Uhh, isn't that obvious? The line is drawn when you pay money for it. It doesn't matter what you call the transfer method, if you are paying for it, then you get taxed.
Why would you suggest Paris Hilton is smart? Because she is famous? Is it that she acts so incredibly stupid because she is secretly smart and knows that sells or could it just be that she is legitimately stupid?
Instead of actually bringing up any reasonable points, you use the lame debate tactic of belittling the person who disagrees with you. Oh, all people who think Paris is dumb is intimidated or manipulated by good looking blondes? Give me a break. If she only acted stupid on her shows then I could understand. But when she does interviews on talk shows and still comes off as dumb and superficial, then you just have to think that is how she is. It isn't like she needs the money. Who really wants fame if it means everyone thinks that you have the mental capacity of an air-headed 13 year old girl?
And what kind of crap do you read to know that someone is "rumoured to be dubbed" in a record book? Why don't you make a youtube video "Leave Paris alone!" and get it over with.
Uh....nothing? I played WoW for awhile and I got way too involved in it. Didn't like the fact I was gaining weight and taking a game so seriously so I uninstalled it from my computer and was happy. There is no chemical dependence so your analogy doesn't apply. As far as taking something away from people...yeah, if you took away something I enjoyed doing I would probably be pretty pissed. If you said I couldn't play soccer anymore or watch the Daily Show I would probably become violent. But that has to do with you being a jerk and telling me what to do, not from the lack of that activity.
I think you make good points. It is just when you get to the end of what you are saying that bothers me. What you said reminds me of the old "slippery slope" argument. In other words, if you allow any laws to be placed on something, then more laws will become easier and then that things will be banned forever. This is a load of crap. Certain gun laws are good and using the "slippery slope" argument is dishonest and vile. There are plenty of loopholes that need to be fixed and some anti-gun laws can be good. I don't think you mind the fact that citizens are banned from having rocket launchers. Obviously, it is where the line is drawn that is important. That is where I didn't agree with Heston...his line was way too far over on the irrational side of things.
What is this talk about zombies? They were vampires. The vampires win.
It isn't so cut and dry as you try to make it out. We don't live in a world where everyone is educated on the proper use of guns. Someone in your family is more likely to be shot than anyone else when you own a gun. I am not saying take away the right to own a gun. I am just saying be realistic about it and understand that some gun laws are good. You can be highly educated and still not like guns. Calling people names is rather pathetic and doesn't help sway anyone to your side.
People are saying that this code is not malicious. I completely disagree. It is one thing to create a crowbar. It has multiple purposes and can be used for legal and illegal tasks. On the other hand, it is illegal to make keys of someone else's house and then sell them to people who want to break in to the house and steal stuff. Gilder is a tool specifically made to break the EULA, that uses up resources, and degrades the experience for other players. If you look and understand it that way, it is malicious and should be considered malware. There is no legitimate purpose for this application to exist. I don't know how anyone can defend it.
You and the post you compliment just don't get it. So let's implement your little accumulate wealth/XP thing. Well then, what is the point in playing the game? Eve is an example of doing the XP training offline yet it is rampant with bots to grind out making the ISK (eve money). If characters generate gold offline, it will just cause mass inflation making everything cost more thus negating any effect that would have. It isn't that people don't like playing WoW. It is that they are cheating so that they can get ahead of others. WoW is nothing like FF11 grindwise...so if you are basing your experience of MMORPGs from that game, you truly have no idea what you are talking about.
There is always one of these stupid posts modded up in a WoW thread. Why stupid? Because even if the game was the most fun ever, there are still going to be people who want to get ahead of others by any means possible. The game could be fun, but a person can't play 24/7 so they use a bot to play. But WoW is probably the most stunning success in gaming history and you sit here and pompously claim the it is crappy game design. Why don't you design it better if it is so crappy? Big surprise, you can't and anything you came up with wouldn't be 1/1000000000 as popular as WoW. Because WoW is a fun game that is well designed. There are just some people who have to be the highest level with the best gear so they decide to cut corners.
Oh, give me a break. Blizzard creates a fantastic game and offers free online play (which they have supported for an incredibly long time) and I am supposed to hate them from stopping a group of people creating their own multiplayer servers for people who do not want to pay for the game. You can give some stupid example of how you didn't like the way battle.net did X and so bnetd was for things other piracy but it is weak at best. bnetd=piracy. That is what it was created for no matter how they tried to dress it up. They didn't hurt them out of spite, they did so to protect the effort they put in to their game. If you can't see why what bnetd was doing was wrong than you are acting like a 6 year old with your fingers in your ears saying "la la la la".
Thanks for the laugh. You are confusing freedom with people being impressed with a (relatively) large penis.
I have no idea what your point is. Despite the fact that there is a 360 elite, it doesn't doom the core or premium versions. They still play the same games and only someone who has to have the best need to waste their money on it. The backward-compatible PS3s gave plenty of notice that they were being phased out so that is your fault that you didn't get it. As far as lack of hard drive space on the 360s, you can always buy extra hard drive space. And it isn't PC hard drives you should be comparing it to since they are better compared to laptop drives. It sure would be nice if you could just hook up a normal hard drive to the things (and I am sure there are hacks to do that) but it really isn't a big deal unless you download things like crazy.
Have you heard of XNA? That's MS's package that can cross-compile for PC and 360. Of course, a game designed to be portable for either system is most likely going to be sub-optimal on either system...particularly the more advanced one.
*sigh* You don't even get the summary part right. What the summary is saying (incorrectly) that to game with a PC, you have to spend a boat load of money. We all know graphics on the PC are better. It used to be that consoles would be graphically superior to PCs when they first came out, but that is no longer true. This generation has PCs keeping up just fine. So you are right in the sense that the graphics aren't the be all and end all of gaming.
But if you don't think people appreciate graphical improvements then you are completely off your rocker. Gameplay is king, but better graphics allow you to have a better, more interactive experience. Yeah, duh, gameplay>graphics but ignoring graphics doesn't work either.
Saying one game is better than another is all personal opinion. I found Morrowind to be dull and I didn't come anywhere to finishing it. Oblivion was much more enjoyable to me and I beat it along with all the other major side quests.
As far as the Wii/PS2 goes, you are vastly over simplifying things. If the Wii cost the same as the PS3 or 360 I would say you have a point. But in todays economy, people want to game and save money. The PS2 is cheap and has a fantastic library of games where the PS3 has essentially no games. The Wii is cheap and targets a wider audience of casual gamers. It isn't that people see the crappier graphics and think it must have great gameplay...it is a lot because it is cheaper and the new control scheme is interesting. There are fantastic games on the 360 that have great gameplay and great graphics. The price of entry is just higher.
In short, the final nail in your argument's coffin is that the Wii is exactly what they are talking about. How can PCs compete when video cards cost 12k and you can get a wii for a few hundred bucks? In any case, the summary should be modded flamebait or troll (a very successful one too).
I think you speak too much in absolutes. You say Tetris is more art than FF. But FF7 actually drew real emotion out of me when I was younger. I will forever remember that moment. But I couldn't care less how many times I beat tetris at whatever skill level. In any case, art is in the eye of the beholder. You shouldn't be so dismissive.
And I have to ask you this...what's with your attitude towards competitive online games? Just because someone likes it they become "jockish" to you. I know that is the Slashdot group think...but come on. Some people realize that AI is no where near human intelligence and that it is fun to compete at a higher level. Just because you aren't good at it, doesn't make everyone who dominates a 15 year old. I have always been good at FPS's and still can be one of the best players at whatever new FPS comes out and I am 30. I also enjoy playing RPGs and loved the old King/Space Quest games. I guess I am just tired of seeing the stupid stereotypes on here. I don't judge you for the games you like...why belittle those of us that enjoy different games?