Of course the majority of Slashdotters know about emulators. Some people would rather play legally. Some people would rather play on consoles.
I am sure the majority of people on here know about wikipedia too. Instead of insulting people who are probably vastly smarter than you and more humble, you could try to present your thoughts in a way that doesn't make you look like a jerk. Just say something like "Another great way to experience classic games is emulators. Here are some of my favorites...and try these games..." You will get better responses and people will actually appreciate your post.
I think Sony's strategy is to sell the PSP...just like Nintendo's strategy with the DS and GBA. You are wrong and you are right. The PSP is an excellent gaming machine. There just hasn't been a hit/must-have game to come out on it. Nintendo has a lot more control since it has a lot stronger first party development than Sony. Every idiot on this forum knows that the games sell the product. You somehow think Sony doesn't know this? All they can really do is try to sell as many portables as possible making it an attractive environment for developers. And then hope one of those developers come up with a hit.
When information is presented, it should be cited when there are profit-based slants involved. I don't want to say there should be a law about it, but in some cases, there are already laws about it. But basically, I believe that if companies have a right to sue and use legal intimidation to slap down critics and even genuine fan-based media, then the public should also have a right to be informed when they are being fed a load of crap generated by marketers and advertisers. I would only consider that to be fair and balanced.
How is it any different than if they show an ad of someone on TV that really wants a PSP? It is pretty obvious when they do this stuff because the pages are too well setup for a normal person. It is deception, but it isn't a scam. A scam would be if you send them money for a PSP and they just took your money. This is just...well, marketing. It really doesn't make a difference. Maybe someone somewhere buys products based off this sort of thing. I don't buy things based on some random person's (fake or real) website. I just don't see how this is a big deal.
I don't know why you would expect the press to cover it any other way. You put consoles vs consoles and handhelds vs handhelds. When you compare the iPod to the Zune, you don't talk about XP sales vs OSX. I'm really not sure what you are expecting.
The Xbox 360 is starting to get some exclusive JRPGs. It will be interesting to see if this makes a difference as shooters are not something that sells in Japan.
I really enjoy how anything negative Nintendo gets a positive spin on here. This is the same company that alienated all their third party partners by being overly restrictive, refusing to move off of cartridges, and saying that people don't want to play online. At least they can figure out when they are wrong. You really have to wonder what their production issues are since they aren't cutting edge like the PS3.
I have been impressed with the Wii showing, though. It seems like it stands a good chance to be the top console this round. It will be interesting to see what happens in a few years though when supplies are plentiful and the differences in hardware will be a lot more pronounced. But maybe graphics don't matter to a majority of people. It seems people are enjoying Wii Sports (I got to play it this weekend) and let's face it, Wii Sports is not something you would play for graphics.
It depends on how common the issues are. If a high enough percentage of the population is doing this, then yes, Nintendo should address it. It shows that they failed to consumer test it well enough to see that their wrist strap was not sufficient. Even if it isn't a significant problem...changing "consumers damaging property with Wii controller" too "people having so much fun with the Wii" is the definition of spin.
You do realize that people have "real life" friends that aren't in the same geograpic reason, right? I know families that play WoW together so that they can keep in touch and enjoy a game together. Sure, it's great to have friends over for a gaming session. But when they live hundreds or even thousands of miles away, you can't beat online multiplayer. Does the Wii need online? No. But Xbox Live proves that a lot of people want it and enjoy it. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean they should ignore it.
If it isn't pro-Nintendo on here it is generally considered flamebait. If he would have added on the end of that, "But who cares about graphics when the Wii is so much fun even my parents play it!" he would have been modded insightful. Go ahead, try it with your next games.slashdot.org post;)
I am sure he is referring to the previous gen where the Gamecube came out third in worldwide sales compared to the Xbox and PS2. He should have said something like "Even if Nintendo ends up in third-place again for this generation, it's no longer possible...". Everyone knows the Wii is outselling the PS3.
Re:The rest of the launch lineup can go to hell...
on
Two Weeks with the Wii
·
· Score: 1
Depends what you mean by failure. If you look at the gamecube as far as profits, it was a stunning success. If you look at it in regards to sales numbers, the last I saw, world wide it was the #3 console for units sold. So your statement that everyone who has a PS2 or Xbox has a gamecube may be true of your ciricle, but is not universally true (obviously, if everyone who had a PS2 and an Xbox had a gamecube, then it would have been the #1 sold console). I don't thing anyone realistically sees the Gamecube as a failure. Maybe more of a disappointment in the sense that it didn't regain Nintendo former dominance in the market.
The real winner is consumers since they have lots of choices...but I am sure that isn't what you are going for.
I don't think Sony is doing that bad. The PS2 and games for it are selling really well. MS, well, the 360 is poised to get some JRPGs which might allow it to hit the 10 million mark which is a good number to encourage third party development. So right now, everyone is winning, just to different degrees.
Don't feel bad. I read it the same. I actually was trying to draw some strange analogy to how pot makes your hungry and this was somehow causing the Wii and the DS to eat each other. Unfortunately, reading the title correctly doesn't make much sense either (as others have pointed out).
Ack, what??? We execute murderers. Maybe they are blue collar workers, maybe not. But the thought that someone out there thinks we need more executions...and above that, that we should kill people who spam...are you really listening to yourself? If you actually believe this (because you say you are quite serious), you really should seek some sort of counseling.
And driving along a highway in a game that has billboards would effect gameplay how? If it is some mountain path that doesn't have billboards...yes, I can understand how that would ruin the immersion...but on a typical highway, there are billboards. I don't see you quitting reality. Yes, a game is something many people use to get away from reality, but having a billboard in a racing game isn't going to significantly change anything. A good game is still a good game. All I am saying is that ads aren't a problem in games as long as they do it in a way that is appropriate for the game. I am not sure how much more clear I can be for you. I understand you hate ads and will probably spontaneously combust if you see them in a game. Well, tough, they are going to be there so it is best advertisers understand how they can do it without pissing off the majority of gamers. Some small number of people may boycott games with ads...but they aren't going to be significant enough to matter (e.g. bnetd and blizzard).
And you would enjoy those games just as much if there was a billboard every now and then on the side of the road. Or if you were driving through a city, there were real companies there. As long as they are not intrusive, you won't even really notice it. NASCAR/F1 racing has ads everywhere in reality. So having the ads in the game change nothing. Your complaints about not liking how the cars look...well, that is how they look in reality. The tracks may be boring to you, but they are games that simulate the real thing so it is appropriate.
A good racing game will still be a good racing game when it has ads (as long as they don't go overboard). I really doubt you are going to find any more racing games that don't have ads. It is just a genre that lends itself easily to advertising since they simulate our current reality (move towards more real physics, modeling the cars, modeling real environments). You do still have some hope as futuristic racing games (say like F-zero) would lose some immersion by placing ads in it. But as companies try to find ways to keep selling games at the same price and make more profits, you just have to give in that there is going to be ads. You can only plead that they keep it to a sane amount.
But you are right on your point that I shouldn't be trying to say all people feel this way. That is just the opinion I get from the gamers I know.
I don't think that really invalidates my point. I don't think console prices are all that jacked up (given inflation and hardware). I agree with your point about EA, I just don't think it was clear at all from your parent post since I see the console market differently.
The only reason I replied is that someone modded that person insightful and felt it should be countered. I am not a console fanboy (considering I own all of them and PC game as well). I do agree he was offtopic. But since he posted that and was modded up, I am a bit confused why I was modded down. If I am responding to an up modded post, it isn't offtopic.
As to how I got PS3 out of $699...that's pretty simple. If someone is refering to an expensive console, which one do you think they are talking about? They could be adding on games, they could have made a typo, or they could be exaggerating in typical anti-Sony fashion on here. I don't think it was unreasonable to assume he was referring to the PS3 in this case.
I guess I just don't get why you are so upset. If you don't care about what the first guy wrote (since it dealt with consoles) why read down to replies to his thread? It's like there are plenty good things on, yet you continue to watch Star Trek and then complain that Star Trek is on.
I think we all agree that ads in games are fine as long as they don't ruin the immersion. In a car racing game, it is comon to see adds along the side of the road in certain sections of a track. This is fine. If I see an add for Burger King in WoW or if the ultimate helmet drop from Nax is the Burger King guys head, then it becomes a problem. As long as they can keep with the theme of the game, they are fine. As soon as they cross the line, people will get irritated.
The thing that really bothers me is that this is not done to any benefit of the consumer. For example, I go to a movie and before it starts I am watching commercials. Are my prices lowered? Heck no, it is more expensive than ever to go to a movie. Now, I refuse to go to movies. I'll catch it in the $.99 rental bin when it falls of the new release shelf.
If adds become intrusive in a game, I will not buy the game. Period. Unfortunately, companies are too stupid to understand why their consumers are leaving. Instead of thinking "hey, now with the added ad revenue, I can give them a cheaper game/movie ticket and that will increase sales and profit", they are thinking "I am not making enough profit, I better jack up the prices and find a way to insert more ads". If you treat your consumers well, they will become loyal. If you treat them like crap, they will dump you. I don't understand why companies don't catch on to this.
Consdiering consoles are just computers...and the PS3 is a very sophisticated one...that's really a deal. Try buying a computer with those specs for that price. I don't understand how people on Slashdot of all places don't understand this.
I always find it amusing when I read Nintendo fanboys bragging how their company always makes more profit. In other words, compared to their competitors they are over pricing their units. Somehow this should be celebrated?
This is only if you live in some sort of retarded universe where Sony is only making the PS3.
In reality, the PS2 is selling like crazy and so are PS2 games. Shareholders aren't going to see "Sony loses money selling consoles". They will see that Sony's game division is making money hands over fist and that they are positioning themselves to continue to do that for the next generation. Right now Sony is making an investment on the future. Any investment is a gamble and this is a big one for Sony. But there is way too much money in console gaming right now to even think for a second there won't be a PS4.
You are making the same "bold" statement that every other Slashdot fanboy on here is making. Sorry, when everyone else is already saying it, it isn't bold, nor is it early.
WoW is just as new to many plays as EQ was to you. I tried playing EQ and just couldn't get in to it. I played FFXI but the forcing to group to level killed the fun in that game. You had to have help to do everything. And the needed classes (like healers) were terrible people who didn't know how to play their characters because they could always find a group. WoW did suck me in. I liked the ability to level without others. I liked being able to do things by myself at my own time. I don't think you played WoW long enough to get to where it gets to the game that you like. Once you hit 60 you join a guild of people that run end game instances. Then you are forced to group and people who play poorly are not accepted or are trained pretty fast.
So yeah, it was probably good you quit when you did. I had to just decide one day there was better things I could be doing with my time and just uninstalled the thing and haven't looked back.
Slashdot Mirror
How did you get modded up instead of flamebait?
Of course the majority of Slashdotters know about emulators. Some people would rather play legally. Some people would rather play on consoles.
I am sure the majority of people on here know about wikipedia too. Instead of insulting people who are probably vastly smarter than you and more humble, you could try to present your thoughts in a way that doesn't make you look like a jerk. Just say something like "Another great way to experience classic games is emulators. Here are some of my favorites...and try these games..." You will get better responses and people will actually appreciate your post.
I think Sony's strategy is to sell the PSP...just like Nintendo's strategy with the DS and GBA. You are wrong and you are right. The PSP is an excellent gaming machine. There just hasn't been a hit/must-have game to come out on it. Nintendo has a lot more control since it has a lot stronger first party development than Sony. Every idiot on this forum knows that the games sell the product. You somehow think Sony doesn't know this? All they can really do is try to sell as many portables as possible making it an attractive environment for developers. And then hope one of those developers come up with a hit.
When information is presented, it should be cited when there are profit-based slants involved. I don't want to say there should be a law about it, but in some cases, there are already laws about it. But basically, I believe that if companies have a right to sue and use legal intimidation to slap down critics and even genuine fan-based media, then the public should also have a right to be informed when they are being fed a load of crap generated by marketers and advertisers. I would only consider that to be fair and balanced.
But that would mean the end of Fox News.
How is it any different than if they show an ad of someone on TV that really wants a PSP? It is pretty obvious when they do this stuff because the pages are too well setup for a normal person. It is deception, but it isn't a scam. A scam would be if you send them money for a PSP and they just took your money. This is just...well, marketing. It really doesn't make a difference. Maybe someone somewhere buys products based off this sort of thing. I don't buy things based on some random person's (fake or real) website. I just don't see how this is a big deal.
I don't know why you would expect the press to cover it any other way. You put consoles vs consoles and handhelds vs handhelds. When you compare the iPod to the Zune, you don't talk about XP sales vs OSX. I'm really not sure what you are expecting.
The Xbox 360 is starting to get some exclusive JRPGs. It will be interesting to see if this makes a difference as shooters are not something that sells in Japan.
I really enjoy how anything negative Nintendo gets a positive spin on here. This is the same company that alienated all their third party partners by being overly restrictive, refusing to move off of cartridges, and saying that people don't want to play online. At least they can figure out when they are wrong. You really have to wonder what their production issues are since they aren't cutting edge like the PS3.
I have been impressed with the Wii showing, though. It seems like it stands a good chance to be the top console this round. It will be interesting to see what happens in a few years though when supplies are plentiful and the differences in hardware will be a lot more pronounced. But maybe graphics don't matter to a majority of people. It seems people are enjoying Wii Sports (I got to play it this weekend) and let's face it, Wii Sports is not something you would play for graphics.
Good question. Why don't we ask Borat?
It depends on how common the issues are. If a high enough percentage of the population is doing this, then yes, Nintendo should address it. It shows that they failed to consumer test it well enough to see that their wrist strap was not sufficient. Even if it isn't a significant problem...changing "consumers damaging property with Wii controller" too "people having so much fun with the Wii" is the definition of spin.
You do realize that people have "real life" friends that aren't in the same geograpic reason, right? I know families that play WoW together so that they can keep in touch and enjoy a game together. Sure, it's great to have friends over for a gaming session. But when they live hundreds or even thousands of miles away, you can't beat online multiplayer. Does the Wii need online? No. But Xbox Live proves that a lot of people want it and enjoy it. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean they should ignore it.
If it isn't pro-Nintendo on here it is generally considered flamebait. If he would have added on the end of that, "But who cares about graphics when the Wii is so much fun even my parents play it!" he would have been modded insightful. Go ahead, try it with your next games.slashdot.org post ;)
I am sure he is referring to the previous gen where the Gamecube came out third in worldwide sales compared to the Xbox and PS2. He should have said something like "Even if Nintendo ends up in third-place again for this generation, it's no longer possible...". Everyone knows the Wii is outselling the PS3.
Depends what you mean by failure. If you look at the gamecube as far as profits, it was a stunning success. If you look at it in regards to sales numbers, the last I saw, world wide it was the #3 console for units sold. So your statement that everyone who has a PS2 or Xbox has a gamecube may be true of your ciricle, but is not universally true (obviously, if everyone who had a PS2 and an Xbox had a gamecube, then it would have been the #1 sold console). I don't thing anyone realistically sees the Gamecube as a failure. Maybe more of a disappointment in the sense that it didn't regain Nintendo former dominance in the market.
The real winner is consumers since they have lots of choices...but I am sure that isn't what you are going for.
I don't think Sony is doing that bad. The PS2 and games for it are selling really well. MS, well, the 360 is poised to get some JRPGs which might allow it to hit the 10 million mark which is a good number to encourage third party development. So right now, everyone is winning, just to different degrees.
Don't feel bad. I read it the same. I actually was trying to draw some strange analogy to how pot makes your hungry and this was somehow causing the Wii and the DS to eat each other. Unfortunately, reading the title correctly doesn't make much sense either (as others have pointed out).
Ack, what??? We execute murderers. Maybe they are blue collar workers, maybe not. But the thought that someone out there thinks we need more executions...and above that, that we should kill people who spam...are you really listening to yourself? If you actually believe this (because you say you are quite serious), you really should seek some sort of counseling.
And driving along a highway in a game that has billboards would effect gameplay how? If it is some mountain path that doesn't have billboards...yes, I can understand how that would ruin the immersion...but on a typical highway, there are billboards. I don't see you quitting reality. Yes, a game is something many people use to get away from reality, but having a billboard in a racing game isn't going to significantly change anything. A good game is still a good game. All I am saying is that ads aren't a problem in games as long as they do it in a way that is appropriate for the game. I am not sure how much more clear I can be for you. I understand you hate ads and will probably spontaneously combust if you see them in a game. Well, tough, they are going to be there so it is best advertisers understand how they can do it without pissing off the majority of gamers. Some small number of people may boycott games with ads...but they aren't going to be significant enough to matter (e.g. bnetd and blizzard).
And you would enjoy those games just as much if there was a billboard every now and then on the side of the road. Or if you were driving through a city, there were real companies there. As long as they are not intrusive, you won't even really notice it. NASCAR/F1 racing has ads everywhere in reality. So having the ads in the game change nothing. Your complaints about not liking how the cars look...well, that is how they look in reality. The tracks may be boring to you, but they are games that simulate the real thing so it is appropriate.
A good racing game will still be a good racing game when it has ads (as long as they don't go overboard). I really doubt you are going to find any more racing games that don't have ads. It is just a genre that lends itself easily to advertising since they simulate our current reality (move towards more real physics, modeling the cars, modeling real environments). You do still have some hope as futuristic racing games (say like F-zero) would lose some immersion by placing ads in it. But as companies try to find ways to keep selling games at the same price and make more profits, you just have to give in that there is going to be ads. You can only plead that they keep it to a sane amount.
But you are right on your point that I shouldn't be trying to say all people feel this way. That is just the opinion I get from the gamers I know.
I don't think that really invalidates my point. I don't think console prices are all that jacked up (given inflation and hardware). I agree with your point about EA, I just don't think it was clear at all from your parent post since I see the console market differently.
The only reason I replied is that someone modded that person insightful and felt it should be countered. I am not a console fanboy (considering I own all of them and PC game as well). I do agree he was offtopic. But since he posted that and was modded up, I am a bit confused why I was modded down. If I am responding to an up modded post, it isn't offtopic.
As to how I got PS3 out of $699...that's pretty simple. If someone is refering to an expensive console, which one do you think they are talking about? They could be adding on games, they could have made a typo, or they could be exaggerating in typical anti-Sony fashion on here. I don't think it was unreasonable to assume he was referring to the PS3 in this case.
I guess I just don't get why you are so upset. If you don't care about what the first guy wrote (since it dealt with consoles) why read down to replies to his thread? It's like there are plenty good things on, yet you continue to watch Star Trek and then complain that Star Trek is on.
I think we all agree that ads in games are fine as long as they don't ruin the immersion. In a car racing game, it is comon to see adds along the side of the road in certain sections of a track. This is fine. If I see an add for Burger King in WoW or if the ultimate helmet drop from Nax is the Burger King guys head, then it becomes a problem. As long as they can keep with the theme of the game, they are fine. As soon as they cross the line, people will get irritated.
The thing that really bothers me is that this is not done to any benefit of the consumer. For example, I go to a movie and before it starts I am watching commercials. Are my prices lowered? Heck no, it is more expensive than ever to go to a movie. Now, I refuse to go to movies. I'll catch it in the $.99 rental bin when it falls of the new release shelf.
If adds become intrusive in a game, I will not buy the game. Period. Unfortunately, companies are too stupid to understand why their consumers are leaving. Instead of thinking "hey, now with the added ad revenue, I can give them a cheaper game/movie ticket and that will increase sales and profit", they are thinking "I am not making enough profit, I better jack up the prices and find a way to insert more ads". If you treat your consumers well, they will become loyal. If you treat them like crap, they will dump you. I don't understand why companies don't catch on to this.
Consdiering consoles are just computers...and the PS3 is a very sophisticated one...that's really a deal. Try buying a computer with those specs for that price. I don't understand how people on Slashdot of all places don't understand this.
I always find it amusing when I read Nintendo fanboys bragging how their company always makes more profit. In other words, compared to their competitors they are over pricing their units. Somehow this should be celebrated?
I'm sorry...but plot in an rpg isn't padding. The story is a major element of RPGs. And just like a good book, you want to keep on reading.
This is only if you live in some sort of retarded universe where Sony is only making the PS3.
In reality, the PS2 is selling like crazy and so are PS2 games. Shareholders aren't going to see "Sony loses money selling consoles". They will see that Sony's game division is making money hands over fist and that they are positioning themselves to continue to do that for the next generation. Right now Sony is making an investment on the future. Any investment is a gamble and this is a big one for Sony. But there is way too much money in console gaming right now to even think for a second there won't be a PS4.
You are making the same "bold" statement that every other Slashdot fanboy on here is making. Sorry, when everyone else is already saying it, it isn't bold, nor is it early.
WoW is just as new to many plays as EQ was to you. I tried playing EQ and just couldn't get in to it. I played FFXI but the forcing to group to level killed the fun in that game. You had to have help to do everything. And the needed classes (like healers) were terrible people who didn't know how to play their characters because they could always find a group. WoW did suck me in. I liked the ability to level without others. I liked being able to do things by myself at my own time. I don't think you played WoW long enough to get to where it gets to the game that you like. Once you hit 60 you join a guild of people that run end game instances. Then you are forced to group and people who play poorly are not accepted or are trained pretty fast.
So yeah, it was probably good you quit when you did. I had to just decide one day there was better things I could be doing with my time and just uninstalled the thing and haven't looked back.