That article is an interesting analysis. It does show that sales leaders don't stay that way for very long in the game market. So, there was a greater chance for a Sony downfall than a less historical analysis may have predicted (or at least one more heavily weighted on the recent past).
Yet, the trends didn't necessarily point out just who would replace Sony (if anyone). In fact, ignoring the criteria Carroll focused on (first to market, graphics capability), you'll notice Nintendo's market share decreasing at a rate greater than Sega ever experienced. In fact, there's no historical trend for any player to significantly increase their market share in successive generations (with the sole exception of Sega's move from the Master System to the Genesis). If anything, the trends pointed to the Wii doing about as well as the Dreamcast.
Another interesting thing in this generation, is it's the first since the SNES generation with only 3 major consoles competing and the first generation ever that has no new companies entering the market. All previous leader changes came from players new to the home console market (Atari-Nintendo-Sony). In this generation, the players are all established. Perhaps with Nintendo's radically different approach, they're playing the role of the newcomer.
In the end, I don't think the best bet was for the Wii to come out on top, even if that's what happens. What's becoming more clear is, at least from a historical perspective, betting the PS3 would dominate was a bad bet. It already lost market share from the PS1-PS2 switch, PS3 was the most expensive and it has the counter-intuitive disadvantage of having the most graphically capable hardware.
You seem to be arguing that some perjury is acceptable. Then I did a bad job explaining my position. Neither instance of perjury was acceptable. This is a different argument than the one you're primarily objecting to - Clinton didn't do anything bad, Libby did (or vice versa). I'll concede there are many ideologues who are being hypocritical on this issue and you're right to point that out. I just meant to demonstrate that there are important differences between the two cases that are independent of whose side they belong to. In other words saying that Clinton shouldn't have been impeached but Libby should serve his time is not the same argument as Clinton did no wrong but Libby should serve his time.
Only in the sense that the leader of each is treated to fanatical loyalty, even to the point of ignoring any foibles, flaws, or criminal tendencies, so long as things are going well. Going well defined as plenty of "cargo" and your cult in power. When things are not so good it's time to chuck the old leadership and find someone new to dieify. I get the cult analogy, it's the cult cargo one I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around. When I hear cargo cult I think of those Polynesian tribes that built replica (but non-functional) airplane runways (and towers and planes) to receive goods out of the sky. We get plenty of bullshit from the parties, but I don't think they actually believe it themselves (not the ones at the top anyway).
Many people who defended Clinton during his impeachment didn't do so because they believed perjury to be a non-crime. They defended him on the basis that perjury committed in the context of a civil trial regarding sexual harassment isn't an impeachable offense. Which means impeachment opponents didn't think it was a "high crime and misdemeanor" against the state.
The context of Libby's perjury (and obstruction of justice and making false statements) is different. It was done during a federal criminal trial (not civil in the case of Clinton) with regards to the outing of a CIA agent. A crime that can pretty easily be construed as against the state. Had Clinton done the same thing, it would've been easier to argue that the crime qualified for the constitutional requirements for impeachment.
Regardless, both of them should have been punished (if that meant jail for Clinton, so be it) but Clinton didn't deserve impeachment for his crime.
On a side note, I don't get your epithet of cargo cult. The major parties have an uncountable number of flaws (the world would be better off without them) but I can't imagine how they're anything like cargo cults.
I'm not surprised by the reaction of the slashdot crowd to this article (or the accompanying moderation values). Why is it any time any criticizes something in general terms, there is always a knee jerk reaction? Don't like current government policy? Move to Russia! Don't like some trends tied with technological progress? Go live in a cave!
I haven't read the book but the review points out some thoughts that are worth entertaining. For example, the notion that while machines might be pretty good at solving a particular task (say washing my clothes) they're not as good at fulfilling human emotional needs (what can replace a human embrace?). Yet, we're sold on this idea that the machine will solve more general needs. I don't know if this is a technological problem so much as a marketing one, but I don't think it's fair to say it's not a problem at all. Or if that one does think it's such a problem that they should give up their washing machine and go hug a tree if they love nature so much.
Then there's the idea that we too commonly reduce life to a set of numbers. Already people have offered a defense of technology citing the current average lifespan, the average income, etc... Sure, these are good indicators we're moving in the right direction in some areas, but you can't answer everything with a number (or even many numbers! and charts!). Some aspects of humanity can be abstracted or reduced but not all. Sometimes you have actually talk to people about how they feel to see how things are going. The worth in our answers and ideas can't be distilled down to a set of numbers we can track and increase (or decrease) over time.
Even if none of this is new, personally, it helps to have this pointed out once in a while. It's easy to lose track that my job is supposed to enable me to meet my needs and isn't necessarily an end in itself. Likewise, technology, by whatever definition, is meant to serve us and not its own progress. There is value in people pointing out that a technological trend is failing in that regard. And the solution doesn't necessarily have to be the abandonment of technology.
I certainly think your interpretation makes sense. The other one does too (it was meant to reflect that Tony's life is a tense one where his untimely demise is always just around the corner). Soprano Home Movies captured this feel too (with Bobby in Tony's final episode role). Much of that episode was a tense buildup of Tony likely killing Bobby for beating him up (the wives worrying, the worry when Tony asks to pull over in the middle of nowhere). But it never comes, Tony doesn't harm a hair on Bobby's head.
So, what was Chase referencing in Home Movies? The boat scene or the trip to meet the Canadians?
As the top of their page states: "Timely Topics for IT Professionals". It's updated 3 times a week with summaries of a bunch of articles. It's mostly ad-free and the articles tend to have an academic slant.
I agree you should take it with a grain of salt. But check out the articles that Cringely links to, specifically the CNN article:
IBM said when it reported earnings last month that it was 'putting in place a series of actions to address our U.S. cost base.'
Hopefully this is much ado about nothing and all they meant was the announced layoff of 1,300 people, the pension freeze and not much else. I'd be worried if I were you (and coming up with a backup plan). Good luck!
You can't make the major focus of a game you play for 20-40 hours a 'lesson' about how bad global warming is.
Let's say I want to make global warming 'message' game. We'd have characters talking about how hot it is, how there's less land than there used to be. Or noting that some creatures are out of place or that there are fewer of them than before. We could have levels where you're trying to escape from a melting and collapsing iceberg. You could have different endings depending on what vehicles you used, use of renewable items versus manufactured ones, etc...
Video Games are more like SPORTS than they are like books/movies/etc
Currently they are, sure. Yet, it's not hard to imagine a game swinging in completely the opposite way. The most extreme example would be a "choose your own adventure" knock off.
Lannings was talking about possibilities, not necessarily the ways things are now. Things like Facade show a future where games can feel much more like a traditional movie or play than like a sport. And where you have resolutions that don't necessarily include violence (or some physical act). One thing about Facade is that while the narrative changes depending on what you do, the major themes stay mostly the same.
as long as the games are still principally fun and he doesn't forget that the reason people load up Abe + co not to learn a lesson but for the same reason people head to the movie house - to have an escape and to get some enjoyment.
Traditionally, most video games have been just an escape, or a simple form of entertainment. That is what the "game" part of "video game" has meant. If that's all you want from your leisure activities, that's ok. But some of us are also entertained by new thoughts or different opinions.
Lanning seems to think that video games can join the ranks of movies, music and books, in that games can also deliver a message from their creator about the world at large or the condition of the human spirit. Now, you may not be interested in movies or games that have a message as their primary draw but why worry that some creators want to imbue such things into their art? It's not an either or proposition, you can go to the theater and see Borat and Syriana (or just one or neither). On the other hand, people who want more philosophy in their games have traditionally few choices. I see little reason why that should be the case.
While you're joking, I think there is a hard limit (something like 3 or 4) to the number of different social security numbers you can (legally) have in your lifetime.
Seems like pretty consistent thinking of the community from my point of view. Were the community gates put up before or after a series of property crime (robbery, vandalism, etc..)?
There's no way I'm watching the shower. Everyone else, don't come complain to me that the mean plant stung you because you're blind. You were warned years ago, but you still decided to go out and watch the pretty lights.
I also enjoyed that capture the flag game where you could use a jeep, helicopter, or tank... I can't remember what it was called but I played that a ton!
I bought a Jag for $20 (new) which came with a few (shitty) games for it. I was surprised however at how comfortable the controller is to hold and reach the conventional (non-keypad) controls. The keypad itself wasn't necessarily a bad idea, just a strange one.
Actually, there were 4 different 3DO hardware configurations. The picture in the article is Panasonic's second version whose main difference with the first was that it loaded top down (like the PS1). The original Panasonic version had a front loading drive (like the PS2). There was also a Goldstar version. The 4th configuration was actually a Creative Labs card (not unlike a 3D gfx card) you could install in your PC to play 3DO games on it.
The reason there were so many different versions of the 3DO (and the reason it cost so much) is that 3DO decided not to manufacture and sell the hardware themselves, they licensed other companies to do that. While an interesting approach to selling consoles, it didn't work because the hardware companies needed to make a profit on each hardware unit sold (hence the $700 price tag), while most video game consoles sell much closer to or below their manufacturing cost (hoping software revenue makes up the difference).
Currently in MI you need an approved reason to vote absentee. Although both the Republican and Democrat candidates for SOS said they'd work to allow no-reason absentee voting.
I usually just translate percentages into a letter grade. Of course, it would be nice if the reviews just gave a letter grade in first place.
As for breaking a game down into categories, I've hated this for a long time. What other reviews do this? I don't see movie reviews being broken down into cinematography, sound, music, acting. If one of those things is noteworthy, the reviewer will comment on it, otherwise, why bother? I hate reading in a category "average, about what's expected of a game like this". If it's not worth mentioning, why are you being forced to mention it?
You're not being paranoid. Thompson is behind at least some of the state laws that attempt to enforce age restrictions of video games. Hillary Clinton also has granted him an audience, so he may have been the one that got her going after Rockstar. I wouldn't be suriprised if there was some connection between him and Gore and Lieberman and their old censorship crusades.
As much as the gaming community hates Thompson, he is much more effective than either the gamer community or the game developer/publisher communities at getting his voice heard where it actually matters (state and national legislatures).
At first glance Dick Dale seems a bit out of place unless you are familiar with is work and his speed
A lot of people might not recognize the name Dick Dale but almost everyone recognizes "that song from Pulp Fiction". My hand cramped up as soon as I saw Misirlou on the list.
Maybe he doesn't drink because he doesn't enjoy it? I didn't do much partying in college either, because I'm very introverted and I simply don't enjoy large social gatherings (big frat parties, bars, etc..). Now if I never tried to go out and party while I was in college, I might be kicking myself now but I made an effort to go out and have fun like everyone else and it just wasn't my thing.
Slashdot Mirror
That article is an interesting analysis. It does show that sales leaders don't stay that way for very long in the game market. So, there was a greater chance for a Sony downfall than a less historical analysis may have predicted (or at least one more heavily weighted on the recent past).
Yet, the trends didn't necessarily point out just who would replace Sony (if anyone). In fact, ignoring the criteria Carroll focused on (first to market, graphics capability), you'll notice Nintendo's market share decreasing at a rate greater than Sega ever experienced. In fact, there's no historical trend for any player to significantly increase their market share in successive generations (with the sole exception of Sega's move from the Master System to the Genesis). If anything, the trends pointed to the Wii doing about as well as the Dreamcast.
Another interesting thing in this generation, is it's the first since the SNES generation with only 3 major consoles competing and the first generation ever that has no new companies entering the market. All previous leader changes came from players new to the home console market (Atari-Nintendo-Sony). In this generation, the players are all established. Perhaps with Nintendo's radically different approach, they're playing the role of the newcomer.
In the end, I don't think the best bet was for the Wii to come out on top, even if that's what happens. What's becoming more clear is, at least from a historical perspective, betting the PS3 would dominate was a bad bet. It already lost market share from the PS1-PS2 switch, PS3 was the most expensive and it has the counter-intuitive disadvantage of having the most graphically capable hardware.
Or for next to nothing you can watch it right now using Netflix's instant viewing option.
Reminds me of this Onion article: .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle Is Pretty Cool
Peace Activist Has To Admit Barrett
Many people who defended Clinton during his impeachment didn't do so because they believed perjury to be a non-crime. They defended him on the basis that perjury committed in the context of a civil trial regarding sexual harassment isn't an impeachable offense. Which means impeachment opponents didn't think it was a "high crime and misdemeanor" against the state.
The context of Libby's perjury (and obstruction of justice and making false statements) is different. It was done during a federal criminal trial (not civil in the case of Clinton) with regards to the outing of a CIA agent. A crime that can pretty easily be construed as against the state. Had Clinton done the same thing, it would've been easier to argue that the crime qualified for the constitutional requirements for impeachment.
Regardless, both of them should have been punished (if that meant jail for Clinton, so be it) but Clinton didn't deserve impeachment for his crime.
On a side note, I don't get your epithet of cargo cult. The major parties have an uncountable number of flaws (the world would be better off without them) but I can't imagine how they're anything like cargo cults.
I'm not surprised by the reaction of the slashdot crowd to this article (or the accompanying moderation values). Why is it any time any criticizes something in general terms, there is always a knee jerk reaction? Don't like current government policy? Move to Russia! Don't like some trends tied with technological progress? Go live in a cave!
I haven't read the book but the review points out some thoughts that are worth entertaining. For example, the notion that while machines might be pretty good at solving a particular task (say washing my clothes) they're not as good at fulfilling human emotional needs (what can replace a human embrace?). Yet, we're sold on this idea that the machine will solve more general needs. I don't know if this is a technological problem so much as a marketing one, but I don't think it's fair to say it's not a problem at all. Or if that one does think it's such a problem that they should give up their washing machine and go hug a tree if they love nature so much.
Then there's the idea that we too commonly reduce life to a set of numbers. Already people have offered a defense of technology citing the current average lifespan, the average income, etc... Sure, these are good indicators we're moving in the right direction in some areas, but you can't answer everything with a number (or even many numbers! and charts!). Some aspects of humanity can be abstracted or reduced but not all. Sometimes you have actually talk to people about how they feel to see how things are going. The worth in our answers and ideas can't be distilled down to a set of numbers we can track and increase (or decrease) over time.
Even if none of this is new, personally, it helps to have this pointed out once in a while. It's easy to lose track that my job is supposed to enable me to meet my needs and isn't necessarily an end in itself. Likewise, technology, by whatever definition, is meant to serve us and not its own progress. There is value in people pointing out that a technological trend is failing in that regard. And the solution doesn't necessarily have to be the abandonment of technology.
I certainly think your interpretation makes sense. The other one does too (it was meant to reflect that Tony's life is a tense one where his untimely demise is always just around the corner). Soprano Home Movies captured this feel too (with Bobby in Tony's final episode role). Much of that episode was a tense buildup of Tony likely killing Bobby for beating him up (the wives worrying, the worry when Tony asks to pull over in the middle of nowhere). But it never comes, Tony doesn't harm a hair on Bobby's head.
So, what was Chase referencing in Home Movies? The boat scene or the trip to meet the Canadians?
As the top of their page states: "Timely Topics for IT Professionals". It's updated 3 times a week with summaries of a bunch of articles. It's mostly ad-free and the articles tend to have an academic slant.
http://technews.acm.org/current.cfm
Lannings was talking about possibilities, not necessarily the ways things are now. Things like Facade show a future where games can feel much more like a traditional movie or play than like a sport. And where you have resolutions that don't necessarily include violence (or some physical act). One thing about Facade is that while the narrative changes depending on what you do, the major themes stay mostly the same.
Lanning seems to think that video games can join the ranks of movies, music and books, in that games can also deliver a message from their creator about the world at large or the condition of the human spirit. Now, you may not be interested in movies or games that have a message as their primary draw but why worry that some creators want to imbue such things into their art? It's not an either or proposition, you can go to the theater and see Borat and Syriana (or just one or neither). On the other hand, people who want more philosophy in their games have traditionally few choices. I see little reason why that should be the case.
While you're joking, I think there is a hard limit (something like 3 or 4) to the number of different social security numbers you can (legally) have in your lifetime.
Seems like pretty consistent thinking of the community from my point of view. Were the community gates put up before or after a series of property crime (robbery, vandalism, etc..)?
There's no way I'm watching the shower. Everyone else, don't come complain to me that the mean plant stung you because you're blind. You were warned years ago, but you still decided to go out and watch the pretty lights.
I bought a Jag for $20 (new) which came with a few (shitty) games for it. I was surprised however at how comfortable the controller is to hold and reach the conventional (non-keypad) controls. The keypad itself wasn't necessarily a bad idea, just a strange one.
Actually, there were 4 different 3DO hardware configurations. The picture in the article is Panasonic's second version whose main difference with the first was that it loaded top down (like the PS1). The original Panasonic version had a front loading drive (like the PS2). There was also a Goldstar version. The 4th configuration was actually a Creative Labs card (not unlike a 3D gfx card) you could install in your PC to play 3DO games on it.
The reason there were so many different versions of the 3DO (and the reason it cost so much) is that 3DO decided not to manufacture and sell the hardware themselves, they licensed other companies to do that. While an interesting approach to selling consoles, it didn't work because the hardware companies needed to make a profit on each hardware unit sold (hence the $700 price tag), while most video game consoles sell much closer to or below their manufacturing cost (hoping software revenue makes up the difference).
Currently in MI you need an approved reason to vote absentee. Although both the Republican and Democrat candidates for SOS said they'd work to allow no-reason absentee voting.
I usually just translate percentages into a letter grade. Of course, it would be nice if the reviews just gave a letter grade in first place.
As for breaking a game down into categories, I've hated this for a long time. What other reviews do this? I don't see movie reviews being broken down into cinematography, sound, music, acting. If one of those things is noteworthy, the reviewer will comment on it, otherwise, why bother? I hate reading in a category "average, about what's expected of a game like this". If it's not worth mentioning, why are you being forced to mention it?
You're not being paranoid. Thompson is behind at least some of the state laws that attempt to enforce age restrictions of video games. Hillary Clinton also has granted him an audience, so he may have been the one that got her going after Rockstar. I wouldn't be suriprised if there was some connection between him and Gore and Lieberman and their old censorship crusades.
As much as the gaming community hates Thompson, he is much more effective than either the gamer community or the game developer/publisher communities at getting his voice heard where it actually matters (state and national legislatures).
Pfft, vault 8 is loaded with 'em.
Ubi is French, not Canadian.
Maybe he doesn't drink because he doesn't enjoy it? I didn't do much partying in college either, because I'm very introverted and I simply don't enjoy large social gatherings (big frat parties, bars, etc..). Now if I never tried to go out and party while I was in college, I might be kicking myself now but I made an effort to go out and have fun like everyone else and it just wasn't my thing.