The university doesn't have any moral claim over your private property, either. Running remote scans on users' computers without their authorization isn't exactly ethical, even if the admin has legal capacity to do so.
Hundreds of dollars? Naw, you just give a starving kid in some third-world country a blank DVD and a chisel, by the time you factor in labor costs the kid actually pays the company for the privilege of producing the disc.
It may make you happy, but releasing it for all three systems definitely wouldn't be a smart move on Square Enix's part. You have to remember, every system has different hardware capabilities and very different code bases--developing the game (assuming that's what it is) for all three systems simultaneously would be prohibitively expensive, especially considering that the Xbox has a market share in Japan approaching zero, and the US Xbox demographic isn't the type noted for playing Final Fantasy.
I remember Outpost. It had the soundtrack accessible as a separate audio track on the CD. I never noticed it while playing the game, but the soundtrack is exactly one song. "The Planets," over and over and over again. It was at this point that I realized something was terribly, terribly wrong with this game.
The I played Civilization II and and all my suspicions were confirmed. I think I still have Outpost buried in a drawer somewhere, but I have a few other world-domination games under my belt now that don't suck.
I don't see how you consider MGS2 overrated. I doubt you'll find a single person on this earth who will describe the gameplay as anything less than "near flawless," but I'm guessing you're taking issue with the plot.
Initially, the plot seems long winded, trite, and completely nonsensical (and indeed it's supposed to be the latter, at least). However, I might recommend this fine article by Tim Rogers delving into the postmodern nature of the story (I know, artistic discussion on/., what am I thinking). After reading that, play through the game again. I guarantee you'll find it much more enriching and enjoyable. I know the round I played after I read it was the first round in which I didn't find Rose to be a longwinded annoying bitch.
I think the thing about this game a lot of people seem to be having trouble with is the fact that FFX-2 doesn't take itself at all seriously. The first fifteen minutes of the game alone contain more smarm and self-referencial humor that most Final Fantasies have in their entire sixty hours.
Frankly, I don't see how this could be a bad thing (excluding the very real possibility that Square doesn't make funny games because nobody there has a sense of humor). Some of the best games you'll ever play are full of self-referential humor: Grand Theft Auto, Serious Sam, Super Mario Bros. (if you can't see all the drug references in that series you're deluding yourself), and pretty much every adventure game ever made by LucasArts.
Really, the game is just meant to be more fun and lighthearted than the previous games in the series. I don't know why this disturbs people. Bunch of angsty humorless teenagers, I guess.
Also, FF7 introduced Limit Breaks as a reliable gameplay mechanic (technically they were in FF6, but they required extremely-near-death circumstances, were totally random, and even given the proper situation were extremely rare).
"...[it] would require file sharers to admit in writing that they illegally traded music online and vow in a legally binding, notarized document, never to do it again."
Do I have to admit to being a member of the communist party when I sign it? Also, am I required to name other illegal file traders to prove that I have changed my ways?
Are people entitled to download whatever they want off the internet because they hate the RIAA/they don't want to pay for it/CDs cost to much? No, obviously not, piracy is illegal and immoral. Is the RIAA entitled to defend their rights? Yes, of course they are, they're essentially being robbed. Are they justified in being complete and utter asses about it, preying on people's fears and misconceptions to accomplish their own ends? No, that's just as immoral as anything the pirates are doing.
I have a grudge against indie labels, and it is thus: indie labels are the reason I can't find a copy of Evanesnence's earlier CDs without paying $300 for them on eBay. It may mean wading through pop crap, but mass distribution has its advatages.
I believe the last time somebody posed that question on/. the answer came out to be roughly like this:
*AA lawyer: Your honor, Mr. Gates is guilty of contributory infringement. Gates: Shut your piehole, meathead, or I'll slap you with this sack of money. Lawyer: Your honor, I can't stand for this kind of treatment! Judge: I believe the defendent told you to shut your piehole, counsel.
I'd give credit for that, but I forgot who wrote it or what article it was in response to.
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, that is a bitch of a question to answer.
The university doesn't have any moral claim over your private property, either. Running remote scans on users' computers without their authorization isn't exactly ethical, even if the admin has legal capacity to do so.
Assumption of guilt, for one.
Hundreds of dollars? Naw, you just give a starving kid in some third-world country a blank DVD and a chisel, by the time you factor in labor costs the kid actually pays the company for the privilege of producing the disc.
The shot in the bottom left that you refer to is a shot from the original FF7, right at the end of disc 1. You know the scene.
It may make you happy, but releasing it for all three systems definitely wouldn't be a smart move on Square Enix's part. You have to remember, every system has different hardware capabilities and very different code bases--developing the game (assuming that's what it is) for all three systems simultaneously would be prohibitively expensive, especially considering that the Xbox has a market share in Japan approaching zero, and the US Xbox demographic isn't the type noted for playing Final Fantasy.
Somebody always has to say it, don't they?
I recall seeing a statistical analysis on /. a month or two ago explaining that the MMORPG market was already oversaturated.
I just use my cell phone.
The I played Civilization II and and all my suspicions were confirmed. I think I still have Outpost buried in a drawer somewhere, but I have a few other world-domination games under my belt now that don't suck.
Initially, the plot seems long winded, trite, and completely nonsensical (and indeed it's supposed to be the latter, at least). However, I might recommend this fine article by Tim Rogers delving into the postmodern nature of the story (I know, artistic discussion on /., what am I thinking). After reading that, play through the game again. I guarantee you'll find it much more enriching and enjoyable. I know the round I played after I read it was the first round in which I didn't find Rose to be a longwinded annoying bitch.
Frankly, I don't see how this could be a bad thing (excluding the very real possibility that Square doesn't make funny games because nobody there has a sense of humor). Some of the best games you'll ever play are full of self-referential humor: Grand Theft Auto, Serious Sam, Super Mario Bros. (if you can't see all the drug references in that series you're deluding yourself), and pretty much every adventure game ever made by LucasArts.
Really, the game is just meant to be more fun and lighthearted than the previous games in the series. I don't know why this disturbs people. Bunch of angsty humorless teenagers, I guess.
Also, FF7 introduced Limit Breaks as a reliable gameplay mechanic (technically they were in FF6, but they required extremely-near-death circumstances, were totally random, and even given the proper situation were extremely rare).
Do I have to admit to being a member of the communist party when I sign it? Also, am I required to name other illegal file traders to prove that I have changed my ways?
2(wrong) != right
Are people entitled to download whatever they want off the internet because they hate the RIAA/they don't want to pay for it/CDs cost to much? No, obviously not, piracy is illegal and immoral. Is the RIAA entitled to defend their rights? Yes, of course they are, they're essentially being robbed. Are they justified in being complete and utter asses about it, preying on people's fears and misconceptions to accomplish their own ends? No, that's just as immoral as anything the pirates are doing.
Oh, and ethics. Don't forget ethics.
... I want to cry, but there aren't enough tears.
You know, I really hate to say this, but: you still have to pay for stuff.
I have a grudge against indie labels, and it is thus: indie labels are the reason I can't find a copy of Evanesnence's earlier CDs without paying $300 for them on eBay. It may mean wading through pop crap, but mass distribution has its advatages.
Because Jedi Outcast is anything but a poor game. It has far and away the best saber combat in any game ever.
Could somebody mark this as a troll, please?
You're not the only one, I haven't heard squat about it. Might be 'cause I've only been here two weeks, but whatever.
In any case, this is nifty. I have absolutely no idea what they're going to use it for, but if I find it I'm dropping Half-Life 2 onto it.
The fine folks at Gamespy seem to have forgotten the fundamental principle of game reviews:
Link always wins.
Funny, I wasn't aware that propety and trade secrets rights were in the Constitution.
I believe the last time somebody posed that question on /. the answer came out to be roughly like this:
*AA lawyer: Your honor, Mr. Gates is guilty of contributory infringement.
Gates: Shut your piehole, meathead, or I'll slap you with this sack of money.
Lawyer: Your honor, I can't stand for this kind of treatment!
Judge: I believe the defendent told you to shut your piehole, counsel.
I'd give credit for that, but I forgot who wrote it or what article it was in response to.