I found this: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0855617.html
But unfortunately it does not break out the countries in the same manner. The U.S. just gets 'white'. Also, Canada gets a huge 'mixed' group, while the U.S. doesn't get that. I would imagine that it is huge- thanks to Thomas Jefferson, and Strom Thurmond.
I do think though that if you look at those numbers objectively, the lower numbers of black, and hispanic populations in Canada would swing the pendulum in the US's favor.
But checkboxes on a census form is not the entire answer. Because 'white' could mean many things. We do have a huge Russian population here, where they are maintaining a lot of their Russian culture. So, while they are 'white', their culture is different.
But- Canada is another example of a fairly diverse country.
First of all- the 'wasted hard drive feature' is awesome.
Never had to buy memory cards. ALL of my saved games in one place. I've ripped my CD's to play during games. I've downloaded tons of content from Live. Some games use it to load levels faster.
If nothing else, the content from Live would be enough to make the hard-drive worthwhile. 49 gazillion saved games is another reason. I've got hundreds and hundreds of saved games, from rentals, games I'm playing, games I've finished etc. It's nice to know that when I go back to play a game a year later, my saved games are still there- I don't need to figure out which memory card it is on. I've downloaded new songs for Dance Dance Revolution..and I don't need to change out discs- very nice. What other console allows you to download new maps, new vehicles, new types of games, etc?
The second point of your message, that makes it clear you smoke too much crack, is that you insinuate that Halo is the only good game.
Really- you should try to mask your ignorance just a little bit. I play games on my Xbox almost every day. In the last year and a half, I've probably only put Halo in 3, maybe 4 times. Mainly because a friend comes over who thinks the only good game is Halo. It doesn't take too long to show him that there are a lot of other great games. (Halo is good though, don't get me wrong.)
Tonight I'll probably play Crimson Skies, using Live, and flying a plane I downloaded, that is now saved on my hard-drive. After that, maybe I'll put in Links, or Top Spin- playing on-line again, possibly on a course I downloaded- but against another real person, somewhere.
Dude- you are just soooo wrong.
I don't think there is a lot of room to dog out the Gamecube, because it does a good job on games. But your comments on the Xbox just show a very high level of ignorance. Live and the hard-drive are not over-hyped and underused...they are very, very cool.
Umm...actually a lot of Americans are Mexican, so there is a good chance that he is.
For all the smack that gets talked about Americans, we're actually surprisingly diverse and worldly. Name me a country in the world that has a population as diverse as ours. Show me another place that has such a wide variety of culture. Honestly, if it can be pointed out that somewhere else in the world there is a place where more cultures co-exist than the United States, I will jump on that bandwagon right away. But, I don't think that place exists.
Most places in the United States have people from all around the world. The area I live in has huge hispanic, Russian, asian, black, Indian, and white populations (probably the only group missing is Eskimo, but we do have a lot of American Indian). You see signs in a zillion different languages- and believe it or not, there are few problems.
I lived in Europe for 4 years, been to Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. Each one of those places is fairly singular in their culture. Each culture has some really amazing things to offer- but surprisingly, it seems like they want to give, but not take. I saw little of Asian culture in Latin America. Europe does not have a lot of Middle Eastern influence- other than the Turkish slums.
While travelling around the world, it seems that I see a lot of europeans who are trying to suck in some culture. Yes, it is great that you went to India. Yes, you saw some good things. Yes, it is sad that a lot of Americans prefer to vacation at Disney World. But...when I want to absorb Indian culture, I can go talk to my neighbors. When I feel the hankering for a little bit of Korea, I just go a few more houses over. And during Black History Month, I don't have far to travel. You get to feel smug about dipping your toe into these cultures during an 'adventure' while I get to see the daily lives of people from all around the world.
And somehow Americans are seen as the ones who are not 'worldly'. We are the ones who are seen as 'insulated'.
While the rest of the world holds onto their culture, we have been absorbing all of them. We have exported some crap (McDonalds, Baywatch, Jerry Lewis) but our culture is really an amalgamation of what the rest of the world has brought here.
Any Slashdotter who lives outside of the US, and would like to come for a visit- I would like to offer up my home as a place for you to stay while visiting. I can show you around, and hopefully you can see that there is more to this place than Dairy Queen and Wal*Mart. Really- this is an open offer. (I live in California if you are interested) (And for a 'freak check' I'm 35, and married. Don't live in my parents house, and don't have foil on my windows. I bathe regularly.)
I am on the completely opposite side of this issue-
#1- I don't understand how people can finish games in a single day. I have never played the 3 you mention, but I have played plenty of games where people say 'I beat it in one day'. The same game will take me weeks. I guess I'm just not very good at them or something. But games can take me weeks, or months to beat. Metal Arms, which was considered a fairly long game, took me about 2 months. I'm still working on Deus Ex from Christmas- and people said that one was really short.
#2- If games took me any longer, I wouldn't like them any more. I *like* to finish my games. But, I guess it's just because they take me so damn long to actually finish.
I'm amazed that you can finish these things so quick. But I really don't want the games to be any longer than they are now.
I'm really glad that the original story included a mention of, and a link to, the Thomas Kincade puzzle game.
What a steaming pile of neo-religious crap Thomas Kincade is. Then, put that with a stupid computer based puzzle game. Holy cow- look out! Or more to the point - holy shit, that sucks.
This is a quote from someone else on the puzzle page:
"What a great time passer. I really like these puzzles." -Tans
TIME PASSER? I pass water, I pass gas, I pass a lot of things...but this puzzle is just a time WASTER designed for little old ladies. Of course they won't be able to make it to the Thomas Kincaide site, but what the hell. Some jackass programmer out there made some money off this I hope.
You need to be able to separate the Army, from the politicians.
Politicians are the ones who made the poor decisions you mentioned. The Army just did their job and implemented those bad decisions.
I think this is a good thing too. The army needs to be a tool of the politicians. The army cannot make decisions on its own. Otherwise, it turns into a situation where the army runs the country, and that never works out.
Sushi- yes, I can see how we probably invented that.
War- hell, nobody does it better, so we were probably the first.
INXS- the guy was banging some hot chicks before he was killed in that mob hit, so probably they were really Americans. (That was when being Australian was cool- so it was all a sham...and that whole 'hung himself' thing...lies...why would you kill yourself when you can bang hot chicks?)
Chess - Dunno about that one, probably invented by the Ruskies, or those sneaky Asians. *SOMEBODY* was fucking with my head when they said that the horsie should go straight, then crooked, or something like that. Yeah...definetly invented by someone sneaky..probably cheaters too.
Shakespeare- Hmm...wasn't that a combo at Long John Silvers? I think it was 'all the fish you could fit on a spear' and two crab-cakes on the side.
Do you really think they give a flying fuck about shielding us?
They don't want bad press- protests, or worst- Wal*Mart not carrying their game because it is inappropriate.
The *really* don't care about the social impact. If you are concerned about the social impact, you probably are not running a *successful* business.
(Yes, of course there are examples of morally correct successful businesses, and many of them are successful because being morally correct is their schtick...money from granolas is just as good as money from the rest of us. But in general, morals and profits don't run down a grassy hill together, hand-in-hand, singing folk music.)
When a big stack of boxes is sitting at Toys R Us next to PS3 and Nextbox and the Gamehole, who is going to pick up a Phantom? And with only $140 million now, how much advertising will they need to run in order to get brand awareness out there?
There are 3 very good consoles out there now.
Nintendo- long-time leader, has money, and an excellent name.
Sony- broke into the market when Sega was falling apart, and had a lot of money for a push.
Microsoft- had enough money to shove their way into the market, and keep things going until it finally got good.
With 3 huge players out there, the Phantom would need to spend billions of dollars to get some attention. I don't think they will get billions of dollars. The market is maturing, it would be much tougher to break in. The current consoles are good, and the next ones will be better. Running PC games in a simple manner is not the holy grail of gaming anymore- because console games are getting good on their own.
Maybe they are hiring former Microsoft employees, in the hope that they still have contacts at the home base. The best thing that could happen to them would be that Microsoft buys them out. Even if it is just to shut them up, and close the company down- that would be a better business plan than actually trying to compete with what is out there now, and even worse, the next generation from the big 3.
Access is great for a lot of people. The ability to set up the entire DB, including forms, reports, data, etc. and e-mail that one file to someone else in the company is great.
Access also inter-operates with Word very well- so that list of customers (or whatever) that they just e-mailed you from the office across the country, can be mail-merged with your letter from Word. It is a format that can be understood by the basic user- just a single file. It's much easier than when they say "what do you mean I need to connect to the database server...can't you just e-mail it to me?"
Also, Access can be 'upsized' into SQL Server very easily.
No- Access is not great, but it does have its uses. Just like a race car driver who has to accept that a lot of the rest of the world drives automatics. We need to understand that not everyone really needs a RDMS server.
I read tons of reviews. I just had no idea that they made games like that- having never experienced any of the other Bioware RPGs. I was actually mystified about the entire thing when I first experienced it- I thought "no...this couldn't be...nobody would want to play a game like this".
Yet again, I was reminded that not everyone is like me...or anyone else for that matter. I like games that some people hate, and others like games I don't even understand. Thank god that there are a lot of different types!
True- they are not my 'friends'. They are a group of guys that I play tennis with. They belong to the same tennis club that I do, and that is how we get together. Just because they have the same interest (tennis) and same schedule (Saturday and Sunday morning at 9:00 am) does not mean that we are friends. I do have a lot of friends, but I don't consider them friends merely because the coincidences that led up to our meeting. In fact, I really don't fit in with the group at all- as I mentioned, for one, they are into sports while I have no interest at all.
My comments were meant to be ironic. Here I was, somewhat judging them for their scheduling a day around sports on TV, while I have my pathetic little video game to play. I understand the irony, and hypocrisy in those two thoughts.
I think that people on Slashdot are very quick to judge- usually to point out how stupid other people are, and make themselves look smarter.
I haven't watched television in about a year. DVD's yes- TV, no. I don't miss it.
Yesterday I was playing tennis, and told everyone I had to leave by 11:00. They all asked "what's the hurry, the game doesn't come on until 12:00".
First, I had no idea what "the game" was. Second, I thought it was sad that they scheduled their day around the television schedule. The same group of guys changed our Monday tennis to Tuesday during football season, so they could watch Monday Night Football.
But I did tell them that "yeah- I gotta go home, and shower and stuff to be ready in time for the game". Sad, I *almost* thought I needed to know what the game was, just to fit in- but I really truly don't give a damn about whatever the hell they were talking about. On the other hand, no reason to stick out like a sore thumb, and get into the whole "I don't watch sports" discussion with 7 guys that are rabid fans.
But for me- it was because I was scheduled to play in a Links 2004 tournament on Xbox Live that started at 11:30. That's the 'game' I was talking about.
Hopefully I'll never go back to watching television. For me, I hate to see the same stupid projects on HGTV every Sunday morning- because sadly, that was about all I was interested in. And for my daughter, while I am definetly not an over-protective parent, I don't think that 5 hours a day of MTV is good for a 13 year old. My wife on the other hand loved things like Lifetime, and other stupid drama channels. She is probably the one most affected by not having TV- not surprising after reading the article regarding programming aimed at women.
I would have to say that if you are just going by disappointment- my worst game ever would be Knights of the Old Republic for the Xbox.
Everywhere I looked, this game was scoring 9.5's or 10's. I figured it had to be good, and I bought it like the first week it was out.
I played for a while, and found out that you don't even get to really SHOOT anyone. You just decide if you want to do battle, and then sit back and 'watch the action'. Hell, that sounds about as exciting as NASCAR.
Personally, I like to control the character, run around, sneak up behind someone, and blast them in the head with a shotgun (or the Star Wars equivalent).
That game was the biggest disappointment of all time. The only saving grace, was that EB Games gave me like $27 when I returned it.
In Top Spin- there is a scene where the female players start walking up to the camera while it is on the ground- and I just can't help but get excited...thinking THIS TIME I'll be able to see up Anna's skirt.
Hasn't happened yet- but no way in hell am I going to hit 'A' to cancel that scene.
Because this entire story/thread is about the tactics of the US military, I just assumed that maybe they should be held up as the experts. In fact, I don't believe that anyone else in the world knows more about the US military tactics than...the US military.
Of course, in your line of arguement, you want to suggest that the army is full of people with an IQ of 65 who carry guns and yell. You assume that intelligence is always the most important factor for a soldier- while I would argue that it is actually the ability to follow orders, and perform the task as required that is the most important qualities of a lower-ranking soldier. It is not the privates job to make the decisions, because he does not have all of the information required. He is just a pawn, or a tool, for the higher ranking soldiers, whether that be an NCO, or an officer, to use to get their objectives met. The strength of the US military does not lie in its heros- but in the ability for the entire operation to work towards achieving a much bigger goal.
I said that it is the experience of these higher ranking soldiers that makes them more important. You rebutted with comments that people all around the world have more experience fighting war than some of our soldiers. Once again, I tried to bring the conversation back on track- I agreed that there are people with more experience fighting war- but we have the most experience fighting our type of war.
It is starting to get very evident, that you are a prime example of the type of person I was referring to earlier. You have zero expeience with the U.S. Military, (other than your intimate knowledge with a few E-9s) yet you know how the military should be run.
Yes- absolutely, there are civilians all around the world with far more experience in war.
First- if we did learn from them, and openly tried to fight a war in the same way that they do- the international 'community' would come down on us so hard, I would NEVER be able to get that new WEGA I've been looking at. Putting bombs on busses may be effective, but unfortunatly we cannot overtly fight that type of battle.
So- we are forced to use Americans that have experience fighting war with the tools and tactics available to us. Women strapped with plastic explosives do not appear in our inventory at all.
Coincidently, those American veterans, have experience with the same weapons, the same tactics, and the same political leanings as the current Army.
So while the typical Afgani fighter may be able to teach us how to live in a cave for months at a time, and come out, and strike- then move back into the civilian population...we don't really use that information. On the other hand, I don't know how much they could tell us about a combined air/ground attack using helicopters, tanks, artillery, satellite intelligence, softening the target using bombers, etc. I will have to trust Americans with that one.
The original start of this article had to do with essentially crowd control. Sending out your hardened and experienced fighters from around the world, to try to control a protest, in an area prone to violence, would be like sending the Hells Angels out to do security at a Rolling Stones concert. It might appear to be a cheap and effective means of security, and the Angels might be a lot 'cooler' than having cops in uniforms...but in the end it might not turn out well.
Obviously you think the American military is a bunch of idiots- but really- we aren't. We just try to make it look that way...
And this sentiment relates to the article in what way?
We are talking about training for confrontation. Not the politics that lead us to it.
It is typically the politicians, in their expensive suits, comfortable houses, and nice cars that send the military out into battle.
Those who end up doing the fighting are not allowed to use diplomacy, or compromise. Typically they are victims of diplomacy.
Telling a soldier about diplomacy will be met with an ironic stare- because it is not his job. If he had a choice, would he be sent out to a foreign county, to be shot at- to be separated from his family, to be hot, cold, miserable and tired? No...so by the time he is out there, it is because others have failed in their duty- now he has to do his job the best he can.
First- every private is a 'dumbass'- that is just the way the Army works. Second, by 'personal issues' I was referring to the personal emotions that would take over when your mind is thinking about self-preservation, not thinking about the greater good. Self versus mission. Personal vs. global. The change in thinking comes with experience and maturity- not intelligence.
The point I was trying to make was not based on the soldiers intelligence- but their position on the 'battlefield'.
It is not the position of a private, no matter what their intelligence, to make a tactical decision- especially where civilians are involved, as the scenarios the article was describing.
It is the position of the leaders to make tactical decisions, and it is the position of the lower ranking soldiers to carry out those decisions. The Army really does NOT want a private to determine if/when to use force- that decision is for someone with much more EXPERIENCE. Intelligence is not part of the system at that level.
Every swingin' dick who enters the Army thinks that they are a genius, just like here on Slashdot- it is the OTHER guys who are stupid. (really- show of hands- how many of you are in the lower 50% of intelligence here at Slashdot? Oh...nobody, right?) Everyone THINKS they should be making the decisions, and of course they all KNOW that those in charge are actually numbskulls.
Well, the U.S. Army has been doing its job for many, many years. Most of those years successfully. They have learned a few things along the way, and now a lot of those things are part of the Army doctrine.
A lot of people think they just simply 'know better'- and want to throw away the experience of tens of millions of people who came before them, who set down policies, procedures, tactics and strategies that work. Well, one of the hardest parts of truly being part of a team, or cohesive unit, is learning that no- I might not know better- but possibly by listening to those with experience I can learn, and someday when I really know what I am talking about, I can add some of my own insight- once it actually is worthwhile.
I was in the Army, and I don't know if this type of simulation is being targeted at the right place.
From the story, it seemed like this was going to be a vertical solution- from the top, all the way down to the individual soldier.
I don't think that anyone below an E-7 (Platoon Sgt) would benefit from this type of training. Below that level, and you are really dealing with more of a human aspect, not tactical. The typical private is going to have more personal issues confronting a hostile crowd, than tactical. Someone else will be there to tell his dumb ass what to do- the question is, can he actual do it- and are his balls big enough.
Contrary to all the dick swinging here on Slashdot- your balls don't get bigger while sitting in front of a computer- they get bigger by experiencing real-world confrontation.
Later on- this might be of use- but one thing a typical soldier has a lot of, is time. Train them like crazy, to prepare for the real world.
I don't know if this is the right place for the 'we have features you do not' discussion...
But regarding Xbox memory cards- I bought one when I bought my Xbox. I put it in the controller at the very beginning. After about 2 days I finally took it out, and I haven't seen it, or missed it in the year or so since.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm....Canada...possibly a good answer.
l
I found this:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0855617.htm
But unfortunately it does not break out the countries in the same manner. The U.S. just gets 'white'. Also, Canada gets a huge 'mixed' group, while the U.S. doesn't get that. I would imagine that it is huge- thanks to Thomas Jefferson, and Strom Thurmond.
I do think though that if you look at those numbers objectively, the lower numbers of black, and hispanic populations in Canada would swing the pendulum in the US's favor.
But checkboxes on a census form is not the entire answer. Because 'white' could mean many things. We do have a huge Russian population here, where they are maintaining a lot of their Russian culture. So, while they are 'white', their culture is different.
But- Canada is another example of a fairly diverse country.
You are sooooo on crack.
First of all- the 'wasted hard drive feature' is awesome.
Never had to buy memory cards. ALL of my saved games in one place. I've ripped my CD's to play during games. I've downloaded tons of content from Live. Some games use it to load levels faster.
If nothing else, the content from Live would be enough to make the hard-drive worthwhile. 49 gazillion saved games is another reason. I've got hundreds and hundreds of saved games, from rentals, games I'm playing, games I've finished etc. It's nice to know that when I go back to play a game a year later, my saved games are still there- I don't need to figure out which memory card it is on. I've downloaded new songs for Dance Dance Revolution..and I don't need to change out discs- very nice. What other console allows you to download new maps, new vehicles, new types of games, etc?
The second point of your message, that makes it clear you smoke too much crack, is that you insinuate that Halo is the only good game.
Really- you should try to mask your ignorance just a little bit. I play games on my Xbox almost every day. In the last year and a half, I've probably only put Halo in 3, maybe 4 times. Mainly because a friend comes over who thinks the only good game is Halo. It doesn't take too long to show him that there are a lot of other great games. (Halo is good though, don't get me wrong.)
Tonight I'll probably play Crimson Skies, using Live, and flying a plane I downloaded, that is now saved on my hard-drive. After that, maybe I'll put in Links, or Top Spin- playing on-line again, possibly on a course I downloaded- but against another real person, somewhere.
Dude- you are just soooo wrong.
I don't think there is a lot of room to dog out the Gamecube, because it does a good job on games. But your comments on the Xbox just show a very high level of ignorance. Live and the hard-drive are not over-hyped and underused...they are very, very cool.
Umm...actually a lot of Americans are Mexican, so there is a good chance that he is.
For all the smack that gets talked about Americans, we're actually surprisingly diverse and worldly. Name me a country in the world that has a population as diverse as ours. Show me another place that has such a wide variety of culture. Honestly, if it can be pointed out that somewhere else in the world there is a place where more cultures co-exist than the United States, I will jump on that bandwagon right away. But, I don't think that place exists.
Most places in the United States have people from all around the world. The area I live in has huge hispanic, Russian, asian, black, Indian, and white populations (probably the only group missing is Eskimo, but we do have a lot of American Indian). You see signs in a zillion different languages- and believe it or not, there are few problems.
I lived in Europe for 4 years, been to Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. Each one of those places is fairly singular in their culture. Each culture has some really amazing things to offer- but surprisingly, it seems like they want to give, but not take. I saw little of Asian culture in Latin America. Europe does not have a lot of Middle Eastern influence- other than the Turkish slums.
While travelling around the world, it seems that I see a lot of europeans who are trying to suck in some culture. Yes, it is great that you went to India. Yes, you saw some good things. Yes, it is sad that a lot of Americans prefer to vacation at Disney World. But...when I want to absorb Indian culture, I can go talk to my neighbors. When I feel the hankering for a little bit of Korea, I just go a few more houses over. And during Black History Month, I don't have far to travel. You get to feel smug about dipping your toe into these cultures during an 'adventure' while I get to see the daily lives of people from all around the world.
And somehow Americans are seen as the ones who are not 'worldly'. We are the ones who are seen as 'insulated'.
While the rest of the world holds onto their culture, we have been absorbing all of them. We have exported some crap (McDonalds, Baywatch, Jerry Lewis) but our culture is really an amalgamation of what the rest of the world has brought here.
Any Slashdotter who lives outside of the US, and would like to come for a visit- I would like to offer up my home as a place for you to stay while visiting. I can show you around, and hopefully you can see that there is more to this place than Dairy Queen and Wal*Mart. Really- this is an open offer. (I live in California if you are interested) (And for a 'freak check' I'm 35, and married. Don't live in my parents house, and don't have foil on my windows. I bathe regularly.)
Thanks for the info. I was wondering why there was such a huge difference in the number sold betweeen Europe and the U.S.
Do they sell this in Japan?
I am on the completely opposite side of this issue-
#1- I don't understand how people can finish games in a single day. I have never played the 3 you mention, but I have played plenty of games where people say 'I beat it in one day'. The same game will take me weeks. I guess I'm just not very good at them or something. But games can take me weeks, or months to beat. Metal Arms, which was considered a fairly long game, took me about 2 months. I'm still working on Deus Ex from Christmas- and people said that one was really short.
#2- If games took me any longer, I wouldn't like them any more. I *like* to finish my games. But, I guess it's just because they take me so damn long to actually finish.
I'm amazed that you can finish these things so quick. But I really don't want the games to be any longer than they are now.
A real 'low-light'- Buying the ATI Half-Life 2 bundle.
(tap)...(tap)...(tap)...still waiting...
I'm really glad that the original story included a mention of, and a link to, the Thomas Kincade puzzle game.
What a steaming pile of neo-religious crap Thomas Kincade is. Then, put that with a stupid computer based puzzle game. Holy cow- look out! Or more to the point - holy shit, that sucks.
This is a quote from someone else on the puzzle page:
"What a great time passer. I really like these puzzles." -Tans
TIME PASSER? I pass water, I pass gas, I pass a lot of things...but this puzzle is just a time WASTER designed for little old ladies. Of course they won't be able to make it to the Thomas Kincaide site, but what the hell. Some jackass programmer out there made some money off this I hope.
Signed,
Not A Fan
You need to be able to separate the Army, from the politicians.
Politicians are the ones who made the poor decisions you mentioned. The Army just did their job and implemented those bad decisions.
I think this is a good thing too. The army needs to be a tool of the politicians. The army cannot make decisions on its own. Otherwise, it turns into a situation where the army runs the country, and that never works out.
Sushi- yes, I can see how we probably invented that.
War- hell, nobody does it better, so we were probably the first.
INXS- the guy was banging some hot chicks before he was killed in that mob hit, so probably they were really Americans. (That was when being Australian was cool- so it was all a sham...and that whole 'hung himself' thing...lies...why would you kill yourself when you can bang hot chicks?)
Chess - Dunno about that one, probably invented by the Ruskies, or those sneaky Asians. *SOMEBODY* was fucking with my head when they said that the horsie should go straight, then crooked, or something like that. Yeah...definetly invented by someone sneaky..probably cheaters too.
Shakespeare- Hmm...wasn't that a combo at Long John Silvers? I think it was 'all the fish you could fit on a spear' and two crab-cakes on the side.
Do you really think they give a flying fuck about shielding us?
They don't want bad press- protests, or worst- Wal*Mart not carrying their game because it is inappropriate.
The *really* don't care about the social impact. If you are concerned about the social impact, you probably are not running a *successful* business.
(Yes, of course there are examples of morally correct successful businesses, and many of them are successful because being morally correct is their schtick...money from granolas is just as good as money from the rest of us. But in general, morals and profits don't run down a grassy hill together, hand-in-hand, singing folk music.)
There are 3 very good consoles out there now.
With 3 huge players out there, the Phantom would need to spend billions of dollars to get some attention. I don't think they will get billions of dollars. The market is maturing, it would be much tougher to break in. The current consoles are good, and the next ones will be better. Running PC games in a simple manner is not the holy grail of gaming anymore- because console games are getting good on their own.
Maybe they are hiring former Microsoft employees, in the hope that they still have contacts at the home base. The best thing that could happen to them would be that Microsoft buys them out. Even if it is just to shut them up, and close the company down- that would be a better business plan than actually trying to compete with what is out there now, and even worse, the next generation from the big 3.
The two games that I have found non-gamers to really enjoy:
Top Spin -tennis on the Xbox. Like Pong, but a lot better.
Simpsons Hit and Run - If they like the Simpsons, they'll like this game.
Both are easy to get started in, and neither has a lot of stuff to remember. Easy games that are fun.
You have to think outside of your box, Jack.
Access is great for a lot of people. The ability to set up the entire DB, including forms, reports, data, etc. and e-mail that one file to someone else in the company is great.
Access also inter-operates with Word very well- so that list of customers (or whatever) that they just e-mailed you from the office across the country, can be mail-merged with your letter from Word. It is a format that can be understood by the basic user- just a single file. It's much easier than when they say "what do you mean I need to connect to the database server...can't you just e-mail it to me?"
Also, Access can be 'upsized' into SQL Server very easily.
No- Access is not great, but it does have its uses. Just like a race car driver who has to accept that a lot of the rest of the world drives automatics. We need to understand that not everyone really needs a RDMS server.
This has been going on for a long time. In fact, I had a Kodak color copier back in 1995 that did the same thing.
I read tons of reviews. I just had no idea that they made games like that- having never experienced any of the other Bioware RPGs. I was actually mystified about the entire thing when I first experienced it- I thought "no...this couldn't be...nobody would want to play a game like this".
Yet again, I was reminded that not everyone is like me...or anyone else for that matter. I like games that some people hate, and others like games I don't even understand. Thank god that there are a lot of different types!
True- they are not my 'friends'. They are a group of guys that I play tennis with. They belong to the same tennis club that I do, and that is how we get together. Just because they have the same interest (tennis) and same schedule (Saturday and Sunday morning at 9:00 am) does not mean that we are friends. I do have a lot of friends, but I don't consider them friends merely because the coincidences that led up to our meeting. In fact, I really don't fit in with the group at all- as I mentioned, for one, they are into sports while I have no interest at all.
My comments were meant to be ironic. Here I was, somewhat judging them for their scheduling a day around sports on TV, while I have my pathetic little video game to play. I understand the irony, and hypocrisy in those two thoughts.
I think that people on Slashdot are very quick to judge- usually to point out how stupid other people are, and make themselves look smarter.
I haven't watched television in about a year. DVD's yes- TV, no. I don't miss it.
Yesterday I was playing tennis, and told everyone I had to leave by 11:00. They all asked "what's the hurry, the game doesn't come on until 12:00".
First, I had no idea what "the game" was. Second, I thought it was sad that they scheduled their day around the television schedule. The same group of guys changed our Monday tennis to Tuesday during football season, so they could watch Monday Night Football.
But I did tell them that "yeah- I gotta go home, and shower and stuff to be ready in time for the game". Sad, I *almost* thought I needed to know what the game was, just to fit in- but I really truly don't give a damn about whatever the hell they were talking about. On the other hand, no reason to stick out like a sore thumb, and get into the whole "I don't watch sports" discussion with 7 guys that are rabid fans.
But for me- it was because I was scheduled to play in a Links 2004 tournament on Xbox Live that started at 11:30. That's the 'game' I was talking about.
Hopefully I'll never go back to watching television. For me, I hate to see the same stupid projects on HGTV every Sunday morning- because sadly, that was about all I was interested in. And for my daughter, while I am definetly not an over-protective parent, I don't think that 5 hours a day of MTV is good for a 13 year old. My wife on the other hand loved things like Lifetime, and other stupid drama channels. She is probably the one most affected by not having TV- not surprising after reading the article regarding programming aimed at women.
I would have to say that if you are just going by disappointment- my worst game ever would be Knights of the Old Republic for the Xbox.
Everywhere I looked, this game was scoring 9.5's or 10's. I figured it had to be good, and I bought it like the first week it was out.
I played for a while, and found out that you don't even get to really SHOOT anyone. You just decide if you want to do battle, and then sit back and 'watch the action'. Hell, that sounds about as exciting as NASCAR.
Personally, I like to control the character, run around, sneak up behind someone, and blast them in the head with a shotgun (or the Star Wars equivalent).
That game was the biggest disappointment of all time. The only saving grace, was that EB Games gave me like $27 when I returned it.
In Top Spin- there is a scene where the female players start walking up to the camera while it is on the ground- and I just can't help but get excited...thinking THIS TIME I'll be able to see up Anna's skirt.
Hasn't happened yet- but no way in hell am I going to hit 'A' to cancel that scene.
Because this entire story/thread is about the tactics of the US military, I just assumed that maybe they should be held up as the experts. In fact, I don't believe that anyone else in the world knows more about the US military tactics than...the US military.
Of course, in your line of arguement, you want to suggest that the army is full of people with an IQ of 65 who carry guns and yell. You assume that intelligence is always the most important factor for a soldier- while I would argue that it is actually the ability to follow orders, and perform the task as required that is the most important qualities of a lower-ranking soldier. It is not the privates job to make the decisions, because he does not have all of the information required. He is just a pawn, or a tool, for the higher ranking soldiers, whether that be an NCO, or an officer, to use to get their objectives met. The strength of the US military does not lie in its heros- but in the ability for the entire operation to work towards achieving a much bigger goal.
I said that it is the experience of these higher ranking soldiers that makes them more important. You rebutted with comments that people all around the world have more experience fighting war than some of our soldiers. Once again, I tried to bring the conversation back on track- I agreed that there are people with more experience fighting war- but we have the most experience fighting our type of war.
It is starting to get very evident, that you are a prime example of the type of person I was referring to earlier. You have zero expeience with the U.S. Military, (other than your intimate knowledge with a few E-9s) yet you know how the military should be run.
That is exactly what the military needs to avoid.
Yes- absolutely, there are civilians all around the world with far more experience in war.
First- if we did learn from them, and openly tried to fight a war in the same way that they do- the international 'community' would come down on us so hard, I would NEVER be able to get that new WEGA I've been looking at. Putting bombs on busses may be effective, but unfortunatly we cannot overtly fight that type of battle.
So- we are forced to use Americans that have experience fighting war with the tools and tactics available to us. Women strapped with plastic explosives do not appear in our inventory at all.
Coincidently, those American veterans, have experience with the same weapons, the same tactics, and the same political leanings as the current Army.
So while the typical Afgani fighter may be able to teach us how to live in a cave for months at a time, and come out, and strike- then move back into the civilian population...we don't really use that information. On the other hand, I don't know how much they could tell us about a combined air/ground attack using helicopters, tanks, artillery, satellite intelligence, softening the target using bombers, etc. I will have to trust Americans with that one.
The original start of this article had to do with essentially crowd control. Sending out your hardened and experienced fighters from around the world, to try to control a protest, in an area prone to violence, would be like sending the Hells Angels out to do security at a Rolling Stones concert. It might appear to be a cheap and effective means of security, and the Angels might be a lot 'cooler' than having cops in uniforms...but in the end it might not turn out well.
Obviously you think the American military is a bunch of idiots- but really- we aren't. We just try to make it look that way...
And this sentiment relates to the article in what way?
We are talking about training for confrontation. Not the politics that lead us to it.
It is typically the politicians, in their expensive suits, comfortable houses, and nice cars that send the military out into battle.
Those who end up doing the fighting are not allowed to use diplomacy, or compromise. Typically they are victims of diplomacy.
Telling a soldier about diplomacy will be met with an ironic stare- because it is not his job. If he had a choice, would he be sent out to a foreign county, to be shot at- to be separated from his family, to be hot, cold, miserable and tired? No...so by the time he is out there, it is because others have failed in their duty- now he has to do his job the best he can.
First- every private is a 'dumbass'- that is just the way the Army works. Second, by 'personal issues' I was referring to the personal emotions that would take over when your mind is thinking about self-preservation, not thinking about the greater good. Self versus mission. Personal vs. global. The change in thinking comes with experience and maturity- not intelligence.
The point I was trying to make was not based on the soldiers intelligence- but their position on the 'battlefield'.
It is not the position of a private, no matter what their intelligence, to make a tactical decision- especially where civilians are involved, as the scenarios the article was describing.
It is the position of the leaders to make tactical decisions, and it is the position of the lower ranking soldiers to carry out those decisions. The Army really does NOT want a private to determine if/when to use force- that decision is for someone with much more EXPERIENCE. Intelligence is not part of the system at that level.
Every swingin' dick who enters the Army thinks that they are a genius, just like here on Slashdot- it is the OTHER guys who are stupid. (really- show of hands- how many of you are in the lower 50% of intelligence here at Slashdot? Oh...nobody, right?) Everyone THINKS they should be making the decisions, and of course they all KNOW that those in charge are actually numbskulls.
Well, the U.S. Army has been doing its job for many, many years. Most of those years successfully. They have learned a few things along the way, and now a lot of those things are part of the Army doctrine.
A lot of people think they just simply 'know better'- and want to throw away the experience of tens of millions of people who came before them, who set down policies, procedures, tactics and strategies that work. Well, one of the hardest parts of truly being part of a team, or cohesive unit, is learning that no- I might not know better- but possibly by listening to those with experience I can learn, and someday when I really know what I am talking about, I can add some of my own insight- once it actually is worthwhile.
I was in the Army, and I don't know if this type of simulation is being targeted at the right place.
From the story, it seemed like this was going to be a vertical solution- from the top, all the way down to the individual soldier.
I don't think that anyone below an E-7 (Platoon Sgt) would benefit from this type of training. Below that level, and you are really dealing with more of a human aspect, not tactical. The typical private is going to have more personal issues confronting a hostile crowd, than tactical. Someone else will be there to tell his dumb ass what to do- the question is, can he actual do it- and are his balls big enough.
Contrary to all the dick swinging here on Slashdot- your balls don't get bigger while sitting in front of a computer- they get bigger by experiencing real-world confrontation.
Later on- this might be of use- but one thing a typical soldier has a lot of, is time. Train them like crazy, to prepare for the real world.
I don't know if this is the right place for the 'we have features you do not' discussion...
But regarding Xbox memory cards- I bought one when I bought my Xbox. I put it in the controller at the very beginning. After about 2 days I finally took it out, and I haven't seen it, or missed it in the year or so since.