A lot of people will argue the "FPS gaming without a mouse is like coding without a keyboard." comment- including me.
That is what I used to think.
When I first started playing FPS on a computer, it took a while, a few days, before I became really comfortable with the controls. After a few years, they were second nature.
The first time I played an FPS on a console, I thought it was the most ridiculous thing ever. Until I spent a little time on it, to get to know the controls.
It probably took the same amount of time to get comfortable with the controls- many, many hours. But now I have absolutely no problem, I actually like it.
A co-worker of mine is in the same boat I was- he comes over to play a few games, and curses the controls the entire time...but I've noticed that he is getting a lot better, and cursing a lot less.
But dammit, if he didn't pick up on the controls for Crimson Skies immediately, and start beating me right away...
I HATE when I am trying to search for something, and just keep coming up with crap sites.
I do web design, and my customers keep asking me how to get further up in Google rankings. I always tell them the same thing- have good content, and get other legitimate sites to link to you.
Some of them have been using these services that set up the link farms, and I will be very happy when it goes away.
I would much rather have the REAL website be the basis for the ranking, not a bunch of crap.
You may have skewed the numbers a bit to make your point. I tried to compare 'first run' books/movies/games to be equal. ($20 movies, and $7 books? What is that- porn at an arcade, and comic books?)
Movies (first run) are usually about $7.50-$9.00 (American) and take about 2.5 hours.
Books (hardcover/early paperback) are about $14-$28 and take anywhere from 5-15 days.
Games are about $50, and usually take 15-100 hours, but can take much, much more.
I think that books are one of the best entertainment values out there- but video games are good too. I hate to re-read books, so the replayability on a book is zero for me. Depening on the type of game, you can choose to spend very little, or TONS of time. (How many hours of practice does it take to finish Metroid Prime in 90 minutes?)
Some games are story driven- lets say 'Return to Castle Wolfenstein'. You finish the story in a certain amount of time (took me about 40 hours) and then you can basically say you are done with the game. Yes, it had online play, but I want to gloss over that for now.
Or, you can get into a different type of game- let's say Top Spin for the Xbox. The 'story' mode can take 10-15 hours. But then you can play against your friends at home, or on Live- and you can do this for many, many hours- hundreds if you really like it.
Also- other games like Diablo II can easily suck up hundreds of hours if you let it- because there really is no 'finish', until you have the BEST of every possible type of item.
So, to me it depends on the type of game. An RTS? Oooohhhh, maybe I can do THIS different, and lets see what happens (for the next 4 hours). But a STORY type game definetly has less replayability, but the intensity of the experience is usually much greater.
In the Quark/InDesign debate, you mentioned a Microsoft attempt at taking over that market...
I hope you aren't talking about Microsoft Publisher...
Publisher is a great program for church newsletters, 4H club brochures, etc. etc. But the other two programs are aimed at the printing/publishishing industry, not the secretary who wants to make something look 'fancy'.
Publisher was never competition for the other two- I don't think it was intended to be.
Because of the 'never give up' attitude, it was quite possible that the Japanese would have continued fighting, and allowed millions more Japanese and Americans (and Chinese/Koreans) die.
It's easy now to look back and say "gee, did we really need to go that far?" At the time, most of the world had been at war for 4 or 5 years. Millions upon millions of lives had been lost.
When the Japanese initiated the war in the Pacific, and attacked without warning, they set themselves up for whatever came to them.
The Japanese brought themselves into WWII. They fought any way they could, they used Kamikazes against our ships, they refused to surrender.
In 1945, the political climate was different. We were at WAR- not sitting around on our butts discussing things. Lives were ruined everywhere- those who had died, and those who had lost others. Once again- the Japanese had started that war, and they made every effort to keep it going. We wanted to end it- and we did.
Hmm...I wonder if that is what they meant when they called it the Windows XP Game Advisor. That you needed XP.
I used it, and it was actually pretty cool. The best part was the 'will it run on my PC' feature.
A separate utility is downloaded (Futuremark) which 'analyzes' your computer. Then, when you click on the 'will it run on my pc' link next to a game, it will tell you what 'percentage' your computer is in comparison to the requirements. My computer was in the 500+% range for all of them.
Saying that the US was not interested in surrender is incorrect.
The US was interested in UNCONDITIONAL surrender. The Japanese wanted to maintain parts of their current political system.
The US decided that removing the system that decided to make an un-provoked attack on Pearl Harbor, attack and occupy parts of China, and wage war across the Pacific, was the only way that we would accept surrender. We had made that very clear. But, the Japanese officials were more interested in their honor, than in saving their own people.
In fact, we did offer surrender to the Japanese a few weeks before the first atomic bomb was dropped. But, the Japanese government, the Supreme War Council specifically, did not want to agree to the terms set. Here are some excerpts from the offer of surrender that we presented to Japan, via the Swedish government. Check out the paragraph marked '(5)', stated very clearly, we will not deviate from these terms. Japan wanted to continue to play games, and did not agree to the what was offered.
(4) The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason.
(5) Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.
(6) There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace, security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world.
In fact, it was not the first bomb that caused the Supreme War Council (SWC) to agree to surrender, nor was it the second. The SWC did not agree to surrender until we dropped leaflets in Japan describing to the Japanese people the decisions that the SWC had made up until that point.
It was the insane focus on 'honor' by the SWC that took them way too far down a road that they should have never taken.
The reason we had to drop atomic bombs on Japan is because they had a very unfortunate way of looking at war. They would not surrender, either individually, or collectively.
American WWII veterans will tell you that fighting the Germans was more of a 'fair fight', in that they would surrender when obviously beaten. Also, when the roles were reversed, the Japanese would kill/torture our troops to a greater extent than the Germans would.
We had little choice when facing an enemy who was willing to send their last man on a kamikaze mission.
I've got 10 days of recovery where I am forced to sit on my ass. Good thing I went out and bought 4 new games before surgery!
The point is - yes, you are right. If you are 'older' and unemployed, you need to be out there looking for a job, not playing games. But occasionally, you are in a position where playing games fits right into your schedule.
I wonder if this will be my last big hurrah of video game play...
Yes- I realize that the reviews are good- but the previews everywhere sucked. It seems like either the previewers didn't actually play the game, or they thought that they couldn't score it well, because there was no hype.
I got the demo for Metal Arms a few months ago in Xbox magazine. It had action, it was funny, looked good, and was easy to play. Somehow though all the magazines gave it like a 7.2 in their previews.
This time I ignored the ratings, and bought it on the day it came out.
It's a great game, lots of fun. I don't think it is earth-shattering, or life changing, but it really is fun. One of the best cameras on a 3rd person game that I have ever played. If nothing else, everyone should be looking at the camera, and trying to duplicate it. Countless 3rd person games have been ruined by a crappy camera (Rayman 3?!).
Right now though, Top Spin is in my Xbox- waiting for me to finish career mode, then I'll go back to Metal Arms.
I don't think that Metal Arms NEEDS Live support though- sometimes a good solid single player campaign is what I am looking for.
Counterstrike for the Xbox was hyped up in previews, but in the end it scored a 7.1 (in some places). Which, as the grandparent pointed out, is only.1 away from the bottom of the barrel.
So there are 700 pre-orders in a county that has about 1% of the population of the United States.
That means we might expect that there are 70,000 pre-orders out there.
Orange County is one of the wealthier counties in the country, so possibly the results are skewed.
(Actually, my numbers are meaningless...but I wanted to point out that 700 pre orders really does not translate to 10 million copies sold, or even less likely, 10 million Xboxes sold)
Okay- I admit to being an Xbox fanboy, but I need to disagree with this.
Halo 2 probably won't even sell 10 million copies. And, most of those copies will be sold to people who already own Halo. Who would probably also own an Xbox already.
Halo 2 might sell Xboxes, but not a ton. A lot of the PC crowd just doesn't understand how a first person shooter can work on a console. Also, they have Halo on the PC, and I guess it wasn't that hot- so not a lot of people are going to feel that left out of the Halo 2 craze.
It would also be cool if they forced Ferrari to sell their cars at the same reasonable price as Volkswagens. AND, they should be as reliable too- otherwise we will all sue.
Then maybe Nokia should be next. Upgrades to phones should be downloadable and free- including a block to any unwanted phone calls I get.
Then we go after the fashion houses- we should determine how the clothes should fit, and how they should look- because it is the governments job to tell a company what its products should be like.
After that- we go after the food companies- why do they charge more money for the stuff in the gold wrapper? It only costs 3 cents more than the other stuff, but the price is double!
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of people will argue the "FPS gaming without a mouse is like coding without a keyboard." comment- including me.
That is what I used to think.
When I first started playing FPS on a computer, it took a while, a few days, before I became really comfortable with the controls. After a few years, they were second nature.
The first time I played an FPS on a console, I thought it was the most ridiculous thing ever. Until I spent a little time on it, to get to know the controls.
It probably took the same amount of time to get comfortable with the controls- many, many hours. But now I have absolutely no problem, I actually like it.
A co-worker of mine is in the same boat I was- he comes over to play a few games, and curses the controls the entire time...but I've noticed that he is getting a lot better, and cursing a lot less.
But dammit, if he didn't pick up on the controls for Crimson Skies immediately, and start beating me right away...
As well they should.
I HATE when I am trying to search for something, and just keep coming up with crap sites.
I do web design, and my customers keep asking me how to get further up in Google rankings. I always tell them the same thing- have good content, and get other legitimate sites to link to you.
Some of them have been using these services that set up the link farms, and I will be very happy when it goes away.
I would much rather have the REAL website be the basis for the ranking, not a bunch of crap.
Is this going to be Electronic Arts new business model?
You may have skewed the numbers a bit to make your point. I tried to compare 'first run' books/movies/games to be equal. ($20 movies, and $7 books? What is that- porn at an arcade, and comic books?)
Movies (first run) are usually about $7.50-$9.00 (American) and take about 2.5 hours.
Books (hardcover/early paperback) are about $14-$28 and take anywhere from 5-15 days.
Games are about $50, and usually take 15-100 hours, but can take much, much more.
I think that books are one of the best entertainment values out there- but video games are good too. I hate to re-read books, so the replayability on a book is zero for me. Depening on the type of game, you can choose to spend very little, or TONS of time. (How many hours of practice does it take to finish Metroid Prime in 90 minutes?)
Some games are story driven- lets say 'Return to Castle Wolfenstein'. You finish the story in a certain amount of time (took me about 40 hours) and then you can basically say you are done with the game. Yes, it had online play, but I want to gloss over that for now.
Or, you can get into a different type of game- let's say Top Spin for the Xbox. The 'story' mode can take 10-15 hours. But then you can play against your friends at home, or on Live- and you can do this for many, many hours- hundreds if you really like it.
Also- other games like Diablo II can easily suck up hundreds of hours if you let it- because there really is no 'finish', until you have the BEST of every possible type of item.
So, to me it depends on the type of game. An RTS? Oooohhhh, maybe I can do THIS different, and lets see what happens (for the next 4 hours). But a STORY type game definetly has less replayability, but the intensity of the experience is usually much greater.
In the Quark/InDesign debate, you mentioned a Microsoft attempt at taking over that market...
I hope you aren't talking about Microsoft Publisher...
Publisher is a great program for church newsletters, 4H club brochures, etc. etc. But the other two programs are aimed at the printing/publishishing industry, not the secretary who wants to make something look 'fancy'.
Publisher was never competition for the other two- I don't think it was intended to be.
Yes, that was the reply.
Because of the 'never give up' attitude, it was quite possible that the Japanese would have continued fighting, and allowed millions more Japanese and Americans (and Chinese/Koreans) die.
It's easy now to look back and say "gee, did we really need to go that far?" At the time, most of the world had been at war for 4 or 5 years. Millions upon millions of lives had been lost.
When the Japanese initiated the war in the Pacific, and attacked without warning, they set themselves up for whatever came to them.
When they mistreated and killed POWs in Bataan, they set themselves up for whatever came to them. http://members.aol.com/bcmfofnm/atrocities.html
The Japanese brought themselves into WWII. They fought any way they could, they used Kamikazes against our ships, they refused to surrender.
In 1945, the political climate was different. We were at WAR- not sitting around on our butts discussing things. Lives were ruined everywhere- those who had died, and those who had lost others. Once again- the Japanese had started that war, and they made every effort to keep it going. We wanted to end it- and we did.
It also takes into consideration your memory, graphics card, etc. Maybe disk space too- I don't know.
Tron probably requires a better graphics card, and possibly more memory.
Hmm...I wonder if that is what they meant when they called it the Windows XP Game Advisor. That you needed XP.
I used it, and it was actually pretty cool. The best part was the 'will it run on my PC' feature.
A separate utility is downloaded (Futuremark) which 'analyzes' your computer. Then, when you click on the 'will it run on my pc' link next to a game, it will tell you what 'percentage' your computer is in comparison to the requirements. My computer was in the 500+% range for all of them.
Saying that the US was not interested in surrender is incorrect.
The US was interested in UNCONDITIONAL surrender. The Japanese wanted to maintain parts of their current political system.
The US decided that removing the system that decided to make an un-provoked attack on Pearl Harbor, attack and occupy parts of China, and wage war across the Pacific, was the only way that we would accept surrender. We had made that very clear. But, the Japanese officials were more interested in their honor, than in saving their own people.
In fact, we did offer surrender to the Japanese a few weeks before the first atomic bomb was dropped. But, the Japanese government, the Supreme War Council specifically, did not want to agree to the terms set. Here are some excerpts from the offer of surrender that we presented to Japan, via the Swedish government. Check out the paragraph marked '(5)', stated very clearly, we will not deviate from these terms. Japan wanted to continue to play games, and did not agree to the what was offered.
(4) The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason.
(5) Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.
(6) There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace, security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world.
You can see many other supporting documents here:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/war.term/093_03.html
In fact, it was not the first bomb that caused the Supreme War Council (SWC) to agree to surrender, nor was it the second. The SWC did not agree to surrender until we dropped leaflets in Japan describing to the Japanese people the decisions that the SWC had made up until that point.
It was the insane focus on 'honor' by the SWC that took them way too far down a road that they should have never taken.
The reason we had to drop atomic bombs on Japan is because they had a very unfortunate way of looking at war. They would not surrender, either individually, or collectively.
American WWII veterans will tell you that fighting the Germans was more of a 'fair fight', in that they would surrender when obviously beaten. Also, when the roles were reversed, the Japanese would kill/torture our troops to a greater extent than the Germans would.
We had little choice when facing an enemy who was willing to send their last man on a kamikaze mission.
I just had surgery on Friday.
I've got 10 days of recovery where I am forced to sit on my ass. Good thing I went out and bought 4 new games before surgery!
The point is - yes, you are right. If you are 'older' and unemployed, you need to be out there looking for a job, not playing games. But occasionally, you are in a position where playing games fits right into your schedule.
I wonder if this will be my last big hurrah of video game play...
Yes- I realize that the reviews are good- but the previews everywhere sucked. It seems like either the previewers didn't actually play the game, or they thought that they couldn't score it well, because there was no hype.
Now most of the reviews are pretty good-
I got the demo for Metal Arms a few months ago in Xbox magazine. It had action, it was funny, looked good, and was easy to play. Somehow though all the magazines gave it like a 7.2 in their previews.
This time I ignored the ratings, and bought it on the day it came out.
It's a great game, lots of fun. I don't think it is earth-shattering, or life changing, but it really is fun. One of the best cameras on a 3rd person game that I have ever played. If nothing else, everyone should be looking at the camera, and trying to duplicate it. Countless 3rd person games have been ruined by a crappy camera (Rayman 3?!).
Right now though, Top Spin is in my Xbox- waiting for me to finish career mode, then I'll go back to Metal Arms.
I don't think that Metal Arms NEEDS Live support though- sometimes a good solid single player campaign is what I am looking for.
How can you stand tht repetition?
The new games really are better...
Modern hardware has a few other advantages:
More memory= larger levels without loading.
DVD media= more, more, more. More voice acting/more levels/better cut-scenes, etc.
Counterstrike for the Xbox was hyped up in previews, but in the end it scored a 7.1 (in some places). Which, as the grandparent pointed out, is only .1 away from the bottom of the barrel.
So there are 700 pre-orders in a county that has about 1% of the population of the United States.
That means we might expect that there are 70,000 pre-orders out there.
Orange County is one of the wealthier counties in the country, so possibly the results are skewed.
(Actually, my numbers are meaningless...but I wanted to point out that 700 pre orders really does not translate to 10 million copies sold, or even less likely, 10 million Xboxes sold)
Okay- I admit to being an Xbox fanboy, but I need to disagree with this.
Halo 2 probably won't even sell 10 million copies. And, most of those copies will be sold to people who already own Halo. Who would probably also own an Xbox already.
Halo 2 might sell Xboxes, but not a ton. A lot of the PC crowd just doesn't understand how a first person shooter can work on a console. Also, they have Halo on the PC, and I guess it wasn't that hot- so not a lot of people are going to feel that left out of the Halo 2 craze.
While you are at it, you can also play Doom 3 on the Xbox http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/doom3/news_60745 03.html
Both of these are in the future, but I believe the releases are going to be very close the to the PC release dates.Either the 'r' key is busted on your computer, or you know a lot of freaks...or feaks...
But see- here is the thing that a lot of people fail to understand.
Xbox Live is WORTH the $50.
Going online with Live is easy, seamless, and painless. It works.
Having a DSL connection is more expensive than dial-up. But I pay for it because it is worth it.
I could get television reception using a standard antenna- but to me Dish is worth it.
Sometimes its okay to spend a little money to get something that's good.
I was just playing Halo today- it is still a fantastic game, and has legs that will carry it until the end of the Xbox (first version).
Halo has its detractors, but I have yet to play a first person shooter that I ENJOYED more.
Other games may have better graphics, better levels, etc, etc- but overall, Halo is a great game.
That sounds like capitalism. I thought you didn't like capitalism... Your own comments
It would also be cool if they forced Ferrari to sell their cars at the same reasonable price as Volkswagens. AND, they should be as reliable too- otherwise we will all sue.
Then maybe Nokia should be next. Upgrades to phones should be downloadable and free- including a block to any unwanted phone calls I get.
Then we go after the fashion houses- we should determine how the clothes should fit, and how they should look- because it is the governments job to tell a company what its products should be like.
After that- we go after the food companies- why do they charge more money for the stuff in the gold wrapper? It only costs 3 cents more than the other stuff, but the price is double!
The government should control all of this stuff!
So the answer is to take out the default- and make the 99% go looking for an answer?
And that is progress...?