"It's expensive, buggy, and doesn't really have that many good games available."
The food sucks and there isn't enough of it!;)
Right now, I don't feel too bad that I don't have an XBox360 yet but, once some of the new games come out this spring, I'll be disappointed if I can't get my hands on the 360.
This sucks, but I'm totally not surprised by this. In fact, if we keep getting stupid lawsuits like "Hot Coffee" then you can expect most software to be released like this. It all depends on if companies think the risk of lawsuit outweighs the benefits of the mod community...
"Finally, rating systems are censorship, plain and simple."
I have to disagree with this. While rating systems can encourage self-censorship, they are not censorship in and of itself. You are free to make whatever game you like, and I am free to choose not to play it based on the rating.
I do agree that you should not be REQUIRED to use ratings. And I will fight any government law that says so. If you want to release a game that has no rating, you should be able to do it. And stores should be free to choose if they want to sell your unrated game.
The fact that there are only 18 AO rated games does not mean that games are being censored. There are hundreds of games out there that would easily get an AO rating IF the publishers decided to rate them with the ESRB. The publishers choose not to rate them because they know they wont get the M rating they need to get into WalMart, so why waste the money? I'm guessing the same is true with many unrated films and the MPAA.
I'm happy with the current rating system. It has some faults, but it works most of the time. From what I've seen, I think the ESRB is a better system then the MPAA. That said, I'm also very happy that it (or any other rating system) is not required and I will do my best to make sure it never is.
I'm starting to think pushing the NextGen of consoles out this soon was bad timing. Sure, video cards and chips have improved a lot since the XBox/PS2 days, but in general not enough people have the HDTVs to take advantage of this.
Also, with higher res and more power, developers are going to want to build bigger, more detailed worlds. It would be nice if they had more room to store all the assets needed (yes, 9GB is huge, but you can never be too rich or have too much memory). But, with the cost of the NextGen of storage being so high right now, either you ignore it (like Microsoft) or you risk making a console too pricey for your average gamer (Sony).
I *love* seeing new technology, but even I'm starting to think that everybody would have been better off waiting 1-2 more years for the tech/cost to come together.
Only worth it if it does what you want...
on
CNN On The $500 PS3
·
· Score: 1
First off, I'd pay $500 or even $600 if it had at least one or two really good games, but I'm a hardcore gamer (or an idiot..not sure if there is a difference sometimes;)).
But I've learned long ago that I'm not the "general public" and neither are a lot of the people who post here on Slashdot. And while having all that hardware at your fingertips is totally worth it to somebody with dreams of modding it to run Linux, I'm guessing the price will turn off a lot of their target market who just want to play games.
Not saying it isn't going to work. Maybe BluRay will do for the PS3 what the DVD player did for the PS2. Maybe Sony has some unknown feature that will make the system fly off shelves even at twice the price (video on demand? programmable sex-bot?). But, right now, it is going to be hard to sell a $500 game machine in today's economy.
The reason why you haven't seen more Car Wars computer games, or any SJ computer games, is Steve Jackson himself. I respect Steve but he is notoriously difficult to work with.
This may have something to do with how the table top game business works. The two fields are similar in concept but I think their business models are very different. Steve is trying to work with the Big Names (like EA) on his terms and they don't feel like he brings enough to the table.
Again, this is my understanding of it from the rumors and a few short meetings with Jackson himself at different conferences. If somebody else has real data, I'd love to hear it.
I didn't say that, I'm quoting somebody else.:) But I think he has a point.
Personally, I agree that they wont be in even half the houses by 2007, but I do think there is a good chance that most hard-core, and many 'normal' gamers will have access to HD by XMas 2007. By then, the market will be big enough to support HD games (e.g. games that take advantage of HD and are geared for hard-core gamers).
This assumes that HD TV continue to go down in price, and more HD content (TV, HD-DVD, Games) becomes available.
It is, and it will be... but not right now. At the moment, there isn't a large enough installed base of HDTVs in consumers' homes, but in a few years there will be. I'd predict around 2007 is when it will really start to matter, in the U.S. at least. This is assuming we are talking about consoles though, as high resolution graphics have mattered for quite some time in the PC market.
-Derick Eisenhardt, EMH Games
My guess to the reason it was left in was poor QA on Rockstar's part.
And, if memory serves me, the ESRB re-rated the product AO, Rockstar pulled the game from the market and removed the content. So they did a little more than "Awe shucks..." I'm not sure what more should have been done. If Rockstar said "Tough luck" to the ESRB, I'm guessing we could of seen what sort of power they really have but, as it stands, I think the right actions were taken.
Honestly, I don't think Clinton, Jack Thomson, or the like would care if Rockstar killed every last person in the QA department, they were looking for an example so they can undermine the ESRB and replace it with their own government control. Like the FCC, but this would be even crazier (for reasons I can go on about, but that's a whole other rant...).
I'm still confused as hell at what went wrong here. The ESRB rated the game based on the content that was playable. "Hot Coffee" is not part of that content since you can't get to it without intentionally hacking the code. It's like complaining to your cable company that you can see the Playboy channel on your home cable system if you install a 3rd party descrambler and enter a code. WTF?
If I had to plan my time around their schedule, I'd give up too. But I have my PVR record a couple of the shows and watch them when I feel like filling in some free time.
AOTS has some okay parts (I skip the really stupid parts, so it take like 15 minutes to watch) and XPlay is still fun. Also Happy Tree Friends (and Friends) and Cinematech make great background video while I wait for my MMPOG group to get their act together...
It doesn't matter to the end user if it comes from Redmond or some programmers in China, I give them credit for hiring people who know what they are doing.
I still think Microsoft was crazy to try this in the first place, but I'm not a marketing guy so what do I know?
Emulating the XBox is not a trivial task. I was surprised when Microsoft said they were going to do it and I'm actually impressed that it works as good as it does. And I'm sure it will get better.
But it will never be 100% and, even if the only title that it doesn't run only sold 50 units, people are going to bitch...
Enough with the VR glasses! It ain't going to happen this generation. Unless some magical technology has happened that I haven't heard of, VR glasses are too expensive and/or bulky to work in the home environment.
Yes, it is nice to dream, but you NintendoVR guys are starting to sound like the Segway people did years ago (the ones who said "IT" was going to be a flying car, or teleporter, or unicorn which rides on magic rainbows...).
> No other company has artificially restricted supply so ridiculously low as Microsoft, either.
>
A) Do we have *any* proof that Microsoft has artificially restricted the supply? Honestly, given how they rushed this project, I'm surprised they got as many out as they did.
B) Artificially restricting supply to drive up prices/demand is not a new tactic. Check out the diamond industry.
I might even pay $15 a month for a single player if it had great new content. But, yes, it is kind of silly to deal with all the issues of a MMPOG (lag, patches, lame players, monthly fees) if you are just playing the single player instances.
>Considering their profitability, Nintendo has more leg room than the other two.
>
That may be true if Sony and Microsoft were both only in the game biz. Both companies can and, from the looks of it, will spend billions to own a part of your livingroom. Nintendo wants to sell you games, Microsoft/Sony wants your eyes.
That said, I think Nintendo will stay around for a while longer.:)
Slashdot Mirror
The food sucks and there isn't enough of it! ;)
Right now, I don't feel too bad that I don't have an XBox360 yet but, once some of the new games come out this spring, I'll be disappointed if I can't get my hands on the 360.
This sucks, but I'm totally not surprised by this. In fact, if we keep getting stupid lawsuits like "Hot Coffee" then you can expect most software to be released like this. It all depends on if companies think the risk of lawsuit outweighs the benefits of the mod community...
I have to disagree with this. While rating systems can encourage self-censorship, they are not censorship in and of itself. You are free to make whatever game you like, and I am free to choose not to play it based on the rating.
I do agree that you should not be REQUIRED to use ratings. And I will fight any government law that says so. If you want to release a game that has no rating, you should be able to do it. And stores should be free to choose if they want to sell your unrated game.
The fact that there are only 18 AO rated games does not mean that games are being censored. There are hundreds of games out there that would easily get an AO rating IF the publishers decided to rate them with the ESRB. The publishers choose not to rate them because they know they wont get the M rating they need to get into WalMart, so why waste the money? I'm guessing the same is true with many unrated films and the MPAA.
I'm happy with the current rating system. It has some faults, but it works most of the time. From what I've seen, I think the ESRB is a better system then the MPAA. That said, I'm also very happy that it (or any other rating system) is not required and I will do my best to make sure it never is.
http://www.esrb.org/
Maybe somebody at Take2 should just buy their own Congressman.
Also, with higher res and more power, developers are going to want to build bigger, more detailed worlds. It would be nice if they had more room to store all the assets needed (yes, 9GB is huge, but you can never be too rich or have too much memory). But, with the cost of the NextGen of storage being so high right now, either you ignore it (like Microsoft) or you risk making a console too pricey for your average gamer (Sony).
I *love* seeing new technology, but even I'm starting to think that everybody would have been better off waiting 1-2 more years for the tech/cost to come together.
But I've learned long ago that I'm not the "general public" and neither are a lot of the people who post here on Slashdot. And while having all that hardware at your fingertips is totally worth it to somebody with dreams of modding it to run Linux, I'm guessing the price will turn off a lot of their target market who just want to play games.
Not saying it isn't going to work. Maybe BluRay will do for the PS3 what the DVD player did for the PS2. Maybe Sony has some unknown feature that will make the system fly off shelves even at twice the price (video on demand? programmable sex-bot?). But, right now, it is going to be hard to sell a $500 game machine in today's economy.
This may have something to do with how the table top game business works. The two fields are similar in concept but I think their business models are very different. Steve is trying to work with the Big Names (like EA) on his terms and they don't feel like he brings enough to the table.
Again, this is my understanding of it from the rumors and a few short meetings with Jackson himself at different conferences. If somebody else has real data, I'd love to hear it.
>
Yes. It is just the developer who gets screwed.
But that's okay, they are probably use to it by now...
Personally, I agree that they wont be in even half the houses by 2007, but I do think there is a good chance that most hard-core, and many 'normal' gamers will have access to HD by XMas 2007. By then, the market will be big enough to support HD games (e.g. games that take advantage of HD and are geared for hard-core gamers).
This assumes that HD TV continue to go down in price, and more HD content (TV, HD-DVD, Games) becomes available.
It is, and it will be... but not right now. At the moment, there isn't a large enough installed base of HDTVs in consumers' homes, but in a few years there will be. I'd predict around 2007 is when it will really start to matter, in the U.S. at least. This is assuming we are talking about consoles though, as high resolution graphics have mattered for quite some time in the PC market.
-Derick Eisenhardt, EMH Games
And, if memory serves me, the ESRB re-rated the product AO, Rockstar pulled the game from the market and removed the content. So they did a little more than "Awe shucks..." I'm not sure what more should have been done. If Rockstar said "Tough luck" to the ESRB, I'm guessing we could of seen what sort of power they really have but, as it stands, I think the right actions were taken.
Honestly, I don't think Clinton, Jack Thomson, or the like would care if Rockstar killed every last person in the QA department, they were looking for an example so they can undermine the ESRB and replace it with their own government control. Like the FCC, but this would be even crazier (for reasons I can go on about, but that's a whole other rant...).
I'm still confused as hell at what went wrong here. The ESRB rated the game based on the content that was playable. "Hot Coffee" is not part of that content since you can't get to it without intentionally hacking the code. It's like complaining to your cable company that you can see the Playboy channel on your home cable system if you install a 3rd party descrambler and enter a code. WTF?
"One unnamed yet "highly anticipated" game in particular is said to currently occupy a full four 9Gb DVDs."
My guess is that this will give the PS3 real advantage when it comes to big budget RPGs.
AOTS has some okay parts (I skip the really stupid parts, so it take like 15 minutes to watch) and XPlay is still fun. Also Happy Tree Friends (and Friends) and Cinematech make great background video while I wait for my MMPOG group to get their act together...
I still think Microsoft was crazy to try this in the first place, but I'm not a marketing guy so what do I know?
But it will never be 100% and, even if the only title that it doesn't run only sold 50 units, people are going to bitch...
Yes, it is nice to dream, but you NintendoVR guys are starting to sound like the Segway people did years ago (the ones who said "IT" was going to be a flying car, or teleporter, or unicorn which rides on magic rainbows...).
>
A) Do we have *any* proof that Microsoft has artificially restricted the supply? Honestly, given how they rushed this project, I'm surprised they got as many out as they did.
B) Artificially restricting supply to drive up prices/demand is not a new tactic. Check out the diamond industry.
I might even pay $15 a month for a single player if it had great new content. But, yes, it is kind of silly to deal with all the issues of a MMPOG (lag, patches, lame players, monthly fees) if you are just playing the single player instances.
>
That may be true if Sony and Microsoft were both only in the game biz. Both companies can and, from the looks of it, will spend billions to own a part of your livingroom. Nintendo wants to sell you games, Microsoft/Sony wants your eyes.
That said, I think Nintendo will stay around for a while longer. :)