Amplitude and Frequency are two of the greatest games I've ever played. Absolutely addicting.
I can't sing for crap, but I'll probably buy this game and make an ass of myself in front of friends and family. Check out Amplitude if you've never played it- it's WELL worth a look. Even if you don't like the rythm genre, and/or scott at the psycho DDR kids, it's really worth a look.
"unimaginative and overpriced"? The system has better hardware than its competitors, period. More memory, more processing power, (in some ways) a better graphics system. Of course it's going to cost more- and, at this point, it's not all that much more expensive. And "unimaginative"? What, exactly, is that supposed to mean? It's a piece of hardware. It does its job, with more built-in features (HD, network support, etc) than any of the other consoles. So... how is that unimaginative?
Your 32X alegory is just plain stupid. The problems developers had with the 32X are MUCH more similar to problems developers are currently having with the PS2- it's _nothing_ like the XBox. Microsoft wasn't trying to make a platform that would keep up with PC architecture, nor were they even claiming its as easy to develop on as a PC. But it is a SOLID FACT that the XBox is MUCH easier to develop on than the GC and (particularly) the PS2.
I know that some of us prefer more "hardcore" programming, but is it really a better idea to develop on a system with no OS or API (save a handful of poorly documented libraries), or one that has a subset of an already well-known and fairly established API? Again, what's the problem here?
Yes, the XBox is expensive to produce. Why else do you think people like this parent's poster realized its much cheaper to turn an XBox into a media center than to build one yourself? There's high-quality, expensive hardware in there. This was not a mistake, it was a design/marketing decision. Yes, it is one that would only work with Microsoft- because they have pockets deep enough to take the intial money hit that comes with selling something at a loss (or near to it).
Anyway, I'm not an XBox fanboy- I don't even really like it, to be honest. I own a PS2 and a GC, but no XBox. But, whether or not I like the platform, it still frustrates me when people who don't really know what they're talking about bash it because it's a Microsoft product. It has its flaws, but if it were being produced by any other company, you'd be touting it as the underappreciated dark horse that could really shine if only some developers took advantage of it. And, furthermore, if it were some sort of open source gaming platform shat out of Linus Torvalis' butt, you'd probably be sleeping with it at night!
If you have some mysterious and valid complaint with this unit that warrants it being one of the "Top 10 disasters in video game history", I'd bloody well love to hear it.
Because, for all you know, the added cost in developing those levels was spent with the idea in mind that it would be recouperated via XBox Live proceeeds. There may have been / probably was an incentive given to the developers by Microsoft for this. So, your argument of "they're already there, it's unfair to not let certain people play them" simply isn't valid: without this pricing model in place, the levels probably wouldn't have been created to begin with.
You're complaining about it because you have a limited perspective on what's going on. Just because something is there and made already doesn't mean it's free!
In short, if you cannot sign up for XBox live, yes, you've been marginalized as far as this plan of operation is concerned. Your votes have already been taken into account, and it was decided they didn't matter... please move on.
They advertised a certain number of levels that you get with the game, plus a certain number extra that you get with XBox Live. This is called an incentive- yes, an incentive to get you to spend your money on XBox Live. I don't see a problem with this, so long as they advertise it as such- which I feel like they did.
The exact way in which that extra content becomes playable to you is a design detail- not something to get all riled up about.
Re:Sorry, I'm just not that excited this time arou
on
Gran Turismo 4 Preview
·
· Score: 1
I seem to recall that there were legal issues with quite a few of the car manufacturer's- part of the agreememnt to use such acurate likenesses of their vehicles was that they didn't want them shown all messed up and damaged.
This could have been an old gamers' wives tale, though.
Personally, I've always felt the game would be much better with realistic vehicle damage. They'd probably have to tone down the difficultly and (greatly) tone up the money received from matches (to cover the cost of repairs), though!
Yeah- I damn near impulse bought one those puppies! That thing looks sweet... but it suffers from the same (well 1/2 anyway) price gouge as the boobieboard. Particularly since I may shell out the $300 for the thing and then decide I hate it... shipping and restocking later, and I've just wasted enough money to have bought a brand new plain-jane keyboard.
Anyway, $300 actually seems reasonable to me for the technology behind that thing, though.. I guess that's the different there... I doubt their profit margins are outrageous, and I'm guessing a lot more engineering went into the touchstream than went into the orbmotron.
Seems like it's this kind of thinking that's caused the keyboard to stay virtually the same for as long as it has, though, don't you think?
I mean, instead of taking on a "change the way we compute" mentality, they're trying to help out a very select group of people (people with disabilities, stress injuries, or just lots of money to piss away). This is admirable in its own way, and if that's their target audience, then, sure, they need a high price point to recoup NRE.
But... when is somebody going to come along and design something like this (maybe not.. just like this), but something that really is a better way to do what a keyboard does? I'm waiting.
I've seen several examples (stationary-hand chorded keyboards, this thing, zero-force keyboards, that crazy-ass cyberhand thing from Contact), but they're all prohibitively expensive.
For this to work, the cost needs to not only be low enough to compete with other fancy keyboards, but low enough for people to want to try it out.
Anyway, I'm waiting... I want a user input device that doesn't suck! They keyboard is most certainly _NOT_ the pinnacle of input devices, regardless of what anyone says. It's outdated, archaic, and designed for something basically different than what we're now using it for.
Funny or no, you have a good point! I'd really love to know _why_ this thing is so expensive- 8-directional digital inputs that you can "click"- that technology is ancient and cheap. The software can't be complex enough to warrant that kind of price tag- it doesn't even have to do any real gesture recognition or anything - just change some bits to other bits... what's the deal? I'd probably try this thing out if it cost less than $100...
(Sorry for the redundant post)
Check the pop-up ad. It's actually pretty clever- but I would hope everyone's come to expect this sort of thing from Rockstar by now- look harder next time!
Slashdot Mirror
Amplitude and Frequency are two of the greatest games I've ever played. Absolutely addicting.
I can't sing for crap, but I'll probably buy this game and make an ass of myself in front of friends and family. Check out Amplitude if you've never played it- it's WELL worth a look. Even if you don't like the rythm genre, and/or scott at the psycho DDR kids, it's really worth a look.
What's the point here?
"unimaginative and overpriced"? The system has better hardware than its competitors, period. More memory, more processing power, (in some ways) a better graphics system. Of course it's going to cost more- and, at this point, it's not all that much more expensive. And "unimaginative"? What, exactly, is that supposed to mean? It's a piece of hardware. It does its job, with more built-in features (HD, network support, etc) than any of the other consoles. So... how is that unimaginative?
Your 32X alegory is just plain stupid. The problems developers had with the 32X are MUCH more similar to problems developers are currently having with the PS2- it's _nothing_ like the XBox. Microsoft wasn't trying to make a platform that would keep up with PC architecture, nor were they even claiming its as easy to develop on as a PC. But it is a SOLID FACT that the XBox is MUCH easier to develop on than the GC and (particularly) the PS2.
I know that some of us prefer more "hardcore" programming, but is it really a better idea to develop on a system with no OS or API (save a handful of poorly documented libraries), or one that has a subset of an already well-known and fairly established API? Again, what's the problem here?
Yes, the XBox is expensive to produce. Why else do you think people like this parent's poster realized its much cheaper to turn an XBox into a media center than to build one yourself? There's high-quality, expensive hardware in there. This was not a mistake, it was a design/marketing decision. Yes, it is one that would only work with Microsoft- because they have pockets deep enough to take the intial money hit that comes with selling something at a loss (or near to it).
Anyway, I'm not an XBox fanboy- I don't even really like it, to be honest. I own a PS2 and a GC, but no XBox. But, whether or not I like the platform, it still frustrates me when people who don't really know what they're talking about bash it because it's a Microsoft product. It has its flaws, but if it were being produced by any other company, you'd be touting it as the underappreciated dark horse that could really shine if only some developers took advantage of it. And, furthermore, if it were some sort of open source gaming platform shat out of Linus Torvalis' butt, you'd probably be sleeping with it at night!
If you have some mysterious and valid complaint with this unit that warrants it being one of the "Top 10 disasters in video game history", I'd bloody well love to hear it.
But, only pretentious gits say "whom".
Only pretentious gits say things like "pretentious git"!
Oops, I said it! Crap, I'm a pretentious git!
Because, for all you know, the added cost in developing those levels was spent with the idea in mind that it would be recouperated via XBox Live proceeeds. There may have been / probably was an incentive given to the developers by Microsoft for this. So, your argument of "they're already there, it's unfair to not let certain people play them" simply isn't valid: without this pricing model in place, the levels probably wouldn't have been created to begin with.
You're complaining about it because you have a limited perspective on what's going on. Just because something is there and made already doesn't mean it's free!
In short, if you cannot sign up for XBox live, yes, you've been marginalized as far as this plan of operation is concerned. Your votes have already been taken into account, and it was decided they didn't matter... please move on.
Exactly- that's a great point I didn't even consider.
They advertised a certain number of levels that you get with the game, plus a certain number extra that you get with XBox Live. This is called an incentive- yes, an incentive to get you to spend your money on XBox Live. I don't see a problem with this, so long as they advertise it as such- which I feel like they did.
The exact way in which that extra content becomes playable to you is a design detail- not something to get all riled up about.
I seem to recall that there were legal issues with quite a few of the car manufacturer's- part of the agreememnt to use such acurate likenesses of their vehicles was that they didn't want them shown all messed up and damaged. This could have been an old gamers' wives tale, though. Personally, I've always felt the game would be much better with realistic vehicle damage. They'd probably have to tone down the difficultly and (greatly) tone up the money received from matches (to cover the cost of repairs), though!
And, you can't shake a stick at 15GB of storage!
;)
Maybe not, but you can shake a 30GB iPod at it!
Where exactly are fans of Daikatana? Um.... There are fans of Daikatana? :)
Yeah- I damn near impulse bought one those puppies! That thing looks sweet... but it suffers from the same (well 1/2 anyway) price gouge as the boobieboard. Particularly since I may shell out the $300 for the thing and then decide I hate it... shipping and restocking later, and I've just wasted enough money to have bought a brand new plain-jane keyboard. Anyway, $300 actually seems reasonable to me for the technology behind that thing, though.. I guess that's the different there... I doubt their profit margins are outrageous, and I'm guessing a lot more engineering went into the touchstream than went into the orbmotron.
Seems like it's this kind of thinking that's caused the keyboard to stay virtually the same for as long as it has, though, don't you think? I mean, instead of taking on a "change the way we compute" mentality, they're trying to help out a very select group of people (people with disabilities, stress injuries, or just lots of money to piss away). This is admirable in its own way, and if that's their target audience, then, sure, they need a high price point to recoup NRE. But... when is somebody going to come along and design something like this (maybe not.. just like this), but something that really is a better way to do what a keyboard does? I'm waiting. I've seen several examples (stationary-hand chorded keyboards, this thing, zero-force keyboards, that crazy-ass cyberhand thing from Contact), but they're all prohibitively expensive. For this to work, the cost needs to not only be low enough to compete with other fancy keyboards, but low enough for people to want to try it out. Anyway, I'm waiting... I want a user input device that doesn't suck! They keyboard is most certainly _NOT_ the pinnacle of input devices, regardless of what anyone says. It's outdated, archaic, and designed for something basically different than what we're now using it for.
Funny or no, you have a good point! I'd really love to know _why_ this thing is so expensive- 8-directional digital inputs that you can "click"- that technology is ancient and cheap. The software can't be complex enough to warrant that kind of price tag- it doesn't even have to do any real gesture recognition or anything - just change some bits to other bits... what's the deal? I'd probably try this thing out if it cost less than $100...
(Sorry for the redundant post) Check the pop-up ad. It's actually pretty clever- but I would hope everyone's come to expect this sort of thing from Rockstar by now- look harder next time!
The real site is in the pop-up ad for a fetish video store.
No, really. There's not much more there, but at least it's a little bit of info... Anyway, turn off your pop-up blockers and take a peek