I don't know why this got modded down, but it is spot on. Nintendo got my ire when they tried to halt the Game Genie way back when. It was arrogant... but their games are still fun. Just like Sony's games are fun, though their other arms (non-gaming) can be infuriating... (their games division less so, but still possible.)
But I suppose the lesson here is that the games are what counts... but no matter how great its games are, a company should never take the goodwill of their customers for granted.
No, that's about correct. And the region locking (that is apparently optional) on Blu-Ray puts us and Japan in the same region, apparently... but nothing's using it so far (no telling when it will happen, but at least it's not yet that I'm aware of...)
Nintendo dangled the carrot for Wii being region-free, then abruptly said "our bad.. it's locked."
Now they want to retroactively lock their handhelds. Bleh.
Hello, kettle? This is pot.... I kid, I kid...
The only assumption I made was your blanket statement that the person making the statements about managing time better "had no kids". That's an assumption right there, so I assumed you simply were being contrary because you disagreed. More details would've been much easier to discern your true intentions. It's true that some people who don't have kids are quick to look down from their high-horse when it comes to dispensing advice... but mine was not such.. It was as metered a reaction I could get because I inferred that because you disagreed with the parent poster, you were defending (by proxy) the very thing we both can agree on... being good parents is hard work.
Besides, most of what I said was directed at the people who decry responsibility as some sort of burden they're not equipped to handle because of life's "other" pressures.:-) Life's all about choices... Most people want everything to go their way and it's nauseating. Sure, hope for that.. but when it doesn't it's not always the other guy/gal's fault. Know what I mean?
Bravo if you can keep it up... your kid won't be one of the morons...
Sitting in the same room with your child (who is watching Sesame Street or Barney) while you read the paper is fine. Going and doing dishes while jr. watches Spongebob is also fine. Using the TV as a substitute for you (the parent) is not. Simply put, using a TV/video game/video tape whatever as a substitute for the parent BEING there (available), even if it's just in another room or sitting in the easy chair is unacceptably bad parenting.
Any other excuse ("me" time, shit like that) for not being there is simply poppycock and shouldn't be viewed as anything but shirking one's parenting duties. I think we're saying the same thing... it just needs more definition. It's all in how one was raised themselves too... what's considered appropriate. But hoping the TV will provide answers to a kid's questions because one has to "do laundry" is moronic.
Nice Non Sequitor. Too bad it has nothing to do with the argument at hand... Funny thing... my father's immune to novocaine. He literally has to have it done "the old fashioned way"
Your argument is irrelevant....
Are you seriously claiming that using the TV as a substitute for actual parenting ISN'T a bad parent? Most of the chores listed could've been done after the little ones went to bed, you know. It's not like they didn't realize this when they decided to have a family.
People did it for generations without TV... why are we so stupid we can't?
Neither do you. If you've got too much to do and the TV becomes a substitute for being a parent, FIX IT. Don't blame all the "tasks" you have to do and complain there's "just so much".... if there is... chances are something could hit the back burner, like when the kids are ASLEEP, or something similar.
There's NO excuse for not spending enough time with kids... laundry, dishes, SETI research, whatever... If you've got no time for kids, why have them? They are your complete responsibility for 18 years... so it's not like you didn't get the memo on how raising kids was a full-time job.
The parent's got a point because the GP is fobbing off duties of parenting because of something that isn't bloody well 100% time-consuming and difficult. Does the GP go to the creek and wash out the laundry between two rocks? No... it's pretty much load "WAIT" unload/load dryer "WAIT" and voila... you have to hang up clothes afterwards... provided you're not doing the hippie thing and leaving them in a pile.
The GP just needs to stop (and you too, Anonymous blowhard) making excuses and RAISE YOUR KIDS. You made/adopted them... put on the adult pants and START TAKING RESPONSIBILITY.
but that's not the new way is it? Blame society, the Pope, God, Shiva... whatever... but not ME... It's not MY fault. Grow up, people.
Re:duh, it ain't Blu-ray it's HD television prices
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 1
You've a good point there. Think about this for a moment. We've got VHS hooked up to our TVs, and over time, we've gradually updated our televisions to larger sets with cable-ready functions and lots of inputs... along comes DVD to take advantage of all those inputs, and VOILA! great picture! So until people go for a larger TV (since they can't buy tube TVs anymore at most B&M's, their next set will be an LCD/plasma etc.), Blu Ray won't appear to do anything for them but cost more. When they get a TV that supports all the resolution, now that's a different story... and I suspect the ubiquity of LCD's and HDTV's in general will usher in a price plunge for Blu-Ray like DVD did when things started moving forward for the format and VHS was finally going the way of the dodo.
I think you've hit something. I am not re-buying my DVD collection. My Blu Ray purchases are based on recent movies (like 300 and so forth)... With the notable exception being 2001. (Which looks great and technically I only had a VHS copy.) I think studios are going to have a hard time convincing people to get a Blu-Ray version of a movie they already have in "Special Edition" on DVD that they only paid $9 for.:) I bought "Dark City" on DVD (the director's cut), and it looked more than fine. It was $15.99 and the DVD was $29.99 (B&M, I didn't bother to check online...)
I might buy Iron Man on Blu-Ray, but chances are, it'll be DVD... which is cheaper...
And, not to mention the whole Divx (not the codec) fiasco that was confusing the masses with "which is better" (Though about 5 minutes of research proved that DVD was superior in every way... that whole "rental" thing didn't fly.)
I think since the Ps3 owners are the bulk of the Blu Ray player market at the moment, there's not going to be a huge amount of demand for movies that don't benefit from the format... or that are $30 when their DVD counterpart's $10. It's simply one of those things when the economy slows down... people don't go to as many movies, and conversely they don't buy them.
The real key would be rental rates. I'd like to see that. It'd show that when things pick up again, we'll see sales do the same. (Provided the numbers are there... who knows if there's enough outlets to rent blu-ray anyway) Just a thought.
Or the Europeans in Africa/India/the far East, or the Soviets in Eastern Europe, or the Spanish in South America, or the Vikings in Ireland... The Assyrians to the rest of the known world (heh)... and so on... It really is an endless cycle. Every era has power struggles like this. To think we're somehow "more" evil than the rest of the previous thousands of years of human history is a bit silly. We generally gauge our "bad guys" based on our own interests... as the rest of the world has done since we started living in caves and peeing art on walls. If you don't share the American interests, I can accept that. But those who do will not simply stop because you find it morally reprehensible we manipulate the planet for our own ends. The Russians do, the Brits do, the French do, the Italians do, the Saudis do, the Iranians do... I could go on and on.. and quite frankly, if I had to choose between us or them (and we often do, since that's the way the game has been played and will continue to be played) I choose us (for me, that's the USA). Whoever is "good" or "evil" in the world is often only based on where you live. With some notable exceptions through history, the concept of who are the "good" and "bad" guys is all from your (and their) own point of view.
Is it morally bankrupt? Depends on your perspective. Sitting in a nice home (or office depending on where you post/read), having abundant food, vastly superior choices in whatever I want to do sorta clouds my judgement on whether or not my country's moral superiority is up to snuff. Is that morally reprehensible? If you're on the outside looking in, I suspect it is. I don't condone missteps in keeping our way of life going (like Iraq), but I certainly don't step onto the moral pulpit and wag my finger at the US like the rest of the world seems so eager to do (and has since oh, 1783?) We've been doing this forever, but so has everybody else. This is the world we live in... making it a land of happiness and hugs is going to take a lot more than simply kicking the top dog off the pedestal. There's another dog waiting in the wings.
Think about it... even when the US has BEEN correct and had the moral high ground, someone finds something to nitpick about and create a cloud of "evil" around America's actions. I tend not to be so dramatic about it. Because make no mistake, if the tables were turned, there'd be news crews in your neighborhood cataloging the injustices of some other world power (and having most of it censored by that power, I suspect.) It's not like the US created the concept, because it's basic human nature... If we want to solve it, the only way we ever will is to all look, act, and believe exactly the same. That's the solution to world peace. I leave it to you to figure out how to do that.:)
You're American? SCEA had a no-shovelware policy but the rest of the world saw piles upon piles of it before the PS3 was even announced.
It's usually the case at the end of any console's lifecycle, shovelware policy or not. We mostly see the cruft start showing up when the system's winding down... the PS2 has been surprisingly strong even in this generation, so I could chalk that up to installed base/anomaly... (The XBox dropped off the radar pretty quick once Microsoft said it was done with that gen...)
It destroyed their relationships with third parties and those wounds still haven't healed.
But that's generally not attributed to their quality policy... there's a myriad of things that Nintendo did to poison third parties long ago... we're only now seeing them simply not bother to come back, and Nintendo, for all its cleverness, hasn't figured out it's really them that is the problem.:) I think if they had a quality policy and it was clear, along with more helpful developer relationships, we'd see less shovelware and the S2N ratio would drop considerably... sure the amount of games would drop off, but even with the top selling console, having so many similar games cannot bode well for people wanting to find something in the pile of white boxes at the local Wal Mart.
Also with the Wii it's hard to tell what will sell and what not, Carnival Games would usually have failed a shovelware test but it sold like hotcakes. Does it make sense to block a game that could be a megaseller because it doesn't look like one according to traditional standards?
I'm not talking in terms of "this is a weird game, hence we're blocking it" sort of quality policy, but the 300+ other games that are exactly like Carnival Games (only less polished and more craptacular) need to be weeded out. Didn't get your Carnival Games knockoff in before the first one dropped? Find another gimmick. No one who thinks the Wii's full of also-rans and shovelware advocates removing the ability to create unique games, but simply because it uses the Wiimote doesn't make it unique. I think if you had "monkey crapfight 2008" developed for the Wii, Nintendo would approve it, provided they made the poo pink or blue or something. I don't really think in an era where big budget titles are selling like poopy-flavored lollipops we should spend most of our time wading through "Circus games, bubble circus games pop, pop balloon circus games" and the like to find the "right" one.
I imagine since we're more in the know about titles, studios, and reputations that we do make more informed decisions about titles we buy (but we can get burned just like anyone else). However, nintendo's grabbed a new group of people who aren't that versed. If they get 3 or 4 absolutely cruddy games that should've not made the cut, it's going to sour them and all the gains Nintendo made will evaporate when the successor to the Wii comes out. Maybe that's why the attach rate for the Wii is so low? *shrug* Oh, and yes, I'm American... so SCEA has insulated me from some of the rest of the world's craptastic PS2 titles.:)
LucasArts was making the Force Unleashed with Wiimote "Lightsaber action" and they would've loved to be involved with a device that made the wiimote more precise. I tend to agree with them... it seems that Nintendo gave a big fat finger to the 3rd parties for a device that is not going to be bundled with new Wiis (which is a good thing for us current owners..heh). I mean Lucasarts is just one high profile 3rd party that was outwardly peeved. The other parties are probably not so vocal, but just as pissed. Maybe it's overrated since it's not going to be required for most games, and it'll be one of those add-ons (like Microsoft's HDD) that drive development a different direction (not caching on the HDD unless you have one is the closest to "using" the HDD on the 360 we've seen from devs.)
As for the shovelware, the PS2 didn't get as much shovelware until Sony revised their requirements of the Ps2 devs _after_ the Ps3 launch (or near to it.) The Wii's had shovelware from day one, because Nintendo doesn't levy any quality requirements anymore, so there can be 10000 carnival style balloon-pop knockoff games in the channel, weakening the brand... like Atari's bout with the glut in the early 80's. Can you justify a $50 game when there are 35 other games just like it for $19 that suck? Nintendo used to have a tight leash on quality with their other consoles... I don't understand why they don't now... it just seems odd to me. That's not to say the games are all bad, but the Signal to noise ratio is bad for N this go-round.
Sony's market approval process per region probably forgoes some good niche titles over here, but even a well-received title that sells poorly doesn't bode well in shareholder's eyes I guess... so they try to only pick the "big sellers" (and they sometimes miss that boat as well... heh.) But letting mostly garbage in to get 1 or 2 great titles that are diamonds in the rough (so to speak) is not a good strategy for any of the game console companies to have, considering the lack of shelf space now... and it's only getting worse as far as longevity and sales numbers go... too much competing for the same dollar amount as last generation is putting a strain on them all... and with software sales (for most companies... dunno about Nintendo) being the recouping asset (like razorblades)... not selling because of shovelware is bad for long-term health.
Not to mention that when flash becomes more cost effective, BD is going to be even moreso (due to its head start and entrenched install base). So playing catch-up while the opponent moves the finish line doesn't bode well for flash being able to overtake BD in a short period of time... 20 years, who knows? 5? Not likely. The successor to BD must be ubiquitous to start out of the gate (i.e. not require another investment in new technology), and it must be markedly cheaper to produce and sell to undercut BD's current pricing. Otherwise it's going to be a while and BD is here to stay...
Of course the BD consortium could do something "Beta-esque" bone-headed in terms of shooting themselves in the foot, but judging from past performance of Sony alone in this format war, I don't see that happening.
Of course it will. It's been selling like hotcakes since it was introduced. The trouble is, third party support is pathetic, and Nintendo seems to be content with selling gadgets for the system and not games... (Not pre-announcing the enhancement to the Wiimote to 3rd parties? LucasArts is pissed...)
I like my Wii and am not here to bash it (in case anyone was ready to throttle me over that), and I've a few things from virtual arcade that bring back memories (some more fond than others...heh), but I'm realistic when I say games like "Too Human" or Fallout 3 are not in the Wii's cards. It's to be expected for any general rule regarding Nintendo's past performance, but it'd be nice if the big N wouldn't give the big finger to third parties so easily... (and get some QC on the shovelware... it's bringing the brand down...)
The Arcade 360 only feels like a non-system to me because I use my HDD on my arcade (built from the ashes of my Elite that is on it's way to Texas as we speak to be fixed), but I played Too Human with just the 256mb memory card in it and it worked just as well. The problem with the HDD on the 360 is the same problem that existed on the original xbox (it's just a place to store saves, patches and music). But the "install to HDD" option that is rumored to come out sounds neat... for those of us stuck with loud-assed DVD drives.
The Wii does need to fix its storage items, since there are so many things that it can hold, but with limited internal memory, it suffers a little for those who are ravenous virtual arcade users.:)
As for Sony, Microsoft's been fumbling the ball of late, and we can see the PS3 gaining ground steadily... it's not over yet, and there is still room for 3 consoles, but the battle for 2nd place this generation is not a shoo-in for Microsoft anymore. Coupled with their reliability issues and a few other questionable things... Sony's still got a shot. (FWIW and in the spirit of full disclosure, I have a PS3 with a 120GB HDD in it. heh.)
You've got 4 more months of this administration. Do you think Obama will be any different? He'll fight for oil same as the rest of them... the only difference is, he'll make you feel bad about having to do it.
Do you think McCain's any different? Nope... same old same old... Just like Obama... "change"... my ass.
We didn't do anything the first time the Soviet tanks rolled into Eastern Europe... so why bother this time? Western Europe was impotent... the UN was a waste of breath, and the US simply built more missiles. How history repeats itself.... I just didn't think it would be so soon. I have no delusions that we would do anything useful, or forceful for that matter, but I do believe this time around we've got the upper hand in terms of military might and presence. Problem is, we don't use it effectively.:)
THE SAME OLD Russia mean anything to you? Do you recall what they did to most of the Eastern European countries (now independent) that made up the USSR? Or do I have to draw a picture?
Learn to connect the dots... most other people seem to be able to... SAME OLD RUSSIA... new coat of paint.. same old tactics. Get it? Good. Now let's move on... there will be handouts for those who can't keep up.
The Russians are holding their typical "show the world our military" parades again... they're making inroads into "disputed" areas with an aggregious overuse of force, they're posturing about everything that happens within 1000 miles of them (Poland joining NATO? We kick you in arse!) I am not saying this particular incident BY ITSELF is the first step towards tanks in Hungary again, but the pattern of behavior over Putin's tenure HAS been very Soviet-like.
Jeez, get some reading comprehension... I didn't think I had to draw a picture.
Indeed. Why are we giving these twits money again?
They are a third world nation with first world aspirations, but they can't seem to get it right. How long before we get back to the old USSR? I'd guess sooner rather than later. Problem this time is, the US and Europe aren't going to let Russia roll their tanks into every Eastern European nation bulldozing their people into submission. Fool us once...
Character development is only part of the process. Without a good story, no amount of magic boots +10 will help make a game enjoyable. I've played enough RPGs from my days starting back on the Atari 800 to want at least a balance of story and character development. (Ultima was my first computer RPG that had graphics... before that I was playing Telengard on the TRS80's at school)
The key is balance. Something most RPGs either go too far one way or the other. Planescape:Torment was a PHENOMENAL game that emphasized story over character development. (and underrated I might add) Since you were dead, the only real thing to develop was the kind and nature of the tattoos you sported for abilities... something very clever and cool for its time. Plus with all the dialogue, there was still fun and excitement to be had working your way through the various locations, that only after the game you realized the scope was far more focused than it appeared. A game that compelling should get an award or something.:)
I played Fallout's grandaddy (and fallout too...which I loved), "Wasteland" and I'd say that in it's 8-bit glory, it was able to make a crew of people mean something with specialized abilities and teamwork so that you could find and destroy Base Cochise.:) Man, that was long time ago. But even back then, with little or no atmosphere or animation, wasteland was able to make a compelling RPG that balanced development and combat. (combat is essential to any RPG I would enjoy, don't get me wrong...)
Your example is precisely what needs balancing in most RPGs today... There should be at least a foreshadowing of the fruits of training and all, because otherwise the game would take forever to get to the actual role-playing part, and you'd feel like you were grinding. Oblivion does a fair job of it (better than most) with side quests. You are leveling when playing the side quests, but it feels like you're still engaged in the story. You are of course free to play the game as a hack-n-slash item grabfest like Diablo if you so choose... but the ability to move your character development into the forefront and create a balanced (or focused) alter ego with skills necessary in the main and side quests is refreshing and most RPGs should take note of what worked so that we have more, not less, of a good thing.;)
My original point was the sole purpose for grinding a level (or many levels) simply to get past an insanely difficult "boss" isn't character development... it's a "stat" version of item grabbing. It's not in the true sense an RPG if you're wandering a particular location and killing lots of rats to get up to level 5 so you can wear the boots of eternal ass-kicking +2.
Don't think I'm a "role playing" snob though. I still love item runs in Diablo II as much as anyone.. I just want to be able to have a compelling story-driven RPG once in a while as well. (Heck, I play Nethack... so you know I love item hoarding. heh.)
Well said. For a minute there I thought I was actually the only one who thought Halo's story was VERY thin. (I admit not playing Halo 3 but as a rental only, but c'mon... the story's truly shallow.) It's not that it makes it a shitty game, it's just not the be-all-end-all of FPSes.
For that, I think Bioshock's a contender (thought System Shock is by far the BEST I've played in a LONG time...)
And truly that is the point of the RPG, but something we've lost over the years and have substituted with "item hoarding" games like Diablo II (I love that game too, but not as an RPG). We didn't have deep RPGs in the days of 48K memory, but as games got larger, good companies (not the also-rans) did flesh out stories and make great games to play and explore. Oblivion was a glimpse at what we can do with a huge game world. It was what Lord British was trying to do with Ultima VII, and nearly pulled it off... People going about their daily lives doing their things like clockwork, where you were in the middle of it moving in at real time (or nearly so).
My take is, we need _more_ Oblivions in this multi-gigabyte storage era.:) I am hoping Fallout 3 delivers... because since I finished Oblivion, I've wanted something to continue that open-ended realistic world feel, but nothing's come close...
and I think level-grinding as side-quests is a fabulous compromise. It allows for good, new stuff to be explored while leveling that simply hitting dungeons over and over won't get you. The true genius of Oblivion is that you could've played the game for WEEKS without doing ANY main quest items.
It wasn't THAT bad. You can't possibly with a straight face say there aren't oodles of games worse off in story than Oblivion overshadowing Oblivion's minor story quibbles.. It wasn't perfect, but it was engaging and VERY large... something most $60 games claim, but rarely deliver.
One of the few games I ever got $60 worth of play out of. The list is _very_ short for games like that, so I tend to buy used.;)
When you fight the controls no amount of adjustment helps. I didn't feel the controls helped me at all, and particularly with the rover, I was working against the controls to get anything done. My companions were the worst cannon-fodder this side of an FPS... the game was just overhyped and underdelivered (not unlike what most people think Too Human has done.)
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why this got modded down, but it is spot on. Nintendo got my ire when they tried to halt the Game Genie way back when. It was arrogant... but their games are still fun. Just like Sony's games are fun, though their other arms (non-gaming) can be infuriating... (their games division less so, but still possible.)
But I suppose the lesson here is that the games are what counts... but no matter how great its games are, a company should never take the goodwill of their customers for granted.
No, that's about correct. And the region locking (that is apparently optional) on Blu-Ray puts us and Japan in the same region, apparently... but nothing's using it so far (no telling when it will happen, but at least it's not yet that I'm aware of...)
Nintendo dangled the carrot for Wii being region-free, then abruptly said "our bad.. it's locked."
Now they want to retroactively lock their handhelds. Bleh.
Hello, kettle? This is pot.... I kid, I kid... The only assumption I made was your blanket statement that the person making the statements about managing time better "had no kids". That's an assumption right there, so I assumed you simply were being contrary because you disagreed. More details would've been much easier to discern your true intentions. It's true that some people who don't have kids are quick to look down from their high-horse when it comes to dispensing advice... but mine was not such.. It was as metered a reaction I could get because I inferred that because you disagreed with the parent poster, you were defending (by proxy) the very thing we both can agree on... being good parents is hard work.
:-) Life's all about choices... Most people want everything to go their way and it's nauseating. Sure, hope for that.. but when it doesn't it's not always the other guy/gal's fault. Know what I mean?
Besides, most of what I said was directed at the people who decry responsibility as some sort of burden they're not equipped to handle because of life's "other" pressures.
Bravo if you can keep it up... your kid won't be one of the morons...
Sitting in the same room with your child (who is watching Sesame Street or Barney) while you read the paper is fine. Going and doing dishes while jr. watches Spongebob is also fine. Using the TV as a substitute for you (the parent) is not. Simply put, using a TV/video game/video tape whatever as a substitute for the parent BEING there (available), even if it's just in another room or sitting in the easy chair is unacceptably bad parenting.
Any other excuse ("me" time, shit like that) for not being there is simply poppycock and shouldn't be viewed as anything but shirking one's parenting duties. I think we're saying the same thing... it just needs more definition. It's all in how one was raised themselves too... what's considered appropriate. But hoping the TV will provide answers to a kid's questions because one has to "do laundry" is moronic.
Nice Non Sequitor. Too bad it has nothing to do with the argument at hand... Funny thing... my father's immune to novocaine. He literally has to have it done "the old fashioned way" Your argument is irrelevant....
Are you seriously claiming that using the TV as a substitute for actual parenting ISN'T a bad parent? Most of the chores listed could've been done after the little ones went to bed, you know. It's not like they didn't realize this when they decided to have a family.
People did it for generations without TV... why are we so stupid we can't?
Neither do you. If you've got too much to do and the TV becomes a substitute for being a parent, FIX IT. Don't blame all the "tasks" you have to do and complain there's "just so much".... if there is... chances are something could hit the back burner, like when the kids are ASLEEP, or something similar.
There's NO excuse for not spending enough time with kids... laundry, dishes, SETI research, whatever... If you've got no time for kids, why have them? They are your complete responsibility for 18 years... so it's not like you didn't get the memo on how raising kids was a full-time job.
The parent's got a point because the GP is fobbing off duties of parenting because of something that isn't bloody well 100% time-consuming and difficult. Does the GP go to the creek and wash out the laundry between two rocks? No... it's pretty much load "WAIT" unload/load dryer "WAIT" and voila... you have to hang up clothes afterwards... provided you're not doing the hippie thing and leaving them in a pile.
The GP just needs to stop (and you too, Anonymous blowhard) making excuses and RAISE YOUR KIDS. You made/adopted them... put on the adult pants and START TAKING RESPONSIBILITY.
but that's not the new way is it? Blame society, the Pope, God, Shiva... whatever... but not ME... It's not MY fault. Grow up, people.
You've a good point there. Think about this for a moment. We've got VHS hooked up to our TVs, and over time, we've gradually updated our televisions to larger sets with cable-ready functions and lots of inputs... along comes DVD to take advantage of all those inputs, and VOILA! great picture! So until people go for a larger TV (since they can't buy tube TVs anymore at most B&M's, their next set will be an LCD/plasma etc.), Blu Ray won't appear to do anything for them but cost more. When they get a TV that supports all the resolution, now that's a different story... and I suspect the ubiquity of LCD's and HDTV's in general will usher in a price plunge for Blu-Ray like DVD did when things started moving forward for the format and VHS was finally going the way of the dodo.
:)
just a thought.
I think you've hit something. I am not re-buying my DVD collection. My Blu Ray purchases are based on recent movies (like 300 and so forth)... With the notable exception being 2001. (Which looks great and technically I only had a VHS copy.) I think studios are going to have a hard time convincing people to get a Blu-Ray version of a movie they already have in "Special Edition" on DVD that they only paid $9 for. :) I bought "Dark City" on DVD (the director's cut), and it looked more than fine. It was $15.99 and the DVD was $29.99 (B&M, I didn't bother to check online...)
I might buy Iron Man on Blu-Ray, but chances are, it'll be DVD... which is cheaper...
And, not to mention the whole Divx (not the codec) fiasco that was confusing the masses with "which is better" (Though about 5 minutes of research proved that DVD was superior in every way... that whole "rental" thing didn't fly.) I think since the Ps3 owners are the bulk of the Blu Ray player market at the moment, there's not going to be a huge amount of demand for movies that don't benefit from the format... or that are $30 when their DVD counterpart's $10. It's simply one of those things when the economy slows down... people don't go to as many movies, and conversely they don't buy them. The real key would be rental rates. I'd like to see that. It'd show that when things pick up again, we'll see sales do the same. (Provided the numbers are there... who knows if there's enough outlets to rent blu-ray anyway) Just a thought.
Or the Europeans in Africa/India/the far East, or the Soviets in Eastern Europe, or the Spanish in South America, or the Vikings in Ireland... The Assyrians to the rest of the known world (heh)... and so on... It really is an endless cycle. Every era has power struggles like this. To think we're somehow "more" evil than the rest of the previous thousands of years of human history is a bit silly. We generally gauge our "bad guys" based on our own interests... as the rest of the world has done since we started living in caves and peeing art on walls. If you don't share the American interests, I can accept that. But those who do will not simply stop because you find it morally reprehensible we manipulate the planet for our own ends. The Russians do, the Brits do, the French do, the Italians do, the Saudis do, the Iranians do... I could go on and on.. and quite frankly, if I had to choose between us or them (and we often do, since that's the way the game has been played and will continue to be played) I choose us (for me, that's the USA). Whoever is "good" or "evil" in the world is often only based on where you live. With some notable exceptions through history, the concept of who are the "good" and "bad" guys is all from your (and their) own point of view.
:)
Is it morally bankrupt? Depends on your perspective. Sitting in a nice home (or office depending on where you post/read), having abundant food, vastly superior choices in whatever I want to do sorta clouds my judgement on whether or not my country's moral superiority is up to snuff. Is that morally reprehensible? If you're on the outside looking in, I suspect it is. I don't condone missteps in keeping our way of life going (like Iraq), but I certainly don't step onto the moral pulpit and wag my finger at the US like the rest of the world seems so eager to do (and has since oh, 1783?) We've been doing this forever, but so has everybody else. This is the world we live in... making it a land of happiness and hugs is going to take a lot more than simply kicking the top dog off the pedestal. There's another dog waiting in the wings.
Think about it... even when the US has BEEN correct and had the moral high ground, someone finds something to nitpick about and create a cloud of "evil" around America's actions. I tend not to be so dramatic about it. Because make no mistake, if the tables were turned, there'd be news crews in your neighborhood cataloging the injustices of some other world power (and having most of it censored by that power, I suspect.) It's not like the US created the concept, because it's basic human nature... If we want to solve it, the only way we ever will is to all look, act, and believe exactly the same. That's the solution to world peace. I leave it to you to figure out how to do that.
It's usually the case at the end of any console's lifecycle, shovelware policy or not. We mostly see the cruft start showing up when the system's winding down... the PS2 has been surprisingly strong even in this generation, so I could chalk that up to installed base/anomaly... (The XBox dropped off the radar pretty quick once Microsoft said it was done with that gen...)
But that's generally not attributed to their quality policy... there's a myriad of things that Nintendo did to poison third parties long ago... we're only now seeing them simply not bother to come back, and Nintendo, for all its cleverness, hasn't figured out it's really them that is the problem. :) I think if they had a quality policy and it was clear, along with more helpful developer relationships, we'd see less shovelware and the S2N ratio would drop considerably... sure the amount of games would drop off, but even with the top selling console, having so many similar games cannot bode well for people wanting to find something in the pile of white boxes at the local Wal Mart.
I'm not talking in terms of "this is a weird game, hence we're blocking it" sort of quality policy, but the 300+ other games that are exactly like Carnival Games (only less polished and more craptacular) need to be weeded out. Didn't get your Carnival Games knockoff in before the first one dropped? Find another gimmick. No one who thinks the Wii's full of also-rans and shovelware advocates removing the ability to create unique games, but simply because it uses the Wiimote doesn't make it unique. I think if you had "monkey crapfight 2008" developed for the Wii, Nintendo would approve it, provided they made the poo pink or blue or something. I don't really think in an era where big budget titles are selling like poopy-flavored lollipops we should spend most of our time wading through "Circus games, bubble circus games pop, pop balloon circus games" and the like to find the "right" one.
:)
I imagine since we're more in the know about titles, studios, and reputations that we do make more informed decisions about titles we buy (but we can get burned just like anyone else). However, nintendo's grabbed a new group of people who aren't that versed. If they get 3 or 4 absolutely cruddy games that should've not made the cut, it's going to sour them and all the gains Nintendo made will evaporate when the successor to the Wii comes out. Maybe that's why the attach rate for the Wii is so low? *shrug* Oh, and yes, I'm American... so SCEA has insulated me from some of the rest of the world's craptastic PS2 titles.
LucasArts was making the Force Unleashed with Wiimote "Lightsaber action" and they would've loved to be involved with a device that made the wiimote more precise. I tend to agree with them... it seems that Nintendo gave a big fat finger to the 3rd parties for a device that is not going to be bundled with new Wiis (which is a good thing for us current owners..heh). I mean Lucasarts is just one high profile 3rd party that was outwardly peeved. The other parties are probably not so vocal, but just as pissed. Maybe it's overrated since it's not going to be required for most games, and it'll be one of those add-ons (like Microsoft's HDD) that drive development a different direction (not caching on the HDD unless you have one is the closest to "using" the HDD on the 360 we've seen from devs.)
:)
As for the shovelware, the PS2 didn't get as much shovelware until Sony revised their requirements of the Ps2 devs _after_ the Ps3 launch (or near to it.) The Wii's had shovelware from day one, because Nintendo doesn't levy any quality requirements anymore, so there can be 10000 carnival style balloon-pop knockoff games in the channel, weakening the brand... like Atari's bout with the glut in the early 80's. Can you justify a $50 game when there are 35 other games just like it for $19 that suck? Nintendo used to have a tight leash on quality with their other consoles... I don't understand why they don't now... it just seems odd to me. That's not to say the games are all bad, but the Signal to noise ratio is bad for N this go-round.
Sony's market approval process per region probably forgoes some good niche titles over here, but even a well-received title that sells poorly doesn't bode well in shareholder's eyes I guess... so they try to only pick the "big sellers" (and they sometimes miss that boat as well... heh.) But letting mostly garbage in to get 1 or 2 great titles that are diamonds in the rough (so to speak) is not a good strategy for any of the game console companies to have, considering the lack of shelf space now... and it's only getting worse as far as longevity and sales numbers go... too much competing for the same dollar amount as last generation is putting a strain on them all... and with software sales (for most companies... dunno about Nintendo) being the recouping asset (like razorblades)... not selling because of shovelware is bad for long-term health.
Just my disconnected thoughts.
Not to mention that when flash becomes more cost effective, BD is going to be even moreso (due to its head start and entrenched install base). So playing catch-up while the opponent moves the finish line doesn't bode well for flash being able to overtake BD in a short period of time... 20 years, who knows? 5? Not likely. The successor to BD must be ubiquitous to start out of the gate (i.e. not require another investment in new technology), and it must be markedly cheaper to produce and sell to undercut BD's current pricing. Otherwise it's going to be a while and BD is here to stay...
Of course the BD consortium could do something "Beta-esque" bone-headed in terms of shooting themselves in the foot, but judging from past performance of Sony alone in this format war, I don't see that happening.
Of course it will. It's been selling like hotcakes since it was introduced. The trouble is, third party support is pathetic, and Nintendo seems to be content with selling gadgets for the system and not games... (Not pre-announcing the enhancement to the Wiimote to 3rd parties? LucasArts is pissed...)
:)
I like my Wii and am not here to bash it (in case anyone was ready to throttle me over that), and I've a few things from virtual arcade that bring back memories (some more fond than others...heh), but I'm realistic when I say games like "Too Human" or Fallout 3 are not in the Wii's cards. It's to be expected for any general rule regarding Nintendo's past performance, but it'd be nice if the big N wouldn't give the big finger to third parties so easily... (and get some QC on the shovelware... it's bringing the brand down...)
The Arcade 360 only feels like a non-system to me because I use my HDD on my arcade (built from the ashes of my Elite that is on it's way to Texas as we speak to be fixed), but I played Too Human with just the 256mb memory card in it and it worked just as well. The problem with the HDD on the 360 is the same problem that existed on the original xbox (it's just a place to store saves, patches and music). But the "install to HDD" option that is rumored to come out sounds neat... for those of us stuck with loud-assed DVD drives.
The Wii does need to fix its storage items, since there are so many things that it can hold, but with limited internal memory, it suffers a little for those who are ravenous virtual arcade users.
As for Sony, Microsoft's been fumbling the ball of late, and we can see the PS3 gaining ground steadily... it's not over yet, and there is still room for 3 consoles, but the battle for 2nd place this generation is not a shoo-in for Microsoft anymore. Coupled with their reliability issues and a few other questionable things... Sony's still got a shot. (FWIW and in the spirit of full disclosure, I have a PS3 with a 120GB HDD in it. heh.)
You've got 4 more months of this administration. Do you think Obama will be any different? He'll fight for oil same as the rest of them... the only difference is, he'll make you feel bad about having to do it.
:)
Do you think McCain's any different? Nope... same old same old... Just like Obama... "change"... my ass.
We didn't do anything the first time the Soviet tanks rolled into Eastern Europe... so why bother this time? Western Europe was impotent... the UN was a waste of breath, and the US simply built more missiles. How history repeats itself.... I just didn't think it would be so soon. I have no delusions that we would do anything useful, or forceful for that matter, but I do believe this time around we've got the upper hand in terms of military might and presence. Problem is, we don't use it effectively.
THE SAME OLD Russia mean anything to you? Do you recall what they did to most of the Eastern European countries (now independent) that made up the USSR? Or do I have to draw a picture? Learn to connect the dots... most other people seem to be able to... SAME OLD RUSSIA... new coat of paint.. same old tactics. Get it? Good. Now let's move on... there will be handouts for those who can't keep up. The Russians are holding their typical "show the world our military" parades again... they're making inroads into "disputed" areas with an aggregious overuse of force, they're posturing about everything that happens within 1000 miles of them (Poland joining NATO? We kick you in arse!) I am not saying this particular incident BY ITSELF is the first step towards tanks in Hungary again, but the pattern of behavior over Putin's tenure HAS been very Soviet-like. Jeez, get some reading comprehension... I didn't think I had to draw a picture.
Indeed. Why are we giving these twits money again?
They are a third world nation with first world aspirations, but they can't seem to get it right. How long before we get back to the old USSR? I'd guess sooner rather than later. Problem this time is, the US and Europe aren't going to let Russia roll their tanks into every Eastern European nation bulldozing their people into submission. Fool us once...
You answered your own question. It was the "few exceptions" that made it suck.
Character development is only part of the process. Without a good story, no amount of magic boots +10 will help make a game enjoyable. I've played enough RPGs from my days starting back on the Atari 800 to want at least a balance of story and character development. (Ultima was my first computer RPG that had graphics... before that I was playing Telengard on the TRS80's at school)
:)
:) Man, that was long time ago. But even back then, with little or no atmosphere or animation, wasteland was able to make a compelling RPG that balanced development and combat. (combat is essential to any RPG I would enjoy, don't get me wrong...)
;)
The key is balance. Something most RPGs either go too far one way or the other. Planescape:Torment was a PHENOMENAL game that emphasized story over character development. (and underrated I might add) Since you were dead, the only real thing to develop was the kind and nature of the tattoos you sported for abilities... something very clever and cool for its time. Plus with all the dialogue, there was still fun and excitement to be had working your way through the various locations, that only after the game you realized the scope was far more focused than it appeared. A game that compelling should get an award or something.
I played Fallout's grandaddy (and fallout too...which I loved), "Wasteland" and I'd say that in it's 8-bit glory, it was able to make a crew of people mean something with specialized abilities and teamwork so that you could find and destroy Base Cochise.
Your example is precisely what needs balancing in most RPGs today... There should be at least a foreshadowing of the fruits of training and all, because otherwise the game would take forever to get to the actual role-playing part, and you'd feel like you were grinding. Oblivion does a fair job of it (better than most) with side quests. You are leveling when playing the side quests, but it feels like you're still engaged in the story. You are of course free to play the game as a hack-n-slash item grabfest like Diablo if you so choose... but the ability to move your character development into the forefront and create a balanced (or focused) alter ego with skills necessary in the main and side quests is refreshing and most RPGs should take note of what worked so that we have more, not less, of a good thing.
My original point was the sole purpose for grinding a level (or many levels) simply to get past an insanely difficult "boss" isn't character development... it's a "stat" version of item grabbing. It's not in the true sense an RPG if you're wandering a particular location and killing lots of rats to get up to level 5 so you can wear the boots of eternal ass-kicking +2.
Don't think I'm a "role playing" snob though. I still love item runs in Diablo II as much as anyone.. I just want to be able to have a compelling story-driven RPG once in a while as well. (Heck, I play Nethack... so you know I love item hoarding. heh.)
I don't own a PC. Though it would be nice to play the mods... :)
Well said. For a minute there I thought I was actually the only one who thought Halo's story was VERY thin. (I admit not playing Halo 3 but as a rental only, but c'mon... the story's truly shallow.) It's not that it makes it a shitty game, it's just not the be-all-end-all of FPSes. For that, I think Bioshock's a contender (thought System Shock is by far the BEST I've played in a LONG time...)
And truly that is the point of the RPG, but something we've lost over the years and have substituted with "item hoarding" games like Diablo II (I love that game too, but not as an RPG). We didn't have deep RPGs in the days of 48K memory, but as games got larger, good companies (not the also-rans) did flesh out stories and make great games to play and explore. Oblivion was a glimpse at what we can do with a huge game world. It was what Lord British was trying to do with Ultima VII, and nearly pulled it off... People going about their daily lives doing their things like clockwork, where you were in the middle of it moving in at real time (or nearly so).
:) I am hoping Fallout 3 delivers... because since I finished Oblivion, I've wanted something to continue that open-ended realistic world feel, but nothing's come close...
My take is, we need _more_ Oblivions in this multi-gigabyte storage era.
and I think level-grinding as side-quests is a fabulous compromise. It allows for good, new stuff to be explored while leveling that simply hitting dungeons over and over won't get you. The true genius of Oblivion is that you could've played the game for WEEKS without doing ANY main quest items.
It wasn't THAT bad. You can't possibly with a straight face say there aren't oodles of games worse off in story than Oblivion overshadowing Oblivion's minor story quibbles.. It wasn't perfect, but it was engaging and VERY large... something most $60 games claim, but rarely deliver. One of the few games I ever got $60 worth of play out of. The list is _very_ short for games like that, so I tend to buy used. ;)
When you fight the controls no amount of adjustment helps. I didn't feel the controls helped me at all, and particularly with the rover, I was working against the controls to get anything done. My companions were the worst cannon-fodder this side of an FPS... the game was just overhyped and underdelivered (not unlike what most people think Too Human has done.)