> The Wii seems to me like it's designed to be a social device, the type of system you play with your family and friends. Online gaming is only 'social' at its lowest common denominator. [...] In my mind, they've already gotten multi-player right by focusing on solid, fun, and communal play when two people are in the same room.
This ignores the situation where your family and game-playing friends don't live near you.
My local friends aren't that into gaming, but my college buds are always up for it, so it's great to be able to set up a private game with headsets and have a social gaming session with friends who are spread all over the country. It's even better in some ways, because everyone gets their own TV screen and none of your friends drink your beer.
So yeah, I think online play is an important and useful part of any gaming platform.
Seriously. Over the long run, voting anti-incumbent every time is going to do less damage than allowing anyone of any party to get entrenched. If you're informed enough to know that someone deserves re-election according to your beliefs, then so be it -- but when in doubt, throw the bastards out.
And if you have more than one alternative to the incumbent, go third party. Any chink in the major two's armor is good for America.
> And who thought San Andreas was so much better than Vice City, or even the "original" GTA3.
I certainly did, and I've been playing the GTA games since the demo of GTA1 first came out.
I think your PGR flub betrays what's actually going on here -- people are usually fondest of whichever game in a series they're exposed to first, unless a sequel really hits the ball out of the park. It's an emotional response, not a rational one. And you have to realize that each sequel is going to be someone's first exposure to a series, so the whole argument is kind of a non-starter.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for the PS2 already uses almost an entire DVD layer (4+ GB), and it doesn't have any in-game FMV. It also compresses the crap out of all of its audio, and often doesn't play its radio songs in their entirety. You push a game like that to next-gen levels and you'll already need 6 times the space for textures just to maintain their per-pixel quality in HD, and you'll probably want to ease up on the audio compression across the board as much as you can. Then factor in the extra geometry and texture volume to give things that "next-gen sheen", and it's not hard to see how the game could easily exceed the capacity of even a double-layer DVD.
Higher storage capacity for consoles is definitely a good thing. It's not yet required for a lot of game types, but for certain ones it definitely is, unless you're ready to make obvious compromises.
Joe Musashi (Shinobi series)
Alex Kidd
The Space Harrier guy
Congo Bongo
Ecco The Dolphin
Any of the Eternal Champions
The Daytona USA car from Fighters Megamix
> Good idea! Now, let's take Super Mario, who sold well, and combine him with a gun, which also sold really well, and what do we get? MEGA SALES! MUAHAHAHAHAHA!
I know you're joking, but Sega actually tried this already with Shadow The Hedgehog. It was both a critical and commercial failure.
> Yes, geeks don't like story. That is why they don't bother to read not only Lord of the Rings, but also all the other Tolkien books, letters and journals to get more into Middle-Earth. That is why there is hardly any backstory to Warhammer. That would be why there are only a few Star Wars Expanded Universe books. That is why Dungeons & Dragons has so little source material.
I think his point was that many geeks are more concerned with the trappings than the actual substance. Yes, they'll read Tolkien, but they'll just as happily read any piece of schlock with a dragon on the cover. They'll watch Blade Runner, but they'll also watch any crappy sci-fi movie that comes out. They'll listen to Nine Inch Nails, but they'll also listen to any old 60-minute techno mix borefest. As long as the same canvas and palette are used, the actual content is often irrelevant to them.
> No, it really didn't. Admittedly, the only Xbox size I could find was a PAL version, but it was a whopping 2.85 GB.
Yes, it really did. I just popped the PS2 GTA:SA disc into my computer and the files totalled 4.15GB. That's basically the entire first layer.
Given that the delay involved in switching layers makes streaming across the layer barrier completely impractical, dual-layer DVDs aren't viable solutions for certain types of games. Then consider that texture data will need to be 6 times larger just to maintain the current pixelwise texture resolution at 1080i (more if you want to take a step forward), and it's not hard to see how the size of game assets will balloon on next-gen titles.
> I doubt people would be saying "Xbox 360 sucks because its games are on DVD!"
No, but if they have to cut back on content or split a game like Grand Theft Auto IV across multiple discs while the PS3 doesn't, people will notice. Considering that GTA:SA already filled an entire DVD on current-gen consoles, it stands to reason that the next-gen iteration will require additional space, and the 360 simply can't accommodate that without going to multiple discs or using other trickery.
> Did anyone in the history of gaming say "I'm getting Xbox because it's more powerful than PS2"?
Well, they certainly didn't say "I'm getting XBox because it has a wider selection of great games than PS2", or "I'm getting XBox because its controller is better than PS2". And most reviews cited the only difference between XBox and PS2 versions of the same game being frame rate and graphical definition -- so yeah, I'd guess that quite a few people got an XBox for graphical power alone.
As good a game as Metal Gear Solid was, they're going to have to strip out quite a bit of the cheese and over-the-top melodrama to make the story palatable to a U.S. movie audience.
Indigo Prophecy was published by Atari last year, and it's a very unique take on the console adventure game. Think Shadow Of Destiny with tighter pacing, more playable characters, a more interesting interface, and no time travel schtick. And GameStop just dropped it to $20 new. Good stuff.
> What stops me from making a fake ID card, that says I'm somebody else, but with MY fingerprints encoded in the card.
The fingerprint minutiae templates are digitally signed and protected by a PIN, and the cards are only issued by approved PIV Issuers who have to get all of the data used on the card through a secure network that you wouldn't have access to. And even if you did, you'd have to corrupt at least two of the major players in the issuance process in order to create a fake card.
> This card is supposed to contain fingerprints as an important part of ensuring a person's ID, but as far as I know there is NO federal standard for matching/comparing fingerprints.
There's no mandated matching algorithm, but there are minimum performance requirements for fingerprint authenticators before they can be certified. See NIST SP 800-76 [PDF] for details.
> If the image of your fingerprints is on the card, then anyone who has stolen your card can make fake fingerprints... and likely a fake card with thier photo on it and with your fingerprint data.
They're fingerprint minutiae templates, not fingerprint images. And they're digitally signed and protected by a PIN. Plus the applicant's original biometrics are kept in a secure database as a backup check, and lost PIV cards can be blacklisted and rendered useless very soon after being reported.
> There are better ways to foil a spy is what I'm saying. Try a retina scan. It's a lot harder to copy one. Or a brain scan; that is, using an MRI scan of a person's brain structure. Try copying that. And then all three of these methods could be doubled-up by also scanning to see if whatever is being used as the object for scanning is actually alive
Agencies are allowed to pack whatever other biometrics they like on the PIV card, and are allowed to use whatever additional security measures they like on their grounds. The two fingerprint minutiae templates are just the baseline requirement.
> Why would I try to crack the card when I could just offer a small sum of money to the nice lady working the security desk, and making the cards? Or if she's got too much integrity for that, I suppose I could just kidnap her son/daughter? I'm quite confident she'd make me a card then.
Because the PIV system is designed so that a single corrupt person in the chain can't wind up issuing a valid credential. The person who sponsors your application is different from the person who collects your biometrics, who's different from the person who puts together your physical card, who's different from the person who checks your biometrics against the final card and issues it to you. You'd have to bribe at least a couple of people in that chain in order to get an illicit card that actually worked.
Who is the author's target audience? The sort of people who are going to make a purchasing decision based solely on the weighted average of an aggregator without reading any of the linked reviews? Obviously not. The people who use an aggregator but do read a cross-section of the linked reviews to get context and multiple points of view? Not them, either.
So who's left? People who don't use an aggregator in the first place. And what's he imploring them to do? Not use an aggregator. Seems kind of pointless, doesn't it...?
Besides, I think aggregators are great. Especially well-stewarded ones like Metacritic (which was strangely dropped from the submission text while the other two aggregators weren't). With intelligently weighted averages you get a useful snapshot of opinion, plus the option to check out as many individual reviews as you like to get a fuller picture. I've bought a number of games that had mediocre averages because the text of the linked reviews made it clear that they were something I'd appreciate, just as I've avoided a number of games with high averages where the text of the reviews made it clear that they wouldn't be suited to my taste.
And yes, having your site included in an aggregator's round-up can only be a good thing -- it'll grant immediate exposure to your work and let readers decide for themselves how much clout to give your reviews vs. the weighted average in the future. This stands out even more when you review more obscure titles that don't get covered by all the big outlets, so you become one of a much smaller group of reviews.
I say aggregators are win-win for both readers and review sites.
Slashdot Mirror
> The Wii seems to me like it's designed to be a social device, the type of system you play with your family and friends. Online gaming is only 'social' at its lowest common denominator. [...] In my mind, they've already gotten multi-player right by focusing on solid, fun, and communal play when two people are in the same room.
This ignores the situation where your family and game-playing friends don't live near you.
My local friends aren't that into gaming, but my college buds are always up for it, so it's great to be able to set up a private game with headsets and have a social gaming session with friends who are spread all over the country. It's even better in some ways, because everyone gets their own TV screen and none of your friends drink your beer.
So yeah, I think online play is an important and useful part of any gaming platform.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (PS2, XBox)
Tempest 2000 (Jaguar)
Guardian Heroes (Saturn)
Shadow Of The Colossus (PS2)
Target Earth (Genesis)
Seriously. Over the long run, voting anti-incumbent every time is going to do less damage than allowing anyone of any party to get entrenched. If you're informed enough to know that someone deserves re-election according to your beliefs, then so be it -- but when in doubt, throw the bastards out.
And if you have more than one alternative to the incumbent, go third party. Any chink in the major two's armor is good for America.
WTF?
> Project Gotham Racing 2 was "eh" after the original
That's funny -- I thought PGR1 was "eh" after the actual original, Metropolis Street Racer on the Dreamcast.
> And who thought San Andreas was so much better than Vice City, or even the "original" GTA3.
I certainly did, and I've been playing the GTA games since the demo of GTA1 first came out.
I think your PGR flub betrays what's actually going on here -- people are usually fondest of whichever game in a series they're exposed to first, unless a sequel really hits the ball out of the park. It's an emotional response, not a rational one. And you have to realize that each sequel is going to be someone's first exposure to a series, so the whole argument is kind of a non-starter.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for the PS2 already uses almost an entire DVD layer (4+ GB), and it doesn't have any in-game FMV. It also compresses the crap out of all of its audio, and often doesn't play its radio songs in their entirety. You push a game like that to next-gen levels and you'll already need 6 times the space for textures just to maintain their per-pixel quality in HD, and you'll probably want to ease up on the audio compression across the board as much as you can. Then factor in the extra geometry and texture volume to give things that "next-gen sheen", and it's not hard to see how the game could easily exceed the capacity of even a double-layer DVD.
Higher storage capacity for consoles is definitely a good thing. It's not yet required for a lot of game types, but for certain ones it definitely is, unless you're ready to make obvious compromises.
How about...
Joe Musashi (Shinobi series)
Alex Kidd
The Space Harrier guy
Congo Bongo
Ecco The Dolphin
Any of the Eternal Champions
The Daytona USA car from Fighters Megamix
> Good idea! Now, let's take Super Mario, who sold well, and combine him with a gun, which also sold really well, and what do we get? MEGA SALES! MUAHAHAHAHAHA!
I know you're joking, but Sega actually tried this already with Shadow The Hedgehog . It was both a critical and commercial failure.
> Yes, geeks don't like story. That is why they don't bother to read not only Lord of the Rings, but also all the other Tolkien books, letters and journals to get more into Middle-Earth. That is why there is hardly any backstory to Warhammer. That would be why there are only a few Star Wars Expanded Universe books. That is why Dungeons & Dragons has so little source material.
I think his point was that many geeks are more concerned with the trappings than the actual substance. Yes, they'll read Tolkien, but they'll just as happily read any piece of schlock with a dragon on the cover. They'll watch Blade Runner, but they'll also watch any crappy sci-fi movie that comes out. They'll listen to Nine Inch Nails, but they'll also listen to any old 60-minute techno mix borefest. As long as the same canvas and palette are used, the actual content is often irrelevant to them.
> And most of all, the PS3 will need its "Halo": A killer game, a 'must have', a signature title that makes you WANT to buy that PS3.
...and I'm sure there will be more.
I can think of two off the top of my head that are PS3 exclusives and potential system sellers:
Metal Gear Solid 4
Virtua Fighter 5
Guitar Hero II is already going to support playable bass lines, including Les Claypool on Primus's "John The Fisherman".
> Not really, especially if you can upgrade current Xbox360's with the HD-DVD drive to play those games.
Nonsense. Name one game console media add-on that has ever caught on in the U.S. market.
> No, it really didn't. Admittedly, the only Xbox size I could find was a PAL version, but it was a whopping 2.85 GB.
Yes, it really did. I just popped the PS2 GTA:SA disc into my computer and the files totalled 4.15GB. That's basically the entire first layer.
Given that the delay involved in switching layers makes streaming across the layer barrier completely impractical, dual-layer DVDs aren't viable solutions for certain types of games. Then consider that texture data will need to be 6 times larger just to maintain the current pixelwise texture resolution at 1080i (more if you want to take a step forward), and it's not hard to see how the size of game assets will balloon on next-gen titles.
> I doubt people would be saying "Xbox 360 sucks because its games are on DVD!"
No, but if they have to cut back on content or split a game like Grand Theft Auto IV across multiple discs while the PS3 doesn't, people will notice. Considering that GTA:SA already filled an entire DVD on current-gen consoles, it stands to reason that the next-gen iteration will require additional space, and the 360 simply can't accommodate that without going to multiple discs or using other trickery.
> Did anyone in the history of gaming say "I'm getting Xbox because it's more powerful than PS2"?
Well, they certainly didn't say "I'm getting XBox because it has a wider selection of great games than PS2", or "I'm getting XBox because its controller is better than PS2". And most reviews cited the only difference between XBox and PS2 versions of the same game being frame rate and graphical definition -- so yeah, I'd guess that quite a few people got an XBox for graphical power alone.
Just my two cents.
As of 2002, the average age of the U.S. comic book reader was 24.
My mailreader of choice is Pine piped through "jive". It makes life so much more interesting...
Indigo Prophecy was published by Atari last year, and it's a very unique take on the console adventure game. Think Shadow Of Destiny with tighter pacing, more playable characters, a more interesting interface, and no time travel schtick. And GameStop just dropped it to $20 new. Good stuff.
The fingerprint minutiae templates are digitally signed and protected by a PIN, and the cards are only issued by approved PIV Issuers who have to get all of the data used on the card through a secure network that you wouldn't have access to. And even if you did, you'd have to corrupt at least two of the major players in the issuance process in order to create a fake card.
There's no mandated matching algorithm, but there are minimum performance requirements for fingerprint authenticators before they can be certified. See NIST SP 800-76 [PDF] for details.
They're fingerprint minutiae templates, not fingerprint images. And they're digitally signed and protected by a PIN. Plus the applicant's original biometrics are kept in a secure database as a backup check, and lost PIV cards can be blacklisted and rendered useless very soon after being reported.
Agencies are allowed to pack whatever other biometrics they like on the PIV card, and are allowed to use whatever additional security measures they like on their grounds. The two fingerprint minutiae templates are just the baseline requirement.
Because the PIV system is designed so that a single corrupt person in the chain can't wind up issuing a valid credential. The person who sponsors your application is different from the person who collects your biometrics, who's different from the person who puts together your physical card, who's different from the person who checks your biometrics against the final card and issues it to you. You'd have to bribe at least a couple of people in that chain in order to get an illicit card that actually worked.
Hey, that's what I just did on all my machines...
So who's left? People who don't use an aggregator in the first place. And what's he imploring them to do? Not use an aggregator. Seems kind of pointless, doesn't it...?
Besides, I think aggregators are great. Especially well-stewarded ones like Metacritic (which was strangely dropped from the submission text while the other two aggregators weren't). With intelligently weighted averages you get a useful snapshot of opinion, plus the option to check out as many individual reviews as you like to get a fuller picture. I've bought a number of games that had mediocre averages because the text of the linked reviews made it clear that they were something I'd appreciate, just as I've avoided a number of games with high averages where the text of the reviews made it clear that they wouldn't be suited to my taste.
And yes, having your site included in an aggregator's round-up can only be a good thing -- it'll grant immediate exposure to your work and let readers decide for themselves how much clout to give your reviews vs. the weighted average in the future. This stands out even more when you review more obscure titles that don't get covered by all the big outlets, so you become one of a much smaller group of reviews.
I say aggregators are win-win for both readers and review sites.