They fought piracy and they lost, obviously. Yes I think Sony won a lot, by leaving a small space for piracy.
Since when is "made more money" synonymous with "lost"? This is not the first quarter since the GC's release that Nintendo's profit reports are higher than Sony's. I believe (I don't even know how to go about confirming this) most of them have been.
I say that if a game is so unique that you can't talk about how it compares to other games in the genre (because there are none), then that's a good thing. The parent to my original post implied that it's a bad thing.
Only if you misread it. It said that you can rarely describe a game as fun. The article said that's good. The parent to your original post disagreed.
That article seems like an attempt to put problems in a positive light, without outright lying.
The games are harder to make, but that's a good thing. For some ill-definted reason. Same for price! Yeah! More artists. That's good, or something. I guess.
I'm amused that you actually think that would make a difference. Most of the kiddies (and just about all of the ones that you and I hate) already have their parents paying for it, you know.
"Competing with battleNet" is nonsensical, businesswise, because Blizzard actually loses money on that little operation, unless the ads (mostly for Blizzard products somehow cover the costs. It's like saying that a restaurant's different dishes are competing with one another -- sure you have to decide what you want, but nobody else really gives a shit what you choose. It just doesn't affect anything.
Blizzard didn't start doing anything about bNetd until it became clear that it was going to be extensively used to bypass copy protection. Nothing that the developers of bNetd could have done -- implementing CD-key checks or whatever -- would have stopped this, as somebody would always just strip that part out.
The problem with Morrowind is simply that it's boring. I can look at it and be incredibly impressed by Bethesda's achievement. But I can't have any damn fun playing the thing.
Wouldn't the ratings for the first episode be the absolute least meaningless stat about a show's popularity and quality? Wouldn't the ratings for the SECOND episode be far, far more telling?
Ah, so then the new series is just carrying on the tradition... (I'm a little young to have known the originals.)
The new series reuses lots of footage. Viper combat landings are always the same. That's the most obvious one, because it happens very often. A lot of other space battle stuff is reused too. I know I've seen the same shots of missiles flying at the Galactica more than once, and certainly the same shots of the Galactica's guns coming to bear. I can think of others, but I think I've made the point.
Not that I mind it the slightest bit, I still think it's one of the best series on TV right now -- I just can't help but notice that it reuses more footage than any other show I've ever seen.
Take a look at the 'Computer Management' window and you begin to understand just how little has actually changed concerning the UI. It's almost like you're running it in a Windows XP emulator frame as it retains the old window controls inside the new fancy ones. Is this the way older programs will look?
Those are actually there NOW. It's an MDI program, those are for manipulating the currently selected subwindow.
Slashdot Mirror
The HL2 thing is hard for me to see. I would personally give it a 9.5/10 or so.
But then I see that that's what EVERYBODY is giving it. There's NO game that EVERYBODY likes that much.
Mmm. I'd like to see speed runs of a few Painkiller levels. It's in the same vein as Sam.
A 20% loss is not the end of the world.
Yes, the headline is wrong. It's not 80%. It's TO 80%.
They fought piracy and they lost, obviously. Yes I think Sony won a lot, by leaving a small space for piracy.
Since when is "made more money" synonymous with "lost"? This is not the first quarter since the GC's release that Nintendo's profit reports are higher than Sony's. I believe (I don't even know how to go about confirming this) most of them have been.
No, but nor will they keep a gaming division going that is continually in the red.
Well, for how long? Aren't they something like $2b in the hole, now? More?
How was the XBox a success? By what standards?
I say that if a game is so unique that you can't talk about how it compares to other games in the genre (because there are none), then that's a good thing. The parent to my original post implied that it's a bad thing.
Only if you misread it. It said that you can rarely describe a game as fun. The article said that's good. The parent to your original post disagreed.
That's almost as powerful as the PS3 will be! Amazing.
That article seems like an attempt to put problems in a positive light, without outright lying.
The games are harder to make, but that's a good thing. For some ill-definted reason. Same for price! Yeah! More artists. That's good, or something. I guess.
I'm amused that you actually think that would make a difference. Most of the kiddies (and just about all of the ones that you and I hate) already have their parents paying for it, you know.
Yeah, the UIN system is terrible. Screennames are a lot easier to remember than huge numbers.
After six years or so, I've finally forgotten mine. I remember "2067"...and then parts of my SSN start creeping in.
Legitimate competition with...what?
"Competing with battleNet" is nonsensical, businesswise, because Blizzard actually loses money on that little operation, unless the ads (mostly for Blizzard products somehow cover the costs. It's like saying that a restaurant's different dishes are competing with one another -- sure you have to decide what you want, but nobody else really gives a shit what you choose. It just doesn't affect anything.
Blizzard didn't start doing anything about bNetd until it became clear that it was going to be extensively used to bypass copy protection. Nothing that the developers of bNetd could have done -- implementing CD-key checks or whatever -- would have stopped this, as somebody would always just strip that part out.
No...no, that's the same meaning, actually.
What's "normal" for an MMO? WoW seems to use about 0.4kbps for me, on average.
Hell, it's probably fixed now.
I've never seen them called Pinky Demons before. That name is...uh...not very menacing.
The problem with Morrowind is simply that it's boring. I can look at it and be incredibly impressed by Bethesda's achievement. But I can't have any damn fun playing the thing.
(that, at least in my ubuntu install, came clearly labeled as "applications", rather than a more cryptic "start")
Oh, please don't tell me you think that 'applications' isn't a completely meaningless word to your average computer user.
Wouldn't the ratings for the first episode be the absolute least meaningless stat about a show's popularity and quality? Wouldn't the ratings for the SECOND episode be far, far more telling?
Who honestly cared to see Worf have a romantic relationship with Dax?
Heh...sci-fi geeks who actually don't have anything approaching romance in their real lives, maybe.
Oh, come on, you know it's true.
Ah, so then the new series is just carrying on the tradition... (I'm a little young to have known the originals.)
The new series reuses lots of footage. Viper combat landings are always the same. That's the most obvious one, because it happens very often. A lot of other space battle stuff is reused too. I know I've seen the same shots of missiles flying at the Galactica more than once, and certainly the same shots of the Galactica's guns coming to bear. I can think of others, but I think I've made the point.
Not that I mind it the slightest bit, I still think it's one of the best series on TV right now -- I just can't help but notice that it reuses more footage than any other show I've ever seen.
Yes, but that wasn't what the parent is talking about.
Also, the people who work on the UI at Blizz don't know anything about that added clause and don't know why it's there.
I think he means the in-game periodic broadcast saying something like "We advise all players to disable their custom UIs."
The game console doesn't require a PC. Much of its functionality requires a net connection, though, and this is just one way to provide it to the box.
Take a look at the 'Computer Management' window and you begin to understand just how little has actually changed concerning the UI. It's almost like you're running it in a Windows XP emulator frame as it retains the old window controls inside the new fancy ones. Is this the way older programs will look?
Those are actually there NOW. It's an MDI program, those are for manipulating the currently selected subwindow.