I have little faith that PD0 will be all that good anyway. Perfect Dark 2 was, in reality, already made, but it wasn't under the Rare name and it was part of the Timesplitters franchise.
The people that made Goldeneye and Perfect Dark left Rare long ago.
The revolution actually has 4 controler ports behind a hidden pannel on the top (or side) of the unit. Im not sure what this will mean for the controllers. Maybe they will recharge there or have an optional cord.
I only just saw those. They look like ports for current GameCube controllers to me, but if it's possible to use them in some way for power to the wireless ones that would, obviously, be great.
I think you just confirmed that statement, rather than refuting it.
I like Star Wars, but Christ, the dialogue is cheesy. I literally could not write cheesier stuff myself if I tried. Worse, sure, but it would lack the Aura of Cheese that Lucas is the master of.
I would fully expect $5-$10 to be much more profitable prices than $20. Once you get below $10, I'd think lots of people will see the price as negligible, and sales will increase massively.
One thing I've noticed about Nintendo is that they tend to be extremely conservative in their promises of quality. They do NOT want to say that a feature will be in, then not have it in, and they do NOT want people to think their stuff is better than it actually is. (They want people to FEEL like its better, sure.)
On the other hand, Sony (and Microsoft, to a lesser degree) do the exact opposite. They trump up their numbers as much as they possibly can without outright lying -- except for when they outright lie.
I think it's safe to say that the PS3 will have more power than its competitors, surely. There's no doubt of that. But I agree with you in that it's too early to say how big the difference will be.
About the batteries, I share your concern. Despite the fact that the XBox360 impresses me the least so far, its default controllers essentially feature wireless as an option. It communicates via wireless always, yes, but it CAN be plugged in during use for power and charging, according to what I've read. I think that's the way to go. I don't know if anything like this is planned for the other consoles, but it would be nice.
Left out of WHAT loop? THis article is about two things that the XBox kinda has, that the Revolution most certainly has, and better. The Revolution was designed to be backwards compatible from the start, while the XBox, clearly, wasn't. Square has voiced strong support for both the Revolution and the DS, while the XBox360 is just getting one FF game that was supposed to come out years ago on the original XBox.
Lots of people hated the old Dual Shock, including me. My hands would start to hurt after a half-hour of play with it because of the small handles, but that seems to be fixed (though it's exactly what makes the new controller look so weird). But I can see other problems with it. Firstly, using that left analog stick (either one really, but we know only the left one usually matters) for extended periods is going to hurt, too. The D-Pad is tilted, which from my experience is good -- except I want it tilted in the opposite direction. The buttons on the right seem to extend past the face of the controller and encroach on what looks to be more the real of the handle, which could make pressing one or two of the buttons less-than-natural.
I would think that those short analog sticks are worse than their predecessors, too. Just...too short. That's all there is to that.
If the next generation is like the current one...I'll buy the Nintendo system for the exclusives and for the unique games. I'll play half the PS3 games that look interesting, and 90% of the XBox 360 games that look interesting, on PC. I'll consider buying a PS3 to catch up on all the games I've missed from the PS1 and PS2, but by that time the PS4 will be announced and I'll just keep waiting for that.
Well, I guess so. I mean, when you're voting for one man to fill one office... someone has to loose. At least in the United States, for the Presidency, the winner has to get a majority.
Except for that time five years ago. And a couple others, I think.
But for the folks who don't own the original console - why not release originals re-compiled as budget titles or bonus discs ala the WindWaker/Ocarina of time deal?
Because the Ocarina of Time for GameCube doesn't help me when I want to play Goldeneye. It's really not the same thing at all. A key aspect of backwards campatibility is that the system instantly has a massive library. If you've ever owned a system in the first few months of its life, you should appreciate this feature. In order to match backwards compatibility, a company would need to rerelease every single game ever made for the first system. That includes titles that only a few people liked, mind you. And that's not going to happen.
So, quick question: Windows has appeared to evolved into a seriously fragmented OS. How many different versions of Windows are there? There is a Mobile, Embedded, Server, Pro, Home, Starter, Handheld......What else?
And here I thought people on/. wanted Windows to be more like Linux.
I reinstalled Windows a few weeks ago, just because I like the feel of a clean registry, and the first thing I did was to install Firefox. I loaded it up and went to Fark. It...well, it didn't crash, but it hung and I had to end the process. I also frequently have problems with the process not closing.
As for the memory, not five minutes ago I just had nothing open but the download window. Out of curiosity, I checked the mem usage on firefox.exe, to find that it was 69MB physical/81MB VM. That's just way, way too much, especially since it's just downloading one file.
I would be using Opera, because it's both more stable for me and has a MUCH smaller footprint, but I don't like that it costs money and web browsers (like OSes) are an area where market share affects usability.
The 'smaller' this is nice, since I noticed a while ago that even with only the download window open, Firefox was using a total of 149MB of RAM. When it gets to be as big as all of Windows, you can no longer claim that the difference is just because IE is part of the OS.
When one considers that the inside of R2 had porn plastered all over the inside to ease Baker's discomfort (I'm not making this up) one wonders what kind of comedy is involved.
My guess is that that's all paged. You don't have the TM set to display VM usage, so I don't know. I say this because if I start the latest version of Firefox, with no extensions installed, it uses 18MB of memory (+10MB VM) right off the bat, with the default start page. (Just a google search box...)
But here's a follow-up. No tabs open. Just a blank window. Mem usage is 50MB, VM usage is 40MB. I even cleared everything I could, in an effort to put a dent in it, but it had no effect.
Their magazines were nice. And I'm not referring to the content, but rather the physical quality of the things. I'm certain that I've never seen another magazine that came close.
I like to keep mags, because it can be VERY interesting to, every five years or so, look back at old issues. It's incredible how things change, isn't it? Anyway, I have a good number of old mags, and most of the time anything over two or three years old is in shambles. That's to be expected, really, I keep them but not wrapped in plastic or anything -- as long as I can read it I'm satisfied. But the NextGen issues, there for ten years, stored and handled with the same lack of care, are exactly like they were when I bought them.
People say it's Windows fault, which makes me wonder why other browsers (and I do NOT mean IE) use so much less RAM.
35MB does tend to be just about right in my experience for actual physical memory usage -- most of it gets swapped out into virtual memory, so that using the browser slows down my entire system.
The bottom line is that whether it is actually using the RAM or not, it's either making it unavailable for other programs, or running slowly because of swapping.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, I read the other day that Rockstar was going to support XBox.
I have little faith that PD0 will be all that good anyway. Perfect Dark 2 was, in reality, already made, but it wasn't under the Rare name and it was part of the Timesplitters franchise.
The people that made Goldeneye and Perfect Dark left Rare long ago.
The revolution actually has 4 controler ports behind a hidden pannel on the top (or side) of the unit. Im not sure what this will mean for the controllers. Maybe they will recharge there or have an optional cord.
I only just saw those. They look like ports for current GameCube controllers to me, but if it's possible to use them in some way for power to the wireless ones that would, obviously, be great.
I think you just confirmed that statement, rather than refuting it.
I like Star Wars, but Christ, the dialogue is cheesy. I literally could not write cheesier stuff myself if I tried. Worse, sure, but it would lack the Aura of Cheese that Lucas is the master of.
NES games? Quite possibly a thousand of those.
A little tidbit - you can EASILY fit EVERY published NES game in 512MB.
I would fully expect $5-$10 to be much more profitable prices than $20. Once you get below $10, I'd think lots of people will see the price as negligible, and sales will increase massively.
One thing I've noticed about Nintendo is that they tend to be extremely conservative in their promises of quality. They do NOT want to say that a feature will be in, then not have it in, and they do NOT want people to think their stuff is better than it actually is. (They want people to FEEL like its better, sure.)
On the other hand, Sony (and Microsoft, to a lesser degree) do the exact opposite. They trump up their numbers as much as they possibly can without outright lying -- except for when they outright lie.
I think it's safe to say that the PS3 will have more power than its competitors, surely. There's no doubt of that. But I agree with you in that it's too early to say how big the difference will be.
About the batteries, I share your concern. Despite the fact that the XBox360 impresses me the least so far, its default controllers essentially feature wireless as an option. It communicates via wireless always, yes, but it CAN be plugged in during use for power and charging, according to what I've read. I think that's the way to go. I don't know if anything like this is planned for the other consoles, but it would be nice.
Left out of WHAT loop? THis article is about two things that the XBox kinda has, that the Revolution most certainly has, and better. The Revolution was designed to be backwards compatible from the start, while the XBox, clearly, wasn't. Square has voiced strong support for both the Revolution and the DS, while the XBox360 is just getting one FF game that was supposed to come out years ago on the original XBox.
Really...what loop are they left out of?
Lots of people hated the old Dual Shock, including me. My hands would start to hurt after a half-hour of play with it because of the small handles, but that seems to be fixed (though it's exactly what makes the new controller look so weird). But I can see other problems with it. Firstly, using that left analog stick (either one really, but we know only the left one usually matters) for extended periods is going to hurt, too. The D-Pad is tilted, which from my experience is good -- except I want it tilted in the opposite direction. The buttons on the right seem to extend past the face of the controller and encroach on what looks to be more the real of the handle, which could make pressing one or two of the buttons less-than-natural.
I would think that those short analog sticks are worse than their predecessors, too. Just...too short. That's all there is to that.
If the next generation is like the current one...I'll buy the Nintendo system for the exclusives and for the unique games. I'll play half the PS3 games that look interesting, and 90% of the XBox 360 games that look interesting, on PC. I'll consider buying a PS3 to catch up on all the games I've missed from the PS1 and PS2, but by that time the PS4 will be announced and I'll just keep waiting for that.
Photoshop has protection? I honestly did not know that.
It is good to maintain backward compatibility, Nintendo will have an easier time getting people that own a GameCube to buy their new console
While you're right, I honestly think it encourages non-GC-owners even more. Backwards campatibility is awesome like that.
Well, I guess so. I mean, when you're voting for one man to fill one office... someone has to loose. At least in the United States, for the Presidency, the winner has to get a majority.
Except for that time five years ago. And a couple others, I think.
But for the folks who don't own the original console - why not release originals re-compiled as budget titles or bonus discs ala the WindWaker/Ocarina of time deal?
Because the Ocarina of Time for GameCube doesn't help me when I want to play Goldeneye. It's really not the same thing at all. A key aspect of backwards campatibility is that the system instantly has a massive library. If you've ever owned a system in the first few months of its life, you should appreciate this feature. In order to match backwards compatibility, a company would need to rerelease every single game ever made for the first system. That includes titles that only a few people liked, mind you. And that's not going to happen.
So, quick question: Windows has appeared to evolved into a seriously fragmented OS. How many different versions of Windows are there? There is a Mobile, Embedded, Server, Pro, Home, Starter, Handheld......What else?
/. wanted Windows to be more like Linux.
And here I thought people on
I reinstalled Windows a few weeks ago, just because I like the feel of a clean registry, and the first thing I did was to install Firefox. I loaded it up and went to Fark. It...well, it didn't crash, but it hung and I had to end the process. I also frequently have problems with the process not closing.
As for the memory, not five minutes ago I just had nothing open but the download window. Out of curiosity, I checked the mem usage on firefox.exe, to find that it was 69MB physical/81MB VM. That's just way, way too much, especially since it's just downloading one file.
I would be using Opera, because it's both more stable for me and has a MUCH smaller footprint, but I don't like that it costs money and web browsers (like OSes) are an area where market share affects usability.
The 'smaller' this is nice, since I noticed a while ago that even with only the download window open, Firefox was using a total of 149MB of RAM. When it gets to be as big as all of Windows, you can no longer claim that the difference is just because IE is part of the OS.
When one considers that the inside of R2 had porn plastered all over the inside to ease Baker's discomfort (I'm not making this up) one wonders what kind of comedy is involved.
My guess is that that's all paged. You don't have the TM set to display VM usage, so I don't know. I say this because if I start the latest version of Firefox, with no extensions installed, it uses 18MB of memory (+10MB VM) right off the bat, with the default start page. (Just a google search box...)
But here's a follow-up. No tabs open. Just a blank window. Mem usage is 50MB, VM usage is 40MB. I even cleared everything I could, in an effort to put a dent in it, but it had no effect.
Their magazines were nice. And I'm not referring to the content, but rather the physical quality of the things. I'm certain that I've never seen another magazine that came close.
I like to keep mags, because it can be VERY interesting to, every five years or so, look back at old issues. It's incredible how things change, isn't it? Anyway, I have a good number of old mags, and most of the time anything over two or three years old is in shambles. That's to be expected, really, I keep them but not wrapped in plastic or anything -- as long as I can read it I'm satisfied. But the NextGen issues, there for ten years, stored and handled with the same lack of care, are exactly like they were when I bought them.
People say it's Windows fault, which makes me wonder why other browsers (and I do NOT mean IE) use so much less RAM.
35MB does tend to be just about right in my experience for actual physical memory usage -- most of it gets swapped out into virtual memory, so that using the browser slows down my entire system.
The bottom line is that whether it is actually using the RAM or not, it's either making it unavailable for other programs, or running slowly because of swapping.
Actually, I was primarily comparing to to Opera, which has an extremely similar set to Firefox, when the most common plugins are used.
They eventually just came out aand said that the gem did nothing and existed solely to be clicked on for hours.