Well, in Minority Report, the glove was just an option to control it remotely. They also had more traditional machines in the movie, as well. And the interface was bluescale, but that's just the design of the interface.
I haven't seen the movie in a while either, but I remember it well. Sure, that system isn't practical for everything, but for applications like what it was used for in the movie, works great. Things where a bunch of people need to be able to see what's going on, where a lot of things are going on at once.
I doubt the stuff Ender does would really be doable in game--tying the soldiers together, making assault craft out of soldiers before they even enter the battle room...
More on why the battle room/space battles from the book would make terrible games. They aren't things you can play with a keyboard or a controller. They're about command, and that's voice--and having teammates that can understand you. It's a neat idea, sure, but an impractical one. The only way to get it is to make it an online game, with one large team against another. That doesn't work with battle room games because there's no control scheme on earth that you could use to control a player, and there's no way that I can accept a space battle where the Formics are played by humans.
I can't think of any way to do it that could work and still be worth calling Ender's Game.
I liked it as well, and I agree with the point about the Final Fantasy name. Not only do I think it would have done better without it, I think I would have personally preferred a different title.
Sure, it shares a grand theme with the rest of the Final Fantasy series with Gaia. But the rest of the movie doesn't fit with the series at all. The games are all fantasy worlds with a bit of sci-fi thrown in. Some have more sci-fi than others, sure, the first part of FF7 was very modern, for example. But on the whole, the games are works of fantasy, hence the title. TSW wasn't, it seemed like it was an attempt to make it appeal to American audiences, but it just let me down.
To say it a bit more elegantly, in the game worlds, the sci-fi stuff is to an extent intruding on a world that was previously one of fantasy. In the movie world, it was quite literally the reverse.
Advent Children really looks like it's got it right, IMO. It still looks a lot more sci-fi-oriented than most of the games, but nowhere near the level of the first movie. The fantasy elements go a bit farther than, "ooh, ghosts!"
And they've got swords, which make all the difference.
Big numbers like that truly do just make real thought impossible.
If somebody kills someone, that's murder, you go to prison. You kill 10 people, you go to Texas, they hit you with a brick, that's what they do. Twenty people, you go to a hospital, they look through a small window at you forever. And over that, we can't deal with it, you know? Someone's killed 100,000 people. We're almost going, "Well done! You killed 100,000 people? You must get up very early in the morning!"
Capital is not always proportional to the quality of output, especially in the world of software. Not only do I know the laws of economics, I also know that they frequently fail completely to predict the real world, and that the frequency is increasing constantly.
Of course, that's because Apple was lucky enough to have none of their competitors match their quality. No matter how good you are, you can always be better, and as such, somebody else might actually outdo you.
Actually, it seems to be the combined might of/. and Penny Arcade itself that took it down, it stayed up for quite a while after it was originally posted. Truly, it is a mighty collaboration.
When I think side-screlloer, I think Viewtiful Joe immediately. Definitely one of the best single-player experiences I've ever had. They actually managed to make it fun for me--I never liked any of those brawlers, including Double Dragon.
Ah, but Microsoft has not been working on security until it became apparent that they were losing huge contracts because of it. There is no passion there to create products that excel.
There's no passion in the makers of any OSes to make their software excel. Oh, unless you mean at all the things I don't give a crap about. But since MS is market-oriented, they care about making my games run.
Just some specs on price, for you. I have a computer that can run games pretty well. I'm poor, so it's not great. It can't run DX2 (heh...for the best?) Price of Persia, or Splinter Cell 2 (sob) because I have cheap-ass GeForce4 MX video card. I can get a much better one for about $100, though, and that's not too bad.
However, barring that, I can run anything I've tried. Far Cry works great on my system. So does the Painkiller demo, though that's supposedly crap on an MX card.
So, now, how much did I pay for this? Not $3000. Original system came pre-made, with one blank hard drive, no CD drives, no monitor, but otherwise fully equipped. $450. Monitor is a simple CRT, about $150. RAM tripling a few months ago, $80. CD drive cost is pretty much negligible, isn't it? I only got it without one because I have piles of them lying around.
Current vital specs are AthlonXP 2100+, 768MB DDR400 RAM, and that damn GeForce4 MX.
So now, I have a system that cost me a total of $680, barring the extra stuff that you don't need for games, like the DVD burner. Using this, I can play more games than any console, a great many of them free. And the extra power I need to play all these games, in itself, added only about $150-$200 to the cost of a basic work machine, though a lot of that money helps me do everything better, not just gaming.
Is that really such a bad deal, compared to $200 for a console, whatever the cost is of your big screen, and your many overpriced accessories?
By the way, as far as consoles go, I'm a huge Nintendo fan. Like I said, the wallet's light.
Uh...yeah...when I get these consistently good games, I just wish they'd do something different for once...
Wait, no. Nevermind. They're as original as anybody else is, anyway. Really, who's better? Whovever came up with that crazy roll-stuff-into-a-ball game, maybe, if that's really much more original than Pikmin.
Slashdot Mirror
My friend had a 1998 Neon! Then somebody rear-ended him.
The car was totalled.
From a simple stop-sign rear-ending.
Good luck with that!
Anybody else really wish this wasn't being settled out of court? I'd love to follow that case.
Well, in Minority Report, the glove was just an option to control it remotely. They also had more traditional machines in the movie, as well. And the interface was bluescale, but that's just the design of the interface.
I haven't seen the movie in a while either, but I remember it well. Sure, that system isn't practical for everything, but for applications like what it was used for in the movie, works great. Things where a bunch of people need to be able to see what's going on, where a lot of things are going on at once.
None of this matters at all. Wow.
I think I was drooling when I saw Minority Report...
And you just reminded me of the Link vs Ganondorf fight they showcased back at the GameCube's unveiling.
I want that...
I like the new Zelda look, I think it fits fairly well, but I would love a Zelda that looked like that.
Not right now...the page won't even load.
I think you just redeemed yourself.
Yes, I suppose there may be a way to disable the braindeadedness of Outlook...
Yes, there is. And it's actually done by default now. Outlook might not be great, but it's no longer 'insecure' enough to whine about by default.
I doubt the stuff Ender does would really be doable in game--tying the soldiers together, making assault craft out of soldiers before they even enter the battle room...
More on why the battle room/space battles from the book would make terrible games. They aren't things you can play with a keyboard or a controller. They're about command, and that's voice--and having teammates that can understand you. It's a neat idea, sure, but an impractical one. The only way to get it is to make it an online game, with one large team against another. That doesn't work with battle room games because there's no control scheme on earth that you could use to control a player, and there's no way that I can accept a space battle where the Formics are played by humans.
I can't think of any way to do it that could work and still be worth calling Ender's Game.
I liked it as well, and I agree with the point about the Final Fantasy name. Not only do I think it would have done better without it, I think I would have personally preferred a different title.
Sure, it shares a grand theme with the rest of the Final Fantasy series with Gaia. But the rest of the movie doesn't fit with the series at all. The games are all fantasy worlds with a bit of sci-fi thrown in. Some have more sci-fi than others, sure, the first part of FF7 was very modern, for example. But on the whole, the games are works of fantasy, hence the title. TSW wasn't, it seemed like it was an attempt to make it appeal to American audiences, but it just let me down.
To say it a bit more elegantly, in the game worlds, the sci-fi stuff is to an extent intruding on a world that was previously one of fantasy. In the movie world, it was quite literally the reverse.
Advent Children really looks like it's got it right, IMO. It still looks a lot more sci-fi-oriented than most of the games, but nowhere near the level of the first movie. The fantasy elements go a bit farther than, "ooh, ghosts!"
And they've got swords, which make all the difference.
Big numbers like that truly do just make real thought impossible.
If somebody kills someone, that's murder, you go to prison. You kill 10 people, you go to Texas, they hit you with a brick, that's what they do. Twenty people, you go to a hospital, they look through a small window at you forever. And over that, we can't deal with it, you know? Someone's killed 100,000 people. We're almost going, "Well done! You killed 100,000 people? You must get up very early in the morning!"
Eddie Izzard.
Capital is not always proportional to the quality of output, especially in the world of software. Not only do I know the laws of economics, I also know that they frequently fail completely to predict the real world, and that the frequency is increasing constantly.
The gender surprise can't happen. You know the name of the lead actress is going to need to be publicized, right?
Not only does it need the fuck toy, but the name of the star needs to be publicized.
Of course, that's because Apple was lucky enough to have none of their competitors match their quality. No matter how good you are, you can always be better, and as such, somebody else might actually outdo you.
Actually, it seems to be the combined might of /. and Penny Arcade itself that took it down, it stayed up for quite a while after it was originally posted. Truly, it is a mighty collaboration.
Nice reference. Now I have to go all day thinking, "We're all misfits!" and....and the song...
What they'll probably do is just make something that makes even less sense than their usual insanity.
When I think side-screlloer, I think Viewtiful Joe immediately. Definitely one of the best single-player experiences I've ever had. They actually managed to make it fun for me--I never liked any of those brawlers, including Double Dragon.
MS needs to drop IE and Outlook. Just get rid of them. Let people download Firefox and Thunderbird or whatever.
Wait...download them with what?
Ah, but Microsoft has not been working on security until it became apparent that they were losing huge contracts because of it. There is no passion there to create products that excel.
There's no passion in the makers of any OSes to make their software excel. Oh, unless you mean at all the things I don't give a crap about. But since MS is market-oriented, they care about making my games run.
Just some specs on price, for you. I have a computer that can run games pretty well. I'm poor, so it's not great. It can't run DX2 (heh...for the best?) Price of Persia, or Splinter Cell 2 (sob) because I have cheap-ass GeForce4 MX video card. I can get a much better one for about $100, though, and that's not too bad.
However, barring that, I can run anything I've tried. Far Cry works great on my system. So does the Painkiller demo, though that's supposedly crap on an MX card.
So, now, how much did I pay for this? Not $3000. Original system came pre-made, with one blank hard drive, no CD drives, no monitor, but otherwise fully equipped. $450. Monitor is a simple CRT, about $150. RAM tripling a few months ago, $80. CD drive cost is pretty much negligible, isn't it? I only got it without one because I have piles of them lying around.
Current vital specs are AthlonXP 2100+, 768MB DDR400 RAM, and that damn GeForce4 MX.
So now, I have a system that cost me a total of $680, barring the extra stuff that you don't need for games, like the DVD burner. Using this, I can play more games than any console, a great many of them free. And the extra power I need to play all these games, in itself, added only about $150-$200 to the cost of a basic work machine, though a lot of that money helps me do everything better, not just gaming.
Is that really such a bad deal, compared to $200 for a console, whatever the cost is of your big screen, and your many overpriced accessories?
By the way, as far as consoles go, I'm a huge Nintendo fan. Like I said, the wallet's light.
...no one is gonna spend all week downloading Final Fantasy XXX.
I can think of plenty of people who would wait years to download a game with that title...
Uh...yeah...when I get these consistently good games, I just wish they'd do something different for once...
Wait, no. Nevermind. They're as original as anybody else is, anyway. Really, who's better? Whovever came up with that crazy roll-stuff-into-a-ball game, maybe, if that's really much more original than Pikmin.