I agree. I don't think the "flavor" of the LOTR that Jackson has already directed is one that should carry over into the Hobbit. Personally, I think a Hobbit movie is unecessary, and as much credit I give PJ and his crew for bringing the LOTR of the rings to the big screen in such a magnificent fashion, I think his desire to make "The Hobbit" is based more on a rather swollen ego. It seems like he has to get his "Tolkien" licks in now, while the gettins' good, so he might be able to write himself down as the one who brought ALL of that vision to the big screen. But where does it stop, Mr. Jackson? WHERE?!
I think it's sort of interesting (and humourous) how many people in this topic have mistakenly referred to the character in FF:TSW as "Ben Affleck" (AKA Pancake Head; maybe SP fans can enlighten me: where the hell DID that come from? HAHAHA. Regardless, I only refer to Ben Affleck as Pancake Head since seeing that episode...), when it was actually a CG model that looked A LOT like Ben Affleck but voiced by Alec Baldwin. I was confused too when the movie first had trailer's released; I thought the CG models were based off of the "real-life" actors who were doing their voices. Pretty influencial and powerful stuff, that CG...
How can one say that Apple is not a monopoly? Does not abuse their position? If you want to buy an Apple product, you have the choice of purchasing a product from Apple, Apple or...well, Apple. Yeah, they're products are better designed, but that's because they can control nearly every factor that goes into their hardware. To say Apple is better than Microsoft because they aren't a monopoly just sounds delusional. If you want to split hairs and go the legal mumbo-jumbo route, then yeah, Apple isn't a monopoly.
If you prefer Apple because it's a better product, fine. Apple might not have broken the law like Microsoft, but that's because a move like that, for a company without the shady connections that MS has, would totally break them. Maybe they know this, and instead they take the route of producing a reliable product, but the only way to do that in a computer industry is to make sure there is something like a hardware standard. Thus, Apple has the control over everything Apple, and technically has more control over Apple-related hardware/software than Microsoft ever will, but whether or not they leverage it in a shady manner like Microsoft has is a different story... Either way, it's a trade-off.
My original point wasn't that being money-hungry is inherently evil, but more that Apple has/can/will play just as dirty as Microsoft has, "superior" products aside.
I understand where some people might want to weigh carrying capacity vs. size/weight/shape, so stating that for only 50 dollars more one can get a higher capacity iPod was a more opinionated statement on my part. I hadn't considered that. I make use of a large music libary, so my primary concern with portable MP3 players is space. I just figured if people didn't care about space, they'd buy a MuVo for 150 or something... I'm at a loss for words with this one, though:
I'm not even going to go into fashion because I am pretty sure that's a minorty of what is making this device popular.
Is this sarcasm? If so, sorry I missed that one, but it seems like a HUGE selling point for the iPod and mini iPod is fashion. Unless you've been totally oblivious to Apples incredibly asthetic product line over the past few years, you're in denial about the fact that Apple uses fashion to sell their products. I've heard a lot of people say the iPod color schemes look hideous, and I tend to agree, but pop-culture hype has the tendency to make ANYTHING look "fashionable", and I'm sure Apple knows exactly what they're doing in this regard.
Re:Kinda validate their price point
on
iPod Mini Sells Out
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
All it really validates is that most consumers are fools and will fall for any hype the Apple marketing department throws at them. If people were intelligent enough to do a little research, they could find that buying a full-blown iPod for only 50 dollars more would be a much wiser decision, space wise, or another portable mp3 player entirely, rather than shelling out an insane amount of money for an Apple iPod that is shiny, pretty, and has "cool" commercials...
I seriously never was a huge fan of Apple, but as the days go on and I see how their marketing machine works, I frankly see them as no worse than Microsoft... The reason they can afford to churn out higher quality products that keep the customers happy more often than MS is because they have so much control over Apple-based hardware. If the tables were turned, and they had the market share that MS does, I personally only see two possibilities: 1. They either keep selling their Apple-branded hardware for the absurd amount of prices because hey, the only hardware that works with Apple products is the stuff you can get from...APPLE!; or 2. They go the way of the "PC" hardware model, and you can buy any hardware you want from any vendor you want, but at the sake of losing stability/compatibility. I'm sure this topic has been talked to death here, but I never see anyone addressing this; so many people seem to go on worshipping whatever overhyped nonsense Apple throws at them. How does this make them any better than a "power hungry" monopoly like Microsoft? I seriously would like to hear, because maybe I'm just missing what Apple is all about and why people are so fanatically devoted...
I'll stop the rant now, but basically all I'm saying is that Apple is as money-hungry Microsoft and I don't think they have any more scruples than MS does in getting paid. To think otherwise is foolish, and frankly for the community here on Slashdot that is often so anti-MS I see way many people kissing the ol' Apple, if you know what I mean...
BTW, I'm not making generalizations about ALL slashdot readers; just those "types". Heh. I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about...
Actually, I don't even know if Lucasarts still posseses the talent behind these classic games anymore. Judging by the way things have gone for the past few years at large game companies like Lucasarts, I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of the creative minds behind the more "cereberal" games at Lucasarts have moved on to other things, most likely non-game related. It just doesn't seem like their development agenda has anything that would keep those type of game developers around...
Then again, I haven't researched this, and my thoughts are sifting through a headcold, so maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about...
At first I'd assumed it was Anakin, but it didn't look like the Christensen fellow at all... More like Ewan...
Maybe it's red herring to through all the production photo nerds off track... Like the wizard impaled on a spiked wheel someone claimed they saw in early production photos of LOTR. Hehehe...
...that the Ashcroft fellow, who registered the link from a poster texture in Rainbox Six (I think it was Rainbow Six...ah, all those tactical FPS are the same anyway) and put all those links to porn sites and what have you, can now totally get nailed by the company instead of them having to pay him for the domain like he's demanding? It might not benefit the game publisher directly, but couldn't they pull some stipulations out on this law and bring it to the attention of some people that could get him in some serious hot water?
Then again, that game probably is (or should be, I'd assume) rated mature, so I guess yougins' shouldn't be playing it anyway. Hmmm...
Is it me, or is it totally illegal for Microsoft to publicly refer to their software as something probably copyrighted (and as silly sounding) as "XP Reloaded"? Not that sounding silly is illegal... I mean, they just (tried) suing that guy for naming his page and software(s) "MikeRoweSoft(.com)", how the hell can they get away with this?
Maybe I just have no grasp on copyright law...
Because in a country as heavily capitalist as America, the only chance you have of effectively voicing your opinion is with your dollars. The legal system here has become so jaded and manipulated that it only seems to benefit those with enough money and influence to sway it to their whims, and sadly the only way Americans can make any difference is by taking some of that power away; namely depriving those powerful and rich individuals of our dollars.
I agree, it is offensive. But don't blame the semantics; blame the reality that is the United States.
Not to be antagonistic or anything, but FFI had horrible cookie cutter story line. It's fun to play for it's merit as a groundbreaking RPG for its time, but to compare its story to the complexity of even some of the weaker storylines of modern RPGs just sounds sort of foolish. Even the recent FF Origins collection did little to improve the story structure of the first NES FF games.
I think I understand what you are saying about modern RPG storylines, and I agree entirely. Too much is concentrated on feature-set and graphics, with very little substance in regards to story to carry the snazzy technical aspects.
I'm no security guru or anything, but this was my first rebuttal when I glanced over Mr. Russell's article.
Besides, my only basic and novice understanding of programming leads me to believe that if a program is open source, its even more likely NOT to have security issues, as any malicious code inserted into the software will be detected and brought out into the open when other members of the open source community tinker around inside the code. Is it even possible to "hide" a malicious function in an open source program?
The bottom line to me is that no matter who you are, there is someone smarter than you, and no matter how clever your malicious code is, you're gonna get pinched by someone who saw it a mile away. They notify the community. It gets removed/patched, you become a laughing stock, and in retaliation write the next MyDoom from your grandmother's basement. Sounds like a great system to me...
Besides, an open source system for governement machines is BETTER for the individuals. Perhaps I didn't RTFA closely enough, but this fool seemed to think that the governemnts "protection of it's citizens data" would be safer with a closed source system. Closed source allows for exacltly the oposite... Was it the ISAKey in Windows? I wonder if Mr. Russel even knows what he is talking about...
What if I use Access to build a crude front-end to a MySQL server (which I am painfully drudging through right now...) Do I need to liscence MySQL, or am I just commiting a cardinal sin, asking for the universe to collapse in all around me?...As far as GPLing my code, hell, I don't care who looks at my MS Access VB. It's a mess. Ha. But seriously, if I'm going to deploy this setup in a small bidness, what do I need to consider...?
I've been wondering all this for a while, but it came up here so I thought I might as well ask. Hope I'm not OT.
Actually, no link. I grabbed it off of SoulSeek ages past... I actually ripped the Fallout soundtracks myself from the cd using a program from No Mutants Allowed (www.nma-fallout.com); there might be something similar in existence for PS. I don't actually own the game, so I never bothered to look. I would love to pick it up, if I could ever find it in the bargain bins I keep hearing about...
Mark Morgan did Fallout 1, 2 and Planescape: Torment(though I've only played the Fallouts, got the Planescape soundtrack online...). He's done some great stuff for "modern" games I think. Incredibly moody and atmospheric. Half of those songs I still remember; the Raider theme is just cool to listen to. Keichi Suziki isn't bad either; composer of the Earthbound(SNES) soundtrack. Incredibly unique and creative stuff...
Personally I think its about time a company took some liberties and did something like this. I can understand someone wanting to build a total powerhouse machine, but testing a system like that is what "benchmarking" programs like 3DMark are for. With a cap on the FPS for gaming (at least by default... I'm sure someone will find a way to remove the cap once the game is released) people can start worrying less about how many FPS their game gets and more about how fun it is to play. Games are for playing, not using as a technology demo. That is, unless id is just simply using the cap to hide something else, which could very well be a possibility...heh.
Well, I won't deny that a thief-based character is my preference when it comes to role playing games, but that aside I just found KOTOR to be a bit to restrictive in regards to the character development in general. Eh, maybe I just need to sit down with the game and quit worrying about how I think the game SHOULD be played and just play it... But that's just my opinion; I'm not saying KOTOR is a bad game; in fact I find it incredibly polished and thorough. I just didn't feel BioWare deserved so much credit for an RPG; a good game, yes. But RPG pioneers, I still have a hard time declaring them as such.
Is it just me, or does anyone else find BioWare EXTREMELY overated? I guess it would be safe to say I fell into the hype of SW:KOTOR this summer when it was released, and sadly it was one of the primary reasons I went out and purchased an XBOX. Well, I bought the game new days after it was released, and to this day I have never gotten any further into it than maybe 6 or 8 hours. It just hasn't grabbed me. People rave about the open-endedness and the impact your character choices have on the game, but I've found the character development to be incredibly limited and the story incredibly boring. Take a game like Fallout (1&2). Brilliant games. The difference it seems is that between a game like Fallout and SW:KOTOR is that in KOTOR, a character that you choose to develop as a "Thief" is more of a cosmetic gameplay mechanic than anything else. In the end, KOTOR comes down to how strong your character is in battle. In Fallout, if you wanted to play as a "thief" you could, and nothing was stopping you from stealing anything and everything you wanted, sneaking around wherenever and whenever, etc. A game like KOTOR only encourages those possibilities to a certain degree, then brings you crashing back down to earth when it is time to progress the story...Here we go, another battle that is going to be unbelievably hard unless you have a party full of "fighters"...
I don't mean to say that BioWare is a bad developer; I've enjoyed many of their games over the past years, but I honestly have to say I'm not very impressed with their most recent releases (NWN and KOTOR) and I just think they are received WAY TOO MUCH credit; much more than they deserve. It just seems like in the end its all just boiling down to hack and slash. Eh, maybe that's all people want and I'm just missing the point entirely.
An issue of Game Informer (can't remember the month...Maybe August... Had Jade Empire on the cover...) had an article about DOOM 3 and from what they explained in the article, it sounds like id is actually trying to go for some atmosphere in DOOM 3. There's a situation where you're walking through a pitch black room with a flashlight that only lights the way like 10 feet all around you, and you can hear demons and such gathering in the darkess surrounding you. Of course, this could just be a case of seeing all the best parts of the movie in the trailer, but I choose to take it as an indication that id might try to build some atmosphere with their engine. I also played a bit of the BETA that leaked last Winter or whenever, and that happened to scare the hell out of me. I guess all we can really do in the end though is hope...
Just out of curiosity, does anyone who is currently living abroad or know first hand whether or not the XBOX is viewed as the bastard console system of the Asian-based market? I mean, Japan has been pumping out consoles for nearly two decades now, and they've been doing a hell of a job at it, so maybe XBOX is just seen by the "non-Western" world just as the French see our wine? Maybe it has sold poorly in Korea just because it seems laughable that the MS juggernaut is trying to cash in on something that has been done for so long as o much better already? I've always wondered this...
I'm not trying to break things down to a simple "black or white" cultural perspective. I think its safe to say these "identities" exist for all products in a globalized capitalist system, so I just wanted to get some input into this. Personally, I do own an XBOX and have a blast playing it, but I gotta say when it comes to console games (particularly RPGs) I think the most acclaimed Japanese-based developers have a better track revord. Not to say every console game that comes out of Japan is flawless, but so many of the better game companies have already established such a great reputation for themselves.
You know, I didn't think about this until I watched Dark City again about a year ago, but does anyone else feel that the concept behind the film was almost entirely ripped off to create The Matrix? It seems that Dark City was the more cereberal film (not cereberal as in "better", but cereberal as in "slower"), and all The Matrix did was take that concept and throw some guns and fancy slow motion fight scenes into the mix... Maybe I'm being too critical.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. I don't think the "flavor" of the LOTR that Jackson has already directed is one that should carry over into the Hobbit. Personally, I think a Hobbit movie is unecessary, and as much credit I give PJ and his crew for bringing the LOTR of the rings to the big screen in such a magnificent fashion, I think his desire to make "The Hobbit" is based more on a rather swollen ego. It seems like he has to get his "Tolkien" licks in now, while the gettins' good, so he might be able to write himself down as the one who brought ALL of that vision to the big screen. But where does it stop, Mr. Jackson? WHERE?!
I think it's sort of interesting (and humourous) how many people in this topic have mistakenly referred to the character in FF:TSW as "Ben Affleck" (AKA Pancake Head; maybe SP fans can enlighten me: where the hell DID that come from? HAHAHA. Regardless, I only refer to Ben Affleck as Pancake Head since seeing that episode...), when it was actually a CG model that looked A LOT like Ben Affleck but voiced by Alec Baldwin. I was confused too when the movie first had trailer's released; I thought the CG models were based off of the "real-life" actors who were doing their voices. Pretty influencial and powerful stuff, that CG...
How can one say that Apple is not a monopoly? Does not abuse their position? If you want to buy an Apple product, you have the choice of purchasing a product from Apple, Apple or...well, Apple. Yeah, they're products are better designed, but that's because they can control nearly every factor that goes into their hardware. To say Apple is better than Microsoft because they aren't a monopoly just sounds delusional. If you want to split hairs and go the legal mumbo-jumbo route, then yeah, Apple isn't a monopoly.
If you prefer Apple because it's a better product, fine. Apple might not have broken the law like Microsoft, but that's because a move like that, for a company without the shady connections that MS has, would totally break them. Maybe they know this, and instead they take the route of producing a reliable product, but the only way to do that in a computer industry is to make sure there is something like a hardware standard. Thus, Apple has the control over everything Apple, and technically has more control over Apple-related hardware/software than Microsoft ever will, but whether or not they leverage it in a shady manner like Microsoft has is a different story... Either way, it's a trade-off.
My original point wasn't that being money-hungry is inherently evil, but more that Apple has/can/will play just as dirty as Microsoft has, "superior" products aside.
I understand where some people might want to weigh carrying capacity vs. size/weight/shape, so stating that for only 50 dollars more one can get a higher capacity iPod was a more opinionated statement on my part. I hadn't considered that. I make use of a large music libary, so my primary concern with portable MP3 players is space. I just figured if people didn't care about space, they'd buy a MuVo for 150 or something... I'm at a loss for words with this one, though:
I'm not even going to go into fashion because I am pretty sure that's a minorty of what is making this device popular.
Is this sarcasm? If so, sorry I missed that one, but it seems like a HUGE selling point for the iPod and mini iPod is fashion. Unless you've been totally oblivious to Apples incredibly asthetic product line over the past few years, you're in denial about the fact that Apple uses fashion to sell their products. I've heard a lot of people say the iPod color schemes look hideous, and I tend to agree, but pop-culture hype has the tendency to make ANYTHING look "fashionable", and I'm sure Apple knows exactly what they're doing in this regard.
All it really validates is that most consumers are fools and will fall for any hype the Apple marketing department throws at them. If people were intelligent enough to do a little research, they could find that buying a full-blown iPod for only 50 dollars more would be a much wiser decision, space wise, or another portable mp3 player entirely, rather than shelling out an insane amount of money for an Apple iPod that is shiny, pretty, and has "cool" commercials...
I seriously never was a huge fan of Apple, but as the days go on and I see how their marketing machine works, I frankly see them as no worse than Microsoft... The reason they can afford to churn out higher quality products that keep the customers happy more often than MS is because they have so much control over Apple-based hardware. If the tables were turned, and they had the market share that MS does, I personally only see two possibilities: 1. They either keep selling their Apple-branded hardware for the absurd amount of prices because hey, the only hardware that works with Apple products is the stuff you can get from...APPLE!; or 2. They go the way of the "PC" hardware model, and you can buy any hardware you want from any vendor you want, but at the sake of losing stability/compatibility. I'm sure this topic has been talked to death here, but I never see anyone addressing this; so many people seem to go on worshipping whatever overhyped nonsense Apple throws at them. How does this make them any better than a "power hungry" monopoly like Microsoft? I seriously would like to hear, because maybe I'm just missing what Apple is all about and why people are so fanatically devoted...
I'll stop the rant now, but basically all I'm saying is that Apple is as money-hungry Microsoft and I don't think they have any more scruples than MS does in getting paid. To think otherwise is foolish, and frankly for the community here on Slashdot that is often so anti-MS I see way many people kissing the ol' Apple, if you know what I mean...
BTW, I'm not making generalizations about ALL slashdot readers; just those "types". Heh. I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about...
Actually, I don't even know if Lucasarts still posseses the talent behind these classic games anymore. Judging by the way things have gone for the past few years at large game companies like Lucasarts, I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of the creative minds behind the more "cereberal" games at Lucasarts have moved on to other things, most likely non-game related. It just doesn't seem like their development agenda has anything that would keep those type of game developers around...
Then again, I haven't researched this, and my thoughts are sifting through a headcold, so maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about...
At first I'd assumed it was Anakin, but it didn't look like the Christensen fellow at all... More like Ewan...
Maybe it's red herring to through all the production photo nerds off track... Like the wizard impaled on a spiked wheel someone claimed they saw in early production photos of LOTR. Hehehe...
Is that Ewan McGreagor with all the "burn" makeup on? When the hell did Obi-Won get burned?
This is what I was referring to...
...that the Ashcroft fellow, who registered the link from a poster texture in Rainbox Six (I think it was Rainbow Six...ah, all those tactical FPS are the same anyway) and put all those links to porn sites and what have you, can now totally get nailed by the company instead of them having to pay him for the domain like he's demanding? It might not benefit the game publisher directly, but couldn't they pull some stipulations out on this law and bring it to the attention of some people that could get him in some serious hot water?
Then again, that game probably is (or should be, I'd assume) rated mature, so I guess yougins' shouldn't be playing it anyway. Hmmm...
Is it me, or is it totally illegal for Microsoft to publicly refer to their software as something probably copyrighted (and as silly sounding) as "XP Reloaded"? Not that sounding silly is illegal... I mean, they just (tried) suing that guy for naming his page and software(s) "MikeRoweSoft(.com)", how the hell can they get away with this?
Maybe I just have no grasp on copyright law...
Because in a country as heavily capitalist as America, the only chance you have of effectively voicing your opinion is with your dollars. The legal system here has become so jaded and manipulated that it only seems to benefit those with enough money and influence to sway it to their whims, and sadly the only way Americans can make any difference is by taking some of that power away; namely depriving those powerful and rich individuals of our dollars.
I agree, it is offensive. But don't blame the semantics; blame the reality that is the United States.
Not to be antagonistic or anything, but FFI had horrible cookie cutter story line. It's fun to play for it's merit as a groundbreaking RPG for its time, but to compare its story to the complexity of even some of the weaker storylines of modern RPGs just sounds sort of foolish. Even the recent FF Origins collection did little to improve the story structure of the first NES FF games.
I think I understand what you are saying about modern RPG storylines, and I agree entirely. Too much is concentrated on feature-set and graphics, with very little substance in regards to story to carry the snazzy technical aspects.
I'm no security guru or anything, but this was my first rebuttal when I glanced over Mr. Russell's article. Besides, my only basic and novice understanding of programming leads me to believe that if a program is open source, its even more likely NOT to have security issues, as any malicious code inserted into the software will be detected and brought out into the open when other members of the open source community tinker around inside the code. Is it even possible to "hide" a malicious function in an open source program? The bottom line to me is that no matter who you are, there is someone smarter than you, and no matter how clever your malicious code is, you're gonna get pinched by someone who saw it a mile away. They notify the community. It gets removed/patched, you become a laughing stock, and in retaliation write the next MyDoom from your grandmother's basement. Sounds like a great system to me... Besides, an open source system for governement machines is BETTER for the individuals. Perhaps I didn't RTFA closely enough, but this fool seemed to think that the governemnts "protection of it's citizens data" would be safer with a closed source system. Closed source allows for exacltly the oposite... Was it the ISAKey in Windows? I wonder if Mr. Russel even knows what he is talking about...
Question...
...As far as GPLing my code, hell, I don't care who looks at my MS Access VB. It's a mess. Ha. But seriously, if I'm going to deploy this setup in a small bidness, what do I need to consider...?
What if I use Access to build a crude front-end to a MySQL server (which I am painfully drudging through right now...) Do I need to liscence MySQL, or am I just commiting a cardinal sin, asking for the universe to collapse in all around me?
I've been wondering all this for a while, but it came up here so I thought I might as well ask. Hope I'm not OT.
Actually, no link. I grabbed it off of SoulSeek ages past... I actually ripped the Fallout soundtracks myself from the cd using a program from No Mutants Allowed (www.nma-fallout.com); there might be something similar in existence for PS. I don't actually own the game, so I never bothered to look. I would love to pick it up, if I could ever find it in the bargain bins I keep hearing about...
Mark Morgan did Fallout 1, 2 and Planescape: Torment(though I've only played the Fallouts, got the Planescape soundtrack online...). He's done some great stuff for "modern" games I think. Incredibly moody and atmospheric. Half of those songs I still remember; the Raider theme is just cool to listen to. Keichi Suziki isn't bad either; composer of the Earthbound(SNES) soundtrack. Incredibly unique and creative stuff...
Personally I think its about time a company took some liberties and did something like this. I can understand someone wanting to build a total powerhouse machine, but testing a system like that is what "benchmarking" programs like 3DMark are for. With a cap on the FPS for gaming (at least by default... I'm sure someone will find a way to remove the cap once the game is released) people can start worrying less about how many FPS their game gets and more about how fun it is to play. Games are for playing, not using as a technology demo. That is, unless id is just simply using the cap to hide something else, which could very well be a possibility...heh.
Well, I won't deny that a thief-based character is my preference when it comes to role playing games, but that aside I just found KOTOR to be a bit to restrictive in regards to the character development in general. Eh, maybe I just need to sit down with the game and quit worrying about how I think the game SHOULD be played and just play it... But that's just my opinion; I'm not saying KOTOR is a bad game; in fact I find it incredibly polished and thorough. I just didn't feel BioWare deserved so much credit for an RPG; a good game, yes. But RPG pioneers, I still have a hard time declaring them as such.
Is it just me, or does anyone else find BioWare EXTREMELY overated? I guess it would be safe to say I fell into the hype of SW:KOTOR this summer when it was released, and sadly it was one of the primary reasons I went out and purchased an XBOX. Well, I bought the game new days after it was released, and to this day I have never gotten any further into it than maybe 6 or 8 hours. It just hasn't grabbed me. People rave about the open-endedness and the impact your character choices have on the game, but I've found the character development to be incredibly limited and the story incredibly boring. Take a game like Fallout (1&2). Brilliant games. The difference it seems is that between a game like Fallout and SW:KOTOR is that in KOTOR, a character that you choose to develop as a "Thief" is more of a cosmetic gameplay mechanic than anything else. In the end, KOTOR comes down to how strong your character is in battle. In Fallout, if you wanted to play as a "thief" you could, and nothing was stopping you from stealing anything and everything you wanted, sneaking around wherenever and whenever, etc. A game like KOTOR only encourages those possibilities to a certain degree, then brings you crashing back down to earth when it is time to progress the story ...Here we go, another battle that is going to be unbelievably hard unless you have a party full of "fighters"...
I don't mean to say that BioWare is a bad developer; I've enjoyed many of their games over the past years, but I honestly have to say I'm not very impressed with their most recent releases (NWN and KOTOR) and I just think they are received WAY TOO MUCH credit; much more than they deserve. It just seems like in the end its all just boiling down to hack and slash. Eh, maybe that's all people want and I'm just missing the point entirely.
An issue of Game Informer (can't remember the month...Maybe August... Had Jade Empire on the cover...) had an article about DOOM 3 and from what they explained in the article, it sounds like id is actually trying to go for some atmosphere in DOOM 3. There's a situation where you're walking through a pitch black room with a flashlight that only lights the way like 10 feet all around you, and you can hear demons and such gathering in the darkess surrounding you. Of course, this could just be a case of seeing all the best parts of the movie in the trailer, but I choose to take it as an indication that id might try to build some atmosphere with their engine. I also played a bit of the BETA that leaked last Winter or whenever, and that happened to scare the hell out of me. I guess all we can really do in the end though is hope...
Just out of curiosity, does anyone who is currently living abroad or know first hand whether or not the XBOX is viewed as the bastard console system of the Asian-based market? I mean, Japan has been pumping out consoles for nearly two decades now, and they've been doing a hell of a job at it, so maybe XBOX is just seen by the "non-Western" world just as the French see our wine? Maybe it has sold poorly in Korea just because it seems laughable that the MS juggernaut is trying to cash in on something that has been done for so long as o much better already? I've always wondered this... I'm not trying to break things down to a simple "black or white" cultural perspective. I think its safe to say these "identities" exist for all products in a globalized capitalist system, so I just wanted to get some input into this. Personally, I do own an XBOX and have a blast playing it, but I gotta say when it comes to console games (particularly RPGs) I think the most acclaimed Japanese-based developers have a better track revord. Not to say every console game that comes out of Japan is flawless, but so many of the better game companies have already established such a great reputation for themselves.
You know, I didn't think about this until I watched Dark City again about a year ago, but does anyone else feel that the concept behind the film was almost entirely ripped off to create The Matrix? It seems that Dark City was the more cereberal film (not cereberal as in "better", but cereberal as in "slower"), and all The Matrix did was take that concept and throw some guns and fancy slow motion fight scenes into the mix... Maybe I'm being too critical.