Perhaps a hybrid of our arguments would make the game the most 'playable'. That is, model the cars damage, however, make it more of a cosmetic thing rather than affecting the handling of the car (unless the car is rammed head-on into the wall of a tunnel). What I mean is this, model the effects of a sideswipe with another car as cosmetic (requiring a fix after the race) but do not stop the race.
An interesting theory about GT5 being the 'killer app' for PS3's. I had not considered that. It all may depend on how well gt4 sells. If they feel that the market for the series is dwindling, they may look elsewhere for the 'next must-have game'. It is interesting that there is really no 'killer app' on PS2 right now. The only candidate, I think, would be GTA:SA, and that is going to be ported to XBox and PC eventually. Halo2 is clearly the flagship for the XBox and we all know it isn't coming to PS2.
The Gran Turismo games really focus on accurate driving physics. Of course, the cars are indestructible which sort of throws a wrench in the accuracy. The GT games also focus on accurate upgrades to the cars. You can trick out your cars with all kinds of add-ons and such, not all of them will increase the car's performance either. The GT games are for gear heads and real race enthusiasts.
The GTA games are more hedonistic in tone.
For me, I could never get around the indestructible cars. It spoils the game, IMO. I know many people really enjoy the game, but for me the cars should have damage modelling. By focusing on reality physics the skills of driving are highlighted. This is cool, but cornering can also involve ricochets off of other cars, as a perfectly valid race technique (in game). This is totally outside the idea of simulation that the games attempts to acheive. And, for me, it spoils it.
I understand the reason for it. The auto makers want there cars to look great in the game. But I'm not so sure that damage modelling would adversely effect the marketing aspect of the car licensing.
Oddly, I had the same thought after my original post. I figured there would be a hundred Trinit33's or some shit like that. That comic is priceless. Thanks for the link.
This game sounds like it could have promise. Of course, I though the second and third movies had promise. Moving past that though, this game really might be something great. Any beta testers out there willing to comment? I'm wondering is the game is worth a look or not.
Then what is the difference between talking to someone in your car, and talking to someone on a hands free headset
Nothing.
However, there is a big difference for individuals using a handheld phone. They are not capable of operationng the car correctly. Whther they are releasing the wheel to shift or not bothering with turn signals, they are impaired. The trouble comes because it is a sustained distraction too. Using a had to tune the radio take seconds. Phone calls can take minutes. Therein lies the dangers.
Further, the act of dialing a phone while driving is a major distraction. Some phones have voice activation, but many do not. This has led to many accidents. Where I live people drive 120km/h on the highway and the time to react is slim at best. Some dolt dialling a phone is just as bad as an old man with slow reaction times.
This makes a great deal of sense to me. Hawkins was a trialblazer in the early video game industry. His influence is perhaps felt more on the business side as opposed to the design side (like Meier and Molyneux). He deserves a place in that Hall of Fame. Well deserved.
Canada could have had French culture, American know-how, and English government. Instead it got French government, English know-how, and American culture.
Yes, the industry needs to protect and cherish its auteurs like Meier and Molyneux. There are the Woody Allen's of the game industry and their work is threatened by corporate homogenisation.
Here, here. I would agree. I am concerned that the games industry will go the way of Hollywood. That is, controlled by huge corporate entities that tend to homogenize content. We see some of that already in games. For example: Medal of Honour was a great game that had interesting content and was fresh, now there are at least 50 WWII themed games and more to come. This is what happens in Hollywood too. When a film (or TV show) is a hit, there are countless bullshit knock-offs to carpet bomb the public. LOTR was well recived and fresh, and this spawned turds like Troy, Alexander and that Crusade movie due out this year. The are reducing LOTR to the epic battles and missing the point that the story was compelling not just the cool action stuff.
I fear this is the future of the games industry. One or two really good titles a year and then hundreds of cheap imitation and derivative works. I hope I'm wrong and that the industry can use the new hardware to really show us something new and special, but I have my doubts.
I think they may be best served my migrating into the College Football domain. The EA franchise there is weak, although it is there unto itself, with no competition. And college football is extremely popular. It could work very nicely. If Sega could get exclusivity from the NCAA that would be a big boon. It may not be possible though, I have no idea how sweeping the NCAA control over marketing and licensing is.
That *may* work for the PC market (although I doubt it), but not in the console market. There are no open source PS2/XBox games. You'd need a modded box to use any that crop up, and no publisher is going to take steps to make mod chips more common place.
I look at it this, the glass is half-full, way. The ESPN license will change the EA football franchise away from Madden. Because, the way I see it, Madden is one of the weakest parts of that franchise. I like Al Michaeals on the play-by-play, but all the repetative MAdden-isms are awful.
I preferred the ESPN football the last few years. The gameplay was better in ESPN/Sega, but not so much so that one was much better than the other. But the voice over work was much less irritating and made for a better game experience.
The exclusivity for EA and the NFL is a serious problem and I think it will lower the innovation in the football genre and it concerns me greatly, but ESPN licensing, is not that big of a deal to me.
Aiming towards a young market with family friendly content doesn't mean you have to make a game without all the exciting features adult gamers come to expect in a premium title.
Yes, I think you do.
No, you don't, but you can have no reasonable expectation for it to sell.
I find this to be an absolute farce. How can legislation of this sort be considered? Well, I'm being rhetorical. The reason for the bill is due to the effective lobby of the entertainment business. This in and of itself is not a negative thing. The lobby that it. But the results, this bill, is absurd.
Another big American lobby, the NRA, often uses the catch phrase "Guns don't kill people, People kill People". Which is true, but the argument is weak and depending on your stance on gun control a case can be made either way. But I digress.
Is it not equally valid to say, "Bit torrents don't steal music, people steal music"? However, in America, the lobby pressure has lead the legislatures into madness.
Assualt Rifle? From my cold dead hand!
eDonkey? Over my dead body!
Two good points. The catch is that, IMHO, Apple is trying to woo new users to the Aplle world with this product. Such people do not have Apple USB keyboards, thus no USB ports on them. (BTW, that is a cool feature and if I get a Mac I may splurge and get a new keyboard too). Either way, You have to get a keyboard or a hub. Not just for iPod. My digital camera is only USB.
You are gonna need a USB hub though. A decent one will run you about $30 - $50. The keyboard and mouse will fill up the existing USB ports.
Here's a question: I'm not a Mac guy (although, I may be soon with prices like this). Do standard (i.e. Best Buy available) USB hubs work on Mac. My instinct is that its no problem, but I thought I'd ask.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting.
Perhaps a hybrid of our arguments would make the game the most 'playable'. That is, model the cars damage, however, make it more of a cosmetic thing rather than affecting the handling of the car (unless the car is rammed head-on into the wall of a tunnel). What I mean is this, model the effects of a sideswipe with another car as cosmetic (requiring a fix after the race) but do not stop the race.
What about that?
An interesting theory about GT5 being the 'killer app' for PS3's. I had not considered that. It all may depend on how well gt4 sells. If they feel that the market for the series is dwindling, they may look elsewhere for the 'next must-have game'. It is interesting that there is really no 'killer app' on PS2 right now. The only candidate, I think, would be GTA:SA, and that is going to be ported to XBox and PC eventually. Halo2 is clearly the flagship for the XBox and we all know it isn't coming to PS2.
The Gran Turismo games really focus on accurate driving physics. Of course, the cars are indestructible which sort of throws a wrench in the accuracy. The GT games also focus on accurate upgrades to the cars. You can trick out your cars with all kinds of add-ons and such, not all of them will increase the car's performance either. The GT games are for gear heads and real race enthusiasts.
The GTA games are more hedonistic in tone.
For me, I could never get around the indestructible cars. It spoils the game, IMO. I know many people really enjoy the game, but for me the cars should have damage modelling. By focusing on reality physics the skills of driving are highlighted. This is cool, but cornering can also involve ricochets off of other cars, as a perfectly valid race technique (in game). This is totally outside the idea of simulation that the games attempts to acheive. And, for me, it spoils it.
I understand the reason for it. The auto makers want there cars to look great in the game. But I'm not so sure that damage modelling would adversely effect the marketing aspect of the car licensing.
I may rent GT4, but I won't buy it.
The pascal branch seems to die out around 1996ish. I remember using it in 2nd year programming as a teaching language. That was in 1995.
Is Pascal all but dead?
What do schools use now as the teaching language? Surely not C. I have nothing against it but it isn't for beginners.
Oddly, I had the same thought after my original post. I figured there would be a hundred Trinit33's or some shit like that. That comic is priceless. Thanks for the link.
This game sounds like it could have promise. Of course, I though the second and third movies had promise. Moving past that though, this game really might be something great. Any beta testers out there willing to comment? I'm wondering is the game is worth a look or not.
Then what is the difference between talking to someone in your car, and talking to someone on a hands free headset
Nothing.
However, there is a big difference for individuals using a handheld phone. They are not capable of operationng the car correctly. Whther they are releasing the wheel to shift or not bothering with turn signals, they are impaired. The trouble comes because it is a sustained distraction too. Using a had to tune the radio take seconds. Phone calls can take minutes. Therein lies the dangers.
Further, the act of dialing a phone while driving is a major distraction. Some phones have voice activation, but many do not. This has led to many accidents. Where I live people drive 120km/h on the highway and the time to react is slim at best. Some dolt dialling a phone is just as bad as an old man with slow reaction times.
This makes a great deal of sense to me. Hawkins was a trialblazer in the early video game industry. His influence is perhaps felt more on the business side as opposed to the design side (like Meier and Molyneux). He deserves a place in that Hall of Fame. Well deserved.
See full text of article here
Canada could have had French culture, American know-how, and English government. Instead it got French government, English know-how, and American culture.
And it chaps my ass every day.
Be careful, or you'll get moderated down to: -1, Hellfire.
And then your karma is fucked.
Yes, the industry needs to protect and cherish its auteurs like Meier and Molyneux. There are the Woody Allen's of the game industry and their work is threatened by corporate homogenisation.
Here, here. I would agree. I am concerned that the games industry will go the way of Hollywood. That is, controlled by huge corporate entities that tend to homogenize content. We see some of that already in games. For example: Medal of Honour was a great game that had interesting content and was fresh, now there are at least 50 WWII themed games and more to come. This is what happens in Hollywood too. When a film (or TV show) is a hit, there are countless bullshit knock-offs to carpet bomb the public. LOTR was well recived and fresh, and this spawned turds like Troy, Alexander and that Crusade movie due out this year. The are reducing LOTR to the epic battles and missing the point that the story was compelling not just the cool action stuff.
I fear this is the future of the games industry. One or two really good titles a year and then hundreds of cheap imitation and derivative works. I hope I'm wrong and that the industry can use the new hardware to really show us something new and special, but I have my doubts.
I think they may be best served my migrating into the College Football domain. The EA franchise there is weak, although it is there unto itself, with no competition. And college football is extremely popular. It could work very nicely. If Sega could get exclusivity from the NCAA that would be a big boon. It may not be possible though, I have no idea how sweeping the NCAA control over marketing and licensing is.
Wake me up when Mario Golf out sells Tiger Woods PGA Tour.
That *may* work for the PC market (although I doubt it), but not in the console market. There are no open source PS2/XBox games. You'd need a modded box to use any that crop up, and no publisher is going to take steps to make mod chips more common place.
I look at it this, the glass is half-full, way. The ESPN license will change the EA football franchise away from Madden. Because, the way I see it, Madden is one of the weakest parts of that franchise. I like Al Michaeals on the play-by-play, but all the repetative MAdden-isms are awful.
I preferred the ESPN football the last few years. The gameplay was better in ESPN/Sega, but not so much so that one was much better than the other. But the voice over work was much less irritating and made for a better game experience.
The exclusivity for EA and the NFL is a serious problem and I think it will lower the innovation in the football genre and it concerns me greatly, but ESPN licensing, is not that big of a deal to me.
Unfortunatly inflation is around 2%, so you are all going to get a little poorer.
Aiming towards a young market with family friendly content doesn't mean you have to make a game without all the exciting features adult gamers come to expect in a premium title.
Yes, I think you do.
No, you don't, but you can have no reasonable expectation for it to sell.
I find this to be an absolute farce. How can legislation of this sort be considered? Well, I'm being rhetorical. The reason for the bill is due to the effective lobby of the entertainment business. This in and of itself is not a negative thing. The lobby that it. But the results, this bill, is absurd.
Another big American lobby, the NRA, often uses the catch phrase "Guns don't kill people, People kill People". Which is true, but the argument is weak and depending on your stance on gun control a case can be made either way. But I digress.
Is it not equally valid to say, "Bit torrents don't steal music, people steal music"? However, in America, the lobby pressure has lead the legislatures into madness.
Assualt Rifle? From my cold dead hand!
eDonkey? Over my dead body!
Madness!
Since there is no iMac G5 in the list I can only assume you'd prefer the iMac G4. May I ask why?
While money is no object, I'll be picking up a PowerMac G5 with dual 2.5 GHz cores. And wo 30in displays to go with it. That would run...about...$10k.
What happened? I have a 9200 too. Does Avalon suck the juice out of it?
And the football title witll be:
Rush Limbaugh 2006
***Now With Analog Contempt***
Two good points. The catch is that, IMHO, Apple is trying to woo new users to the Aplle world with this product. Such people do not have Apple USB keyboards, thus no USB ports on them. (BTW, that is a cool feature and if I get a Mac I may splurge and get a new keyboard too). Either way, You have to get a keyboard or a hub. Not just for iPod. My digital camera is only USB.
You are gonna need a USB hub though. A decent one will run you about $30 - $50. The keyboard and mouse will fill up the existing USB ports.
Here's a question: I'm not a Mac guy (although, I may be soon with prices like this). Do standard (i.e. Best Buy available) USB hubs work on Mac. My instinct is that its no problem, but I thought I'd ask.