Anyone else noticed how odd of a release date the 21st is? That's a Sunday. Considering most delivery trucks don't run on Sunday, they're either getting the system on Saturday, in which case they'll probably start selling it early (like the Gamecube sold early), or the 21st is a placeholder date, and they're not real sure when it's going on sale.
Bush DID do so well in Florida because of the hurricanes. In fact, I think it was all a political ploy. He had the CIA use its weather machine to send the hurricanes to Florida, so he'd have a way to gain political clout here.
How do the laws define enforce? I imagine the publishers couldn't fine the retailers, but at least the big retailers could enter into a contract, or threaten to not use that retailer as a distribution channel anymore, if MSRP was not adhered to.
If the game publishers can enforce the street date, stopping them from selling the game prior to the "release day", then why can't they just let them sell the game whenever they get it, and instead, enforce a MSRP price, so no gouging occurs?
I agree with the grandparent post. It seems assinine that they are bitching about early pirate releases, but then refuse to sell the game until some PR date.
Maybe you did and you just wanted to be funny, but the PAL region includes more than just the UK. The article mentioned translating to 13 different languages.
The new PS2's biggest feature appears to be its size. Okay, it's smaller. So what? It's not portable. I'm not going to carry it around in my pocket with 15' of A/V cables and power cords trailing behind me in case I happen to end up somewhere with a TV to hook it up to. The only reasonable thing I've seen so far is that it'd be ideal to install in your car, if that's your thing.
By the same token, lots of people had a problem with the Xbox because of its size. Why?
We're not talking Univac sized room filling machines. Stick the sucker on a shelf, or next to your TV on the floor, and forget about it. Why does anyone care about size?
Personally, I'd love to see them all come in a standard size. If they were the same dimensions of a DVD player, or VCR, I could stack them all on top of each other. Considering aesthetic design seems to be so important to someone, that'll never happen though.
True, I didn't even think about the Incredible Machines, but those are great examples. Unlike a lot of games that use physics as icing for the cake, IM couldn't be done without physics.
Not doubting you, but I am curious how Thief is an example, though. I'd put it into the Max Payne category of just using physics as icing on the cake, rather than an important facet of gameplay. Maybe I'm not thinking about something, though.
Check out Gish if you haven't. It's a game whose gameplay is pretty much solely physics based.
You're a blob and you roll around the level collecting things in kind of your tradiional platform format.
The different is you're affected by physics, so there is no standard platforming double jumping. If you want to jump higher, you have to bounce up and down a few times. You can cling to ceilings by making yourself more sticky, but gravity and how fast you're moving or changing directions can peel you off.
Anyhow, it's a pretty nifty game where physics actually is more integral into the gameplay than making shotgun blasts to the chest throw bodies around.
I don't throw my old boxes up. I have a wall to wall bookcase built into my computer room where I shelve and display my game collection.
The lack of extras is another issue, but I remember the old days when a game came with a nice thick color manual that nowadays sells seperately from the game, and is called a 'strategy guide'. Lots of times you also got cloth maps, comic books, or other random useless stuff like that.
And sure I could burn a copy of what I download, but I paid for the game, so why do I have to waste my time and media to do that? If I'm paying the same price as the guy who gets it from the store, that's extra wasted time and media. And that's assuming the distribution client puts the stuff I downloaded in a recognizable location that's not hidden or spread out over a series of folders, and can be reinstalled from the media I burn without me having to trick it somehow.
The truely hardcore HL fans will buy it whenever it comes out. But a whole lot of the money is made on impulse buys and holiday gift sales.
Also, I disagree with the death of traditional publishers being good for us. Steam's content distribution system is a decent idea, but I would like it much better if after you purchased and downloaded the game, they sent you the box, manual, and media in the mail. As it is now, you pay the same price for the boxed set, and get it at the same time it's available in stores. While you don't have to leave the house to get it, it can be quicker to go out and buy it if its a large game that does not preload, and you don't get the media, manual, or nice shiney box.
And while I will say the game is the most important part, if I'm paying the same price, I want the same nice little extras.
I've heard that too, but I've lost faith in that type of reasoning. I remember they blamed lack of damage modelling on the inability to license the cars if they also showed them damaged. Something about the manufactuers not wanting to show the cars in less than pristine condition.
It seemed like a perfectly reasonable and valid excuse at the time, but since then, numerous games have come out with realistic damage modelling on licensed cars. I suppose it could be something like if even one of the manufactuers fails to approve damage modelling, they can't damage model the other's for consistency's sake, but it seems a little fishy to me.
Truth be told, I'd rather have a huge range of types and models of cars to choose from, rather than a limited selection that gets damage modeled, but I'd prefer them to just come out and say "We've got 500 cars, and damage modelling them all would take another 2 years."
I can give other similar examples of where they say and promise one thing, and we end up with a totally different result, and other examples of just lazyness, or a rush to get the game out the door.
Remember GT1, where you could get a racing package for EVERY car, that gave it nifty looking authentic race decals and paint jobs and body work? Then GT2, only some cars could be fitted with that. Then in GT3, it pretty much disappeared. Remember how they touted GT3's AI drivers, saying how they'd have emotion, learn, and hold grudges against you if you rubbed them the wrong way? Firing up the game, though, it was immediately apparent that they drove with the same robot like ignorance of you and your presence. They just drove their line blindly no matter where you where and what you did to influence them.
Don't get me wrong, I love the GT series. That's probably why I am so critical of it, because I want to see it get better, not just prettier with new cars and tracks. I just wish it was exempt from the same false hype and marketing pitfalls as other games.
Enjoying the single player isn't mutually exclusive to enjoying the multiplayer. What if online was a little bit more than an online matchmaking? What if there were cars you could win only in an online series? What if there were parts you could get only by winning online tournaments? Or, since that would probably piss off the people who can't or don't want to get online, it could be as simple as a special decal or cosmetic part that distinguished your car, a badge of honor that shows, at a glance, how much ass you kick.
Kind of like in MMORPG's when you see the guy with all the special glowing armor, you know he's been there and done that.
The myth might die sooner if you'd include some proof backing up your claim. I've already heard that consoles maker lose out on production of their systems, at least initially. And I'm not talking about hearing it from my brother's sister's cousin's barber. I read about it on sites specializing in gaming news, magazines, etc.
How does Microsoft have any less control over part fabrication than other console makers? Granted they're using a setup similar to PCs in architecture, but I would think that would make it even cheaper, as you get off the shelf components instead of ones you have to dump R&D into developing and then producing yourself.
Something must be seriously wrong with it to push it back this far. I mean, they've known from the beginning that they wanted to make it online, so it's not like it's been a last minute hustle to try to shoehorn the game online.
The game has been already oft delayed enough as it is. I could understand if it were delayed to add more track, cars, or improve the AI, but to this news implies that the major delay has been related to the online piece of the game. Considering that GT4 Prologue edition has been released in Japan and Europe's markets earlier this year, it's obvious that the engine is done.
I am now having my doubts on how well it will perform online once the online version comes out if they haven't been able to nail it down after all this time.
I think it's probably a no brainer that many developers would love the idea of digital content distribution. With it, they could eliminate many of the middlemen, and get more profit for themselves. No need for CD pressing, manual printing, publishing costs, etc. Publishers would be out of luck and out of business, unless they were used strictly for marketing.
However, in the typical business model structure, I'm not sure I see it happening. Consoles are generally produced and sold at a loss, with the intent of recouping the losses through licensing fees. Although they could still charge these fees for digital content distribution, I can't see them charging as much. Some companies, like Nintendo, even insist on creating consoles that require proprietary media, another sneaky way to get some extra cash.
Add to that the fact that everyone still does not have broadband, and casual gamers that impulse buy at Walmart make up a large portion of the overall market, I can't see this becoming the only way any console ever sells its games.
And doing it both ways is probably going to be equally as challenging. If you still rely on the old fashioned way of distribution, you're going to need a publisher. And no publisher worth their salt is going to let you get away with also selling the game through digital content channels without taking just a big piece of the cut. Look at Valve's Steam and VU's lawsuits and spats.
I can't believe someone is actually recommending a rerelease of an old title. Yeah, it's got the game 'n' watch's dual screens, but how bout some new games?
I'm getting pretty tired of Nintendo rereleases for the Gameboy. They've done the original Mario 1, 2, 3, Super Mario World, Yoshi's island, original Zelda, a slew of classic NES games like Balloon Fight, Ice Climbers, Excitebike (and more) etc.
They've just released a new pokemon, which is a remake of the original, which isn't even THAT old. The worse part is these games come out either full price, or at cheapest, $15, which is still way too much for a cartridge with just the old Excitebike on it.
I'd be one thing for them to release bundles, like a collection of original marios, a collection of NES. But no, all seperate.
I really like the GBA SP system, but I can't help but think they're milking the classics way too much, and wasting time that could be better spent on developing new titles.
WTF? Most of the mod chips sold are "completely legal". Most of them can even load any bios you want. They're completely legal because they're not shipped to you with an illegal bios (ie, a hacked version of the MS one that lets you do whatever you want). They allow you to flash any bios you want because they can't ship them with a bios, because then they'd become illegal.
For what it's worth, I've not heard many good things about the solderless chips. They work, but they're easy to jar loose, and then you have to open your Xbox again and reseat them. Just solder your chip, it's only 9 wires with most mods.
Granted, it's a pain to pirate the GC, but I can't believe that's the only reason why piracy isn't more rampant. I have to think that the low number of games that are worth even pirating has to do with it.
Sure there's a few really good GC only games, but who's going to go to all the trouble of hacking a HD or external DVD drive into a GC to play Metroid Prime only?
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone else noticed how odd of a release date the 21st is? That's a Sunday. Considering most delivery trucks don't run on Sunday, they're either getting the system on Saturday, in which case they'll probably start selling it early (like the Gamecube sold early), or the 21st is a placeholder date, and they're not real sure when it's going on sale.
Don't forget the recent game, Driv3r, which is pronounced "Driv-three-er".
Bush DID do so well in Florida because of the hurricanes. In fact, I think it was all a political ploy. He had the CIA use its weather machine to send the hurricanes to Florida, so he'd have a way to gain political clout here.
How do the laws define enforce? I imagine the publishers couldn't fine the retailers, but at least the big retailers could enter into a contract, or threaten to not use that retailer as a distribution channel anymore, if MSRP was not adhered to.
If the game publishers can enforce the street date, stopping them from selling the game prior to the "release day", then why can't they just let them sell the game whenever they get it, and instead, enforce a MSRP price, so no gouging occurs?
I agree with the grandparent post. It seems assinine that they are bitching about early pirate releases, but then refuse to sell the game until some PR date.
Maybe you did and you just wanted to be funny, but the PAL region includes more than just the UK. The article mentioned translating to 13 different languages.
By the same token, lots of people had a problem with the Xbox because of its size. Why?
We're not talking Univac sized room filling machines. Stick the sucker on a shelf, or next to your TV on the floor, and forget about it. Why does anyone care about size?
Personally, I'd love to see them all come in a standard size. If they were the same dimensions of a DVD player, or VCR, I could stack them all on top of each other. Considering aesthetic design seems to be so important to someone, that'll never happen though.
I'll pony up too, but I'll also be playing it a month early.
The big draw isn't Xbox Live. The big draw is it's a new Halo, and any Xbox Live support is just icing on the cake.
Halo 1 did fine without it. You can still play with your friends locally, or even use XBConnect to use it to play over the Internet.
Tivo in general has gotten pretty good marks on user friendlyness, and with it, you can pause, and then later record, as far back as the buffer goes.
Not doubting you, but I am curious how Thief is an example, though. I'd put it into the Max Payne category of just using physics as icing on the cake, rather than an important facet of gameplay. Maybe I'm not thinking about something, though.
"I just saw Gabe Newell up there in first class."
"Oh? What's he doing?"
"Not making HL2."
You're a blob and you roll around the level collecting things in kind of your tradiional platform format.
The different is you're affected by physics, so there is no standard platforming double jumping. If you want to jump higher, you have to bounce up and down a few times. You can cling to ceilings by making yourself more sticky, but gravity and how fast you're moving or changing directions can peel you off.
Anyhow, it's a pretty nifty game where physics actually is more integral into the gameplay than making shotgun blasts to the chest throw bodies around.
The lack of extras is another issue, but I remember the old days when a game came with a nice thick color manual that nowadays sells seperately from the game, and is called a 'strategy guide'. Lots of times you also got cloth maps, comic books, or other random useless stuff like that.
And sure I could burn a copy of what I download, but I paid for the game, so why do I have to waste my time and media to do that? If I'm paying the same price as the guy who gets it from the store, that's extra wasted time and media. And that's assuming the distribution client puts the stuff I downloaded in a recognizable location that's not hidden or spread out over a series of folders, and can be reinstalled from the media I burn without me having to trick it somehow.
Also, I disagree with the death of traditional publishers being good for us. Steam's content distribution system is a decent idea, but I would like it much better if after you purchased and downloaded the game, they sent you the box, manual, and media in the mail. As it is now, you pay the same price for the boxed set, and get it at the same time it's available in stores. While you don't have to leave the house to get it, it can be quicker to go out and buy it if its a large game that does not preload, and you don't get the media, manual, or nice shiney box.
And while I will say the game is the most important part, if I'm paying the same price, I want the same nice little extras.
It seemed like a perfectly reasonable and valid excuse at the time, but since then, numerous games have come out with realistic damage modelling on licensed cars. I suppose it could be something like if even one of the manufactuers fails to approve damage modelling, they can't damage model the other's for consistency's sake, but it seems a little fishy to me.
Truth be told, I'd rather have a huge range of types and models of cars to choose from, rather than a limited selection that gets damage modeled, but I'd prefer them to just come out and say "We've got 500 cars, and damage modelling them all would take another 2 years."
I can give other similar examples of where they say and promise one thing, and we end up with a totally different result, and other examples of just lazyness, or a rush to get the game out the door.
Remember GT1, where you could get a racing package for EVERY car, that gave it nifty looking authentic race decals and paint jobs and body work? Then GT2, only some cars could be fitted with that. Then in GT3, it pretty much disappeared. Remember how they touted GT3's AI drivers, saying how they'd have emotion, learn, and hold grudges against you if you rubbed them the wrong way? Firing up the game, though, it was immediately apparent that they drove with the same robot like ignorance of you and your presence. They just drove their line blindly no matter where you where and what you did to influence them.
Don't get me wrong, I love the GT series. That's probably why I am so critical of it, because I want to see it get better, not just prettier with new cars and tracks. I just wish it was exempt from the same false hype and marketing pitfalls as other games.
Kind of like in MMORPG's when you see the guy with all the special glowing armor, you know he's been there and done that.
The myth might die sooner if you'd include some proof backing up your claim. I've already heard that consoles maker lose out on production of their systems, at least initially. And I'm not talking about hearing it from my brother's sister's cousin's barber. I read about it on sites specializing in gaming news, magazines, etc. How does Microsoft have any less control over part fabrication than other console makers? Granted they're using a setup similar to PCs in architecture, but I would think that would make it even cheaper, as you get off the shelf components instead of ones you have to dump R&D into developing and then producing yourself.
The game has been already oft delayed enough as it is. I could understand if it were delayed to add more track, cars, or improve the AI, but to this news implies that the major delay has been related to the online piece of the game. Considering that GT4 Prologue edition has been released in Japan and Europe's markets earlier this year, it's obvious that the engine is done.
I am now having my doubts on how well it will perform online once the online version comes out if they haven't been able to nail it down after all this time.
However, in the typical business model structure, I'm not sure I see it happening. Consoles are generally produced and sold at a loss, with the intent of recouping the losses through licensing fees. Although they could still charge these fees for digital content distribution, I can't see them charging as much. Some companies, like Nintendo, even insist on creating consoles that require proprietary media, another sneaky way to get some extra cash.
Add to that the fact that everyone still does not have broadband, and casual gamers that impulse buy at Walmart make up a large portion of the overall market, I can't see this becoming the only way any console ever sells its games.
And doing it both ways is probably going to be equally as challenging. If you still rely on the old fashioned way of distribution, you're going to need a publisher. And no publisher worth their salt is going to let you get away with also selling the game through digital content channels without taking just a big piece of the cut. Look at Valve's Steam and VU's lawsuits and spats.
I can't believe someone is actually recommending a rerelease of an old title. Yeah, it's got the game 'n' watch's dual screens, but how bout some new games?
I'm getting pretty tired of Nintendo rereleases for the Gameboy. They've done the original Mario 1, 2, 3, Super Mario World, Yoshi's island, original Zelda, a slew of classic NES games like Balloon Fight, Ice Climbers, Excitebike (and more) etc.
They've just released a new pokemon, which is a remake of the original, which isn't even THAT old. The worse part is these games come out either full price, or at cheapest, $15, which is still way too much for a cartridge with just the old Excitebike on it.
I'd be one thing for them to release bundles, like a collection of original marios, a collection of NES. But no, all seperate.
I really like the GBA SP system, but I can't help but think they're milking the classics way too much, and wasting time that could be better spent on developing new titles.
How is that simple? In a large company with a lot of turnaround, it'd be a big maintence job keeping that whitelist updated.
WTF? Most of the mod chips sold are "completely legal". Most of them can even load any bios you want. They're completely legal because they're not shipped to you with an illegal bios (ie, a hacked version of the MS one that lets you do whatever you want). They allow you to flash any bios you want because they can't ship them with a bios, because then they'd become illegal. For what it's worth, I've not heard many good things about the solderless chips. They work, but they're easy to jar loose, and then you have to open your Xbox again and reseat them. Just solder your chip, it's only 9 wires with most mods.
I thought about this so much, I even tried it. It was great until they shut my power off.
Granted, it's a pain to pirate the GC, but I can't believe that's the only reason why piracy isn't more rampant. I have to think that the low number of games that are worth even pirating has to do with it. Sure there's a few really good GC only games, but who's going to go to all the trouble of hacking a HD or external DVD drive into a GC to play Metroid Prime only?