Depends on the current state of attack vs defense at the time of the battle. E.g. the first ironclad battles were at a time where defense heavily outstripped offense and neither combatant could really dent the other. Modern combat is strongly going the other way, even heavy armor is no match against the kind of weapons we fling around and carriers are used precisely because ships are far too vulnerable compared to small and agile weapons-with-engines (planes). Carriers are mobile bases, you always need a base of some sort and of course sometimes it needs to be movable to be near the frontline. A plane can easily destroy a carrier once in range which is why carriers need to be kept far from the actual battles.
Planes are designed around a situation where weapons are so powerful that no armor can really stop them so they rely on speed to avoid being hit while delivering positively devastating payloads. If your space combat takes place at a time when weapons significantly outstrip armor it will be a better idea to deploy drone swarms that close to the enemy base ships and bomb them into oblivion. Unlike pure missiles the drones can be reusable and thus outfitted with significantly more expensive equipment to avoid being hit by enemy defenses and better counteract enemy countermeasures. Hell, you could even do a mixture of battleships and carriers where the drones are heavily armored balls of death while their controller/maintenance ship (the carrier) stays far away from the action. It's probably still a good idea to leave spare ammo and maintenance gear at "home" and have that home be a mobile base so your attack craft have less mass to shift around and can maneuver quicker.
Pretty much all space games with a backstory more involved than "if it moves shoot it" have that reasoning. Shattered Horizon is the only one where that has an actual gameplay impact due to the low power mode on your space suit.
Well, that is barring some supertech stuff like say portable wormholes or teleporters that you can use to dump your heat to the other end of the galaxy.
Your missiles are the ones that have to identify the real target, the guys on your ship are too far away to do anything. What would you do with the information about which is the real target? Try to shoot it? At a range of lightseconds your lasers will be too diffuse and your kinetics too inaccurate, all you have are projectiles that can adjust their trajectory in mid-flight, i.e. guided missiles (and even then there's the question of how much fuel they'd need to bridge that distance in a useful time).
I guess at that point we have to ask whether a lightsecond is even a possible engagement range or if combat would have to take place at significantly shorter distances if you actually want to HIT something.
I need to use considerable force and plenty of attempts to make my iPod Touch charge, the connector has degraded so much that the plug will only barely get a connection and I have to apply pressure for several seconds to make it stay in place (have to slide my fingers off the plug after that, just lifting them pulls enough on the plug to make it disconnect again). It's not the fault of the cable, a different cable gets the same result.
A speaker should work just fine with the standard headphone jack present on all these devices (since plugging headphones into the large proprietary port is going to do wonders for durability).
I'm trying to figure out what kind of filter you're using that includes Mario, Zelda and No More Heroes but ignores all the other good Wii games (not saying NMH was a good game but what exactly made you pick THAT ONE?).
Next-gen is such a nebulous, marketing bullshit term. Going by the strict definition it's always the console that's not released yet so you can't buy a next-gen system. So yeah, the Wii U is next-gen until it's released. Then it becomes current-gen and the Wii becomes last-gen. To a marketer next-gen is their own system and everything else isn't (Sony: "Next-gen doesn't start until we say so!").
Nintendo did a pretty crappy job of actually using the motion controls and third parties were often even worse. They forgot that motion controls require adjustments to game designs if you don't want them to feel tacked on (standard game designs are built around buttons and assume characters that can perform everything perfectly so motion controls get turned into on/off affairs where they're obviously inferior). Motion controls add many more ways for humans to mess up and that should be incorporated into the gameplay instead of treated as a problem. The golf games are some of the few games that did it right, because they're trying to simulate an imperfect action anyway (with clunky workarounds for controllers) they're a great match for motion controls.
For example you can't have a game about a superhuman dude slicing hundreds of enemies apart with canned combos and then bind those combos to waggle, that's stupid. The human controlling the game won't be able to keep up and the waggle is just stupid either way. You gotta take away some of the unrealism to add proper motion controls, instead of canned combos have direct sword controls and balance around what a player can be expected to handle, instead of armies of enemies have a more realistic count so the fights can afford to be more involved.
Of course none of this is written in stone but it's a start. On the other hand Zangeki no Reginleiv had you kill hundreds of dudes with motion controls by letting you do extra stuff with them, e.g. instead of just swinging your sword in a fixed arc you draw lines on the screen with your swings and enemies take damage along those lines, both allowing you to hit multiple enemies at once and aim for specific limbs. The game doesn't really work without motion controls (you can try using the classic controller but it's a bad idea). Yet games where the motion controls add instead of detract from the game are rare.
Mario has seen a high recently, while the GC/GBA era was pretty meh for him the Wii saw the Galaxy games (extremely positive critical reaction, Metacritic score at times the highest of any game in the database!) and following the DS iteration got New Super Mario Bros Wii (extremely high sellers, the DS one broke all Mario sales records, the Wii one still sold over 20 million showing that the general public still loves this style more than the 3D style) and the 3DS got Super Mario 3D Land which also got a ton of praise and sales. If you don't like any of those then Mario just isn't for you.
DKC got DKC Returns which was widely loved. Probably more than anything Rare has done since the split from Nintendo (though Viva Pinata and Banjo Kazooie Nuts & Bolts deserved more recognition than they got).
The common term is "character action" which tells you about fuck all about the actual game but seems to mean roughly "more evolved beat 'em up" since most actual beat 'em ups from the arcade era are actually pretty awful games with the depth of a puddle. Basically if it's third person and has melee with a combat system that's not too basic it's character action (if it's more about shooting it's a third person shooter, if the combat isn't as important as exploration and puzzle solving it's likely an action adventure like Zelda).
They release plenty of new games but whenever they announce multiple games everybody only cares about the Mario and Zelda parts, the rest gets overlooked (with the exception of some of the Wii Whatever games). Yet games like Excite Trucks/Bots, Fluidity, Xenoblade, Sin & Punishment, Pushmo, Picross 3D, etc generally receive a lot of praise by critics. Of course there are also duds which I won't bother trying to remember right now. Stuff like Steel Diver.
The Wii's strength among the casual crowd was always local multiplayer. You can't get much of that from the iPad and with the iPhone it's practically impossible. It fills a completely different role than the iP*s, it's not for passing the time on the toilet or on the commute but a main activity in the living room.
The Wii U is a different matter and I don't see it taking off with the Wii's new audience.
Some other consoles have offered ESPN streaming, the trick is that you can only stream that if you have a cable subscription that includes ESPN and is provided by the same company as your internet connection. Did you really think they'd let you get away so easily?
Checking for updates isn't the job of the application itself, that's done by the Google Play application so if the internet permission is on something that doesn't need the internet for actual functionality then you can be sure it's for DRM or spying.
That said, we ARE talking about an OS provided by one of the biggest dataminers on the planet. Even if your downloaded apps don't phone home that's not saying anything about the OS itself.
The release dates seem more based on publishers than consoles. The reason I DON'T want the Xbox to win is because... Well, have you seen the damn Dashboard lately? It's ads all the way down.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on the current state of attack vs defense at the time of the battle. E.g. the first ironclad battles were at a time where defense heavily outstripped offense and neither combatant could really dent the other. Modern combat is strongly going the other way, even heavy armor is no match against the kind of weapons we fling around and carriers are used precisely because ships are far too vulnerable compared to small and agile weapons-with-engines (planes). Carriers are mobile bases, you always need a base of some sort and of course sometimes it needs to be movable to be near the frontline. A plane can easily destroy a carrier once in range which is why carriers need to be kept far from the actual battles.
Planes are designed around a situation where weapons are so powerful that no armor can really stop them so they rely on speed to avoid being hit while delivering positively devastating payloads. If your space combat takes place at a time when weapons significantly outstrip armor it will be a better idea to deploy drone swarms that close to the enemy base ships and bomb them into oblivion. Unlike pure missiles the drones can be reusable and thus outfitted with significantly more expensive equipment to avoid being hit by enemy defenses and better counteract enemy countermeasures. Hell, you could even do a mixture of battleships and carriers where the drones are heavily armored balls of death while their controller/maintenance ship (the carrier) stays far away from the action. It's probably still a good idea to leave spare ammo and maintenance gear at "home" and have that home be a mobile base so your attack craft have less mass to shift around and can maneuver quicker.
Pretty much all space games with a backstory more involved than "if it moves shoot it" have that reasoning. Shattered Horizon is the only one where that has an actual gameplay impact due to the low power mode on your space suit.
The military does sometimes ask fiction producers to share notes, see e.g. Dr. Hazard's talk on time travel related to the game Achron.
Well, that is barring some supertech stuff like say portable wormholes or teleporters that you can use to dump your heat to the other end of the galaxy.
Your missiles are the ones that have to identify the real target, the guys on your ship are too far away to do anything. What would you do with the information about which is the real target? Try to shoot it? At a range of lightseconds your lasers will be too diffuse and your kinetics too inaccurate, all you have are projectiles that can adjust their trajectory in mid-flight, i.e. guided missiles (and even then there's the question of how much fuel they'd need to bridge that distance in a useful time).
I guess at that point we have to ask whether a lightsecond is even a possible engagement range or if combat would have to take place at significantly shorter distances if you actually want to HIT something.
The Jews don't recognize the NT. Doesn't turn them into murdering monsters though.
Yep, there was a big debate about the burka ban in France.
Don't worry, the solution is to have the robots process humans into furniture and arrange it in aesthetically pleasing ways.
You can just use Metacritic to get a convenient list.
But only if you have Apple's cable. The cable that came with the standard USB charger won't plug into the iPhone.
That requires having the HTC's cable at hand.
I need to use considerable force and plenty of attempts to make my iPod Touch charge, the connector has degraded so much that the plug will only barely get a connection and I have to apply pressure for several seconds to make it stay in place (have to slide my fingers off the plug after that, just lifting them pulls enough on the plug to make it disconnect again). It's not the fault of the cable, a different cable gets the same result.
A speaker should work just fine with the standard headphone jack present on all these devices (since plugging headphones into the large proprietary port is going to do wonders for durability).
I'm trying to figure out what kind of filter you're using that includes Mario, Zelda and No More Heroes but ignores all the other good Wii games (not saying NMH was a good game but what exactly made you pick THAT ONE?).
Why? The Android software market isn't very profitable currently.
Next-gen is such a nebulous, marketing bullshit term. Going by the strict definition it's always the console that's not released yet so you can't buy a next-gen system. So yeah, the Wii U is next-gen until it's released. Then it becomes current-gen and the Wii becomes last-gen. To a marketer next-gen is their own system and everything else isn't (Sony: "Next-gen doesn't start until we say so!").
Nintendo did a pretty crappy job of actually using the motion controls and third parties were often even worse. They forgot that motion controls require adjustments to game designs if you don't want them to feel tacked on (standard game designs are built around buttons and assume characters that can perform everything perfectly so motion controls get turned into on/off affairs where they're obviously inferior). Motion controls add many more ways for humans to mess up and that should be incorporated into the gameplay instead of treated as a problem. The golf games are some of the few games that did it right, because they're trying to simulate an imperfect action anyway (with clunky workarounds for controllers) they're a great match for motion controls.
For example you can't have a game about a superhuman dude slicing hundreds of enemies apart with canned combos and then bind those combos to waggle, that's stupid. The human controlling the game won't be able to keep up and the waggle is just stupid either way. You gotta take away some of the unrealism to add proper motion controls, instead of canned combos have direct sword controls and balance around what a player can be expected to handle, instead of armies of enemies have a more realistic count so the fights can afford to be more involved.
Of course none of this is written in stone but it's a start. On the other hand Zangeki no Reginleiv had you kill hundreds of dudes with motion controls by letting you do extra stuff with them, e.g. instead of just swinging your sword in a fixed arc you draw lines on the screen with your swings and enemies take damage along those lines, both allowing you to hit multiple enemies at once and aim for specific limbs. The game doesn't really work without motion controls (you can try using the classic controller but it's a bad idea). Yet games where the motion controls add instead of detract from the game are rare.
Mario has seen a high recently, while the GC/GBA era was pretty meh for him the Wii saw the Galaxy games (extremely positive critical reaction, Metacritic score at times the highest of any game in the database!) and following the DS iteration got New Super Mario Bros Wii (extremely high sellers, the DS one broke all Mario sales records, the Wii one still sold over 20 million showing that the general public still loves this style more than the 3D style) and the 3DS got Super Mario 3D Land which also got a ton of praise and sales. If you don't like any of those then Mario just isn't for you.
DKC got DKC Returns which was widely loved. Probably more than anything Rare has done since the split from Nintendo (though Viva Pinata and Banjo Kazooie Nuts & Bolts deserved more recognition than they got).
The common term is "character action" which tells you about fuck all about the actual game but seems to mean roughly "more evolved beat 'em up" since most actual beat 'em ups from the arcade era are actually pretty awful games with the depth of a puddle. Basically if it's third person and has melee with a combat system that's not too basic it's character action (if it's more about shooting it's a third person shooter, if the combat isn't as important as exploration and puzzle solving it's likely an action adventure like Zelda).
All of them. Hardcore these days means something like "not absolutely mainstream". The term's been watered down heavily by marketing divisions.
They release plenty of new games but whenever they announce multiple games everybody only cares about the Mario and Zelda parts, the rest gets overlooked (with the exception of some of the Wii Whatever games). Yet games like Excite Trucks/Bots, Fluidity, Xenoblade, Sin & Punishment, Pushmo, Picross 3D, etc generally receive a lot of praise by critics. Of course there are also duds which I won't bother trying to remember right now. Stuff like Steel Diver.
The Wii's strength among the casual crowd was always local multiplayer. You can't get much of that from the iPad and with the iPhone it's practically impossible. It fills a completely different role than the iP*s, it's not for passing the time on the toilet or on the commute but a main activity in the living room.
The Wii U is a different matter and I don't see it taking off with the Wii's new audience.
Some other consoles have offered ESPN streaming, the trick is that you can only stream that if you have a cable subscription that includes ESPN and is provided by the same company as your internet connection. Did you really think they'd let you get away so easily?
Checking for updates isn't the job of the application itself, that's done by the Google Play application so if the internet permission is on something that doesn't need the internet for actual functionality then you can be sure it's for DRM or spying.
That said, we ARE talking about an OS provided by one of the biggest dataminers on the planet. Even if your downloaded apps don't phone home that's not saying anything about the OS itself.
The release dates seem more based on publishers than consoles. The reason I DON'T want the Xbox to win is because... Well, have you seen the damn Dashboard lately? It's ads all the way down.