He means this Bolero. It was written for a ballet, and was inspired by the generic "bolero" type of music in spanish tradition.
The "Bolero of Fire", I guess, is supposed to be reminiscent of the traditional Spanish style of music (not the musical piece you provided a link to). But the original "Bolero" by Ravel (that you linked to) is the one that they were going to put at the front of "The Legend of Zelda" as the theme, except it wasn't public property yet. That's actually pretty interesting, considering that video game music is now its own movement.
Re:Can't get enough of those catch-phrases
on
Something Awful on G4TV
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Basically the guy is lamenting the loss of a channel that was for nerds. TechTV (or ZDTV, if you remember that far back) used to cover all sorts of nerdy stuff. Particularly, the Screen Savers was a very cool show with some neat tips and experiments, and was the first TV show I ever saw that publicly acknowledged that Linux existed.
There was a show that covered new technology that was emerging and reviewed them once they went commercial (handy for buying a PDA at the time), and then Gamespot TV was pretty cool (becuase it was before G4TV was announced, and was actually really good.) And there were some filler shows too, but they seemed to have their own niche (for instance, Call For Help was handy if you didn't want to explain how to burn a cd to your grandmother).
In short, TechTV used to be really interesting, and the only TV I ever watched. We're all sad that it left, I suppose.
I'm sure what he meant was "Adam Sessler is the fucking man, but has to play the part of a retard now that he is on G4TV and works with Morgan Webb, just to make her look smart".
Trust me, when Adam Sessler was solo (or with that other hot chick back when the Dreamcast was still around), the show rocked and I hated to miss it. I think it was Gamespot TV then. Then it changed names to something weird, then it changed to X-Play and started sucking like a Dyson.
Even if Valve went without a publisher, do you really think they would charge that much less for their games? $50 has long been the standard price, and they won't tarry far from that path. After all, they are a business, first and foremost, and will make as much money as they can. It is inherent to what they do.
Also, they are going to get a publisher. Think about who buys games. Mostly teenagers. Now think about how people buy games via Steam. They buy with a credit card. I don't know about you, but my parents never let me use their cards. They risk alienating a lot of their market (under 18, I'd wager a good half) by moving to a Steam only market.
You are absolutely right. Some of the better design processes (to me) have involved turning the initial documentation into skeleton code, then writing comments around all the functions and classes that describe exactly what the program is supposed to do. Not only does it provide for excellent commenting and understandable code, it is immensely helpful in the writing of these functions.
Having a function named "getKey(row r)" with a comment saying/*retrieves the key 'SS#' from row r*/ may seem like overkill at first, but people who go over my work later don't even have to read the function for the code (unless they suspect the function is the source of a bug). They know what it is supposed to do, and a written out comment is generally clearer than a pre:post: with the bare minimum of description that some people prefer.
Re:Why are old arcade games considered good?
on
10 Gateway Games
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I have to say, my significant other loves Ms. Pac-Man and Centipede, and Animal Crossing, and The Sims. She loves DDR, and she plays so many Pop-Cap games it's a wonder she gets work done.
Thing is, these aren't necessarily good games to introduce people to. You are absolutely right about the Atari games. She loves those games because they are old, and she remembers playing them when she was little. Same with Dr. Mario, it was an accessible classic (certainly an easier concept than Tetris). And the Pop-Cap games are mostly variations on the theme.
Now, I can see where they get the Sims kind of, as well as Animal Crossing. My SO (much like many of her age) are big into the Trading Spaces type of show, and so the Sims is a nice little escape to design a really awesome house, or just play with design ideas. And on top of that, she liked to get the people involved in complicated relationships with the whole neighborhood, to see the social repercussions. I can see many other women of her age group getting into it for similar reasons, but other than that I think the whole "girl gamer" (or intro gamer) analogy stops there.
You see, there is such a variety out there, there is no set way to introduce any set of people to games. You're not going to lure the sports nut dad to video games with Ninja Gaiden (unless he is an armchair martial artist as well), and at the same time you're not going to lure most women in with a lot of the current popular games. This is because a lot of these games are aimed at men specifically, games like Grand Theft Auto and the afore-mentioned Counter-Strike. All this article did was pick a handful of pretty good games that weren't particularly aimed at the 13-34 male demographic. This list could have included any number of old Atari games, or a plethora of NES games. Nothing particularly insightful, they inductively deduced that many women who don't play games now probably don't because they consider them "boy toys". And lets face it, some women just aren't going to like your typical modern game fare that uses sex to sell. Video games are competitive by nature, and there are people who don't like competing, even with themselves or a computer. Video Games are not for everyone.
On the flipside of that, there are many corporations who go out of their way to find people that know Linux and can get a Linux server running in no time, and do all their Linux support in-house. They actively train those who don't know it as well, and are proficient at providing all sorts of in-house Linux support. To these corporations, it can be hard to find someone who says "I know Windows really well" and expect them to know how to do some of the stuff an MCSE can do. Saying "I know Windows" in an interview is radically different than saying "I know Linux", and it shows in the levels of confidence in the interviewee (unless they are a good liar).
You've hit on a few of the things that make Deus Ex so exhilarating. See, aside from the crazy storyline, Deus Ex has this whole notion of "Investment and payoff". For instance, as you progress in the game, you gather skills and items, and how you use those points defines how you make your approach later in the game. You put points into sniping and demolitions, you become a spy-like soldier.
Me, I also used leg augmentations and shields. I remember running as an alarm went off in one level, and I had to make a hasty escape. I remember turning augs on in a hurry and leaping from the fourth floor of a building to the first floor lobby, outrunning any of the guards in the area. It was exciting and I felt rewarded for being able to make such a retreat (which I wouldn't have if I had invested in silent running).
But the storyline in this game is also brilliant. It has you running around the world trying to find out just who you are, and who you have been working for. You switch sides halfway through the game, and it is one of the first games to try and make you realize the repercussions of your actions (run-and-gun or sneak and immobilize). Truly an amazing game.
Huh? Did you actually play the Wind Waker? It isn't Z-Targeting anymore. You still target with the button that is (relatively) in the same place. Namely, the L button. It is the one that is where your left index finger would be, just like the Z trigger was on the N64 controller.
Also, the Z button is actually a "C" button now. You assign swappable items to it, like the bow, bombs, etc.
Also also, you should know that the Wind Waker is considerably larger than the Ocarina of Time. Though there aren't nearly as many dungeons in the Wind Waker, they are all of very high quality. (Which I would contend, the OOT later levels weren't. The Shadow level and the level where you get the lens of truth felt last minute, and I hate to say it, but so did the Desert level).
What needs to be modified is the civil definition. No one's trying to take away religious institutions' rights to be hateful bigots.
And that's what I'm trying to say. You're so angry because I say "Christian" that you fly off the handle, not even taking into consideration what I'm saying. I'm saying, in the laws, call it "Legal Joining" or something like that. Then you redefine the laws to take this new word into consideration, passing rights to everyone.
Marriage is a secular institution subject to secular law. Christ, didn't you know that it's eminently possible for a couple to marry without a religious official of any kind being present? A judge can perform marriages. I've been to such a marriage. No religious overtones at all. It was a purely civil ceremony.
Yeah, I know that too. I was drawing a line between "Marriage" and "Legal Joining". I was saying, if the gay couple can find a church that will "Marry" them, then they say they're married. Otherwise, they say they're life partners or whatever the current catchphrase is, because they were joined at a courthouse instead of a church. Again, not reading what I'm saying, I'm not negative about Christianity, so I must be retarded, right?
At the same time granting some sort of perverse copyright on the term "marriage" to Christian fundamentalists. That's pure idiocy.
Go look in a dictionary, look up marriage. The primary definition is "union between a man and a woman". Only recently has it even entered any dictionary that marriage should also encompass same sex marriages. And the definition comes from religious contexts, so the word "Marriage" stems from the very idea of two people uniting as one in a ceremony. So, to keep one side happy, you don't redefine "marriage" because you are getting rid of the history of the word, which is why there's such a big hubbub about it all. It's called a compromise, and the govermnment is good at using compromises. Hell, the whole fact that we have two houses in Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) stems from a big compromise. The most fundamentalist Christians don't want the union to be able to happen at all. You give some, you get some. And besides, gay couples can be called "married" too if they want, they just have to find a church that will support the claim, like I said. Not hard, considering churches in Canada will reportedly do this. So, churches here in the U.S. will allow it as well, depending on their doctrine and views.
Christianity's views on homosexuals are rather clearly-cut. You're supposed to execute them. Hateful bigots have ample justification in rallying behind the Christian banner.
Wow, you don't know anything about the Bible, do you? Just because God has killed homosexuals in the past doesn't mean Christians have the right to. In fact, Christians don't have the right to kill anyone. Anyone who kills in the name of Christianity, as I said, is rallying behind the name to push their hatred of others forward as a group. If a Christian befriends a homosexual person, it doesn't make them a bad Christian. Quite the contrary, it makes them a good one. Get your facts straight before pushing out anti-Christian FUD.
Adventure gaming still lives in the hearts of some
on
Myst IV Postmortem
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
No sir, Myst has more than just "wow" visual appeal. While it helped things visually that the brothers who thought up Myst have heavy art backgrounds, there was more to Myst's gameplay than that. Namely, Myst has some amazing puzzles, visually stunning worlds (Not just in terms of graphics, but in terms of sheer imagination), a very neat story concept (adding pages to books to make them more powerful) and the fact that it is an adventure game.
There are many of us who love adventure games of all sorts, and don't mind the point and click/puzzle game every once in a while. I find the Myst games a worthwhile pursuit, even if some of the puzzles are essentially "Random clicky maze" puzzles, and that most of them require some paper and time away from the physical game to figure out.
Wait wait wait... Homosexuality is not a gender. The absence or presence of certain sexual organs defines gender, my friend. It's cut and dry, Male or Female. And while Hermaphrodites may be a special case, almost always they choose a sex and get surgery (or surgery is performed at birth). And as far as I know, the state recognizes them as one sex or the other to keep things simple.
Now, the fact of the matter is, marriage is deeply entrenched in our laws (think taxes), and the reason Christians are so offended is because they feel that defining marriage to also include "same sex relationships" is stepping on their beliefs. And it is, only the most Liberal of Christian organizations believe that God will sanction a homosexual joining.
So, what's the solution? Rewrite the laws so that the legal rights of same sex life-joinings are the same as current married benefits and rights. Don't call it marriage. Now, the benefits of this: 1. Religious groups will be appeased with the technicality, since gay couples won't be "married" unless they find a religious organization that will sanction it. They will be "legally joined". 2. Homosexual unions will be allowed by the US, and given equal rights. No discrimination. 3. If a gay couple claims to be "married", then the Christians can take offense with the religious organization that sanctioned it, not the couple itself.
Granted, some "Christians" are so shallow that they would rather hate the individual as well, but they're just using the name to rally behind a cause that is essentially hatred.
I believe that if the work is copywrighted corporately, you wouldn't have the right to do that by contract anyway. And if you did, then it was in the contract that you retained rights. Either way, I think you are covered in the case that you want to share your own music online and you created it.
Lots of reasons, a few of which have been touched already:
1: Hard Drives are pricy. self-explanatory
2: Hard Drives break easy. Suppose they are going for a "portable" image with the new console. Hard drives make things less portable, since they have to be padded and even then are still easily breakable.
3: You can take away functionality and later charge more for it and call it a "feature" with good marketing. And everyone's eating it up.
What is up with the web tv thing anyway? It is like Microsoft is trying to make the X-Box more of a "living room computer" every day. If I want to browse the web, I'm going to use my computer, not my console. Sorry Bill, I'm not buying into it.
Actually, no. Let me be the first to tell you, Choicepoint has competition. And, more than likely, Choicepoint paid for that information. So, it is inherent in their business model that they would want to keep the data safe from anybody else. Not only that, but they lose face with their customers if they seem insecure. And once again, there are strong competitors ready to scoop up the new business.
Also, security has always been the primary concern with these (data collection) companies. Choicepoint's only big flaw is that they trusted their customers too much, so it was easy for someone to pose as an up-and-coming business with need for Choicepoint's services.
Which is why Nintendo is working on shedding the "kiddy" image. I don't know who even uses the argument anymore and really believes it, but Nintendo realized a while back that blood in a game isn't going to hurt console sales.
And the point of defending "kiddy" games is the fact that a lot of us prefer the attention put into gameplay detail, instead of blood spray pattern detail or the boob jiggle detail.
The thing about adult games is, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Playing the open-ended field for someone like me (a la Grand Theft Auto) just gets boring. After shooting a street full of mobsters and stealing that mustang ripoff for the twentieth time, it just isn't fun anymore. On the flipside, you have your espionage games (Splinter Cell and Metal Gear) that are intensely fun, and your shooters (which go either way).
See, those of us who defend "kiddy games" against those who proclaim "bloody games" to be the best notice that a lot of those who defend "bloody games" defend even the bad ones. I'll admit that I like games from both camps, but if someone flat out says that they prefer a bad GTA ripoff with no thought put into any of it over something crazy fun like Smash Brothers, I'm going to laugh in their face and assume they are a fanboy. Simple as that.
You're missing the point. The whole reason this is posted as "news" is because it is reporting on the status of the mod community, showing that it is hard at work. It isn't praising Half-Life 2 as a game, it is praising it as a canvas. It's news to me, because I don't follow the mod community religiously. It turns out to be kind of hard to find good mods that don't just modify core play in the original game. All I ever seem to be able to find is a swath of mods that are still making models of guns.
I hate how people will go out and buy hype, then manifest their current eagerness everywhere they can. I guarantee you, in a year, God of War won't be considered the platform game. Besides, isn't God of War technically a hack 'n slash? When I think platformer, I think of games were half the difficulty comes from maneuvering. Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is a good modern one, but Mario Brothers 3 perfected the art, if you ask me.
Back to my point, it just seems that a lot of these entries are either hype-mongers or uber-nostalgists. I don't care that Guy #1 is old enough to remember getting an insane score in Pitfall, nor do I believe that a game that came out a month ago is the best of its series. If the same guy can play four really good games in the same genre six months from now, and go back to God of War, and still say it is the best in the genre, then I'll believe him.
It is a natural thing to assume that a video game culture exists. Video games have been amazingly popular since the 80's, and have only grown in popularity since then. What companies haven't figured out is how to penetrate the market.
Want to know why? Companies have no idea what the typical gamer is like. The stereotype has changed so much, it's impossible to get everyone and their dog to like exactly the same thing. Gamers are everything from sweaty perverted nerds (as seen in Dead or Alive 3 commercials), people desperate to be cool (as seen by this link), a bunch of lazy kids (as seen in any commercial you can think of where kid X doesn't want to do homework then suddenly pigs out on pizza product Y), and... well... you get the picture.
What the corporate world doesn't realize is that everyone plays games. You can't get the attention of the 13-year-old sex depraved "gamer" without shunning a few "grrl gamers" and serious adults. Likewise, you're not going to get much love from the adult/retro crowd without sacrificing the interests of "Hal0-Xb0x-R0xx0rz3000" and his buddies in Junior High. Sony and Blockbuster and anybody else that can jump on the bandwagon are trying as hard as they can to fit the "gamer" peg into the square hole, but they don't realize that the "gamer" peg is only one of the pieces out there. And that is why there are so many loyalties and fanboys for every product you can imagine.
I don't know what world you live in, but in this world countries have banned several video games, and that fact was used as a selling point here in America. The only thing we really censor is nudity, we just try to control the amount of violence that a child observes here in America.
Example, Carmageddon was banned in Australia I believe, as well as Postal 2 and more that I can't remember off hand.
Also, it may be the parent's job to do so, but you have to admit that children can be pretty convincing/conniving if they want a game that is "Adult" enough. And, the industry is pretty guilty of trying to sell on that type of appeal, whether they want to admit it or not.
First of all, the ESRB is doing its job. They take a game, and I'm sure they have a tally sheet marking whether games have certain degrees of violence type 1,2, and 3, or whether it has certain degrees of nudity. That's not the issue.
The article paints a picture of "lawmakers vs. ESRB", but it mentions one Republican who is accusing the ESRB of being too light on handing out AOs, and another (Clinton) of launching an investigation into the effects of M games.
Now, read that again. Clinton (and, for that matter, almost every other lawmaker "fighting the good fight") doesn't have a problem with the rating system, they have a problem with the games. The article only has one quote from one senator that thinks the ESRB is not tough enough. Then the article goes on to point out how tough the ESRB is. And the insight they give there is pretty spot-on, espeically the comparisons between the MPAA and the ESRB.
However, the majority of the article is a defense against the first politician's quote, and doesn't really hold water against the other attacks (which are against videogames that have been rated M, not the rating system itself). Besides, it isn't the ESRB's job to ensure that games rated M aren't sold to 17 year olds, it is the retailer's job. And video game (only) retail stores are pretty scuzzy to begin with, especially the chain ones.
Okay, so I only skimmed the article, but it seems like John Kennedy is trying to guilt-trip ISPs into signing an agreement. He's saying "We spend nearly 66% of our income on research and development, so we're the reason that people have high bandwidth now. So, help us police the internet and we'll keep dumping money into R&D."
Then he goes on to say (and has the audacity to title this argument "Music is Driving the Digital Revolution") "Selling digital music is a good market". Okay, how is the success of the iTunes Music store "Driving the Digital Revolution"? Really? I'm waiting... That's what I thought. It isn't. In fact, he doesn't even have an argument for this. All he can say is "Selling songs online is getting us money again." That's hardly revolutionizing. Revolutional would be "Musicians sell their own music online." No, this is just the old business model with new technology, the same technology they're trying to stagnate and police.
I'm sorry, but your analysis isn't quite correct. Valve doesn't press CDs. Valve doesn't pay for advertizements, or arrange where they go. Valve doesn't pay to ship the game out, either. Vivendi Universal does all that.
So, basically, the whole reason a lot of people like Steam (but aren't vocalizing) is because it cuts out the middle man. Your hard earned dollars don't go to a distribution company that publishes and advertizes for a cut of the profits. It goes to the company who made the game. In fact, one of the big stinks surrounding Steam, and ultimately pushing the release back, was the fact that Vivendi wasn't going to get all the money from sales for the copies distributed online. No need for them, and suddenly they get worried.
The last part, the lack of pirates, I see as a good thing. I'm all for people getting paid for their work. It is rewarding to get more through higher stock prices as an employee, and it makes you want to make better games. And Half-Life 2 is a good game.
So we don't like Valve's anti-piracy model. They read their forums (for the most part), go tell them about it. I'm sure many have, and they will most likely listen about offline mode. But I'm all for playing multiplayer with the folks that paid for the game. And I'm all for Steam, I'm not worried about a little ad for twenty seconds while I'm watching a loading bar go by. Most of the time, the ad just says "Valve content server 20" anyway. When the scathing expose stating that Valve has been collecting data off of people's hard drives comes out, then I'll worry. But now, I'm only slightly annoyed about Steam, and that's only because it is a ram hog, and cuts in on my performance. Slightly.
Slashdot Mirror
He means this Bolero. It was written for a ballet, and was inspired by the generic "bolero" type of music in spanish tradition.
The "Bolero of Fire", I guess, is supposed to be reminiscent of the traditional Spanish style of music (not the musical piece you provided a link to). But the original "Bolero" by Ravel (that you linked to) is the one that they were going to put at the front of "The Legend of Zelda" as the theme, except it wasn't public property yet. That's actually pretty interesting, considering that video game music is now its own movement.
Basically the guy is lamenting the loss of a channel that was for nerds. TechTV (or ZDTV, if you remember that far back) used to cover all sorts of nerdy stuff. Particularly, the Screen Savers was a very cool show with some neat tips and experiments, and was the first TV show I ever saw that publicly acknowledged that Linux existed.
There was a show that covered new technology that was emerging and reviewed them once they went commercial (handy for buying a PDA at the time), and then Gamespot TV was pretty cool (becuase it was before G4TV was announced, and was actually really good.) And there were some filler shows too, but they seemed to have their own niche (for instance, Call For Help was handy if you didn't want to explain how to burn a cd to your grandmother).
In short, TechTV used to be really interesting, and the only TV I ever watched. We're all sad that it left, I suppose.
I'm sure what he meant was "Adam Sessler is the fucking man, but has to play the part of a retard now that he is on G4TV and works with Morgan Webb, just to make her look smart".
Trust me, when Adam Sessler was solo (or with that other hot chick back when the Dreamcast was still around), the show rocked and I hated to miss it. I think it was Gamespot TV then. Then it changed names to something weird, then it changed to X-Play and started sucking like a Dyson.
Even if Valve went without a publisher, do you really think they would charge that much less for their games? $50 has long been the standard price, and they won't tarry far from that path. After all, they are a business, first and foremost, and will make as much money as they can. It is inherent to what they do.
Also, they are going to get a publisher. Think about who buys games. Mostly teenagers. Now think about how people buy games via Steam. They buy with a credit card. I don't know about you, but my parents never let me use their cards. They risk alienating a lot of their market (under 18, I'd wager a good half) by moving to a Steam only market.
You are absolutely right. Some of the better design processes (to me) have involved turning the initial documentation into skeleton code, then writing comments around all the functions and classes that describe exactly what the program is supposed to do. Not only does it provide for excellent commenting and understandable code, it is immensely helpful in the writing of these functions.
/*retrieves the key 'SS#' from row r*/ may seem like overkill at first, but people who go over my work later don't even have to read the function for the code (unless they suspect the function is the source of a bug). They know what it is supposed to do, and a written out comment is generally clearer than a pre:post: with the bare minimum of description that some people prefer.
Having a function named "getKey(row r)" with a comment saying
I have to say, my significant other loves Ms. Pac-Man and Centipede, and Animal Crossing, and The Sims. She loves DDR, and she plays so many Pop-Cap games it's a wonder she gets work done.
Thing is, these aren't necessarily good games to introduce people to. You are absolutely right about the Atari games. She loves those games because they are old, and she remembers playing them when she was little. Same with Dr. Mario, it was an accessible classic (certainly an easier concept than Tetris). And the Pop-Cap games are mostly variations on the theme.
Now, I can see where they get the Sims kind of, as well as Animal Crossing. My SO (much like many of her age) are big into the Trading Spaces type of show, and so the Sims is a nice little escape to design a really awesome house, or just play with design ideas. And on top of that, she liked to get the people involved in complicated relationships with the whole neighborhood, to see the social repercussions. I can see many other women of her age group getting into it for similar reasons, but other than that I think the whole "girl gamer" (or intro gamer) analogy stops there.
You see, there is such a variety out there, there is no set way to introduce any set of people to games. You're not going to lure the sports nut dad to video games with Ninja Gaiden (unless he is an armchair martial artist as well), and at the same time you're not going to lure most women in with a lot of the current popular games. This is because a lot of these games are aimed at men specifically, games like Grand Theft Auto and the afore-mentioned Counter-Strike. All this article did was pick a handful of pretty good games that weren't particularly aimed at the 13-34 male demographic. This list could have included any number of old Atari games, or a plethora of NES games. Nothing particularly insightful, they inductively deduced that many women who don't play games now probably don't because they consider them "boy toys". And lets face it, some women just aren't going to like your typical modern game fare that uses sex to sell. Video games are competitive by nature, and there are people who don't like competing, even with themselves or a computer. Video Games are not for everyone.
On the flipside of that, there are many corporations who go out of their way to find people that know Linux and can get a Linux server running in no time, and do all their Linux support in-house. They actively train those who don't know it as well, and are proficient at providing all sorts of in-house Linux support. To these corporations, it can be hard to find someone who says "I know Windows really well" and expect them to know how to do some of the stuff an MCSE can do. Saying "I know Windows" in an interview is radically different than saying "I know Linux", and it shows in the levels of confidence in the interviewee (unless they are a good liar).
You've hit on a few of the things that make Deus Ex so exhilarating. See, aside from the crazy storyline, Deus Ex has this whole notion of "Investment and payoff". For instance, as you progress in the game, you gather skills and items, and how you use those points defines how you make your approach later in the game. You put points into sniping and demolitions, you become a spy-like soldier.
Me, I also used leg augmentations and shields. I remember running as an alarm went off in one level, and I had to make a hasty escape. I remember turning augs on in a hurry and leaping from the fourth floor of a building to the first floor lobby, outrunning any of the guards in the area. It was exciting and I felt rewarded for being able to make such a retreat (which I wouldn't have if I had invested in silent running).
But the storyline in this game is also brilliant. It has you running around the world trying to find out just who you are, and who you have been working for. You switch sides halfway through the game, and it is one of the first games to try and make you realize the repercussions of your actions (run-and-gun or sneak and immobilize). Truly an amazing game.
Huh? Did you actually play the Wind Waker? It isn't Z-Targeting anymore. You still target with the button that is (relatively) in the same place. Namely, the L button. It is the one that is where your left index finger would be, just like the Z trigger was on the N64 controller.
Also, the Z button is actually a "C" button now. You assign swappable items to it, like the bow, bombs, etc.
Also also, you should know that the Wind Waker is considerably larger than the Ocarina of Time. Though there aren't nearly as many dungeons in the Wind Waker, they are all of very high quality. (Which I would contend, the OOT later levels weren't. The Shadow level and the level where you get the lens of truth felt last minute, and I hate to say it, but so did the Desert level).
Yeah, I know that too. I was drawing a line between "Marriage" and "Legal Joining". I was saying, if the gay couple can find a church that will "Marry" them, then they say they're married. Otherwise, they say they're life partners or whatever the current catchphrase is, because they were joined at a courthouse instead of a church. Again, not reading what I'm saying, I'm not negative about Christianity, so I must be retarded, right?
Go look in a dictionary, look up marriage. The primary definition is "union between a man and a woman". Only recently has it even entered any dictionary that marriage should also encompass same sex marriages. And the definition comes from religious contexts, so the word "Marriage" stems from the very idea of two people uniting as one in a ceremony. So, to keep one side happy, you don't redefine "marriage" because you are getting rid of the history of the word, which is why there's such a big hubbub about it all. It's called a compromise, and the govermnment is good at using compromises. Hell, the whole fact that we have two houses in Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) stems from a big compromise. The most fundamentalist Christians don't want the union to be able to happen at all. You give some, you get some. And besides, gay couples can be called "married" too if they want, they just have to find a church that will support the claim, like I said. Not hard, considering churches in Canada will reportedly do this. So, churches here in the U.S. will allow it as well, depending on their doctrine and views.
Wow, you don't know anything about the Bible, do you? Just because God has killed homosexuals in the past doesn't mean Christians have the right to. In fact, Christians don't have the right to kill anyone. Anyone who kills in the name of Christianity, as I said, is rallying behind the name to push their hatred of others forward as a group. If a Christian befriends a homosexual person, it doesn't make them a bad Christian. Quite the contrary, it makes them a good one. Get your facts straight before pushing out anti-Christian FUD.
No sir, Myst has more than just "wow" visual appeal. While it helped things visually that the brothers who thought up Myst have heavy art backgrounds, there was more to Myst's gameplay than that. Namely, Myst has some amazing puzzles, visually stunning worlds (Not just in terms of graphics, but in terms of sheer imagination), a very neat story concept (adding pages to books to make them more powerful) and the fact that it is an adventure game.
There are many of us who love adventure games of all sorts, and don't mind the point and click/puzzle game every once in a while. I find the Myst games a worthwhile pursuit, even if some of the puzzles are essentially "Random clicky maze" puzzles, and that most of them require some paper and time away from the physical game to figure out.
Wait wait wait... Homosexuality is not a gender. The absence or presence of certain sexual organs defines gender, my friend. It's cut and dry, Male or Female. And while Hermaphrodites may be a special case, almost always they choose a sex and get surgery (or surgery is performed at birth). And as far as I know, the state recognizes them as one sex or the other to keep things simple.
Now, the fact of the matter is, marriage is deeply entrenched in our laws (think taxes), and the reason Christians are so offended is because they feel that defining marriage to also include "same sex relationships" is stepping on their beliefs. And it is, only the most Liberal of Christian organizations believe that God will sanction a homosexual joining.
So, what's the solution? Rewrite the laws so that the legal rights of same sex life-joinings are the same as current married benefits and rights. Don't call it marriage. Now, the benefits of this:
1. Religious groups will be appeased with the technicality, since gay couples won't be "married" unless they find a religious organization that will sanction it. They will be "legally joined".
2. Homosexual unions will be allowed by the US, and given equal rights. No discrimination.
3. If a gay couple claims to be "married", then the Christians can take offense with the religious organization that sanctioned it, not the couple itself.
Granted, some "Christians" are so shallow that they would rather hate the individual as well, but they're just using the name to rally behind a cause that is essentially hatred.
I believe that if the work is copywrighted corporately, you wouldn't have the right to do that by contract anyway. And if you did, then it was in the contract that you retained rights. Either way, I think you are covered in the case that you want to share your own music online and you created it.
Lots of reasons, a few of which have been touched already:
1: Hard Drives are pricy.
self-explanatory
2: Hard Drives break easy.
Suppose they are going for a "portable" image with the new console. Hard drives make things less portable, since they have to be padded and even then are still easily breakable.
3: You can take away functionality and later charge more for it and call it a "feature" with good marketing.
And everyone's eating it up.
What is up with the web tv thing anyway? It is like Microsoft is trying to make the X-Box more of a "living room computer" every day. If I want to browse the web, I'm going to use my computer, not my console. Sorry Bill, I'm not buying into it.
Actually, no. Let me be the first to tell you, Choicepoint has competition. And, more than likely, Choicepoint paid for that information. So, it is inherent in their business model that they would want to keep the data safe from anybody else. Not only that, but they lose face with their customers if they seem insecure. And once again, there are strong competitors ready to scoop up the new business.
Also, security has always been the primary concern with these (data collection) companies. Choicepoint's only big flaw is that they trusted their customers too much, so it was easy for someone to pose as an up-and-coming business with need for Choicepoint's services.
Which is why Nintendo is working on shedding the "kiddy" image. I don't know who even uses the argument anymore and really believes it, but Nintendo realized a while back that blood in a game isn't going to hurt console sales.
And the point of defending "kiddy" games is the fact that a lot of us prefer the attention put into gameplay detail, instead of blood spray pattern detail or the boob jiggle detail.
The thing about adult games is, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Playing the open-ended field for someone like me (a la Grand Theft Auto) just gets boring. After shooting a street full of mobsters and stealing that mustang ripoff for the twentieth time, it just isn't fun anymore. On the flipside, you have your espionage games (Splinter Cell and Metal Gear) that are intensely fun, and your shooters (which go either way).
See, those of us who defend "kiddy games" against those who proclaim "bloody games" to be the best notice that a lot of those who defend "bloody games" defend even the bad ones. I'll admit that I like games from both camps, but if someone flat out says that they prefer a bad GTA ripoff with no thought put into any of it over something crazy fun like Smash Brothers, I'm going to laugh in their face and assume they are a fanboy. Simple as that.
You're missing the point. The whole reason this is posted as "news" is because it is reporting on the status of the mod community, showing that it is hard at work. It isn't praising Half-Life 2 as a game, it is praising it as a canvas. It's news to me, because I don't follow the mod community religiously. It turns out to be kind of hard to find good mods that don't just modify core play in the original game. All I ever seem to be able to find is a swath of mods that are still making models of guns.
I hate how people will go out and buy hype, then manifest their current eagerness everywhere they can. I guarantee you, in a year, God of War won't be considered the platform game. Besides, isn't God of War technically a hack 'n slash? When I think platformer, I think of games were half the difficulty comes from maneuvering. Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is a good modern one, but Mario Brothers 3 perfected the art, if you ask me.
Back to my point, it just seems that a lot of these entries are either hype-mongers or uber-nostalgists. I don't care that Guy #1 is old enough to remember getting an insane score in Pitfall, nor do I believe that a game that came out a month ago is the best of its series. If the same guy can play four really good games in the same genre six months from now, and go back to God of War, and still say it is the best in the genre, then I'll believe him.
I, for one, welcome our new digital music overlords. Wait, shit. Where am I?
It is a natural thing to assume that a video game culture exists. Video games have been amazingly popular since the 80's, and have only grown in popularity since then. What companies haven't figured out is how to penetrate the market.
Want to know why? Companies have no idea what the typical gamer is like. The stereotype has changed so much, it's impossible to get everyone and their dog to like exactly the same thing. Gamers are everything from sweaty perverted nerds (as seen in Dead or Alive 3 commercials), people desperate to be cool (as seen by this link), a bunch of lazy kids (as seen in any commercial you can think of where kid X doesn't want to do homework then suddenly pigs out on pizza product Y), and... well... you get the picture.
What the corporate world doesn't realize is that everyone plays games. You can't get the attention of the 13-year-old sex depraved "gamer" without shunning a few "grrl gamers" and serious adults. Likewise, you're not going to get much love from the adult/retro crowd without sacrificing the interests of "Hal0-Xb0x-R0xx0rz3000" and his buddies in Junior High. Sony and Blockbuster and anybody else that can jump on the bandwagon are trying as hard as they can to fit the "gamer" peg into the square hole, but they don't realize that the "gamer" peg is only one of the pieces out there. And that is why there are so many loyalties and fanboys for every product you can imagine.
I don't know what world you live in, but in this world countries have banned several video games, and that fact was used as a selling point here in America. The only thing we really censor is nudity, we just try to control the amount of violence that a child observes here in America.
Example, Carmageddon was banned in Australia I believe, as well as Postal 2 and more that I can't remember off hand.
Also, it may be the parent's job to do so, but you have to admit that children can be pretty convincing/conniving if they want a game that is "Adult" enough. And, the industry is pretty guilty of trying to sell on that type of appeal, whether they want to admit it or not.
First of all, the ESRB is doing its job. They take a game, and I'm sure they have a tally sheet marking whether games have certain degrees of violence type 1,2, and 3, or whether it has certain degrees of nudity. That's not the issue.
The article paints a picture of "lawmakers vs. ESRB", but it mentions one Republican who is accusing the ESRB of being too light on handing out AOs, and another (Clinton) of launching an investigation into the effects of M games.
Now, read that again. Clinton (and, for that matter, almost every other lawmaker "fighting the good fight") doesn't have a problem with the rating system, they have a problem with the games. The article only has one quote from one senator that thinks the ESRB is not tough enough. Then the article goes on to point out how tough the ESRB is. And the insight they give there is pretty spot-on, espeically the comparisons between the MPAA and the ESRB.
However, the majority of the article is a defense against the first politician's quote, and doesn't really hold water against the other attacks (which are against videogames that have been rated M, not the rating system itself). Besides, it isn't the ESRB's job to ensure that games rated M aren't sold to 17 year olds, it is the retailer's job. And video game (only) retail stores are pretty scuzzy to begin with, especially the chain ones.
Okay, so I only skimmed the article, but it seems like John Kennedy is trying to guilt-trip ISPs into signing an agreement. He's saying "We spend nearly 66% of our income on research and development, so we're the reason that people have high bandwidth now. So, help us police the internet and we'll keep dumping money into R&D."
Then he goes on to say (and has the audacity to title this argument "Music is Driving the Digital Revolution") "Selling digital music is a good market". Okay, how is the success of the iTunes Music store "Driving the Digital Revolution"? Really? I'm waiting... That's what I thought. It isn't. In fact, he doesn't even have an argument for this. All he can say is "Selling songs online is getting us money again." That's hardly revolutionizing. Revolutional would be "Musicians sell their own music online." No, this is just the old business model with new technology, the same technology they're trying to stagnate and police.
I'm sorry, but your analysis isn't quite correct. Valve doesn't press CDs. Valve doesn't pay for advertizements, or arrange where they go. Valve doesn't pay to ship the game out, either. Vivendi Universal does all that.
So, basically, the whole reason a lot of people like Steam (but aren't vocalizing) is because it cuts out the middle man. Your hard earned dollars don't go to a distribution company that publishes and advertizes for a cut of the profits. It goes to the company who made the game. In fact, one of the big stinks surrounding Steam, and ultimately pushing the release back, was the fact that Vivendi wasn't going to get all the money from sales for the copies distributed online. No need for them, and suddenly they get worried.
The last part, the lack of pirates, I see as a good thing. I'm all for people getting paid for their work. It is rewarding to get more through higher stock prices as an employee, and it makes you want to make better games. And Half-Life 2 is a good game.
So we don't like Valve's anti-piracy model. They read their forums (for the most part), go tell them about it. I'm sure many have, and they will most likely listen about offline mode. But I'm all for playing multiplayer with the folks that paid for the game. And I'm all for Steam, I'm not worried about a little ad for twenty seconds while I'm watching a loading bar go by. Most of the time, the ad just says "Valve content server 20" anyway. When the scathing expose stating that Valve has been collecting data off of people's hard drives comes out, then I'll worry. But now, I'm only slightly annoyed about Steam, and that's only because it is a ram hog, and cuts in on my performance. Slightly.
Also of interest,1 12.html
2 64.html
o mint=1
Rumor Control: http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/25/news_6121
Same story from Gamespot: http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/29/news_6121
More Rumors and speculation from IGN: http://cube.ign.com/articles/522/522559p1.html?fr
The latter has some interesting theories and "leaks", as well as some drawings of interest.