Agreed -- not everyone steals a phone in order to "claim it," but rather to use it for some deals or whatever, then strip the chip out if they figure it's sellable. Plenty of time for them to simply wipe the memory of the thing.
However, not all people store contacts to the SIM card. I know I've always stored contacts on the phone itself, mostly so I can assign home/work/cell icons to classify people AND use the phone's speed dial w/o needing to press 4 digits. Pressing #1 is a lot easier than #6122. At that point I might as well just dial the number.
I back up and maintain all my contacts on my computer so it's not a big deal for my own uses. It's one of the weird crappy things about using SIMs, I guess.
I know this is going to sound like blatant fanboyism, but this is the same subtle feature inclusion that brought me over to Apple. Little things that you think "hmm, what if I just try it and see what happens" and you realize that what you wanted to do was already coded, tested, and well implemented.
Map software is the kind of thing that shouldn't rely on add-ons or extensions -- the core development team should be thinking of the various ways that people will assume, or at least hope, that the software will work. I just noticed, in looking at it again, that if you zoom in on expressways it lists the exit numbers. That's a new(er) feature, I think, but subtle yet incredibly useful, considering how often directions utilize exit numbers. There's always odd little things added to Maps that I'm not sure are new features or old features I just never noticed before since I didn't need them, but not everything needs a major announcement -- sometimes a feature is just a good feature that people can explore and discover on their own.
I like that. Of course, I also like when the major ones, like this redirect thing, are announced:D
They seem to change them. I did a standard route here in Baltimore a few years ago, and it routed you through the city. Everyone in Baltimore knows that the ONLY way to travel outside of Baltimore is to get on the 695 beltway, even if it *seems* like it would be more direct to go straight through the city.
So going from, say, north of the city to the IKEA, Google Maps directed people directly through the city. Which, of course, was mostly city streets at 30 mph with lots of lights. The way everyone *actually* goes is all expressway.
So, in an attempt to try this new feature out, I plug in the same route I did before. Only this time, it automatically pulled up the "correct" route, which was all expressway. The idea of taking the city streets, even though it's more direct, is long gone. Since there's this new feature, I "forced it" to take the city route, and sure enough the time was reduced according to their calculations -- it went from 22 minutes to 15 minutes. But maybe they realized that expressways are almost always faster, or someone tipped them off that Baltimore's interior roads don't work for traversing the city, because even though it calculates out faster, it's definitely a longer duration.
So something's up. Not only can people move their own routes, but Google is doing something to "fix" routes that are off in their system. Maybe they're both synched up to the same system, cos Mapquest also shows the correct route, but these systems are far from static. Especially with features like this (I actually appreciate the traffic thing more).
Hear hear. The ebay adwords were always the bottom of the barrel -- either words that no one else wanted, or that were moderately popular but eBay had paid so little that they were listed last.
It's sad, though, that I didn't even realize they were missing until this article came out. Sure enough, I can't think of a search in recent memory that had "Find it on eBay!" in google ads. Too bad, really; I wish I could've been more pleased with their absence.
Exactly. I was insanely pleased when I discovered that a great deal of retail hardware comes with those big, foldout "quickstart" manuals that have big pictures, direct people how to plug things in, and uses a very straightforward method to get people going.
Of course, they're usually complemented with the encyclopedia, which contains all of the rest of the information for actually using and maintaining their products. It doesn't help that nearly every company only includes support for their own brand of products, which most people don't own.
Those are the people who called. What about the people who didn't call because they just read the manual? It's an unknown -- a good manual will reduce call numbers, but if you didn't have a manual, would the numbers be higher? How much?
Lots of companies assume that since they're already paying for phone support, they might as well cut costs on the manual and let the phone people handle it. Which is dumb. For that guy who called and you pointed them to the manual, since it was already written down *and they could follow along,* not only was the answer quick (as you say, less than a minute), but you weren't kept on the phone while the customer tried out the solution.
That same customer could also have had another question but simply referred to the manual, instead of calling back again. The problem is the same as "happy customers," though -- happy customers don't complain, so you don't hear from them. If you only respond to the unhappy ones, you're ignoring a large portion of your customer base.
Well the caveat that they shouldn't announce until they're ready to drop the prices implies that people would actually buy the console at the current price:)
That's the thing -- people DO read manuals if they're good manuals. if they flip through it and it's just page after page of "Thank you for purchasing one of our products" with a list of all possible specs and languages, they're going to assume it's crap.
If it was actually relevant to their computer and covered the basics, they would know it was a reference. Sadly, good documentation (and I mean good, not just "listing everything") is usually one of the first things cut, despite the amount of money it can potentially save.
The Halo series is a pretty solid game for a console shooter. I dislike PC shooters for their uber-competitive nature, yet most console shooters are annoyingly awkward in multiplayer, which is where most of the fun comes from. Yet as someone who isn't head over heads for FPS games, and also doesn't hold Goldeneye in high regard, I probably had the most fun online in Halo 2 than any other multiplayer game I've played. There's enough consistency and interesting balance in the game that most games end up very entertaining.
I think the game rates poorly for people who are very competitive, since it's not as open to clanning and grouping compared to a PC game. I also think the fact that it's based on a gamepad discourages people, especially those who are very focused on using a mouse and getting constant headshots. But for people who like FPS games but don't want to deal with uberweapons, there's enough variety and subtle balance in the game that I really, really enjoyed it.
Most FPS games for a broad audience just shoot for cheese or wacky, like TimeSplitters. Or there's too much emphasis on giving everyone crazy weapons or weird customization that does nothing to really make the core game better (just a different avatar). Halo, I think, succeeded very well at being a broad-audience FPS, as I think its sales numbers show. I don't think it's "the best," but "best" is very subjective anyway. I appreciate that the game was serious about strategy and maps and weapon balance, without focusing on the elite gamers who only play for rank or achievements. I hope Halo 3 follows in those footsteps.
I think we're getting to the point where multiplayer games are more network-code with multiple-console support, rather than split screen. I personally love getting people together for a 4player game, since I have a large enough TV for it, and I've even gotten 8 people on it (4 player split screen with a vertical split-screen on the tv itself, with a pair of Xbox or GameCubes running it). A lot of fun, but I don't know how much focus there is for amateurs to code multiplayer games in general, let alone "party-style" games.
I mean, on Windows there's a surprising amount of small dev teams (or individuals) who craft mods or original games for FPS-style games and the entire game is based around multiplayer, but since the coders are relatively hardcore they're usually coding for an equally hardcore userbase. And most emulators cheat, by grafting netcode into the system to "emulate" having a 2nd player when it's really just another full system playing a copy of the game.
I'd love for coders to get interested in creating new original games that weren't just clones of old games, and I'd love it even more if they were coding multiplayer games (since paying $60 for a game you can only play when 3 people are over can be tough to stomach). But they're not doing it now, so it strikes me as a chicken/egg scenario. Are they not coding it because they're not interested, or because without the devkits it's too difficult? But if the devkits were free or easier to work with, would they suddenly start coding them (despite the focus being on emulators and classic game clones)?
I just think it's sad that most of the innovation for homebrew seems to be entirely unrelated to the gaming crowd. I mean, homebrew DS has MIDI over wifi and a handful of actual audio apps. That's impressive, to me, but I don't see much interest in original games.
So it's not a knockoff handheld, but most everything you list involves it just playing old games originally created for other systems. I'm not knocking the hardware, but most of the interest in the system is from people who just want to play old ROMs on the go.
The problem is that you would have to be a serious coder AND be serious about developing a game that people would want to pay for (even if it's cheap). The thing that always depresses me about homebrew is that it's literally overflowing with emulators and ROMs. If 5% of the homebrew population makes a stink about making it easier for people to load homebrew, and the other 95% is only interested in playing old SNES games, why would a company make the cost of entry any cheaper?
Most of the games I see for homebrew are more proof of concept than actual game, like an asteroids or breakout clone. While interesting, it seems that most gamers who want to code a game would rather just code it for a desktop OS.
The White House is blocking attempts from Congress to change their current path? I'm completely surprised. I mean, what's next, the idea that next-gen consoles could go down in price at some future point?
I'm curious about their actual influence. Kaplan and Harrison are high profile because they're well known by gamers, due to interviews and press releases. But do they really DO anything? I'm not saying that their jobs are unworthy or meaningless, of course, but it's not like Nintendo has really done anything interesting regarding its own marketing and advertising. A few interesting commercials every once in a while but it wouldn't surprise me if this is both a space issue and a shakeup. A lot of these people have been around since at least the GameCube launch, so maybe they're just "old."
On the other hand, it does make sense to move a marketing department to a city where a lot of activity occurs simply so you're "in on the action" without having to take the plane each time. There's a lot more exciting things happening in media in both cities compared to Redmond, which I'm sure has an influence on the move.
I love how this reads like an extortion racket. Who's to say that these pornographers aren't the same people creating the filtering software? After all, they would know exactly how to filter out what they sell.
"Hey lady, those are some nice kids you got there. T'would be a shame if they happened to see porn, wouldn't it?"
Depends on whose desktop we're talking about. A user who uses their computer for audio purposes? It's been a kludge for a while with UbuntuStudio only coming out recently. Inkscape for vector graphics has gotten pretty nice but it's also pretty recent.
Personally, I think the reason people haven't picked up Linux for home is the same reason that Ubuntu is doing well -- it makes installing extra crap you don't usually think about simple. I mean, MOST people who should otherwise be fine using Linux use their computers for entirely random things without really thinking about it. They buy a digital camera and don't research whether it's easily mountable in Linux -- they just snag something at Best Buy. They don't check to see if their printer is Linux compatible -- they just have the free one that was shipped with their computer, and is probably clogged anyway. In fact, the biggest problem is, in my opinion, more that people want to do a specific thing, and because they're on windows they look for windows solutions and either end up locked in due to a format or simply familiarity.
When I bought my mac, I thought I'd never be able to use it regularly because there was no free software out there for it. Of course, after I owned the thing for a few weeks I actually found where I look for said software and could actually install it and try it out. It was no different from Windows, or Linux really, except that since I was actually on the machine I was motivated to find software for it. If I was only using windows, why would I explore other options? Truly, the major motivation for my "switch" was because I was sick of how Windows handled audio.
Even now, I'd switch my windows laptop to Ubuntu if it wasn't for vendor lock-in (some VSTs that only work on Windows I've got installed on there and still use).
I love the lights too. It makes me feel like I'm in a cockpit or other cool place where a lot of stuff happens. People buy audio hardware because of the blinking lights!
If this guy is so intent on fixing it, he should get out the soldering iron and disconnect them himself. Or do the thing everyone else does when something is blinking or flashing too much -- cover it up with electrical tape.
Depends on the winning condition, if you ask me. If a game is timed, and each round will always take X minutes, then assisting the loser should provide a greater challenge for the leader while evening things out, which should lead to a more interesting game. Since the win condition is to simply be better at the end of X minutes, making the most of that time should be worthwhile.
On the other hand, if it's the first to, say, 3 flags, a handicap that allows a losing team to walk faster or get better weapons completely defeats the point. If a strong team stomps a weak one, the game is over quickly and there's a good metric.
Ultimately, though, I think it would make the most sense to just do both. Just like the random map thing -- have static maps, and then also have random variations for those who want it. Have a handicap system for those who prefer it, and have a "straight up" version to let skill and luck shine above all else. Some game systems work well with handicaps and make team play worthwhile. Others just make the game longer (like monopoly home rules).
I don't hate them, but I do know that part of the fun of really getting into a game is knowing where you have to go on a map, what routes are best for certain activities, and what you have to watch out for.
If the map changes too much, each team is left spending the first few minutes of a match figuring out what's different and how that affects any strategies. For deathmatch, whoever spawns closest to the "best weapons" has an advantage until people figure out what's different.
I can understand some randomization being a good thing. It's more fun if a team can't just lock down a part of a map that has all of the "goodies" and simply wait for things to respawn. Similarly, good randomization would keep a map generally the same, but with a general change that's easy to grasp -- such as a rectangular map "bending" more, or a round map distorting into different shapes. Things like randomizing tunnel in/outs or doorway locations, though, just leads to confusion, and confusion leads to unhappy players.
Do you understand spoken japanese? I know a fair number of anime fans who prefer japanese subtitles simply because they don't understand what they're saying, and therefore don't realize that they're just as bad or cheaply done as US ones.
You mean like fighting Bahamut.. and then summoning Bahamut?
Re:Square is in for a rude surprise.
on
Ten Years of FFXIII?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I honestly feel that the reason that 6 isn't addressed anymore is due to how the game isn't a set of characters and their melodramatic relationships, but rather more of a "group of adventurers from around the globe who group together to defeat evil." The WoR portion is largely what the "aftermath" of most games are, and there are signs of the world recovering. Kefka is largely absent other than the occasional show of power and prevention of any real order developing. When he is defeated, there are no questionable towns, no weird alliances or government programs that could, potentially, continue. The Esper thing is resolved and the world can essentially get back to normal.
Even worse for spin-offs, there's little to really address before the story occurs, and many people in the story have no story-based history. Celes has a minor amount of history in the main story, but everyone else is sort of convinced of the problem and realizes that action needs to be taken.
Compare that to 7, where a band of individuals is fighting a government power. The real enemy, though, is a crazy guy with a mom-complex. When he's defeated, the government programs and all of the technology associated with it don't just disappear. Likewise, there's a huge history of the conspiracies built up in the game. A lot of it is terribly cliche, but it's ripe for expansion in spin-off games.
To me, though, that's also why I really like 6 a lot more. It felt like a full game, and you play the story from beginning to end. You start basically right where the real action begins and where the empire starts to make its moves, and it ends after a hell of a lot happens -- after the climax, after the denoument, at the real "end." FF4 is similar, although it peppers the world with more "mysterious old things from an advanced civilization" which are really just holdover themes from FF1-3. 7 felt like a snapshot, like the story was picked up in the middle and here are the characters. They're introduced and typecast as soon as you meet them, and nothing really changes. There are some twists in the story but the events don't really change the world. In fact, the prevention of any major change is pretty much the underlying element. Compared to 6, where you ride huge changes all the way through (from the discovery of magic, to the use of magic, to the destruction of the world and how it changes past locations, up to people coming to grips with the change and growing past it).
Sadly, it means that it's not a good market for sequels, but I think that's simply testament to how good of a story it was.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, if they're smart enough to figure all that out, they're smart enough to have a better gig than stealing phones.
Agreed -- not everyone steals a phone in order to "claim it," but rather to use it for some deals or whatever, then strip the chip out if they figure it's sellable. Plenty of time for them to simply wipe the memory of the thing.
However, not all people store contacts to the SIM card. I know I've always stored contacts on the phone itself, mostly so I can assign home/work/cell icons to classify people AND use the phone's speed dial w/o needing to press 4 digits. Pressing #1 is a lot easier than #6122. At that point I might as well just dial the number.
I back up and maintain all my contacts on my computer so it's not a big deal for my own uses. It's one of the weird crappy things about using SIMs, I guess.
I know this is going to sound like blatant fanboyism, but this is the same subtle feature inclusion that brought me over to Apple. Little things that you think "hmm, what if I just try it and see what happens" and you realize that what you wanted to do was already coded, tested, and well implemented.
:D
Map software is the kind of thing that shouldn't rely on add-ons or extensions -- the core development team should be thinking of the various ways that people will assume, or at least hope, that the software will work. I just noticed, in looking at it again, that if you zoom in on expressways it lists the exit numbers. That's a new(er) feature, I think, but subtle yet incredibly useful, considering how often directions utilize exit numbers. There's always odd little things added to Maps that I'm not sure are new features or old features I just never noticed before since I didn't need them, but not everything needs a major announcement -- sometimes a feature is just a good feature that people can explore and discover on their own.
I like that. Of course, I also like when the major ones, like this redirect thing, are announced
They seem to change them. I did a standard route here in Baltimore a few years ago, and it routed you through the city. Everyone in Baltimore knows that the ONLY way to travel outside of Baltimore is to get on the 695 beltway, even if it *seems* like it would be more direct to go straight through the city.
So going from, say, north of the city to the IKEA, Google Maps directed people directly through the city. Which, of course, was mostly city streets at 30 mph with lots of lights. The way everyone *actually* goes is all expressway.
So, in an attempt to try this new feature out, I plug in the same route I did before. Only this time, it automatically pulled up the "correct" route, which was all expressway. The idea of taking the city streets, even though it's more direct, is long gone. Since there's this new feature, I "forced it" to take the city route, and sure enough the time was reduced according to their calculations -- it went from 22 minutes to 15 minutes. But maybe they realized that expressways are almost always faster, or someone tipped them off that Baltimore's interior roads don't work for traversing the city, because even though it calculates out faster, it's definitely a longer duration.
So something's up. Not only can people move their own routes, but Google is doing something to "fix" routes that are off in their system. Maybe they're both synched up to the same system, cos Mapquest also shows the correct route, but these systems are far from static. Especially with features like this (I actually appreciate the traffic thing more).
Hear hear. The ebay adwords were always the bottom of the barrel -- either words that no one else wanted, or that were moderately popular but eBay had paid so little that they were listed last.
It's sad, though, that I didn't even realize they were missing until this article came out. Sure enough, I can't think of a search in recent memory that had "Find it on eBay!" in google ads. Too bad, really; I wish I could've been more pleased with their absence.
Exactly. I was insanely pleased when I discovered that a great deal of retail hardware comes with those big, foldout "quickstart" manuals that have big pictures, direct people how to plug things in, and uses a very straightforward method to get people going.
Of course, they're usually complemented with the encyclopedia, which contains all of the rest of the information for actually using and maintaining their products. It doesn't help that nearly every company only includes support for their own brand of products, which most people don't own.
Those are the people who called. What about the people who didn't call because they just read the manual? It's an unknown -- a good manual will reduce call numbers, but if you didn't have a manual, would the numbers be higher? How much?
Lots of companies assume that since they're already paying for phone support, they might as well cut costs on the manual and let the phone people handle it. Which is dumb. For that guy who called and you pointed them to the manual, since it was already written down *and they could follow along,* not only was the answer quick (as you say, less than a minute), but you weren't kept on the phone while the customer tried out the solution.
That same customer could also have had another question but simply referred to the manual, instead of calling back again. The problem is the same as "happy customers," though -- happy customers don't complain, so you don't hear from them. If you only respond to the unhappy ones, you're ignoring a large portion of your customer base.
Well the caveat that they shouldn't announce until they're ready to drop the prices implies that people would actually buy the console at the current price :)
That's the thing -- people DO read manuals if they're good manuals. if they flip through it and it's just page after page of "Thank you for purchasing one of our products" with a list of all possible specs and languages, they're going to assume it's crap.
If it was actually relevant to their computer and covered the basics, they would know it was a reference. Sadly, good documentation (and I mean good, not just "listing everything") is usually one of the first things cut, despite the amount of money it can potentially save.
The Halo series is a pretty solid game for a console shooter. I dislike PC shooters for their uber-competitive nature, yet most console shooters are annoyingly awkward in multiplayer, which is where most of the fun comes from. Yet as someone who isn't head over heads for FPS games, and also doesn't hold Goldeneye in high regard, I probably had the most fun online in Halo 2 than any other multiplayer game I've played. There's enough consistency and interesting balance in the game that most games end up very entertaining. I think the game rates poorly for people who are very competitive, since it's not as open to clanning and grouping compared to a PC game. I also think the fact that it's based on a gamepad discourages people, especially those who are very focused on using a mouse and getting constant headshots. But for people who like FPS games but don't want to deal with uberweapons, there's enough variety and subtle balance in the game that I really, really enjoyed it. Most FPS games for a broad audience just shoot for cheese or wacky, like TimeSplitters. Or there's too much emphasis on giving everyone crazy weapons or weird customization that does nothing to really make the core game better (just a different avatar). Halo, I think, succeeded very well at being a broad-audience FPS, as I think its sales numbers show. I don't think it's "the best," but "best" is very subjective anyway. I appreciate that the game was serious about strategy and maps and weapon balance, without focusing on the elite gamers who only play for rank or achievements. I hope Halo 3 follows in those footsteps.
I think we're getting to the point where multiplayer games are more network-code with multiple-console support, rather than split screen. I personally love getting people together for a 4player game, since I have a large enough TV for it, and I've even gotten 8 people on it (4 player split screen with a vertical split-screen on the tv itself, with a pair of Xbox or GameCubes running it). A lot of fun, but I don't know how much focus there is for amateurs to code multiplayer games in general, let alone "party-style" games.
I mean, on Windows there's a surprising amount of small dev teams (or individuals) who craft mods or original games for FPS-style games and the entire game is based around multiplayer, but since the coders are relatively hardcore they're usually coding for an equally hardcore userbase. And most emulators cheat, by grafting netcode into the system to "emulate" having a 2nd player when it's really just another full system playing a copy of the game.
I'd love for coders to get interested in creating new original games that weren't just clones of old games, and I'd love it even more if they were coding multiplayer games (since paying $60 for a game you can only play when 3 people are over can be tough to stomach). But they're not doing it now, so it strikes me as a chicken/egg scenario. Are they not coding it because they're not interested, or because without the devkits it's too difficult? But if the devkits were free or easier to work with, would they suddenly start coding them (despite the focus being on emulators and classic game clones)?
I just think it's sad that most of the innovation for homebrew seems to be entirely unrelated to the gaming crowd. I mean, homebrew DS has MIDI over wifi and a handful of actual audio apps. That's impressive, to me, but I don't see much interest in original games.
So it's not a knockoff handheld, but most everything you list involves it just playing old games originally created for other systems. I'm not knocking the hardware, but most of the interest in the system is from people who just want to play old ROMs on the go.
The problem is that you would have to be a serious coder AND be serious about developing a game that people would want to pay for (even if it's cheap). The thing that always depresses me about homebrew is that it's literally overflowing with emulators and ROMs. If 5% of the homebrew population makes a stink about making it easier for people to load homebrew, and the other 95% is only interested in playing old SNES games, why would a company make the cost of entry any cheaper?
Most of the games I see for homebrew are more proof of concept than actual game, like an asteroids or breakout clone. While interesting, it seems that most gamers who want to code a game would rather just code it for a desktop OS.
The White House is blocking attempts from Congress to change their current path? I'm completely surprised. I mean, what's next, the idea that next-gen consoles could go down in price at some future point?
I'm curious about their actual influence. Kaplan and Harrison are high profile because they're well known by gamers, due to interviews and press releases. But do they really DO anything? I'm not saying that their jobs are unworthy or meaningless, of course, but it's not like Nintendo has really done anything interesting regarding its own marketing and advertising. A few interesting commercials every once in a while but it wouldn't surprise me if this is both a space issue and a shakeup. A lot of these people have been around since at least the GameCube launch, so maybe they're just "old."
On the other hand, it does make sense to move a marketing department to a city where a lot of activity occurs simply so you're "in on the action" without having to take the plane each time. There's a lot more exciting things happening in media in both cities compared to Redmond, which I'm sure has an influence on the move.
I love how this reads like an extortion racket. Who's to say that these pornographers aren't the same people creating the filtering software? After all, they would know exactly how to filter out what they sell.
"Hey lady, those are some nice kids you got there. T'would be a shame if they happened to see porn, wouldn't it?"
Depends on whose desktop we're talking about. A user who uses their computer for audio purposes? It's been a kludge for a while with UbuntuStudio only coming out recently. Inkscape for vector graphics has gotten pretty nice but it's also pretty recent.
Personally, I think the reason people haven't picked up Linux for home is the same reason that Ubuntu is doing well -- it makes installing extra crap you don't usually think about simple. I mean, MOST people who should otherwise be fine using Linux use their computers for entirely random things without really thinking about it. They buy a digital camera and don't research whether it's easily mountable in Linux -- they just snag something at Best Buy. They don't check to see if their printer is Linux compatible -- they just have the free one that was shipped with their computer, and is probably clogged anyway. In fact, the biggest problem is, in my opinion, more that people want to do a specific thing, and because they're on windows they look for windows solutions and either end up locked in due to a format or simply familiarity.
When I bought my mac, I thought I'd never be able to use it regularly because there was no free software out there for it. Of course, after I owned the thing for a few weeks I actually found where I look for said software and could actually install it and try it out. It was no different from Windows, or Linux really, except that since I was actually on the machine I was motivated to find software for it. If I was only using windows, why would I explore other options? Truly, the major motivation for my "switch" was because I was sick of how Windows handled audio.
Even now, I'd switch my windows laptop to Ubuntu if it wasn't for vendor lock-in (some VSTs that only work on Windows I've got installed on there and still use).
ah, very true! I do like just glancing at the router to see that everything is going well (and to quickly figure out if it's not).
I love the lights too. It makes me feel like I'm in a cockpit or other cool place where a lot of stuff happens. People buy audio hardware because of the blinking lights!
If this guy is so intent on fixing it, he should get out the soldering iron and disconnect them himself. Or do the thing everyone else does when something is blinking or flashing too much -- cover it up with electrical tape.
Depends on the winning condition, if you ask me. If a game is timed, and each round will always take X minutes, then assisting the loser should provide a greater challenge for the leader while evening things out, which should lead to a more interesting game. Since the win condition is to simply be better at the end of X minutes, making the most of that time should be worthwhile.
On the other hand, if it's the first to, say, 3 flags, a handicap that allows a losing team to walk faster or get better weapons completely defeats the point. If a strong team stomps a weak one, the game is over quickly and there's a good metric.
Ultimately, though, I think it would make the most sense to just do both. Just like the random map thing -- have static maps, and then also have random variations for those who want it. Have a handicap system for those who prefer it, and have a "straight up" version to let skill and luck shine above all else. Some game systems work well with handicaps and make team play worthwhile. Others just make the game longer (like monopoly home rules).
I don't hate them, but I do know that part of the fun of really getting into a game is knowing where you have to go on a map, what routes are best for certain activities, and what you have to watch out for.
If the map changes too much, each team is left spending the first few minutes of a match figuring out what's different and how that affects any strategies. For deathmatch, whoever spawns closest to the "best weapons" has an advantage until people figure out what's different.
I can understand some randomization being a good thing. It's more fun if a team can't just lock down a part of a map that has all of the "goodies" and simply wait for things to respawn. Similarly, good randomization would keep a map generally the same, but with a general change that's easy to grasp -- such as a rectangular map "bending" more, or a round map distorting into different shapes. Things like randomizing tunnel in/outs or doorway locations, though, just leads to confusion, and confusion leads to unhappy players.
Hey, they could call it eye-M!
Do you understand spoken japanese? I know a fair number of anime fans who prefer japanese subtitles simply because they don't understand what they're saying, and therefore don't realize that they're just as bad or cheaply done as US ones.
You mean like fighting Bahamut.. and then summoning Bahamut?
I honestly feel that the reason that 6 isn't addressed anymore is due to how the game isn't a set of characters and their melodramatic relationships, but rather more of a "group of adventurers from around the globe who group together to defeat evil." The WoR portion is largely what the "aftermath" of most games are, and there are signs of the world recovering. Kefka is largely absent other than the occasional show of power and prevention of any real order developing. When he is defeated, there are no questionable towns, no weird alliances or government programs that could, potentially, continue. The Esper thing is resolved and the world can essentially get back to normal.
Even worse for spin-offs, there's little to really address before the story occurs, and many people in the story have no story-based history. Celes has a minor amount of history in the main story, but everyone else is sort of convinced of the problem and realizes that action needs to be taken.
Compare that to 7, where a band of individuals is fighting a government power. The real enemy, though, is a crazy guy with a mom-complex. When he's defeated, the government programs and all of the technology associated with it don't just disappear. Likewise, there's a huge history of the conspiracies built up in the game. A lot of it is terribly cliche, but it's ripe for expansion in spin-off games.
To me, though, that's also why I really like 6 a lot more. It felt like a full game, and you play the story from beginning to end. You start basically right where the real action begins and where the empire starts to make its moves, and it ends after a hell of a lot happens -- after the climax, after the denoument, at the real "end." FF4 is similar, although it peppers the world with more "mysterious old things from an advanced civilization" which are really just holdover themes from FF1-3. 7 felt like a snapshot, like the story was picked up in the middle and here are the characters. They're introduced and typecast as soon as you meet them, and nothing really changes. There are some twists in the story but the events don't really change the world. In fact, the prevention of any major change is pretty much the underlying element. Compared to 6, where you ride huge changes all the way through (from the discovery of magic, to the use of magic, to the destruction of the world and how it changes past locations, up to people coming to grips with the change and growing past it).
Sadly, it means that it's not a good market for sequels, but I think that's simply testament to how good of a story it was.