Increasingly, national mainstream journalism has slowly had to come to terms with the fact that video games aren't just a quick fad for the kiddies, and are here to stay. They're even trying to do pieces that stray from simply "The Social Ramifications of Video Games," an important topic, to be sure, but one that's getting terribly repetative and tends to degenerate into a fire and brimstone sermon on Grand Theft Auto. I listen a lot to NPR, especially programs like Fresh Air, which do hour-long in-depth interviews and discussions with artists, politicians, entrepreneurs and other influential types. Generally, the quality of their interviews and the depth of their discussions is usually quite high, but every time they do a piece on video games—a topic they're trying out more and more—they fall flat on their face, and the result is embarrassing.
For one, only a small genre of video games exist in their eyes: online multiplayer games with audiences of generally wide demographics. Single-player games do not exist, console games NEVER exist, any games with narrative structure do not exist (and this is probably the area that I feel is in the most dire need of critique), games made outside of America do not exist (????). I can't count how many times the shows have fallen back on discussions revolving around the popularity of WoW and online versions of The Sims. It seems that the entire show is spent on trying to legitimize games as an adult "endeavor" (notice how I didn't use the word entertainment). All discussions tend to point toward the idea of gaming as a new form of social interaction, without any regard to the other 3/4s or so of gaming, which is a form of escapism, though still in its infancy, is more akin to literature, film, and other "legitimate" forms of art and entertainment.
I recently took a college course on the unique philosophical implications of film, it was a wounderfully thought-provoking class with hours of open discussion, and it openned up some new ways of thinking about the genre. A few of my classmates were gamers, and we would end up staying 45 minutes afterwords, doing our own little colloquium on games. Because of our interest in film, conversations generally revolved around exploring games as an extension of narrative media, along with the implications of interactivity. We quickly realized that there was a couse-full of material. Had I not been a graduating senior, I could imagine that we would have done a student-run colloquium on the subject.
So it comes to no surprise, that I'm a bit tired of always hearing games perceived, by mainstream media in thoughtful discusions, as ONLY a form of social interaction; again, a ligitimate topic, but also something that has little relevance to me, as well as a substantial percentage of the gaming community. The stigma against solitary gaming is great, so I can understand that in attempt to try to legitimize games as an adult endeavor, journalists try to avoid the concept altogether. That said, it also avoids a substantial part of the gaming community: the offline roll-players, the survival horror enthusiasts, the adventure gamers, and the like. At this point, the narrative trends in games are piss-poor, to put it lightly, and are in dire need of critique, something that no media seems interested in tackling, which really concerns me.
Seriously, I thought the constant ass-raping of Rockstar was more interesting and relevant than this crap.
Not that I either expect them to, or want them to, but if they can't win on this, they're going to be in serious trouble. After the total failour of the XBox 360 launch (quite possibly the weakest launch of any major console in terms of "trend setting"), and a pretty dismal year for their shareholders, noone's going to take them seriously in new, younger markets anymore. In other news, their market share is slipping (slowly, but still on a negative trend), and national headlines (NBC nightly news) were made yesterday when serious flaws in windows security were discovered. They're currently losing the HD media wars badly. They're on the cusp of losing all their major upcoming battles, and with all the money they have, you'd think they'd find a quick way of bailing themselves out, but I think MS have really bitten off more than they can chew. Sure, they'll get a chunk of change from "Vista", later this year, but that's only because they've got one market locked in, their break-in power to new markets, on the other hand, has been pretty bad as of late.
They're not going to have as easy a time killing off iTunes as they did Netscape. They got IE in the door because of large businesses with a "no touch" attitude towards new installs on their computers, so they'd stick to the pre-installed IE. Their main demographic in THIS battle, however, is a highly capable, No Fear, computer savvy youth who previously had the RIAA worried by their increased downloads of illegal music from virtually no-named services. This isn't the same crowd with the, "if it's not broke, don't fix it", this is a demographic that's not afraid to go out of their way to get what they want. So, this time, they're really going to have to compete in terms of style and trend, something they've never been good at. Their first move seems pretty clueless to me: hire on a former music content provider (MTV), which is currently regarded by today's youth as being "so yesterday"; for you're spokesman, get on board a washed up teen idol who may have hit it big with 14 year old girls in 1998, but who's name is going to insite a resounding "Justin who?" response from the same demographic today. I mean, Justin Timberlake coule be Dick Clark for all they care—yes, pop culture moves THAT FAST. And for the grand finale, name your service, as someone said, something associated with gross bodily function. Seriously, my first reaction to the name was "ewww", it conjure's up images of some guy badly needing to take a dump. This reminds me of a funny scene from a commedy a few years back, "Nothing to Lose", in which the main character, a marketting specialist, warns one of his clients, "Excriment is the last thing people are going to want to think about when buying cookies", I think this holds true in this case too. Apple captured millions with sillohette's dancing around with iPods, how popular would they have been if the sillohette's were holding their crotches, swaying back and forth saying, "I need to pee"?
Ummm, say again? AIM? What kind of crack are you smoking? AIM is still by far the biggest instant messanging service. And from what I've heard, Google Messanger is overtaking it by leaps and bounds at the moment. Does MSN messanger still exist? I don't know anyone who uses it.
I'm TOTALLY with this guy on the fact that gaming is escapism. I play games to get AWAY from having to interact with people all the time. I think there are two very very different cultures of gamers: one of group gamers, and one of solitary gamers. For me, gaming is almost wholely a solitary enterprise. Sure, I do get together and Smash with friends from time to time, but I end up getting suckered into it.
For one thing, I'm beginning to see a pretty disturbing trend in some people today that do so much social gaming that, pretty much, their entire social life revolves around playing games. Now, I'm great friends with a lot of solitary gamers, and we'll get together and talk about RPGs we're playing, analyze systems and discuss the philosophy behind different entertainment media (a few of my friends and I took a college class on this, revolving around film, and we spent hours sitting around applying it to gaming); but in all of this, we weren't actually gaming, we were enjoying the conversation, which just happened to be about gaming, sort of like a group of avid book readers sitting around and discussing their latest novel. But, unfortunately, I see a lot of guys who don't want to talk or really interact with eachother, they become either bored or anxious without a mutual activity. I have one longtime, close friend, for instance, that the first thing he asks when we get together, is, "So, what'chya wanna do?"
Anyway, I like my escapism, and I feel more and more, these days, that unless you play games socially, you're some kind of pittiful, wierdo, sissy boy. I really like becoming extremely emmersed in the atmosphere created by a game, and I can't really do that easilly if I'm having to interact with anyone. I don't read books or listen to music as a form of social interaction, hell, TV/Movies are only about 50/50, why should gaming?
Everyone forgets the BIGGEST reason why BetaMax failed: STORAGE CAPACITY. It's simple: VHS has the ability to hold well over 2 hours of video, BetaMax can hold 90mins MAXIMUM: one medium is more than a feature length film, one is less. Don't get me wrong, for quality, BetaMax is far superior, the TV station where I work, uses BetaCAM exclusively, I don't think they even own a VHS recorder. But when it came time for the film industry to decide whether to put E.T. on one tape or two, it's pretty obvious why they chose to get behind VHS instead.
Here are some other obvious media wins:
CD vs. Minidisc - MiniDisc comes out quite a bit after CDs are already beginning to be entrenched, they hold less data (bad for use as computer media), use shoddy (at the time) audio compression, and their ingrained ability to be re-written worries the recording industry.
MP3 vs. Ogg - MP3s come out well before Ogg, become a household name (thanks to Metallica and a bunch of silly, high profile lawsuits), and require MUCH less processing power (ie: don't sap battery life on portable media players). Ogg Vorbis, though sounding better, has one of the dumbest sounding names on the face of the planet (a name can make or break a product). Let's think about this: "ogg", for me, conjures up thoughts of cavement beating their chests and yelling "Ooog, Ogg, Bunga!". "Vorbis" is the name of an evil, sadistic cleric from a Terry Prachet novel. In the end, strangely enough, it's AAC that wins the day.
In this case, it's reversed. Blu-Ray is quite a bit higher capacity, and is at least capable of being superior in EVERY way (that is, unless Microsoft is successful in sabotaging it's usability) to HD-DVD.
I know some people are going to laugh, but Blu-Ray has one other thing going for it: a catchy name. This WILL make a huge difference, and may be even big enough to be a deciding factor. "HD-DVD" is clunky to say, and will sound, to most consumers, like a new media based on old technology (think "Double Density 3.5" disks). If people are going to spend their money on upgrading their media, they're going to want to feel like they're actually really getting something new out of it. Blu-Ray is a sexy name, it's not inherently "techy", and will fit right in to the mainstream, it's the kind of name people will WANT to use in day-to-day conversation, because it just sounds cool. Word of mouth is extremely important. When I hear the worlds "Blue Ray" I think of some futuristic sci-fi laser that, like, kills people, or at the very least, will read my mind.
I seriously think the name alone could have a huge impact.
Anyone find it suspicious that this news comes just 2 weeks after NBC signed on with the iTMS? Not to mention that Microsoft just announces an online media retailer of it's own to compete with iTMS. I was very surprised a few weeks ago when NBC showed up on iTMS, and wondered, at the time, whether the two companies had had a falling out. Apple as a whole may not be much of a threat to Microsoft, but iTMS most definitely is—besides Blu-Ray/PS3, it's probably the biggest thing standing in their way of inevitable media domination. Currently, with the unbelievable promise that iTMS is showing, Microsoft's future in controlling media content is looking pretty bleak, and it might have been that NBC jumped ship.
Think about it, the TV/Film industry sat back and watched the music industry go down the toilet due to their resistance of digital media, and they don't want to make the same mistake. iTMS offers a simple introduction into online media distrobution NOW, where-as microsoft sits back, shooting it's mouth off, trying to slow things down. They failed to offer HD compatable media with their game system, and they have failed to deliver online media distrobution at a time when the market is extremely ripe for development. It's obvious that they can't be counted on to carry any allied companies into the future of media. NBC, in attempts to avoid a similar debacle to that of the music industry, wants onboard now. Whatever promises MS makes for the future of online media distrobution cannot be trusted to be delivered before the industry takes off without them.
Interesting thing, on a "money show" the other day, there was a guy going on and on about how, even though 2005 was the year of Google and Apple, that 2006 would undoubtedly be the year of Microsoft: his reasoning? XBox360 and Vista. Seeing as how the XBox360 has had quite possibly the worst press of any major console I've ever seen (and that's without the two other competitors who will be jumping on board within in the next year) I can't see how stockholders can get really excited about investing cash based on it's "success". And Vista is possibly the biggest unknown the industry has ever been faced with.
Not to mention, a form of civil disobedience, or something like it (since this isn't a legal issue). Seriously, it's the same kind of thing as a black person, back in the day, drinking in a "white only" drinking fountain for the specific purpose of going to jail and raising public awareness as to how bad things are.
Frank Zappa did something similar, actually, not too long before he died. He released an album called "Frank Zappa meets the Mothers of Prevention", which was all about music censorship at the time when the music industry was currently going through the hearings with Tipper Gore. He put in one track that consisted of a goofy voice yelling, "Fuck! Fuck! Fuck!... SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX!" and one instrumental with the title "Alien Oriface". In this case, though, he released the album a few days before the advisory campaign got started, with the whole front of the album being one big advisory sticker.
Yeah, I think the film producers probably purposefully put in content to get it rated NC-17. I haven't seen it, but I bet it's something like, "And here's an example of material that will get you banned..." followed by goofy sex scene or over-the-top violence. Sure it's a PR stunt, but that's also the point of the film; raising public awareness. Also, irony is a great way of getting across you're point. It'll probably work too.
I totally agree that Aperture is not an image editing program and is meant as a workflow program. That said, Photoshop doesn't exactly target the pro photography market directly. Photoshop has become more of a graphic design tool with digital darkroom functions built-in, but the interface is setup much more for graphic designers. Photographers, unless they're doing collage's or massive manipulations (which basically falls in the category of graphic design, for practical concern), have little to no need for layers, filters (except for sharpenning), lighting effects, blending options, or about 3/4 of the tools. The options that are most useful to photographers are adjustment layers (with layer mask), burn/dodge tools, healing tool, and unsharp masking.
I love Adobe's products, especially photoshop. I, myself, am a graphic designer, so it works perfectly for my needs. But I work along with a lot of photographers, and do a lot of digital darkroom work as well. The other day, I had to go through a plethora of RAW files and convert them to jpeg for web use. In Photoshop, it's a nightmare, with having to record actions. It's slow, it's inconvenient, and inflexable. That said, it WOULD be very nice, for once, to be able to do some basic editting on RAW photos, directly, without changing the image data. I've been screaming for a program to introduce a means of spot-toning as a non-destructive function—something like a "healing adjustment layer"—and the same for sharpenning and burning/doging.
Since most photographers don't need 3/4 of the functions in Photoshop, and Aperture is already a convenient workflow/RAW converter, I do hope they consider adding in the few editting functions that photographers do regularly use. Yes, Aperture is not meant as an editing tool, but if you could have you're editing software right inside your workflow/RAW converter, that would be extremely convenient. Let's face it, switching back and forth between two programs is tedious and irritating. And professional photographers, like the ones I work with, in doing commercial work, don't really have the time to be constantly juggling files around multipul applications all the time. There is an obvious need for a program that does both editing and organization, which is why Adobe has been putting so much energy, as of late, into their image browser. So Aperture is an organization program with some limited editing functions (well, RAW file options), and Photoshop is an image editor with a limited organization system. Whoever can bridge the gap eligently, first, will take the market, I garentee. It's going to be very dificult for Adobe, who is having to play, primarily, to the graphic design market, and who is already so entrenched in their interface design, to be able to bridge the gap cleanly. That said, Apple has a long way to go before their software replaces photoshop's editing functionality for photography, and currently it seems that it goes against their philosophy.
I am not one to like "all-in-one" applications, which combine unrelated functions. But in this case, the two functions will always be used together: if you're going to edit photography, you're going to need to convert/organize it, and many times you're going to be doing both at the same time. So this is one instance where combining multipul functions really makes a lot of sense.
It's their perogitive, and the way I see it, everyone wins. The games won't cost much; I'm guessing NES games will probably be $3 tops, $5 for SNES, $10 tops for N64. GameCube discs (and controllers, btw) will be compatable with the Revolution, so that will not be in their downloadable catalog.
I think the idial solution would be to sell the NES titles really cheap, around $1-$2 like iTunes songs/videos, everyone will find the price so neglegable, they'll start downloading a ton. The comment about them rereleasing old NES games for $10 for the GBA is a little different, they have to make GBA games at least somewhat competative with their modern counterparts, and they usually countered this by updating the graphics or adding new features. These will be the original games, in their original form, for the original system, just emulated. There will be no cartridge to manufacture either, which they charge a bit for, alone. I'm also predicting that the basic system will come with a certain amount of "credits" to download a few old games, just to get people onboard. Question is, now that the GameBoy is becoming unsupported, will original GameBoy games be playable? I'm guessing that they'll put the functionality in there for them to be, but won't release any games until the GBA SP is discontinued.
I'm a Liberal, and I read the Post daily. I think, however, that the news media probably, as a whole, tends to have a leaning (I wouldn't go as far to say bias), toward the left simply because (and this is not meant to gauge conservative few points) the idea of empassionately assessing multipul viewpoints tends to be a process championed more by progressive ways of thinking. But the heart of it, I think the Post, whether left or right, practices GOOD journalism. The job of a journalist is to be a voice of communication for the people as a whole, so theoretically, a very good news source could position itself in such a way, that everyone thinks it's on their side. I'm pretty surprised, and actually a bit glad, to see conservatives think that the Post reflects more their views, because I think it reflects mine. Of course, that's not the point of journalism, but it feels that, at some level, they've earned the trust of a lot of people on both sides, which is very important.
My number one news source, however, is the News Hour. I don't watch network TV news: CNN is filth, CBS, NBC, and ABC are fluff (even if everyone says they're left leaning, I don't care, they lost THIS liberal), and FOX is made up of a bunch of neoconservative lobbiests—seriously, half of their stuff is made up of former conservative political advisors... Yes, I'm looking at you, Bill Kristol! The News Hour, and the other PBS news shows (Washington Week, Now, and Charlie Rose) feel like the only TV news that doesn't talk to me like I'm in 6th grade, and doesn't try to compress complicated events into 1 minute soundbytes. And when I watch news, I don't need to be entertained. I'm honestly excited and interested in learning about events at hand. Tell it to me straight. PBS is the only one that really does this anymore, the rest is just entertainment.
Well, currently I'm trying my hand at Star Ocean: Till the End of Time, which is a sort of an action RPG, and it's really giving my ass a pounding. It's been a long time since I died in a game, as well, and even longer since I died in a dungeon (with RPGs/Adventures/FPSs these days, dungeons seem to be mostly just time consuming obsticles which don't really pose any real threat). It's not a perfect game, the storyline is not for everyone (kinda "meh", IMO), but it has it's charm, and the gameplay is very engaging and difficult. Probably the hardest RPG I've played since FFIV (hard type). From what I've read online, it's been giving pretty much everyone a thrashing. And it's not a game you can rape by munchkining; leveling does practically nothing, you have to rely on your own skill to progress through it. Very satisfying.
The point is, though, that Nintendos franchise games tend to be more orginal than most companies' "originals". Every Zelda game is different enough, in gameplay and content, to be a completely different series, it's just tied together with the same characters and the same basic plot (of which is pretty inconsequential to the value of the series). The differences are even more stark in any Mario game. Warioware is one of the most unique games (now a series) ever made. Sure, it's a huge franchize, what's wrong with that? Disney made it big with children and adults alike for decades with a silly little mouse. If the game isn't meant to revolve around it's narrative, than it makes sense and is comforting to have repetition of characters. In these series (Metroid maybe slightly more involved), the characters and story are just a vessel for the gameplay, which time and time again, have been proven to be unique and fun.
And let's get this straight:
"Kiddie" = ages 1-10 & 21+
Mature = ages 11-20
Nintendo makes games for kids, adults, and stoners.
Ya know, I never thought about it much, but I think you're right. It's not like Nintendo to release information on the real meat of a product long before it's release, yet they did it with the controller. This seems like a very poor business practice, seeing that by the time the Revolution does come out, the buzz about the new controller would have simmered down. Wouldn't it have been better to announce the innovative controller like 4-8 weeks before it's launch? I smell something fishy in all of this. I can only guess that the big N has something else they're not saying.
One thing I've been chuckling at was the big statements by Microsoft and Sony that their next systems will be over 100x more powerfull than their last system, while Nintendo waved a flag and says, "and our system will only be about 3x more powerful". My thought is that Nintendo was realizing that Sony/Microsoft's statements were completely fabricated (after all, with what variables do you chose to measure the "power" of a system?), and that when people actually sit down in play, their first reaction to the system is, "wow, this system is much better than their last, about 3 or 4 times more powerfull!". Then, when the Revolution finally comes out, it will have much more similar speed and graphical prowess to the other two. I mean, come on, the demo shots I've seen from the 360 and the PS3, while being really pretty, seriously, are they completely mind-blowing considering the general graphical abilities of our era? No. Are they even THAT much more amazing than the GameCube and XBox? Eh, not particularly. Hell, the GameCube looked good enough for me, though it's time for an upgrade, 3 or 4 times more "power" (whatever that means) will be more than enough for me. Traditionally, when you look back on it, all the launch titles of a console are not incredibly distinguishable from the last year of titles from the previous generation: Mario 3 often gets compared to early SNES games, FF6 is often pitted against PS and Saturn titles, FF8 -> FF10, anyone? No big deal. Traditionally, the biggest gaps are from the launch titles to the mid-late games, once developers really get their legs for it. Super Mario World vs. Chrono Trigger, damn. Duck Hunt vs. Mario 3, different world. No system has made a giant leep in technical prowess on it's launch, and I'm pretty convinced from the PS3 and XBox360, that we won't see one this time around either. On the flip side, that's ALL that Sony and Micrsoft have been screeming about. I think some people are going to be in for a big dissapointment. Nintendo, on the other hand, isn't making ANY promisses about technical prowess, but selling their system to the public by promissing innovative game play, something I'm a lot more willing to buy (especially coming from Nintendo), then promisses about how some new graphical UI is going to change my life.
Also, HDTV is almost totally unneccessary, IMO. It was so obviously hype generated by media hardware manufacturers in order to find a new product to sell, since DVD profits have been declining. On a computer, where most images on the screen are static and don't move for long periods of time, high resolution is important, but when you have constantly moving imagery like in a movie or a video game, the human eye fails to notice blockier or more pixilated images because in the next frame, the position will have changed. This is why TV is still acceptable for most people, and is about 4x lower resolution than the computers they use. Sure, HDTV will look slightly better, but it's not going to revolutionize viewing pleasure. And seriously, I've not really seen a lot of public outcry, I've seen a lot of companies (and now the US government) trying to stir up public sentiment against current television technology, and failing misserably. I never needed HDTV in order to enjoy my video games before, why should I now?
Nintendo's not offering a replacement to the GameCube, as has been the previous trend for systems, but an alternative that also happens to include the har
This is some scary shit. Republicans always hid behind the "small government and uninhibitted trade" arguement, but for at least the past 20 years, it's been total bullshit. Now, we've found a way to do something that's effectively the opposite of communism: tax the people in order to pay the businesses. Yea, $3 billion from the government to the people! That money doesn't come out of thin air, the comes out of our taxes. So this redistribution is in such a way that will guarentee that people continue to buy televisions. So, in the ecconomic scheme, where does all that money end up? In the hands of big businesses like Phillips, Sony, Magnavox, etc. [Public -> Government -> Public (specifically to buy item) -> Phillips/Sony/Magnavox]; or to put it in short form: [Public -> Phillips/Sony/Magnavox] through government redistrobution. IE: money taken from lower, middle, and upper classes, and given to the upper classes, most of which will NOT trickle down. Any fool can see that the effect of this is a widening of the income gap and nothing else. The current income gap is the worst it's ever been in US history. We have a deficit that MY grandchildren (I'm 24) will still have even if we were to start paying it off now. BTW: most TV manufacturers are located in Japan, and probably very soon, China. Great, so lets just create more reasons to send all of our money out of our ecconomy, WOO HOO!
I remember hearing in a world history class about a state that started throwing money at people for luxuries like theatrical events, public executions, and other feel-good services, in order to take the common folks' attention away from the people who were dieing in the streets. Oh yeah, that was the Roman Empire just before its total collapse. The similarity is uncanny: Katrina destroys New Orlands, leaving a thousand dead, and hundreds of thousands homeless; public opinion of the government falls; government throws luxury items at the people to keep them quiet, fat and happy so they wont notice that their neighbors down at the local shelter are starving, and their children are coming home in body bags. This is truly history repeating itself.
Bush made this big speech about how we were going to do "what it takes" to stabilize the victims of Katrina. The question was asked, "where do we get that money from?" Since then we've increased military spending, cut funding to programs benefiting the very poor we're trying to help, expect to lower taxes, and have been unable to come up with any way of doing "what it takes", and now they want to put $3 billion into increasing TV reception! Ted Stevens, my [Alaska's] great senator who is the spokesman for this television bill, is the same guy who just yesterday, in a dramatic, teary-eyed sherade, threatened to quit if congress removed funding for two worthless multi-billion dollar bridges in the transportation bill. I'll tell ya, I live in Alaska, those bridges are a JOKE: one connects a 150 person village to an air strip (noble cause, sure, but the village itself didn't even ask for it or even care!), the other bridge lessons the commute time from Anchorage to an UNINHABITED region across the bay--guess whose friends own all the property in that area, expecting future developement? Go to hell, Ted Stevens!
Meanwhile, Don Young, our lone house representative, when explained that a majority of Alaskans were in favor of giving the bridges back, exclaimed, "They [Alaskans] can all kiss my ear!". This guy's been in for 20+ years, nothing will bring him down. If Young asks his voters to suck his cock, they all just get on their knees; I hate my state.
Sorry this got off topic, I'm just incredibly jaded by this and all the events that have lead up to this.
There are a couple of other considerations to take into account, mainly is, what do you enjoy doing with your time? I've spent a significant part of my life making digital audio and graphics FOR FUN (well, and for radio and theatre), so hell, I might as well get paid while I'm doing it. And now I am. I landed a private contract a few months back doing sound design for a fairly small, but published console game manufacturer doing sound design and bits of voice acting. I'm fresh out of college with a music degree with a specialization in electroacoustic music composition. My intention is to eventually move into doing scoring (for any kind of media), but I realize I need to get my foot in the door first. I'm not getting paid big bucks to do this, and I'm having to work like a dog at it, a few weeks ago I had to put out 50+ sound effects in over 24 hours, and yes, I was working MOST of that time. But I enjoyed every minute of it, as I always have. And I sorta wish they would give me another huge load like that every week.
Why does America tend to promote the life of working at some dull desk job making big bucks and enjoying life only when you're with you're family? Personally, I come from a family of self-imployed artists. My father's a freelance photographer, my mother's a private consultant. Sure, we just get by, but they love their work and find it rewarding enough to choose this life. It seems more and more to me like most people believe that you're not supposed to like your work, if you do, then you're just playing around and not really working, like if you're enjoying your work then you're family must not be good enough for you. Bullshit, I think people should try to find things that they can get enjoyment out of, after all, they're more likely to do better work, therefor, it's better for everyone.
Second thing is that some people don't mind working 70+ hours a week. I'm the kind of guy who, when I used to do stage managing for theatre, loved the rush of "hell week", it gave me structure, which I tend to lack, and a feeling of purpose. At the same time, I was working 80h+ a week. This is more important to me than making a buttload of money. As long as you can support yourself (and at this point in my life, I don't need to support anyone else), who cares? Sure, I might not be able to buy a lot of luxury items, but then again, my day to day life is more enjoyable, so I really don't need as much. Obviously, if you can't support yourself, that's a problem, but Americans tend to believe that there's more to ecconomic life than supporting yourself and whoever else you're supporting, but also supporting all your stupid habits and luxury needs too... screw that, I'm going to spend a large percentage of my life working, I might as well enjoy it.
I've been working with Finale since 2.0, and it makes me cry. Coda/MakeMusic (sorta like Puff Daddy -> P Diddy) has to be one of the worst software manufacturers on the planet. Every upgrade has a mandatory propriatary format overhall, so if you don't upgrade along with other people you're sharing with, you're screwed. It's as if Adobe suddenly made it impossible to share Photoshop CS2 files with CS1. Add one of the worst UIs ever designed, one of the clunkiest midi data entry systems ever devised (drawing in midi data on an included draw program to a grid with no snap-to properties with only numeric reference... holy shit that is bad). Now they've partnered up with the single worst orchestral synth manufacturer on the market, Garratin, which is just laughably bad. Maybe if Adobe or Apple released a program, they'd do it right and sign on with East-West Quantum Leap instead of Gary Garratin.
All that, and it's STILL better than Sibelius, which may have a better interface, but it's compositional philosophy is so f**ked up it's just breathtaking. For example, if you want to add an extra beat in, you have to completely re-write a measure, how screwed up is that? It's like if your text editor made you re-write a sentance every time you wanted to add an adjective. Two days on Sibelius and I was scrambling back to Finale.
I've been praying to God for Adobe to hit the music notation market for years now. They're interface design is second to none (even possibly apple). My experience with Adobe's pro software has been even better than Apple, I'm still not so sure about the UI design of Final Cut Pro, for instance. Either way, though, if either company went into the music notation market, I'd buy it in an instant. "Notes" would be an overnight success. The entire music community hates Finale, but is forced to use it anyway. Make Music and Sibelius would literally die overnight if either Adobe or Apple would release a notation app.
Nintendo, cel shaded? I'm curious of exactly what games you're talking about, since I've had a GC for a few years now and I've only played one cel shaded game, and that was Wind Waker, the only other one I can think of is Paper Mario 2. I've honestly played far more cel shaded games on the PS2 then on the GameCube. Sure, first party Nintendo games are meant to be "comic" in style, but very very few of them use cel shading. Then there's the discussion of what "cel shading" is, cel shading is just a graphic technique, and it's probably as widely varied as traditional textured polygon graphics. It can be used in a variety of ways and achieve numerous effects. Just compare the cell shading of Wind Waker (which, I might add, is probably the most unique use of cell shading I've yet to see) with Wild Arms 3 or Dark Cloud. Sure, they both may look cartoony, but similarly, I don't see anyone complaining that Cowboy Bebop is trying to look anything like Mickey Mouse.
I just think you're falling victim to your own arguement (of which I agree with). Instead of sticking with and examining the nuances of a certain graphical style, most companies tend to shift to extremes of realism to surrealism, when they've hammered one particular style to death. Nintendo, on the other hand, has been one of the only game companies that has not been wildly influenced by the latest trend, and tends to have a consistant aesthetic. When other companies were making Golden Eye, Unreal Tournament, Final Fantasy VII, and Half-life, they were doing Starfox 64, Mario 64, F-Zero X, and Majora's Mask. You have to remember that Nintendo is, and always has been, primarily a cartoon and comic based game company, in the same way that Pixar doesn't make realistic films. Sure, there's always Nintendogs and a few others that break the mould, but they're few and far between (and I wouldn't exactly put Nintendogs in the same genre as Halo 2). Their primary audiences are <12 and >20, children who either innocently accept the surealistic cartoon, and adults who are eager to retain some of that "lost" innocence. When I was little, I had trouble accepting it, but now I realize that my parents really did enjoy taking me to see a good cartoon at the movie theater, not just because I wanted to see it, but because they wanted to as well. Cel shading is a technique that "draws" objects in a way similar to traditional cartoons. If you're trying to make a game that draws on the feel of hand drawn caracatures, it's a pretty good way of doing it. I'm surprised that Nintendo hasn't done it more. Remember Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island? They developed some new advanced graphical techniques specifically designed to make the game world more hand drawn and innoncent looking in a very similar way that cel shading is used for Wind Waker today. Their aesthetic has changed very little over the years, as neither have many historic film and cartoon companies.
The teenage years aren't good for Nintendo, many mainstreem teens are likely to avoid cartoony looking things for fear that they may be seen as immature at a time of life when the most important thing is gaining independance and the recognition of being a mature "adult". At this time, "tastes" tend to swing wildly as far away from the caricaturistic as possible, which is why "ultra-realism", depicting all that was forbodden to them as children (violence, sex, language, etc.), is the style of choice. Teens have something to prove to the world, as they should, it's their time to gain self-recognition as an individual. But it's for this reason that the game industry has "turned" to ultra-realism. It's actually always been there, but it's hard for us to look back on the 8-bit era and see anything as "realistic", as we'll probably look back at the 2000's as an "age of innocence" come 2020.
I hate to come across looking like a fanboy of any company (who does?) but more and more Nintendo is emerging, in my mind, as the most cohesive and steady company in the industry. I watch as these Halos and Maddens come
I don't deny global warming, but I have faith in our ability to deal with it.
That's the problem, Americans have too much faith and not enough reason. You say you care, but then act as if the problem will fix itself on its own. I don't know if there is any explanation for this viewpoint other than laziness and apathy. Faith never put food on anyone's table, and it sure as hell won't fix any environmental problems.
That's interesting to know. I've actually never heard of BetaCAM, then again, I have no connection to the pro video market, where I'm guessing it was most widely used. But for the pro audio market, there was extensive use of BetaMAX, partially because SONY especially designed ADC/DAC units to be able to convert audio to be stored on the video track as two extra digital tracks (enabling a fairly efficant way of recording and storing quadrophonic audio). I don't know if this same system can be used with BetaCAM tapes, but I do know that this system was widely used in the pro audio industry in the late 80s and early 90s before CD burners, ADAT, and hard drive system became readily available.
Many professional formats started off as consumer formats. DAT and MD are two examples. In the states, both are virtually dead in the basic consumer electronics market, and are used primarilly as field recorders for audio technicians. I've used both, and they both have their benefits (DAT for fidelity, MD for candidness and portability). All audio people I know who have MD recorders bought into small consumer-marketed devices, insead of the larger recorders aimed at professionals because fidelity is not MDs strong-point, portability is, which can be more important and some circumstances--if you're looking for fidelity, you get a DAT recorder or hard disk system, not a portable MD deck. So, the consumer grade models were of more use to audio professionals than the ones actually designed for professional use.
Similarly, BetaMAX was widely used by the AUDIO world because it offered a reasonably portable (as apposed to tape machines) and cheep solution for multi-channel audio. For the evolving electroacoustic music world, the need for multi-channel audio was becoming more and more prevolent, and Betamax offers 4 channels (2 analog, 2 digital through the video channel). This wasn't its originally intended use, but it became so widely used that SONY produced ADC/DAC decks to be able to digitally encode and decode the video channel into 2 digital audio channels. I recently had a job converting old Betamax tapes from the early 90s into stereo to be put on CD. Even for professionals, price and portability are of high importance for certain kinds of needs, so consumer products can become very good alternates (or even standards) for professional use. I've never heard of anyone who used BetaCAM, maybe it was widely used in the video field, but I've never heard of it being used in the audio industry. I don't proclaim to be an expert on this, however, so I may be mistaken.
I see neither BetaMAX or MD as failed standards, both had success outside of the US, and both became successfull inside the US for specialized needs. So, as for the current issue, my prediction is, though it's probably too soon to be sure, that HD DVD may be able to take the US market, but BluRay will unquestionably become the standard in Japan and probably Europe. I hope Microsoft doesn't think that the XBox 360 will "make" HD DVD, because there is very little sales of the XBox in Japan, and it only has reasonable success in Europe. Even if it doesn't do as well as expected, the PS3 will sell reasonably in the US. In the end, though, neither console (or any computer system) will decide the media standard on its own. It will be whoever can sell more video player decks to the 30+ crowd. Sony is one of the top distributers of video decks, Microsoft an Intel aren't even on the charts, their input is virtually irrelivent. I'm going to put my money on BluRay.
The only reason why physical CD sales is higher is because it's there, and it's tradition. If tomorrow, your favorite artist (or an artist you've followed for a while) stopped selling CDs and went to digital, I bet you'd get on iTunes and buy it there. Sure, there'll be a few who don't know about iTunes, but also consider this, artists would make something like 65% on their music without a CD distributer, instead of the measily %5 they do now, meaning that even if they held onto 1/13th of their audience (not a problem for an established band with an audience), they wouldn't lose money. Furthermore, even though musicians are humans, they're also artists, and many artists already sacrifice a lot of their money for social causes. I could imagine an artist like R.E.M or Springstein (if those particular musicians weren't already on indy lables that they have good relationships with), jumping at the chance to break loose from the chains of the physical music industry.
And I agree, Apple should just start their own label, "iMusic Inc." or, "iTunes Records", or be done with it and buy out Apple Records once and for all. There's a lot of money to be had in the music industry, even if you're better to your artists than most companies are, and even if they broke even on a record company, the enormously possitive PR it would generate would easilly sell many iPods. I have no question that they'll start a record company fairly soon, it's only natural since getting their foot into the music market.
Slashdot Mirror
Increasingly, national mainstream journalism has slowly had to come to terms with the fact that video games aren't just a quick fad for the kiddies, and are here to stay. They're even trying to do pieces that stray from simply "The Social Ramifications of Video Games," an important topic, to be sure, but one that's getting terribly repetative and tends to degenerate into a fire and brimstone sermon on Grand Theft Auto. I listen a lot to NPR, especially programs like Fresh Air, which do hour-long in-depth interviews and discussions with artists, politicians, entrepreneurs and other influential types. Generally, the quality of their interviews and the depth of their discussions is usually quite high, but every time they do a piece on video games—a topic they're trying out more and more—they fall flat on their face, and the result is embarrassing.
For one, only a small genre of video games exist in their eyes: online multiplayer games with audiences of generally wide demographics. Single-player games do not exist, console games NEVER exist, any games with narrative structure do not exist (and this is probably the area that I feel is in the most dire need of critique), games made outside of America do not exist (????). I can't count how many times the shows have fallen back on discussions revolving around the popularity of WoW and online versions of The Sims. It seems that the entire show is spent on trying to legitimize games as an adult "endeavor" (notice how I didn't use the word entertainment). All discussions tend to point toward the idea of gaming as a new form of social interaction, without any regard to the other 3/4s or so of gaming, which is a form of escapism, though still in its infancy, is more akin to literature, film, and other "legitimate" forms of art and entertainment.
I recently took a college course on the unique philosophical implications of film, it was a wounderfully thought-provoking class with hours of open discussion, and it openned up some new ways of thinking about the genre. A few of my classmates were gamers, and we would end up staying 45 minutes afterwords, doing our own little colloquium on games. Because of our interest in film, conversations generally revolved around exploring games as an extension of narrative media, along with the implications of interactivity. We quickly realized that there was a couse-full of material. Had I not been a graduating senior, I could imagine that we would have done a student-run colloquium on the subject.
So it comes to no surprise, that I'm a bit tired of always hearing games perceived, by mainstream media in thoughtful discusions, as ONLY a form of social interaction; again, a ligitimate topic, but also something that has little relevance to me, as well as a substantial percentage of the gaming community. The stigma against solitary gaming is great, so I can understand that in attempt to try to legitimize games as an adult endeavor, journalists try to avoid the concept altogether. That said, it also avoids a substantial part of the gaming community: the offline roll-players, the survival horror enthusiasts, the adventure gamers, and the like. At this point, the narrative trends in games are piss-poor, to put it lightly, and are in dire need of critique, something that no media seems interested in tackling, which really concerns me.
Seriously, I thought the constant ass-raping of Rockstar was more interesting and relevant than this crap.
This is truly the Lark's Tongue in Bill Gates' ass.
Not that I either expect them to, or want them to, but if they can't win on this, they're going to be in serious trouble. After the total failour of the XBox 360 launch (quite possibly the weakest launch of any major console in terms of "trend setting"), and a pretty dismal year for their shareholders, noone's going to take them seriously in new, younger markets anymore. In other news, their market share is slipping (slowly, but still on a negative trend), and national headlines (NBC nightly news) were made yesterday when serious flaws in windows security were discovered. They're currently losing the HD media wars badly. They're on the cusp of losing all their major upcoming battles, and with all the money they have, you'd think they'd find a quick way of bailing themselves out, but I think MS have really bitten off more than they can chew. Sure, they'll get a chunk of change from "Vista", later this year, but that's only because they've got one market locked in, their break-in power to new markets, on the other hand, has been pretty bad as of late.
They're not going to have as easy a time killing off iTunes as they did Netscape. They got IE in the door because of large businesses with a "no touch" attitude towards new installs on their computers, so they'd stick to the pre-installed IE. Their main demographic in THIS battle, however, is a highly capable, No Fear, computer savvy youth who previously had the RIAA worried by their increased downloads of illegal music from virtually no-named services. This isn't the same crowd with the, "if it's not broke, don't fix it", this is a demographic that's not afraid to go out of their way to get what they want. So, this time, they're really going to have to compete in terms of style and trend, something they've never been good at. Their first move seems pretty clueless to me: hire on a former music content provider (MTV), which is currently regarded by today's youth as being "so yesterday"; for you're spokesman, get on board a washed up teen idol who may have hit it big with 14 year old girls in 1998, but who's name is going to insite a resounding "Justin who?" response from the same demographic today. I mean, Justin Timberlake coule be Dick Clark for all they care—yes, pop culture moves THAT FAST. And for the grand finale, name your service, as someone said, something associated with gross bodily function. Seriously, my first reaction to the name was "ewww", it conjure's up images of some guy badly needing to take a dump. This reminds me of a funny scene from a commedy a few years back, "Nothing to Lose", in which the main character, a marketting specialist, warns one of his clients, "Excriment is the last thing people are going to want to think about when buying cookies", I think this holds true in this case too. Apple captured millions with sillohette's dancing around with iPods, how popular would they have been if the sillohette's were holding their crotches, swaying back and forth saying, "I need to pee"?
Ummm, say again? AIM? What kind of crack are you smoking? AIM is still by far the biggest instant messanging service. And from what I've heard, Google Messanger is overtaking it by leaps and bounds at the moment. Does MSN messanger still exist? I don't know anyone who uses it.
I'm TOTALLY with this guy on the fact that gaming is escapism. I play games to get AWAY from having to interact with people all the time. I think there are two very very different cultures of gamers: one of group gamers, and one of solitary gamers. For me, gaming is almost wholely a solitary enterprise. Sure, I do get together and Smash with friends from time to time, but I end up getting suckered into it.
For one thing, I'm beginning to see a pretty disturbing trend in some people today that do so much social gaming that, pretty much, their entire social life revolves around playing games. Now, I'm great friends with a lot of solitary gamers, and we'll get together and talk about RPGs we're playing, analyze systems and discuss the philosophy behind different entertainment media (a few of my friends and I took a college class on this, revolving around film, and we spent hours sitting around applying it to gaming); but in all of this, we weren't actually gaming, we were enjoying the conversation, which just happened to be about gaming, sort of like a group of avid book readers sitting around and discussing their latest novel. But, unfortunately, I see a lot of guys who don't want to talk or really interact with eachother, they become either bored or anxious without a mutual activity. I have one longtime, close friend, for instance, that the first thing he asks when we get together, is, "So, what'chya wanna do?"
Anyway, I like my escapism, and I feel more and more, these days, that unless you play games socially, you're some kind of pittiful, wierdo, sissy boy. I really like becoming extremely emmersed in the atmosphere created by a game, and I can't really do that easilly if I'm having to interact with anyone. I don't read books or listen to music as a form of social interaction, hell, TV/Movies are only about 50/50, why should gaming?
Everyone forgets the BIGGEST reason why BetaMax failed: STORAGE CAPACITY. It's simple: VHS has the ability to hold well over 2 hours of video, BetaMax can hold 90mins MAXIMUM: one medium is more than a feature length film, one is less. Don't get me wrong, for quality, BetaMax is far superior, the TV station where I work, uses BetaCAM exclusively, I don't think they even own a VHS recorder. But when it came time for the film industry to decide whether to put E.T. on one tape or two, it's pretty obvious why they chose to get behind VHS instead.
Here are some other obvious media wins:
CD vs. Minidisc - MiniDisc comes out quite a bit after CDs are already beginning to be entrenched, they hold less data (bad for use as computer media), use shoddy (at the time) audio compression, and their ingrained ability to be re-written worries the recording industry.
MP3 vs. Ogg - MP3s come out well before Ogg, become a household name (thanks to Metallica and a bunch of silly, high profile lawsuits), and require MUCH less processing power (ie: don't sap battery life on portable media players). Ogg Vorbis, though sounding better, has one of the dumbest sounding names on the face of the planet (a name can make or break a product). Let's think about this: "ogg", for me, conjures up thoughts of cavement beating their chests and yelling "Ooog, Ogg, Bunga!". "Vorbis" is the name of an evil, sadistic cleric from a Terry Prachet novel. In the end, strangely enough, it's AAC that wins the day.
In this case, it's reversed. Blu-Ray is quite a bit higher capacity, and is at least capable of being superior in EVERY way (that is, unless Microsoft is successful in sabotaging it's usability) to HD-DVD.
I know some people are going to laugh, but Blu-Ray has one other thing going for it: a catchy name. This WILL make a huge difference, and may be even big enough to be a deciding factor. "HD-DVD" is clunky to say, and will sound, to most consumers, like a new media based on old technology (think "Double Density 3.5" disks). If people are going to spend their money on upgrading their media, they're going to want to feel like they're actually really getting something new out of it. Blu-Ray is a sexy name, it's not inherently "techy", and will fit right in to the mainstream, it's the kind of name people will WANT to use in day-to-day conversation, because it just sounds cool. Word of mouth is extremely important. When I hear the worlds "Blue Ray" I think of some futuristic sci-fi laser that, like, kills people, or at the very least, will read my mind.I seriously think the name alone could have a huge impact.
Anyone find it suspicious that this news comes just 2 weeks after NBC signed on with the iTMS? Not to mention that Microsoft just announces an online media retailer of it's own to compete with iTMS. I was very surprised a few weeks ago when NBC showed up on iTMS, and wondered, at the time, whether the two companies had had a falling out. Apple as a whole may not be much of a threat to Microsoft, but iTMS most definitely is—besides Blu-Ray/PS3, it's probably the biggest thing standing in their way of inevitable media domination. Currently, with the unbelievable promise that iTMS is showing, Microsoft's future in controlling media content is looking pretty bleak, and it might have been that NBC jumped ship.
Think about it, the TV/Film industry sat back and watched the music industry go down the toilet due to their resistance of digital media, and they don't want to make the same mistake. iTMS offers a simple introduction into online media distrobution NOW, where-as microsoft sits back, shooting it's mouth off, trying to slow things down. They failed to offer HD compatable media with their game system, and they have failed to deliver online media distrobution at a time when the market is extremely ripe for development. It's obvious that they can't be counted on to carry any allied companies into the future of media. NBC, in attempts to avoid a similar debacle to that of the music industry, wants onboard now. Whatever promises MS makes for the future of online media distrobution cannot be trusted to be delivered before the industry takes off without them.
Interesting thing, on a "money show" the other day, there was a guy going on and on about how, even though 2005 was the year of Google and Apple, that 2006 would undoubtedly be the year of Microsoft: his reasoning? XBox360 and Vista. Seeing as how the XBox360 has had quite possibly the worst press of any major console I've ever seen (and that's without the two other competitors who will be jumping on board within in the next year) I can't see how stockholders can get really excited about investing cash based on it's "success". And Vista is possibly the biggest unknown the industry has ever been faced with.
Not to mention, a form of civil disobedience, or something like it (since this isn't a legal issue). Seriously, it's the same kind of thing as a black person, back in the day, drinking in a "white only" drinking fountain for the specific purpose of going to jail and raising public awareness as to how bad things are.
Frank Zappa did something similar, actually, not too long before he died. He released an album called "Frank Zappa meets the Mothers of Prevention", which was all about music censorship at the time when the music industry was currently going through the hearings with Tipper Gore. He put in one track that consisted of a goofy voice yelling, "Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! ... SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX!" and one instrumental with the title "Alien Oriface". In this case, though, he released the album a few days before the advisory campaign got started, with the whole front of the album being one big advisory sticker.
Yeah, I think the film producers probably purposefully put in content to get it rated NC-17. I haven't seen it, but I bet it's something like, "And here's an example of material that will get you banned..." followed by goofy sex scene or over-the-top violence. Sure it's a PR stunt, but that's also the point of the film; raising public awareness. Also, irony is a great way of getting across you're point. It'll probably work too.
I totally agree that Aperture is not an image editing program and is meant as a workflow program. That said, Photoshop doesn't exactly target the pro photography market directly. Photoshop has become more of a graphic design tool with digital darkroom functions built-in, but the interface is setup much more for graphic designers. Photographers, unless they're doing collage's or massive manipulations (which basically falls in the category of graphic design, for practical concern), have little to no need for layers, filters (except for sharpenning), lighting effects, blending options, or about 3/4 of the tools. The options that are most useful to photographers are adjustment layers (with layer mask), burn/dodge tools, healing tool, and unsharp masking.
I love Adobe's products, especially photoshop. I, myself, am a graphic designer, so it works perfectly for my needs. But I work along with a lot of photographers, and do a lot of digital darkroom work as well. The other day, I had to go through a plethora of RAW files and convert them to jpeg for web use. In Photoshop, it's a nightmare, with having to record actions. It's slow, it's inconvenient, and inflexable. That said, it WOULD be very nice, for once, to be able to do some basic editting on RAW photos, directly, without changing the image data. I've been screaming for a program to introduce a means of spot-toning as a non-destructive function—something like a "healing adjustment layer"—and the same for sharpenning and burning/doging.
Since most photographers don't need 3/4 of the functions in Photoshop, and Aperture is already a convenient workflow/RAW converter, I do hope they consider adding in the few editting functions that photographers do regularly use. Yes, Aperture is not meant as an editing tool, but if you could have you're editing software right inside your workflow/RAW converter, that would be extremely convenient. Let's face it, switching back and forth between two programs is tedious and irritating. And professional photographers, like the ones I work with, in doing commercial work, don't really have the time to be constantly juggling files around multipul applications all the time. There is an obvious need for a program that does both editing and organization, which is why Adobe has been putting so much energy, as of late, into their image browser. So Aperture is an organization program with some limited editing functions (well, RAW file options), and Photoshop is an image editor with a limited organization system. Whoever can bridge the gap eligently, first, will take the market, I garentee. It's going to be very dificult for Adobe, who is having to play, primarily, to the graphic design market, and who is already so entrenched in their interface design, to be able to bridge the gap cleanly. That said, Apple has a long way to go before their software replaces photoshop's editing functionality for photography, and currently it seems that it goes against their philosophy.
I am not one to like "all-in-one" applications, which combine unrelated functions. But in this case, the two functions will always be used together: if you're going to edit photography, you're going to need to convert/organize it, and many times you're going to be doing both at the same time. So this is one instance where combining multipul functions really makes a lot of sense.
It's their perogitive, and the way I see it, everyone wins. The games won't cost much; I'm guessing NES games will probably be $3 tops, $5 for SNES, $10 tops for N64. GameCube discs (and controllers, btw) will be compatable with the Revolution, so that will not be in their downloadable catalog.
I think the idial solution would be to sell the NES titles really cheap, around $1-$2 like iTunes songs/videos, everyone will find the price so neglegable, they'll start downloading a ton. The comment about them rereleasing old NES games for $10 for the GBA is a little different, they have to make GBA games at least somewhat competative with their modern counterparts, and they usually countered this by updating the graphics or adding new features. These will be the original games, in their original form, for the original system, just emulated. There will be no cartridge to manufacture either, which they charge a bit for, alone. I'm also predicting that the basic system will come with a certain amount of "credits" to download a few old games, just to get people onboard. Question is, now that the GameBoy is becoming unsupported, will original GameBoy games be playable? I'm guessing that they'll put the functionality in there for them to be, but won't release any games until the GBA SP is discontinued.
My number one news source, however, is the News Hour. I don't watch network TV news: CNN is filth, CBS, NBC, and ABC are fluff (even if everyone says they're left leaning, I don't care, they lost THIS liberal), and FOX is made up of a bunch of neoconservative lobbiests—seriously, half of their stuff is made up of former conservative political advisors... Yes, I'm looking at you, Bill Kristol! The News Hour, and the other PBS news shows (Washington Week, Now, and Charlie Rose) feel like the only TV news that doesn't talk to me like I'm in 6th grade, and doesn't try to compress complicated events into 1 minute soundbytes. And when I watch news, I don't need to be entertained. I'm honestly excited and interested in learning about events at hand. Tell it to me straight. PBS is the only one that really does this anymore, the rest is just entertainment.
Let them duke it out Mortal Kombat style! Which one will rip out the other's cpu and smash it in their disc drive?
Seriously, let's give the ESRB some REAL console violence!Well, currently I'm trying my hand at Star Ocean: Till the End of Time, which is a sort of an action RPG, and it's really giving my ass a pounding. It's been a long time since I died in a game, as well, and even longer since I died in a dungeon (with RPGs/Adventures/FPSs these days, dungeons seem to be mostly just time consuming obsticles which don't really pose any real threat). It's not a perfect game, the storyline is not for everyone (kinda "meh", IMO), but it has it's charm, and the gameplay is very engaging and difficult. Probably the hardest RPG I've played since FFIV (hard type). From what I've read online, it's been giving pretty much everyone a thrashing. And it's not a game you can rape by munchkining; leveling does practically nothing, you have to rely on your own skill to progress through it. Very satisfying.
The point is, though, that Nintendos franchise games tend to be more orginal than most companies' "originals". Every Zelda game is different enough, in gameplay and content, to be a completely different series, it's just tied together with the same characters and the same basic plot (of which is pretty inconsequential to the value of the series). The differences are even more stark in any Mario game. Warioware is one of the most unique games (now a series) ever made. Sure, it's a huge franchize, what's wrong with that? Disney made it big with children and adults alike for decades with a silly little mouse. If the game isn't meant to revolve around it's narrative, than it makes sense and is comforting to have repetition of characters. In these series (Metroid maybe slightly more involved), the characters and story are just a vessel for the gameplay, which time and time again, have been proven to be unique and fun.
And let's get this straight:Nintendo makes games for kids, adults, and stoners.
Ya know, I never thought about it much, but I think you're right. It's not like Nintendo to release information on the real meat of a product long before it's release, yet they did it with the controller. This seems like a very poor business practice, seeing that by the time the Revolution does come out, the buzz about the new controller would have simmered down. Wouldn't it have been better to announce the innovative controller like 4-8 weeks before it's launch? I smell something fishy in all of this. I can only guess that the big N has something else they're not saying.
One thing I've been chuckling at was the big statements by Microsoft and Sony that their next systems will be over 100x more powerfull than their last system, while Nintendo waved a flag and says, "and our system will only be about 3x more powerful". My thought is that Nintendo was realizing that Sony/Microsoft's statements were completely fabricated (after all, with what variables do you chose to measure the "power" of a system?), and that when people actually sit down in play, their first reaction to the system is, "wow, this system is much better than their last, about 3 or 4 times more powerfull!". Then, when the Revolution finally comes out, it will have much more similar speed and graphical prowess to the other two. I mean, come on, the demo shots I've seen from the 360 and the PS3, while being really pretty, seriously, are they completely mind-blowing considering the general graphical abilities of our era? No. Are they even THAT much more amazing than the GameCube and XBox? Eh, not particularly. Hell, the GameCube looked good enough for me, though it's time for an upgrade, 3 or 4 times more "power" (whatever that means) will be more than enough for me. Traditionally, when you look back on it, all the launch titles of a console are not incredibly distinguishable from the last year of titles from the previous generation: Mario 3 often gets compared to early SNES games, FF6 is often pitted against PS and Saturn titles, FF8 -> FF10, anyone? No big deal. Traditionally, the biggest gaps are from the launch titles to the mid-late games, once developers really get their legs for it. Super Mario World vs. Chrono Trigger, damn. Duck Hunt vs. Mario 3, different world. No system has made a giant leep in technical prowess on it's launch, and I'm pretty convinced from the PS3 and XBox360, that we won't see one this time around either. On the flip side, that's ALL that Sony and Micrsoft have been screeming about. I think some people are going to be in for a big dissapointment. Nintendo, on the other hand, isn't making ANY promisses about technical prowess, but selling their system to the public by promissing innovative game play, something I'm a lot more willing to buy (especially coming from Nintendo), then promisses about how some new graphical UI is going to change my life.
Also, HDTV is almost totally unneccessary, IMO. It was so obviously hype generated by media hardware manufacturers in order to find a new product to sell, since DVD profits have been declining. On a computer, where most images on the screen are static and don't move for long periods of time, high resolution is important, but when you have constantly moving imagery like in a movie or a video game, the human eye fails to notice blockier or more pixilated images because in the next frame, the position will have changed. This is why TV is still acceptable for most people, and is about 4x lower resolution than the computers they use. Sure, HDTV will look slightly better, but it's not going to revolutionize viewing pleasure. And seriously, I've not really seen a lot of public outcry, I've seen a lot of companies (and now the US government) trying to stir up public sentiment against current television technology, and failing misserably. I never needed HDTV in order to enjoy my video games before, why should I now?
Nintendo's not offering a replacement to the GameCube, as has been the previous trend for systems, but an alternative that also happens to include the har
I could definitely see Ron Jeremy as Mario... in fact, the similarites are uncanny.
Hold the phone, you say "Cats" like that's a good thing!
I got something to say:
This is some scary shit. Republicans always hid behind the "small government and uninhibitted trade" arguement, but for at least the past 20 years, it's been total bullshit. Now, we've found a way to do something that's effectively the opposite of communism: tax the people in order to pay the businesses. Yea, $3 billion from the government to the people! That money doesn't come out of thin air, the comes out of our taxes. So this redistribution is in such a way that will guarentee that people continue to buy televisions. So, in the ecconomic scheme, where does all that money end up? In the hands of big businesses like Phillips, Sony, Magnavox, etc. [Public -> Government -> Public (specifically to buy item) -> Phillips/Sony/Magnavox]; or to put it in short form: [Public -> Phillips/Sony/Magnavox] through government redistrobution. IE: money taken from lower, middle, and upper classes, and given to the upper classes, most of which will NOT trickle down. Any fool can see that the effect of this is a widening of the income gap and nothing else. The current income gap is the worst it's ever been in US history. We have a deficit that MY grandchildren (I'm 24) will still have even if we were to start paying it off now. BTW: most TV manufacturers are located in Japan, and probably very soon, China. Great, so lets just create more reasons to send all of our money out of our ecconomy, WOO HOO!
I remember hearing in a world history class about a state that started throwing money at people for luxuries like theatrical events, public executions, and other feel-good services, in order to take the common folks' attention away from the people who were dieing in the streets. Oh yeah, that was the Roman Empire just before its total collapse. The similarity is uncanny: Katrina destroys New Orlands, leaving a thousand dead, and hundreds of thousands homeless; public opinion of the government falls; government throws luxury items at the people to keep them quiet, fat and happy so they wont notice that their neighbors down at the local shelter are starving, and their children are coming home in body bags. This is truly history repeating itself.
Bush made this big speech about how we were going to do "what it takes" to stabilize the victims of Katrina. The question was asked, "where do we get that money from?" Since then we've increased military spending, cut funding to programs benefiting the very poor we're trying to help, expect to lower taxes, and have been unable to come up with any way of doing "what it takes", and now they want to put $3 billion into increasing TV reception! Ted Stevens, my [Alaska's] great senator who is the spokesman for this television bill, is the same guy who just yesterday, in a dramatic, teary-eyed sherade, threatened to quit if congress removed funding for two worthless multi-billion dollar bridges in the transportation bill. I'll tell ya, I live in Alaska, those bridges are a JOKE: one connects a 150 person village to an air strip (noble cause, sure, but the village itself didn't even ask for it or even care!), the other bridge lessons the commute time from Anchorage to an UNINHABITED region across the bay--guess whose friends own all the property in that area, expecting future developement? Go to hell, Ted Stevens!
Meanwhile, Don Young, our lone house representative, when explained that a majority of Alaskans were in favor of giving the bridges back, exclaimed, "They [Alaskans] can all kiss my ear!". This guy's been in for 20+ years, nothing will bring him down. If Young asks his voters to suck his cock, they all just get on their knees; I hate my state.Sorry this got off topic, I'm just incredibly jaded by this and all the events that have lead up to this.
Mac users use macs because they want to,
Windows users use windows because they have to.
There are a couple of other considerations to take into account, mainly is, what do you enjoy doing with your time? I've spent a significant part of my life making digital audio and graphics FOR FUN (well, and for radio and theatre), so hell, I might as well get paid while I'm doing it. And now I am. I landed a private contract a few months back doing sound design for a fairly small, but published console game manufacturer doing sound design and bits of voice acting. I'm fresh out of college with a music degree with a specialization in electroacoustic music composition. My intention is to eventually move into doing scoring (for any kind of media), but I realize I need to get my foot in the door first. I'm not getting paid big bucks to do this, and I'm having to work like a dog at it, a few weeks ago I had to put out 50+ sound effects in over 24 hours, and yes, I was working MOST of that time. But I enjoyed every minute of it, as I always have. And I sorta wish they would give me another huge load like that every week.
Why does America tend to promote the life of working at some dull desk job making big bucks and enjoying life only when you're with you're family? Personally, I come from a family of self-imployed artists. My father's a freelance photographer, my mother's a private consultant. Sure, we just get by, but they love their work and find it rewarding enough to choose this life. It seems more and more to me like most people believe that you're not supposed to like your work, if you do, then you're just playing around and not really working, like if you're enjoying your work then you're family must not be good enough for you. Bullshit, I think people should try to find things that they can get enjoyment out of, after all, they're more likely to do better work, therefor, it's better for everyone.
Second thing is that some people don't mind working 70+ hours a week. I'm the kind of guy who, when I used to do stage managing for theatre, loved the rush of "hell week", it gave me structure, which I tend to lack, and a feeling of purpose. At the same time, I was working 80h+ a week. This is more important to me than making a buttload of money. As long as you can support yourself (and at this point in my life, I don't need to support anyone else), who cares? Sure, I might not be able to buy a lot of luxury items, but then again, my day to day life is more enjoyable, so I really don't need as much. Obviously, if you can't support yourself, that's a problem, but Americans tend to believe that there's more to ecconomic life than supporting yourself and whoever else you're supporting, but also supporting all your stupid habits and luxury needs too... screw that, I'm going to spend a large percentage of my life working, I might as well enjoy it.
--EricI've been working with Finale since 2.0, and it makes me cry. Coda/MakeMusic (sorta like Puff Daddy -> P Diddy) has to be one of the worst software manufacturers on the planet. Every upgrade has a mandatory propriatary format overhall, so if you don't upgrade along with other people you're sharing with, you're screwed. It's as if Adobe suddenly made it impossible to share Photoshop CS2 files with CS1. Add one of the worst UIs ever designed, one of the clunkiest midi data entry systems ever devised (drawing in midi data on an included draw program to a grid with no snap-to properties with only numeric reference... holy shit that is bad). Now they've partnered up with the single worst orchestral synth manufacturer on the market, Garratin, which is just laughably bad. Maybe if Adobe or Apple released a program, they'd do it right and sign on with East-West Quantum Leap instead of Gary Garratin.
All that, and it's STILL better than Sibelius, which may have a better interface, but it's compositional philosophy is so f**ked up it's just breathtaking. For example, if you want to add an extra beat in, you have to completely re-write a measure, how screwed up is that? It's like if your text editor made you re-write a sentance every time you wanted to add an adjective. Two days on Sibelius and I was scrambling back to Finale.
I've been praying to God for Adobe to hit the music notation market for years now. They're interface design is second to none (even possibly apple). My experience with Adobe's pro software has been even better than Apple, I'm still not so sure about the UI design of Final Cut Pro, for instance. Either way, though, if either company went into the music notation market, I'd buy it in an instant. "Notes" would be an overnight success. The entire music community hates Finale, but is forced to use it anyway. Make Music and Sibelius would literally die overnight if either Adobe or Apple would release a notation app.
--EricNintendo, cel shaded? I'm curious of exactly what games you're talking about, since I've had a GC for a few years now and I've only played one cel shaded game, and that was Wind Waker, the only other one I can think of is Paper Mario 2. I've honestly played far more cel shaded games on the PS2 then on the GameCube. Sure, first party Nintendo games are meant to be "comic" in style, but very very few of them use cel shading. Then there's the discussion of what "cel shading" is, cel shading is just a graphic technique, and it's probably as widely varied as traditional textured polygon graphics. It can be used in a variety of ways and achieve numerous effects. Just compare the cell shading of Wind Waker (which, I might add, is probably the most unique use of cell shading I've yet to see) with Wild Arms 3 or Dark Cloud. Sure, they both may look cartoony, but similarly, I don't see anyone complaining that Cowboy Bebop is trying to look anything like Mickey Mouse.
I just think you're falling victim to your own arguement (of which I agree with). Instead of sticking with and examining the nuances of a certain graphical style, most companies tend to shift to extremes of realism to surrealism, when they've hammered one particular style to death. Nintendo, on the other hand, has been one of the only game companies that has not been wildly influenced by the latest trend, and tends to have a consistant aesthetic. When other companies were making Golden Eye, Unreal Tournament, Final Fantasy VII, and Half-life, they were doing Starfox 64, Mario 64, F-Zero X, and Majora's Mask. You have to remember that Nintendo is, and always has been, primarily a cartoon and comic based game company, in the same way that Pixar doesn't make realistic films. Sure, there's always Nintendogs and a few others that break the mould, but they're few and far between (and I wouldn't exactly put Nintendogs in the same genre as Halo 2). Their primary audiences are <12 and >20, children who either innocently accept the surealistic cartoon, and adults who are eager to retain some of that "lost" innocence. When I was little, I had trouble accepting it, but now I realize that my parents really did enjoy taking me to see a good cartoon at the movie theater, not just because I wanted to see it, but because they wanted to as well. Cel shading is a technique that "draws" objects in a way similar to traditional cartoons. If you're trying to make a game that draws on the feel of hand drawn caracatures, it's a pretty good way of doing it. I'm surprised that Nintendo hasn't done it more. Remember Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island? They developed some new advanced graphical techniques specifically designed to make the game world more hand drawn and innoncent looking in a very similar way that cel shading is used for Wind Waker today. Their aesthetic has changed very little over the years, as neither have many historic film and cartoon companies.
The teenage years aren't good for Nintendo, many mainstreem teens are likely to avoid cartoony looking things for fear that they may be seen as immature at a time of life when the most important thing is gaining independance and the recognition of being a mature "adult". At this time, "tastes" tend to swing wildly as far away from the caricaturistic as possible, which is why "ultra-realism", depicting all that was forbodden to them as children (violence, sex, language, etc.), is the style of choice. Teens have something to prove to the world, as they should, it's their time to gain self-recognition as an individual. But it's for this reason that the game industry has "turned" to ultra-realism. It's actually always been there, but it's hard for us to look back on the 8-bit era and see anything as "realistic", as we'll probably look back at the 2000's as an "age of innocence" come 2020.
I hate to come across looking like a fanboy of any company (who does?) but more and more Nintendo is emerging, in my mind, as the most cohesive and steady company in the industry. I watch as these Halos and Maddens come
That's the problem, Americans have too much faith and not enough reason. You say you care, but then act as if the problem will fix itself on its own. I don't know if there is any explanation for this viewpoint other than laziness and apathy. Faith never put food on anyone's table, and it sure as hell won't fix any environmental problems.
--EricThat's interesting to know. I've actually never heard of BetaCAM, then again, I have no connection to the pro video market, where I'm guessing it was most widely used. But for the pro audio market, there was extensive use of BetaMAX, partially because SONY especially designed ADC/DAC units to be able to convert audio to be stored on the video track as two extra digital tracks (enabling a fairly efficant way of recording and storing quadrophonic audio). I don't know if this same system can be used with BetaCAM tapes, but I do know that this system was widely used in the pro audio industry in the late 80s and early 90s before CD burners, ADAT, and hard drive system became readily available.
Many professional formats started off as consumer formats. DAT and MD are two examples. In the states, both are virtually dead in the basic consumer electronics market, and are used primarilly as field recorders for audio technicians. I've used both, and they both have their benefits (DAT for fidelity, MD for candidness and portability). All audio people I know who have MD recorders bought into small consumer-marketed devices, insead of the larger recorders aimed at professionals because fidelity is not MDs strong-point, portability is, which can be more important and some circumstances--if you're looking for fidelity, you get a DAT recorder or hard disk system, not a portable MD deck. So, the consumer grade models were of more use to audio professionals than the ones actually designed for professional use.
Similarly, BetaMAX was widely used by the AUDIO world because it offered a reasonably portable (as apposed to tape machines) and cheep solution for multi-channel audio. For the evolving electroacoustic music world, the need for multi-channel audio was becoming more and more prevolent, and Betamax offers 4 channels (2 analog, 2 digital through the video channel). This wasn't its originally intended use, but it became so widely used that SONY produced ADC/DAC decks to be able to digitally encode and decode the video channel into 2 digital audio channels. I recently had a job converting old Betamax tapes from the early 90s into stereo to be put on CD. Even for professionals, price and portability are of high importance for certain kinds of needs, so consumer products can become very good alternates (or even standards) for professional use. I've never heard of anyone who used BetaCAM, maybe it was widely used in the video field, but I've never heard of it being used in the audio industry. I don't proclaim to be an expert on this, however, so I may be mistaken.
I see neither BetaMAX or MD as failed standards, both had success outside of the US, and both became successfull inside the US for specialized needs. So, as for the current issue, my prediction is, though it's probably too soon to be sure, that HD DVD may be able to take the US market, but BluRay will unquestionably become the standard in Japan and probably Europe. I hope Microsoft doesn't think that the XBox 360 will "make" HD DVD, because there is very little sales of the XBox in Japan, and it only has reasonable success in Europe. Even if it doesn't do as well as expected, the PS3 will sell reasonably in the US. In the end, though, neither console (or any computer system) will decide the media standard on its own. It will be whoever can sell more video player decks to the 30+ crowd. Sony is one of the top distributers of video decks, Microsoft an Intel aren't even on the charts, their input is virtually irrelivent. I'm going to put my money on BluRay.
--EricThe only reason why physical CD sales is higher is because it's there, and it's tradition. If tomorrow, your favorite artist (or an artist you've followed for a while) stopped selling CDs and went to digital, I bet you'd get on iTunes and buy it there. Sure, there'll be a few who don't know about iTunes, but also consider this, artists would make something like 65% on their music without a CD distributer, instead of the measily %5 they do now, meaning that even if they held onto 1/13th of their audience (not a problem for an established band with an audience), they wouldn't lose money. Furthermore, even though musicians are humans, they're also artists, and many artists already sacrifice a lot of their money for social causes. I could imagine an artist like R.E.M or Springstein (if those particular musicians weren't already on indy lables that they have good relationships with), jumping at the chance to break loose from the chains of the physical music industry.
And I agree, Apple should just start their own label, "iMusic Inc." or, "iTunes Records", or be done with it and buy out Apple Records once and for all. There's a lot of money to be had in the music industry, even if you're better to your artists than most companies are, and even if they broke even on a record company, the enormously possitive PR it would generate would easilly sell many iPods. I have no question that they'll start a record company fairly soon, it's only natural since getting their foot into the music market.
--Eric