Yeah extra mods and levels that wouldnt be in the original game and which ups its size by nearly 17Gig.
System Requirements make the install size 5.5Gig. Well within the size of DVD9.
This is like me taking my Quake2 directory which is about 13gig in size due to mods and such and claiming DVD9 wasnt sufficient when Quake2 was released. Absolute nonsense.
These are nonsense arguments. The internet doesnt work like the real world.
Google, Yahoo even Microsoft search engines all lead to the piratebay.
If the pirate bay is breaking the law by linking to illegal torrents that in turn makes Google, yahoo and Microsoft illegal as well because they are linking to an illegal site. If Google, yahoo and Microsofts search are illegal that makes every single site and browser that has there searches illegal. That means Opera, Firefox, IE the browser tool bars and any others that use these things are all illegal. and so on and so forth.
It is simply not possible to consider the directions to something illegal online, illegal in itself otherwise everything is. Though im sure there are plenty of companies and politicians who would be very eager to see that happen.
There really isnt a real world analogy that will match this. Just a bit of reason that shows you there can not be any legal basis for banning torrent sites.
I dont think he means it in that way a key part of the article is when he says.
'Instead of power depth based on level, focus on power breadth.'
Or in other words you still have the RPG world and way of working but instead of your character leaping in and getting to work ramping up through the levels your reward is essentially to create your character. The only thing I can think of that I can liken it to is Fable. By expanding how you can define your character in the world you can spend far more time doing that than just shooting up to level 60. (Oblivion and the Elder Scrolls games also have this the leveling up part is almost a background occurence to what is happening in the game.)
The problem being how to do that in a MMORPG especially one like he suggests with several thousand players all in one environment. He doesnt really give any answers for that.
Like a lot of stunningly great ideas his article appears to be far superior on paper than it would be in practice. At least until he shares with us exactly how all of this would be implemented.
'if your connection drops out, you don't get to move.'
Um thats the point. The moment someone lags out in a Quake match someone can come up behind them and get an easy frag. Its exactly the same thing thats going on here only the host is controlling who lags out and who doesnt. The only time everyone lags in a Quake match is if the host is down. Which also happens in Halo. There is no difference its kind of 'mindblowing' that you didnt realise that.
The only reason this didnt happen in Quake is because there isnt a global overseeing score board like there is in Halo2. In Quake you essentially have a world full of random matches with tournaments fully monitored stuck in throughout the place. (Much like the real world.) In Halo you have every single player in the world with a set standing. Kind of like a tournament that includes every single game type, every single game and every single player. Thats impossible to monitor in its entirety, and thus cheating gets out of hand.
If you consider these to be bad design choices then please suggest some ways you could do it better that dont involve lagging everyone just because one person has a bad connection.
Wow sounds like someone has been listening to the corporate 'hype machine'
Lets see now there are a huge number of countries some of which with powerful economies (Germany being one of them.) all obeying the Kyoto agreement something that is greeted in America with sniggers or skepticism. Yet not one of them has seen there economy crashing.
The only reason why America doesnt work to cut down emitions is because it would make the stupendously rich not so stupendously rich. Thats it.
I rarely side with environmentalists. To be honest this is our planet we are the dominant species and we can and do do as we please with its resources. However, if global warming is being affected by us (and I stress the if) there is no quick fix. It will literally fuck us up, for good. So whether its true or not it makes damn good sense to ensure we minimise our impact just in case.
No ones economies are going to collapse. That much weve proven for a fact. Can you say the same for what is causing global warming?
'Mostly, what this tells you is that Microsoft is confused and doesn't know what they are doing in this area'
Nor, apparently, do you.
'First of all, compression really isn't an issue with digital cameras or image storage. Among other things, the fact that most serious photographers store RAW images is a good indication of that.'
As someone has already pointed out the vast majority of cameras are not proffesional level and compress there images by default. Decent compression is a big selling factor especailly when you go to the increasingly popular phone cameras which have very limited space.
'Second, lumping together JPEG and JPEG 2000 as "JPEG" doesn't make sense; JPEG 2000 already has all the advantages that Windows Media Photo claims, but it's an open standard. Microsoft should implement it, as should electronics manufacturers.'
Wrong. The reason why people havent implimented Jpeg 2000 is precisely because it is not an open standard. Large chunks of its algorithms are patented and anyone who starts picking it up run the risk of getting hit with fines just like what happened with Gif.
'Third, Microsoft is overestimating their market position and significance in the digital imaging market.'
You could argue that about a lot of new areas MS has taken on. Yet its doing pretty well in most of them.
'I suppose you can't fault them for trying, but this particular attempt at monopolizing the market looks pretty pathetic.'
Im sure its that attitude that MS loves to see from the people who deride them. Calling any attempt MS makes to monopolize an area 'pathetic' is a clear sign of dangerously underestimating the company.
You cant just make any amount of units for the following reasons.
1. Storage space. Holding a million units of something for a month is going to require a huge storage space and as a result huge costs for keeping that storage space in check.
With a lack of infinite storage space you want to be making units as near as you can to deadline so you dont have to fork out a crap load of cash to keep units sitting around doing nothing. However, after a few months of selling you will only want say a million units a month. So.
2. You cant gear up the factories enough to make much more than your fixed million a month. Which applies a restriction on just how many you are churning out.
The only other option you have is to get more factory space on the go working on making new units. However, this factory equipment costs staggering amounts and as I said youll only want a million a month soon enough. So.
3. You cant buy up a crap load of factory space and equipment because it will all have to be discarded after a few months and will cost a metric shit load in the meantime.
So basically you have a large balancing act. Do you poor money in to storage space and keep a slow and steady production which will mean you have to have that storage space maintained for months on end? Do you poor money in to new factory equipment knowing full well itll be sat doing nothing after the initial bursts of sales? Or do you stick with what you ahve and invariably have horrendous shortages.
Usually people opt for a mixture of all three but it rarely meets the full demand. ITs just a fact of business and not, as many people seem to believe, a tactic to show off how popular the console is. No one ever made money out of this kind of thing.
Both the X-Box360 and the PS3 have been converted from Dollars to Pounds in a similar way. If you work it out they add about 35 cents per dollar before converting it over. So 225 + 225 * 0.35 is 303.75 now convert that to pounds and your in the 160 quid range.
Thats assuming they keep in line with the others. Id still be safer predicting it coming to us at 200 but I remain hopefull that it is closer to the 150 mark. Which is very nice indeed for a new console release.
'Why do schools sit there and try to claim "Its not our jobs, its the parents job" when at the very same time they are going to reach into the home and bypass the parents for something so innocuous as this?'
Because idiots have handed such vast powers to the schools in the first place.
If a child gets beaten up outside school, if a child gets distressed outside school, if a child doesnt know about the birds and the bees outside school etc, etc, etc. Its the schools fault every single time, and the schools have to take on more and more responsibility to raise peoples children in the place of parents. Now your saying that they shouldnt bipass the parents? Why the fuck not? Parents werent there to teach sex ed, parents were there to protect there child, parents werent there to comfort there child but now the school is kicking the child out so the parent might actually have to do something there up in arms about it??? Seriously who is trying to have it both ways here?
I dont agree with the decision, I do think the school has overstepped its bounds, but im not surprised by it, and trying to claim the schools are somehow robbing parents of there right to raise there children. Especially when parents have been whining, complaining and suing the schools in to taking over all there responsibilities. Thats just absurd.
Look at it this way. If people choose the schools to back off and stop teaching or getting involved with anything outside of basic education, I would put money on the fact youd have a half dozen parents groups and legal cases within a year because there children dont know what a condom is, and twice the cases based on the fact the school wasnt looking after there kids out of school hours. (because there have been so many parents leaving there children with the school around here for a good hour or so after the place is supposed to close they had to hire more staff to look after them. Note that wasnt a service it was a neccesity because the parents just werent getting there on time.) Youd sure as hell have a lot more outrage at schools doing that than you would at schools kicking kids out for blogs. Cant have it both ways? Your right so parents have to pick one. strip the school of its responsibilities and raise your own child or dont be surprised if the school is gonna bitch slap your kid any time it pleases.
Well I believe I can rationalise this. I mean things are always going to look expensive in England but while the pound is worth a lot of dollars, the pounds in our pay cheques are worth more as well.
So I did a comparison using amazon. The X-Box360 core in England is £209.99 ($396.11). In America its $299.99.
So we see the X-Box is upped by $96.12 in its transfer over to us. Which for every dollar you are spending an extra 32 cents.
The PS3 has a comparison of $600 to £425 ($801.68) Well thats an upping of $201.68 but your spending more dollars so get a per dollar amount. That comes to 34 cents. Or if they were hammering out X-Box360's thatd be upping it by roughly $101.93. So only about $5 or 2 or 3 quid more than the 360.
This just isnt an unusual price for the cross over to pounds. While I still believe it is overpriced in general. They arnt really over pricing it even more.
So cant really bash for there conversion price (Well unless your bashing the whole conversion price thing in general.) but if your just bashing for the overpricing in general. Carry on.
Backing up what others have said I have a Geforce 6600GT for 90 quid. (Not sure how its price translates to dollars.)
It runs Oblivion with just about everything but AA on at reasonable resolution (800x600) Gets some fairly bad slow down out with a crap load of grass but typically runs nice and smooth. I also have a gig and a half of RAM (which is a fair amount) and a 2.8 P4. (not such a fair amount.)
First off 'Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans.' yeah nice no domestic spying rule theyve got there.
Secondly as far as I am aware the GCHQ have to have reasons and warrents to spy on anyone. Domestic or not.
Now they may break the rules sometimes. Thats pretty much a certainty. However there is a wopping difference between an intelligence agency being naughty with its powers and an intelligence agency allowed by law to observe anyone they want.
For example monitoring every telephone call is out of the question for the GCHQ and indeed for the NSA. It was only by ropping in the other companies that they can do it. The GCHQ could never pull that off because its not legal to be trying in the first place. (Unless they got the warrents which is highly unlikely.)
First off I dont think hes talking about stopping the characters flying back more talking about when there arms seem to fold in to there bodies and all sorts as they flop around.
Which also brings me to the second point that is creating physics thats complex enough to simulate real life does not necessarily mean you are going to use it to simulate real life.
Kind of like CG, my mum asked 'Whats the point of getting all these computer effects to look like real life when we already have a real world.' but it was the fact that they could simulate the real world that then allowed them to seamlessly produce things that were far more fantastical. E.g. Many of the huge pieces of scenery in the lord of the rings were entirely CG. Most people didnt even notice. It is infact incredibly difficult to pick out whats New Zealand and whats fabricated.
The same can be said of physics. The reason why ragdoll physics makes a person flop around unrealistically is because its flawed not because they made a conscious choice to make it less realistic. When you have the ability to perfectly simulate a human falling down then you can alter the physics to either have them all floppy, have them fall down like a plank, or anything in between. (Including, if you want, a fully realistic simulation.)
Im seeing dozens of comments pointing out how many headlines Nintendo have stolen, how many people are talking about it, and claiming this as some sort of victory.
The saying any publicity is good publicity refers to people not pieces of hardware. If Jack Nicholson gets caught shagging a prostitute with that big grin on his face he will get infamous and probably a few movie deals. If Nvidia come out with an advertising slogan saying. "Buy our graphics card even though we havent finished the drivers and itll probably blow up your computer" They wont sell any units despite the many headlines im sure that would steal.
Now the name Wii certainly isnt a faulty graphics card that blows up computers, but, assuming that because a piece of hardware has gained lots of publicity thats always going to be a good thing is ridiculous.
Id be fairly stunned if Nintendo didnt alter the name before release. Id be even more stunned it this terrible name got them a single sale because of the interest its generated. Theyll no doubt make a fair bit of cash but itll be despite the name, not because of it.
Because all of the publicity is along the lines of. 'Oh my God what an absolute joke.'
Now they say any publicity is good publicity id argue that that only really applies to movie stars and others that can succeed based on being famous or infamous.
With a console, on the day your taking your fat wallet full o cash out to pick one up, the jokes and humour is gonna fall away and youve got the choice of buying a Playstation an X-Box or something that sounds like what you piss in to a toilet.
I.e. its like the publicity the N-Gage got for looking like a taco stuck to your head. Hilarious yes, but it didnt sell for shit.
Games really have nothing to do with art they are only about gameplay and how to make that gameplay better.. Everything in a game caters, or at least should cater, to the gameplay not beuty, not a deeper message, not anything that art is created for.
The problem with this whole debate stems from two things.
1. Games have art built on to them. (Such as his Myst example.) That means people will take that art and hold it up as an example of what games can do. What people miss is that that 'game art' is just the old forms of art bolted on. E.g. the storylines told through text in an RPG, in the real world thats called a book. The cut scenes in most games, these are called movies. etc. etc. These snipets of art enrich the experience but they are not a part of the gameplay which is what defines a game.
Think of the greatest and purest games of all time. E.g. Tetris. There is no art there, (Well there is but in a different meaning as in its a finely crafted game.) there no particular beuty. (Unless you like shapes made out of 4 squares.) You dont play a game of Tetris to feel emotions or take away a deeper understanding of anything. You play it because its addictive fun. (and yes I am aware most movies dont make you feel emotions or give you deeper understanding. However, while Tetris is the pinnacle of gaming and offers no art experience. Movies that do the same are considered bad films.)
2. People have a strange tendancy to take deep offense to something they have created not being called art, if there was ever the possibility that it could have been art in the first place. Im not entirely sure why this is. Games are still going to be made, and they will still be fun with or without the art label. Chess and Go are not pieces of art yet they have entertained and arguably been more important to people for centuries.
I really dont see how a game can be considered art. Whats more I dont see why a game needs to be, or even why it should aim to be, considered art.
1. Couldnt be more true. Brand loyalty is absurd your not supporting a friend your buying a product. The moment it sucks is the moment you should drop it. That goes for Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Likewise you shouldnt hesitate to pick it back up when it gets good again.
2. Couldnt be more true. Prerelease hype is mad especially some of Sony's claims, though im fairly sure they do that on purpose. People who believe that stuff have issues its almost certainly all there just to whip people up in to debate about how much is true. The lightgun comment was a bit offtopic for the actual point and though biassed it does bring you back down to Earth somewhat. There is every chance the controller could still turn out to be a gimmick rather than a top seller.
3. Couldnt be more true. The amount of people tied in to a single console even if they have switched over before is silly some of the best purchases ive made are of other consoles for a lot less than whats recently coming out. A lot of people have never thought of that as an option.
4. Controversial but I also believe couldnt be more true. The one thing the 360 has demonstrated to me is that MS were bang on about backwards compatibility. Not many people care. Even those who do, dont care enough to change console plans. Its a great feature and like the article says its gonna get in some good game time but it isnt going to send the console to the top.
5. Couldnt be more true. Nintendo like there rivals are a company. Like all company they care only for profits. Now a lot of people especially recently have painted Nintendo as the good guys, it just doesnt work that way. They are the good guys because it currently makes more money to be the good guys. If they ever got to the top theyd be trying to shut down Sony and MS at every point and to hell with being the good guys anymore. Its business companies arnt evil they are just companies.
6. Made me laugh but fairly inacurate. Just because they are targeting new markets doesnt mean they dont give a shit about old ones. The article lauds the DS later on but this has done exactly the same. Attacked a new market while maintaining the old.
7. Controller has a cradle. Would have been a decent point if it didnt though.
8. A little presumptious to assume what the Revolution will provide on launch in games but also a possibile issue, the recent article saying there are 20 games sounds like a decent enough start but im wondering just what forms those games take. How many are more concept than full game. How many are clones with a new control interface. Still, its quite likely Nintendo will put out a good lineup.
9. Couldnt be more true. Price of the console has never had too much baring on its success. All the cheapest consoles, the gamecube which dropped to 50 quid in no time being a prime example, have done no better because of there lower cost. (Sony, if they are releasing at the high price they claim, may change this. No one has ever really pushed it that far in comparison to the competition.)
10. Couldnt be more true. I dont understand people who do the whole queueing up for hours and hours to get a console far more likely to be bug ridden on the first day. I guess you get to show off for a couple of weeks until everyone has them. Its just not worth it.
11. Nahh. Nintendo would love to be number 1 again and all there efforts arnt just in hand held and making a bit of cash on the side from the home system. Even if you dont think the controller is going to work out youd have to be fairly stupid to think it was easily designed and produced. Its clearly an attempt to get back to the top spot and Nintendo clearly care quite a bit.
12. Also too true. I dont think anyone is completely without fanboy issues. Even this article.
For a large part the article was pretty accurate. I find the fact that most slashdot posts quote one or two sentances that they disagree with, then rubbish the whole article based on them to be amusing. Its almost as if there are some fanboys about.
They used the same excuse with Starcraft and why it was limited to a terrible resolution.
One simple solution that solves the whole thing. Server side settings.
The server can determine the max resolution, the resolution types and pretty much every other setting anyone is linking up with. As long as you program that in to the interface for online gaming there should be no limits on how great you can make things look.
No, my first claim was that there were studies proving gravity moves around light speed. My second claim was that there are also studies proving these are flawed. My third claim was that there is no reason to exlude the idea that it moves faster than light. My fourth claim was that we just werent entirely sure.
and not one of them is inacurate. There _are_ studies proving and attacking all of our current methods of measuring its speed. There _isnt_ as far, as I am aware, hard evidence that it moves at the speed of light. Which means that you _can not_ exclude the possibility it doesnt, and we are in fact unsure.
'strongly suggests' is a reason to doubt gravity moves at anything other than light speed. Not believe that it is a certainty and can now exclude all other possibilities.
Which is what my 'central' claim was. An attack on the absolute accuracy of its speed shown by other posters. Given that I have always stressed throughout all of this that it is highly likely that it does move at light speed I do not understand the problem here. You appear to be on a mission to discredit my posts by bringing up facts and theories that I have never disputed, or which attack things that I have never even claimed.
'The article to which you link mentions a paper by Kopeiken that has been discredited.'
Really? How'd you work that out? Was it from the second link I posted discrediting him perhaps...
'Measurements of binary pulsars, the canonical example of which is PSR B1534+12, have demonstrated that the speed of gravity is equivalent to the speed of light to within +/-1.5%.'
Yes and the study I posted, while less accurate, said more or less the same thing.
'Quite apart from these results, gravity most certainly does not (as some here have suggested) propagate at infinite speed. The fact that we observe gravitational damping of binary pulsar systems such as PSR 1913+16 conclusively demonstrates that gravity has a finite propagation speed.'
A moot point. I never said gravity works at instantaneous speeds. If others did respond to them with your self superior crap.
As far as I am aware gravitational damping is evidence that gravity moves at a speed around that of light. At no point did I dispute that, in fact, as ive said already the site I posted says more or less the same.
As I also pointed out in my post there are arguments for and against all the tests for gravitational speed they all remain inconclusive and unless you can actually post some evidence, there is no study that proves for certain gravity works at light speed.
Its exceptionally likely that it does, there is torrents of indirect evidence and theory backing that fact up. Something I also said in my apparently nonsensical post...
Contrary to some of the other posts there is no current reason to exclude the idea that gravity is faster than the speed of light. Some experiments have shown that it is possible. ( http://physics.about.com/cs/gravity/a/speedofgravi ty_2.htm ) We do not know what gravity is, exactly, so its impossible to simple compare it to your average particle physics and the like.
As I said there is equal amounts of arguments against these experiments and there conclusions so we simply dont know for sure. It is very likely that it does travel at exactly the same speed as light (Just as Einstein predicted) but you should never rule out other possibilities until you are sure.
No, your just looking at pre MS bungie with rose tinted lenses.
Bungie has made pretty much nothing other than Halo type games. Pathways in to Darkness, Marathon, Marathon 2 and Marathon Infinity leading up in to Halo are all essentially progressions of the previous game. They even have similar worlds and themes running through them.
With the exception of myth (Which, because Take2 already owned 20% of Bungie before MS got there, went to them. As in MS cant continue that series.) and Oni (Which was released while MS were in control.) your 'creative' game company has been churning out the same kind of game for its entire existence.
but then so has ID and they're pretty succesful. Its daft to think that continuing a succesful line of games is some how wrong or that the company was this creative powerhouse before Microsoft ruined them. Neither are true.
Take a look at the companies MS Games has bought up.
Bungie made Halo by a long long way the most succesful game they ever created. Digital Anvil made freelancer the most succesful game they ever created. Ensemble Studios made Age of Empires the most succesful game they ever created. (I hope your noting the pattern here) FASA made Crimson Skies the most succesful game they ever created. Rare remain the only studio that hasnt prospered quite as much as theyd hoped though with Perfect Dark and Kameo. Hardly a bad start.
(and lets not have 'Bungie made Halo for PC!' crap. Thats not the point, MS not killing off the studio, is.)
Lionhead was going down. You had either EA, Ubisoft or Microsoft. So which do you want? EA who has bought and dissolved countless companies with no regard for there worth? Ubisoft who have recently taken a liking to absurd protection methods. Or Microsoft who buy up companies to use there names and ideas exclusively? Its not exactly a clear cut 'MS are teh evil' situation.
I know to a lot of people they're the big evil corporation but seriously take a step back and look around for two seconds. You really think the other publishers are better? In fact take a look at the other studios MS owns, you really think Lionhead is gone now?
Im not saying bad things arnt going to happen to molyneux's baby but MS, in this case, is arguably there best option. (With Ubisoft coming a close second. Lets not even suggest the Bullfrog destroying EA.) Heck, Id even go so far as to say they stand a chance of releasing some pretty solid stuff.
A little less of the incessant farewell, RIP, crap and perhaps a little more perspective on what is going on.
I can only speculate that they are trying to make it seem like they earned more last year than they did the most recent year. However, even 807 million dollars is no comparison to 637 million pounds. I believe theyd have to make over 1 billion dollars to match that. Either that or they hit 3 instead of 4 by accident.
Still, whatever reasons for it, thats some pretty hefty profit.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah extra mods and levels that wouldnt be in the original game and which ups its size by nearly 17Gig.
System Requirements make the install size 5.5Gig. Well within the size of DVD9.
This is like me taking my Quake2 directory which is about 13gig in size due to mods and such and claiming DVD9 wasnt sufficient when Quake2 was released. Absolute nonsense.
These are nonsense arguments. The internet doesnt work like the real world.
Google, Yahoo even Microsoft search engines all lead to the piratebay.
If the pirate bay is breaking the law by linking to illegal torrents that in turn makes Google, yahoo and Microsoft illegal as well because they are linking to an illegal site. If Google, yahoo and Microsofts search are illegal that makes every single site and browser that has there searches illegal. That means Opera, Firefox, IE the browser tool bars and any others that use these things are all illegal. and so on and so forth.
It is simply not possible to consider the directions to something illegal online, illegal in itself otherwise everything is. Though im sure there are plenty of companies and politicians who would be very eager to see that happen.
There really isnt a real world analogy that will match this. Just a bit of reason that shows you there can not be any legal basis for banning torrent sites.
'No, what that sounds like is Halo.'
I dont think he means it in that way a key part of the article is when he says.
'Instead of power depth based on level, focus on power breadth.'
Or in other words you still have the RPG world and way of working but instead of your character leaping in and getting to work ramping up through the levels your reward is essentially to create your character. The only thing I can think of that I can liken it to is Fable. By expanding how you can define your character in the world you can spend far more time doing that than just shooting up to level 60. (Oblivion and the Elder Scrolls games also have this the leveling up part is almost a background occurence to what is happening in the game.)
The problem being how to do that in a MMORPG especially one like he suggests with several thousand players all in one environment. He doesnt really give any answers for that.
Like a lot of stunningly great ideas his article appears to be far superior on paper than it would be in practice. At least until he shares with us exactly how all of this would be implemented.
'if your connection drops out, you don't get to move.'
Um thats the point. The moment someone lags out in a Quake match someone can come up behind them and get an easy frag. Its exactly the same thing thats going on here only the host is controlling who lags out and who doesnt. The only time everyone lags in a Quake match is if the host is down. Which also happens in Halo. There is no difference its kind of 'mindblowing' that you didnt realise that.
The only reason this didnt happen in Quake is because there isnt a global overseeing score board like there is in Halo2. In Quake you essentially have a world full of random matches with tournaments fully monitored stuck in throughout the place. (Much like the real world.) In Halo you have every single player in the world with a set standing. Kind of like a tournament that includes every single game type, every single game and every single player. Thats impossible to monitor in its entirety, and thus cheating gets out of hand.
If you consider these to be bad design choices then please suggest some ways you could do it better that dont involve lagging everyone just because one person has a bad connection.
'kill our economy'
Wow sounds like someone has been listening to the corporate 'hype machine'
Lets see now there are a huge number of countries some of which with powerful economies (Germany being one of them.) all obeying the Kyoto agreement something that is greeted in America with sniggers or skepticism. Yet not one of them has seen there economy crashing.
The only reason why America doesnt work to cut down emitions is because it would make the stupendously rich not so stupendously rich. Thats it.
I rarely side with environmentalists. To be honest this is our planet we are the dominant species and we can and do do as we please with its resources. However, if global warming is being affected by us (and I stress the if) there is no quick fix. It will literally fuck us up, for good. So whether its true or not it makes damn good sense to ensure we minimise our impact just in case.
No ones economies are going to collapse. That much weve proven for a fact. Can you say the same for what is causing global warming?
'Mostly, what this tells you is that Microsoft is confused and doesn't know what they are doing in this area'
Nor, apparently, do you.
'First of all, compression really isn't an issue with digital cameras or image storage. Among other things, the fact that most serious photographers store RAW images is a good indication of that.'
As someone has already pointed out the vast majority of cameras are not proffesional level and compress there images by default. Decent compression is a big selling factor especailly when you go to the increasingly popular phone cameras which have very limited space.
'Second, lumping together JPEG and JPEG 2000 as "JPEG" doesn't make sense; JPEG 2000 already has all the advantages that Windows Media Photo claims, but it's an open standard. Microsoft should implement it, as should electronics manufacturers.'
Wrong. The reason why people havent implimented Jpeg 2000 is precisely because it is not an open standard. Large chunks of its algorithms are patented and anyone who starts picking it up run the risk of getting hit with fines just like what happened with Gif.
'Third, Microsoft is overestimating their market position and significance in the digital imaging market.'
You could argue that about a lot of new areas MS has taken on. Yet its doing pretty well in most of them.
'I suppose you can't fault them for trying, but this particular attempt at monopolizing the market looks pretty pathetic.'
Im sure its that attitude that MS loves to see from the people who deride them. Calling any attempt MS makes to monopolize an area 'pathetic' is a clear sign of dangerously underestimating the company.
You cant just make any amount of units for the following reasons.
1. Storage space. Holding a million units of something for a month is going to require a huge storage space and as a result huge costs for keeping that storage space in check.
With a lack of infinite storage space you want to be making units as near as you can to deadline so you dont have to fork out a crap load of cash to keep units sitting around doing nothing. However, after a few months of selling you will only want say a million units a month. So.
2. You cant gear up the factories enough to make much more than your fixed million a month. Which applies a restriction on just how many you are churning out.
The only other option you have is to get more factory space on the go working on making new units. However, this factory equipment costs staggering amounts and as I said youll only want a million a month soon enough. So.
3. You cant buy up a crap load of factory space and equipment because it will all have to be discarded after a few months and will cost a metric shit load in the meantime.
So basically you have a large balancing act. Do you poor money in to storage space and keep a slow and steady production which will mean you have to have that storage space maintained for months on end?
Do you poor money in to new factory equipment knowing full well itll be sat doing nothing after the initial bursts of sales? Or do you stick with what you ahve and invariably have horrendous shortages.
Usually people opt for a mixture of all three but it rarely meets the full demand. ITs just a fact of business and not, as many people seem to believe, a tactic to show off how popular the console is. No one ever made money out of this kind of thing.
Actually probably not entirely true.
Both the X-Box360 and the PS3 have been converted from Dollars to Pounds in a similar way. If you work it out they add about 35 cents per dollar before converting it over. So 225 + 225 * 0.35 is 303.75 now convert that to pounds and your in the 160 quid range.
Thats assuming they keep in line with the others. Id still be safer predicting it coming to us at 200 but I remain hopefull that it is closer to the 150 mark. Which is very nice indeed for a new console release.
'Why do schools sit there and try to claim "Its not our jobs, its the parents job" when at the very same time they are going to reach into the home and bypass the parents for something so innocuous as this?'
Because idiots have handed such vast powers to the schools in the first place.
If a child gets beaten up outside school, if a child gets distressed outside school, if a child doesnt know about the birds and the bees outside school etc, etc, etc. Its the schools fault every single time, and the schools have to take on more and more responsibility to raise peoples children in the place of parents. Now your saying that they shouldnt bipass the parents? Why the fuck not? Parents werent there to teach sex ed, parents were there to protect there child, parents werent there to comfort there child but now the school is kicking the child out so the parent might actually have to do something there up in arms about it??? Seriously who is trying to have it both ways here?
I dont agree with the decision, I do think the school has overstepped its bounds, but im not surprised by it, and trying to claim the schools are somehow robbing parents of there right to raise there children. Especially when parents have been whining, complaining and suing the schools in to taking over all there responsibilities. Thats just absurd.
Look at it this way. If people choose the schools to back off and stop teaching or getting involved with anything outside of basic education, I would put money on the fact youd have a half dozen parents groups and legal cases within a year because there children dont know what a condom is, and twice the cases based on the fact the school wasnt looking after there kids out of school hours. (because there have been so many parents leaving there children with the school around here for a good hour or so after the place is supposed to close they had to hire more staff to look after them. Note that wasnt a service it was a neccesity because the parents just werent getting there on time.) Youd sure as hell have a lot more outrage at schools doing that than you would at schools kicking kids out for blogs. Cant have it both ways? Your right so parents have to pick one. strip the school of its responsibilities and raise your own child or dont be surprised if the school is gonna bitch slap your kid any time it pleases.
Well I believe I can rationalise this. I mean things are always going to look expensive in England but while the pound is worth a lot of dollars, the pounds in our pay cheques are worth more as well.
So I did a comparison using amazon. The X-Box360 core in England is £209.99 ($396.11). In America its $299.99.
So we see the X-Box is upped by $96.12 in its transfer over to us. Which for every dollar you are spending an extra 32 cents.
The PS3 has a comparison of $600 to £425 ($801.68) Well thats an upping of $201.68 but your spending more dollars so get a per dollar amount. That comes to 34 cents. Or if they were hammering out X-Box360's thatd be upping it by roughly $101.93. So only about $5 or 2 or 3 quid more than the 360.
This just isnt an unusual price for the cross over to pounds. While I still believe it is overpriced in general. They arnt really over pricing it even more.
So cant really bash for there conversion price (Well unless your bashing the whole conversion price thing in general.) but if your just bashing for the overpricing in general. Carry on.
Backing up what others have said I have a Geforce 6600GT for 90 quid. (Not sure how its price translates to dollars.)
It runs Oblivion with just about everything but AA on at reasonable resolution (800x600) Gets some fairly bad slow down out with a crap load of grass but typically runs nice and smooth. I also have a gig and a half of RAM (which is a fair amount) and a 2.8 P4. (not such a fair amount.)
First off 'Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans.' yeah nice no domestic spying rule theyve got there.
Secondly as far as I am aware the GCHQ have to have reasons and warrents to spy on anyone. Domestic or not.
Now they may break the rules sometimes. Thats pretty much a certainty. However there is a wopping difference between an intelligence agency being naughty with its powers and an intelligence agency allowed by law to observe anyone they want.
For example monitoring every telephone call is out of the question for the GCHQ and indeed for the NSA. It was only by ropping in the other companies that they can do it. The GCHQ could never pull that off because its not legal to be trying in the first place. (Unless they got the warrents which is highly unlikely.)
and yes I will have nice day. Thanks.
http://www.broadband-help.com/articles/consumer/br oadband_providers_in_the_UK/
'Significant migration of domestic internet connectivity from dialup to broadband started in year 2000 here in the UK.'
Even the earliest geek people I new with broadband didnt have it till very late nineties.
Java has been out since mid nineties and was doing rather well by late nineties, it has no trouble working on slower connections.
Theres no mismatch there, and quite frankly there are a whole lot of other far worse flaws with his story.
First off I dont think hes talking about stopping the characters flying back more talking about when there arms seem to fold in to there bodies and all sorts as they flop around.
Which also brings me to the second point that is creating physics thats complex enough to simulate real life does not necessarily mean you are going to use it to simulate real life.
Kind of like CG, my mum asked 'Whats the point of getting all these computer effects to look like real life when we already have a real world.' but it was the fact that they could simulate the real world that then allowed them to seamlessly produce things that were far more fantastical. E.g. Many of the huge pieces of scenery in the lord of the rings were entirely CG. Most people didnt even notice. It is infact incredibly difficult to pick out whats New Zealand and whats fabricated.
The same can be said of physics. The reason why ragdoll physics makes a person flop around unrealistically is because its flawed not because they made a conscious choice to make it less realistic. When you have the ability to perfectly simulate a human falling down then you can alter the physics to either have them all floppy, have them fall down like a plank, or anything in between. (Including, if you want, a fully realistic simulation.)
Im seeing dozens of comments pointing out how many headlines Nintendo have stolen, how many people are talking about it, and claiming this as some sort of victory.
The saying any publicity is good publicity refers to people not pieces of hardware. If Jack Nicholson gets caught shagging a prostitute with that big grin on his face he will get infamous and probably a few movie deals. If Nvidia come out with an advertising slogan saying. "Buy our graphics card even though we havent finished the drivers and itll probably blow up your computer" They wont sell any units despite the many headlines im sure that would steal.
Now the name Wii certainly isnt a faulty graphics card that blows up computers, but, assuming that because a piece of hardware has gained lots of publicity thats always going to be a good thing is ridiculous.
Id be fairly stunned if Nintendo didnt alter the name before release. Id be even more stunned it this terrible name got them a single sale because of the interest its generated. Theyll no doubt make a fair bit of cash but itll be despite the name, not because of it.
Because all of the publicity is along the lines of. 'Oh my God what an absolute joke.'
Now they say any publicity is good publicity id argue that that only really applies to movie stars and others that can succeed based on being famous or infamous.
With a console, on the day your taking your fat wallet full o cash out to pick one up, the jokes and humour is gonna fall away and youve got the choice of buying a Playstation an X-Box or something that sounds like what you piss in to a toilet.
I.e. its like the publicity the N-Gage got for looking like a taco stuck to your head. Hilarious yes, but it didnt sell for shit.
Games really have nothing to do with art they are only about gameplay and how to make that gameplay better.. Everything in a game caters, or at least should cater, to the gameplay not beuty, not a deeper message, not anything that art is created for.
The problem with this whole debate stems from two things.
1. Games have art built on to them. (Such as his Myst example.) That means people will take that art and hold it up as an example of what games can do. What people miss is that that 'game art' is just the old forms of art bolted on. E.g. the storylines told through text in an RPG, in the real world thats called a book. The cut scenes in most games, these are called movies. etc. etc. These snipets of art enrich the experience but they are not a part of the gameplay which is what defines a game.
Think of the greatest and purest games of all time. E.g. Tetris. There is no art there, (Well there is but in a different meaning as in its a finely crafted game.) there no particular beuty. (Unless you like shapes made out of 4 squares.) You dont play a game of Tetris to feel emotions or take away a deeper understanding of anything. You play it because its addictive fun. (and yes I am aware most movies dont make you feel emotions or give you deeper understanding. However, while Tetris is the pinnacle of gaming and offers no art experience. Movies that do the same are considered bad films.)
2. People have a strange tendancy to take deep offense to something they have created not being called art, if there was ever the possibility that it could have been art in the first place. Im not entirely sure why this is. Games are still going to be made, and they will still be fun with or without the art label. Chess and Go are not pieces of art yet they have entertained and arguably been more important to people for centuries.
I really dont see how a game can be considered art. Whats more I dont see why a game needs to be, or even why it should aim to be, considered art.
Wow this sure has got peoples hackles up.
Look at the points one by one.
1. Couldnt be more true. Brand loyalty is absurd your not supporting a friend your buying a product. The moment it sucks is the moment you should drop it. That goes for Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Likewise you shouldnt hesitate to pick it back up when it gets good again.
2. Couldnt be more true. Prerelease hype is mad especially some of Sony's claims, though im fairly sure they do that on purpose. People who believe that stuff have issues its almost certainly all there just to whip people up in to debate about how much is true. The lightgun comment was a bit offtopic for the actual point and though biassed it does bring you back down to Earth somewhat. There is every chance the controller could still turn out to be a gimmick rather than a top seller.
3. Couldnt be more true. The amount of people tied in to a single console even if they have switched over before is silly some of the best purchases ive made are of other consoles for a lot less than whats recently coming out. A lot of people have never thought of that as an option.
4. Controversial but I also believe couldnt be more true. The one thing the 360 has demonstrated to me is that MS were bang on about backwards compatibility. Not many people care. Even those who do, dont care enough to change console plans. Its a great feature and like the article says its gonna get in some good game time but it isnt going to send the console to the top.
5. Couldnt be more true. Nintendo like there rivals are a company. Like all company they care only for profits. Now a lot of people especially recently have painted Nintendo as the good guys, it just doesnt work that way. They are the good guys because it currently makes more money to be the good guys. If they ever got to the top theyd be trying to shut down Sony and MS at every point and to hell with being the good guys anymore. Its business companies arnt evil they are just companies.
6. Made me laugh but fairly inacurate. Just because they are targeting new markets doesnt mean they dont give a shit about old ones. The article lauds the DS later on but this has done exactly the same. Attacked a new market while maintaining the old.
7. Controller has a cradle. Would have been a decent point if it didnt though.
8. A little presumptious to assume what the Revolution will provide on launch in games but also a possibile issue, the recent article saying there are 20 games sounds like a decent enough start but im wondering just what forms those games take. How many are more concept than full game. How many are clones with a new control interface. Still, its quite likely Nintendo will put out a good lineup.
9. Couldnt be more true. Price of the console has never had too much baring on its success. All the cheapest consoles, the gamecube which dropped to 50 quid in no time being a prime example, have done no better because of there lower cost. (Sony, if they are releasing at the high price they claim, may change this. No one has ever really pushed it that far in comparison to the competition.)
10. Couldnt be more true. I dont understand people who do the whole queueing up for hours and hours to get a console far more likely to be bug ridden on the first day. I guess you get to show off for a couple of weeks until everyone has them. Its just not worth it.
11. Nahh. Nintendo would love to be number 1 again and all there efforts arnt just in hand held and making a bit of cash on the side from the home system. Even if you dont think the controller is going to work out youd have to be fairly stupid to think it was easily designed and produced. Its clearly an attempt to get back to the top spot and Nintendo clearly care quite a bit.
12. Also too true. I dont think anyone is completely without fanboy issues. Even this article.
For a large part the article was pretty accurate. I find the fact that most slashdot posts quote one or two sentances that they disagree with, then rubbish the whole article based on them to be amusing. Its almost as if there are some fanboys about.
They used the same excuse with Starcraft and why it was limited to a terrible resolution.
One simple solution that solves the whole thing. Server side settings.
The server can determine the max resolution, the resolution types and pretty much every other setting anyone is linking up with. As long as you program that in to the interface for online gaming there should be no limits on how great you can make things look.
No, my first claim was that there were studies proving gravity moves around light speed.
My second claim was that there are also studies proving these are flawed.
My third claim was that there is no reason to exlude the idea that it moves faster than light.
My fourth claim was that we just werent entirely sure.
and not one of them is inacurate. There _are_ studies proving and attacking all of our current methods of measuring its speed. There _isnt_ as far, as I am aware, hard evidence that it moves at the speed of light. Which means that you _can not_ exclude the possibility it doesnt, and we are in fact unsure.
'strongly suggests' is a reason to doubt gravity moves at anything other than light speed. Not believe that it is a certainty and can now exclude all other possibilities.
Which is what my 'central' claim was. An attack on the absolute accuracy of its speed shown by other posters. Given that I have always stressed throughout all of this that it is highly likely that it does move at light speed I do not understand the problem here. You appear to be on a mission to discredit my posts by bringing up facts and theories that I have never disputed, or which attack things that I have never even claimed.
'Mod parent down: -1 nonsense.'
Err thanks.
'The article to which you link mentions a paper by Kopeiken that has been discredited.'
Really? How'd you work that out? Was it from the second link I posted discrediting him perhaps...
'Measurements of binary pulsars, the canonical example of which is PSR B1534+12, have demonstrated that the speed of gravity is equivalent to the speed of light to within +/-1.5%.'
Yes and the study I posted, while less accurate, said more or less the same thing.
'Quite apart from these results, gravity most certainly does not (as some here have suggested) propagate at infinite speed. The fact that we observe gravitational damping of binary pulsar systems such as PSR 1913+16 conclusively demonstrates that gravity has a finite propagation speed.'
A moot point. I never said gravity works at instantaneous speeds. If others did respond to them with your self superior crap.
As far as I am aware gravitational damping is evidence that gravity moves at a speed around that of light. At no point did I dispute that, in fact, as ive said already the site I posted says more or less the same.
As I also pointed out in my post there are arguments for and against all the tests for gravitational speed they all remain inconclusive and unless you can actually post some evidence, there is no study that proves for certain gravity works at light speed.
Its exceptionally likely that it does, there is torrents of indirect evidence and theory backing that fact up. Something I also said in my apparently nonsensical post...
According to this http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_spee d_030107.html Gravity travels at light speed.
e d_030116.html
i ty_2.htm ) We do not know what gravity is, exactly, so its impossible to simple compare it to your average particle physics and the like.
However, it was immediately attacked http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_spe
Contrary to some of the other posts there is no current reason to exclude the idea that gravity is faster than the speed of light. Some experiments have shown that it is possible. ( http://physics.about.com/cs/gravity/a/speedofgrav
As I said there is equal amounts of arguments against these experiments and there conclusions so we simply dont know for sure. It is very likely that it does travel at exactly the same speed as light (Just as Einstein predicted) but you should never rule out other possibilities until you are sure.
No, your just looking at pre MS bungie with rose tinted lenses.
Bungie has made pretty much nothing other than Halo type games. Pathways in to Darkness, Marathon, Marathon 2 and Marathon Infinity leading up in to Halo are all essentially progressions of the previous game. They even have similar worlds and themes running through them.
With the exception of myth (Which, because Take2 already owned 20% of Bungie before MS got there, went to them. As in MS cant continue that series.) and Oni (Which was released while MS were in control.) your 'creative' game company has been churning out the same kind of game for its entire existence.
but then so has ID and they're pretty succesful. Its daft to think that continuing a succesful line of games is some how wrong or that the company was this creative powerhouse before Microsoft ruined them. Neither are true.
Take a look at the companies MS Games has bought up.
Bungie made Halo by a long long way the most succesful game they ever created.
Digital Anvil made freelancer the most succesful game they ever created.
Ensemble Studios made Age of Empires the most succesful game they ever created. (I hope your noting the pattern here)
FASA made Crimson Skies the most succesful game they ever created.
Rare remain the only studio that hasnt prospered quite as much as theyd hoped though with Perfect Dark and Kameo. Hardly a bad start.
(and lets not have 'Bungie made Halo for PC!' crap. Thats not the point, MS not killing off the studio, is.)
Lionhead was going down. You had either EA, Ubisoft or Microsoft. So which do you want? EA who has bought and dissolved countless companies with no regard for there worth? Ubisoft who have recently taken a liking to absurd protection methods. Or Microsoft who buy up companies to use there names and ideas exclusively? Its not exactly a clear cut 'MS are teh evil' situation.
I know to a lot of people they're the big evil corporation but seriously take a step back and look around for two seconds. You really think the other publishers are better? In fact take a look at the other studios MS owns, you really think Lionhead is gone now?
Im not saying bad things arnt going to happen to molyneux's baby but MS, in this case, is arguably there best option. (With Ubisoft coming a close second. Lets not even suggest the Bullfrog destroying EA.) Heck, Id even go so far as to say they stand a chance of releasing some pretty solid stuff.
A little less of the incessant farewell, RIP, crap and perhaps a little more perspective on what is going on.
I can only speculate that they are trying to make it seem like they earned more last year than they did the most recent year. However, even 807 million dollars is no comparison to 637 million pounds. I believe theyd have to make over 1 billion dollars to match that. Either that or they hit 3 instead of 4 by accident.
Still, whatever reasons for it, thats some pretty hefty profit.