If you want to sign up to your own ID card system, fine, I have no problem with that whatsoever.
The problem is, if I don't want to sign up with your system, you get to put me in jail. This is downright wrong and against the basic right that all human beings have to stay silent about their personal information.
Not to mention, any time in human history where ID schemes and mandatory databases have been misused they used exactly the same "what could go wrong/what have you got to hide" reasoning as they are using now.
Godwin's law be damned, how do you think the Nazi government knew where all the jews lived when they started handing out arm bands and shipping them to concentration camps?
The point isn't what today's government in today's climate will do with it. The point is that no organization should be given that much unchecked power to mandate citizens to give up their private information when it has never been proven that a government is immune to corruption and incompetence.
Governments have proven themselves untrustworthy with this level of information on the general public.
The UK government lost 28 million peoples private information LAST YEAR alone.
But the government has proven itself competent and reliable in every other aspect of its business so I guess we should trust it on this one.....
If they were actually making changes anyone wanted I would love microsoft. All they are doing is cementing their monopoly on PC games which anyone can tell you is no good thing.
I don't want to only be able to run the cutting edge games on Direct X 10 for vista. I don't want to have my game developers jump through hoops for brand label appeal.
The reason people dislike microsoft is they make sure people have to buy XP/Vista/whatever to do what they want. I don't blame microsoft for doing it, but i don't like it. Sure if I had directx 10, I would use it to make people buy my new operating system, but people really don't like being messed around with like that.
The reason I won't be getting Vista is because I don't want to support microsoft's attempt to control PC gaming. I don't want "live anywhere", I don't want any of the crap Microsoft are offering bar Direct X 10. Hopefully some game developers will get their act together and stop playing into Microsofts hands. I think windows are going to see a big backlash in its short sighted attempt to get everyone to buy vista.
In the end its about dishonesty.
Most gamers worth there salt dont give a crap about anything microsoft is offering bar DirectX 10, and when microsoft pretend that Vista is GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE PC GAMING, when all its doing is making DirectX 10 exclusive, then people aren't going to like it, me included.
"I'm open to a discussion here, but please ask yourself, is there anything that Microsoft could do as a business that would ever please you?"
You obviously havnt played Half Life 2 or if you have seem to be confusing it with something else.
Finding various scientists and assauling a tower?
The game spans roughly 14 chapters, ranging from fighting in a zombie invested rebel township to running through giant insect infected beaches. In no part of the game do you have to find 'various scientists'. I believe what you may be refering to is the section of the game where you have to drive through City 17's sewers and water ways in order to meet Eli Vance after a failed teleportation. You could make the argument that this section is an unneccesary, and a waste of time, or that it is a interesting section of gameplay that helps immerse the player in the artistic universe of the game. Either way, that section is only an hour tops if you are exceptionally slow, and so refering to this as "all it was" is just misleading.
How can you say "I found that to be the worst FPS (single-player wise)"? Half Life 2 was one of the most critically acclaimed single player games of all time (for the PC), if you take the time to read www.metacritic.com you will find little to no mention of the multiplayer aspect.
As for only a level to play around with the gravity gun. A) you have the gravity gun for about half the game. B) The game is not split into levels put chapters, i can only assume you are talking about the brief 5 minute section you first get the gravity gun. If all you could find from 15+ hours of gaming was "finding various scientists, then assaulting a tower. Oh, and a level to play around with the Gravity gun" then i suggest you need to replay the game in order to make a better assesment.
What you are saying is baseless waffle, however, the post you are replying to that was labelled "trolling" has some grounding in fact, namely, based from current previews Halo 3 looks extremely similar to the previous games with a few new weapons and 1 new vehicle. The argument that we should withheld judgement as this is in the early stages is irrelevent and senseless, as if people were saying "It looks AWESOME!" no one would be saying wait till the finished product comes out. That is the point of a preview, you comment on the available information.
Half Life 2 may have some flaws, but if you are going to criticize it at least make it relevant to the game, not just spray whatever you can remember from screenshots.
A few new weapons, a new map, a vehicle that was meant to be in the previous game, is it enough just to say HALO 3 and expect fans to go into a flurry of hype?
Where's the innovation?
If you look at the marathon jump between HL1 and HL2, what Bungie are doing is pathetically lazy. If time is constraining them from doing anything truly different from previous games (which is highly dubious) then leave it a little while before you release something with the $50 price tag.
"What if you could save your own movies from Halo 3's single- and multiplayer gameplay and then rewatch them? In Halo 3, you can."
Great, something thats already available and expected in many games. Come on this is meant to be the 'NEXT GENERATION' of gaming, this stuff shouldn't even be being mentioned in comparison with actual developments.
"Halo 3 will have three retail SKUs: standard, collector's edition, and Legendary. Guess which one comes with a helmet and four discs of content?"
How is having extra shit to sell to people meant to get people excited about the game?
Is this all there is needed to cause a sycophantic hysteria months, maybe even a year before the game is released?
The Spore, Supreme Commander, Crysis, Portal all even the ill fated Stalker all showed tremendous promise during previews. Hell most games claim to be REVOLUTIONISING the genre, but Halo 3 doesnt even seem to be trying to fool anyone.
This trend of meager sequels is worrying, together with micro transactions for maps, exclusive content etc. I would not be surprised if Halo 3 were to charge for a 'updates' that were mandatory to play online. These "features" for Halo 3 would not be out of place among free updates for multiplayer games such as Red orchestra and other game developers with a strong dedication to the online community.
I appreciate this is an early preview, but why does this mean only mediocre improvements must be shown. This probably seems more inflamatory than is my intention, and I guess if this is what people want to pay for its good that Bungie are providing it.
Re:10 hours is a lot, really.
on
Yakuza Review
·
· Score: 0
If the game is worth playing you would finish it in one weekend. I know thats what I did with max payne.
If you are playing it in 30 minute chunks a day then it can't be too compelling.
Take down the links to introversion and defcon.
These guys are not prepared for massive amounts of traffic and you're only going to put off people from actually getting the game.
wow this is just like in America when they thought that the stock market would grow exponentially and everyone would become a millionaire, i cant remember exactly how it turned out but im pretty sure nothing crashed.
"Most of the release titles were sequels of solid games (COD, Perfect Dark, EA sports games)."
For sequels read the same game with slight graphic improvement. I wonder how long it will take for people to realise that the EA SPORTS NFL 06, is exactly like EA SPORTS NFL 05 except with a few name changes and A BRAND NEW FEATURE THAT IS GOING TO ROCK YOUR WORLD.(not really)
Microsoft no longer need to hype their shit up (not that it stops them), they've been so effective XBOX owners now generate their own hype and spin that would normally cost millions in advertising. Does it not tell people something that half of the games for a NEXT GENERATION CONSOLE EXTREME, are available on PC's and old gen consoles already? It's not an XBOX 360, its an xbox 1.2, except with better marketing and appearance.
How would it be possible for someone to prove that the guy isn't mute?
People are too narrow minded when it comes to "OMGZORZ TEH TERRORIZTZ R TAKING OVER TEH COUNTRY!!!"
Dying from a terrorist attack is highly unlikely. You are far more likely to die in a plane crash or a car crash, does that mean these vehicles should be banned? No.
Putting ridiculous amounts of security on aircraft won't deter terrorists. They'll just bomb the underground/crowded mall/any public transport.
Battlefront is proficient as a movie tie in, but games like BF2 do it so, so, so much better. If you don't own one of the battlefield games, don't waste your money on this mediocre game, get BF2 instead.
I agree with this guy on the whole "IT LOOKS DIFFERENT SO IT MUST BE ART" attitude that alot of people have but in truth I havn't seen a game that could be classed as true art, but games aren't just about art, it's about PLAYING the game (CS, Quake 3, Zero Hour) or experiencing a different world (HL2, Halo, Baldurs Gate) with plenty of cross over in between. Most art is about evoking emotion or opinion. Not many games do that, sure, you get the "BAN THIS SICK FILTH" over GTA games, but its the equivelant of the shock tactic modern art that just tries to get discussed on its shock factor rather than its artistic content (not that GTA is trying to be art).
Well said.
"The United States is uniquely positioned in the world to protect the fundamental principles of free press and free speech, upon which the Internet has thrived," Goodlatte said in a statement.
Is that guy on crack?
Wouldn't somewhere small and neutral, say SWITZERLAND, be better for something like this. They are in possesion ALOT of the worlds money and have very liberal (as in leave everyone the fuck alone kind of liberal) laws.
A gimmicky site with aload of self-appreciating bullshit (XBOX 360 and wildest gaming dreams are mentioned in the same breathe) won't stop the 360 from being shite.
What we can look foward to in the XBOX 360:
Better Graphics.
Halo 3*.
A shit load of derivitive clones/sequels.
* = Halo 3 is only something to look foward to if you are a douche.
This can be said for all consoles but microsoft have shown even less drive to take risks than Sony and Nintendo.
I own 9 XBOX games, only one of them is not available on other consoles. That 1 is Halo,
which i did manage to complete in the vain hope that i would come across something new or interesting, and that somehow the cripplingly bad selection of weapons and combat dynamic would improve later on.
360 isnt going to be that bad compared to past consoles, but its the WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE VERY FABRIC OF SPACE AND TIME! shit i have a problem with.
This is not a new idea, I remember playing an arcade game a few years back where you had this little plastic sword and your movements with it where acted out on screen. Yet another example of Nintendo claiming to be the saviour of gaming with an AMAZING NEW REVOLUTION IN GAMING TECHNOLOGY, when in reality all it is is a stupid gimmick to make sales.
They had a fucking fishing rod on the dreamcast,whoopy shit, having a cool feature doesn't make the games any better, just look at the DS, no one has thought of a good idea to use i that you couldnt't just do with a mouse instead of a touchscreen (WOOOO, DRAG THINGS ABOUT AND POKE STUFF), I can do that on Black and White and i don't need to pay for an extra screen.
The kind of people who think this is going to change gaming in any significant way are the same kind of people that think the XBOX 360 is going to be anything more than a PC in a shiny box. I.e guillible morons.
There is no reason to make the revolution controller a one handed remote instead of just standard 2 handed D-pad and 4 button lay out but with a motion sensor built in. Well, no reason apart from pretentious twats being able to mouth off about how more innovative/creative/original than any of the other consoles on the market.
Take the game cube controller for instance. Only a complete brand slave would think its anyway superior (in functionality not looks) to the PS2 or (small) Xbox controller. It has all the same features of the other 2 (d-pad, analouge sticks, 4 buttons, shoulder buttons), the only difference is they're in better looking shapes, WOW THE A BUTTON IS BIGGER THAN THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE IT IS THE MOST USED!
No. I have never, ever been playing a PS2 or XBOX game and thought, "i wish the X/Y button was bigger because its so hard to conjure the skill in hand to eye co ordination and hit the fucking button." please, apart from looks, the gamecube controller is in no way better than the XBOX or PS2 controllers, in fact, because they decided to make the design so INNOVATIVEtm, the right analouge stick is in a spectacularly shitty place which means if you were to play an FPS theres no way you can easily hit another button at the same time as looking anywhere without developing some claw like playing style.
Even if you don't agree with me, and think im a "noob" because i cant master the gamecube's unique design you can at least admitt it adds nothing to the other design and is in now way better than the other controllers.
Anyone who thinks Nintendo is on the cutting edge of anything needs a serious reality check. Isn't anyone tired of mario sequels already? Or link?
Those characters were created when nearly all games only had 2 dimensions, its time they moved on from it and started coming up with new idea's instead of relying on people automatically buying a game because its Mario/Zelda/Donkey Kong no matter what the game plays like.
Why does everyone think mario is so awesome anyway?
Compared to Deus Ex its pathetic. It's merely a fancy reaction and spacial awareness test with pretty drawings.
Super Mario features:
- Jump over random holes in the ground
- Jump on top of creatures that show absolutely no reaction to anything you do.
- Jump into coins
- Jump into Mushrooms
- Jump Jump Jump
WOW! REVOLUTIONARY GAMEPLAY. If i released a game like that now but minus the mario logo it would sink like a soggy shit, and rightly so.
So your sitting there thinking, hang on, Mario has alot of good points. Well I tried to find some evidence of this, browsed through a few reviews, here is one that seemed to lack any critical thought at all, here it is :
Super Mario Bros.
Best. Game. Ever.
By kasperstegeman
"12 April 2005 - As far as i'm concerned, anyone who disagrees with me now already can go to hell, and i'm not lying. This is the sublime leader of all the videogames ever, and there probably will never be any game this good. Seriously. Anyone who's played this will have to agree with me, if not go to hell and live through a lifetime of suffering. The best game ever award is maybe somethin
If all I'll get for $60 dollars is another Tekken/Halo/Generic sports game sequel/clone with better graphics, I don't think i'll get a "next generation" console.
Indie developers like Introversion are a great example of how you don't need massive budgets and spectacular graphics to make a brilliant game.
Both Uplink and Darwinia a far better than most of the pap EA come out with and were made with a fraction of the cost.
This is just aload of hype from people who still think Nintendo are "doing it for the games".
Putting a touch screen in a controller would make them incredibly expensive,not to mention extrememly chunky if you stuck standard controlls on it (think Jaguar).
At the end of the day, Miyamoto might say he's all about creativity and "revolution". But at the end of the day he's still afraid to take a risk, sure, we'll see a few odd ball side projects, but the main meat of Nintendo is just boring sequel after boring sequel. Mario was around in the days before the 3rd dimension, time to come up with a new idea people. Zelda? Oooh.. start off as a gay fag all the time and get bigger swords as you go along, then you have a showdown with the big bad guy.
It wasn't to bad for them to do a metroid sequel, since there havnt been shitloads before hand, but now they're milking it for everything its worth, yet another example of lazy game development and people scared to lose their precious money.
"WHOA!! NINTENDO REVOLUTION IS GOING TO PLUG INTO YOUR SPINE AND WILL CLEAN YOUR HOUSE AT THE SAME TIME!"
No. What we will see is another mario game with better graphics, another zelda game with better graphics, another Metroid game with better graphics, possibly another donkey kong game with better graphics, you get the picture.
Nintendo doesn't sell interesting games, it sells a brand with graphic updates. Just check all the games on the DS, albeit the graphics aren't better than gamecube but their better than the GBA's so, what do you know, more franchises.
I wish people would stop hailing Nintendo as a becon of creativity, because they're just as money oriented as Microsoft or Sony, the difference is Nintendo used to be original, so they have hordes of fan boys willing to cream their jeans everytime they see a fat plumber and his moustache.
If GTA had realistic repercussions you'd spend 90% of the game inside a jail cell. Games are meant to be fantasy. If you're relying on videogames to teach your kids morals you probably shouldn't have any.
I was playing doom when i was 5 and i managed not to shoot all my classmates. Blaming the media for an individuals crimes is just lazy. It makes it easier for us to accept what they did if we believe computer games made them do it rather than the fact they could be mentally ill, immoral or just plain retarded.
The mainstream media needs to get off the whole "Video games are evil and if you play them you're evil and so are all your friends" bandwagon and tackle some bigger/real issues.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to sign up to your own ID card system, fine, I have no problem with that whatsoever.
The problem is, if I don't want to sign up with your system, you get to put me in jail.
This is downright wrong and against the basic right that all human beings have to stay silent about their personal information.
Not to mention, any time in human history where ID schemes and mandatory databases have been misused they used exactly the same "what could go wrong/what have you got to hide" reasoning as they are using now.
Godwin's law be damned, how do you think the Nazi government knew where all the jews lived when they started handing out arm bands and shipping them to concentration camps?
The point isn't what today's government in today's climate will do with it. The point is that no organization should be given that much unchecked power to mandate citizens to give up their private information when it has never been proven that a government is immune to corruption and incompetence.
Governments have proven themselves untrustworthy with this level of information on the general public.
The UK government lost 28 million peoples private information LAST YEAR alone.
But the government has proven itself competent and reliable in every other aspect of its business so I guess we should trust it on this one.....
yeesh
Sources :
http://www.betanews.com/article/UK_government_loses_data_on_as_many_as_25_million_people/1195687877
http://www.news.com/U.K.-government-loses-data-on-driving-test-candidates/2100-1029_3-6223292.html
http://www.news.com/U.K.-government-loses-pensioner-data/2100-1029_3-6223493.html
If they were actually making changes anyone wanted I would love microsoft. All they are doing is cementing their monopoly on PC games which anyone can tell you is no good thing.
I don't want to only be able to run the cutting edge games on Direct X 10 for vista. I don't want to have my game developers jump through hoops for brand label appeal.
The reason people dislike microsoft is they make sure people have to buy XP/Vista/whatever to do what they want. I don't blame microsoft for doing it, but i don't like it. Sure if I had directx 10, I would use it to make people buy my new operating system, but people really don't like being messed around with like that.
The reason I won't be getting Vista is because I don't want to support microsoft's attempt to control PC gaming. I don't want "live anywhere", I don't want any of the crap Microsoft are offering bar Direct X 10. Hopefully some game developers will get their act together and stop playing into Microsofts hands. I think windows are going to see a big backlash in its short sighted attempt to get everyone to buy vista.
In the end its about dishonesty.
Most gamers worth there salt dont give a crap about anything microsoft is offering bar DirectX 10, and when microsoft pretend that Vista is GOING TO REVOLUTIONISE PC GAMING, when all its doing is making DirectX 10 exclusive, then people aren't going to like it, me included.
"I'm open to a discussion here, but please ask yourself, is there anything that Microsoft could do as a business that would ever please you?"
Some people eh.
What the hell are you talking about?
I have a shelf full of PC games and they're exactly the same size as the dvd cases consoles use.
Where the hell do you live that they are using those old big boxes for PC games?
You obviously havnt played Half Life 2 or if you have seem to be confusing it with something else.
Finding various scientists and assauling a tower?
The game spans roughly 14 chapters, ranging from fighting in a zombie invested rebel township to running through giant insect infected beaches.
In no part of the game do you have to find 'various scientists'. I believe what you may be refering to is the section of the game where you have to drive through City 17's sewers and water ways in order to meet Eli Vance after a failed teleportation. You could make the argument that this section is an unneccesary, and a waste of time, or that it is a interesting section of gameplay that helps immerse the player in the artistic universe of the game. Either way, that section is only an hour tops if you are exceptionally slow, and so refering to this as "all it was" is just misleading.
How can you say "I found that to be the worst FPS (single-player wise)"? Half Life 2 was one of the most critically acclaimed single player games of all time (for the PC), if you take the time to read www.metacritic.com you will find little to no mention of the multiplayer aspect.
As for only a level to play around with the gravity gun. A) you have the gravity gun for about half the game. B) The game is not split into levels put chapters, i can only assume you are talking about the brief 5 minute section you first get the gravity gun. If all you could find from 15+ hours of gaming was "finding various scientists, then assaulting a tower. Oh, and a level to play around with the Gravity gun" then i suggest you need to replay the game in order to make a better assesment.
What you are saying is baseless waffle, however, the post you are replying to that was labelled "trolling" has some grounding in fact, namely, based from current previews Halo 3 looks extremely similar to the previous games with a few new weapons and 1 new vehicle. The argument that we should withheld judgement as this is in the early stages is irrelevent and senseless, as if people were saying "It looks AWESOME!" no one would be saying wait till the finished product comes out. That is the point of a preview, you comment on the available information.
Half Life 2 may have some flaws, but if you are going to criticize it at least make it relevant to the game, not just spray whatever you can remember from screenshots.
A few new weapons, a new map, a vehicle that was meant to be in the previous game, is it enough just to say HALO 3 and expect fans to go into a flurry of hype?
1 23408599084&q
Where's the innovation?
If you look at the marathon jump between HL1 and HL2, what Bungie are doing is pathetically lazy. If time is constraining them from doing anything truly different from previous games (which is highly dubious) then leave it a little while before you release something with the $50 price tag.
"What if you could save your own movies from Halo 3's single- and multiplayer gameplay and then rewatch them? In Halo 3, you can."
Great, something thats already available and expected in many games. Come on this is meant to be the 'NEXT GENERATION' of gaming, this stuff shouldn't even be being mentioned in comparison with actual developments.
"Halo 3 will have three retail SKUs: standard, collector's edition, and Legendary. Guess which one comes with a helmet and four discs of content?"
How is having extra shit to sell to people meant to get people excited about the game?
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=6359615
Is this all there is needed to cause a sycophantic hysteria months, maybe even a year before the game is released?
The Spore, Supreme Commander, Crysis, Portal all even the ill fated Stalker all showed tremendous promise during previews. Hell most games claim to be REVOLUTIONISING the genre, but Halo 3 doesnt even seem to be trying to fool anyone.
This trend of meager sequels is worrying, together with micro transactions for maps, exclusive content etc. I would not be surprised if Halo 3 were to charge for a 'updates' that were mandatory to play online. These "features" for Halo 3 would not be out of place among free updates for multiplayer games such as Red orchestra and other game developers with a strong dedication to the online community.
I appreciate this is an early preview, but why does this mean only mediocre improvements must be shown. This probably seems more inflamatory than is my intention, and I guess if this is what people want to pay for its good that Bungie are providing it.
If the game is worth playing you would finish it in one weekend. I know thats what I did with max payne. If you are playing it in 30 minute chunks a day then it can't be too compelling.
Take down the links to introversion and defcon. These guys are not prepared for massive amounts of traffic and you're only going to put off people from actually getting the game.
wow this is just like in America when they thought that the stock market would grow exponentially and everyone would become a millionaire, i cant remember exactly how it turned out but im pretty sure nothing crashed.
"Most of the release titles were sequels of solid games (COD, Perfect Dark, EA sports games)."
For sequels read the same game with slight graphic improvement. I wonder how long it will take for people to realise that the EA SPORTS NFL 06, is exactly like EA SPORTS NFL 05 except with a few name changes and A BRAND NEW FEATURE THAT IS GOING TO ROCK YOUR WORLD.(not really)
Microsoft no longer need to hype their shit up (not that it stops them), they've been so effective XBOX owners now generate their own hype and spin that would normally cost millions in advertising. Does it not tell people something that half of the games for a NEXT GENERATION CONSOLE EXTREME, are available on PC's and old gen consoles already? It's not an XBOX 360, its an xbox 1.2, except with better marketing and appearance.
How would this work for these guys?
How would it be possible for someone to prove that the guy isn't mute?
People are too narrow minded when it comes to "OMGZORZ TEH TERRORIZTZ R TAKING OVER TEH COUNTRY!!!"
Dying from a terrorist attack is highly unlikely. You are far more likely to die in a plane crash or a car crash, does that mean these vehicles should be banned? No.
Putting ridiculous amounts of security on aircraft won't deter terrorists. They'll just bomb the underground/crowded mall/any public transport.
Battlefront is proficient as a movie tie in, but games like BF2 do it so, so, so much better. If you don't own one of the battlefield games, don't waste your money on this mediocre game, get BF2 instead.
I agree with this guy on the whole "IT LOOKS DIFFERENT SO IT MUST BE ART" attitude that alot of people have but in truth I havn't seen a game that could be classed as true art, but games aren't just about art, it's about PLAYING the game (CS, Quake 3, Zero Hour) or experiencing a different world (HL2, Halo, Baldurs Gate) with plenty of cross over in between. Most art is about evoking emotion or opinion. Not many games do that, sure, you get the "BAN THIS SICK FILTH" over GTA games, but its the equivelant of the shock tactic modern art that just tries to get discussed on its shock factor rather than its artistic content (not that GTA is trying to be art).
Well said. "The United States is uniquely positioned in the world to protect the fundamental principles of free press and free speech, upon which the Internet has thrived," Goodlatte said in a statement. Is that guy on crack? Wouldn't somewhere small and neutral, say SWITZERLAND, be better for something like this. They are in possesion ALOT of the worlds money and have very liberal (as in leave everyone the fuck alone kind of liberal) laws.
How about not enforcing completely facist patent laws and dont try and milk your audience for as much money as you can make.
A gimmicky site with aload of self-appreciating bullshit (XBOX 360 and wildest gaming dreams are mentioned in the same breathe) won't stop the 360 from being shite. What we can look foward to in the XBOX 360: Better Graphics. Halo 3*. A shit load of derivitive clones/sequels. * = Halo 3 is only something to look foward to if you are a douche. This can be said for all consoles but microsoft have shown even less drive to take risks than Sony and Nintendo. I own 9 XBOX games, only one of them is not available on other consoles. That 1 is Halo, which i did manage to complete in the vain hope that i would come across something new or interesting, and that somehow the cripplingly bad selection of weapons and combat dynamic would improve later on. 360 isnt going to be that bad compared to past consoles, but its the WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE VERY FABRIC OF SPACE AND TIME! shit i have a problem with.
This is not a new idea, I remember playing an arcade game a few years back where you had this little plastic sword and your movements with it where acted out on screen. Yet another example of Nintendo claiming to be the saviour of gaming with an AMAZING NEW REVOLUTION IN GAMING TECHNOLOGY, when in reality all it is is a stupid gimmick to make sales. They had a fucking fishing rod on the dreamcast,whoopy shit, having a cool feature doesn't make the games any better, just look at the DS, no one has thought of a good idea to use i that you couldnt't just do with a mouse instead of a touchscreen (WOOOO, DRAG THINGS ABOUT AND POKE STUFF), I can do that on Black and White and i don't need to pay for an extra screen. The kind of people who think this is going to change gaming in any significant way are the same kind of people that think the XBOX 360 is going to be anything more than a PC in a shiny box. I.e guillible morons. There is no reason to make the revolution controller a one handed remote instead of just standard 2 handed D-pad and 4 button lay out but with a motion sensor built in. Well, no reason apart from pretentious twats being able to mouth off about how more innovative/creative/original than any of the other consoles on the market. Take the game cube controller for instance. Only a complete brand slave would think its anyway superior (in functionality not looks) to the PS2 or (small) Xbox controller. It has all the same features of the other 2 (d-pad, analouge sticks, 4 buttons, shoulder buttons), the only difference is they're in better looking shapes, WOW THE A BUTTON IS BIGGER THAN THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE IT IS THE MOST USED! No. I have never, ever been playing a PS2 or XBOX game and thought, "i wish the X/Y button was bigger because its so hard to conjure the skill in hand to eye co ordination and hit the fucking button." please, apart from looks, the gamecube controller is in no way better than the XBOX or PS2 controllers, in fact, because they decided to make the design so INNOVATIVEtm, the right analouge stick is in a spectacularly shitty place which means if you were to play an FPS theres no way you can easily hit another button at the same time as looking anywhere without developing some claw like playing style. Even if you don't agree with me, and think im a "noob" because i cant master the gamecube's unique design you can at least admitt it adds nothing to the other design and is in now way better than the other controllers. Anyone who thinks Nintendo is on the cutting edge of anything needs a serious reality check. Isn't anyone tired of mario sequels already? Or link? Those characters were created when nearly all games only had 2 dimensions, its time they moved on from it and started coming up with new idea's instead of relying on people automatically buying a game because its Mario/Zelda/Donkey Kong no matter what the game plays like. Why does everyone think mario is so awesome anyway? Compared to Deus Ex its pathetic. It's merely a fancy reaction and spacial awareness test with pretty drawings. Super Mario features: - Jump over random holes in the ground - Jump on top of creatures that show absolutely no reaction to anything you do. - Jump into coins - Jump into Mushrooms - Jump Jump Jump WOW! REVOLUTIONARY GAMEPLAY. If i released a game like that now but minus the mario logo it would sink like a soggy shit, and rightly so. So your sitting there thinking, hang on, Mario has alot of good points. Well I tried to find some evidence of this, browsed through a few reviews, here is one that seemed to lack any critical thought at all, here it is : Super Mario Bros. Best. Game. Ever. By kasperstegeman "12 April 2005 - As far as i'm concerned, anyone who disagrees with me now already can go to hell, and i'm not lying. This is the sublime leader of all the videogames ever, and there probably will never be any game this good. Seriously. Anyone who's played this will have to agree with me, if not go to hell and live through a lifetime of suffering. The best game ever award is maybe somethin
If all I'll get for $60 dollars is another Tekken/Halo/Generic sports game sequel/clone with better graphics, I don't think i'll get a "next generation" console. Indie developers like Introversion are a great example of how you don't need massive budgets and spectacular graphics to make a brilliant game. Both Uplink and Darwinia a far better than most of the pap EA come out with and were made with a fraction of the cost.
This is just aload of hype from people who still think Nintendo are "doing it for the games". Putting a touch screen in a controller would make them incredibly expensive,not to mention extrememly chunky if you stuck standard controlls on it (think Jaguar). At the end of the day, Miyamoto might say he's all about creativity and "revolution". But at the end of the day he's still afraid to take a risk, sure, we'll see a few odd ball side projects, but the main meat of Nintendo is just boring sequel after boring sequel. Mario was around in the days before the 3rd dimension, time to come up with a new idea people. Zelda? Oooh.. start off as a gay fag all the time and get bigger swords as you go along, then you have a showdown with the big bad guy. It wasn't to bad for them to do a metroid sequel, since there havnt been shitloads before hand, but now they're milking it for everything its worth, yet another example of lazy game development and people scared to lose their precious money. "WHOA!! NINTENDO REVOLUTION IS GOING TO PLUG INTO YOUR SPINE AND WILL CLEAN YOUR HOUSE AT THE SAME TIME!" No. What we will see is another mario game with better graphics, another zelda game with better graphics, another Metroid game with better graphics, possibly another donkey kong game with better graphics, you get the picture. Nintendo doesn't sell interesting games, it sells a brand with graphic updates. Just check all the games on the DS, albeit the graphics aren't better than gamecube but their better than the GBA's so, what do you know, more franchises. I wish people would stop hailing Nintendo as a becon of creativity, because they're just as money oriented as Microsoft or Sony, the difference is Nintendo used to be original, so they have hordes of fan boys willing to cream their jeans everytime they see a fat plumber and his moustache.
If GTA had realistic repercussions you'd spend 90% of the game inside a jail cell. Games are meant to be fantasy. If you're relying on videogames to teach your kids morals you probably shouldn't have any. I was playing doom when i was 5 and i managed not to shoot all my classmates. Blaming the media for an individuals crimes is just lazy. It makes it easier for us to accept what they did if we believe computer games made them do it rather than the fact they could be mentally ill, immoral or just plain retarded. The mainstream media needs to get off the whole "Video games are evil and if you play them you're evil and so are all your friends" bandwagon and tackle some bigger/real issues.
Is it me you're looking for? sorry.