That's like saying "Complex analysis is really just the Cauchy integral formula. How people could study that for hundreds of years and still claim to have new results is beyond me."
Trig is also generally taught at high school, where the pace is slower than at college. And I've never known a trig course to go over exp(ix)=cos(x)+i*sin(x).
"Theory" in math is really a subject that is based upon a collection of core theorems. Things like bifurcation theory, equation theory, number theory, graph theory. The term "theory" in math is everywhere, and has nothing to do with the definition of "theory" given to grade school students in science classs.
Then again, at the same time, I do have a problem with saying you can do any math without axioms. That's impossible. The way math works is you start out with whatever rules you agree already exist (your axioms) and start proving things from there. Maybe they didn't explicitly state their axioms, but they're there.
No, I really didn't mean it as pro- or anti- anything. It was just a string of bad luck for my friend. Though I think the KOTOR saves were too big for memory cards. Even still, he just totally forgot about it and didn't think to back anything up.
Yeah, my PS2 got the famous disc read error. Thankfully they fixed it for free, got it back in about a week. Haven't had any problems since (been at least a year since then).
A friend of mine on the other hand got an Xbox shortly after it came out. His had similar read problems. He had to send it in two or three times before it finally started working properly. Then later he traded it in for a limited translucent one. Only notable thing about that was he didn't think about how he would no longer have his KOTOR saves! Hours and hours down the drain. Funny but sad.
I'm sorry, but I disagree with almost everything you say. Most of the reason is that in the debate between PC games or console games or old games versus new games, I don't think either is decidedly better than the other, just different.
There are a number of genres that primarily just exist on the PC, like strategy, sim, and FPS, and others that are primarily on consoles, like Japanese RPGs, surivial horror, platformers. Naturally there is some crossing over and ports, but it seems that people who worship one or the other are really in it for their favored genre. Their bias towards a platform then comes from that.
If you honestly believe that PC games are better partly because they are capable of better resolution and have better processing power, then that seems to go against your later argument that older games - made when the capabilities were even lower - are better. Personally I think the reason most people favor old games over new games is that some genres have fallen by the wayside as time moved on, while other new ones have come up and started getting good. Well, and I could see an argument that many games didn't survive the transition to 3D, but I think that's gradually getting better.
I'm a firm believer that games, just like any media, will always produce good and bad products. As time goes on people just tend to forget the slew of mediocrity that came along with the good stuff that they do remember. I would be surprised if there was a significant difference in the ratio of good to bad games released over time.
And I am somewhat glad for modern pricing. It is possible for good new games to come out at $20 (Katamari Damacy) or $30 (quite a few more). Though many games come out for more, at least we don't have the inflated prices that came with cartridges during the Nintendo's hayday. Usually just special editions come greater than $50.
Modern gaming is much better than you seem to think. But like with all things, you just have to look for the good stuff.
The problem with top whatever lists is they seem designed to start flamewars. For example, the first list seems to me to be very biased towards pc games. It's almost as though the console games there were tossed on because even PC gamers know all about them.
The second list seemed very biased towards early games. Though you could argue that if it is a list of games that "defined" the PS1, then it's to be expected.
But someone already noted that the lists seem very good to them. So it shows what I know. Possibly means I'm biased, not the lists.
"When Sony launched its console, the gaming industry was bogged down by expensive production, too many competing standards, and crippling uncertainty among the mind-share leaders."
Too bad nothing seems to have changed. Articles about the massive expense of making next-gen titles are common these days. Arguments over either DVD, HD-DVD, and Blu-Ray or the differing architechtures of the PC, PS3, and XBox360 are also common (haven't heard much about revolution coding). Uncertainty also seems rampant, if you count that by all the sequels and cheap licenses that come out. But I feel that just like the other issues, the creativity/sequel issue is no more or less prevalent now than any other time in console life.
No, what the PS1 did what is propelled games into the mainstream. Though it's awful cliche, the PS1 made it cool for the MTV crowd to play games.
I like the principle of Steam getting rid of the publishing middleman, but I absolutely hate the requirement of being online even after buying the game. Call me old fashioned, but I've always prefered being able to buy a game, play it, then a few years later bust it out and play it again. If I wanted, I could go home right now and bust out my nintendo and start playing some games. Steam requires that the company still exist and have the same setup a few years later. Technology changes so quickly that I don't have a whole lot of confidence that it will retain a similar form, if it still exists. This is something (aside from the price) that has traditionally kept me away from MMOGs. The impermanence of it being so built in. If that changes I'll give it another look.
As for the revolution. That's all speculation right now, but I can only hope it will do all that people hope it can. If old things aren't so available, at least they can still be playable.
At least the last few times I've dealt with them, amazon.com actually was just a front that actually sold games through gamestop.com. Kinda like their toy section was selling Toys 'R' Us toys. If that's changed, I'll have to give them another look.
I'll have to check out compusa. I'm ashamed to admit it, but lately I've been getting better online results with walmart.com than with anyone else. Even bestbuy. Thanks for the ideas.
For quite some time I've lamented how few video game retailers there are. Gamestop and EB have very variable workforce and policies. Larger stores that do video games in addition to other products (Best Buy, Target, Walmart, and so on) have a terrible selection. Even Best Buy, who is good with DVDs at least, tends to be a few weeks behind on the video games, if they get them at all.
This is compounded even more when looking online. I have yet to find an online video game retailer that is decent. Especially regarding preorders. If I preorder three things from gamestop.com, two come out one day, and a third comes out one day later, they will send them to me UPS. In three different packages. And there's no way I know to keep that from happening.
So when I heard the news of the merger, this just made me depressed that there would be that much less competition between retailers. Unless there are some magical game retailers I'm missing. Does anyone out there know of (especially online) game retailers that are good?
Slashdot Mirror
That's like saying "Complex analysis is really just the Cauchy integral formula. How people could study that for hundreds of years and still claim to have new results is beyond me."
Trig is also generally taught at high school, where the pace is slower than at college. And I've never known a trig course to go over exp(ix)=cos(x)+i*sin(x).
"Theory" in math is really a subject that is based upon a collection of core theorems. Things like bifurcation theory, equation theory, number theory, graph theory. The term "theory" in math is everywhere, and has nothing to do with the definition of "theory" given to grade school students in science classs.
Then again, at the same time, I do have a problem with saying you can do any math without axioms. That's impossible. The way math works is you start out with whatever rules you agree already exist (your axioms) and start proving things from there. Maybe they didn't explicitly state their axioms, but they're there.
No, I really didn't mean it as pro- or anti- anything. It was just a string of bad luck for my friend. Though I think the KOTOR saves were too big for memory cards. Even still, he just totally forgot about it and didn't think to back anything up.
8Bit theater reference maybe?
Yeah, my PS2 got the famous disc read error. Thankfully they fixed it for free, got it back in about a week. Haven't had any problems since (been at least a year since then).
A friend of mine on the other hand got an Xbox shortly after it came out. His had similar read problems. He had to send it in two or three times before it finally started working properly. Then later he traded it in for a limited translucent one. Only notable thing about that was he didn't think about how he would no longer have his KOTOR saves! Hours and hours down the drain. Funny but sad.
I'm sorry, but I disagree with almost everything you say. Most of the reason is that in the debate between PC games or console games or old games versus new games, I don't think either is decidedly better than the other, just different. There are a number of genres that primarily just exist on the PC, like strategy, sim, and FPS, and others that are primarily on consoles, like Japanese RPGs, surivial horror, platformers. Naturally there is some crossing over and ports, but it seems that people who worship one or the other are really in it for their favored genre. Their bias towards a platform then comes from that. If you honestly believe that PC games are better partly because they are capable of better resolution and have better processing power, then that seems to go against your later argument that older games - made when the capabilities were even lower - are better. Personally I think the reason most people favor old games over new games is that some genres have fallen by the wayside as time moved on, while other new ones have come up and started getting good. Well, and I could see an argument that many games didn't survive the transition to 3D, but I think that's gradually getting better. I'm a firm believer that games, just like any media, will always produce good and bad products. As time goes on people just tend to forget the slew of mediocrity that came along with the good stuff that they do remember. I would be surprised if there was a significant difference in the ratio of good to bad games released over time. And I am somewhat glad for modern pricing. It is possible for good new games to come out at $20 (Katamari Damacy) or $30 (quite a few more). Though many games come out for more, at least we don't have the inflated prices that came with cartridges during the Nintendo's hayday. Usually just special editions come greater than $50. Modern gaming is much better than you seem to think. But like with all things, you just have to look for the good stuff.
The problem with top whatever lists is they seem designed to start flamewars. For example, the first list seems to me to be very biased towards pc games. It's almost as though the console games there were tossed on because even PC gamers know all about them.
The second list seemed very biased towards early games. Though you could argue that if it is a list of games that "defined" the PS1, then it's to be expected.
But someone already noted that the lists seem very good to them. So it shows what I know. Possibly means I'm biased, not the lists.
Too bad nothing seems to have changed. Articles about the massive expense of making next-gen titles are common these days. Arguments over either DVD, HD-DVD, and Blu-Ray or the differing architechtures of the PC, PS3, and XBox360 are also common (haven't heard much about revolution coding). Uncertainty also seems rampant, if you count that by all the sequels and cheap licenses that come out. But I feel that just like the other issues, the creativity/sequel issue is no more or less prevalent now than any other time in console life. No, what the PS1 did what is propelled games into the mainstream. Though it's awful cliche, the PS1 made it cool for the MTV crowd to play games.
As for the revolution. That's all speculation right now, but I can only hope it will do all that people hope it can. If old things aren't so available, at least they can still be playable.
I'll have to check out compusa. I'm ashamed to admit it, but lately I've been getting better online results with walmart.com than with anyone else. Even bestbuy. Thanks for the ideas.
This is compounded even more when looking online. I have yet to find an online video game retailer that is decent. Especially regarding preorders. If I preorder three things from gamestop.com, two come out one day, and a third comes out one day later, they will send them to me UPS. In three different packages. And there's no way I know to keep that from happening.
So when I heard the news of the merger, this just made me depressed that there would be that much less competition between retailers. Unless there are some magical game retailers I'm missing. Does anyone out there know of (especially online) game retailers that are good?