True, I'm just using the assumption that if one would be a re-release, one would presumably be willing to buy a remake, given the right price of course. Few are really going to spend more on a remake if it's available as a release. I wouldn't download a remake of the original Zelda when I already own the VC rerelease, even if the graphics looked like A Link to the Past.
suspect Star Trek Online will do better than yet another Sword & Sorcery game
You make an good observation. Richard Bartle, author of "Designing Virtual Worlds" talked about this same aspect.
Here's a snippit of what he has to say...
Why are there so few Wild West vitual worlds? Because it's very hard to explain why Joe Newbie's character can't enter a shop, buy a loaded six-gun, and empty it into the back of a character someone else has been playing for five years. They didn't call those things "equalizers" for nothing! Fantasy, Science Fiction, and Horror worlds have fiction-preserving ways out of this, as do ones based another hundred years or more into the past. It's not the only issue, though - there are plenty more. Following are some examples:
Crime fiction doesn't work well as a genre because players don't want to divulge clues to one another. This means they're discouraged from communicating; most designers would prefer to encourage them.
Comedy flops as a genre. You laugh the first time something funny happens, but by th etenth time that same thing happens, it ceases to amuse you.
Romance doesn't work for virtual worlds. Sex does, but romance doesn't. If you start out with the former, you rapidly end up with the later.
Lone heroes or heroines don't translate well into virtual worlds. It doesn't make sense to have 5,000 people running around who all act like Indiana Jones, Lara Croft, James Bond, or Dr Who. There wouldn't be room for them in the real world, let alone a virtual one
~ Designing Virtual Worlds, Richard A. Bartle, New Riders, p.40-41
The gem is just one of many great points he covers. Anyone who's a fan of video games and MMO's would probably truly enjoy reading this book. It's basically a complete history of MMO's with great details on how virtual worlds work and how they don't.
I've learned a lot in just 100 pages. Though, it was released in 2003, so it's only current up to Dark Age of Camelot, which is a bit sad as I would LOVE to hear his views on the monster that is World of Warcraft as he analysis games such as EQ, DAoC, Ultima Online, MUDs, MUCKs, MUSHES, AC, AO, and SWG.
I didn't realize how much I missed those old games until I fired up the VC on the Wii
Exactly, the virtual console is pretty much proof of concept that "remakes" can be wildly successful. To think, I just dropped ~$9 to buy "World Heroes" from the Neo Geo (a system I never owned) on the VC. *Shrug* It enjoyed playing that game a long time ago in the arcade and it's still fairly fun today. Though, I'd be the first to sign a petition to drop VC prices by 1/2. =) There's lots of games I probably buy if they didn't cost nearly as much as a used DS game. =P
Further to support "remakes", there are a lot of games I know I and my fiancee would buy if they remade them. Sadly, in the game world, all those small mom/pop shops that made some good games went under or where eaten by the bigger fish and the license to (re-)produce such games are in legal limbo. Or on a similar note, getting "Tecmo Super Bowl" on the VC is a wet dream, except it's likely not going to happen without a renewed and excessively expensive license from the NFL, despite the rosters for the teams being dead.
But the point is, people who create sites do care if their name is recognizable. They have to. Nobody wants to create a popular site, and then have somebody else squat the exact same URL (except with a different TLD) and populate it with a bunch of porn links or ads.
Your point is taken well. TLD's are not just "TLDs". They've become part and parcel with trademarked names and company names. No,no, no. It's not Expedia... it's Expedia[dot]COM. Etc. Companies scramble to register their business names only to find another business with the same name (see Nissan Computerslong legal battle against Nissan Automotive).
You have to consider registering variations of your domain name before someone else does to avoid trademark dilution and consumer confusion. {company name}, {company name}Manufacturing, {company name}ManufacturingCompany, {company name}MFGCO, etc. Of course, YMMV depending on your company name and sector/trade.
Companies have multiple sites such as "corporate site", "brand A site", "Brand B site", "Product A Micro-site", etc. Then, they might have to register multiple variants of those sites. Singular and plural versions, Nicknames, and keywords. ie: should it be Business.com, BusinessProduct.com, BusinessProducts.com, BusinessProductName.com, etc. (some products are two words that are commonly referred to in the singural, like "Toilet Seat" might just be called a "Seat" or "Seats" in the context of a bathroom.
On top of that you have to consider registering multiple TLD's..COM,.NET,.ORG,.JOBS,.BIZ,.INFO, etc. Now, if you're an international company, you have to consider registering country specific TLD's..US,.CO.UK,.FR,.IT,.CN,.MX, etc. Now, they're opening up regional TLD's that companies have to consider....EU,.ASIA.
You take all the TLD's , all the sites a company might have, and all the name variations a of a site name a company might register, and you get yourself one hell of a mess and cost. Sure, domains are relatively cheep but if you're managing hundreds or thousands, it becomes a huge sink, particularly since most everyone STILL uses.COM.
Then you have to tie this all in with Search Engine parameters such as duplication. All you do is register these domains and 301 redirect them to your flagship domain name, which doesn't do a whole lot for you. Others might use language specific sites, which will pass duplication standards.
I guess, a good question is... what do people with to manage their site domains? What is your domain strategy? Do you try to register everything you can to avoid squatters and parkers for brand dilution? Or do you just say "screw it" and let them have them, they're not likely to get much out of them. Should you really use.jobs to be/point or redirect to your careers page? Or just say "screw it" because "no one"(tm) uses it?
That, to me, sums it up just nicely. It is a decent enough value at the price and the hours of play more than justify it.
Am I the only one who's seriously disappointed by the "orange box"? I already own HL2 and EP1. Gift cards to give HL2 and EP1 to a friend? Give me a break. It's a pure marketing scam to get HL2 in more peoples hands. OH! So the friend gets a free copy of HL2 and EP1 at your expense. How nice of them use US to give someone ELSE their product! Of course, since the friend didn't pay for his HL2, he'll be more than willing to drop $50 for the orange box.
Sadly, I'm a big enough fan of HL and it's off shoots (Counter Strike, Team Fortress, etc), that I'm willing to drop $45 for it (hey, $5 off when pre-ordered from GameStop, I'll take what I can get). If I'm lucky and if I find a friend who wants it, I can make him buy me a few beers for the game.
Lots of people are bashing Sony here, but considering the price of a PS2, how many people *actually need* a machine that plays PS2 games and don't have have one?
As a PS2 owner who had interest in the PS3, I can say that I would NOT want to own both. First thing to go would be the PS2 because I can use the PS3 for it. It sucks enough having to switch my PS2 and Wii around every time I want to play a diff. game.
I was working on getting a Xbox 360 so I could buy Rock Band, but then the rumors of it coming out on the Wii started and I decided to just pick up Guitar Hero 3 for the Wii and wait for Rock Band. I'd think of getting Rock Band for the PS2, but the one feature I really want is to be able to download games (which I'm keeping my figures crossed that Nintendo will get their online store worked out so 3rd parties can use it for their games).
Though, my write-up was worded much differently, this article cannot be called 'fair'. It's cleverly written, and has a lot of facts, but it's not fair. Here's why...
Sensationalism is a manner of being extremely controversial, loud, or attention-grabbing.
The definition of sensationalism I'm using, so we're all on the same page.
Nintendo Wii takes a murderous turn
Nintendo is not murdering people, nor are they planning on it. Catchy, but sensationalist because Nintendo is also not the only company releasing Manhunt 2. Not a 'fair' headline by any means, but very "attention-grabbing". Well chosen for a sensationalist piece.
Since the Wii version uses the motion-sensitive controllers, it literally gives players the hands of a killer.
No it doesn't. Pure sensationalism as well as being very unfair to Nintendo.
Manhunt 2 was originally rated Adults Only -- equivalent to an X in films --
Very cleverly chosen words. "X" rating is not used anymore. It's called "NC-17". I believe "X" was used purposefully to draw it's readers upon it's connection to "XXX" films to make it's previous rating appear even worse to the reader. Fair? Debatable. But without a doubt, a very interesting choice of words.
Nintendo doesn't need to expand its user base to help the Wii continue to outsell its pricier and technologically superior competitors.
False. Nintendo has every need to expand it's user base. They're in a competitive environment. If they don't try to expand their user base, they could loose their ground eventually, particularly if their competitors expand into Nintendo's target market, which is what they're doing. Purely false. Bad business. All sensationalism to convince the reader of their authors point. Not fair. (particularly since Nintendo has a bad rap in the "hardcore gamer" department which keeps plenty of people from taking Nintendo seriously)
Since launching in November, Nintendo has sold 4 million Wiis; in the same time, Microsoft has sold 3 million Xbox 360s and Sony 1.75 million PS3s,
Excellent fact. Makes the author more convincing, however, it's a smoke screen. The number of units Nintendo sold is irrelevant to Manhunt 2's violence. Unless you're trying to convince people that Nintendo's choice to carry this title is "Evil"(tm). This statement brings along a lot of baggage to the reader where they start drawing their own conclusions that the author cleverly crafted them into. I'll avoid expanding on this for brevity.
Wii remains so successful that Nintendo doesn't think it can supply enough to meet this holiday season's demand.
Again, an excellent fact, but irrelevant to Nintendo's choice to carry Manhunt 2. Except, again, to lead the reader into the conclusion that since this article is about Manhunt 2 and violence and therefor Nintendo is trying to put violence in everyone's home. Again, unfairly targeting Nintendo. With the previous statement, the author continues to try and build up his other sensationalist statements with irrelevant facts. Thus making his sensationalist statements even more so.
A flood of new Wii titles is on the way, [list of Wii Titles]. But Manhunt 2 goes the furthest.
Please, the furthest? No other game has gone further or as far. Pure sensationalism and extremely unfair as the author ONLY talks about Wii games in connection to Manhunt 2, when Manhunt 2 is not a Wii exclusive nor developed by Nintendo.
On the Wii, players physically make killing motions with the
I would not be surprised to see this develop to their logical conclusion where there are distribution sites that offer a range of services to artists to distribute their work but do not "own" the distribution or copyrights to those works.
I think Garage Band has been trying to do something like this for a while. My brothers band used it for a while and I know at least one band that made it big, but did so by going through a traditional record label and having only been discovered on the site.
It's a great site to find indie artists. I've heard some good stuff and some complete crap. In general, I enjoy it for what it's worth: something I won't hear on the radio.
You're right on the 'crap' part, but not necessarily the 'facts' part. Just do a search to see how much Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie, Brittney Spears and Lindsay Lohan dominated the news in 2007. I imagine most of those stories where 'factual' but not worth the treatment they got.
but how in the world do you incorporate a game controller into a long series of leg lifts and crunches?
What about that EyeToy thing they have for the PS2? I'd wager this piece of hardware pretty much failed in the U.S. but I'm not big on the PS2. I do know that Karaoke Revolution Party uses it and I saw a kid using it at a wal-mart demo.
On the other hand, I find it QUITE surprising that the Wii can so handily outsell the 360 when its game library is, all things considered, horribly outmatched. This is a very strong example of the fact that games do NOT sell the system, as many gamers like to think.
I see what you're trying to say, but I respectfully disagree. My reason is that "Wii Sports" is the "killer ap" that is selling the system. A close second is the Virtual Console.
It's always been people's enjoyment of Wii Sports that they see the 'potential' of the system and the motion sense. When my old man picked up the controller and held it like a baseball bat, he thought it was the coolest thing. Like virtual reality. When my mom played bowling, she thought it was as real as you could get. Everyone enjoyed playing Tennis as a family activity.
For the dedicated gamers, Zelda helped sell the system at the start, before others had a share of the fun. Also the promise of Smash Bros., Mario Cart, Mario Galaxies, and the recent release of Metroid, had a lot of fans picking up the system in simple anticipation.
My fiancee (who doesn't like video games) is adamantly playing Zelda, Zelda 2, Donkey Kong Country, Mario Bros., etc. on the Virtual Console. Explaining to me she never got the chance to play them as a kid as her father dominated the system. She's reliving a lot of nostalgia (and showing me up that she knows more about the original Zelda games than I do).
The 360 has a lot of great games and a lot more of them, but the Wii definitely has the exclusive 'killer ap' game, Wii Sports. Even if it gets old real quick. It only takes once to get addicted and when people leave to buy the system on impulse and they find they're all sold out (still) they are overcome by the "must have" bug as the Wii is more than just a video game system now, it's pop culture.
If Andy Warhol was around, he's probably paint a picture of it.
Indeed, I don't think Nintendo expected cruiseships wanting Wii's or people purchasing multiple consoles for home and travel.
Out of curiosity, I talked to a GameStop employee and asked him how the Wii was doing? Long story short, he claims they get an average of 25 units a week and sell out within 48 hours. 25 units a week (for one store) and they're still selling out months later. It is pretty surprising.
Of course, the real under-rated news is not the Wii but the DS. For all the people I know who won a Wii, I know twice as many who also have a DS. People who wouldn't buy a Wii as even that is too much 'video game' for them. Those "brain" games (Brain Age, Big Brain Academy) is by far the sleeper "killer ap". Who would have thunk that someone would drop $120 just to do some math equations? =P
Though, the DS does have a lot of great (and cheap) games. The Wii? Zelda, Mario Party, Metroid, Raymon, Wii Sports/Play... I've not been impressed with a whole lot else. So, that does say something about the unique frenzy the Wii is causing. Or maybe it's because I'm spending more time playing the Virtual Console? =P (yes, I've been playing on emulators on my PC since 2000, I still prefer the VC)
I go in and still find titles 3+ years old selling for more than $20 used. Seems a bit ridiculous to me, seeing that if one were to try to sell said games to gamestop they'd get about $5.00 for it.
Supply/Demand and the business model.
Supply and Demand
I can walk into a Gamestop and buy a used PS2 game for $3 or for $80+. It depends on the game. No joke. Buy a copy of Madden Football [year-2] (aka it's 2008, get 2006) or a professional wrestling game and it'll probably be $3. Conversely, just the other day I found Marvel vs Capcom 2 for the PS2 for $79.99, no box slip, no manual, etc. Why? Because you cannot find MvC2 or games like some "Baulders Gate" or "Champions of Norrath", etc High Demand, Low Supply. It's economics, you cannot fault them for that.
Business Model
Used games is where stores like Gamestop make their money. It's not selling consoles or new games. The games industry has very tight control over the games price and the profit garnered from each game. Suffice it to say, the margins are small. Without used games, such speciality stores probably wouldn't be able to operate.
Use it to your advantage
Is it disappointing to see used games sell for $45 when the new game is $50? Sure. Then buy the new version (or save yourself $5, because, hey, it's $5. That's 1-2 beers at a bar.) Not happy that they'll only give you $0.50 or $3 for your 3 year old game? Then sell it on Ebay, in classified ads, or many other options. Reselling video games are not an exclusive right to Gamestop.
I understand how Everyone wants something for nothing, but I'm willing to see a service for what it's worth. It cleans to my house and I take full advantage of promotions that are always running that sometimes net me the same or more money for trade-ins than I paid for it. I can also maximize it to cost less than renting new games. At least, console games can be traded in, unlike PC games.
Sometimes we luck out and get a great game for real cheap, other times we're out of luck when you really want to get Marvel vs Capcom 2 but have to pay a premium for it, sometimes 2x or 3x what it cost (try looking up prices for Final Fantasy VII for the original Playstation and see that it goes for $50-$300, which is much lower now that the hype died down after the movie and sequel game have come and gone)
The Wii Zapper is nothing but a molded shell to hold your actual controller(s).
I was just talking to a Gamestop employee about this. I've seen the "mold holder" that just holds the controllers, but the employee mentioned something about the 'official' zapper having extra buttons or something. I don't know if that's true or what, but, there might be an actual difference.
A well programmed client side script (like anything Google's coded) runs great on even a 500MHz Pentium 3.
A very good "apples to apples" example of good/bad JavaScript programming can be seen by anyone who uses Blockbuster Online's website vs NetFlix.
Blockbusters new site (while better than their previous site) suffers horribly from by Client-Side scripting. Most queue management causes 3-4 second lag, even on a desktop built for high-end gaming. It's also too feature rich. Every link or item is trying to do something, even when your in a context when you don't need to know this extra information, like pop-up bubbles and such.
Netflix is much more enjoyable to use and I find runs a lot faster. Though, I still prefer the Blockbuster style of online rentals (free in-store rentals), I wouldn't mind if they cleaned up their JavaScript on their site. Not to mention, I've had just some bizarre situations like getting duplicate discs in a "locked" TV series (because I double clicked the "add to queue" button.
I also find the "CakePHP vs PHP5" question to not make any sense, I'm sorry.
yes, I was very confused about this as well, which just makes me feel kdawson doesn't know what he's talking about. But I'll assume that "PHP5" he means "Zend Framework 1.0" which was recently released.
We then use a standards-compliant well-documented library, jQuery, to add an onclick-handler to the link.
Absolutely, this design style, called Unobtrusive JavaScript (for those reading and learning something new) seems to have become a recent push since the whole AJAX thing exploded. It's well covered by the gurus of the field Jeremy Keith (talks about it in his book Bulletproof AJAX) and Peter-Paul Koch (ppk) of QuicksMode. I've not read his book, "PPK on JavaScript" but if it's half has good as his website, it would be a standard buy for any web person.
Speaking of jQuery, Jeremy Keith also lists the following JavaScript Libraries/Frameworks/Toolkits...
The only way someone would be screwed with this solution would be if [...] I am not aware of even a single example [of a browser that could screw this up]
Right, while not all objects/functions are supported cross-browser, they usually work the same when they are supported. There's only one real concern about the world of "AJAX" and "Web 2.0" that Jeremy Keith pointed out in Bulletproof AJAX: screen readers. Apparently Screen readers are far behind in detecting dynamically updated content via JavaScript. JavaScript "could" be turned on and the page properly updated but the Screen Reader won't understand this and this is a big problem for those sites concerned with accessibility. In short, those who require screen readers should turn off JavaScript and allow the site (if properly designed with unobtrusive JavaScript) fall back to the full page refresh updates. However, I don't know if there's a foolproof (or bulletproof) way of making sure screen readers turn off JavaScript and it could be bad to assume one would be turned off (if your sites traffic has high accessibility needs).
You could just RTFA before posting a comment and then not look quite as foolish.
"The consumer watchdog alleges Google does not do enough to differentiate "organic" search results - those ranked by relevance - from sponsored links which appear at the top of the results page."
From TFA...
In particular, the ACCC claims Trading Post breached the Trade Practices Act in 2005 when it used the names of NSW car dealerships Kloster Ford and Charlestown Toyota as hyperlinks to its own site.
These hyperlinks appeared in a shaded area titled "Sponsored Links" at the top of the results page, but appeared to be the dealerships' official sites, or at least affiliated with the dealerships.
It appears to have more to do with a 3rd party abusing Pay Per Click advertising (in this case, Google AdWords) than it has to do with a Google issue with organic vs sponsored links. Also this deceptive practice is nothing new and has been around almost as long as PPC advertising.
I didn't finish reading TFA but I didn't see where the organic/sponsor links thing came in.
Slashdot Mirror
True, I'm just using the assumption that if one would be a re-release, one would presumably be willing to buy a remake, given the right price of course. Few are really going to spend more on a remake if it's available as a release. I wouldn't download a remake of the original Zelda when I already own the VC rerelease, even if the graphics looked like A Link to the Past.
Cheers,
Fozzy
You make an good observation. Richard Bartle, author of "Designing Virtual Worlds" talked about this same aspect.
Here's a snippit of what he has to say...
The gem is just one of many great points he covers. Anyone who's a fan of video games and MMO's would probably truly enjoy reading this book. It's basically a complete history of MMO's with great details on how virtual worlds work and how they don't.
I've learned a lot in just 100 pages. Though, it was released in 2003, so it's only current up to Dark Age of Camelot, which is a bit sad as I would LOVE to hear his views on the monster that is World of Warcraft as he analysis games such as EQ, DAoC, Ultima Online, MUDs, MUCKs, MUSHES, AC, AO, and SWG.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Exactly, the virtual console is pretty much proof of concept that "remakes" can be wildly successful. To think, I just dropped ~$9 to buy "World Heroes" from the Neo Geo (a system I never owned) on the VC. *Shrug* It enjoyed playing that game a long time ago in the arcade and it's still fairly fun today. Though, I'd be the first to sign a petition to drop VC prices by 1/2. =) There's lots of games I probably buy if they didn't cost nearly as much as a used DS game. =P
Further to support "remakes", there are a lot of games I know I and my fiancee would buy if they remade them. Sadly, in the game world, all those small mom/pop shops that made some good games went under or where eaten by the bigger fish and the license to (re-)produce such games are in legal limbo. Or on a similar note, getting "Tecmo Super Bowl" on the VC is a wet dream, except it's likely not going to happen without a renewed and excessively expensive license from the NFL, despite the rosters for the teams being dead.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Your point is taken well. TLD's are not just "TLDs". They've become part and parcel with trademarked names and company names. No,no, no. It's not Expedia... it's Expedia[dot]COM. Etc. Companies scramble to register their business names only to find another business with the same name (see Nissan Computers long legal battle against Nissan Automotive).
You have to consider registering variations of your domain name before someone else does to avoid trademark dilution and consumer confusion. {company name}, {company name}Manufacturing, {company name}ManufacturingCompany, {company name}MFGCO, etc. Of course, YMMV depending on your company name and sector/trade.
Companies have multiple sites such as "corporate site", "brand A site", "Brand B site", "Product A Micro-site", etc. Then, they might have to register multiple variants of those sites. Singular and plural versions, Nicknames, and keywords. ie: should it be Business.com, BusinessProduct.com, BusinessProducts.com, BusinessProductName.com, etc. (some products are two words that are commonly referred to in the singural, like "Toilet Seat" might just be called a "Seat" or "Seats" in the context of a bathroom.
On top of that you have to consider registering multiple TLD's. .COM, .NET, .ORG, .JOBS, .BIZ, .INFO, etc. Now, if you're an international company, you have to consider registering country specific TLD's. .US, .CO.UK, .FR, .IT, .CN, .MX, etc. Now, they're opening up regional TLD's that companies have to consider... .EU, .ASIA.
You take all the TLD's , all the sites a company might have, and all the name variations a of a site name a company might register, and you get yourself one hell of a mess and cost. Sure, domains are relatively cheep but if you're managing hundreds or thousands, it becomes a huge sink, particularly since most everyone STILL uses .COM.
Then you have to tie this all in with Search Engine parameters such as duplication. All you do is register these domains and 301 redirect them to your flagship domain name, which doesn't do a whole lot for you. Others might use language specific sites, which will pass duplication standards.
I guess, a good question is... what do people with to manage their site domains? What is your domain strategy? Do you try to register everything you can to avoid squatters and parkers for brand dilution? Or do you just say "screw it" and let them have them, they're not likely to get much out of them. Should you really use .jobs to be/point or redirect to your careers page? Or just say "screw it" because "no one"(tm) uses it?
Cheers,
Fozzy
Am I the only one who's seriously disappointed by the "orange box"? I already own HL2 and EP1. Gift cards to give HL2 and EP1 to a friend? Give me a break. It's a pure marketing scam to get HL2 in more peoples hands. OH! So the friend gets a free copy of HL2 and EP1 at your expense. How nice of them use US to give someone ELSE their product! Of course, since the friend didn't pay for his HL2, he'll be more than willing to drop $50 for the orange box.
Sadly, I'm a big enough fan of HL and it's off shoots (Counter Strike, Team Fortress, etc), that I'm willing to drop $45 for it (hey, $5 off when pre-ordered from GameStop, I'll take what I can get). If I'm lucky and if I find a friend who wants it, I can make him buy me a few beers for the game.
Cheers,
Fozzy
As a PS2 owner who had interest in the PS3, I can say that I would NOT want to own both. First thing to go would be the PS2 because I can use the PS3 for it. It sucks enough having to switch my PS2 and Wii around every time I want to play a diff. game.
I was working on getting a Xbox 360 so I could buy Rock Band, but then the rumors of it coming out on the Wii started and I decided to just pick up Guitar Hero 3 for the Wii and wait for Rock Band. I'd think of getting Rock Band for the PS2, but the one feature I really want is to be able to download games (which I'm keeping my figures crossed that Nintendo will get their online store worked out so 3rd parties can use it for their games).
Summed up, consolidation is a good thing.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Though, my write-up was worded much differently, this article cannot be called 'fair'. It's cleverly written, and has a lot of facts, but it's not fair. Here's why...
The definition of sensationalism I'm using, so we're all on the same page.
Nintendo is not murdering people, nor are they planning on it. Catchy, but sensationalist because Nintendo is also not the only company releasing Manhunt 2. Not a 'fair' headline by any means, but very "attention-grabbing". Well chosen for a sensationalist piece.
No it doesn't. Pure sensationalism as well as being very unfair to Nintendo.
Very cleverly chosen words. "X" rating is not used anymore. It's called "NC-17". I believe "X" was used purposefully to draw it's readers upon it's connection to "XXX" films to make it's previous rating appear even worse to the reader. Fair? Debatable. But without a doubt, a very interesting choice of words.
False. Nintendo has every need to expand it's user base. They're in a competitive environment. If they don't try to expand their user base, they could loose their ground eventually, particularly if their competitors expand into Nintendo's target market, which is what they're doing. Purely false. Bad business. All sensationalism to convince the reader of their authors point. Not fair. (particularly since Nintendo has a bad rap in the "hardcore gamer" department which keeps plenty of people from taking Nintendo seriously)
Excellent fact. Makes the author more convincing, however, it's a smoke screen. The number of units Nintendo sold is irrelevant to Manhunt 2's violence. Unless you're trying to convince people that Nintendo's choice to carry this title is "Evil"(tm). This statement brings along a lot of baggage to the reader where they start drawing their own conclusions that the author cleverly crafted them into. I'll avoid expanding on this for brevity.
Again, an excellent fact, but irrelevant to Nintendo's choice to carry Manhunt 2. Except, again, to lead the reader into the conclusion that since this article is about Manhunt 2 and violence and therefor Nintendo is trying to put violence in everyone's home. Again, unfairly targeting Nintendo. With the previous statement, the author continues to try and build up his other sensationalist statements with irrelevant facts. Thus making his sensationalist statements even more so.
Please, the furthest? No other game has gone further or as far. Pure sensationalism and extremely unfair as the author ONLY talks about Wii games in connection to Manhunt 2, when Manhunt 2 is not a Wii exclusive nor developed by Nintendo.
I think Garage Band has been trying to do something like this for a while. My brothers band used it for a while and I know at least one band that made it big, but did so by going through a traditional record label and having only been discovered on the site.
It's a great site to find indie artists. I've heard some good stuff and some complete crap. In general, I enjoy it for what it's worth: something I won't hear on the radio.
Cheers,
Fozzy
0/10 troll attempt.
You're right on the 'crap' part, but not necessarily the 'facts' part. Just do a search to see how much Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie, Brittney Spears and Lindsay Lohan dominated the news in 2007. I imagine most of those stories where 'factual' but not worth the treatment they got.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Hehe, no kidding. As I read it... "Boeings new Planes are not safe if they crash!"
Really? They figure that out all by themselves?
What about that EyeToy thing they have for the PS2? I'd wager this piece of hardware pretty much failed in the U.S. but I'm not big on the PS2. I do know that Karaoke Revolution Party uses it and I saw a kid using it at a wal-mart demo.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Come'on. That was more entertaining than TFA.
Too much over-time at work.
NOOOOooooo! *sniff*
I see what you're trying to say, but I respectfully disagree. My reason is that "Wii Sports" is the "killer ap" that is selling the system. A close second is the Virtual Console.
It's always been people's enjoyment of Wii Sports that they see the 'potential' of the system and the motion sense. When my old man picked up the controller and held it like a baseball bat, he thought it was the coolest thing. Like virtual reality. When my mom played bowling, she thought it was as real as you could get. Everyone enjoyed playing Tennis as a family activity.
For the dedicated gamers, Zelda helped sell the system at the start, before others had a share of the fun. Also the promise of Smash Bros., Mario Cart, Mario Galaxies, and the recent release of Metroid, had a lot of fans picking up the system in simple anticipation.
My fiancee (who doesn't like video games) is adamantly playing Zelda, Zelda 2, Donkey Kong Country, Mario Bros., etc. on the Virtual Console. Explaining to me she never got the chance to play them as a kid as her father dominated the system. She's reliving a lot of nostalgia (and showing me up that she knows more about the original Zelda games than I do).
The 360 has a lot of great games and a lot more of them, but the Wii definitely has the exclusive 'killer ap' game, Wii Sports. Even if it gets old real quick. It only takes once to get addicted and when people leave to buy the system on impulse and they find they're all sold out (still) they are overcome by the "must have" bug as the Wii is more than just a video game system now, it's pop culture.
If Andy Warhol was around, he's probably paint a picture of it.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Indeed, I don't think Nintendo expected cruise ships wanting Wii's or people purchasing multiple consoles for home and travel.
Out of curiosity, I talked to a GameStop employee and asked him how the Wii was doing? Long story short, he claims they get an average of 25 units a week and sell out within 48 hours. 25 units a week (for one store) and they're still selling out months later. It is pretty surprising.
Of course, the real under-rated news is not the Wii but the DS. For all the people I know who won a Wii, I know twice as many who also have a DS. People who wouldn't buy a Wii as even that is too much 'video game' for them. Those "brain" games (Brain Age, Big Brain Academy) is by far the sleeper "killer ap". Who would have thunk that someone would drop $120 just to do some math equations? =P
Though, the DS does have a lot of great (and cheap) games. The Wii? Zelda, Mario Party, Metroid, Raymon, Wii Sports/Play... I've not been impressed with a whole lot else. So, that does say something about the unique frenzy the Wii is causing. Or maybe it's because I'm spending more time playing the Virtual Console? =P (yes, I've been playing on emulators on my PC since 2000, I still prefer the VC)
Cheers,
Fozzy
Supply/Demand and the business model.
Supply and Demand
I can walk into a Gamestop and buy a used PS2 game for $3 or for $80+. It depends on the game. No joke. Buy a copy of Madden Football [year-2] (aka it's 2008, get 2006) or a professional wrestling game and it'll probably be $3. Conversely, just the other day I found Marvel vs Capcom 2 for the PS2 for $79.99, no box slip, no manual, etc. Why? Because you cannot find MvC2 or games like some "Baulders Gate" or "Champions of Norrath", etc High Demand, Low Supply. It's economics, you cannot fault them for that.
Business Model
Used games is where stores like Gamestop make their money. It's not selling consoles or new games. The games industry has very tight control over the games price and the profit garnered from each game. Suffice it to say, the margins are small. Without used games, such speciality stores probably wouldn't be able to operate.
Use it to your advantage
Is it disappointing to see used games sell for $45 when the new game is $50? Sure. Then buy the new version (or save yourself $5, because, hey, it's $5. That's 1-2 beers at a bar.) Not happy that they'll only give you $0.50 or $3 for your 3 year old game? Then sell it on Ebay, in classified ads, or many other options. Reselling video games are not an exclusive right to Gamestop.
I understand how Everyone wants something for nothing, but I'm willing to see a service for what it's worth. It cleans to my house and I take full advantage of promotions that are always running that sometimes net me the same or more money for trade-ins than I paid for it. I can also maximize it to cost less than renting new games. At least, console games can be traded in, unlike PC games.
Sometimes we luck out and get a great game for real cheap, other times we're out of luck when you really want to get Marvel vs Capcom 2 but have to pay a premium for it, sometimes 2x or 3x what it cost (try looking up prices for Final Fantasy VII for the original Playstation and see that it goes for $50-$300, which is much lower now that the hype died down after the movie and sequel game have come and gone)
Cheers,
Fozzy
I was just talking to a Gamestop employee about this. I've seen the "mold holder" that just holds the controllers, but the employee mentioned something about the 'official' zapper having extra buttons or something. I don't know if that's true or what, but, there might be an actual difference.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Thanks, I didn't know they changed this. Makes me wonder if Wal-Mart is still selling the game for $20.
A very good "apples to apples" example of good/bad JavaScript programming can be seen by anyone who uses Blockbuster Online's website vs NetFlix.
Blockbusters new site (while better than their previous site) suffers horribly from by Client-Side scripting. Most queue management causes 3-4 second lag, even on a desktop built for high-end gaming. It's also too feature rich. Every link or item is trying to do something, even when your in a context when you don't need to know this extra information, like pop-up bubbles and such.
Netflix is much more enjoyable to use and I find runs a lot faster. Though, I still prefer the Blockbuster style of online rentals (free in-store rentals), I wouldn't mind if they cleaned up their JavaScript on their site. Not to mention, I've had just some bizarre situations like getting duplicate discs in a "locked" TV series (because I double clicked the "add to queue" button.
Cheers,
Fozzy
yes, I was very confused about this as well, which just makes me feel kdawson doesn't know what he's talking about. But I'll assume that "PHP5" he means "Zend Framework 1.0" which was recently released.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Absolutely, this design style, called Unobtrusive JavaScript (for those reading and learning something new) seems to have become a recent push since the whole AJAX thing exploded. It's well covered by the gurus of the field Jeremy Keith (talks about it in his book Bulletproof AJAX) and Peter-Paul Koch (ppk) of QuicksMode. I've not read his book, "PPK on JavaScript" but if it's half has good as his website, it would be a standard buy for any web person.
Speaking of jQuery, Jeremy Keith also lists the following JavaScript Libraries/Frameworks/Toolkits...
Right, while not all objects/functions are supported cross-browser, they usually work the same when they are supported. There's only one real concern about the world of "AJAX" and "Web 2.0" that Jeremy Keith pointed out in Bulletproof AJAX: screen readers. Apparently Screen readers are far behind in detecting dynamically updated content via JavaScript. JavaScript "could" be turned on and the page properly updated but the Screen Reader won't understand this and this is a big problem for those sites concerned with accessibility. In short, those who require screen readers should turn off JavaScript and allow the site (if properly designed with unobtrusive JavaScript) fall back to the full page refresh updates. However, I don't know if there's a foolproof (or bulletproof) way of making sure screen readers turn off JavaScript and it could be bad to assume one would be turned off (if your sites traffic has high accessibility needs).
Cheers,
Fozzy
From TFA...
It appears to have more to do with a 3rd party abusing Pay Per Click advertising (in this case, Google AdWords) than it has to do with a Google issue with organic vs sponsored links. Also this deceptive practice is nothing new and has been around almost as long as PPC advertising.
I didn't finish reading TFA but I didn't see where the organic/sponsor links thing came in.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Noooooo!