I wouldn't call them useless. I've always enjoyed strategy guides, but I admit, the only one I can recall buying was the Neverwinter Nights guide on how to create your own modules and scripting... which was pretty worth while I think. I often just go to GameFAQs to get quick tips or locations for those last lost items or treasure chests.
However, I'd buy a WoW guide or other MMO guide, if it was expansive enough, contained full color maps, and in a well organized format, to prevent myself from having to dig through countless sites to download and print off color copies of maps and strategies and compile them into a binder. I was considering a Prima WoW guide, but it lacked dungeon maps, so I decided against it. It did have tables of items and values which was nice. Though, I did do this for EQ back in the day. Was kind of fun, but I don't have that gravey college job anymore. =P
Oddly enough, I use to be a huge PC gaming fan who's now turning back to consoles. I played all the FPS, RTS, RPG, MMO, games out there and am just missing the one thing that's good on consoles, platform action/adventure games. RPG's feel a little better to me on consoles as well, with the exception of the MMO kind. Of course, I'm also eager to pickup my Wii and try that new experience!
I wouldn't say there's any kind of revival in anything. Games get pushed back all the time and won't kill a platform due to it. Likewise, I guess since the Burning Crusade was pushed back as well, I could argue that the PC gaming market is dying an consoles are gaining popularity with the viral marketing phenomenon of the Wii.
Though, I would say to anyone who's new to PC gaming, you're missing out on some good titles, like the ones mentioned in the previous post as well as Warcraft II and II, Starcraft, and old Lucas Art games like Sam and Max. =)
I just read somewhere (was it here on/.?) that KoTOR 2 was being modded by the community to include all the content that was removed and re-write the ending or expand the ending of the game?
Yes, but level 0 children only get 2d2-1 hit points.
LOL, I'm only catching this now, but... is there a d2 die? Is it a coin? LOL, I've only been playing D&D once a week for the last 6 months and I've only gone through parts of the player handbook (3.0 edt). So, I don't know if there's a 'true' d2 die or not.
The problem is, the term 'carebear' is a created internet term, much like w00t, pawn, haxxor, leet, and others are. To this degree, there's no standard definition for it, and it's open to be used or abused in sentaces that don't properly phase the word to it's original means.
Carebear was always implied 'childish' behavoir or actions as The Carebears was a popular childrens cartoon in the 1980's. It was used to insult people who would yell and scream at someone for 'killing' their character. I believe this was back in the Ultima days when PvP was open and easy. If you're missed those days, then maybe you've seen the South Park episode featuring WoW? You know that half naked guy running around killing people for no reason? Well, it was kind of like that. The grief would call the people he griefed 'carebears' because they would complain and yell at him for loosing, like a child would cry if they lost at a sport.
So, in the wonderful world of online gaming and RPG's, two terms where developed to insult the other people. "Griefer" and "Carebear". A person would call someone a "griefer" if they would kill you repeatedly and a person who complained (ie. cried about) at being killed repeatadly would be called a "carebear". Of course, in Ultima, that game mechanic was possible.
Of course, these terms survived and moved into EQ and all the games to be spawned after it. The term became associated with "easy" as games started to restrict the ability to kill others, such as requiring an accepted duel or special areas that a player could 'choose' to enter. Thus the 'griefers' where killed off and in their anger claimed that such games where too "carebear" to play because there was no threat of grief. Not surprisingly, the player base increased dramatically when such restrictions where part of the game model. Though, to cater to the Ultima fans, EQ and the following games created special servers that allowed open fighting and killing, usually after a certain, very low level. This of course, lead to the popular (and hilarious) story of Fansy the Bard.
Since then, games have tried to cater to the Player vs Player fan base, who liked the idea of danger and suspense when anyone could attack you. Dark Age of Camelot, who's game was designed with restricted areas for PvP combat, created an all open PvP server where anyone could fight anyone at any time. I even tried this server, but didn't last past the first level of open combat as it was just too annoying after I got my quick thrills of griefing. This became famous for showing how over powered the Enchanter class was, as it had a magic casting pet with no line of sight restriction, allowing it to attack you from far away without recourse. It also became famous for the small city of Mag Mel(sp?), where you could resurect and continue fighting. Ultimatly, the server numbers dwindelled to next to nothing because, due to game mechnics, you had very little chance, and players had very little reason, to let you level to the maxium level and have a fair(er) playing field. It's all part of the video game 'God' complex. Of course, at that time, those in support of PvP DAoC servers would call who critizied them 'carebears'.
So, there's a brief history, as I know it, of the term "carebear". And that's why it's not a very good use of the term when calling a game carebear, as a game cannot complain about the way people use it. Of course, if games where real, I could see Shadowbane calling WoW a carebear while Ultima Online kills them both. hehe
For more issues that Ultima faced, you can read some on Wikipedia.
*snickers* Carebear... Fozzy... Touche! hehe, I didn't think about that. =P Though, I wasn't jumping on anyone, Simply pointing out my opinion of the use of a term as my comments where made in general, not towards the original poster. It was just the first post where I read the term being used.
Of course, "fozzY" is a rock band with a 'pro' wrestler, and "fozzIE" is a muppet. Of course, I should admit, I was just a bad speller when I picked this username some 10 years ago. LOL
What really ticks me off in "modern" MMORPGs is the carebear attitude towards the players. Why don't they just hand out everything to everyone?
I'm always amused at the term 'carebear'. As if it was some sort of insult to use it, either towards another person, idea, or action. Can you think of getting into a fight and be like... "Oh yeah?!? Well, you're... you're... a BIG carebare! HA! Take that! Mwuahahaha *walks away gleefully as if scoring some major victory*".
Ironically, it's been my experiance that those people who have used this term to insult things, act more childish than the actions or people it's being used upon.
First, let me say... it's disappointing. WoW has been out for 2 years now? They've not released one (large) expantion yet. They have released content patches. However, if you haven't realized it, most of this content was planned to be in the game since WoW began but was pushed back to focus on other things.
Second, I must say I can't be too surprised, knowing the gaming industry (particularly PC games), heck any software, and how often they get pushed back.
Third, it does make me wonder. How would something like this effect memberships? Will people quite until the expantion or will they keep playing, even if they have not much else to do 'in game' as they've done a lot of it already? Even thouse who aren't addicted.
Fourth, as pointed out by another, this means that there will be less problems over the Christmas period with kids and their addiction to WoW and their inactivity with other family events. I know how it goes, I was, and to some degree still am, one of those people. You gobbel down your food, talk a little bit, your leg is pumping ready to spring back to the computer (which you left on and logged in while you're AFK at some inn), to continue your quest/grind.
Fifth, This is been a "Blizzard" theme. They tend to often not care about dates or pre-concived notions of "what the players want". They're very good at making a game they want to make. That of course doesn't mean they don't listen to the player base, because, afterall, not all ideas are bad ideas.
WoW was originally suppose to have Hero classes.. when the game was released, much like the Hero classes in WarcraftIII. Those where 'delayed' until some time after release.. and ultimately dropped for other purposes. Unlike other MMO's I've played, I've seen a bit more conservatisim from this game. Though, all MMO's all suffer from the same fate eventually. You always have to introduce 'new' things and with that, new items that have to be somehow equally powerful (but different) or more powerful than items that have come before.
Myself, I've stopped playing WoW since, oh, April/May 2005. I was considering getting the expantion, but I'm already catching up on my PS2 games (I've only recently purchased a used PS2), and by that time, the Wii will be out and I'll have 4 more games at launch to play (Zelda, Marvel, DBZ, Red Steel), and by the time I'm done with those, more of the Wii games should be out (Mario, Metroid), and probably some more I don't know about yet.
Then maybe I'll pick up the expantion, only, now I'll be far behind, my level 60 Hunter with epic armours will be pitiful to the level 70 characters in legendary armour. I get to spend more time grinding, probably never see any of good content as now you'll need to be 'X' level with 'X' items before you are allowed to go, and you need to have finsihed 'x' quests to even get a key to be allowed into the dungeon, and only if you're in a guild large enough to go into this place, and of course, IF the 'raid time' doesn't conflict with real life schedules... oh, like, dinner, courses, cleaning, grocery shopping, etc...
Man, I always called it a second job, but never-the-less I'm always surprised how much time you need to invest to fully utilize these games. Hehe, maybe that's why I'm console gaming again. I can obsess with a game, beat it, and re-sell it, never looking back. =P
HA! From another article linked from the orignal article...
He also commented in the course of his email to GamePolitics: "When kids start showing up in ERs with slingshot wounds at the hands of Bully enthusiasts, don't blame me."
I play D&D and I can tell you... slingshots do crap damage!
IBM said that Amazon.com has willfully infringed and continues to infringe on a number of key IBM patents, including:
1. US 5,796,967 - Presenting Applications in an Interactive Service.
2. US 5,442,771 - Storing Data in an Interactive Network.
3. US 7,072,849 - Presenting Advertising in an Interactive Service.
4. US 5,446,891 - Adjusting Hypertext Links with Weighted User Goals and Activities.
5. US 5,319,542 - Ordering Items Using an Electronic Catalogue.
I'm going to patent "interacting in an interactive environment" and let the $ roll in for my 'patent'. Or maybe I can patent "doing stuff"? Or has that been taken already?
What's more concerning, does this mean if I create my own shopping cart, review system, or recommendation system, that I can get sued from IBM? If I build my own car, will I get sued by Ford or GM? I guess I'll have to have sheep with lazers on their heads as "aquatic animals with lasers on their heads" might have been patented by now.
Indeed. The original article is "popular" or "important" because it's to introduce people to the knowledge that there is a phenominon in the game culture that can extend outside the actual game (talk about virtual reality, hehe). Not that, "gaming in moderation" can be good for you.
What is interesting, however, is the fact that these online games (having a virtual social and economic society) can actually be used to find the effects of 'real' world social and economic theories theories. I be interested in reading an article written about using WoW to try and munipulate market prices through supply and demand in an online economy (one which has limitless but rare materials) or other economic and social theories to see how they hold true in todays popular virtual worlds.
How about running guilds in a communist, democratic, and socialist way and compare the differences in impact? Do online gamers have inherent social beliefs based on their real world counterpart (depending where you live), or would a person living in a real-world democracy actually favor an opposing view point?
Is it just me, the fact that I'm not much of a Sony fan (I only bought a used PS2 a month ago, but I do enjoy the games I'm playing), but I'm not exactly interested in the titles they're offering up? Untold Legends? I had the first one on the PSP and it was traded in
Of course, I've been pretty negative about the PS3 with it's high price and undesired hardware (HD output and blue-ray, though I like the Blue-Ray more than HD-DVD), but being a person who dislikes sports titles on video games (Techmo SuperBowl is the only game I ever truely enjoyed), I AM actually intersted in the Wii sports package... which, by the way, comes with the system. I dunno, maybe I'm not into the NCAA, FIFA, NFL, NHL titles. The sports games I enjoyed (with the exception above) where always 'generic' leages, like "Basebase All-Stars" for the NES or that old NES hocky game, "Blades of Steel" I think it was called? Oh, "Double Dribble" was fun, but I don't recall if it used real 'teams' or not.
Anyway, I'm not impressed with this line-up so far.
Actually, what you discribe is caused by 2 reasons I know of...
Superiour sales of a console.
Much easier / cheaper to produce a game for a console.
In the case of the NES (Nintendo Entertainment System... yes, the 'first' one), Nintendo squized 3rd party support for all kinds of nickels and dimes to produce a game on their system... only, no matter what crap they made, it was going to make a profit (well, almost always), simply due to the fact that EVERYONE had a NES. This doesn't mean everyone would buy the game, but rental stores at the time would pretty much stock a game and the large stores would stock multiple copies. In a way, it was turning into a scam after a while. produce a cheap crappy game, market it well, and sit back and let the 'bling' roll in.
With the case of the PSOne, Sony went and made it EASY for 3rd parties to make a game on their system. They need to take the market share of Nintendo away, who had redicoulous license fees. They had made it simple and cheap to make a game, therefor, everyone and their mother started making games. Of course, the first few games where really quite good on the PSOne. The PSOne was selling well, and soon, it reaches a point where it's also profitable to make a crappy game on the PSOne as it was on the NES and Super NES. Now, you combine cheap licenses (though they got more expensive as the PSOne sold more) and a well penatrated console, and you got yourself a playground for endless games of crap, with a few real winners in-between.
Of course, since the PS2 and the N64/GameCube, game developement costs have skyrocketed. Millions of dollars are spent on making a game. You can no longer just code a game up in your basement, so to speak, and be given a license to print money. That's why we're seeing more generally 'decent' games while seeing less crap, compared to the PSone and (late)NES days. That's also the same reason why you rarely see 'new' or 'original' titles. Because it's too risky to try something new and money is poured into 'safe' things like franchise titles and sequels to smash hits.... not unlike the Hollywood formula.
Ever heard of Final Fantasy? Or Metal Gear Solid? Or Grand Theft Auto?
MGS is not an exclusive francise to Sony, neither is GTA as you can find them on XBox and PC (like you said). You can also find FF games on the PC as well as other 'old' consoles before Sony. So, like I said, they're not exclusive like Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc. Until the day Nintendo goes the way of Sega, where Sonic can now be found on different systems, you won't be able to play any flavor of Nintendo 'franchise' games on a different system.
Lastly, if you forgot to notice, that was a question that was possed, not an insinuating remark. As the point was, Sony doesn't own any francises, those are all 3rd party games, with the exception of the Everquest games, which Sony does own now after they purchased Verant and it was absorbed into "Sony Station Online". However, I do believe Sony might own the license right to some FF games like FFVII which will obviously prevent titles based off those characters/stores form appearing on other consoles.
Ultima was the first Online game, but I wouldn't personally classify it as the first 'mainstream' MMO. By 'Mainstream', I mean refer to the penetration it had on people outside of the 'geek' circle that I normally get lost in =P. This might have been due to Ultima being much more hard-core in that it had (a debatably cool feature) of being able to kill anyone. This turned off people. So the more (as they say in MMO speak) "carebear" EQ game, where player vs player was heavily restricted, appealed to a much larger user base.
Exactly, when you want to talk 'exclusive', you cannot get very far without talking about franchise names. Afterall, what does Sony have? I was going to say Crash Bandicot but a quick search shows he wasn't 'exclusive'. The only 2 franchises I can think of for Sony is Twisted Metal and the Everquest games (Champions of Norath, etc).
However, with that said, franchise games won't 'sell' millions of consoles. Just look at the Gamecube. I bought that over the PS2 due to primarly Zelda and Metroid. The GameCube was not as strong as Nintendo would have hoped. And even if a game is labeled as 'exclusive' (unless franchise 1st party like Mario), it doesn't mean it won't migrate to a different platform in the future.
Afterall, at one point I recall the Resident Evil series was going to be 'exclusive' to the GameCube. Well, they got REZero and RE4, then RE4 was ported to the PS2. In the end, 'exclusivity' is just as strong as the entity that owns the license rights. The license can be sold to another person to allow that game to be created on another platform.
So, yes, exclusives helps (how many people bought an N64 just to play GoldenEye?), but it's truely title availability that matters. As a GameCube owner, it was more than frustrating seeing games come out for the XBox and PS2 but not the GameCube (due to whatever technical limits the GC had verses cost of converting the title). I now purchased a PS2 about a month ago and I'm catching up on all the great titles I missed (Kingdom Hearts, God of War, GTO, Final Fantasy, Guitar Hero, DDR, etc., etc.)
Anything can be an addiction, and video games are no different. However, with the advent of MMO's, game addition has become much more social and mainstream than before.
From the article...
Why did I leave? Simple: Blizzard has created an alternate universe where we don't have to be ourselves when we don't want to be. From my vantage point as a guild decision maker, I've seen it destroy more families and friendships and take a huge toll on individuals than any drug on the market today, and that means a lot coming from an ex-club DJ.
This is true of Blizzard, however, it should be noted that this did not start with WoW. EverQuest(EQ) was the pioneer of the 'mainstream' MMO. Every heard of the phrase 'EverCrack'? Anyone who's played EQ has. There was a group formed called EverQuest Widows that comprised of people who left their husband / wife because of their game addiction. Or Husbands / Wives who had an affair with someone they meet playing this online game.
Of course, it isn't just EverQuest, it's an MMO thing, or possibly just restricted to the Fantasy genre as I've not heard of these same issues nor have I ever been as addicted to MMO's such as City of Heroes / Villans, Star Wars, or Matrix. I've seen these issues in EQ, Dark Age of Camelot (DAoC), and World of Warcraft (WoW).
During my time in DAoC, I actually experianced a real life situation where a wife who recently left her husband due to his game addiction. A wife I met playing DAoC with her and her husband. She joined DAoC to try and spend more time with her husband only to be left to level her own toon, while her husband ran off to do 'end game' raids.
This couple had other problems that an MMO addiction amplified. And their story will be familiar to a vast number of people. WoW, did not start this kind of 'extreme' addiction, but being the largest MMO, it will introduce it to the most number of people.
MMO and game addiction for myself, almost killed my college education. Of course, I've been addicted to Nintendo since I was 8 (and Pong and Intellivison before that). I hated sports until I was 12 when I started Football, despite my parents forcing me to wrestle between 8-12 year of age. I was overweight when I was a kid and I didn't get out and play with a lot of kids. My favorite gifts where Tiger Electronic hand held games. So, suffice it to say, I've been an 'addict' for a long time. However, the MMO and it's 'vitual' reality and the ability to actaully people with other people (co-op multi-player games where my favorite however you had to find a friend to play Nintendo with you) pulled me deeper than ever before. Dusk to Dawn game sessions. Skipping class (in college), passing oppurtunties to party (in one of the US's highest rated party schools), little to no studying. 10 mins reading a book, and I'd be thinking "If I kill these mobs, I can get this item! I can just farm those and level!"
It was after DAoC experiance that I had to regain control. Then I studied in Europe for a year with no outlet to really play video games at all. It was a great way to break the habit. When I returned from Europe, WoW was released. I still bought and played it on release day. I even had some long game sessions. However, it was much easier to pull myself away than before. My GPA went from 2.0 to 3.4. I went out at least twice a week with friends and visited my family more often.
The beauty of WoW is that it's extreamily easy to get a character to the 'end' level (whatever that may be at any given time). while all the other games I played make it so hard and difficult, that I've never actually 'maxxed out' a character in any other game.
Video Game addiction is a serios thing that gets little attention due to it's 'taboo' idea or possibly sound 'silly'. I don't th
And for all those interested, I asked the store manage how his PS3 sales went... he said it took the entire day, but he reserved them all. Except he had 2x or 3x as many people on the 'call' list but all said "'nah" when they where confirmed it was $600.
Is price really going to kill the PS3? For me, I scoff at the idea of paying that much. Particularly when I'm not interested in converting my movie library from DVD to blue-ray (or if Blue-Ray will out last HD-DVD, though I think it will) and I'm not interested in HD-TV connections as I don't own a HD-TV and don't plan on getting one until I need to get a new TV. *cross fingers* which I hope will still be a few years into the future.
"it'll also be possible to buy PSone and PS2 classics you missed out on, as well as a selection of PSP games, from the PlayStation Store, and download them directly to your PS3."
Even more reason for me to try an sell my PSP. Man, I had such hopes for that system. Sadly, I can only get about $60 for it from GameStop. =( Such a beautiful piece of hardware, only to sit, stale on my desk for lack of games and the inability to actually use the bloody Wi-Fi to game with others... unless it's Ad-Hoc. I'm no longer interested in 'modifying' things like I was 10 years ago. I just want to pay for something that will give me what I want 'out-of-the-box'.
Other than that, the online services seem to be in the right direction for Sony. Particularly downloading those hard to find or expensive to now buy PSOne and PS2 games.
Yes, I got my email yesterday. I went 1.5 hours early. I was 4th in line at my store. Had to wait in about 25F weather. (wind at 35MPH, yuck).
However, our store had about a 16 limit on orders. We started about 15mins to 10:00am and they where all gone by 10:00am.
I am glad I have mine. Though, I'm surprised orders are so low, given Nintendos statements of a large number of orders available. I would guess Wal-Mart or BestBuy might be getting large quantities.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't call them useless. I've always enjoyed strategy guides, but I admit, the only one I can recall buying was the Neverwinter Nights guide on how to create your own modules and scripting... which was pretty worth while I think. I often just go to GameFAQs to get quick tips or locations for those last lost items or treasure chests.
However, I'd buy a WoW guide or other MMO guide, if it was expansive enough, contained full color maps, and in a well organized format, to prevent myself from having to dig through countless sites to download and print off color copies of maps and strategies and compile them into a binder. I was considering a Prima WoW guide, but it lacked dungeon maps, so I decided against it. It did have tables of items and values which was nice. Though, I did do this for EQ back in the day. Was kind of fun, but I don't have that gravey college job anymore. =P
Cheers,
Fozzy
Oddly enough, I use to be a huge PC gaming fan who's now turning back to consoles. I played all the FPS, RTS, RPG, MMO, games out there and am just missing the one thing that's good on consoles, platform action/adventure games. RPG's feel a little better to me on consoles as well, with the exception of the MMO kind. Of course, I'm also eager to pickup my Wii and try that new experience!
I wouldn't say there's any kind of revival in anything. Games get pushed back all the time and won't kill a platform due to it. Likewise, I guess since the Burning Crusade was pushed back as well, I could argue that the PC gaming market is dying an consoles are gaining popularity with the viral marketing phenomenon of the Wii.
Though, I would say to anyone who's new to PC gaming, you're missing out on some good titles, like the ones mentioned in the previous post as well as Warcraft II and II, Starcraft, and old Lucas Art games like Sam and Max. =)
Cheers,
Fozzy
I just read somewhere (was it here on /.?) that KoTOR 2 was being modded by the community to include all the content that was removed and re-write the ending or expand the ending of the game?
Man, if I had some mod points, I'd mod this up as "funny" for this statement! lol
LOL, I'm only catching this now, but... is there a d2 die? Is it a coin? LOL, I've only been playing D&D once a week for the last 6 months and I've only gone through parts of the player handbook (3.0 edt). So, I don't know if there's a 'true' d2 die or not.
The problem is, the term 'carebear' is a created internet term, much like w00t, pawn, haxxor, leet, and others are. To this degree, there's no standard definition for it, and it's open to be used or abused in sentaces that don't properly phase the word to it's original means.
Carebear was always implied 'childish' behavoir or actions as The Carebears was a popular childrens cartoon in the 1980's. It was used to insult people who would yell and scream at someone for 'killing' their character. I believe this was back in the Ultima days when PvP was open and easy. If you're missed those days, then maybe you've seen the South Park episode featuring WoW? You know that half naked guy running around killing people for no reason? Well, it was kind of like that. The grief would call the people he griefed 'carebears' because they would complain and yell at him for loosing, like a child would cry if they lost at a sport.
So, in the wonderful world of online gaming and RPG's, two terms where developed to insult the other people. "Griefer" and "Carebear". A person would call someone a "griefer" if they would kill you repeatedly and a person who complained (ie. cried about) at being killed repeatadly would be called a "carebear". Of course, in Ultima, that game mechanic was possible.
Of course, these terms survived and moved into EQ and all the games to be spawned after it. The term became associated with "easy" as games started to restrict the ability to kill others, such as requiring an accepted duel or special areas that a player could 'choose' to enter. Thus the 'griefers' where killed off and in their anger claimed that such games where too "carebear" to play because there was no threat of grief. Not surprisingly, the player base increased dramatically when such restrictions where part of the game model. Though, to cater to the Ultima fans, EQ and the following games created special servers that allowed open fighting and killing, usually after a certain, very low level. This of course, lead to the popular (and hilarious) story of Fansy the Bard.
Since then, games have tried to cater to the Player vs Player fan base, who liked the idea of danger and suspense when anyone could attack you. Dark Age of Camelot, who's game was designed with restricted areas for PvP combat, created an all open PvP server where anyone could fight anyone at any time. I even tried this server, but didn't last past the first level of open combat as it was just too annoying after I got my quick thrills of griefing. This became famous for showing how over powered the Enchanter class was, as it had a magic casting pet with no line of sight restriction, allowing it to attack you from far away without recourse. It also became famous for the small city of Mag Mel(sp?), where you could resurect and continue fighting. Ultimatly, the server numbers dwindelled to next to nothing because, due to game mechnics, you had very little chance, and players had very little reason, to let you level to the maxium level and have a fair(er) playing field. It's all part of the video game 'God' complex. Of course, at that time, those in support of PvP DAoC servers would call who critizied them 'carebears'.
So, there's a brief history, as I know it, of the term "carebear". And that's why it's not a very good use of the term when calling a game carebear, as a game cannot complain about the way people use it. Of course, if games where real, I could see Shadowbane calling WoW a carebear while Ultima Online kills them both. hehe
For more issues that Ultima faced, you can read some on Wikipedia.
Cheers,
Fozzy
*snickers* Carebear... Fozzy... Touche! hehe, I didn't think about that. =P Though, I wasn't jumping on anyone, Simply pointing out my opinion of the use of a term as my comments where made in general, not towards the original poster. It was just the first post where I read the term being used.
Of course, "fozzY" is a rock band with a 'pro' wrestler, and "fozzIE" is a muppet. Of course, I should admit, I was just a bad speller when I picked this username some 10 years ago. LOL
Cheers,
Fozzy
I'm always amused at the term 'carebear'. As if it was some sort of insult to use it, either towards another person, idea, or action. Can you think of getting into a fight and be like... "Oh yeah?!? Well, you're... you're... a BIG carebare! HA! Take that! Mwuahahaha *walks away gleefully as if scoring some major victory*".
Ironically, it's been my experiance that those people who have used this term to insult things, act more childish than the actions or people it's being used upon.
Cheers,
Fozzy
First, let me say... it's disappointing. WoW has been out for 2 years now? They've not released one (large) expantion yet. They have released content patches. However, if you haven't realized it, most of this content was planned to be in the game since WoW began but was pushed back to focus on other things.
Second, I must say I can't be too surprised, knowing the gaming industry (particularly PC games), heck any software, and how often they get pushed back.
Third, it does make me wonder. How would something like this effect memberships? Will people quite until the expantion or will they keep playing, even if they have not much else to do 'in game' as they've done a lot of it already? Even thouse who aren't addicted.
Fourth, as pointed out by another, this means that there will be less problems over the Christmas period with kids and their addiction to WoW and their inactivity with other family events. I know how it goes, I was, and to some degree still am, one of those people. You gobbel down your food, talk a little bit, your leg is pumping ready to spring back to the computer (which you left on and logged in while you're AFK at some inn), to continue your quest/grind.
Fifth, This is been a "Blizzard" theme. They tend to often not care about dates or pre-concived notions of "what the players want". They're very good at making a game they want to make. That of course doesn't mean they don't listen to the player base, because, afterall, not all ideas are bad ideas.
WoW was originally suppose to have Hero classes.. when the game was released, much like the Hero classes in WarcraftIII. Those where 'delayed' until some time after release.. and ultimately dropped for other purposes. Unlike other MMO's I've played, I've seen a bit more conservatisim from this game. Though, all MMO's all suffer from the same fate eventually. You always have to introduce 'new' things and with that, new items that have to be somehow equally powerful (but different) or more powerful than items that have come before.
Myself, I've stopped playing WoW since, oh, April/May 2005. I was considering getting the expantion, but I'm already catching up on my PS2 games (I've only recently purchased a used PS2), and by that time, the Wii will be out and I'll have 4 more games at launch to play (Zelda, Marvel, DBZ, Red Steel), and by the time I'm done with those, more of the Wii games should be out (Mario, Metroid), and probably some more I don't know about yet.
Then maybe I'll pick up the expantion, only, now I'll be far behind, my level 60 Hunter with epic armours will be pitiful to the level 70 characters in legendary armour. I get to spend more time grinding, probably never see any of good content as now you'll need to be 'X' level with 'X' items before you are allowed to go, and you need to have finsihed 'x' quests to even get a key to be allowed into the dungeon, and only if you're in a guild large enough to go into this place, and of course, IF the 'raid time' doesn't conflict with real life schedules... oh, like, dinner, courses, cleaning, grocery shopping, etc...
Man, I always called it a second job, but never-the-less I'm always surprised how much time you need to invest to fully utilize these games. Hehe, maybe that's why I'm console gaming again. I can obsess with a game, beat it, and re-sell it, never looking back. =P
Cheers,
Fozzy
HA! From another article linked from the orignal article...
I play D&D and I can tell you... slingshots do crap damage!
This guy has some issues. Problably from playing too many games as a kid.
Is this seriously all you have to do?
I'm going to patent "interacting in an interactive environment" and let the $ roll in for my 'patent'. Or maybe I can patent "doing stuff"? Or has that been taken already?
What's more concerning, does this mean if I create my own shopping cart, review system, or recommendation system, that I can get sued from IBM? If I build my own car, will I get sued by Ford or GM? I guess I'll have to have sheep with lazers on their heads as "aquatic animals with lasers on their heads" might have been patented by now.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Indeed. The original article is "popular" or "important" because it's to introduce people to the knowledge that there is a phenominon in the game culture that can extend outside the actual game (talk about virtual reality, hehe). Not that, "gaming in moderation" can be good for you.
What is interesting, however, is the fact that these online games (having a virtual social and economic society) can actually be used to find the effects of 'real' world social and economic theories theories. I be interested in reading an article written about using WoW to try and munipulate market prices through supply and demand in an online economy (one which has limitless but rare materials) or other economic and social theories to see how they hold true in todays popular virtual worlds.
How about running guilds in a communist, democratic, and socialist way and compare the differences in impact? Do online gamers have inherent social beliefs based on their real world counterpart (depending where you live), or would a person living in a real-world democracy actually favor an opposing view point?
Cheers,
Fozzy
Indeed! Of course, this should have been known back in the BETA/VHS days.
Is it just me, the fact that I'm not much of a Sony fan (I only bought a used PS2 a month ago, but I do enjoy the games I'm playing), but I'm not exactly interested in the titles they're offering up? Untold Legends? I had the first one on the PSP and it was traded in
Of course, I've been pretty negative about the PS3 with it's high price and undesired hardware (HD output and blue-ray, though I like the Blue-Ray more than HD-DVD), but being a person who dislikes sports titles on video games (Techmo SuperBowl is the only game I ever truely enjoyed), I AM actually intersted in the Wii sports package... which, by the way, comes with the system. I dunno, maybe I'm not into the NCAA, FIFA, NFL, NHL titles. The sports games I enjoyed (with the exception above) where always 'generic' leages, like "Basebase All-Stars" for the NES or that old NES hocky game, "Blades of Steel" I think it was called? Oh, "Double Dribble" was fun, but I don't recall if it used real 'teams' or not.
Anyway, I'm not impressed with this line-up so far.
Cheers,
Fozzy
It's always interesting to see how different the gaming habits are in different countries/cultures.
That's why I eat celery all the time. Celery with Ranch dressing, Celery with peanut butter, etc. It works great!
cheer,
fozzy
Actually, what you discribe is caused by 2 reasons I know of...
In the case of the NES (Nintendo Entertainment System... yes, the 'first' one), Nintendo squized 3rd party support for all kinds of nickels and dimes to produce a game on their system... only, no matter what crap they made, it was going to make a profit (well, almost always), simply due to the fact that EVERYONE had a NES. This doesn't mean everyone would buy the game, but rental stores at the time would pretty much stock a game and the large stores would stock multiple copies. In a way, it was turning into a scam after a while. produce a cheap crappy game, market it well, and sit back and let the 'bling' roll in.
With the case of the PSOne, Sony went and made it EASY for 3rd parties to make a game on their system. They need to take the market share of Nintendo away, who had redicoulous license fees. They had made it simple and cheap to make a game, therefor, everyone and their mother started making games. Of course, the first few games where really quite good on the PSOne. The PSOne was selling well, and soon, it reaches a point where it's also profitable to make a crappy game on the PSOne as it was on the NES and Super NES. Now, you combine cheap licenses (though they got more expensive as the PSOne sold more) and a well penatrated console, and you got yourself a playground for endless games of crap, with a few real winners in-between.
Of course, since the PS2 and the N64/GameCube, game developement costs have skyrocketed. Millions of dollars are spent on making a game. You can no longer just code a game up in your basement, so to speak, and be given a license to print money. That's why we're seeing more generally 'decent' games while seeing less crap, compared to the PSone and (late)NES days. That's also the same reason why you rarely see 'new' or 'original' titles. Because it's too risky to try something new and money is poured into 'safe' things like franchise titles and sequels to smash hits.... not unlike the Hollywood formula.
Cheers,
Fozzy
MGS is not an exclusive francise to Sony, neither is GTA as you can find them on XBox and PC (like you said). You can also find FF games on the PC as well as other 'old' consoles before Sony. So, like I said, they're not exclusive like Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc. Until the day Nintendo goes the way of Sega, where Sonic can now be found on different systems, you won't be able to play any flavor of Nintendo 'franchise' games on a different system.
Lastly, if you forgot to notice, that was a question that was possed, not an insinuating remark. As the point was, Sony doesn't own any francises, those are all 3rd party games, with the exception of the Everquest games, which Sony does own now after they purchased Verant and it was absorbed into "Sony Station Online". However, I do believe Sony might own the license right to some FF games like FFVII which will obviously prevent titles based off those characters/stores form appearing on other consoles.
Cheers,
Fozzy
Ultima was the first Online game, but I wouldn't personally classify it as the first 'mainstream' MMO. By 'Mainstream', I mean refer to the penetration it had on people outside of the 'geek' circle that I normally get lost in =P. This might have been due to Ultima being much more hard-core in that it had (a debatably cool feature) of being able to kill anyone. This turned off people. So the more (as they say in MMO speak) "carebear" EQ game, where player vs player was heavily restricted, appealed to a much larger user base.
Exactly, when you want to talk 'exclusive', you cannot get very far without talking about franchise names. Afterall, what does Sony have? I was going to say Crash Bandicot but a quick search shows he wasn't 'exclusive'. The only 2 franchises I can think of for Sony is Twisted Metal and the Everquest games (Champions of Norath, etc).
However, with that said, franchise games won't 'sell' millions of consoles. Just look at the Gamecube. I bought that over the PS2 due to primarly Zelda and Metroid. The GameCube was not as strong as Nintendo would have hoped. And even if a game is labeled as 'exclusive' (unless franchise 1st party like Mario), it doesn't mean it won't migrate to a different platform in the future.
Afterall, at one point I recall the Resident Evil series was going to be 'exclusive' to the GameCube. Well, they got REZero and RE4, then RE4 was ported to the PS2. In the end, 'exclusivity' is just as strong as the entity that owns the license rights. The license can be sold to another person to allow that game to be created on another platform.
So, yes, exclusives helps (how many people bought an N64 just to play GoldenEye?), but it's truely title availability that matters. As a GameCube owner, it was more than frustrating seeing games come out for the XBox and PS2 but not the GameCube (due to whatever technical limits the GC had verses cost of converting the title). I now purchased a PS2 about a month ago and I'm catching up on all the great titles I missed (Kingdom Hearts, God of War, GTO, Final Fantasy, Guitar Hero, DDR, etc., etc.)
Cheers,
Fozzy
Anything can be an addiction, and video games are no different. However, with the advent of MMO's, game addition has become much more social and mainstream than before.
From the article...
This is true of Blizzard, however, it should be noted that this did not start with WoW. EverQuest(EQ) was the pioneer of the 'mainstream' MMO. Every heard of the phrase 'EverCrack'? Anyone who's played EQ has. There was a group formed called EverQuest Widows that comprised of people who left their husband / wife because of their game addiction. Or Husbands / Wives who had an affair with someone they meet playing this online game.
Of course, it isn't just EverQuest, it's an MMO thing, or possibly just restricted to the Fantasy genre as I've not heard of these same issues nor have I ever been as addicted to MMO's such as City of Heroes / Villans, Star Wars, or Matrix. I've seen these issues in EQ, Dark Age of Camelot (DAoC), and World of Warcraft (WoW).
During my time in DAoC, I actually experianced a real life situation where a wife who recently left her husband due to his game addiction. A wife I met playing DAoC with her and her husband. She joined DAoC to try and spend more time with her husband only to be left to level her own toon, while her husband ran off to do 'end game' raids.
This couple had other problems that an MMO addiction amplified. And their story will be familiar to a vast number of people. WoW, did not start this kind of 'extreme' addiction, but being the largest MMO, it will introduce it to the most number of people.
MMO and game addiction for myself, almost killed my college education. Of course, I've been addicted to Nintendo since I was 8 (and Pong and Intellivison before that). I hated sports until I was 12 when I started Football, despite my parents forcing me to wrestle between 8-12 year of age. I was overweight when I was a kid and I didn't get out and play with a lot of kids. My favorite gifts where Tiger Electronic hand held games. So, suffice it to say, I've been an 'addict' for a long time. However, the MMO and it's 'vitual' reality and the ability to actaully people with other people (co-op multi-player games where my favorite however you had to find a friend to play Nintendo with you) pulled me deeper than ever before. Dusk to Dawn game sessions. Skipping class (in college), passing oppurtunties to party (in one of the US's highest rated party schools), little to no studying. 10 mins reading a book, and I'd be thinking "If I kill these mobs, I can get this item! I can just farm those and level!"
It was after DAoC experiance that I had to regain control. Then I studied in Europe for a year with no outlet to really play video games at all. It was a great way to break the habit. When I returned from Europe, WoW was released. I still bought and played it on release day. I even had some long game sessions. However, it was much easier to pull myself away than before. My GPA went from 2.0 to 3.4. I went out at least twice a week with friends and visited my family more often.
The beauty of WoW is that it's extreamily easy to get a character to the 'end' level (whatever that may be at any given time). while all the other games I played make it so hard and difficult, that I've never actually 'maxxed out' a character in any other game.
Video Game addiction is a serios thing that gets little attention due to it's 'taboo' idea or possibly sound 'silly'. I don't th
And for all those interested, I asked the store manage how his PS3 sales went... he said it took the entire day, but he reserved them all. Except he had 2x or 3x as many people on the 'call' list but all said "'nah" when they where confirmed it was $600.
Is price really going to kill the PS3? For me, I scoff at the idea of paying that much. Particularly when I'm not interested in converting my movie library from DVD to blue-ray (or if Blue-Ray will out last HD-DVD, though I think it will) and I'm not interested in HD-TV connections as I don't own a HD-TV and don't plan on getting one until I need to get a new TV. *cross fingers* which I hope will still be a few years into the future.
"it'll also be possible to buy PSone and PS2 classics you missed out on, as well as a selection of PSP games, from the PlayStation Store, and download them directly to your PS3."
Even more reason for me to try an sell my PSP. Man, I had such hopes for that system. Sadly, I can only get about $60 for it from GameStop. =( Such a beautiful piece of hardware, only to sit, stale on my desk for lack of games and the inability to actually use the bloody Wi-Fi to game with others... unless it's Ad-Hoc. I'm no longer interested in 'modifying' things like I was 10 years ago. I just want to pay for something that will give me what I want 'out-of-the-box'.
Other than that, the online services seem to be in the right direction for Sony. Particularly downloading those hard to find or expensive to now buy PSOne and PS2 games.
Yes, I got my email yesterday. I went 1.5 hours early. I was 4th in line at my store. Had to wait in about 25F weather. (wind at 35MPH, yuck).
However, our store had about a 16 limit on orders. We started about 15mins to 10:00am and they where all gone by 10:00am.
I am glad I have mine. Though, I'm surprised orders are so low, given Nintendos statements of a large number of orders available. I would guess Wal-Mart or BestBuy might be getting large quantities.
Cheers,
Fozzy