I've played World of Warcraft for a year. If I could play it on the 360, from my comfy couch, on my 54-inch DLP, with a real game controller, and built-in voice chat support, I'd be right back on the money train in a second. Less than a second, I'd be offering to pay early to support the beta.
I don't see any reason why MMO's on the 360 shouldn't be as good as, or better than MMOs on a PC.
Death to the mouse and keyboard games. I use a mouse and a keyboard for work 18 hours a day, 6 days a week. On game night, I want to relax and leave the computer in the dark.
I played the first on PS1. More movie than game, unfortunately.
"story" doesn't necessarily mean sitting through 15 minute cutscenes.
The first few Soul Reaver games were excellently done, as far as keeping the game and story together.
What happened to "smart" games? Where are the "Gabriel Knight" games for this generation? The point-and-click genre might be dead, but that doesn't mean we didn't want adult stories or games that aren't based on twitch skills.
Well, I find that I can't keep up the hand-eye coordination required for something like Burnout:Revenge for too long (although I did beat it), and I'm not really using any problem solving skills thes days. Almost every game qualifies as a twitch game.
I think I'm looking for the same things in games that I'm looking for in movies: a good story, polished setting, and real emotion (even if it's just fear). Since the fall of the point-and-click adventure game, the story has consistently taken a back-seat to graphics and speed. Heck, even the 90's exploitation storyline of GTA:SA was a refreshing break from the sci-fi-military pulp onslaught.
Good story-driven games:
- Silent Hill 2 - Resident Evil 4 - Condemned - Indigo Prophesy - Strangers Wrath - Morrowind - GTA: San Andreas
This list is short, but I don't own a PS2.
Even my father, in his mid-fities, completed San Andreas. (with the exception of the flying missions, which had very frustrating controls on the Xbox.)
As crazy as it seems, World of Warcraft hit 5 million subscribers in December. It seems to appeal to high-school level students all the way up the age ladder.
Statistically, it's not crazy to think that one of those people might be president one day, just improbable. The population of Los Angeles in 2004 was 3.8 million, and you probably wouldn't think it that unlikely that a future president might be any one of those people.
That's an entirely different problem. North Americans are hypnotized by the media and so over-entertained in general that they couldn't care less about anything that isn't standing in their livingroom to really get behind any cause, even voting. Especially when the actual process of tabulating the votes based on states and seats seems only to remove people from the sense that their vote makes any difference. If you can cut up the numbers in such a way that anyone can win, why bother?
That's a gross generalization, of course. Not everyone stays away from the polls.
You don't think anyone from the 60's would notice the number of women and minorities in the government today as compared to the US government of the 60's
Do you think the standards board of the 50's would have allowed something like "Sex in the City" or "The L Word" to air on television?
As much as everyone has jumped on racial profiling as a hot topic, does it really compare to the McCarthy hearings?
These things aren't news to some of us, because we grew up with them. Kids can read about them in History, but they'll never know what they're like, because they never had to live through them. Their concept of the world starts when they are born, and they move forward from that base.
We tend to breed out bad ideas over time.
Are people still greedy and corrupt? Yes, it turns out we're still human. I hope that's not breaking news to anyone.
My comment was not that Nintendo doesn't have a valid product point by excluding HD in exchange for a lower price point. It was that they were insinuating that the HD graphics somehow looked worse than SD graphics on an SD TV. The 360 plays with regular televisions just fine.
I'm with you. I have a Toshiba DLP, and I'm reasonably happy with my 360. Condemned was pretty good, COD2 was great, NFSMW is great, and DOA4 is good (yeah, ate my save file too), but all in all, the starting lineup is a dud. And aside from the lighting effects in NFS and just about everything in Condemned, they haven't made much of a case for HD graphics with most of the games out so far. If Condemned is any indication, though, next gen games are going to look sweet =)
This sounds like a solid marketing strategy for Nintendo. If they can't do HD, then their best strategy is instilling enough fear, uncertainty and doubt in potential customers that HD games won't work on their existing televisions that people opt to wait for HD systems until they have an HD television.
And since a) "gaming journalism" consists almost entirely of reprinting or reformating press releases, and b) the internet is such a poor source of definitive information that you can find people backing up or debunking almost every piece of information in existence, they'll probably succeed in scaring enough customers into believing them.
It's a wonder Call of Duty 2 for the 360 made the top 10 in sales last month, considering that the general population is under the impression that the 360 overheats, eats disks and smothers babies.
Whenever you despair over politics, or the news, or video game legislation, remember this:
People die. Usually as they get older. They are replaced by younger people.
At some point most of the government, the media, the police, etc. will be from your generation. There will probably be a president that has played Super Mario Brothers, or World of Warcraft.
Whatever videogames are "doing to our kids", they have already done to us, and we're not exactly helpless.
If you'd like to worry about something long-term, think about this: the population of China is almost a quarter of the world's population. India and China combined is over a third of the world's population. In the grand scheme of things, our petty concerns over here have almost nothing to do with the state of the world.
You're just talking semantics here. I don't care what their cost is.
The bottom line is that the publisher has made what they cann expect to make off that one game. If they want to participate in the used sales market, they should be expected to assume some of the risk of paying for games that may not resell at all.
It's the EB's and the mom-and-pop stores that are payinng for our used games and storing them. If a game stinks, they don't have much chance of reselling a useed copy, and they've returned ~30% of the sticker price to me for the game, which easily wipes out any profit they made the first time around. It's a risk they take, and thhe publisher isn't due any of that profit.
If I pay for a new car, then sell it to you, which one of us should be responsible for paying the manufacturer again? I've already paid for the car, you're reimbursing me, what does Toyota/Ford/GM/etc. have to do with the sale at that point?
The publisher made $70 off the original purchase, which is already inflated, and the retailer is taking a risk by paying for the used game in the hopes that it will sell again.
Do you think that publishers should return a portion of the purchase price when we are bored with the game, as retailers do now? If they wanted a share of the used game market, they should also be required to assume some of the risk.
Gamers don't buy smart games that rely on gameplay, they buy shallow games based on screenshots and video previews, then complain that they are boring.
One of the best games of the last year was Oddworld: Strangers Wrath. The art direction and voice acting was stellar, the story was engaging, and the action was white knuckle most of the way through.
What happened to it? Well, how do you market a western filled with aliens? EA couldn't figure out how, so it just dumped it on the market with no advertising. You can find it new for under $20 now, and I encourage you to do so.
I couuld play Stranger's Wrath sequels for the next 10 years. I want to see where the story goes from here, I want to see other stories in this world. Will I? No. The frustration over the broken publishing system has forced Oddworld to abandon the gaming market completely.
Thanks EA.
Why even bother to produce smart games anymore? Publishers don't want them, and when they do, gamers don't buy them. And it's not improving, it's getting far worse. I'm holding on to the games that I love, because I can forsee a market that no longerr produces any games I'm interested in.
Thank god for the used games market, so I can always go back and find good games that I've missed while the new rack is full of Madden 2010 (hint: still football)
Take Two has been ripe with cash from the GTA games. They could probably use a few bumps in the road to encourage them to learn how to run a company and manage their money. It's somewhat easier to run a company if you just have a giant cash cow pouring money into your coffers on a consistent basis.
Rockstar would be the golden child in any publisher's roster. Does anyone really care what happens to Take Two?
Slashdot Mirror
I think they'd have to cheat this.
Technically, if you start as a human, and you're killed, wouldn't you become a zombie?
And, depending on how they work the origin of the zombie in this case, the zombie population could be bolstered by the dead and buried.
If they were going to be harsh about it, the game would be entirely zombies in short order.
Why are PC's better suited to MMO's?
I've played World of Warcraft for a year. If I could play it on the 360, from my comfy couch, on my 54-inch DLP, with a real game controller, and built-in voice chat support, I'd be right back on the money train in a second. Less than a second, I'd be offering to pay early to support the beta.
I don't see any reason why MMO's on the 360 shouldn't be as good as, or better than MMOs on a PC.
Death to the mouse and keyboard games. I use a mouse and a keyboard for work 18 hours a day, 6 days a week. On game night, I want to relax and leave the computer in the dark.
I played the first on PS1. More movie than game, unfortunately.
"story" doesn't necessarily mean sitting through 15 minute cutscenes.
The first few Soul Reaver games were excellently done, as far as keeping the game and story together.
What happened to "smart" games? Where are the "Gabriel Knight" games for this generation? The point-and-click genre might be dead, but that doesn't mean we didn't want adult stories or games that aren't based on twitch skills.
Except that the video game industry is bigger than the movie industry.
People are still buying games.
It's a generation shift year. These companies know it and didn't plan very well.
Badly managed companies fail in every industry.
Well, I find that I can't keep up the hand-eye coordination required for something like Burnout:Revenge for too long (although I did beat it), and I'm not really using any problem solving skills thes days. Almost every game qualifies as a twitch game.
I think I'm looking for the same things in games that I'm looking for in movies: a good story, polished setting, and real emotion (even if it's just fear). Since the fall of the point-and-click adventure game, the story has consistently taken a back-seat to graphics and speed. Heck, even the 90's exploitation storyline of GTA:SA was a refreshing break from the sci-fi-military pulp onslaught.
Good story-driven games:
- Silent Hill 2
- Resident Evil 4
- Condemned
- Indigo Prophesy
- Strangers Wrath
- Morrowind
- GTA: San Andreas
This list is short, but I don't own a PS2.
Even my father, in his mid-fities, completed San Andreas. (with the exception of the flying missions, which had very frustrating controls on the Xbox.)
As crazy as it seems, World of Warcraft hit 5 million subscribers in December. It seems to appeal to high-school level students all the way up the age ladder.
http://www.blizzard.com/press/051219.shtmlStatistically, it's not crazy to think that one of those people might be president one day, just improbable. The population of Los Angeles in 2004 was 3.8 million, and you probably wouldn't think it that unlikely that a future president might be any one of those people.
http://www.demographia.com/db-usmuni2004.htmThat's an entirely different problem. North Americans are hypnotized by the media and so over-entertained in general that they couldn't care less about anything that isn't standing in their livingroom to really get behind any cause, even voting. Especially when the actual process of tabulating the votes based on states and seats seems only to remove people from the sense that their vote makes any difference. If you can cut up the numbers in such a way that anyone can win, why bother?
That's a gross generalization, of course. Not everyone stays away from the polls.
You don't think anyone from the 60's would notice the number of women and minorities in the government today as compared to the US government of the 60's
Do you think the standards board of the 50's would have allowed something like "Sex in the City" or "The L Word" to air on television?
As much as everyone has jumped on racial profiling as a hot topic, does it really compare to the McCarthy hearings?
These things aren't news to some of us, because we grew up with them. Kids can read about them in History, but they'll never know what they're like, because they never had to live through them. Their concept of the world starts when they are born, and they move forward from that base.
We tend to breed out bad ideas over time.
Are people still greedy and corrupt? Yes, it turns out we're still human. I hope that's not breaking news to anyone.
My comment was not that Nintendo doesn't have a valid product point by excluding HD in exchange for a lower price point. It was that they were insinuating that the HD graphics somehow looked worse than SD graphics on an SD TV. The 360 plays with regular televisions just fine.
I'm with you. I have a Toshiba DLP, and I'm reasonably happy with my 360. Condemned was pretty good, COD2 was great, NFSMW is great, and DOA4 is good (yeah, ate my save file too), but all in all, the starting lineup is a dud. And aside from the lighting effects in NFS and just about everything in Condemned, they haven't made much of a case for HD graphics with most of the games out so far. If Condemned is any indication, though, next gen games are going to look sweet =)
This sounds like a solid marketing strategy for Nintendo. If they can't do HD, then their best strategy is instilling enough fear, uncertainty and doubt in potential customers that HD games won't work on their existing televisions that people opt to wait for HD systems until they have an HD television.
And since a) "gaming journalism" consists almost entirely of reprinting or reformating press releases, and b) the internet is such a poor source of definitive information that you can find people backing up or debunking almost every piece of information in existence, they'll probably succeed in scaring enough customers into believing them.
It's a wonder Call of Duty 2 for the 360 made the top 10 in sales last month, considering that the general population is under the impression that the 360 overheats, eats disks and smothers babies.
Yes, because Grand Theft Auto will be just as fun with green-blooded robots.
Won't that be lovely.
Whenever you despair over politics, or the news, or video game legislation, remember this:
People die. Usually as they get older. They are replaced by younger people.
At some point most of the government, the media, the police, etc. will be from your generation. There will probably be a president that has played Super Mario Brothers, or World of Warcraft.
Whatever videogames are "doing to our kids", they have already done to us, and we're not exactly helpless.
If you'd like to worry about something long-term, think about this: the population of China is almost a quarter of the world's population. India and China combined is over a third of the world's population. In the grand scheme of things, our petty concerns over here have almost nothing to do with the state of the world.
You're just talking semantics here. I don't care what their cost is.
The bottom line is that the publisher has made what they cann expect to make off that one game. If they want to participate in the used sales market, they should be expected to assume some of the risk of paying for games that may not resell at all.
It's the EB's and the mom-and-pop stores that are payinng for our used games and storing them. If a game stinks, they don't have much chance of reselling a useed copy, and they've returned ~30% of the sticker price to me for the game, which easily wipes out any profit they made the first time around. It's a risk they take, and thhe publisher isn't due any of that profit.
If I pay for a new car, then sell it to you, which one of us should be responsible for paying the manufacturer again? I've already paid for the car, you're reimbursing me, what does Toyota/Ford/GM/etc. have to do with the sale at that point?
bull.
The publisher made $70 off the original purchase, which is already inflated, and the retailer is taking a risk by paying for the used game in the hopes that it will sell again.
Do you think that publishers should return a portion of the purchase price when we are bored with the game, as retailers do now? If they wanted a share of the used game market, they should also be required to assume some of the risk.
Gamers don't buy smart games that rely on gameplay, they buy shallow games based on screenshots and video previews, then complain that they are boring. One of the best games of the last year was Oddworld: Strangers Wrath. The art direction and voice acting was stellar, the story was engaging, and the action was white knuckle most of the way through. What happened to it? Well, how do you market a western filled with aliens? EA couldn't figure out how, so it just dumped it on the market with no advertising. You can find it new for under $20 now, and I encourage you to do so. I couuld play Stranger's Wrath sequels for the next 10 years. I want to see where the story goes from here, I want to see other stories in this world. Will I? No. The frustration over the broken publishing system has forced Oddworld to abandon the gaming market completely. Thanks EA. Why even bother to produce smart games anymore? Publishers don't want them, and when they do, gamers don't buy them. And it's not improving, it's getting far worse. I'm holding on to the games that I love, because I can forsee a market that no longerr produces any games I'm interested in. Thank god for the used games market, so I can always go back and find good games that I've missed while the new rack is full of Madden 2010 (hint: still football)
Take Two has been ripe with cash from the GTA games. They could probably use a few bumps in the road to encourage them to learn how to run a company and manage their money. It's somewhat easier to run a company if you just have a giant cash cow pouring money into your coffers on a consistent basis. Rockstar would be the golden child in any publisher's roster. Does anyone really care what happens to Take Two?