Sure hardcore gamers will go for all three or their brand-loyal console regardless of price/performance/games but the average gamer and family I think will be voting on the Revolution.
I think if that was the case The Dreamcast or Gamecube would have taken the current generation.
The Revolution is going to come last to the party, after both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 have launched, and certainly the Xbox 360 will be on its second-generation games already. The Revolution is apparently severly underpowered when compared to the other two, so it's not going to come off well when you look at the games side by side. People who don't want the graphical splendour of the Xbox 360 and PS3 will probably be tempted to stick with a PS2 or Xbox (as the Revolution will probably be only about twice as powerful as an Xbox), as they are much cheaper and already have vast catalogues of cheap games.
Let's not beat around the bush here: The main reason (from what we know about the Revolution) that people will buy the Revolution will be to play Nintendo games on it. I doubt there'll be as much third-party support for it as for the other two as they won't be able to make their cross-platform games for it without severely sacrificing quality. You'll probably also get people with young children buying it just so they can get an easy supply of cheap N64 and SNES games for them to play as well.
Last time around the dollar was considerably stronger than it is now.
If you compare against Pounds Sterling, for instance, One US Dollar back in 2001 would get you around 72p. Nowadays it'll only get you about 54p, so versus the Pound it's lost about 25% of its value, which coincides remarkably well with the $300 -> $400 change.
Of course, the Xbox isn't manufactured in the UK, so the numbers will be rather different with respect to whatever countries it is manufactured in, but it is a trend. The Dollar just isn't worth as much any more and although you are to an extent buffered by your sheer size, if the Dollar doesn't increase soon you will find things getting more expensive.
Hey I'll be one of the first to buy the x86 version of MacOS X.
Why?
it's not as if you'll be able to run it on your PC. If Apple did decide to do change over to x86, you'd still have to buy an Apple machine to run OSX (OSXI by then?).
If you've got a definitive source for that, I'd love to see it.
Yes, some stuff was definitely rendered in realtime. Fight Night was for example, as was the Final Fantasy VII demo and I-8. However, there was a definite difference in quality between those titles and some of the others like Killzone 2. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure Killzone 2 will look lovely, but just not quite that lovely.
It's pretty clear that Sony has the advantage with the brand, and that the PS3 *will* be more powerful than the Xbox 360, but the Killzone 2 demo *was* prerendered. I don't see that as spreading lies.
I hear the accusation of Kiddy Porn quite a lot about FreeNet, but how does anybody actually know? I thought the big idea was that you don't know what's stored on your node - unless you're actually downloading FreeNet kiddy porn, how can you tell?
I don't remember saying that Christianity should be removed from everything personal, in fact I passionately believe that people should be free to practice the religion of their choice*.
And sure, as a member of a religion, your views are as valid as anybody else's, and your contribution will help shape the views and ethics of the country.
However, I do belive that it's not in any country's best interests to involve religion in the running of government - I think there are enough examples throughout history to show it's not a good idea.
* Well, within reason. I don't agree that religious belief is a valid excuse to break the law - by shooting abortion doctors, flying aeroplanes into buildings, killing young women who bring 'shame' to the family etc... - but I think most reasonable people of any belief system would agree with me there.
I am a christian. Our nation is christian. We were founded on christian ideals. The only reason there is a seperation of church and state is not to keep religion out of government, but to keep government out of the church.
"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." - George Washington
"And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions." - Thomas Jefferson
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." - John Adams
It certainly doesn't sound that way to me. The founding fathers were well aware of the problems caused by integrating Church and State, and seemed to have a dim view in general of the trappings of organised religion.
However, I'm VERY disappointed that not only is Sony not discouraging this type of play, they are now actively encouraging it, facilitating it, and taking part in it. There's a huge difference, and it's all for a few lousy bucks. I echo Mark's sentiments when he says, "Shame on you."
But if the majority of people seem to prefer 'rollplaying' as you put it, why should Sony put obstacles in their way? I realise it's not to your taste, but it evidently is to the taste of the majority of their customers. I don't see why for some strange reason it's Sony's duty to bear the torch for pure uncorrupted roleplaying. They have made a game which people enjoy and are positively reacting to their customer's needs.
If you don't like it, find a MMORPG that doesn't have levelling - there's gotta be one somewhere, and it's not like there isn't a precedent from tabletop roleplaying - Traveller had hardly any character development to speak of - once you'd set up your character, their stats, skills etc stayed pretty much static.
Online RPGs have always been less about roleplaying - it's difficult to see how they could be any other way, without the presence of a gamesmaster/referee to help guide play.
You say that Sony is hurting the 'genre of RPGs', but I don't see how that's the case. What they're doing is expanding the genre - you'll still have your tabletop RPGs, and if you don't like MMORPGs that have auctions, fine - play the ones that don't.
Yes, I was talking about the times whe you run a scanner on your entire disk (The only way I tend to run a virus checker), but you make a good point about the disk use of in-memory virus checkers.
I don't think it's dumb to only rely on occasional disk scanning. I'm careful about what I run, and I've not had a virus infection yet. I do the occasional scan just in case, especially as my children sometime use my computer as well. I have of course told them about safe computer use, but it's best to be cautious.
I don't like in-memory virus checkers, as I've only ever had bad experiences with them.
Instead I run http://housecall.antivirus.com/ every month or so or when the computer is exhibiting odd behaviour.
Running a virus checker slows down your computer because of the amount of disk accesses, not because it's using up your computer's CPU power. Adding an extra core isn't going to help.
"...we did get three very productive years out of it, and we not only learnt how SCMs can work, we also taught a lot of people what to expect of a _good_ SCM, so anybody who claims that it was a waste of time to go with BK obviously doesn't have his head screwed on right. BK did good."
There seems to be the idea that now that they've got to move off BitKeeper that it's the end of the world. It isn't. What if they hadn't used BitKeeper - kernel development would not have progressed at nearly the rate that it has and they'd still be in the same position they are in now, but with less work done on the kernel. They'd still have had to work out some alternative SCM, they might just have had to do it sooner.
I really don't see what the big deal is. Linus hasn't lost anything by using BitKeeper - you say that he was "dependent on the goodwill of [BitMover]", but dependent for what? we still have the Linux source - the only thing he was dependent on them for was the productivity that no open source product was capable of offering. So all he's done is gain, and lost nothing.
So, he's in it for the money. Is anyone surprised?
So is Linus! So is every other professional programmer! At some level, we're all in it for the money, because we wish to make a living out of our trade - and unless we're independantly wealthy, that means getting paid to do it.
And what is BitMover so upset about? That anyone would dare compete with them?
The audacity!
BitMover are fine with people competing with them. What they are not fine with is people using the free version they give out to create a competitor that could help put them out of buisiness.
It sounds fair enough to me. It's like lending a neighbour a tractor on the condition he doesn't start ploughing up your driveway.
Does any vendor of a commercial product have a moral high ground to complain when a competitor appears? And whose problem is it if they are trying to charge money for something other will do for free?
I haven't seen BitMover complaining about competitors appearing. All they are saying is "Sure, you can make a competitor to BitKeeper, but don't expect us to help you out by giving you a free copy of BitKeeper."
Slashdot Mirror
Dang, I wish I still had my mod points...
Yes, I'd never heard of lemonparty before either.
'course, I've got the sense not to look it up...
Sure hardcore gamers will go for all three or their brand-loyal console regardless of price/performance/games but the average gamer and family I think will be voting on the Revolution.
I think if that was the case The Dreamcast or Gamecube would have taken the current generation.
The Revolution is going to come last to the party, after both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 have launched, and certainly the Xbox 360 will be on its second-generation games already. The Revolution is apparently severly underpowered when compared to the other two, so it's not going to come off well when you look at the games side by side. People who don't want the graphical splendour of the Xbox 360 and PS3 will probably be tempted to stick with a PS2 or Xbox (as the Revolution will probably be only about twice as powerful as an Xbox), as they are much cheaper and already have vast catalogues of cheap games.
Let's not beat around the bush here: The main reason (from what we know about the Revolution) that people will buy the Revolution will be to play Nintendo games on it. I doubt there'll be as much third-party support for it as for the other two as they won't be able to make their cross-platform games for it without severely sacrificing quality. You'll probably also get people with young children buying it just so they can get an easy supply of cheap N64 and SNES games for them to play as well.
Last time around the dollar was considerably stronger than it is now.
If you compare against Pounds Sterling, for instance, One US Dollar back in 2001 would get you around 72p. Nowadays it'll only get you about 54p, so versus the Pound it's lost about 25% of its value, which coincides remarkably well with the $300 -> $400 change.
Of course, the Xbox isn't manufactured in the UK, so the numbers will be rather different with respect to whatever countries it is manufactured in, but it is a trend. The Dollar just isn't worth as much any more and although you are to an extent buffered by your sheer size, if the Dollar doesn't increase soon you will find things getting more expensive.
Hey I'll be one of the first to buy the x86 version of MacOS X.
Why?
it's not as if you'll be able to run it on your PC. If Apple did decide to do change over to x86, you'd still have to buy an Apple machine to run OSX (OSXI by then?).
If you've got a definitive source for that, I'd love to see it.
Yes, some stuff was definitely rendered in realtime. Fight Night was for example, as was the Final Fantasy VII demo and I-8. However, there was a definite difference in quality between those titles and some of the others like Killzone 2. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure Killzone 2 will look lovely, but just not quite that lovely.
Lies?
It's pretty clear that Sony has the advantage with the brand, and that the PS3 *will* be more powerful than the Xbox 360, but the Killzone 2 demo *was* prerendered. I don't see that as spreading lies.
I hear the accusation of Kiddy Porn quite a lot about FreeNet, but how does anybody actually know? I thought the big idea was that you don't know what's stored on your node - unless you're actually downloading FreeNet kiddy porn, how can you tell?
I feel the need to do a Nelson.
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.
If you can take a shit without having to go to some outhouse to do your business into a hole in the floor, thank a sewage worker.
... because the bastards still haven't released the original in Europe. Grrrr.
I don't remember saying that Christianity should be removed from everything personal, in fact I passionately believe that people should be free to practice the religion of their choice*.
And sure, as a member of a religion, your views are as valid as anybody else's, and your contribution will help shape the views and ethics of the country.
However, I do belive that it's not in any country's best interests to involve religion in the running of government - I think there are enough examples throughout history to show it's not a good idea.
* Well, within reason. I don't agree that religious belief is a valid excuse to break the law - by shooting abortion doctors, flying aeroplanes into buildings, killing young women who bring 'shame' to the family etc... - but I think most reasonable people of any belief system would agree with me there.
I am a christian. Our nation is christian. We were founded on christian ideals. The only reason there is a seperation of church and state is not to keep religion out of government, but to keep government out of the church.
"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." - George Washington
"And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions." - Thomas Jefferson
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." - John Adams
It certainly doesn't sound that way to me. The founding fathers were well aware of the problems caused by integrating Church and State, and seemed to have a dim view in general of the trappings of organised religion.
However, I'm VERY disappointed that not only is Sony not discouraging this type of play, they are now actively encouraging it, facilitating it, and taking part in it. There's a huge difference, and it's all for a few lousy bucks. I echo Mark's sentiments when he says, "Shame on you."
But if the majority of people seem to prefer 'rollplaying' as you put it, why should Sony put obstacles in their way? I realise it's not to your taste, but it evidently is to the taste of the majority of their customers. I don't see why for some strange reason it's Sony's duty to bear the torch for pure uncorrupted roleplaying. They have made a game which people enjoy and are positively reacting to their customer's needs.
If you don't like it, find a MMORPG that doesn't have levelling - there's gotta be one somewhere, and it's not like there isn't a precedent from tabletop roleplaying - Traveller had hardly any character development to speak of - once you'd set up your character, their stats, skills etc stayed pretty much static.
Online RPGs have always been less about roleplaying - it's difficult to see how they could be any other way, without the presence of a gamesmaster/referee to help guide play.
You say that Sony is hurting the 'genre of RPGs', but I don't see how that's the case. What they're doing is expanding the genre - you'll still have your tabletop RPGs, and if you don't like MMORPGs that have auctions, fine - play the ones that don't.
They'll probably maintain 'lite' versions of all of the above, giving consumers the illusion of choice.
What do you mean by this? How will this be different from what we've got now?
Yes, I was talking about the times whe you run a scanner on your entire disk (The only way I tend to run a virus checker), but you make a good point about the disk use of in-memory virus checkers.
I don't think it's dumb to only rely on occasional disk scanning. I'm careful about what I run, and I've not had a virus infection yet. I do the occasional scan just in case, especially as my children sometime use my computer as well. I have of course told them about safe computer use, but it's best to be cautious.
I don't like in-memory virus checkers, as I've only ever had bad experiences with them.
Instead I run http://housecall.antivirus.com/ every month or so or when the computer is exhibiting odd behaviour.
Running a virus checker slows down your computer because of the amount of disk accesses, not because it's using up your computer's CPU power. Adding an extra core isn't going to help.
Linus says it himself:
"...we did get three very productive years out of it, and we not only learnt how SCMs can work, we also taught a lot of people what to expect of a _good_ SCM, so anybody who claims that it was a waste of time to go with BK obviously doesn't have his head screwed on right. BK did good."
There seems to be the idea that now that they've got to move off BitKeeper that it's the end of the world. It isn't. What if they hadn't used BitKeeper - kernel development would not have progressed at nearly the rate that it has and they'd still be in the same position they are in now, but with less work done on the kernel. They'd still have had to work out some alternative SCM, they might just have had to do it sooner.
I really don't see what the big deal is. Linus hasn't lost anything by using BitKeeper - you say that he was "dependent on the goodwill of [BitMover]", but dependent for what? we still have the Linux source - the only thing he was dependent on them for was the productivity that no open source product was capable of offering. So all he's done is gain, and lost nothing.
The sky hasn't fallen.
Such as? I hate all this FUD about Wikipedia. I believe the peer review process works just as well.
Why? Do you believe this because it's been proven or because you'd like to think that it works just as well?
Until someone (prefreably someone impartial) has done a study on this, it's difficult to know what to believe.
There's no apostrophe required for the plural, moron!
link
So, he's in it for the money. Is anyone surprised?
So is Linus! So is every other professional programmer! At some level, we're all in it for the money, because we wish to make a living out of our trade - and unless we're independantly wealthy, that means getting paid to do it.
And what is BitMover so upset about? That anyone would dare compete with them?
The audacity!
BitMover are fine with people competing with them. What they are not fine with is people using the free version they give out to create a competitor that could help put them out of buisiness.
It sounds fair enough to me. It's like lending a neighbour a tractor on the condition he doesn't start ploughing up your driveway.
Does any vendor of a commercial product have a moral high ground to complain when a competitor appears? And whose problem is it if they are trying to charge money for something other will do for free?
I haven't seen BitMover complaining about competitors appearing. All they are saying is "Sure, you can make a competitor to BitKeeper, but don't expect us to help you out by giving you a free copy of BitKeeper."
Not listened to Lugradio before.
Too much nervous laughter for my tastes.
You get paid in property?!