These 18-26 year-olds might have different opinions in 10-20 years. Until then, their opinions don't matter. Why? They're not politically involved when compared to older demographics. But NASA is smart in trying to preempt future apathy.
Besides, not enough Americans care about taxes and program funding for this to matter. As long as politicians want huge NASA contracts going to their district/state, NASA will have funding. Whether or not this funding is merited is a different story...
Is it too late for Britain to reverse its course? People get used to cameras because they provide security. Then the authorities add speakers to provide more security. In 10 years, cameras will have face recognition systems. This happens so gradually that citizens become accustomed to Big Brother's constant presence and don't question the next move.
50 years from now, I think historians will look at 9/11 (and the Madrid bombings, etc.) as the beginning of the end of privacy standards that literally took centuries to establish. We have to stop this now before it's too late.
They do realize what happened to the original Crossfire, right?
Besides, do people actually enjoy watching people argue about videogaming? Seems boring when you can just log onto a forum and argue consoles there...
I paid $40 for Half-Life and now I'll be forced to see in-game ads when I play CS. Is Valve going to give me a refund? No, because game companies have no problem charging you full price for a game and still making you see ads.
But here's my biggest problem: people pay $X a month to run CS servers. Will they get a cut of the ad profit? Will they be able to block these ads? Or will Valve screw them over too? If server admins have no part of the advertisement process, then Valve has sunk to the level of EA...
If you want to nip this horrible in-game ad trend in the bud, then stop playing CS. I didn't buy Battlefield 2142 because I wanted to vote no to in-game ads with my dollars...plus BF2142 just blows.
Of course MS wants to emphasize gaming on their OS. Many people, myself included, would never touch Windows again if it weren't for the games...
But I find this stupid:
"To earn the GFW brand, a title must comply with certain Microsoft-tested specifications, including... compatibility with the Xbox 360 controller."
Another example of MS bullying game publishers to adopt its standards. Do all PC gamers have an Xbox or like its controller? Why not other PC-only gamepads that might work better? Besides, what true gamer would limit their FPS experience with a friggn' console controller?
But simplifying install (and uninstall) and system reqs makes sense. Too bad it took so damn long.
Indeed, he should stand by his work. But all of the websites and blogs weren't afraid to use Mr. Bernoff's report to drum up an Apple doom-and-gloom story for the sake of attracting readers.
Consumers aren't entirely stupid. If you don't already own one, you can snag a PS2 dirt cheap. And there's a huge library of games - many going for $10-30, even cheaper used. PS2 even has some awesome games coming out in 2007, like Rogue Galaxy. If you're itching for party games (sans Wii Remote of course), you can't go wrong with Gamecube's library. The last gen (funny saying that) still has plenty of life.
The point is the current lineup for Wii and PS3 isn't that great, especially considering the high asking price.
That, and the technical jump to Wii/PS3 from GC/PS2 is less than the jump from N64/PSX to GC/PS2.
After the Army Times called for Rumsfeld to step down, the White House could no longer ignore criticisms of the SecDef. That, and a Democratic Congress could very well "blackmail" the White House with legislative stoppages until Rumsfeld resigns.
Rumsfeld was good at waging the initial war, but was simply unable to adapt to the insurgency or maintaining an extended peace.
These are the same journalists who won't give any exclusively reviewed game less than a 9.0/10, use developer diaries (aka devs shamelessly plugging their projects) to fill webspace, make every previewed game sound like The Next Big Thing, frequently make grammatical errors on their front pages (it's and its are different, IGN.com), write like they're still in high school, and generally suck at everything they do.
Sorry for sounding so cynical, but I've been reading gaming mags and websites for years and the quality is steadily decreasing. Gaming journalism is about not pissing off the big guys (like EA) so you keep your ad revenue coming, effectively destroying any integrity in the game review process. Not every website is this bad, I know, but the big ones are pretty shameless. Go to Metacritic.com and click every review for Battlefield 2142. Funny how only one or two mention how the game has in-game advertisements...
Al's greatest work
on
An Ode To Al
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
If you want proof of Al's talent, look no further than "Bob," a brilliant tribute to the lyrical stylings of Bob Dylan. A parody of Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues," "Bob" is done entirely in palindromes while still retaining the lyrical absurdities of the original song. Al also interjects several completely unnecessary 1-second harmonica rifts in the song, poking fun at Dylan's use of the instrument.
I'm a huge Dylan fan and this was by far one of the most original tributes to the man.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Nej4xJe4Tdg
"On top of that, you can spend 600 Microsoft points (GBP 5.10 / EUR 6.98) on an "Advance Pack" which adds 22 new skins (as well as adding a golden yacht to Tetsuya Mizuguchi's berth at Tokyo harbour, presumably)."
This microdownload stuff is complete bullshit. There was a time when devs would include this content with the original purchase, but I guess it's passé to nickel and dime your customers with these downloads.
I didn't buy that horse armor and I sure won't be buying this.
I refuse to buy a game that has in-game ads AND retails for $50. If you're going to ruin the creative integrity of the game, at least make it cheaper for me to purchase. Until some of the ad revenue gets passed down to consumers in the form of cheaper retail prices, I can't get behind this scheme.
For every one game that does in-game ads right, there will be 50 that blatantly sell out and ruin the gaming experience...
Don't forget the extra money for "microdownloads" (the buzzword for "content that should've been included in the original package"), especially for the GT series.
Oh, and don't be surprised if we're eventually forced to view in-game ads all while receiving no price break.
So Yahoo! wants to shell out $900 mill for a service that's fast becoming another MySpace? Instead of maintaining its brilliant niche market - appealing to college kids through closed registration - Facebook decides to open registration. I fail to see the wisdom of that decision; MySpace already exists for everyone else. Facebook was, in a way, the anti-MySpace, a cooler, less annoying networking site. Users were PO'd about recent additions like the news ticker...just wait until the flood gates open and every emo, pedophile, jerk, and jackass on the Web starts signing up.
PS: Web 2.0 bubble burst rapidly approaching, captain.
It seems more and more consoles are providing classic game download services. This means that copyright holders will have a vested interest in shutting down ROM and Emulator sites, for these will take away business from the "legal" download service. So download ROMS while you can, before the packs of lawyers start searching for targets.
Ads are realistic in a racing game and I probably won't mind them so much. But in the post-apocalyptic future world of Battlefield 2142? I'd like to know how they plan on doing that.
Reminds me of when SOE introduced ads into PlanetSide. Yep, nothing like seeing posters for Deuce Bigalow European Gigolo before heading off into battle...on another planet...several thousand years in the future.
Yet another reason for me to stop buying EA games.
Slashdot Mirror
These 18-26 year-olds might have different opinions in 10-20 years. Until then, their opinions don't matter. Why? They're not politically involved when compared to older demographics. But NASA is smart in trying to preempt future apathy.
Besides, not enough Americans care about taxes and program funding for this to matter. As long as politicians want huge NASA contracts going to their district/state, NASA will have funding. Whether or not this funding is merited is a different story...
Is it too late for Britain to reverse its course? People get used to cameras because they provide security. Then the authorities add speakers to provide more security. In 10 years, cameras will have face recognition systems. This happens so gradually that citizens become accustomed to Big Brother's constant presence and don't question the next move.
50 years from now, I think historians will look at 9/11 (and the Madrid bombings, etc.) as the beginning of the end of privacy standards that literally took centuries to establish. We have to stop this now before it's too late.
Orwell was a man ahead of his time...
They do realize what happened to the original Crossfire, right? Besides, do people actually enjoy watching people argue about videogaming? Seems boring when you can just log onto a forum and argue consoles there...
What bandwidth? People pay their own money to run CS servers. Valve just pays to run Steam, the biggest DRM-infested piece of shit out there.
I paid $40 for Half-Life and now I'll be forced to see in-game ads when I play CS. Is Valve going to give me a refund? No, because game companies have no problem charging you full price for a game and still making you see ads. But here's my biggest problem: people pay $X a month to run CS servers. Will they get a cut of the ad profit? Will they be able to block these ads? Or will Valve screw them over too? If server admins have no part of the advertisement process, then Valve has sunk to the level of EA... If you want to nip this horrible in-game ad trend in the bud, then stop playing CS. I didn't buy Battlefield 2142 because I wanted to vote no to in-game ads with my dollars...plus BF2142 just blows.
Of course MS wants to emphasize gaming on their OS. Many people, myself included, would never touch Windows again if it weren't for the games... But I find this stupid: "To earn the GFW brand, a title must comply with certain Microsoft-tested specifications, including ... compatibility with the Xbox 360 controller."
Another example of MS bullying game publishers to adopt its standards. Do all PC gamers have an Xbox or like its controller? Why not other PC-only gamepads that might work better? Besides, what true gamer would limit their FPS experience with a friggn' console controller?
But simplifying install (and uninstall) and system reqs makes sense. Too bad it took so damn long.
Indeed, he should stand by his work. But all of the websites and blogs weren't afraid to use Mr. Bernoff's report to drum up an Apple doom-and-gloom story for the sake of attracting readers.
Consumers aren't entirely stupid. If you don't already own one, you can snag a PS2 dirt cheap. And there's a huge library of games - many going for $10-30, even cheaper used. PS2 even has some awesome games coming out in 2007, like Rogue Galaxy. If you're itching for party games (sans Wii Remote of course), you can't go wrong with Gamecube's library. The last gen (funny saying that) still has plenty of life.
The point is the current lineup for Wii and PS3 isn't that great, especially considering the high asking price.
That, and the technical jump to Wii/PS3 from GC/PS2 is less than the jump from N64/PSX to GC/PS2.
After the Army Times called for Rumsfeld to step down, the White House could no longer ignore criticisms of the SecDef. That, and a Democratic Congress could very well "blackmail" the White House with legislative stoppages until Rumsfeld resigns. Rumsfeld was good at waging the initial war, but was simply unable to adapt to the insurgency or maintaining an extended peace.
"Universal Tube, which sells used machines that make tubes..." Well now we know who built the backbone of the Internets
These are the same journalists who won't give any exclusively reviewed game less than a 9.0/10, use developer diaries (aka devs shamelessly plugging their projects) to fill webspace, make every previewed game sound like The Next Big Thing, frequently make grammatical errors on their front pages (it's and its are different, IGN.com), write like they're still in high school, and generally suck at everything they do.
Sorry for sounding so cynical, but I've been reading gaming mags and websites for years and the quality is steadily decreasing. Gaming journalism is about not pissing off the big guys (like EA) so you keep your ad revenue coming, effectively destroying any integrity in the game review process. Not every website is this bad, I know, but the big ones are pretty shameless. Go to Metacritic.com and click every review for Battlefield 2142. Funny how only one or two mention how the game has in-game advertisements...
If you want proof of Al's talent, look no further than "Bob," a brilliant tribute to the lyrical stylings of Bob Dylan. A parody of Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues," "Bob" is done entirely in palindromes while still retaining the lyrical absurdities of the original song. Al also interjects several completely unnecessary 1-second harmonica rifts in the song, poking fun at Dylan's use of the instrument. I'm a huge Dylan fan and this was by far one of the most original tributes to the man. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Nej4xJe4Tdg
"On top of that, you can spend 600 Microsoft points (GBP 5.10 / EUR 6.98) on an "Advance Pack" which adds 22 new skins (as well as adding a golden yacht to Tetsuya Mizuguchi's berth at Tokyo harbour, presumably)."
This microdownload stuff is complete bullshit. There was a time when devs would include this content with the original purchase, but I guess it's passé to nickel and dime your customers with these downloads.
I didn't buy that horse armor and I sure won't be buying this.
I refuse to buy a game that has in-game ads AND retails for $50. If you're going to ruin the creative integrity of the game, at least make it cheaper for me to purchase. Until some of the ad revenue gets passed down to consumers in the form of cheaper retail prices, I can't get behind this scheme. For every one game that does in-game ads right, there will be 50 that blatantly sell out and ruin the gaming experience...
Don't forget the extra money for "microdownloads" (the buzzword for "content that should've been included in the original package"), especially for the GT series.
Oh, and don't be surprised if we're eventually forced to view in-game ads all while receiving no price break.
And you wonder why people pirate games?
So Yahoo! wants to shell out $900 mill for a service that's fast becoming another MySpace? Instead of maintaining its brilliant niche market - appealing to college kids through closed registration - Facebook decides to open registration. I fail to see the wisdom of that decision; MySpace already exists for everyone else. Facebook was, in a way, the anti-MySpace, a cooler, less annoying networking site. Users were PO'd about recent additions like the news ticker...just wait until the flood gates open and every emo, pedophile, jerk, and jackass on the Web starts signing up. PS: Web 2.0 bubble burst rapidly approaching, captain.
It seems more and more consoles are providing classic game download services. This means that copyright holders will have a vested interest in shutting down ROM and Emulator sites, for these will take away business from the "legal" download service. So download ROMS while you can, before the packs of lawyers start searching for targets.
Ads are realistic in a racing game and I probably won't mind them so much. But in the post-apocalyptic future world of Battlefield 2142? I'd like to know how they plan on doing that. Reminds me of when SOE introduced ads into PlanetSide. Yep, nothing like seeing posters for Deuce Bigalow European Gigolo before heading off into battle...on another planet...several thousand years in the future. Yet another reason for me to stop buying EA games.