It seems alot of X-box 360 people are thinking the X-box 360 and the Wii are perfect together because you get the "high end graphics of the X-box 360" and the innovative game play of the Wii for the same price as a PS3. haha.. That's a scary thought.
Uploading to libsyn via ftp is rubbish. Aside from sending our password over the internet in CLEARTEXT, it doesn't update the DNS load balancing forwarders immediately if you do it that way.
Libsyn isn't interested in have actual, properly authenticated file transfers outside of their website. Believe me, I've asked.
The PS3 sux. That's all I have to say, and yeah. You could buy the premiere version of the 360 and a Wii for the same price as a 60GB PS3. That's freakin' ridiculous.
I'm just waiting for Gears of War, then I'll purchase the 360. Nothing on the PS3 looks that great anyway. My brother has a PS2 and I hate it, and I hate the controller. However, after all this hating of the PS consoles, I love the PSP.
I think I saw it on Kotaku but someone over heard a marketing exec say that he THINKS that they might have just alienated a whole crap load of people with the high price point. Um, YEAH! Way to fuck your self Sony. At a $600 price point I will wait at least 2 years before purchasing...either that or con my folks into getting it for me (they can afford it).
Sony, Microsoft, lay down your arms, because the Wii has already won. Any console that lets you swing your controller like a lightsaber has got my money.
I like the concept for the wii controler alot. I wonder if there will be an option where I can either do the swing action or just push b. I imagine that I can get tired sword swinging with some games. Also I want those options so that I won't have to make alot of room for when I'm playing games.
They seem to have said that, for the Zelda game, you swing the sword with the button, not by swinging the Wiimote. Actually swinging the sword may well be reserved for special puzzles, battles, or scenes.
Makes sense, since Zelda games are more about puzzles and exploring than straight-out fighting, and there's a lot of grass and bushes to mow down ;^)
I think they can emulate the reaction time, speed, and techniques. But I wonder if they can emulate the ability to predict the opponent's actions. I can see it working with the Wii reading the subtle movements of the controller and doing some algorithms to attempt to predict most likely attacks and coming up with an appropriate response a split second before the player attacks.
But this requires complex algorithms and the controller being extremely sensitive.
Thoughts on the Xbox 360 Shadowrun game, which has piqued my interest.
First off, I should mention that I'm relatively new to the original Shadowrun RPG, but I'm growing to like it a great deal. I'm also not too perturbed by what the developers of the Xbox version claim they're doing to the history. It's hard to tell much with only the few tidbits available, but there is truth to the statement that getting rid of that baggage makes some things easier.
Shadowrun has very strong themes of individualism vs. groupthink/corporate culture. These are not uncommon in cyberpunk literature, and the designers and writers of the RPG successfully use the fantastical stuff to reinforce them: this is the main reason the combination of all the standard fantasy elements and all the standard cyberpunk elements actually works, rather than seeming totally forced.
The accumulated world history, of course, builds these themes up, but all that detail is not strictly necessary to do so. If I choose to read the few statements I've seen about this game in an optimistic fashion, it looks like they're just setting the game very early in the course of that history (just as the Awakening is beginning...if you don't know what I'm talking about, and care, look up the Shadowrun timeline on wikipedia). If they still use the fantasy-cyberpunk mix in the right way, the story could be interesting even without the accumulated history.
And yes, I realize that a good story does not equal a good game. But it's a start.
So I guess I'll remain cautiously optimistic, at least until I hear more.
EDIT: Also, there's this other matter I haven't weighed in on yet. In short: Weeeeeee!
I have no real concern with omitting vast tracts of the Shadowrun Bible, no problem at all, it is intimidating and excluding. What I take umbrage at is that it's only a multiplayer FPS. It's a wasted opportunity to create a Shadowrun game with real depth. There's more to the franchise than its history, there's decking, rigging, astral travel, and many other fantastic, unique elements that really can't be properly captured by a multiplayer shooter.
I guess I was really disappointed by the lost opportunity for something truly great. Now it's just something... bleh.
With most RPG systems/settings, it doesn't matter whether they change something to make a game, because half of the point of RPGs is to make a game that the players will enjoy, and only use the setting that is provided as a general backdrop, where you mould it to fit your game. I hate it when people complain that a RPG setting has been changed in a game, like Forgotten Realms in any of the games.
Games where the Setting is an important aspect, like Earthdawn and Shadowrun, I can see how people could be annoyed by the change, but it still doesn't matter if they make it fit and not be stupid.
So get this, Microsoft said that instead of spending $600 dollars on the PSP, you should buy a Xbox 360 and a Nintendo Wii for the same price. That is kick ass!!! It's like Microsoft and Nintendo are making an alliance. They're out to take down the giant. By the way, that came straight from the horse's mouth, by Peter Moore.
Did you read that? Peter Moore is complimenting Nintendo. That is awesome.
I think Nintendo and Microsoft are going to have something in these coming years. I don't know what, but something. They've been pissed ever since that PS1 came out, and now they're going to be the leaders of the console wars once and for all.
Comments
http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=987&topic=28043293
It seems alot of X-box 360 people are thinking the X-box 360 and the Wii are perfect together because you get the "high end graphics of the X-box 360" and the innovative game play of the Wii for the same price as a PS3. haha.. That's a scary thought.
Libsyn isn't interested in have actual, properly authenticated file transfers outside of their website. Believe me, I've asked.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/05/11/trauma-center-2-for-wii-launch-window/
I'm just waiting for Gears of War, then I'll purchase the 360. Nothing on the PS3 looks that great anyway. My brother has a PS2 and I hate it, and I hate the controller. However, after all this hating of the PS consoles, I love the PSP.
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/e3/nintendo-wii-249-173413.php
How Nintendo is going to deal with the PS3:
http://static.flickr.com/53/145152416_80fd6904a9.jpg?v=0
PS3/Xbox360 overlay:
http://static.flickr.com/52/145155699_3ceaa23309.jpg?v=0
Old and new PS3 compare:
http://static.flickr.com/53/145155700_ce5e65a87f.jpg?v=0
Makes sense, since Zelda games are more about puzzles and exploring than straight-out fighting, and there's a lot of grass and bushes to mow down ;^)
But this requires complex algorithms and the controller being extremely sensitive.
First off, I should mention that I'm relatively new to the original Shadowrun RPG, but I'm growing to like it a great deal. I'm also not too perturbed by what the developers of the Xbox version claim they're doing to the history. It's hard to tell much with only the few tidbits available, but there is truth to the statement that getting rid of that baggage makes some things easier.
Shadowrun has very strong themes of individualism vs. groupthink/corporate culture. These are not uncommon in cyberpunk literature, and the designers and writers of the RPG successfully use the fantastical stuff to reinforce them: this is the main reason the combination of all the standard fantasy elements and all the standard cyberpunk elements actually works, rather than seeming totally forced.
The accumulated world history, of course, builds these themes up, but all that detail is not strictly necessary to do so. If I choose to read the few statements I've seen about this game in an optimistic fashion, it looks like they're just setting the game very early in the course of that history (just as the Awakening is beginning...if you don't know what I'm talking about, and care, look up the Shadowrun timeline on wikipedia). If they still use the fantasy-cyberpunk mix in the right way, the story could be interesting even without the accumulated history.
And yes, I realize that a good story does not equal a good game. But it's a start.
So I guess I'll remain cautiously optimistic, at least until I hear more.
EDIT: Also, there's this other matter I haven't weighed in on yet. In short: Weeeeeee!
I guess I was really disappointed by the lost opportunity for something truly great. Now it's just something... bleh.
Games where the Setting is an important aspect, like Earthdawn and Shadowrun, I can see how people could be annoyed by the change, but it still doesn't matter if they make it fit and not be stupid.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20060512153710.html
Did you read that? Peter Moore is complimenting Nintendo. That is awesome.
I think Nintendo and Microsoft are going to have something in these coming years. I don't know what, but something. They've been pissed ever since that PS1 came out, and now they're going to be the leaders of the console wars once and for all.