I don't get how you would walk around. I mean, you can make small movements which it knows but how about jumping up to the high platform like Luke did in RoTJ? With the Wii I have the nunchuck with its stick so I can move my character. How will the Kinect do that?
For throwing a frisbee, motion detection is terrific, because the character just rotates. Golf? Perfect, because the character is rotating. Anything where the character doesn't have to move forwards or backwards (beyond very short distances) works just fine.
Think about it, though. In games where the character needs to run, or needs to walk long distances, how is that done? It's not done with motion detection, with rare exceptions, because even if you can detect someone running in place, or walking in place (Hey! Is that man walking against the wind?), it would be boring as hell for the person actually running or walking.
That's why the Wii controller has a nunchuck with an analog stick, generally--for walking and turning characters through a game world.
Now think about Kinect. That isn't available, because there's no mixing of control methods. It's ALL motion detection. So when Microsoft tells developers to "think outside the box," that's a little misleading. What they're really saying is "Think outside that box. Think inside this one." There's still a box, and in many ways, it's more limiting.
My prediction is $249 for the bare-bones version, and a bundle version for $299 with a memory card and a game.
Why would they want to have their first failure in years? To price a handheld the same as a full console - that can play DVDs, music, has facebook, online games, etc. - would be a big failure. It just wouldn't work.
I love them. We took a two week vacation to Charlottesville VA last summer and I ate there 3-4 times. I even got a t-shirt! Of course the only reason I could do that is because we don't have any in Iowa and probably won't for years (and by then they will have started cutting costs so they won't be as good).
Quote from: farley2k on June 09, 2010, 04:00:58 PM
Quote from: CeeKay on June 09, 2010, 12:28:43 AM
over 5 million shipped (not sold). not GTA IV numbers but hopefully they'll make the 4 million sold target they need to make to recoup dev costs.
So at $60 a game that means it cost roughly 24 million to develop RDR
Am I missing an inside joke or is my math off?
Shouldn't that be $240 million?
Maybe, I used the windows calculator and it doesn't put in the commas between zeros.
If it cost even half that much to make (120 million) it was insane. I mean, I am really loving the game but that is just ridiculous. It is a no wonder companies are concentrating on only AAA titles and repeat brands. They can't spend that on more that 1 or 2 games.
Suddenly have 6 books there are these new ways to defeat Voldemort the Deathly Hallows. If they were so important why were they not part of the theme of the whole series? Speaking of themes of the whole series what happened to the racism theme? We see how they mistreat house elves, how they mistreat giants, how they are split over mudbloods. These are big ways that the wizarding world is flawed, but rather than try to deal with them they are just dumped completely in the last book for some mumbo jumbo about the Hallows. I mean really why did we spend hundreds of pages about S.P.E.W? It was just dropped.
And the worst part - Dumbledore coming back from the dead to give yet another speech to Harry explaining things! When he died I thought -"Wow Harry will have to figure things out for himself now. In every book Dumbledore comes along and explains things to Harry. This will force Harry to grow up and show how he has grown!" But no! Dumbledore can still find a way to sit with Harry and explain everything like a school teacher to a little kid! Harry doesn't have to grow up, he never has to connect the dots himself, no Dumbledore from beyond the veil can still explain it all to the little kid. It was insulting - and it removed a lot of the power from his death.
To drag this out into two movies is just milking a franchise.
Well what did folks think? I was grinning the whole episode! It didn't disappoint at all. Setup the bigger story arc, got him back with the team, solved an A-team type problem for this weeks client. It is so nice to have it back.
Sadly though, those few ideas which do work well are buried by a multitude of issues which systematically tear down and destroy the huge potential that could have been afforded by Obsidianís choice of setting and approach. The poor balancing, the rambling speeches, the linearity and the simple fact that the combat doesnít feel pleasant? These are just the highlights.
It's pretty amazing that you guys will argue (though tongue in cheek in this thread) against increased taxes when your health insurances cost more than the taxes usually would (and those cover more than just medical stuff), and provides poor service unless you pay even more. Hell, from the prices mentioned in this thread I could probably spend less paying for a damn comfortable home!
+1000 or more.
When you look at how much single payer government health care would increase taxes then look at what insurance costs out of the paycheck it is clear it is cheaper to have government health care. But people don't really see the cost out of their pay check. Oh, I see $216.00 a month coming out of my paycheck - but the actual cost is $1,440.00 - my employer pays that $1200 difference. And that is not noted on each check, or very often made clear to employees. So many people don't have a clue what health insurance costs, even though they see how much they pay each month. So even if the government took $1,440 a month from me in extra taxes for health insurance it wouldn't cost me any more than I pay now!
Anyway I am all on the move to Canada train I just don't know how to plan for that - any web sites about that?
Not a bad couple of episodes. They certainly set themselves up for next season while wrapping things up enough to make everyone happy with this season's story line. I still wish the show had the lightheartedness it had in season 1 and 2 but that isn't where it seems to be going.
This is an M rated Rockstar game. You should have known what you were getting yourself into before you even bought the game.
Sorry, do you not read or do you just post without really thinking about it?
I know exactly what this game is, and I am enjoying it. I just comment that I wished they had made this game for kids. Not that I was fooled in some way by what the game is.
Perhaps semiconscious said it better that it would be nice if they made another game like this for kids. It is a great mechanic and game type and yet no one makes one suitable for kids. I think that is a shame.
I think more importantly it's a Rockstar game, and given their track record to expect it to be kid friendly and not crazy violent is even less realistic than their take on the west.
besides, if you're looking for a horse riding game there's always Barbie's Horse Adventures
I know you are kidding but I think many people think that if you don't want lots of violence then you do want a kiddie game. Keeping the western theme, I don't consider Rio Grande, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, or Silverado to be kiddie movies (well maybe Silverado) but their violence is much less than RDR.
Saying this is Nintendo at its platforming best is an understatement. This is the equivalent of a baseball player hitting nothing but home runs for an entire four-game series, calling his shots Babe-Ruth-style before each swing. Nintendo plays with the genre like there is nothing at stake, doing incredible things with it as if it's simply a decision to make a game this good.
I don't have a Wii but if I did I think this would be a purchase for me.
The west was a violent place. Hookers were stabbed. Blood splatters when you shoot someone. Essentially you wanted it turned into fluffy bunny game so you can play with your kid. That's not at all what the game is designed to be.
I do hope someone makes a more kid friendly western for sure. But RDR was never going to be that game.
yes, right in front of everyone in town. Murder happened every couple minutes in 1891. Well know fact (by delusional people who never read a history book)
And people who were shot by rifles often got up the next day after a kind woman saved them...without any lasting effects! And they never had to eat, or drink. And ... awe screw it. This game is not even remotely realistic so trying to pretend that the game is ok because the west was a violent place is just silly. They picked and chose what they wanted and it is just people's enjoyment and obsession with violence that makes them pick the violent aspects.
semiconscious made a good point. There can be both and while this is not that game I would like to see that game made.
I wish they made this game for kids. My four year old would love to watch or to try riding a horse but I can't very well let him play at all since he might run into a guy stabbing a hooker, or other unacceptable violence. And it kind of bugs me because in many ways the violence seems tacked on to make it more appealing to teenage boys. The best example is the when you skin an animal - how the screen spatters with blood. If the animal is dead there is not much chance of splattering but they wanted to throw it in to make it appeal to people who want more violence. Almost all of the violence is egregious like that. They practically could have trimed about 3 things and had a game anyone could play. Get rid of splatters when you skin or shoot someone (make shooting look like John Wayne movies), get rid of the bad language (which I have only heard about twice so it wouldn't have been much to cut), and remove the out of place violence (hooker being stabbed outside the saloon is the most common example). However they had to throw that stuff in so it would appeal to people who expect it from Rockstar - and if it didn't people would complain that their game was being censored or that Rockstar caved to pressure.
Oh well, I love it but I wish it could be enjoyed by more of my family.
Give me a break. Name the last AAA title that didn't get great a glowing reviews? Perhaps it is because all these games are great or perhaps it is for other reasons. It isn't that Rockstar controls the media but that all big publishers seem to get better reviews (one could easily argue this is because their games are better)
Anyone who has played game for a long time knows this and takes great views as a given. I remember buying Black and White because of all the glowing reviews of the masterpiece. This is why I use Gamefly. I played Batman: Arkham Asylum when it came out (and it was great) and now I can buy it for $18.00 from Gamefly or rent it again when I want to play it.
I just got around to watching this week's episode on Hulu....I can see why there hasn't been much talk about it. Bland, not funny, not exciting, and generally bad. It was almost all setup, Ellie and the Ring, Chuck's dreams, etc. I can live with that kind of episode if it is funny but this wasn't at all.
Quote from: Blackjack on May 11, 2010, 08:45:56 PM
My couple favorite IM2 things:
Spoiler for Hiden:
His father's "city design" serving as a clue was, I thought, a great thing. Some of that reminded me a bit of Indiana Jones searching for clues in that miniature city in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark.'
And I know it's nothing deep, but I lost my father when I was 8. And I don't have any film of him, only a reel-to-reel audio tape of him giving a business presentation, which I don't have anything to play it on. So the sequence of watching his father on film and then hearing him briefly speak to him -- for me that was great, touching stuff. For others, it probably just flew by as piffle.
Spoiler for Hiden:
I hated the design thing. It was so implausible. Why hide it in the design of the city? Who did he want to keep it from? Maybe that will be explained in the Captain America movie that Howard Stark is supposed to play some role in but as seen it makes no sense.
The film thing again was so implausible. The only time in life he told his son he loved him was at the very end of a reel? And not even a reel meant for Tony but some promo piece for the Stark Expo? It just was not believable.
Yeah, I am not complaining. It is only $2 and it feels that way so far. I too hope they improve the end game. Once you got that spell that turned the four corners into wild cards I could basically win without the enemy ever having a turn. It was pretty unbalanced.