This isn't necessarily true. For my Sprint TP2 (also a worldphone), they did supply a Sprint SIM that charged outrageous rates. But the phone was SIM-unlocked, meaning I could throw any SIM I wanted into it. It just had a special radio on it (which could be flashed if you security unlocked) that made it unable to detect American cell phone towers. I used my TP2 in many foreign countries by just picking up prepaid SIMs.
Will Sprint keep the iPhone 4S SIM-unlocked? Honestly, I don't know why they wouldn't. The phone costs $200 with a 2-year agreement, and the retail price is $650. Their ETF is $350 or $400, I don't remember which, so they're easily within striking distance of the actual price--certainly they can recoup the cost of the phone. My impression is that the Sprint iPhone 4S will be SIM-unlocked.
Will Sprint keep the iPhone 4S SIM-unlocked? Honestly, I don't know why they wouldn't. The phone costs $200 with a 2-year agreement, and the retail price is $650. Their ETF is $350 or $400, I don't remember which, so they're easily within striking distance of the actual price--certainly they can recoup the cost of the phone. My impression is that the Sprint iPhone 4S will be SIM-unlocked.
The hackers who revealed the PS3's exploit talked quite a long time about this. Your "98%" statistic notwithstanding, the fact is that if Sony had not removed Linux support for the PS3, this exploit never would have happened. The team who cracked the PS3 specifically said they were only interested in doing so once Sony removed the OtherOS feature--and they expressed surprise at how easy the PS3 was to break.
The piracy cycle works like this:
Console manufacturer closes their system down because they're paranoid
Legitimate hackers who want to use their system however they please break the closed ecosystem
Pirates swoop in, taking advantage of the open ecosystem
The fact that the PS3 stayed unbroken as long as it did is strong evidence in favor of this cycle: the machine was untouched (except by hardware mods) until Sony closed the ecosystem.
The solution is simple: don't piss off hackers with your console. Segment the game-playing side from other general hardware, and let them do whatever they want with the rest of the console. (Stating, of course, that custom programs means that the manufacturer isn't liable for damages.) Do that, and no one smart enough to break your game encryption methods will ever be tempted to do so.
The piracy cycle works like this:
Console manufacturer closes their system down because they're paranoid
Legitimate hackers who want to use their system however they please break the closed ecosystem
Pirates swoop in, taking advantage of the open ecosystem
The fact that the PS3 stayed unbroken as long as it did is strong evidence in favor of this cycle: the machine was untouched (except by hardware mods) until Sony closed the ecosystem.
The solution is simple: don't piss off hackers with your console. Segment the game-playing side from other general hardware, and let them do whatever they want with the rest of the console. (Stating, of course, that custom programs means that the manufacturer isn't liable for damages.) Do that, and no one smart enough to break your game encryption methods will ever be tempted to do so.
@Chrysolite:
Developers do get royalty checks. If you do not recall, Infinity Ward (now Respawn) *sued Activision* in part because they failed to deliver their royalties. Publishers take the lion's share because they're the ones taking the most risk: it's on their dollar. If you front your own capital, you get more of the royalties. It's all about risk/reward.
Ignoring the piracy argument (it's a silly one to have), there are two things that make or break any dev studio: critical acclaim of your game, and sales. Frankly, sales matter more. Because sales are dependent on a lot of other things than your dev studio (marketing, platform maturity, what other games released when yours did), critical acclaim is sort of a "secondary" metric. (If you make great games that don't sell particularly well, you still build a reputation as a solid developer, which helps when you're pitching to publishers.) But ultimately, if you can't point to great sales of your titles, there will be no "other project" for your dev team. Your games have to sell well for you to stay in business.
Also, your tirade against middle management and marketing is laughable. Those guys make or break the game as much as anyone that programs. Some of the best games out there floundered because they weren't marketed properly, or the middle management couldn't keep the dev cycle on-time or producing usable code. Regardless of the horror stories you've heard, they do not represent the industry at large, and effective managers at a company are the most valuable thing they can have.
Case in point: how many great leaders do you know? People that can helm a project: get everyone happy, make sure all the deadlines are hit, keep it under budget, and produce a great finished product, and keep lines of communication open throughout? That is much, much rarer than the guy who happens to be good at C++.
Developers do get royalty checks. If you do not recall, Infinity Ward (now Respawn) *sued Activision* in part because they failed to deliver their royalties. Publishers take the lion's share because they're the ones taking the most risk: it's on their dollar. If you front your own capital, you get more of the royalties. It's all about risk/reward.
Ignoring the piracy argument (it's a silly one to have), there are two things that make or break any dev studio: critical acclaim of your game, and sales. Frankly, sales matter more. Because sales are dependent on a lot of other things than your dev studio (marketing, platform maturity, what other games released when yours did), critical acclaim is sort of a "secondary" metric. (If you make great games that don't sell particularly well, you still build a reputation as a solid developer, which helps when you're pitching to publishers.) But ultimately, if you can't point to great sales of your titles, there will be no "other project" for your dev team. Your games have to sell well for you to stay in business.
Also, your tirade against middle management and marketing is laughable. Those guys make or break the game as much as anyone that programs. Some of the best games out there floundered because they weren't marketed properly, or the middle management couldn't keep the dev cycle on-time or producing usable code. Regardless of the horror stories you've heard, they do not represent the industry at large, and effective managers at a company are the most valuable thing they can have.
Case in point: how many great leaders do you know? People that can helm a project: get everyone happy, make sure all the deadlines are hit, keep it under budget, and produce a great finished product, and keep lines of communication open throughout? That is much, much rarer than the guy who happens to be good at C++.
@LucasTizma: Really? A site full of complete asshats needlessly insulting women, and you're up in arms about their *grammar*?
@Clashwerk: RPGFan reviewed it here: [www.rpgfan.com]
There's also a TouchArcade forum thread about it here: [forums.toucharcade.com]
Hope that helps.
There's also a TouchArcade forum thread about it here: [forums.toucharcade.com]
Hope that helps.
@dowingba: I don't know but now I'm freaking out about this werewolf thing. Thanks a lot!
I visited Nintendo HQ when I was studying in Kyoto a few years back--I was pretty surprised that the building was so low-key myself. It's like a well-kept secret. I found it fitting with Kyoto's atmosphere.
Although, in downtown Kyoto, (intersection of shujo and kawaramachi, where the train station is), the city is very metropolitan. There're giant signs and billboards galore. I wonder if the regulations are actually *more* strict elsewhere? There's a huge shift in the way the city looks once you cross the river.
Although, in downtown Kyoto, (intersection of shujo and kawaramachi, where the train station is), the city is very metropolitan. There're giant signs and billboards galore. I wonder if the regulations are actually *more* strict elsewhere? There's a huge shift in the way the city looks once you cross the river.
@TechniMyoko: I never used the word "enjoy." I used the word "identify." It's about having something resonate with you.
The example I gave re: JRPGs speaks for itself, I think. When you couch a story in a cultural context that is completely alien and makes no effort to identify with you, it's much less likely that you, as a player, are going to get much emotional impact out of it. Like I said, it's not about race, it's about context. There are very, very few contextually black games.
@JahB: It's only stupid if you think there isn't an audience. If there is an audience AND it's something they want, then you are, in fact, quite smart for doing it. I'm not saying "we need more black characters in games because diversity is good." That's bunk. What I am saying is: "black gamers play games, there are laughably few games that actually represent and cater to their demographics, this is something that should be fixed, PROVIDED they care." If the game flops, then clearly this wasn't the game to do it. If a series of contextually black games fails, then you're absolutely right: the notion is stupid because the audience is unresponsive.
The example I gave re: JRPGs speaks for itself, I think. When you couch a story in a cultural context that is completely alien and makes no effort to identify with you, it's much less likely that you, as a player, are going to get much emotional impact out of it. Like I said, it's not about race, it's about context. There are very, very few contextually black games.
@JahB: It's only stupid if you think there isn't an audience. If there is an audience AND it's something they want, then you are, in fact, quite smart for doing it. I'm not saying "we need more black characters in games because diversity is good." That's bunk. What I am saying is: "black gamers play games, there are laughably few games that actually represent and cater to their demographics, this is something that should be fixed, PROVIDED they care." If the game flops, then clearly this wasn't the game to do it. If a series of contextually black games fails, then you're absolutely right: the notion is stupid because the audience is unresponsive.
@FoolsErrand: I don't mean to suggest that everyone is not stereotyped equally. But I think black gamers are in a unique position because they apparently play a lot of games and yet have almost nothing that caters specifically to them.
White gamers have a ton of white protagonists to choose from: wanna be a badass adventurer? Hello Uncharted. Want to be a badass killer? Hello every FPS ever made. Want to be a badass fighter? Hello Street Fighter. It's more than just skin color: the language, settings, and culture that permeates most games is uniquely Anglo-American, because they're the ones programming games.
That doesn't make them racist. But it does mean that not a whole lot of other cultures find settings and characters in video games that resonate with them. The Japanese RPG is a good example of this: I rarely, if ever, identify with JRPGs, because the setting is so far removed from anything remotely resembling my cultural context. But a game like Dragon Age: Origins, while arguably more "fantastic" than a JRPG, has characters and settings that occur within *my* cultural context, as someone who grew up in a Western society.
All I'm saying is that black gamers should have games that do the same. I don't know what that looks like--is it a hip-hop music game? Maybe, maybe not. But I applaud the company for trying.
White gamers have a ton of white protagonists to choose from: wanna be a badass adventurer? Hello Uncharted. Want to be a badass killer? Hello every FPS ever made. Want to be a badass fighter? Hello Street Fighter. It's more than just skin color: the language, settings, and culture that permeates most games is uniquely Anglo-American, because they're the ones programming games.
That doesn't make them racist. But it does mean that not a whole lot of other cultures find settings and characters in video games that resonate with them. The Japanese RPG is a good example of this: I rarely, if ever, identify with JRPGs, because the setting is so far removed from anything remotely resembling my cultural context. But a game like Dragon Age: Origins, while arguably more "fantastic" than a JRPG, has characters and settings that occur within *my* cultural context, as someone who grew up in a Western society.
All I'm saying is that black gamers should have games that do the same. I don't know what that looks like--is it a hip-hop music game? Maybe, maybe not. But I applaud the company for trying.
This is a long-standing problem within the gaming industry--outside of the Sports genre, there are noticeably fewer games with identifiably African-American leads, or with ties to African-American culture. "Parappa the Rappa" doesn't count: it's a cutesy-Japanese take on the rap genre, which makes it an awesome game but certainly not representative of the hip-hop scene.
I'm really interested to see how this game fares. I don't have the study in front of me, but I remember reading a couple years back that black gamers were prolific players. If they are, they really should have more products that at least contain elements of their culture that isn't simply a caricature. (GTA, every S-E game ever made, etc.)
I'm really interested to see how this game fares. I don't have the study in front of me, but I remember reading a couple years back that black gamers were prolific players. If they are, they really should have more products that at least contain elements of their culture that isn't simply a caricature. (GTA, every S-E game ever made, etc.)
@Rachel Fogg: 6 years? FFXII came out in 2006. It's only been 3 years. In contrast, the gap between FFX and FFXII was 5 years--no doubt in part to SE's foray into MMORPGs in 2003.
I think people are taking the "helpless irony" statement out of context. It IS ironic that the game they bonded over is titled "Call of Duty: World at War," and mentioning that irony is not a negative or derogatory thing.
The fact is, his son lost his life obeying the call of duty. It is in no way disrespectful of the son's sacrifice or the father's gift to make note of the "helpless" (i.e. tragic) irony in this.
Luke:
You're reading the financial statement wrong. What you highlighted is top-line revenue: i.e. gross sales. What Blizzard contributes to Activision's bottom line is in fact under "Segment Income (Loss) from Operations," and here we see that Blizzard contributed roughly $700m while Activision contributed $304m. Blizzard's evidencing a 50% margin, whereas Activision is barely breaking a 10% margin.
What's interesting about these statements is that, while Act/Blizz is posting a loss, it's all from non-operational expenses. They take a large hit in "deferred revenues," which I assume is tax-related, and they also wrote down some of their IPs, it appears. (The ~400m amortization charge.) The company itself appears to be quite healthy: they've got plenty of cash flows and good top-line growth. Although Activision should find ways to improve their operating margins, since without Blizzard it appears they'd be in serious trouble.
Edit: First sentence in third paragraph should be "This does not make gaming less worthwhile as a hobby."
Are we really so defensive of our hobbies that now we refuse to recognize them for what they are?
Games provide absolutely no lasting merit to the person who completes them. You don't walk away from a game that you've "mastered" with any meaningful accomplishments--you are not more physically fit, you are not healthier, you are not substantially more intelligent. You have simply mastered a small set of skills that will have absolutely no impact on the rest of your life. And it doesn't matter how difficult it was to master those set of skills; simply because something is difficult does not make it worthwhile. Games exist, fundamentally, to emulate the real world (or a fantasy world.) In fact, the only times a game succeeds in breaking away from emulation and wanders into creation or other "real" endeavors (i.e. not pretending to be doing something that one could feasibly do in a real or fantasy world) are when it strays away from the "gaming." (Note that I am only talking about the act of playing games--creating a game is an entirely different story.)
This does not make games less worthwhile. And if you read the article, he's not advocating watching the Olympics over playing video games. He's lamenting the fact that interest in sport, overall, has dropped off--and he even states that it's not just a medical thing. And he's right: we're not just getting heavier because of the food that we eat; our attitudes have shifted pretty dramatically as well. And this isn't a good thing. Everyone acts like sports are some way to get picked on and tormented and quite frankly it's bullshit--I was a fat nerd in elementary and middle school and I *loved* playing sports. I just happened to love playing video games and reading books more, but as I've grown, I've found that being physically active and having face-to-face interactions with my peers is much more meaningful and satisfying than gunning down someone in CoD 4. (Although that, too, is awesome.)
It's not always about competition and "being the best," and I can't fathom why so many posters here act as if every athlete conforms to the "asshole jock" stereotype. I have witnessed MUCH more virulent denigration and overall assholishness on Xbox Live and WoW than I have *ever* seen displayed on a sports field.
Games are what they are--games. I'll be the first to admit that not all sports are created equal. But *any* activity where I am interacting with the physical world and doing something *real* is inherently more meaningful than a game, where I'm only pretending to do so. The things that could make the game more meaningful--an intellectually (or emotionally) stimulating story, beautiful music, gorgeous art--are all things that are not intrinsic to gaming, but are instead tacked on to complement the gameplay.
There's nothing wrong or insulting about those statements. It sure as hell isn't going to make me stop gaming.
wow, i didn't know we called it the 'den of espionage'
that's a pretty wicked name
next time i'm in iran i'm going to suggest we complement it with a "cave of secrecy" and maybe a "lair of inestimable evil"
Is the entire premise of this game that a chick in a bikini kills zombies? I mean, seriously?
And yeah, the model sure knew how to enjoy herself while playing the Wii. I wonder if she tried to hang herself with the nunchuck between takes.
silkylove and phineas: Just wanted to say I've really enjoyed reading your debate on the character of God in the three Abrahamic religions. It's been very interesting.
@JakeDunn: You hit the nail on the head. That's Mrs. Bashcraft giving her husband crap. This is commonplace in relationships, and I found the comment hilarious.
