>> ^coolhund:

That was such an awesome game. But thanks to consoles the time of such PC games is over.
Really sad to see games actually regress to a point where very old games like this has the superior gameplay.


I think actually what you will find is that the most inovatve games can still be found on pc.

the thing you see less now on pc are giant publisher cash cows , which more often than not contain the same old game play repackaged. something that i am not sad to see leave pc.

pc innovated in FPS in the late 90s and early 00s, pc games are now innovating in other places such as social gaming ultra casual gaming. I think pcs will always be home to developers like Frictional Games or independents that don't want to dip into funding.

I think consoles are gr8 fun , but the thing that pcs or open architecture platforms will allays have is this Testbed mentality where new concepts can be knocked out , before risk adverse publishers will back them and push them on platforms like ps3 360. granted u have psn and xbl arcade and indi but i dont realy think they are that viable for an indi as primary ditrabutoin platform where as pc and some of the new mobile platforms are.


any way , lol my point is I think pc will be the place where games as gr8 and revolutionary as home world will be spawned ( the majority of the time). and console will pretty much be the place where well tried and tested games will be found. at least in the western markets ,

in Japan they are far more open about having new and often totally mental ideas debue on console. I guess relative to the madness found in manga and animé its a safe bet for them , I also think cultraly they can easily separate core game play mechanics from the visual context.


What is disastrous however is that on pc we are now getting shit console ports constantly so i guess that aspect of pc gaming is pretty shitty.

It's good to see they realize that the first game filled a unique niche among MMOs. The lack of monthly fees, focus on action, quick leveling, and completely instanced design was perfect for more casual players. I just hope they won't ruin this one with micro transactions. I'm sure they're under a lot of pressure to somehow make it a cash cow beyond the initial sale.

Apple's claim that a software glitch made it show the wrong number of bars doesn't fix the problem at all; it's just a placebo to silence some the the criticism. There is no industry standard for what bars mean on a cell phone anyway. This really just reveals their (Apple or AT&T) previous policy of "Just show them a bunch of bars. It doesn't mean anything, but it'll make them happy." That only came out now because they got called on it. It wasn't a glitch.

The main problem is still a hardware issue. No downloadable update will be able to physically alter the antenna. The best solution would be for all the iPhone 4's to come with the case (which mostly resolves the issue), but there's no way Apple is going to give them away - they'd rather sell them to you for $30. It's a piece of stamped rubber in a box, which means nothing but profit for Apple, but public scrutiny will have to increase even more before Apple gives them away.

Then, internal instructions to AppleCare staff were leaked saying to not give away the bumpers or offer warranty service to fix the problem.

There's already at least three class action suits being filed against Apple, but mostly this looks like some angry customers and law firms trying to get their fingers into Apple's deep pockets. The suit claims (as I understand it) that Apple is being negligent with customer support on the issue and that Apple "knowingly selling a defective product" and "misrepresenting" reception problems.

In response to the suit, Apple is waiving their "restocking fee" of $20 or $30, depending on which model you have, and giving full refunds to any customer returning an undamaged iPhone 30 days from purchase.


My thoughts on all this? Apple made a cool toy, but it has a problem. Apple knew their toy was cool so they could push their weight around and be dicks about it. Don't tell your customers they're holding it wrong. Don't try and say it was a software glitch; man up and admit you made a mistake. It would be easily fixable if you just started giving away those bumpers, but you don't want to because it's a cash cow. Frankly, it's border-line unethical to try and make money fixing a problem you made or knew would be there.

To bash the other side, the firms filing these law suits are nothing more than corporate ambulance chasers. These aren't the kinds of firms that are interested in protecting consumer rights; they make a living out of suing rich people. Thousands of defective products are released every year, many of them knowingly, many of them screwing their customers. Apple just gets sued because they're worth over $200 billion and the lawyers get a double-digit percentage of whatever the payout is.

Its funny cause the Simpsons probably paid for their salaries, that show is a massive cash cow for FOX. Extra Points for Golgi for using s seamless reference to the show.

I love these sifts. They're your cash cow, mikes.

>> ^Xax:
I'm curious about the dog comment. Does the writer really view these people as sub-human, or was it meant to be metaphorical in some way? Even if it were the latter, you'd think anyone with half a brain would be conscientious enough to not use such disrespectful and callous terminology, even internally.


My best guess for this is that "dog" in this context is an allusion to the BCG matrix, which is a way of categorizing investments. If they're talking about the fact that they're not making any money off of that particular group of plans, it would follow that that group of plans would be called "dogs," as opposed to stars, cash cows or question marks.

http://www.netmba.com/strategy/matrix/bcg/

A broader definition of "dog" in that context is any investment which isn't worth its price, which a $1 million a year plan in exchange for a few hundred bucks a month certainly is, from a bottom-line standpoint only.

As for the callous terminology, there was a Bill Moyers interview on the sift somewhere with a former insurance company executive that really highlighted how far removed these people can be from the real impact their decisions can have on people. They aren't in the habit of thinking of plans as they relate to people, only as they relate to dollars. It's not because they're monsters, exactly, but more because they're oblivious.

...Doesn't look at medical bankruptcy at all. It basically just looks at the per capita bankruptcy rate of Canada and the US, finds them similar, and declares Canada's program as being no help in general bankruptcy.

In every country on Earth there are thousands of bankruptcies. Other nations do not offically list 'medical expenses' in a legal docment as the cause of their bankruptcy because of nationalization. However, those charges (which still exist) are in the taxes that went to supporting aforementioned medical systems and contributed to the person's bankruptcy. Person "X" still had medical expenses and had to pay all his life. What Franken does is confine his definition to ONLY include persons who filed for chapter 7 or chapter 13 (a specific legal action) with medical expenses as a factor. Well, that 'factor' contributed to the bankruptcies of persons in Germany too - but didn't get listed in an official legal document. It's nothing but semantic humbuggery.

Fewer U.S. citizens are going bankrupt than Canada (proven). That probably extends to Germay, France & Switzerland as well, but maybe not. Regardless, it is sophistry to claim make propogandistic emotional pleas for 'no one should go medically bankrupt' and claim it doesn't happen in other countries. Bull. It happens all the time. It just isn't listed in the documents because it got smooshed into the tax code.

Liar liar, pants on fire.

It's exactly what Democrats said. You just don't like it. Cowboy up, pardner, and stop running away from what your guys are saying. Democrats have openly stated they are going to have no choice but to ration health care based solely on economic motivations. Their legislation is being crafted to relect that. By design, their plan will treat old people as nothing but expenses to be written off the books ASAP, and young people as cash-cows who get no treatment but have to pay taxes to support the program. Those are their words. This is medical care as envisioned by liberal democrats...

But that means you--particularly you young healthy people--you're going to have to pay more. "If you're very old, we're not going to give you all that technology and drugs for the last couple of years of your life. It's too expensive, so we're going to let you die. I'm going to use the bargaining leverage of the federal government in terms of Medicare, Medicaid to force drug companies and insurance companies and medical suppliers to reduce their costs. But that means less innovation, and that means less new products and less new drugs on the market.

If someone is sick, gets free care, and then goes bankrupt, they didn't go bankrupt from medical costs.

There is no such thing as 'free' care'. This is a neolib myth that only exists in the realm of pink unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters. Socialized medicine is - in fact - very very expensive for all citizens. As I stated above, just because their bankruptcy costs were hidden away as 'taxes' instead of defined as 'medical costs' going to a medical provider doesn't mean they didn't go medically bankrupt. It is legalese. It is buearucratic legerdemain.

The whole point of the health care reform is to attempt to address those issues.

No - the whole point of the Democrat vision of health care is so they can go to dinner parties and not have to get crap from other liberals about America not having a 'European' medical system. There are tons of better solutions than the specific policies of liberal democrats. They just don't want to try them. They don't even want to study them.

Its just immoral, unethical, and unwise. Winston, does not understand pain and suffering. Nor does he understand sacrifice. But, given my knowledge of life, I KNOW, he will have to face up to reality sooner or later in his life time. And then, he'll just be a hypocrit.

Standard neolib ad hominem bilge. I served as a volunteer unpaid missionary. I donate a large percentage of my personal income to charities. I volunteer in the community to help people get jobs, find work, and train. I visit the sick & widows in my community frequently. And just because I disagree with a top-down socialist so-called 'solution' to a problem I therefore don't understand sacrifice? All your words prove is that you don't know jack about me, and that you are a very small-minded, simplistic, judgemental buffoon.

>> ^inflatablevagina:
My point is even if the fine is $1000 I am going to speed sometime. If you say you don't speed.... I am calling bullshit. (p.s. im not picking on you.. i like you)
The speed limit around here is mostly 60 MPH. Do you know how many people actually drive 60 all the time? I bet if there are any... it's a relatively small percentage. If I want to drive 70 or 75 so be it. I leave plenty of space between me and the car in front of me. If someone tailgates me I move. I am all about being safe, but mandatory arbitrary speed limits on highways are ridiculous to me. I am totally fine speed limits in residential neighborhoods and school zones. I obey those speeds as I suspect most do.
I don't like stupid rules to be placed on me because other people can't handle their shit. I have an issue with a cop chasing me down the highway at 70 MPH and giving me a $250-300 ticket for speeding. Fuuuuuuck that. Cops have many uses in society and I bet you, I BET, that if they didn't have to babysit the roads then they would be able to perform an ACTUAL service to the community. Those cops didn't sign up to sit on the fucking highway and pull over people to ticket, did they? No most likely they signed up to patrol and protect the citizens... they have no place monitoring my speed.



Inflatable, you're exactly right. If laws worked to stop people from breaking the law, then states with death penalties would have no murders.

Whatever happened to punishment fitting the crime? Most of all punishment these days is monetary. Speeding tickets are a cash cow for the state. They make loads of money, and they also give their officers a quota so they can ensure they make that same revenue amount each year.

You feel you're a safe driver, and you also feel you should be able to drive 70 or 75 in the 60 MPH zone, but the Statists around you think you're too dangerous and irresponsible to do so and there must be a law against you doing so - and men with guns should pull you over to cite you.

The State sends these men with guns out to force you to obey their belief system which also generates income for them. How is this not racketeering? How is this not akin to paying protection money to the mob? And if you disagree with their monetized dogma, the men with guns throw you in a cage.

they cant recapture what made it so good... mainly the fact that everyone was a young kid and computer games were not-so-common status symbols...unique and not used only as cash cows... you would have to release an experience-revolutionizing console or something to equal that power.

Thanks for the reminder. (I was able to snag the cash cow for the first time.)

It seems the new reviews are available right at 9am Pacific/12pm Eastern.

These are very intelligent people. They used a boobshot for their thumbnail to get us all to watch. and watch we did.

Anyways we should all be scared shitless about this. If the internet goes down w/o a fight it will be a tragedy of un-imaginably large scale. The little people, the small groups, the personal niches of the internet will be steamrolled by money grabbing cash cow companies such as... COMCAST and others. It's comparable to the Berlin wall being rebuilt. Lets fight shall we?

Michael J, and Paul Mc C,
worked together in perrrfect, har-mo-ny,
until Michael the freakshow stole the, Beatles, libraaarryyyyyyy! (Beat It, Mike)

Steevies' cool, this song blows chunks, thot y'all night like to know the latest with ol' Paul and Ringo's bout with the Bleached Shark Thing.....

August 10, 1985 in History
Event:
Michael Jackson buys ATV Music (every Beatle song) for $47 million

Thank God, may he lose the rest of his empire, soon-He may have to give away the cash cow-then, we can stop being pummeled with craptacular commercials used to butt-rape great Beatles tunes......
http://www.nme.com/news/michael-jackson/27052

oh, and by the way, forgot to think evil thoughts of Heather Mills today......sorry-ass twat!!!!

>> ^rottenseed:
Hmmm...I think I've found my next career path. Exploit faithful sheep and make a pretty penny doing it. It's almost TOO perfect.


That the next best cash cow, create a MMORPG.
I think I'll go with the second.

It's WAY more fun to be an optimist than to waste time caring about stuff. We should all try it now and then, don't you think?

In reply to this comment by choggie:
It will not be legal in the U.S.
Profit has come to the powerful few who control drug trade, and governments have a vested interest in keeping it tight. The 3 legal drugs mentioned above, are also controlled by a few-and the govt. has their hands innit up to their shoulders and necks.
Drugs legalized would cripple the economy in America-the low-end wage earners would be that much more unmotivated to change your oil or tires, make your burgers, etc. hence, casualties on the highways and in stomachs-
The prison system depends on drugs, a first arrest for possession of pot, for example, gets the new cash-cow into the system, when finally inside, they are groomed and recruited for more badness that will feed that hydra head-

Basically, the system is set up like this for a reason-to keep the profits in the hands of a few-Don't look to anything more than increased control, surveillance, and prohibitions, this is the global agenda.

Ron Paul has not a chance in hell, of slowing the program that these people have been working on feverishly for the past 40 years-short of another revolution or coop, which is unlikely, this current paradigm will play itself out according to plan.

Live to the fullest within any paradigm, use the prohibition of freedoms as a license to benifit from the same, otherwise, waste your time as an activist, conspiracy theorist, junkie, or ....voter.

It will not be legal in the U.S.
Profit has come to the powerful few who control drug trade, and governments have a vested interest in keeping it tight. The 3 legal drugs mentioned above, are also controlled by a few-and the govt. has their hands innit up to their shoulders and necks.
Drugs legalized would cripple the economy in America-the low-end wage earners would be that much more unmotivated to change your oil or tires, make your burgers, etc. hence, casualties on the highways and in stomachs-
The prison system depends on drugs, a first arrest for possession of pot, for example, gets the new cash-cow into the system, when finally inside, they are groomed and recruited for more badness that will feed that hydra head-

Basically, the system is set up like this for a reason-to keep the profits in the hands of a few-Don't look to anything more than increased control, surveillance, and prohibitions, this is the global agenda.

Ron Paul has not a chance in hell, of slowing the program that these people have been working on feverishly for the past 40 years-short of another revolution or coop, which is unlikely, this current paradigm will play itself out according to plan.

Live to the fullest within any paradigm, use the prohibition of freedoms as a license to benifit from the same, otherwise, waste your time as an activist, conspiracy theorist, junkie, or ....voter.