>> ^ant:
*kids


The *kids channel description: "Sandbox for Sift Tots. This is a realm for videos that are suitable for children to enjoy. Non-kid-friendly videos that simply happen to contain a kid do not belong here." I don't think this is a video kids would enjoy.

*nochannel *news *controversy *fail

Model additions to GTA, no biggie. Let me know when working portals are running in the sandbox world, then I will take interest.

This program reminds me of this sci Friday. For me, questions have ALWAYS been more fun than answers. Whys more alluring than becauses. More than likely, it is why I enjoy sandbox games so much, I am more interested in discovering the bounders to the box of knowledge than what is inside and out specifically.

http://www.npr.org/2012/06/01/154148658/why-ignorance-trumps-knowledge-in-scientific-pursuit

In reply to this comment by Barseps:
Pure *Quality

Thanks Mike!

I post because some might remember this: http://videosift.com/video/Interactive-Kinect-Sandbox which isn't a dupe.

By the look of some of the bugs, mainly walking at slanty angles when exiting a vehicle, my guess is this is a mod for the open source classic Rigs of Rods. Amazing physics based sandbox game if you have the time and imagination for it.

if you're into this sort of stuff you might enjoy 'universe sandbox' (via steam).

>> ^w1ndex:

I was 4 years old, me and my brother were watching it on his t.v. in his room. It is one of the most vivid memories that I have from my youth.


My only vivid memory from that year was being barefoot in a sandbox and remembering that my mother said to put my shoes back on since chernobyl had just exploded.

I agree with you in principle but s**t man, relax. It's only the internets. >> ^jackhalfaprayer:

argumentum ad hominem. it's not my job to do better; it's rockstar's job to do better. we weren't talking about me or anyone else until you changed the subject. i'd say that bethesda has been doing better open world games since the mid-to-late 90's, konami's silent hill series has been better at telling stories (read: making one feel like playing through a movie, which rockstar wishes they could accomplish), and just about any third-person game from tomb raider to max payne has a better 3-rd person targeting system than that broken-ass excuse rockstar has been trying to fix for 10 iterations or so. so pretty much everything that GTA has been mashing up into a huge meaningless sandbox of drivel has been done before in a less broken fashion, with more variety, less linearity, less repetitive gameplay, and without falling back on hopelessly cliche, hackneyed mafioso stereotypes and slipshod driving mechanics.
but if you wanted to give me money to write a game and pay some programmers and artists and designers, absolutely! i'd be happy to present to you a game that is better than anything rockstar has produced to date. until then, fanboy, defend this mediocre studio with some actual points instead an ad hominem logical fallacy... or just stfu about what i or anyone else should be doing better than rockstar. rockstar puts out unoriginal crap with semi-impressive tech and people like you eat it up, bloat their egos, and line the pockets of corporate lackeys that are afraid to do anything new with an old IP. there's better work out there. you must not hear about it because it's not mentioned in your gamepro subscription. so go preorder this re-hash bullshit, and rest ignorant of the knowledge that people like you are destroying this industry, and this community, by buying into the hype machine of some fake gangster-sim crap with nothing new to offer since version III. and don't tell me that I should put up with it because there's nothing better out there, wtf sort of defense is that?
>> ^Yogi:
>> ^jackhalfaprayer:
GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.

You...or ANYONE do better. Seriously we've seen other sandbox games try and fail...this is like criticizing WoW for being what it is. Do something better or accept that this is as good as it gets right now and shut up.

argumentum ad hominem. it's not my job to do better; it's rockstar's job to do better. we weren't talking about me or anyone else until you changed the subject. i'd say that bethesda has been doing better open world games since the mid-to-late 90's, konami's silent hill series has been better at telling stories (read: making one feel like playing through a movie, which rockstar wishes they could accomplish), and just about any third-person game from tomb raider to max payne has a better 3-rd person targeting system than that broken-ass excuse rockstar has been trying to fix for 10 iterations or so. so pretty much everything that GTA has been mashing up into a huge meaningless sandbox of drivel has been done before in a less broken fashion, with more variety, less linearity, less repetitive gameplay, and without falling back on hopelessly cliche, hackneyed mafioso stereotypes and slipshod driving mechanics.

but if you wanted to give me money to write a game and pay some programmers and artists and designers, absolutely! i'd be happy to present to you a game that is better than anything rockstar has produced to date. until then, fanboy, defend this mediocre studio with some actual points instead an ad hominem logical fallacy... or just stfu about what i or anyone else should be doing better than rockstar. rockstar puts out unoriginal crap with semi-impressive tech and people like you eat it up, bloat their egos, and line the pockets of corporate lackeys that are afraid to do anything new with an old IP. there's better work out there. you must not hear about it because it's not mentioned in your gamepro subscription. so go preorder this re-hash bullshit, and rest ignorant of the knowledge that people like you are destroying this industry, and this community, by buying into the hype machine of some fake gangster-sim crap with nothing new to offer since version III. and don't tell me that I should put up with it because there's nothing better out there, wtf sort of defense is that?

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^jackhalfaprayer:
GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.

You...or ANYONE do better. Seriously we've seen other sandbox games try and fail...this is like criticizing WoW for being what it is. Do something better or accept that this is as good as it gets right now and shut up.

>> ^jackhalfaprayer:

GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.


You...or ANYONE do better. Seriously we've seen other sandbox games try and fail...this is like criticizing WoW for being what it is. Do something better or accept that this is as good as it gets right now and shut up.

GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.

When I first saw this video in Sift Talk I thought, " why the hell does this one need to be discussed?" I see now, a channel discussion, okay.

I agree with @alien_concept here.

Yes, @BoneRemake, this could easily be used as a valuable learning tool for kids--but, as with all learning tools, that learning should include mediation by that kids adults. If the kids channel is defined as something unsupervised kids should be able to watch then this video doesn't belong.

Now on to the definition of this channel, I will quote, "Sandbox for Sift Tots." Um...not very defining. Sift Tots? That could be interpreted as meaning some "adults" who use the site (not looking at anyone here ). If you take this as meaning "kids who sift" (which I believe is the intent) then ac is correct. But, I think a possible expansion of the definition would be helpful.

That is all.

These toys may be designed with the iPad in mind, but kids aren't always gentle, and I don't know how durable that screen is for little Timmy to be repeatedly pounding on it with the toy car. Next comes food and drink spills, scribbles with a pen, and then you find it outside in the sandbox.

I guess I stand corrected, most gamers are now grumpy old men pining for the glories of yesteryear.

Fuck me, no wonder they advertize Viagra during X-Play.

I hear what you guys are saying, I just don't feel the same way. I guess part of it is that I don't really get the appeal of first person shooters anymore. I sorta liked 'em back when Doom was a hot name in gaming, and when I was young enough to think Duke Nukem 3D was groundbreaking for its mature themes. The last one I really liked was Half-Life, but that's because it heavily incorporated story elements, not because of the game mechanics (which were far from groundbreaking).

I thought Gears of War was a refreshing change of pace, and IMO presented the first real gameplay innovations we've seen in shooters since Doom. I'm glad there's been a lot of copying of their cover mechanics, since it adds real tactical considerations like cover fire and flanking to firefights. It's not enough to really make me a shooter fan again, but it's enough to keep me from being annoyed at developers for just continually putting new paint on 20-year old game mechanics.

I guess I just generally prefer action-adventure or sandbox games nowadays. Combat shouldn't be 100% of what games are about anymore as far as I'm concerned. If developers still want to make shooting the centerpiece of gameplay, then it should at least require some thought along the way, and force you to change weapons and tactics every now and then so it doesn't get stale.

Reverting back to "classic" shooter mechanics just seems like a step in the wrong direction to me.

Oh, and full disclosure, the only modern shooters I've played are Resistance, Gears, and Halo. Maybe I'm just missing out on something new and unique that everyone knows about from CoD or Battlefield, but from the sound of the reviews, I kinda doubt it.