Before I begin I have to warn some of you that my comment may at first seen off topic. I assure you there's a point.
We all know that these automated, non-human review searches have an extremely big flaw....not to be political, and this is for a reference only, we have the IRS scandal to thank for a great example as to why automated key word searches are a terrible way to make any sort of decision whether legal or determining non-profit status.
That being sId, Microsoft uses a third party company that lazily uses such automation. As much as they gripe and pick at Google (though I think Bill and Melissa Gates sort of have a point about the lack of altruistic goals...I'll explain if asked), I don't think it fully their fault that this crap happens.
Microsoft's issue is that they are using a lazy company. I myself have come across this. When I got my first apartment, my patents had to sign on as credit holders because I never used a credit card in my life to that point. Now, while they did the background checks on all of us. The company that owned my aspiring living quarters used a third party to do the background check. My poor father, who was in a second bout of cancer at the time, who was forced into early retirement due to said cancer, turned out to be a sex offender according to the check. It turns out that the company that did the background check...used no other unique identifiers other than his first and last name...we had to resend everything and had the local police department do the second background check.
So what am I getting at? While I do blame Microsoft for their stupidity in their own right for the chicanery (save aforementioned altruistic criticism from Bill Gates), I can't help but notice the third party automation company they chose to do these searches.
"I was mocking your poor grasp of the English language."
First off, I don't have to answer to you because you're too lazy to look at my other comments outside of this rather stupid and nitpicky conversation you're trying to hold onto for dear life. You assume my English is somehow bad due to issues where Autocorrect wrecks havoc on me.
Second....I already answered your damn question...and you flipped out when I didn't answer the way you wanted me to and proceeded to call me obtuse and a blithering idiot for giving my own valid opinion about something. Clearly you don't know the nuance of subtext. Just accept the fact that I may be correct for once and move on. The fact that you admitted to deliberately mocking my English (which of course is my native language) indicates that you clearly wish to nitpick further on pointlessly until I bend to the answers you want from me....which will never ever happen because I have already given the same answer to everyone which I was going to give you. If you're too fucking lazy to look through other strings of threads then I really have no reason to answer to you at all.
Now to answer your question so you can finally just fuck off and be merrily on your way.
You stupidly asked me "Tips what off?" to which I responded "The hot air"....and I left you to figure out what that was. Then you accused me of being obtuse and a blithering idiot for pointing out my opinion. In the same attack, you also stated that "lack of technological knowledge fails" me....when my opinion of the matter was VASTLY outside of what you comprehended.
With this:
"Ok...really? You can't comprehend that maybe, just maybe, that italicization can be used for quotes and emphasis? It's very obvious that I was pointing out what Marincoz was saying was hot air."
"So, again, do you wish to refute the comment actually being made - against this SPECIFIC restriction - or are you going to continue attack fictional positions?"
Dude if you had already picked up on the fact that I stated the complaint from Kotaku was nothing more than hot air...you wouldn't have to ask this question of me. Other users didn't ask me to specify deeper than already bluntly indicated...and you accuse of having a thick skull?
Just give up being nitpicky because in your eyes, you will always find something wrong with what I say when it doesn't conform to things you want to hear.
In the case of movies...yes I'd like to share as much as I like...that's obvious. Software is a different story though. You don't typically interact with a movie trailer (save Super 8's interactive trailer on Steam) so it's sort of difficult to compare the two.
Not always...Dome Wars in particular did this...it's a Scorched Earth clone for the Macintosh if you're wandering. So I'm not worried about the method in which this demo is distributed. There's a lot of risk that the developers are taking in making that demo because if it's good enough demo and the plot line eventually busts as a full game...people aren't going to recommend it.
However, the inverse could happen and it's a crappy demo but a great game.
Agreed....honestly this is just giving me more reason to see why there shouldn't be any shock or reason to be surprised that a demo
has that type of restriction.
"Strange. You're responding directly to me, but I need to read other conversations to work out what you're "really" saying?"
Yes....and because I said practically the same thing and advocated the idea that there is no need to flip out as everyone is doing....clearly you are just too logically nit-picky to read anything between the lines.
"Maybe you should try clarifying that. Here, in response to my question, not in some vague manner elsewhere."
So far you're the only one who has disagreed with me base on the simple fact that I said it. So when I specify, I get nit picked at by you...and when it's not the answers you want to see, I'm suddenly vague? I'm sorry, I apparently wasn't aware that you wanted this conversation to go your way where you magically turn out right and prove me wrong just for having a valid opinion about what and how someone said something. Clearly you're a god I must bow down to...
"You no English good. That's probably why you've completely misconstrued at least 2 peoples' points in this thread alone."
Racism gets you nowhere in validating your "opinion".
"Seriously, stop being a smug jerk and pretending you know more than everyone else on tech issues. It's embarrassing even when you are correct - and that's a long way from every time. What makes you think you have such superior knowledge here?"
Or maybe it's that someone already mentioned it before you chimed in on this string a out how "wrong" and "vague l" I am and didn't consider that I likely learned it from a commenter stead of PaulT Almighty.
"Reading comprehension, moron. I was responding to you being so dead set against "outrage" generating extra traffic for this post while happily contributing to it. You know, the thing in the comment I quoted and responded to? That's how these things work - the quoted text makes it clear what I'm responding to."
You lost me there because you made no such agreeing argument on your own in the comments outside of this thread until I pointed out my validity into stance on the matter.
The Hebrew word for "Beloved" also translates to "kind" as in "kindred" or "kin" in the adjective....clearly that website missed a step or two in logic when conflating the idea. I'm not against the idea of homosexual Jesus, but the semantics of what "Beloved" translates back to Hebrew from in the adjective form blow that notion out of the water.
You will never be satisfied with the way I think as long as you look smart huh PaulT?
"If someone is 'satisfied' with the demo, then limiting them to 20-30 boots is unlikely to drive sales, since when the demo they are playing is finished being played, they'll just move on to the next demo."
Yet DOOM and Prince of Persia are among the top selling games of all time....
It's not so much as a similar distribution method to shareware as it is the same advertising used. Some game demos restricted numer game starts on a Mac before making the demo useless and the issue here is that it's just advertising. The game is released now so there is an incentive to buy it if you enjoyed the demo...if this was going on during the development of Wonderful 101 I would see reason to complain, but honestly there really isn't.
Besides, nobody to my knowledge has cracked the 3DS or WiiU yet, so I don't think the restriction is an anti piracy measure.
"Gamers are like drug addicts: they have to have it, no matter what it costs or how awful the terms are. Game companies are like drug dealers: the first sample is always free. But once they have the customers hooked, then they turn the screws. And gamers go right along with it, whining and crying all the way."
Not that I don't somewhat disagree, but methinks you've never really get very far trying to troll people mindlessly to getting a console war going.
"That's right, but the "this" is NOT the fact that there were restrictions. It's the specific type of restriction.
Is that through your thick skull yet?"
You have a superiority complex or something? I am well aware of the type of restriction....read my other comments outside of our "discussion" that I've had with a few of the AC's. You're just looking for anything to pounce on dude, and you're the only person deliberately not comprehending what I'm saying so just chill.
"Then stop commenting on the post with your stupidity and increasing those said ratings if you're so against that. Nothing you've said refutes a word of what either I or Marincoz have typed. You're arguing against something nobody except you has asserted."
Who says I was against the restriction like that when it's used to give players a considerably open taste for the game....I am however aware that some writers of Kotaku like to blue things out of proportion. There was quite an interesting bit of FUD that was written about the Ouya Android game console and how it promoted illegal piracy because its easily open and hackable....
You're committing straw man. Please just stop finding little things to complain about in my comments because I was quite more aware than you could imagine as to how the demos work on a WiiU.
"Learn to write, then. Context matters. You responded to people having issues with demos being limited to the *number of plays* with crap about shareware that had nothing to do with the complaints in the article.
Yes, shareware had other types of limitations. You know else had limitations? Standard game demos. So why did you write 2 paragraphs criticising Marinconz when you probably both agree on this point?"
Ok...really? You can't comprehend that maybe, just maybe, that italicization can be used for quotes and emphasis? It's very obvious that I was pointing out what Marincoz was saying was hot air.
Let's take a good look at what your "correction" of my "lack" of knowledge:
""Limited play demos are nothing new to anyone who grew up in the hay day of shareware distribution"
Your tech knowledge fails you again.
Shareware releases were typically limited to a certain portion of the game (only episode 1 of Doom, for example, you had to pay to get the rest). Some were time limited, IIRC, in cases where the games couldn't be easily split into discreet chapters, although that was more "normal" game demos than shareware. But you could play the game as many times as you wanted from the beginning up until the point where you were asked to pay.
Unless you have an example, I can't think of anything that limited number of plays in the manner being discussed. In other words, you're addressing something completely different. Do you have such an example?"
Right....sure this isn't the real reason you responded and saw what I said as wrong right?
Marincoz was surprised and annoyed that Nintendo did this on a digital download demo of a game getting released this month. As other an AC mentioned, Nintendo did this with another game that did fairly well. The criticism of the statement he made needed to be addressed...and really how can one seriously be surprised of the concept of limited use game demo boots as a teaser. He was "shocked" and surprised that Nintendo would inform people of it rather than leave it hanging.
No matter how you look at it PaulT, the entire italicized statement is nothing but hot air meant to cause outrage and a ratings increase.
The Quran and Tohra and the Bible all give fairly concise ideas as to things that may have actually caused the 7 plagues.....the plauges needed to be explained some how and it seems to support evidence of a volcanic erruption at least somewhere in the region. The locusts and the flies behaved in ways that are consistent with what insects usually do when escaping a volcanic eruption....they get away from it.
The boils or legions and the death of Egypts first born can easily be tied to CO2 poisoning...
The frogs with the typical Ph change in the water imherrent with a volcanic eruption thereby making it too basic or too acidic for them to survive.
And the blood in the Nile could've been caused by slight tremors. The red color could have loosed red clay sentimentiary deposits and after a trip to the Grand Canyon after it has rained...and the dessert dust washed away...blood red rocks show up.
So when one really thinks about how the natural world really sort of works and you put it up with the rather concise descriptions attributing to the plagues given by all three scriptural accounts, it starts to make sense that whomever wrote it.
Funny thing with Moses is that his existence is vastly more probable because the language written in the Tohra is Aramaic....which was around as a written language since before Ramses II.
Your reading comprehension fails you more than your claims of my lack of historical technical knowledge...which is to say....I never said that was typical did I? I only said , "Limited play demos are nothing new to anyone who grew up in the hay day of shareware distribution."
Tell me exactly where I said that the limited play demo was the only one typical method of shareware distribution in that...well? Oh I guess I didn't... It is fairly obvious it wasn't typical which is why I never claimed it to be, but it was an example of some of the methods methods that shareware developers used. Maybe you should read my comment a tad more carefully before you go on your rants about my "lack" of knowledge on the subject matter...
Oh the part that "tips it off"....look at my subject heading...it's clear you didn't read that either and assumed that I blundered and you just "had" to point out that I was "wrong".
I have the US version of SSB Brawl so I never got to play the 10 minute demos of those games...however, since Wonderful 101 is already in shipment rather than development, it is still a moot point. During the SareWare hay days (note I grew up on pre MacOS8 and pre Mac System7.6.0) there were a few titles that are ingrained into memory...the ENTIRE Glider series by Cassidy and Greene are gems that come to mind...also, a Scorched Earth clone named Dome Wars limited the number of days (15) you could have it on your hard disk before it nagged you to buy it...I got Glider 4.0 and GliderPro as Christmas presents when they came out....
The point is that if you really want the game you can buy it. Nintendo is just doing what any other company would do back in the Shareware days...ask you to buy it.
Mike, the issue really isn't that people don't care more or less about helpfulness ratings...but it does play a huge factor for most Amazon users. The conundrum about the rating vs the review is that it typically stems from bias. Often times users rely on that review as well as where it is ranked in helpfulness to determine a purchase. Bennett might not have a clue about how the Internet works, but honestly it doesn't take much to see how a biased helpfulness astrofturfing bunch of votes can give the wrong review "good" credit thus making a bad product look good or visa versa.
Ah thanks for correcting that then :-) That must mean there is all the more reason not to complain about a demo that only lasts 20 plays as it is meant to give you an incentive to buy the game ;-)
Either way, the old Shareware method is brutally honest and more challenging to developers because they have to keep with the expectation a game gets.
On the post: Microsoft Uses DMCA To Block Many Links To Competing Open Office
This may sound off the topic but...
We all know that these automated, non-human review searches have an extremely big flaw....not to be political, and this is for a reference only, we have the IRS scandal to thank for a great example as to why automated key word searches are a terrible way to make any sort of decision whether legal or determining non-profit status.
That being sId, Microsoft uses a third party company that lazily uses such automation. As much as they gripe and pick at Google (though I think Bill and Melissa Gates sort of have a point about the lack of altruistic goals...I'll explain if asked), I don't think it fully their fault that this crap happens.
Microsoft's issue is that they are using a lazy company. I myself have come across this. When I got my first apartment, my patents had to sign on as credit holders because I never used a credit card in my life to that point. Now, while they did the background checks on all of us. The company that owned my aspiring living quarters used a third party to do the background check. My poor father, who was in a second bout of cancer at the time, who was forced into early retirement due to said cancer, turned out to be a sex offender according to the check. It turns out that the company that did the background check...used no other unique identifiers other than his first and last name...we had to resend everything and had the local police department do the second background check.
So what am I getting at? While I do blame Microsoft for their stupidity in their own right for the chicanery (save aforementioned altruistic criticism from Bill Gates), I can't help but notice the third party automation company they chose to do these searches.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hot air...
First off, I don't have to answer to you because you're too lazy to look at my other comments outside of this rather stupid and nitpicky conversation you're trying to hold onto for dear life. You assume my English is somehow bad due to issues where Autocorrect wrecks havoc on me.
Second....I already answered your damn question...and you flipped out when I didn't answer the way you wanted me to and proceeded to call me obtuse and a blithering idiot for giving my own valid opinion about something. Clearly you don't know the nuance of subtext. Just accept the fact that I may be correct for once and move on. The fact that you admitted to deliberately mocking my English (which of course is my native language) indicates that you clearly wish to nitpick further on pointlessly until I bend to the answers you want from me....which will never ever happen because I have already given the same answer to everyone which I was going to give you. If you're too fucking lazy to look through other strings of threads then I really have no reason to answer to you at all.
Now to answer your question so you can finally just fuck off and be merrily on your way.
You stupidly asked me "Tips what off?" to which I responded "The hot air"....and I left you to figure out what that was. Then you accused me of being obtuse and a blithering idiot for pointing out my opinion. In the same attack, you also stated that "lack of technological knowledge fails" me....when my opinion of the matter was VASTLY outside of what you comprehended.
With this:
"Ok...really? You can't comprehend that maybe, just maybe, that italicization can be used for quotes and emphasis? It's very obvious that I was pointing out what Marincoz was saying was hot air."
"So, again, do you wish to refute the comment actually being made - against this SPECIFIC restriction - or are you going to continue attack fictional positions?"
Dude if you had already picked up on the fact that I stated the complaint from Kotaku was nothing more than hot air...you wouldn't have to ask this question of me. Other users didn't ask me to specify deeper than already bluntly indicated...and you accuse of having a thick skull?
Just give up being nitpicky because in your eyes, you will always find something wrong with what I say when it doesn't conform to things you want to hear.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hot air...
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
However, the inverse could happen and it's a crappy demo but a great game.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re:
has that type of restriction.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hot air...
Yes....and because I said practically the same thing and advocated the idea that there is no need to flip out as everyone is doing....clearly you are just too logically nit-picky to read anything between the lines.
"Maybe you should try clarifying that. Here, in response to my question, not in some vague manner elsewhere."
So far you're the only one who has disagreed with me base on the simple fact that I said it. So when I specify, I get nit picked at by you...and when it's not the answers you want to see, I'm suddenly vague? I'm sorry, I apparently wasn't aware that you wanted this conversation to go your way where you magically turn out right and prove me wrong just for having a valid opinion about what and how someone said something. Clearly you're a god I must bow down to...
"You no English good. That's probably why you've completely misconstrued at least 2 peoples' points in this thread alone."
Racism gets you nowhere in validating your "opinion".
"Seriously, stop being a smug jerk and pretending you know more than everyone else on tech issues. It's embarrassing even when you are correct - and that's a long way from every time. What makes you think you have such superior knowledge here?"
Or maybe it's that someone already mentioned it before you chimed in on this string a out how "wrong" and "vague l" I am and didn't consider that I likely learned it from a commenter stead of PaulT Almighty.
Oh look...
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130813/10170624153/nintendo-restricts-number-times-you-c an-play-game-demo-some-reason.shtml#c344
"Reading comprehension, moron. I was responding to you being so dead set against "outrage" generating extra traffic for this post while happily contributing to it. You know, the thing in the comment I quoted and responded to? That's how these things work - the quoted text makes it clear what I'm responding to."
You lost me there because you made no such agreeing argument on your own in the comments outside of this thread until I pointed out my validity into stance on the matter.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "sins"
You will never be satisfied with the way I think as long as you look smart huh PaulT?
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Give Nintendo a break already
Yet DOOM and Prince of Persia are among the top selling games of all time....
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Besides, nobody to my knowledge has cracked the 3DS or WiiU yet, so I don't think the restriction is an anti piracy measure.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Nintendo is sadistic
Not that I don't somewhat disagree, but methinks you've never really get very far trying to troll people mindlessly to getting a console war going.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hot air...
Is that through your thick skull yet?"
You have a superiority complex or something? I am well aware of the type of restriction....read my other comments outside of our "discussion" that I've had with a few of the AC's. You're just looking for anything to pounce on dude, and you're the only person deliberately not comprehending what I'm saying so just chill.
"Then stop commenting on the post with your stupidity and increasing those said ratings if you're so against that. Nothing you've said refutes a word of what either I or Marincoz have typed. You're arguing against something nobody except you has asserted."
Who says I was against the restriction like that when it's used to give players a considerably open taste for the game....I am however aware that some writers of Kotaku like to blue things out of proportion. There was quite an interesting bit of FUD that was written about the Ouya Android game console and how it promoted illegal piracy because its easily open and hackable....
You're committing straw man. Please just stop finding little things to complain about in my comments because I was quite more aware than you could imagine as to how the demos work on a WiiU.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Nintendo is sadistic
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hot air...
Yes, shareware had other types of limitations. You know else had limitations? Standard game demos. So why did you write 2 paragraphs criticising Marinconz when you probably both agree on this point?"
Ok...really? You can't comprehend that maybe, just maybe, that italicization can be used for quotes and emphasis? It's very obvious that I was pointing out what Marincoz was saying was hot air.
Let's take a good look at what your "correction" of my "lack" of knowledge:
""Limited play demos are nothing new to anyone who grew up in the hay day of shareware distribution"
Your tech knowledge fails you again.
Shareware releases were typically limited to a certain portion of the game (only episode 1 of Doom, for example, you had to pay to get the rest). Some were time limited, IIRC, in cases where the games couldn't be easily split into discreet chapters, although that was more "normal" game demos than shareware. But you could play the game as many times as you wanted from the beginning up until the point where you were asked to pay.
Unless you have an example, I can't think of anything that limited number of plays in the manner being discussed. In other words, you're addressing something completely different. Do you have such an example?"
Right....sure this isn't the real reason you responded and saw what I said as wrong right?
Marincoz was surprised and annoyed that Nintendo did this on a digital download demo of a game getting released this month. As other an AC mentioned, Nintendo did this with another game that did fairly well. The criticism of the statement he made needed to be addressed...and really how can one seriously be surprised of the concept of limited use game demo boots as a teaser. He was "shocked" and surprised that Nintendo would inform people of it rather than leave it hanging.
No matter how you look at it PaulT, the entire italicized statement is nothing but hot air meant to cause outrage and a ratings increase.
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The boils or legions and the death of Egypts first born can easily be tied to CO2 poisoning...
The frogs with the typical Ph change in the water imherrent with a volcanic eruption thereby making it too basic or too acidic for them to survive.
And the blood in the Nile could've been caused by slight tremors. The red color could have loosed red clay sentimentiary deposits and after a trip to the Grand Canyon after it has rained...and the dessert dust washed away...blood red rocks show up.
So when one really thinks about how the natural world really sort of works and you put it up with the rather concise descriptions attributing to the plagues given by all three scriptural accounts, it starts to make sense that whomever wrote it.
Funny thing with Moses is that his existence is vastly more probable because the language written in the Tohra is Aramaic....which was around as a written language since before Ramses II.
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Hot air...
Tell me exactly where I said that the limited play demo was the only one typical method of shareware distribution in that...well? Oh I guess I didn't... It is fairly obvious it wasn't typical which is why I never claimed it to be, but it was an example of some of the methods methods that shareware developers used. Maybe you should read my comment a tad more carefully before you go on your rants about my "lack" of knowledge on the subject matter...
Oh the part that "tips it off"....look at my subject heading...it's clear you didn't read that either and assumed that I blundered and you just "had" to point out that I was "wrong".
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re:
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The point is that if you really want the game you can buy it. Nintendo is just doing what any other company would do back in the Shareware days...ask you to buy it.
On the post: Telco Astroturfing Or Elaborate Double-Reverse Sabotage Fakeout? You Decide
Both...and here's why...
On the post: Nintendo Restricts The Number Of Times You Can Play A Game Demo For Some Reason
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Either way, the old Shareware method is brutally honest and more challenging to developers because they have to keep with the expectation a game gets.
Next >>