Commodore75

I just assumed it has two (extra) [cameras,sensors] that triangulate where you are. But that's probably because I missed all of this years E3 (coverage), bar podcasts. (Job situation has been wacky lately. Thus this link-n-run.) Also, Natal everywhere! -Bill

They're talking about the PSP Go there. Or am I missing something? [edit] Ah, it's this one I agree Wurtsi, well done summary.

Seems like it could be a nice tech demo for natal. The way Wii Sport was a good tech demo to bundle with the system. As a stand-alone game that people are expected to pay for ... ooooh, I don't know. Will that unlock the "Ivan The Terrible"-achievement?

Don't know about the PS2 version, but arsTechnica seems to think the Wii version is more cartoony than the x360/PS3 ones.They still think it's more a rental, rather than a buy. As for x360 vs. PS3 : Seems the x360 version might have a slight edge over the PS3 one.

FWIW America's Army 3 is out, so I guess that means USA:ers won't have to worry about recruitment ads in their games, the rest of us OTOH...

Didn't they also make another game ... a "more realistic" one? "Full [spectrum Warrior]" or something? [EDIT] name of the game, also, maybe not "realistic", but rather give an insight into where they wanted infantry fighting to go. (Looksie! Ain't it cool?)

My bad. I forgot the sarcasm-tags in my last post. P.S. But my question still stands. P.P.S. I'd also like to hear what the forumgoers have to say. (I know there are people who don't mind military recruitment ads in "3+"-rated games.)

Aahw, come on, what's wrong with some diet pill ads in Barbie's Horse Adventure, or an innocent Roids™-ad in a wrestling game? And who doesn't want Bacardi ads in their driving games? Dang puritans...

Oh, I have another one, or rather a two-part questions: a) What ads don't you want in your games?, and in which games don't you want them? For some reason I get realy uncomfortable when I see military recruitment ads in my "age 3 and up"-rated game*). I guess we have a duty to protect the God-given rights of companies to maxemize thier profits, so I don't realy have a problem with tabacco/booze/pr0n-ads in games rate 10+/13+/etc, but military-ads in todler-rated games ... though if the same ads were to appear in my teen-rated games, I don't think I would have any problem with them. But I guess that's just me. So what about you? *) But I still love that specific game.

Wait, it's now "Five old games for the price of one new game"? Hasn't that always been 5=1 ?

"This game made my cat crap out its hairballs." - IGN.com Have they asked us to "not think of the children" yet? I tried reading through the thread, but 19 pages are a lot...

yes (but the people playing may not be hooked.) some of them are also humans

e-mail is for people born in the 40ies. I have a "re-question" (Scroll down for tl;dr) In ep.25 (1h 1m 40s) you adressed a question from ... Darkness(?), regarding Games as Drugs. I got me thinking of another question than the one that was asked and answered. I would like to hear some thoughts on making games as addictive as drugs. (Not "Are games addictive? 'cause that would probably be pretty fruitless, seeing as there are still people who don't think cocain is addictive.) When I heard ep.25 I was playing a game that I think is so poor/lacking that I don't want to mention its name, since I want people to either a) forget about it as soon as possible, or never ever learn of it... Yet I could not stop playing that awful piece of * When I heard "Games as a Drug" I started thinking about how slot-machines are designed. The sounds and visuals are all created to draw attention to them, then give audio-visual stimulation. So it has to draw you in, but not scare you away once you're there. Then you have the "Near-Win"-factor, where the player is given the impression that they were close to winning. Like Cherry, then banana, but the cherry is just above banana, and then cherry again. "Ah, almost won ... sooooo close ... " (When in fact you lost. Plain and simple. Nothing "almost" about it.) Never "Total Failure!" At first I discarded this idea on the basis of "Why would any dev/publisher want people to keep playing rather than buying new games?" But as more games get revenue from in-game advertising, keeping people playing your games has more of an incentive. (There are other reasons of course.) tl;dr Are more games now created to try and get people "hooked" rather than "playing"?

Sort of reminds me of how a lext stays readable even if the letters are moved around, as long as the first and last letter don't move. ...only now we're replacing letters with random numbers. Yet, it somehow stays readable. Thank you very much!Been a while since I laughed that loud.

So it's a teaser for a upcoming game trailer. I feel ashame for all of mankind. The last podcast touched on this, didn't it? "Countdown for the next countdown, which may, or may not, be ... The Final Countdown™" Is it more important than before to get people excited longer before the product is available, in order to get people to start saving up the cash, now with the financial situation...?