...it is arguably "stealing reputation" (depriving another of their reputation and taking it for yourself).

I've referred to it as "reputation fraud," but yes, we appear to be in general agreement.

I see this old semantic game blooms anew on Slashdot. "It isn't stealing". Fine. It's fraud. Don't worry that your reputation is shot and/or somebody else is trading on your good name. It isn't stealing. Oh... the victim feels much better now.

I don't understand; what are you complaining about? You're correct. It isn't theft, it is fraud. So why call it theft when it's clearly something else?

If you call it by the correct name, you'll get community support, even among the "copying is not theft" crowd. OTOH, if you call it stealing, then you'll get mired in a gigantic semantic dogpile as hundreds of people re-litigate what constitutes "stealing."

We don't even need to raise the "Is it stealing?" question in this case. It's clearly fraud. So call it "fraud." Geez...

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS DOING ON SLASHDOT?!?

You want to spread whiny, partisan, maliciously misleading horseshit? Go to RedState or Breitbart; that's their stock in trade. It doesn't fscking belong here. Get this garbage off Slashdot now.

Professionals do the job and get paid.

They did neither.

End of argument.

"Hey, kid. If you get down in that mine, dig out the coal, and bring it back to me, I'll pay you. ...What? You want a light? Why did you take the job if you don't have the tools to do it? Batteries cost money, kid. ...What? What's all this whining about dust and poisonous gases and how you can't carry more than two lumps because you're only six years old? I'm paying you; do your job. You don't want to be thought of as unprofessional, do you?"

What self-serving sophistry.

"Contracts" or not, the developers' reaction was the correct one.

Fable is by Lionhead Studios, home of longtime auteur game designer Peter Molyneux, who has a tendency to promise the Earth and be ultimately be crippled by his own ambition (see the big fat broken monkey-fest Black & White). During the development of Fable, for example, it was promised to have features like rival NPC characters, plants growing in real time, and a system wherein your every slightest choice and action changes your appearance and the world around you. What we ended up with was a buggy action RPG with a great big stiffy for itself.

-- Yahtzee Croshaw

Can't say that I blame you. I was contemplating maybe helping get a couple of titles I'm associated with onto the platform- but after getting one...heh...

They're talking like they're going to be partnering with MadCatz on the MOJO for the next generation since they're a UI/API spec as well as a console hardware item.

They *MIGHT* survive being "absorbed" by MadCatz, but yeah, they didn't execute as good as they hoped on several fronts.

Refurbished X-Box 360 or PS3? For $100? I don't know where YOU shop, but pretty much everywhere locally and online are selling refurbs for $150-200 on either console. Now, I'll agree the premise you're talking to is more sound at this time (Because the budget difference is realistically minimal...), but the concept they were aiming for was the best of the best in the Indie space making titles that were try before you buy for free. For all of the PS3 and X-Box 360 being "better" (Which, by they way, if you had adequate content to compare would be nearly at or on parity with those consoles for most titles...) you still don't have that with either of those two. You pay and keep paying. Which is fine because the used game market, at least for now, rocks. If they'd pulled it off a little better than they did...might be a bit of a different discussion there. As it stands, though, it's not "same price". Close, but no cigar there.

Heh... This presumes two things:

* You've got a high-end ($700-900 retail...) cell phone that you're willing to use for this purpose.
* Said high-end phone doesn't bake itself running continuous duty at peak clock.

The Ouya and MadCatz MOJO are dedicated set-top devices- with fans and all. They're not designed for mobile service and are designed to actually put out peak operation continuously. A cell phone's not designed for that abuse. It can only really do it part of the time- and they're expecting you to replace the thing within 2-4 years max. The whole premise you espouse will make Samsung and the like *VERY* happy and you very poor...knock yourself out.

Actually, they have the "right" hardware overall- but the problem's more that they didn't get it out fast enough to be eclipsed by MadCatz providing a system that's usable with the Play store and can run games right straight out of that along with fielding one of the most agrressive Android set-top configurations to date at the $200-300 price point. And, there's a few "good" games, but nothing killer or showcasing- because you can get the title in the Play store as well. The only plus they have is the thing they're now axing as a requirement.

What's disappointing is the walled garden they have, combined with the dearth (again, they have some good stuff- but most of it is the dregs...) of worthy titles on the system. $99 is a compelling story with what they have. It'd work if they had better stuff in their store.

Really? I couldv'e sworn that Valve's got most of their titles over there...must've been my imagination.