XBox Screenshot Flim-Flammery? 210
X_Bones points to discussion on ign.com, saying: "There's been some amount of talk recently about XBox screenshots being touched up using Photoshop. Apparently a game character was pasted on the scene background and a stock Photoshop lens flare was added (which looks like it centers on the eyewear frame, and not the lens itself). here(1)'s a comparison between the "original" and a lens flare, and here(2) and here(3) are two more detailed comparisons." While companies have long used visual and verbal exaggerations of their products (glass marbles hold up soup veggies, and fruit glistens with baby oil), implying extra graphics capabilities for what is essentially a graphics box seems a little worse than some advertisng slime-tactics, though this too surely isn't new. The screenshots on the XBox site have been updated, but gamers seem to have long, intense, pixel-specific memories.
Re:Keep in mind Photoshop junkies aren't always ri (Score:1)
Re:Same thing happens (Score:1)
Re:oh come on. (Score:2)
Learn to spot the trolls, too, if you can't already. It's quite entertaining to watch the effects of a good troll as it suckers people in. Almost like one of the currently fashionable 'voyeur' TV programs, 'examining' human nature.
Re:Well... (Score:3)
Maybe its Fraud, yet Dreamcast games use LensFlare (Score:5)
Maybe its Fraud, yet Dreamcast games use Lens Flare in many of the premier titles.
Many of the outdoor 3d combat games use Lens Flare (such as Soul Calibur), and many outdoor race games such as Sega Extreme Sports, I seem to recall.
Live Lensflare added on top of a 3d scene is simple and is merely an overlay, and is not 3d intensive, It moves interestingly as the camera swivels past the action, but its still not a big deal.
Faking shadows would be far more serious of fraud for XBOX, or faking reflections, translucency, flowing robe animation, flowing hair, course woven cloth etc.
But faking a lens flare is not a big deal because its not a big deal to add in real life and not a massive computation.
Am I shoked that they would resort to fraud? No. Some game console companies in the late 1970s and early 1980s used to have a fake console box on a table but the wires to the demo screen came from special high end hardware hidden in rackmount device under the convention table!
Switching BOXES is the ultimate fraud. And that was done.
Gaming companies are all corrupt. They survive on draconian punishment clauses for publicly discussing terms of distriution.
3D0 (a 602 PPC console) and Apple Pippin (603 PPC) had 3% royalty extrortions of the GROSS, same as the Apple Newton. 3% of the GROSS not NET sales.
And if you did not like it, your media could not ever boot becuase the devices booted encrypted (scrambled technically), media only.
3D0,Pippin, and Newton are all dead. Maybe the 3% had something to do with it.
The TI/994A had a PATENT ON THE CONNECTOR to the game cartridge. A Patent! Just to keep out unlscenced content. Years later in Europe they agreed that you can ignore patents desinged to merely prohibit interoperability, like the TI-994A game connector patent.
The Europeans also allowed that Kodaks disgusting PATENT on a file format was invalid and that people not wanting to spend 100,000 dollars to obtain the PhotoCD fle format manual from Kodak could use the "bootleg" independently reverse engineered PhotoCD code.
Imagine a patent on ASCII files!
The disgusting american DMCA is headed back toward protecting such disgusting things.
Apple had no less than FIVE, count them FIVE fraudulent patents on the PEF container file format header.
Without a PEF header no code can load in Apples newer PowerPC architectures. Creating a PEF header required 5 thousnad dollar liscence from apple.
5 Thousand. Even if you wnat ed to write a shareware or freeware assembler or small c compiler.
5 Thousnad for PEF was so disgusting in turned my stomach the real goal was to make money off EVERY PROGRAM EVER WRITTEN FOR THE MAC. And porno and anti-women content would make you lose the "made for Mac" box art. They also had executive artistic content control over Pippin and Macintosh games.
Eventually After Tom Dowdy (i thinm it was jim) finally wrote a letter to Dr Dobbs, apple stopped charging people 5 thousnad to look at how to make object code loadable on a powermac.
Metrowerks (now Motorola) also had to pay 5 thousand. I asked them.
The XBox will be little different from all other protected content delivery platforms... Encryption, scrambling, violation of CD R-W channels and or 14 bit EFM moduilation, bogus session lead out information, and probably new stuff like track wobble detection to combat CDR at a hardware reading level.
But liscensing and patents will no doubt be a part of the the pay-per-play model.
Re:OSS does that too (Score:1)
Wow. (Score:5)
I'm impressed!
- A.P.
--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.
Re:Maybe its Fraud, yet Dreamcast games use LensFl (Score:1)
By the way, here's a Random Dreamcast Lens-Flare [min.net] that still manages to beat the pants off M$'s screenshot.
Re:what else would you expect? (Score:1)
No way, just darkness
Re:Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:1)
Why so surprised? (Score:2)
Put down those eyebrows, Milhouse. And the other one.
--
"Where, where is the town? Now, it's nothing but flowers!"
Re:Good Grief (Score:1)
While it might be good, I still refuse to buy it (Score:2)
Re:Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:1)
As for the wheel, wasn't that Mouse Systems?
Same thing happens (Score:2)
Only interesting X is: (Score:1)
Re:More common then you think .. (Score:1)
The point I was trying to make is that everyone shows the best side of the product in an ad - MS, Redhat, whoever - that's advertising.
How sad that this is accepted. One of the critical points for captilalism to work correctly is that the consumer has to be informed and know what the better product for their needs is. Modern day adverstising (and reviews) tell you little about the product in a manner you can use to make an informed purchase. Lies like this X-box show, and I'm sure just about every other advertiser uses, just makes it that much harder for a consumer, who doesn't spend a lot of time in research, to make an informed purchasing decision.
Re:Wow. (Score:1)
Time flies like an arrow;
Re:Good Grief (Score:2)
Feh. I don't believe it. Here's what happened:
1. They throw something out there. It's a fake, but they don't tell anyone.
2. Someone spots the trickery and cries foul.
3. Microsoft feigns innocence: "OH, we didn't say it was a manufactured demo? Sorry, must have slipped our minds."
And, BTW, I'm not talking about the Xbox here - I'm thinking of what happened with that "demo" videotape during their antitrust trial. Anyone remember that? Anyone see a pattern here? Anyone still trust Microsoft?
--Jim
Stop the cram (Score:2)
But that does not change the fact that M$ is playing dirt. Some people claim that "it's natural" and that "everyone does" and "it's expected" in a game development stage.
Whoever does this is acting quite uethical in relation to its potential consumers. If "everyone" does this then we have a problem in this industry.
But I could accept it... Should I? No! That would be accepting that "butter" can be stamped on every piece of grease with a look near to butter. That would be accepting certain companies to claim their product is made of oranges, lemons ot other fruits. That would be accepting that major corps would "forget" to add the level of conservants in their products.
Yes, it's a piece of software. But M$ sells it to me the same way as Coca-Cola sells me its cans. Why should I accept?
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
Cars will eventually be able to do big loops in the air, as well as even fly about. However, if Chrystler were to show this on their commercials air next month, it would be false advertising, and would be illegal. Until the game can actually do it, they can't advertise that it does.
What Microsoft is actually advertising is a photoshop doctored picture, something which X-Box will never be able to create. Microsoft can legally post a screenshot taken from 20 different X-Box generated screens, but if they add even one photoshop generated scene, it's false advertising.
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
You state repetitively that these doctored images are not harming the consumer. I'm not an anti-Microsoft zealot. I'm not blinded by hate towards Microsoft programmers. I don't even believe that consumers are wronged by being shown doctored images from a game system currently in development. I understand that X-Box should be able to do this kind of stuff in the future. The point still remains, however, that they didn't tell us that these images were doctored, leading us to the conclusion that when we buy an X-Box six months from now, the image should look like that. Since it won't be able to run Photoshop filters, it won't look like that, and the consumer gets the shaft.
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
The bottom line is that if a company is selling something that can do graphics, and makes a prototype image to demonstrate the power that they intend to put in, they ought to declare it as a prototype. If they do not, consumers will assume it's the real deal, and be wronged because of it.
Re:So? (Score:1)
Not a fMS$ing troll! (Score:1)
Its a fair point.
This is just another example of their willingness to go to any length to prop-up and maintain THE IMAGE, no matter what the cost.
They are, above all else, a marketing company albeit a very good one
Re:Well, maybe... (Score:1)
Re:oh come on. (Score:1)
Re:Yeah, This Is News Worthy, *Sheesh* (Score:1)
The new screenshots show the big difference in character quality.
This is was xbox.com wrote about this (Score:1)
xbox.com clarification
Some of the images for Amped released during Gamestock were enhanced to illustrate some features that will be in the final product. While this is a common practice for games so early in development, we apologize for the confusion. No one intended to be deceptive. Everyone was so busy prepping for Gamestock, that we just missed the fact that these were labeled "concept art". Frankly, we're impressed with the skillz of those digital sleuths! Nice work!
I've tried to document this whole thing since we talked about it in the IGN forums in my website [sellmic.com].
Re:Why doctor? (Score:1)
Re:Proof: Independant game journalism is important (Score:1)
This is not only about MS, but other game companies trying to fool the public. However, MS does make a good example as usual, so this story will hopefully make game developers be more careful in the future.
Either that, or they'll hire more professional "fake screenshot" engineers.
Re:More common then you think .. (Score:1)
The funny thing is, we tought it was only the close up of the boarder that was fake, but it turned out (like many suspected) that all of the screenshots had fake characters in them.
This is like pasting a render of a dinosaur from the Jurassic Park movie on top of a pixelated background from a real game and claiming that's how the game looks.
Re:Who cares? Artist conception a new thing? (Score:1)
Catching companies cheating ... (Score:1)
Also, many gaming sites found this newsworthy, so I don't know why you're complaining :
planetgamecube.com [planetgamecube.com]
computerandvideogames.com [computeran...ogames.com]
fgnonline.com [fgnonline.com]
gamers.com [gamers.com]
xbox.ign.com [ign.com]
Re:Yeah, This Is News Worthy, *Sheesh* (Score:1)
LOL !!!
Re:Wrong (Score:1)
Re:not the first time (Score:1)
Re:Good Grief (Score:1)
It was a pre-rendered high quality character, that does not look like that in the real game.
This is not even disputed right now (Score:1)
Now, the only thing you need to do to convince yourself, is to go to xbox.com and see the "new" "real" Amped screenshots, the model looks nothing like the first released images.
Re:Good Grief (Score:1)
I'm reminded of the Spanish saying :
"Cria fama y acuestate a dormir."
Sort of means : "Create a reputation and go to sleep".
BTW : The other screenshots, didn't have the horrible edge artifacts with the model, they were somewhat more believeable, yet, they proved to be "concept art" too.
McDonalds ??? (Score:1)
There were screenshots released at GameStock, to prove how "powerful" the X-Box is, and how it's games look.
Does McDonald's release tech demos ?
Also, what do you suggest we do ? Just ignore it for the good of MS ?
Re:oh come on. (Score:2)
They probably can. Initially this is want hinted to us that there was a problem with this picture. However, the main thing was that the character model was pasted on the real game background.
Look at the new screenshots (real ones) and the old ones and compare, there's a BIG difference in poly count/quality of the models.
Re:Wrong (Score:2)
They pasted the characters on top of the background. The background is in-game, the character is not.
Re:Good Grief (Score:2)
The only question is, was it an honest mistake, or a real attempt of deception ?
Re:More common then you think .. (Score:2)
Because usually, you don't get random white pixels intersecting the background. Also, like I pointed out in my image [sellmic.com], there are 3 types of edges. This is very strange, plus the edge around the character is just typical "pasted" image on Photoshop quality.
Notice also, that there are white pixels, even when the intersection of colors does not contain any white (trees and face).
This type of problem, could have been a bug, but coupled with the obvious fake lens flare, and the apparent resolution differences between the character and the background, it's obvious it's pasted on.
Anyways, it doesn't matter if I proved it completely or not, MS admitted those characters were added to the backgrounds.
Does this really surprise anybody? (Score:2)
As a corporation, they have absolutely no conscience. I'm sure there are some good, honest people working for MS, but I don't know how they can do it. I guess they must truly believe the propaganda.
Re:Yeah, This Is News Worthy, *Sheesh* (Score:2)
The only thing I would say to that is you are probably right for the most part. But, if you had a vision for a game, and it was not complete, would you modify the graphics to represent what you think the finished product would look like, or would you just post an image from the incomplete product?
Bryan R.
Yeah, This Is News Worthy, *Sheesh* (Score:5)
Bryan R.
Well... (Score:3)
--
Re:Yeah, This Is News Worthy, *Sheesh* (Score:2)
--
Re:So fine... (Score:2)
It can do lens-flares in real time -- check out http://gamershq.madonion.com for their 3D Mark 2001 benchmark app, which will give you some feeling as to what the XBox will do.
Simon
Keep in mind Photoshop junkies aren't always right (Score:3)
In the end, only one thing will count (Score:2)
My bet is on Nintendo for first place, and Microsoft for the usual second place. But Microsoft will act like it has the better box, because that's what they do.
[caveat - I own shares of both MSFT and NTDOY (ADR)]
Re:Who cares? Artist conception a new thing? (Score:3)
Well, maybe it's because their Xbox site says "Yes, these are actual acreenshots" below the pictures...
- - - - -
Re:oh come on. (Score:3)
... is it common practice to label doctored images with the legend "Yes, these are actual screenshots?"
- - - - -
Re:Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:2)
Plus they were the first company to deliver optical mice that don't need a reflective mousepad. And the first company to have a mouse with a scroll wheel.
I hear their joysticks are of comparable quality, but I haven't used them myself. But my experience with microsoft hardware has been quite excellent in all cases.
Re:Good Grief (Score:2)
Sorry, but anyone who says that this is just an honest mistake by Microsoft is deluding themselves. The mistake that Microsoft is a really sorry about is getting caught.
Re:Good Grief (Score:2)
What Microsoft did was shitty. Using the 'but everyone does it' excuse is childish and immature. If you can't demonstrate the actually quality of your product in pre-release, then DON'T DEMONSTRATE YOUR PRODUCT.
If you look at the new images, there is a SEVERE difference in the quality of the image between the 'REAL' post, and the DOCTORED post is dramatically different. So, why aren't the doctored images 'false advertising?.
*Sigh* (Score:2)
Sorry for being a troll, but sometimes I can't believe all the hours wasted looking for stupid details like this one. The worst part is that slashdot is posting 'em
This is a troll? (Score:2)
Granted, the comment was a bit blunt, but is a "troll" label necessary?
There was ample evidence to suggest that Microsoft did fake demonstration videos during the DOJ trial. The Washington Post reported in Feb 1999 (sorry, no URL available) that "Microsoft was forced to concede that the demonstrations contained inaccuracies". Wired also reported [wired.com] that Microsoft conveniently "edited" video to that inaccurately suggested that Netscape Communicator was easier to install than it really was. the DOJ submitted their own footage indicating this, which forced MS Vice President Brad Chase to concede.
Newsbytes reported a similar incident (sorry, no URL available), when Boise confronted Allchin with proof that another MS video didn't depict what it was supposed to about the "Felton Program" and its effect on Internet Explorer.
Each time this happens, Microsoft responds with a "Whoops! An unfortunate mistake!" Of course, they only seem to do this when they're caught. I haven't heard of an incident when they've volunteered this information before someone caught them.
Touched up images (Score:4)
pictures for download, and nobody seems to complain about them.
Please No! (Score:2)
Sweek Jesus! Don't tell me everyone is going to start add stock disclaimers to their posts - as if IANAL wasn't bad enough!
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
In fact I have seen many ads here which seem to show things which just plain wouldn't happen. And quite a few with just plain outright lies. Coming from the UK, this was quite a shock to me as consumer protection is taken quite seriously there (for better or worse) and honesty in advertising is strictly enforced (an exception was made for Heineken as the claims in their adverts were considered as just too outlandish to apply (as I guess the pickup/moon could claim to be)
Rich
Not touching up (Score:2)
Re:Why doctor? (Score:2)
With a 3d engine you could end up with 'jaggie' edges, like the trees have with the rest of the backdrop, but this isn't what you get round the figure. The figure had already been anti-aliased, only they'd been anti-aliased onto a white backdrop, when they cut'n'pasted off this they had the problem that there were rogue stray white pixels round the figure, and the edges faded to white. This is not a new problem, designers face this everyday when copying images from stock studio photographs to use elsewhere. What is new is their solution: Don't bother. Given a Photoshop-equipped machine and a bit of time I could have removed the white edges to some reasonable amount, and I'm not a professional designer.
The fact is these were not only faked, but faked badly. Yes, you can easily get better images from a 3d package, or Photoshop, but these didn't do it. The artifacts round the character are definately those of copying off a white background though, I somehow don't think nVidia are suddenly going to build chips that randomly add white pixels round a character, and alias the surrounding character pixels to them and not the background. It's pathetic.
Now the reason this is the 'worst offence' is that in game graphics the amount of polugons, and the shading used on them, is king. nVidia became leaders by throwing more polygons round in a reasonable time than their competitors. The face on this screenshot is pretty much what I'd expect from a pre-render for a 3d package.. the actual polygon quality is far in excess of what most games have at the moment. Yes, XBox will be capable of doing some quite incredible 3d tricks (Having read, and salivated, at the specs for the GeForce3 I can tell nVidia is doing some good stuff) but it won't be capable of this. That's the problem, the face is too good, and claiming it's an actual screenshot is a blatant lie.
This is like a newspaper doctoring the image of President Bush to actually show devil's horns sticking out of the top of his head, and claiming it's an actual photograph. No matter what your politics, or viewpoint, what was done here was lying- not marketing. It's simple.
Marbles in soup (Score:4)
Re:More common then you think .. (Score:2)
---
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
Are you saying that the Xbox won't be able to do simple 2d image transformations that I could do on my Pentium 75? Adobe premiere was capable of doing the lens flair effect in better then real time on a 60mhz PPC Mac back at my high school. In fact, most lens flair effects in video games don't have anything to do with 3d. Just a couple of alpha blended circles being drawn on the screen. I'm sure the X-box would be capable of it.
A lens flair is totally within the realm of the X-Box's graphic capability.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com [picture-rate.com]
filters? (Score:2)
Anyway, the final lens flair might look a little diffrent, but probably not by much.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com [picture-rate.com]
Nope (Score:2)
But whatever, almost every image looks 'doctored' if you look close enough.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com [picture-rate.com]
NVidia card (Score:2)
Rate me on Picture-rate.com [picture-rate.com]
Re:BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT (Score:2)
X-Box Xposed Again! (Score:2)
Re:oh come on. (Score:2)
Re:Not touching up (Score:2)
Cars will eventually be able to do big loops in the air, as well as even fly about. However, if Chrystler were to show this on their commercials air next month, it would be false advertising, and would be illegal.
But say their new car had a new type of door. If all of the technology and research and design work was in place to make implementing the door a trivial matter, and this was clear, would it still be false advertising if it wasn't on the current development version of the car? Are you really so biased against Microsoft that you can't see a Microsoft programmer being able to use a simple lens flare?
Until the game can actually do it, they can't advertise that it does.
False advertising prevent you the consumer from buying a product that was advertised to be able to do more than what the product you bought can do. You cannot buy the development XBox, and the XBox that you will be able to buy will contain all of the features that they advertise. How are you, as the consumer, being wronged?
Microsoft can legally post a screenshot taken from 20 different X-Box generated screens, but if they add even one photoshop generated scene, it's false advertising.
In the little banner ad above the Slashdot site here, I can see some examples of what you can do with the service being advertised, which appear to be commands typed out on a shell (bash, actually). Is it false advertising if those commands were something that you could type into bash and get the result they promise, but if the actual commands shown were put into the image in photoshop? How are you wronged? How is the consumer hurt?
Re:Wrong (Score:2)
If you look at the pictures of Abe's Oddyssey for XBox, which has no "modifications" at all, you'll see that they're just as amazing, if not more so. XBox has put out the best visuals of all the upcoming consoles, hands down.
Re:Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:2)
Re:What's the big deal about XBox? (Score:2)
The whole point of hacking a cheap box is because it's cheap. $400 for a high-end P3, NVidia GeForce 3, 100 MB ethernet, 8GB hard drive, 2 USB ports and high end video outputs doesn't seem like a bad deal to me AT ALL.
Re:Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:2)
Re:While it might be good, I still refuse to buy i (Score:2)
Uh, how? If you use free software (which I imagine you do, low user #3438) your software choices aren't limited by buying X-Box at all. There will still be a million Linux distros. Freshmeat will still exist.
If anything, you'll actually be hurting Microsoft by not purchasing software to support the traditional console model (sell the hardware below cost, then rack up profits with the licensing fees). If you're totally against Microsoft so far as you have the words "anti-M$" tatooed to your arm, purchasing the X-Box hardware then not getting the software is probably the BEST thing you can do.
Re:BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT (Score:2)
BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT (Score:4)
But no. We focus on the same "Slashdot M$" bullshit as always. The enhance a couple of pics. Key word: a couple. They throw a crappy lens flare up and change the background. Personally I thought the pictures looked worse.
But does anyone at Slashdot look at some of the other, non-modified screenshots like Abe's Oddysey (which look awesome?) Or say anything other than "Well it's M$. We know they'se are the eE. Where are my Warez? I'm so l33t!" Noooooooo.
This is such absolute biased bullshit. We've got a great machine here people. Why shoot it down. Why not hack the damn thing. Noone seems to know about this on Slashdot because, quite frankly, most of the people who are anti-MS here act like complete children.
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit...
Proof: Independant game journalism is important! (Score:4)
George Broussard of 3D Realms stated earlier this year that he opposed people taking their own screenshots and posting them on the web or using those shots in magazines. [theregister.co.uk] His interest, of course, is to prevent crappy screenshots from making his games look like crap.
But of course, the problem with his position is that unethical game developers might try to start passing off touched-up photos as the real deal. I guess we should thank Microsoft (king of the unethical) for proving this point. Good, uncensored reviews are important for the consumer; then it doesn't matter if the screenshots coming out of MS are fake. Informed consumers will be able to seek out and find the truth out for themselves.
Uninformed consumers, of course, will still be duped, but they already get duped by crappy games in great looking boxes covered with screenshots of pre-rendered cut scenes.
M$ say "oops...." (Score:2)
Flim-Flamming the Faithful (Score:2)
I do not even assign them any particular malice in this sort of thing. I see it as sort of being an ingrained character trait. They might not even be aware of it as a bad thing to do as such. They migh have all sorts of reasons, like all of the good MS has done for the world.
Microsoft has been famous for vaporware and demos that were not the real thing for many many years. You expect them to suddenly get religion now?
Even their faithful supporters know better, and expect a flim flam from the marketing department, an exaggerated claim, a quick shuffle and brush off. Even their supporters know to be just a little bit cynical.
We are not even talking about their "Evil Master Plan"(tm) - We are talking about the culture and the business as usual attitudes. If you live within that culture for many years, all kinds of things becomes justifiable.
A note of caution: if you choose to fight monsters, be careful that you do not turn into a monster yourself.
Re:*shakes head* (Score:2)
3DFX focused on quality over frame rate - for the time being the 5500 will sit.
Now _THAT'S_ a riot. When every other hardware company had moved to 24/32-bit color 3dfx was the only company not making the transition, trying to convince everyone that there wasn't a difference anyways. 3dfx' mantra was frame-rate over quality, and they were very explicit in stating this. It's just interesting seeing revisionist history such as what you are stating.
They bought out the competitoin and sold thier souls to Microsoft.
Bought out? 3dfx was headed to the grave. nvidia did what was reasonable and obtained the technology, though most likely purely to ensure there are no ridiculously broad patents in 3dfx' portfolio that a malicious buyer could use to harrass them with. Windows happens to be on the majority of home PCs, and many console makers are looking to supplant PCs and take over as your primary home entertainment/net access box and this represents a threat to both Microsoft and nvidia (mind you these vacuous threats are about as credible as Marc Andreeson's claims many years ago that Netscape would shortly be your operating system), so of course they coordinate to take on contenders such as Sony and Nintendo. More power to them.
What's the big deal about XBox? (Score:2)
Similar NVidia card
DVDR/DVD/CDRW (take your pick)
Ethernet
Hard drive
It also has a faster processor (G4 at 733MHz) as well as gigabit ethernet(I think)
I guess it's going to be 8x more expensive, but the point is those hardware junkies could get a similar machine now... while the BSD people, well, can wait for their XBox, I guess.
Is it the prospect of a Microsoft driven gaming economy? Or the high quality of Microsoft software? What?
Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]
Re:What's the big deal about XBox? (Score:2)
And as per the processor, I know they are of different breeds... but still, a 733MHz G4 vs a 733MHz PIII isn't exactly unfair, since they both exhibit the same clock!
Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]
So? (Score:2)
Don't forget the pictures on cereal boxes! (Score:2)
Good Grief (Score:5)
Anyhow, here are the specifics of the situation:
1) Microsoft released some screenshots
2) Some gamers noticed that they looked faked, and an uproar was started
3) Microsoft re-checked the images, and had this to say:
"Some of the images for Amped released during Gamestock were enhanced to illustrate some features that will be in the final product. While this is a common practice for games so early in development, we apologize for the confusion. No one intended to be deceptive. Everyone was so busy prepping for Gamestock, that we just missed the fact that these were labeled "concept art". Frankly, we're impressed with the skillz of those digital sleuths! Nice work!"
4) The game dev team issued new screenshots, which they insist are in-game, and haven't been doctored in any way, and hte old shots were removed.
You can read threads about this entire debacle over at Ars:
http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?q
and at Dailyradar:
http://forums.dailyradar.com/2/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=
The long and the short of it is no, there isn't some sort of conspiracy, and Microsoft isn't pulling a sham on anyone. If you really think that all of the media and so forth up to this point is fake, then you have two options:
a) go see the thing demoed somewhere when it comes out
b) don't buy it.
Simple, ne?
-------
-- russ
"You want people to think logically? ACK! Turn in your UID, you traitor!"
Some criticism is deserving, some not (Score:4)
Microsofts hardware though is glorious. It's all beautifully engineered, and works as advertised. It's like they are two different companies.
It's a Dr, Jekyll - Mr. Hyde relationship. So perhaps the don't deserve some of the flames on the hardware side (and do you ever hear any??). But doctoring the photos "because everybody does it" doesn't make it right.
That being said, if you have read slashdot for any length of time, the kind of journalism here is off the cuff and raw, bias built in. Its not meant for the average CNN crowd.
In fact, your post is as flamy as some of the bias you set out to condemn. Your points would carry more weight if they didn't have the flames.
Re:So what? (Score:2)
Uhm, actually I don't know, what does that mean? flashlight? blowtorch? what turkeys? Just curious!
Re:More common then you think .. (Score:2)
I do not condone or othwerwise make a value judgement on MS's "false" advertisement (we have laws for that) MS's competitors in this field (of which there are plenty and they have money) can choose to take MS to task for false advertisement if they see a procecutable case. Frankly I don't give a damn what happens to the XBox
These days we're drowned in advertisement that I can't see how anyone can take anything in ads as face value. Who is going to ring Colgate and tell them that their teeth models have had a PaintBox whitening ? Or what the f*ck happened to those McD's Burgers
--
More common then you think .. (Score:5)
I am sure most of the slashdot readers would know not to buy the bok based on it's cover (unless it has an animal on it =))
--
Much Ado About Nothing (Score:2)
When you purchase a box of corn flakes, do you care that Kelloggs went through 300 boxes of flakes to find 50 perfect ones for the picture? And do you care that the milk is really Elmer's Glue? No, you don't. And will you really care if Brett Favre has a Type 3 or Type 2 anti-aliased head in Madden 200x? No, you won't.
This is just creative advertising. If Microsoft was trying to seriously dupe the public, then they wouldn't have actual video of Amped on the Xbox website. They haven't done anything out of the ordinary here, folks. Advertisers have been doing this very thing for years.
oh come on. (Score:3)
Also, its a fucking silly thing anyway. Does anyone out there really think that of all the things the X-Box can't do, real-time lens flares are one of them? Heh heh. How silly is this shit?
I really should stop reading Slashdot, as all it ever does is piss me off these days..unfortunately as it slides into uselessness at the speed of VA Linux's stock decline, I can't help but look..kind of like a car wreck.
not the first time (Score:2)
Do you remember the box of Command & Conquer:Tiberian Sun? The effects (especially the fire and the light) on the pictures that were supposed to be in-game pics looked way better than in the actual game.
If you really want to know what a game looks like before you buy it: play it.
Who cares? Artist conception a new thing? (Score:3)
Pleading to /. community. (Score:2)
This modification is as minor as the baby oil on fruit or pushing vegies in soup to the top. No, it's not nearly that intense. Just relax.
I can't believe shit like this gets posted as a front-page story on /.