I'm really hoping to prove string theory, but I need the encouragement to foster my new achievement.

Don't really feel like traveling to Norway, much too busy. Please have them mail my award to Old Pink, care of the funny farm.

Of course Flickr has the right. But, just like everything else in the media, what's okay to do to conservatives is not okay to do to liberals.

Consider this image from flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/24917549@N04/2709323478/

I would think this should be taken down. Also comments like "Bushtard is an utterly worthless waste of oxygen, DNA, and a desk. " should be removed with the offending poster's photstream deleted.

Doesn't that make sense? It's okay to do the whole "Bush is a murderer, idiot, liar and fascist", but it's not okay to say "This joker Obama is a socialist". Wake the fuck up people, which of these is more fascist thought?

Websites are just as biased in their reviews as magazines. True, in the case of OXM, Bungie could compress feces into a DVD form, slap a Halo logo on it, and OXM would rate it a 10/10, but they've been doing that for years. It's the previews that really bug me, as they make crap games sound good (Hour of Victory anyone?). However, you just take the previews with a huge grain of salt and continue on. My biggest gripe with them is that the magazine seems to get thinner and thinner each year.

Let's face it, it's not like these magazines are the Economist. They're decent bathroom material. Judging them on journalism acumen is hardly worthwhile.

I've been getting Xbox World 360 from the UK for a couple of months now, and have been happy with that mag (despite the $10 price in the States). The previews aren't afraid to pull punches and the reviews seem to be fair.

I echo your "Seriously?" sentimonies. I am constantly giving my girlfriend shit for infringing copyrights, but this is insane. I read it to be "Just because you buy something from us doesn't give you the right to listen to it x time from now". Bullshit indeed!

While I have been sympathetic to their generic argument "You want to listen to this song, then you should buy it", I am starting to think they've taken a few hundred miles with the inch I gave them.

Perchance this is how pirates are born?

Good point, however, I would like to think the type of gamer who would care enough to put up an investment in a game would be a little more advanced than the "ur a fag" or "sony is teh suxxorz" variety.

I saw this news yesterday, and said to myself, "hell yeah, I'd give $100 to get a new Rainbow Six game that brought the tactical aspects back. I'd want the plotting of waypoints, and setting up a strategy, not knowing where the randomly spawned enemies would be located". Would this idea sell? Would I be overruled by 40,000 'nade spammers who just want to run n' gun? What about some "Colbert stunt" to get people to vote him in as one of the game's main characters?

I would envision a regular touchpoint, where the devs open up the game for feedback sessions. Certain aspects could be voted on by the financing community, but in the end, if 25,000 gamers got together and put up $100 each, they'd only be financing $2.5 million, hardly enough to have veto power or any sort of real input into the game.

In short, I feel like I'd be stuck with a run n' gun, 'nade spamming generic shooter, with Colbert as the villain, rather than the tactical strategy squad based shooter I so desperately wanted.

A good test of this may be in the DLC market. It's cheaper overall, already has an established fan base, and a quicker time to delivery.

Finally, my requisite slashdot conspiracy theory. Let's say you do invest in a game. The game is released, and people are playing it and buying it. It sells a million copies. People start griping because they've not seen any ROI (there would most likely have to be a profit sharing model in place). Publisher comes out and says, "yes, game X sold very well, but it wasn't enough to cover costs and credit obligations - because of PIRACY!!!". With that, perhaps a community led anti-piracy movement is created.

I've found the recession to actually cause me to buy more games. Here's the kicker - I rarely buy them at $59.99 at release (maybe 1 per month, down from 4-6 across PC, 360, Wii, PS3, PSP, DS). So, I'm spending less on games, but playing more.

Considering the typical game release lifecycle:

1. Hype game months before release
2. Fanboys proclaim it the next big thing
3. Release game
4. Lukewarm community reception
5. Fanboy revolt/denial - "the game is great, you have to know how to play it"
6. Play for 5-10 days
7. Game is all but abandoned on-line.
8. GOTO 2

What I'm doing is hitting up games on the cheap. Say I'm mildly interested in a game, but it's not a ZOMG GOTTA HAVE NOW!!!, I've just learned a bit of patience and will get it on a price drop. It's amazing how a middle of the road game can be a bad experience at $60, but a decent play at $20(FEAR 2 for example).

Thanks for the link. I can see why it isn't an XBLA/PSN/Steam download, they really know how to tack on the fees. $25 for a season, $10 for a ballpark, $10 for a schedule - that would never fly on those distribution channels.

Still, an all in cost of $150 for a few historically great seasons, a couple ballparks and the game itself isn't a bad deal if you're into this kind of thing.

I played APBA back in the 80's, as a kid (now 35). It was a very fun game, and I've spent the past couple of years searching for an electronic version or replacement. I even stooped so low as to buy MLB Front Office Manager, which did nothing to fill that void.

OOTP has promise, as does Baseball Mogul, but neither really hit the sweet spot. Back in the late 90's there was Ernie Harwell's Baseball Blast, which was an APBA game, and was pretty good. Sadly, nothing new since.

The opportunity is there, and there chance for microtransactions and DLC is great. I'm surprised there has been nothing. Perhaps the 2k Sports exclusivity is getting in the way? Perhaps the powers that be don't see a market.

Why don't I just go tabletop? Well, I don't have anyone to play against. While my comic book store has a great big tabletop section where cats can sit and play all day long, there are sadly no APBA leagues, nor interest (an exploratory flyer didn't get a single response).

In my experience, having been on 3 sides of this - client, vendor and 3rd party system integrator - many times, they're struck with the same problems they had before because the business refuses to update their processes. Case in point, a few years ago, was working on a nifty java solution for a major bank. Their existing process was mainframe. They had no interest in process re-engineering, nor did they have any interest in using out of the box industry standard functionality. Ego and laziness drives many business decisions. Be it "we've got 30 years of knowledge in this mainframe system, we won't change processes" to "we can't assign a full time SME to this effort", in the end, business has a huge part in why projects fail.

As for SAP, big whoop. A salesman sold a blue sky picture with vaporware and a presentation. That's sort of the norm. Shame on WM for falling for it. I would be a dollar to donuts that an "enterprise architect" was asleep at the wheel, dreaming up grandiose ivory tower patterns that could never be implemented in the real world on a timely, cost effective basis, and thought the SAP proposal was lock step with his vision.

Being on the implementation side, I'm always at odds with our sales staff. Luckily, I'm now high enough up on the food chain that I've been able to implement a golden rule, which has worked: "All presales demos, proof of concepts and prototypes must be demonstrative of out of the box functionality, not include customization unless it is achieved through out of the box customization options". Customers seem to love it, because I can walk in with sales, talk tech and then show their tech people that it's not smoke and mirrors. Others can't/won't/don't.