Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Tell that to (Score 1) 87

Mario Galaxy?

What people really want... is the Mario 64 series... with co-op. (Mario 64, Galaxy, etc.) It's the best Mario series--other than maybe Super Mario World to some--because it has the best level designs and stories.

They tried to half-ass multiplayer with that "every level is isometric and square" one, Super Mario 3D World. But it... it didn't have the charm and fun of the level design. Forcing everyone onto one screen forced the perspective into a less personal one, and much less ambitious and interesting levels.

They added multiplayer to the New Super Mario Bros Wii. Which was good for the multiplayer. But again, the level design felt... boring. I can count the number of "notable" levels on one hand. We felt ourselves playing more levels... just to get them over with, more than enjoying discovering new content.

That's the key thing about 3-D Mario. Exploration. Finding little cute people who tell you stories, and racing penguins down a hill. Fighting a boss that's bullying the town. And the isometric 3-D Mario didn't really have that.

Mario 2-D, I guess, is more about completing a short map, than revisiting it over and over in the 3-D ones. (Except with new power ups to unlock secret areas.) But I'm in serious danger of getting off track here, so I'll stop now.

3-D Mario is still missing real co-op. Not "helper co-op" where the second player is a substantially less useful character (ala Tails in Sonic 3), and usually does not have their own screen.

People want to play games together, and people would love exploring a universe as rich as Mario, together.

You're welcome to disagree. But that's how I feel, and many people similar to me.

Comment Tell that to (Score 1) 87

Tell that to to Sega, and Sonic. They couldn't figure out how to make a fun 3-D version, and Nintendo won.

Mario is doing just fine in both 2-D and 3-D.

You'd have to be an idiot to think that people want the world's most recognized platforming hero (even at the end of the Rio Olympics), to change drastically at the core.

Comment 7%? (Score 1) 188

>while 7% did not even own a turntable.

It's like Humble Bundles and steam sales, turned into real life.

HOWEVER, it should be noted. People buy plenty of stuff for various reasons other than the media itself. Many people never open their "collectors edition" stuff. It's about owning something, not necessarily playing it.

I own Demolition Man on LaserDisk, as well as Sega CD. I love that movie. I've didn't have the Laser Disk player when I bought it. And I still haven't watched it on LaserDisk. It's not about that. It's about having a little memento more than the media itself. And I don't even own a Sega CD. It's just a cool box, for a vintage game system from my childhood, for one of my favorite movies.

Comment Re:Suck it Apple! (Score 2) 100

Yeah, it's pretty clear to anyone watching from the background, that Apple (and other US companies) get preferential treatment from lawmakers and the Justice Department.

US governments treatment of GM vs Toyota, anyone?

Has anyone at GM lost their jobs over kids dying, except that one "engineer" that had to take the fall? Compare to the downright hide-your-kids-eyes treatment of Toyota...

Comment The litmus test (Score 5, Insightful) 121

Does anything on Huff, and WaPo pass?

You know the funniest thing about everyone talking about "fake news"? They make it look like it's only a conservative rag problem. People's memories are so razor short these days, they've already forgotten that The Rolling Stone published literal, fake "news" about a campus rape story, ruined peoples lives, and were sued for 8 (reduced to 3) million dollars.

If people here were half as skeptical as they claim to be, they'd have no respect for conservative AND liberal "journalists." Science demands proof. It doesn't care if the lack-of-data is coming from people you like.

Comment Re: Don't give him ideas (Score 1) 555

Looks like your emotions were stronger than your will to find elegant solutions to your problem.

I've spent over five years nearly bedridden throughout my 20's, with a chronic disorder. You don't see me flaunting it as if it's some magical way to win an argument.

I mean, what are you really complaining about here? Has everyone missed that? You had to be on call for ten years, so A COUPLE AMBER ALERT TEXT MESSAGES are the horrible injustice in that equation? Where's the perspective?

Your parents had to be "on call" at a time when there was no caller ID or message filtering at all. The phone rang, and you picked it up. It could be a wrong number, it could be a sales pitch, it could be your father dying, an invitation to dinner, or your child is dead.

I can't even find an expression that fits how silly and pointless your complaint is. Your typical smug use of the word "privilege" fits perfectly with your lack of perspective.

Comment Re:Small Sample Size (Score 1) 228

I love how the one intelligent, skeptical comment on a site full of "skeptics" is always half-way down. You'd think "skeptics" would be more skeptical of everything. Turns out, they're just skeptical of things threatening to their ego. But their egos are just as threatened as everyone else's apparently. In other words, they're just as religious as religious people, they're just meaner and smarter at being mean.

"Ha ha! Look at these stupid religiouses!"

"The study was poor science."

"The study is still correct because my FEELINGS are more valid than SCIENCE! Therefor my ego is no longer threatened and I may continue about my life without experiencing mental pain. Mental gymnastics for the win!"

Comment Sign me up! (Score 1) 351

I, too, believe in feel good measures that have nothing to do with actually improving our world.

There are so many chemistry professors who are pissed at the fool's gold of ethanol. Way back in college, they made us do the well-to-wheel calculations down to the chemical bonds, to prove how shitty it was.

No one seems to mind the fact that ethonal is corn, and corn takes up land that could be used for other crops, which means that ethanol is the freaking reason it costs twice as much to buy a freakin' box of frozen mac-n-cheese that it did in 2005. But screw the lower class, who cares if they can afford to eat, am I right? That's so progressive.

Comment Re:To big to fail? (Score 2, Insightful) 302

I love how people who tout solar and wind as "clean" are actually a form of NIMBY because they don't mind all of the strip-mining at slave wages for all of the rare earth minerals that have to me mined and transported to build them. Let alone all of the pollution created during that process.

Anyone with the simplest understanding of nuclear vs chemical bonds should understand that there is no comparison. We might as well be still running 8086--except nuke is even larger comparison. 1st-world countries should be capable of running nuclear power without serious problems if their governments actually demanded quality. Leave 3rd-world "chemical" power to 3rd-world countries that can't be trusted with nuclear weapons. (That is, if you already have nuclear bombs, there's ZERO rational argument against nuclear power. I'm not suggesting proliferation of more weaponry.)

And Japan? Japan put a ton of reactors on a freaking crowded island, and then didn't bother to inspect them properly. (Any moron with a badge could have noticed their backup generators weren't on the required stilts above the waterline--which failed when flooded.) The story of Fukushima is a failure of government to regulate greedy corporations, not an inherent failure of technology.

I'll never understand why slashdotters claim to love technology and "science" but eschew one of the greatest advances in the history of mankind. Nuclear power is the future. End of story. You can drag your feet all you want, but that doesn't make you progressive. The future will still win out one day--it's only a matter of when.

Comment I know no one will ever believe me (Score 3, Interesting) 172

But I have consistently been able to identify (without prior knowledge) sucralose, an artificial sweetener, in my food.

I can do that because I get sick immediately after.

I get a horrible after-taste coming up from my stomach, and one time I ate a whole can of peaches before realizing it (canned PEACHES have artificial sweetener now?!), I ended up dizzy and I could feel heart was beating out of my chest and a pain all around it.

I've thought about doing a live double blind study, on video, and posting it to Youtube to prove I'm not full of crap. But it's also strange that I'd have to go to such extravagant lengths to "prove" I'm not lying. Are we supposed to assume every chemical produced by a "food" company is good for us now? When did Big Pharma become the good guys?

Slashdot Top Deals

Heuristics are bug ridden by definition. If they didn't have bugs, then they'd be algorithms.