Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Announces Halo 4, TV For Xbox Live, Kinect Star Wars

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the better-than-last-year dept.

E3 157

Today Microsoft held their E3 press conference, announcing a number of major new games and services for the Xbox 360 platform. Halo 4 was briefly revealed, and is currently planned for a holiday 2012 launch. In addition, the original Halo is getting an HD remake. Smash indie hit Minecraft will be coming to the 360 this winter, with support for Kinect. In fact, there is a huge push from many game-makers to bring Kinect integration to the next level — from a new Fable game where you can use your hands to cast spells, to EA Sports titles, to Kinect Star Wars. Topping it off is an update to Xbox Live which will bring live TV to the console (including DVR functions), controllable by voice through Kinect. YouTube and voice search through Bing are coming as well. The update is planned for this fall. Those interested can catch a video of the press conference, which includes all the relevant game trailers, at G4TV.

cancel ×

157 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frist Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36354502)

Frosty Piss Y'all!

Re:Frist Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36354594)

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
                                              Version 3, 29 June 2007

  Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <http://fsf.org/>
  Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
  of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

                                                        Preamble

    The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for
software and other kinds of works.

    The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed
to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast,
the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to
share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free
software for all its users. We, the Free Software Foundation, use the
GNU General Public License for most of our software; it applies also to
any other work released this way by its authors. You can apply it to
your programs, too.

    When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you
want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new
free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

    To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you
these rights or asking you to surrender the rights. Therefore, you have
certain responsibilities if you distribute copies of the software, or if
you modify it: responsibilities to respect the freedom of others.

    For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same
freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive
or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they
know their rights.

    Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps:
(1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License
giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.

    For the developers' and authors' protection, the GPL clearly explains
that there is no warranty for this free software. For both users' and
authors' sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as
changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to
authors of previous versions.

    Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run
modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer
can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of
protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic
pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to
use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we
have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those
products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we
stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions
of the GPL, as needed to protect the freedom of users.

    Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents.
States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of
software on general-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish to
avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program could
make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL assures that
patents cannot be used to render the program non-free.

    The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.

                                              TERMS AND CONDITIONS

    0. Definitions.

    "This License" refers to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.

    "Copyright" also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds of
works, such as semiconductor masks.

    "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
License. Each licensee is addressed as "you". "Licensees" and
"recipients" may be individuals or organizations.

    To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the
earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.

    A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based
on the Program.

    To "propagate" a work means to do anything with it that, without
permission, would make you directly or secondarily liable for
infringement under applicable copyright law, except executing it on a
computer or modifying a private copy. Propagation includes copying,
distribution (with or without modification), making available to the
public, and in some countries other activities as well.

    To "convey" a work means any kind of propagation that enables other
parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user through
a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying.

    An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices"
to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently visible
feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice, and (2)
tells the user that there is no warranty for the work (except to the
extent that warranties are provided), that licensees may convey the
work under this License, and how to view a copy of this License. If
the interface presents a list of user commands or options, such as a
menu, a prominent item in the list meets this criterion.

    1. Source Code.

    The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work
for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source
form of a work.

    A "Standard Interface" means an interface that either is an official
standard defined by a recognized standards body, or, in the case of
interfaces specified for a particular programming language, one that
is widely used among developers working in that language.

    The "System Libraries" of an executable work include anything, other
than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of
packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major
Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that
Major Component, or to implement a Standard Interface for which an
implementation is available to the public in source code form. A
"Major Component", in this context, means a major essential component
(kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
(if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to
produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.

    The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all
the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable
work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to
control those activities. However, it does not include the work's
System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free
programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but
which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source
includes interface definition files associated with source files for
the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically
linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require,
such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those
subprograms and other parts of the work.

    The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users
can regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding
Source.

    The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that
same work.

    2. Basic Permissions.

    All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of
copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated
conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited
permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a
covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its
content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your
rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.

    You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not
convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains
in force. You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose
of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you
with facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with
the terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do
not control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works
for you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction
and control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of
your copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.

    Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under
the conditions stated below. Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10
makes it unnecessary.

    3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.

    No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological
measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article
11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or
similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such
measures.

    When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid
circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention
is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to
the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or
modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's
users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of
technological measures.

    4. Conveying Verbatim Copies.

    You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you
receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice;
keep intact all notices stating that this License and any
non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code;
keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all
recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.

    You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey,
and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.

    5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.

    You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

        a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified
        it, and giving a relevant date.

        b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is
        released under this License and any conditions added under section
        7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to
        "keep intact all notices".

        c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this
        License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This
        License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7
        additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts,
        regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no
        permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not
        invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.

        d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display
        Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive
        interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your
        work need not make them do so.

    A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent
works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work,
and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program,
in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an
"aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not
used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users
beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work
in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other
parts of the aggregate.

    6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.

    You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms
of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the
machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License,
in one of these ways:

        a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
        Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium
        customarily used for software interchange.

        b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a
        written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as
        long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product
        model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a
        copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the
        product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical
        medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no
        more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this
        conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the
        Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.

        c) Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the
        written offer to provide the Corresponding Source. This
        alternative is allowed only occasionally and noncommercially, and
        only if you received the object code with such an offer, in accord
        with subsection 6b.

        d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated
        place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the
        Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no
        further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the
        Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to
        copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source
        may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party)
        that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain
        clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the
        Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the
        Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
        available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

        e) Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided
        you inform other peers where the object code and Corresponding
        Source of the work are being offered to the general public at no
        charge under subsection 6d.

    A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded
from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be
included in conveying the object code work.

    A "User Product" is either (1) a "consumer product", which means any
tangible personal property which is normally used for personal, family,
or household purposes, or (2) anything designed or sold for incorporation
into a dwelling. In determining whether a product is a consumer product,
doubtful cases shall be resolved in favor of coverage. For a particular
product received by a particular user, "normally used" refers to a
typical or common use of that class of product, regardless of the status
of the particular user or of the way in which the particular user
actually uses, or expects or is expected to use, the product. A product
is a consumer product regardless of whether the product has substantial
commercial, industrial or non-consumer uses, unless such uses represent
the only significant mode of use of the product.

    "Installation Information" for a User Product means any methods,
procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install
and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from
a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must
suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object
code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because
modification has been made.

    If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or
specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as
part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the
User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a
fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the
Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied
by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply
if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install
modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has
been installed in ROM).

    The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a
requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates
for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient, or for
the User Product in which it has been modified or installed. Access to a
network may be denied when the modification itself materially and
adversely affects the operation of the network or violates the rules and
protocols for communication across the network.

    Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided,
in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly
documented (and with an implementation available to the public in
source code form), and must require no special password or key for
unpacking, reading or copying.

    7. Additional Terms.

    "Additional permissions" are terms that supplement the terms of this
License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions.
Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall
be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent
that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions
apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately
under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by
this License without regard to the additional permissions.

    When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of
it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own
removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place
additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work,
for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of
that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:

        a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the
        terms of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or

        b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or
        author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal
        Notices displayed by works containing it; or

        c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
        requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in
        reasonable ways as different from the original version; or

        d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
        authors of the material; or

        e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some
        trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or

        f) Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that
        material by anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of
        it) with contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for
        any liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on
        those licensors and authors.

    All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further
restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you
received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is
governed by this License along with a term that is a further
restriction, you may remove that term. If a license document contains
a further restriction but permits relicensing or conveying under this
License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms
of that license document, provided that the further restriction does
not survive such relicensing or conveying.

    If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you
must place, in the relevant source files, a statement of the
additional terms that apply to those files, or a notice indicating
where to find the applicable terms.

    Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the
form of a separately written license, or stated as exceptions;
the above requirements apply either way.

    8. Termination.

    You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or
modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third
paragraph of section 11).

    However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your
license from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a)
provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and
finally terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright
holder fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means
prior to 60 days after the cessation.

    Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the
violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have
received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that
copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after
your receipt of the notice.

    Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under
this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently
reinstated, you do not qualify to receive new licenses for the same
material under section 10.

    9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.

    You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However,
nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or
modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do
not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a
covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.

    10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.

    Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and
propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible
for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

    An "entity transaction" is a transaction transferring control of an
organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an
organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered
work results from an entity transaction, each party to that
transaction who receives a copy of the work also receives whatever
licenses to the work the party's predecessor in interest had or could
give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the
Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if
the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.

    You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may
not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of
rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that
any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for
sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.

    11. Patents.

    A "contributor" is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this
License of the Program or a work on which the Program is based. The
work thus licensed is called the contributor's "contributor version".

    A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims
owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or
hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted
by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version,
but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a
consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For
purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant
patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of
this License.

    Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free
patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to
make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and
propagate the contents of its contributor version.

    In the following three paragraphs, a "patent license" is any express
agreement or commitment, however denominated, not to enforce a patent
(such as an express permission to practice a patent or covenant not to
sue for patent infringement). To "grant" such a patent license to a
party means to make such an agreement or commitment not to enforce a
patent against the party.

    If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license,
and the Corresponding Source of the work is not available for anyone
to copy, free of charge and under the terms of this License, through a
publicly available network server or other readily accessible means,
then you must either (1) cause the Corresponding Source to be so
available, or (2) arrange to deprive yourself of the benefit of the
patent license for this particular work, or (3) arrange, in a manner
consistent with the requirements of this License, to extend the patent
license to downstream recipients. "Knowingly relying" means you have
actual knowledge that, but for the patent license, your conveying the
covered work in a country, or your recipient's use of the covered work
in a country, would infringe one or more identifiable patents in that
country that you have reason to believe are valid.

    If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or
arrangement, you convey, or propagate by procuring conveyance of, a
covered work, and grant a patent license to some of the parties
receiving the covered work authorizing them to use, propagate, modify
or convey a specific copy of the covered work, then the patent license
you grant is automatically extended to all recipients of the covered
work and works based on it.

    A patent license is "discriminatory" if it does not include within
the scope of its coverage, prohibits the exercise of, or is
conditioned on the non-exercise of one or more of the rights that are
specifically granted under this License. You may not convey a covered
work if you are a party to an arrangement with a third party that is
in the business of distributing software, under which you make payment
to the third party based on the extent of your activity of conveying
the work, and under which the third party grants, to any of the
parties who would receive the covered work from you, a discriminatory
patent license (a) in connection with copies of the covered work
conveyed by you (or copies made from those copies), or (b) primarily
for and in connection with specific products or compilations that
contain the covered work, unless you entered into that arrangement,
or that patent license was granted, prior to 28 March 2007.

    Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting
any implied license or other defenses to infringement that may
otherwise be available to you under applicable patent law.

    12. No Surrender of Others' Freedom.

    If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot convey a
covered work so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may
not convey it at all. For example, if you agree to terms that obligate you
to collect a royalty for further conveying from those to whom you convey
the Program, the only way you could satisfy both those terms and this
License would be to refrain entirely from conveying the Program.

    13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed
under version 3 of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single
combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this
License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work,
but the special requirements of the GNU Affero General Public License,
section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the
combination as such.

    14. Revised Versions of this License.

    The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of
the GNU General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.

    Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General
Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the
option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered
version or of any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the
GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published
by the Free Software Foundation.

    If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future
versions of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy's
public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you
to choose that version for the Program.

    Later license versions may give you additional or different
permissions. However, no additional obligations are imposed on any
author or copyright holder as a result of your choosing to follow a
later version.

    15. Disclaimer of Warranty.

    THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY
OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM
IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF
ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

    16. Limitation of Liability.

    IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS
THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY
GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE
USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF
DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD
PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS),
EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES.

    17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.

    If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided
above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms,
reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates
an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the
Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a
copy of the Program in return for a fee.

                                          END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS

                        How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs

    If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.

    To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.

        <one line to give the program's name and a brief idea of what it does.>
        Copyright (C) <year> <name of author>

        This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
        it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
        the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
        (at your option) any later version.

        This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
        but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
        MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
        GNU General Public License for more details.

        You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
        along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.

    If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short
notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode:

        <program> Copyright (C) <year> <name of author>
        This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
        This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
        under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.

The hypothetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show the appropriate
parts of the General Public License. Of course, your program's commands
might be different; for a GUI interface, you would use an "about box".

    You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary.
For more information on this, and how to apply and follow the GNU GPL, see
<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

    The GNU General Public License does not permit incorporating your program
into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you
may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with
the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Lesser General
Public License instead of this License. But first, please read
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html>.

Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (3, Insightful)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354504)

Seems like Activision and Microsoft are going toe to toe in the grand "Squeeze the most money out of an IP" competition. Oh great...

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (5, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354556)

SquareEnix has a HUGE head start on either of them.

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354774)

Perhaps, though I really don't follow the FF series, aren't they all different characters, in different worlds? So essentially different games by the same person with FF slapped on? On that thought though, I guess it still counts as franchise whoring. So yeah, your point is taken.

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355222)

I don't even know that much, but each one with a name that includes "final" I would expect each one to be the last. I have been constantly annoyed with every sequel.

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355770)

To be fair, when they released the first game the company was circling the drain. They used every last penny they had to publish the game and were more surprised than anyone that it was the hit that it was. That's where the "Final Fantasy" moniker comes from.

And since you are self admittedly unaware of the games, it's worth pointing out that there are very few sequels in the family. In fact, until FF X2 there were none that even took place in the same universe as any of the other entries. Since then, there have been a number that overlap universes, but generally separated by hundreds or thousands of years in universe time; enough so that the events of one game have virtually no impact on the other. There have also been a few more direct sequels (the aforementioned FF X2, Tactics Advance 2, a couple of crappy FFVII cashcows), but even those generally have different mechanics and game play.

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (2)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355432)

Sort of. All the numbered games are individual - VI has no characters in common with I, IV or IX. They have made a few sequels - X-2 is a sequel to X, FFIV: The After Years is a sequel to IV, VII has both a prequel and sequel game (Crisis Core and Dirge of Cerberus, respectively), etc. And, if you want to get technical, VII, X and X-2 are technically in the same universe, but that's a rather obscure fact, and there's no shared characters between VII and X.

Normally, there are certain constants in the series. There is almost always a character named Cid, but they share nothing besides the name. The gameplay is relatively similar in most of them - I and XII are closer in gameplay than, say, Quake and Quake III. There are certain common elements (airships), certain musical themes carried throughout the series (da da-da da, da da daa da-daaa), and character archetypes are usually the same (ie. there's Chick with a Staff, Big Scary Guy Who Is Often Black, Creepy Goth Guy, etc.). And shout-outs are common, especially in remakes (see: Gilgamesh). However, none of the main games is dependent on any of the others - it's like how George Lucas has shout-outs to THX1138 in most of his films. The fans like it, the developers like it, everyone else doesn't even notice it.

Normally, it would just be seen as sort of a label for the creators - you would see "FFVIII" and think "Oh, it's from the guys who made FFI through VII, and I (liked those/didn't like those) and will make my purchase decision based on that". In fact, most of the series was made by a few people - Nobuo Uematsu composed the entire soundtrack for the first nine games, and worked on several others; Yoshitaka Amano designed the characters for the first six; Hironobu Sakaguchi designed the gameplay for the first eleven. So, for a while, it was sort of like a band's name - you would know "Final Fantasy = these people", and know that meant it was probably a good game.

Unfortunately, that's no longer the case. Most, if not all, of the people who made the classic Final Fantasies (IV-IX, by my count) have left. Amano only designs the title logo now; Uematsu left but is sometimes brought back in as a contractor; Sakaguchi left and made his own game company. Most players agree that the past few games have been markedly different, although whether they're still good or not is up for debate.

Compounding the problem is that Square is sort of franchise-whoring the series. Spin-offs are far more common - Final Fantasy VII alone has a prequel game (Crisis Core, generally liked), a sequel game (Dirge of Cerberus, generally disliked), a prequel anime OVA (Before Crisis), a sequel full-length movie (Advent Children), and has had guest appearances in far, far too many games (I know of many, many people who only played Kingdom Hearts to see Sephiroth and Cloud one more time). You could legitimately call that single "game" a series in it's own right.

And then there's Dissidia. Think "Square Enix's version of Super Smash Bros.". A game that, judged on its own merits, sucks. If you were completely ignorant of who the characters were, you would hate the game. It's a gameplay mess, the story is convoluted and pointless, and it's repetitive and boring. However, it was well-received because it had the main hero and villain of every major Final Fantasy game. And yeah, it's cool to see Kefka and Sephiroth duke it out. That would be like seeing Darth Vader and Darth Maul fight - instant nerd awesomeness. But it taught Square that they could sell a game purely on the Final Fantasy name. (I'm aware of the earlier Mystic Quest/Legends games, but those had the distinction of actually being worth playing on their own merits).

So, to answer your question, no, Square Enix doesn't actually have a lead on Activision re: franchise whoring. But they're catching up fast.

Re:Actisoft...Microvision...whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355640)

Maybe they are like volumes... Like in Kill Bill... Wait, no... Even Kill Bill was continuous...

Halo 4? (1, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354518)

I swore I read somewhere that Halo 3 was the last one, and that's why they went the prequel route after that.

Maybe I'm misremembering.

Has Johnny Depp signed on for 40 million yet (I may be cross-remembering my "our series is done at 3" press releases here)?

Re:Halo 4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36354650)

If I recall correctly, Bungie said it was the last one THEY would make..and thus when they went back to the trough they did a couple prequels like ODST which was a bit different and Reach which was a real prequel. This is being done separately by an internal Microsoft group. I always knew there was NO way they would allow their single largest IP to just be over.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

capnchicken (664317) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354670)

Bungie was done at 3 like it said in the summary.

Also, the Story Arc that Started in Halo:CE ended at 3. I'm guessing that this will be a new story arc.

Re:Halo 4? (2)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354824)

The real question is who's left for the enemy - the Covenant became allies in Halo 3, and the Flood are dead. Hopefully they'll do something reasonably creative.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

Mike Mentalist (544984) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355008)

The relationship between humans and the various races of the Covenant is far from settled. The Arbiter doesn't speak for all the Elites, let alone the Brutes, Jackals, etc.

As someone who very, very much enjoyed the Halo games and reads the books I am looking forward to the new games.

And don't underestimate the Flood either...

Re:Halo 4? (1)

tophermeyer (1573841) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355052)

The relationship between humans and the various races of the Covenant is far from settled. The Arbiter doesn't speak for all the Elites, let alone the Brutes, Jackals, etc.

And don't underestimate the Flood either..

Plus the Human government was dealing with colonial rebellions and pirate organizations at the beginning of the story. Plenty of potential bad guys there.

Re:Halo 4? (2)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355318)

Plus the Human government was dealing with colonial rebellions and pirate organizations at the beginning of the story. Plenty of potential bad guys there.

True, but Bungie first caught my eye for their stories of a lone player character pitted against/with intelligences far greater than their own. The villain decay started with Halo 2 and was apace in the third instalment; I think if they continue the franchise with human or covenant remnants than the grandeur will be lost. On the other hand, if they introduce another ostensibly invincible enemy we'll be faced with what happened to Stargate*. If that enemy happens to be the Forerunner we'd be left with an issue akin to comic book retconning: "actually, they weren't all killed off", despite that being the whole point of the race as far as the plot is concerned. For me, Halo was done after 3, where the arcs were tied up (for better or worse).

*OMG The Goa'uld can't be beaten, we're fucked! Oh, wait we beat them... OMG Replicators!... OMG Ori!... etc. For the record I do love SG1, but because of MacGuyver and the self-contained episodes like Zero Hour, rather than any long-running plot.

Re:Halo 4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36356114)

Indeed. There is also the issue of the empire’s ambiguous tariff statutes that will mandate close reexamination of galactic import quotas. Interim Princess Agoomba has co-chaired a subcommittee to draft amendments to existing trade policies. Meanwhile, regulatory agencies are being heavily lobbied by a consortium of mercantile interest groups and their suppliers to streamline loading restrictions for Class C cargo vessels.

All of this will have to be dealt with in the trilogy. It's going to be a riveting series...

Re:Halo 4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355094)

From the preview video I'd put money on it being the forerunners. Since it continues to follow the chief and he's stuck in slipspace, it'd make sense to run into super advanced stuff that ties into the existing plot.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

The Moof (859402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354948)

Bungie was done at 3 like it said in the summary.

Sure.. if you ignore ODST and Reach.

Re:Halo 4? (5, Insightful)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354684)

It's no longer developed by Bungie (although many employees moved to the new in-house developer, 343 Industries). And this surely isn't over yet, one thing the summary neglected to mention is that Microsoft announced a new trilogy. Expect Halo 5 and 6 as well.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36354712)

You are correct. Bungie aren't doing it, 343 studios are.

Anyone watch the huge lag with kinect demos? It was around 0.5s!

Re:Halo 4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36354852)

Bungie said that Halo 3 would end the story arc that Halo 1 began. So Halo 4 probably won't have you fighting Covenant and Flood, or exploring more Halo ringworlds if that's right. I definitely expect more ancient Forerunner structures and plans though.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354900)

Same thing was said about Diablo II. But then it was discovered that they like money.

Re:Halo 4? (1)

Dutchmaan (442553) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355122)

Nevermind the fact that the gaming community was practically begging for D3. As opposed to the Halo gaming community which is scratching their heads wondering why another one is even necessary. When it comes to Bliz and MS they're both doing it for the money but Bliz also seems to just do what it wants as opposed to being galley slaves saying "yes sir.... we'd be happy do another Halo" /pointsguntohead

Re:Halo 4? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355534)

I swore I read somewhere that Halo 3 was the last one, and that's why they went the prequel route after that.

Halo 3 ended the Master Chief saga. That's it, the end, case closed. That's what Bungie has always said - it's the end of the 'Chief.

FTA:

Halo 4 is "the dawn of a new trilogy for Xbox 360," Microsoft's Don Mattrick said of the new title

It's a new story arc. No more Master Chief, other than odd cameo you'll find.

Halo Reach wasn't really a prequel either, it doesn't goes into the whole backstory of the 'Chief, but portrays a different part of the early years of the Human-Covenant war.

And there have been 3 non-'Chief games so far - Halo 3 ODST, Halo Wars, and Halo Reach, each delving inside a different part of the Halo Universe.

The only thing I can guess would be a post-'Chief world, or maybe the Human-Covenant-Flood war after Halo 3 (remember, the Humans and the Convenant are still at war - though the Elites (one race amongst the Convenant) have shifted sides with the Humans).

Re:Halo 4? (1)

The Moof (859402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355790)

Actually, this is the continuation of the Master Chief saga, as was shown by the trailer. It's where the story continues after the teaser at the end of 3 on Legendary (343 even mentioned this in their follow up interview).

Not bad. (2)

lwap0 (866326) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354678)

Steve Jobs took a dig at XBOX Live today during the WWDC. "In just 9 months we have 50 million Game Center users. To put that into perspective Xbox Live has been around for about eight years and they have around 30 million users." It's not the same. A one time purchase of Angry birds doesn't compare to a subscribing, active user of XBOX live. For all of Microsoft's missteps and gaffs (and there have been plenty), XBOX live seems to be the one thing they got right. It's a great UI, and it has some great content from outside providers (Netflix, ESPN). Make my XBOX a DVR and stream quality TV through it, and I don't need much else for my entertainment needs. If we could just upgrade the blasted XBOX360 hardware, and get better QA, I'd be good to go.

Re:Not bad. (1)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354764)

Can Steve Ballmer take credit for over night creating however many million Games for Windows users over night? Steve Jobs, you are a jackass.

Re:Not bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355068)

Angry much?

Re:Not bad. (0)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355232)

NO! Neither am I redundant either!

Re:Not bad. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354908)

Do you still have to tithe to MS to be able to use netflix?

Re:Not bad. (1)

lwap0 (866326) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355054)

Yeah. It's a subscription fee to be able to use Netflix. That's a bummer, but it is what it is. And honestly, in bits and pieces, it could still pan out for a nice al la carte service. Xbx, Netflix, and throw in TV service w/DVR, and heck, that's probably way cheaper than Verizon/Comcast. But maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

Re:Not bad. (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355116)

Roku or PS3 is then a better way to go if you are optimizing for money. The yearly subscription would cover the cost of a Roku. I will not pay to watch something I already pay to watch.

Why they feel the need to charge for something that costs them nothing to provide I do not understand. Heck, Wii and PS3 and even my phone can do netflix and none of those charge me a monthly fee to enable it.

Re:Not bad. (1)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355086)

No. It works with your regular subscription. IIRC, it has the same selection as the Netflix streaming service, which is to say, not much, which is why I cancelled it.

Re:Not bad. (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355166)

I have netflix streaming and it has a pretty good selection. Easily better than amazon prime and hulu combined. My understanding was to use your netflix subscription you had to pay for Xbox live Gold. Which to me is a total ripoff. I guess if you already have live for some other reason it makes sense, but I am not going to pay money to listen to 12 year olds call each other bad words.

Re:Not bad. (1)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355442)

That may be. I already have gold, so I was unawares of that requirement. There are games that kids don't play, plus you can play online with your friends and hear none of the kids at all. But if you're looking for a device that just streams Netflix to your TV, you may be better off just building an HTPC as I find the 360 to be on the loud side. There are plenty of totally silent options for making something that can stream 1080p video.

Re:Not bad. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355708)

So you need a Gold subscription just to play online?
Are there free games or something?

This really seems like MS is double dipping. I have played PC games since the late 80s and since the time multiplayer was available have never paid to play with friends.

Re:Not bad. (2)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355810)

I've long said that Xbox Live! is the world's most expensive P2P network, but for console gaming it's the very best option. What Sony and Nintendo offer is a total joke.

Re:Not bad. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356224)

In what way it is better?
How does it compare to other free services like steam?

Re:Not bad. (0)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356400)

With Steam I have to use a keyboard and sit at a desk. With a console I can sit on my couch. This may sound minor, but I prefer it. I've also long been out of gaming on computers as I get tired of how much the games tend to crap up Windows or require regular hardware upgrades.

Re:Not bad. (1)

tebixan (2118724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355412)

Actually, you do need Xbox Live Gold to get Netflix over the Xbox.

IIRC, it has the same selection as the Netflix streaming service, which is to say, not much

When did you quit? With all of the TV shows that have been added recently I feel like the streaming service has tons of content.

Re:Not bad. (1)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355606)

It was only a few months ago. Yes, they 'added' a lot of shows, but they neutered them. There would be several episodes missing from the beginning, or some such. And still nearly everything I searched for was unavailable for the streaming service, even old stuff. Since I pay quite a bit for DirecTV, I'm not willing to take on too many additional content delivery services, although I'm likely to be cancelling DirecTV soon. The content has really gone downhill the past few years, and pretty much all the shows or stations I watched regularly have been cancelled. I have nearly all the packages except the sports packages, and it blows my mind that I can't find anything to watch.

Re:Not bad. (1)

ottothecow (600101) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355850)

My experience so far with netflix streaming works more like this:

If you have something in particular to search for, you search it and add it to your queue. You might get lucky and find it to be available to stream, but the value of the disk-version of netflix is that you can search for something and get it sent to your house (and they have pretty much everything).

If you want to watch something but don't know what (or maybe just know what you are in the mood for), you start browsing the streaming options. There is a TON of content on there...sure you might not be able to find the exact thing you want, but there should be something there that interests you (certainly more than would be starting on the next 30 minutes on any normal cable TV subscription).

Re:Not bad. (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354998)

I have to admit that MS has stayed with it in the console war. They just keep plugging away and away at it. All the blood and sweat, all the mistakes and finally it's starting to look like they will overcome Sony. Sony had it all but they've just sat on their asses.

Live TV? (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355090)

Can anyone tell me what the summary means when it says MS is bringing "live TV" to the Xbox?

Does that mean Sid Caesar is coming back?

Re:Not bad. (1)

camperslo (704715) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355098)

At about 180 Watts power consumption, streaming tv with an Xbox 360 is not environmentally responsible. In comparison the Apple TV uses about 3 Watts (and at 10 Watts an iPad even has a display).

Power consumed becomes heat which is one reason the 360 has so many heat-related hardware failures.
Using a desktop PC as an alarm clock works too, but it is too wasteful to consider...

Re:Not bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355890)

At about 180 Watts power consumption, streaming tv with an Xbox 360 is not environmentally responsible. In comparison the Apple TV uses about 3 Watts (and at 10 Watts an iPad even has a display).

Very few people care. If you are one that does, don't use an Xbox to stream tv.

And a note: Running a 360 or any other form of computer in winter is often free; since all waste energy converts to heat, it reduces the amount of energy needed to specifically dedicate to heating.

Re:Not bad. (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356472)

And a note: Running a 360 or any other form of computer in winter is often free; since all waste energy converts to heat, it reduces the amount of energy needed to specifically dedicate to heating.

I've read that natural gas heating is more efficient than electric heating because half the power isn't wasted turning a steam turbine and moving the energy across miles of wire.

Apple TV needs 4,600 hours to pay for itself (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356516)

At about 180 Watts power consumption, streaming tv with an Xbox 360 is not environmentally responsible. In comparison the Apple TV uses about 3 Watts (and at 10 Watts an iPad even has a display).

Ignore for a moment the cost of cooling. Then unplugging an existing Xbox 360 and plugging in an Apple TV 2 will save 0.177 kWh for each hour of video that one watches. How much does one have to watch at $0.12 per kWh to make up for the $99 retail price of an Apple TV 2? That makes 825 kWh, or 4,661 hours of video. How many hours of video do people watch per month?

Re:Not bad. (1)

atrain728 (1835698) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355270)

Steve can compare apples to oranges if he likes (no pun intended). He certainly doesn't want to compare AppleTV to the Xbox in terms of, well, anything.

Minecraft (1, Interesting)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354736)

The 360 has a JVM? Or are they going to do a half assed port in XNA?

Also, I guess I shouldn't be surprised Notch sold exclusivity to MS.

Re:Minecraft (0)

i kan reed (749298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355312)

Believe it or not, microsoft has a half-assed Java-light language that compiles to .NET. I'm not talking about C#, a language that literally copies the syntax of java called J#.

Re:Minecraft (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356462)

J# has been dead since 2005. Even then, it was roughly between Java 1.1 and Java 1.2 in what it supported.

Re:Minecraft (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355422)

The 360 has a JVM? Or are they going to do a half assed port in XNA?

Yes, because the current version is just the greatest, most performant code base ever constructed. HAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh wait, it's written by a guy who is worse than most amateurs considering how buggy the game is and how many unhandled exceptions it throws and all the memory leaks.

Also, I guess I shouldn't be surprised Notch sold exclusivity to MS.

Because you thought Notch was making Minecraft for something other than to make money?

Re:Minecraft (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355536)

The 360 has a JVM? Or are they going to do a half assed port in XNA?

Yes, because the current version is just the greatest, most performant code base ever constructed. HAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh wait, it's written by a guy who is worse than most amateurs considering how buggy the game is and how many unhandled exceptions it throws and all the memory leaks.

Never said it was performant, but I can only imagine taking a less performant game in the JVM and all their coding conventions and trying to shoehorn it in .NET.

Also, I guess I shouldn't be surprised Notch sold exclusivity to MS.

Because you thought Notch was making Minecraft for something other than to make money?

He's been pretty fair (I think) with the price (I got in during the $10 phase) but I know if it were me, I'd want to get it on as many systems as I could and not sign over for exclusivity. In fact, I can't think of a point where I would sign exclusive if I wanted to get as big of a user base as I could. Those contracts always feel to me like lube-ups.

Re:Minecraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36356282)

Dude, you're wrong. Plainly wrong. If any decent coder would get their hands on Minecraft the game would improve vastly. Bad coding is the major downfall of the game. I know you're doing this to troll against MS but if you have any amount of care for this kind of thing you'd admit to the truth here.

Re:Minecraft (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356526)

The 360 has a JVM? Or are they going to do a half assed port in XNA?

There's no need for half-assed ports - because CIL is, semantically, complete superset of JVM bytecode, it's possible to have a JVM implemented on top of CLR (with automatic translation of bytecode). This already exists - IKVM.NET [ikvm.net] - and it can do "ahead-of-time" translation (i.e. feed it .class files, get a .NET assembly).

The trick is getting the class libraries. IKVM offers a lot of fundamental Java classes (collections, I/O etc). But it also gives you the ability to call directly into .NET APIs from Java, so it's entirely possible to take an existing Java codebase, rewrite just the renderer, audio and input to work with XNA, and leave the game logic intact.

Alternatively, there is Sharpen, which works on source code level rather than with bytecode - it takes Java and spits out C#. Again, this is possible because C# is a superset of Java feature-wise, and most things have direct, one-to-one mappings.

I still consider myself a gamer (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354740)

But I'm finding myself really, really uninterested in what's coming out. These AAA titles get so caught up in the extraneous BS that they forget to put a fun game in there. And so many overblown, uninteresting stories! A minimal storyline can be fine but the more involved it is, the better it had be. A big story that's stupid is worse than a minimal story that's good because the poorness is staring you in the face. An actor might not be a song and dance guy. If he doesn't do a routine in the film, you won't miss it. But if he tries to do a Fred Astaire scene and falls woefully short, now your attention is drawn to how awful it is. Do it right or leave it out. You make a big, stupid story be front and center and it's awful then it's just ruining the whole experience. You have to spend all this time paying attention to how it sucks.

And sadly even if the story is interesting the gameplay itself just isn't any fun. Poor controls make it feel like more of a chore than something that becomes engrossingly fun.

I think it's blockbuster syndrome. The more splosions in a movie, generally the worse the plot. The more money thrown at a AAA title, the more focus-grouped and pedestrian the results will be. Smaller titles still take chances. That's when they get bought up by the big boys and turned into zombie franchises.

There are some exceptions. I still think GTAIV was very impressive. But that's a very rare bird.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (2)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354920)

Do you guys just copy-and-paste this same old shit into every single Slashdot thread, or are people actually typing it over and over again under the delusion that 1) it's an original sentiment, or 2) other people care to read it?

Because if it's the latter, it's impressive how alike they all end up sounding.

This is just the Slashdot Games version of, "you darn kids, get off my lawn!"

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355414)

Bravo! Mod parent up.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355558)

Just don't let him know the URL for the templates!

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355464)

You sir are right on! I'm starting to think these people like jollyreaper OP are just trolls sent here to kill what's left of Slashdot.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355506)

Yea, I'd really like to believe it's just a troll. While I certainly have met quite a number of people who share jollyreapers ridiculously selective memory, the line about GTAIV is just too much. I mean, I liked GTAIV to an extent, but you can't honestly complain about overblown stories and poor controls and then hold GTAIV up as a paragon of modern gaming.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354932)

And so many overblown, uninteresting stories! A minimal storyline can be fine but the more involved it is, the better it had be.

Trying to force stories into games is one of the reasons why so many new games are so bad. I buy a game, install it, start it up, have to sit and wait through a bunch of stupid videos, have to sit and wait through uber-cool animated menus to start the game, and then I have to sit and wait through half an hour of unskippable cutscenes where I make two dialog choices which have no real impact on the game. So an hour after I started it up I get to do something for two minutes before the next unskippable cutscene.

I'll take a game with the storyline of 'Doom' any day over tedious, poorly-written, poorly-acted, repetitive cutscenes. If I wanted to spend my time watching poorly-written, poorly-acted CG I'd subscribe to the Sci-Fi channel.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

Dutch Gun (899105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356046)

Trying to force stories into games is one of the reasons why so many new games are so bad.

To me, games simply aren't as engaging or interesting unless it also tells a story. And frankly, for as many people like you who are more interested in the gameplay, there are plenty of people like me who who tend to view story-driving cutscenes as a tangible reward for gameplay progress, and look forward to them. I lost interest in pure twitch-fest gameplay quite a while ago. While the occasional arcade game is entertaining for brief periods, it just can't hold my attention for long anymore.

The inclusion of story is not a new phenomenon, nor is it a poor fit. It's just that technology allows us to present the story in a more engaging fashion nowadays. Donkey Kong was telling a story through its characters and setting, and even had a simple cutscene! Even the simplest arcade games typically provided some sort of character motivation to drive the player forward toward some ultimate goal. Actions without motivation are extremely boring to me. That being said, the overall quality of storytelling and presentation needs to be high quality, or game devs shouldn't even bother. Nor is an engaging story an excuse to neglect core gameplay elements.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go pick up my copy of LA Noir.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

yarnosh (2055818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356464)

Here's a thought, if you don't like games with elaborate stories, don't play them. Obviously their not your thing. Other people, on the other hand, enjoy the "interactive movie" type game. It isn't like there aren't plenty of pure action/strategy/whatever games out there.

Re:I still consider myself a gamer (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354936)

personally i liked lost planet (the first one) the second is exactly as you claim.. they focused so much on adding multi player that the single/story based version sucked

Getting old. (3, Informative)

yarnosh (2055818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355118)

Either that or you're just getting older. Generally it is safe to assume it is yourself changing and becoming bored with games rather than games becoming boring. Same with music or movies. Not sure how old you are but when I was younger, I could become engrossed by the stupidest, most trivial of video games. Some (most) of those Atari/Coleco/etc games were really pretty shitty if you think about it, and they're even worse if you try to go back and play them now. And how about that Atari joystick? Terrible controller with a single button. But damn if I didn't sit in front of them for hours at a time, trying to jump the pixilated stick figure of an avatar over chasms and shit. Hell, just how many 2D side scrolling action games WERE there back in the day?

Also, there's the fact that we tend to forget all the shitty stuff from the past and just remember the highlights. Take any five year stretch and you could pick out a dozen really cool games and that's all you'll remember. 10 years from now you (or your kids) wll be able to do the same thing about the games now. GTAIV is just one of your picks.

What's odd is that you would even expect to like a majority of games out there. I mean, on one hand you claim that developers pander to focus groups for mass appeal but then you expect a game that "takes risks" to be good. You obviously have very specific tastes so you should expect the majority of games to not appeal to you. But you know what? Those blockbuster games make money because other peopel like them. If the games were the problem, they wouldn't be selling.

interesting timing (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354828)

This announcement happens to coincide with the Macworld or whatever they call it now. It couldnt be a method to distract attention and have people think of a cool xbox 360 and not a mac

Re:interesting timing (1)

tebixan (2118724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355492)

Microsoft doesn't decide when E3 should be held. All of the major electronic entertainment companies are making their biggest announcements of the year right now.

Star Wars seems laggy (1)

Jim Hall (2985) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354862)

Might be me, but that Star Wars title seems to lag quite a bit whenever that guy jumped, or swung the 'lightsaber'. I don't know that I could play a game with that much lag.

Also, where are the other controls for that game? What controls the walking around? I didn't see the guy on stage with any kind of controlling device (other than Kinect "lightsaber, on!" and jumping about) so I'm left to assume this is a "on a rail" type of game? What if I don't want to be "on a rail" and follow exactly the path laid out for me? Maybe I want to check out the corners, look for hidden items, secrets, etc?

I think the 'Star Wars' titles are getting a bit stale. This looks like another game set in the Clone Wars. And they're back at Bespin? What about the expanded universe?

If we're going to re-tread old ground, I'd like to see someone do a really awesome remake of the Star Wars: Jedi Knight: Dark Forces 2 game. I think the PlayStation Move would be a great fit for that - very little lag, and it sort of feels like a lightsaber, anyway. With the Navigation controller, you can do FPS stuff, and use the Move controller as a point & shoot "gun" (similar to Killzone 3.) But personally, when I played that game, once I got the lightsaber I never used any of the other weapons.

Re:Star Wars seems laggy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355424)

Also, where are the other controls for that game? What controls the walking around? I didn't see the guy on stage with any kind of controlling device (other than Kinect "lightsaber, on!" and jumping about) so I'm left to assume this is a "on a rail" type of game? What if I don't want to be "on a rail" and follow exactly the path laid out for me? Maybe I want to check out the corners, look for hidden items, secrets, etc?

Then this game isn't for you... and probably any Kinect game, since "you are the controller" and don't have much of a way to walk freely without being required to do something akward.

Re:Star Wars seems laggy (1)

Jim Hall (2985) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356096)

>> Also, where are the other controls for that game? What controls the walking around? I didn't see the guy on stage with any kind of controlling device (other than Kinect "lightsaber, on!" and jumping about) so I'm left to assume this is a "on a rail" type of game? What if I don't want to be "on a rail" and follow exactly the path laid out for me? Maybe I want to check out the corners, look for hidden items, secrets, etc?

> Then this game isn't for you... and probably any Kinect game, since "you are the controller" and don't have much of a way to walk freely without being required to do something akward.

Wait, so every Kinect game is an "on a rail" type of game? No ability to explore levels in Kinect? And people actually like those kinds of limited games?

Yeah, I guess I'm not a Kinect gamer, then.

I hope you can disable video sources... (1)

DdJ (10790) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354864)

I hope the system-wide search lets me disable particular video sources.

My ISP does not provide ESPN3, I do not use "Zune Video", and I do not have a "Hulu Plus" account. I won't want searches to ever show me content from those three sources.

Think Microsoft will accommodate me?

Re:I hope you can disable video sources... (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355144)

Think Microsoft will accommodate me?

Nah, I doubt it. Businesses don't accommodate punters, they accommodate other businesses.

Re:I hope you can disable video sources... (1)

pckl300 (1525891) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355690)

Sure. You have to have software installed on your box for all of those video services. If they're not installed, I doubt your Xbox even knows how to display such results.

Re:I hope you can disable video sources... (1)

pi_is_after_you (857195) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356166)

Nope. The icons for ESPN, Netflix, and HULU are on all up-to-date Xboxes. Clicking them downloads the program, and the icon is a shortcut to the program. Also, there's no way of editing the order (that I've found), and the real programs you have installed are on a pre-determined list spread out among ads or other download shortcuts. IIRC, It's ESPN, ad, Netflix, ad, HULU. And for a while Netflix was the only video program I had installed.

Re:I hope you can disable video sources... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356602)

My ISP does not provide ESPN3

Does the other ISP in your area?

No Character Control (1)

myrdos2 (989497) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354910)

I notice you still can't control where your character moves in Star Wars. He follows a pre-defined path, and you just swipe at enemies as you approach them. What I'd really like to see is Kinect + some sort of hand-held controller for moving around. Then you'd have a truly immersive experience; ducking to avoid fire, using your body for emotes, crouching with a sniper rifle, throwing a grenade...

I can't believe no-one's done it yet.

Re:No Character Control (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355050)

Its called the PS Move.

People knock it for having a controller then complaint that move needs one. PS Move really is like the Wii the way it should have been. I say that because you can't just flick your wrist when bowling or similar things the wii lets you get away with. This is because it not only tracks acceleration but also location and orientation much better.

Re:No Character Control (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355102)

A hand-held controller is absolutely necessary for these types of input schemes; that's one of the reasons the Wii has the nunchuck (or, for that matter, why pc games use a keyboard, not just the mouse).

I think it's some measure of weird corporate pride that is keeping MS from releasing one. It's like they built an innovative visual recognition system, and decided that it should be sufficient for all input needs. It's not, obviously. If they released a nunchuck-type controller for kinect, you could go from playing simple on-rails shooters to a full first-person shooter, for instance.

What about tv? the ISP have there own and cap down (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354916)

What about tv? the ISP have there own and cap downloads to keep from useing there data line from useing IP based TV and they own alot of the RSN's. The only CSN channel that may show up is CSN Chicago as Comcast only owns 20%, maybe some of the FSN's, root sports is iffy part fox and part directv. espn maybe but the ISP deals with them and epsn 3 may get in the way. MLB network likely not. NHL network part comcast owned NBA tv maybe yes NFL network maybe with thursday night football games at a added cost. other comcast / nbc channels may not want to be part of this. SHOW TIME, HBO, STARS, Cinemax, and epix likely at a added cost. ON line NBA LP, MLB EI, NHL CI maybe or maybe still on there own.

They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (3, Insightful)

harl (84412) | more than 3 years ago | (#36354954)

Fable game where you can cast spells with your hands? Star Wars Kinect game?

I remember the exact moment the Wii went from Cool to Lame for me. About 20 minutes into Spiderman 2. Likely the best spiderman game released. Captured the look and feel. Had great voice acting. Top notch product. I highly recommend it. That is on a traditional controller. After 20 minutes of punching the air in front of me, to mimic shooting webs, the Wii went from Must Buy to Never Buy.

Waving your hands to play a game sounds cool but sucks in reality. Better put you need to design the game from the first word in the design document to be a motion game. Tacking motion control onto other games is a waste of time.

The problem is that if you follow that advice you end up with a single platform game. Really a single sub-platform because if you've done your design work right the game will suck if played with a traditional controller. People don't want to take that risk.

Re:They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355078)

I agree 100%. The PS move games have the same issue, the ones that are move only are great, sports, boxing, shooting gallery. The ones that try to accommodate both are mostly terrible. Killzone 3 is ok on both controllers, but not as good as it could have been if they had only had one control scheme.

Re:They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355710)

Waving your hands to play a game sounds cool but sucks in reality.

Even more so in Minecraft. Thinking about digging down towards bedrock or mining some obsidian? Hope you like mimicking swinging a pickax several hundred times!

Re:They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (1)

tebixan (2118724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355764)

Now that all three consoles have motion control, there should be enough of a market for the developers to invest significant money into making a quality motion control game. It seems like a very large portion of Wii owners never bought a single game after Wii Sports which came with the console. That's why so many of the 3rd party games are just packages of low budget mini-games with no depth.

From what I saw, the Kinect Fable game is not just a standard Fable game with motion control tacked on, but a game specifically made for motion control. It looks kind of like an HD fantasy version of the old rail shooter arcade games like Time Crysis or Area 51. You're riding along on a horse or something that's controlled by the game, and using arm motions to 'create' spells (like rubbing your hands together to make a fireball, the longer you rub them together the bigger the fireball you make) then flinging them at enemies on the screen. If done right, it looks like it could be a lot of fun.

Re:They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (1)

yarnosh (2055818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356530)

It seems like a very large portion of Wii owners never bought a single game after Wii Sports which came with the console.

Really? That odd. It was my impression that Wii sports was just sort of a demo. I mean, I had Wii Golf mastered in an hour. It is only 9 holes that never change!

Re:They're making the same mistakes as the Wii (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355916)

"Waving your hands to play a game sounds cool but sucks in reality."

Depends on the game, Metroid prime is definitely a better game with the wand. Few games use the game controller to it's strength is the real issue. I agree though that the regular controller didn't need re-inventing BUT... I hate how most Wii games do not support Wii classic controller, it was my biggest pet peeve buying a Wii Nintendo did not ensure that you could use a regular controller over the wand with most (all?) first party games and it ticked me off.

Features (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355092)

How abut making it possible to use regular terabyte harddisks?

Re:Features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36355584)

highly unlikely, the rights holders would throw a fit if their content could be saved to a non-DRMed device.

Colour me unimpressed (1)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355168)

I was hoping for something more interesting in the Star Wars games they demoed.

I guess it's not 'there' yet.

The visual were quite nice though.

Also it appears too scripted, like the old Dragon's Lair game...

I suppose it is too much to ask for today for the game to be open-ended. Don't know why though, there is enough computing power to enable something very sophisticated but it appears their resources are not used efficiently enough.

Cast spells with my hands? (1)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355174)

Does it also understand Klingon?

Star Wars on Kinect (2)

eclectus (209883) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355276)

That Star Wars Kid [youtube.com] from a fews years back is finally gonna get his revenge once Star Wars comes out and he can use the Kinect controller.

Minecraft for Xbox? (1)

mcfatboy93 (1363705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355410)

Personally i don't see this working. i can play Minecraft on my PC with an Xbox controller (xpadder) and even then i still need to bind my mouse to the sticks. not that that's a bad thing, but traditionally games for PC are a bit more complicated that games for console. also the whole Xbox controller for the PC is more of a toy to show off to friends than effective way to play games like WoW or LoL.

Re:Minecraft for Xbox? (1)

Pumpkin Tuna (1033058) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355518)

Minecraft on Kinect? I just get tired thinking about it. Digging all those tunnels would be a pretty good upper body workout though.

Re:Minecraft for Xbox? (1)

hibiki_r (649814) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355892)

Now we know what Notch is spending his time on, instead of adding some real meat to Minecraft. It's fine and dandy as a construction set, but the actual exploring and adventuring side of the game is still very thin. Now we can use the netherworld to travel long distances, but there's very little to find while traveling.

He should take a look at Terraria: Technologically inferior, but there's a lot more to do in the world, including having real reasons to fight the monsters.

Come on, less ports to random platforms, and add more beef to the main game.

DVR (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 3 years ago | (#36355864)

So, where in the XBOX 360 do I plug in the CableCARD, or will it be via another add-on USB device? And will I still be at the whims of a cable company's Switched Digital Video tuning adapter over what channels I will be able to tune when I want or will support for that be included (and will it function reliably)?

I ask because Time Warner Cable seems to want to sabotage any DVR that isn't their own, designing unreliability into their cable boxes and tuning adapters to that end. (And they don't support HBO GO either.)

Re:DVR (1)

johncandale (1430587) | more than 3 years ago | (#36356492)

I would love a DVR on the 360, but my concern is you really need a robust enterprise hard-drive or hard drive array for all those rewrites, especially when people like me like who used to rerecord all the futruma/south park/trek reruns every single night whether I watched them or not just to make sure I have something to watch if I wanted to. I don't think the 350 drive is up for it.

TV streaming...in the US, only, of course. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36356380)

Sure, we finally get a dumbed-down version on Netflix in Canada, but our government doesn't want us to pay for subscription cloud services, that would only slow down the pirating....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>