me (Prot warrior), Holy priest healer, Destro lock, Shadow priest and Fury warrior on DPS in heroic Bot. basically, no CC at all for that place and limited AOE. made it through to Thorngrin with no problem and on the trash pulls after that, everyone died but me and the lock - we two-manned like, two trash pulls using very effective DoT placement, kiting and AOE fears when things got too heavy, bandaging and popping pots as needed. we did that like, 3 times, hahaha. awesomeness ^_^
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME? Who decides this shit? Someone at Sony must've sucked a whole buncha dick to get an Emmy for something that's so blatantly a rip-off of the Wii's controller. My favorite part is this: "The overwhelming consumer demand and critical acclaim for PS3 is testament of the platform's strength and the industry's desire for a true next-generation entertainment system." Whatever Tretton's smoking that makes him deluded enough to spout that, I got five on the next bag. XD
7 PS3s is nothing - the Best Buy here in Fayetteville, NC must've had at least 20 sitting in the middle of the store like that. Funnily enough, they had two sales associates standing there with 'em like they actually NEEDED to keep people from taking them.
Believe it or not, I've been gaming on my PC with a setup similar to that of this controller for months. I plug a modded X-Box controller S in, only use the analog, trigger, D-pad, start and back buttons on the left side and then use the mouse for everything else. It's actually a pretty good way to game, IMO - you get the accuracy of mouse aiming with the best parts of a gamepad.
"I, Mario" has been around for at least a year now. It started as just a random idea in the forums on OverClocked Remix and had such massive support from a lot of people there that they eventually got their own message board. I did some digital coloring for a few of the concept sketches (namely the armored Koopa, Magikoopa & Geno) on the message board they got specifically for the project: http://specter24.proboards44.com/index.cgi
Are you serious? Is this article a joke? Seriously, is it? First off, what does it matter if a company's losing money on hardware if the odds are good they'll be making up the losses through game sales and residuals from third-party controllers and such? "Oh, Bill Gates is losing money on every X-Box and X-Box 360 that's made and sold!" Boo-hoo - he can dry his tears with the hundreds of millions of dollars he personally, and his company, still have that are barely affected by, at most, a few million. Same goes for Sony - they're both international megacorporations that can afford to lose money on console sales because they have their hands in other cookie jars that are totally profitable. So that's out.
Second, how does Nintendo's profiting off the Wii at launch equate to them being scared of long-run prospects? Instead of automatically jumping to the conclusion that they engineered the profitability of the Wii to cover their ass if the console doesn't go over well, did you ever think that maybe - just maybe - it was good business sense? If the Wii does go over well, which it more than likely will with such overwhelming gamer and developer support, then that means that Nintendo's going to profit from it for years on end. That's just sharp business sense, dude.
Microsoft probably expected to profit off the X-Box and the 360, too, but when they didn't, they covered up their obvious disappointment and anger by saying, "We're losing money on these systems, but we're still making them because we're that confident in its capabilities," all the while secretly cracking the whip on companies like Bungie and Bethesda and Rockstar and Lucasarts to ensure that their games are profitable enough to make up that lost console money. Which, in a sense, is also good business strategy, but not nearly as much so as Nintendo, who designed a console that'll be profitable in addition to the games for it. In all honesty, if the choice was to be made solely on the basis of corporate decisions and not the merits of the console itself, I'd gladly choose the company who was both confident AND profitable with their hardware as opposed to companies who aren't profitable and are only confident in the system so long as the lost money can be recouped somewhere else.
Seriously, if the 360 and PS3's games don't end up making back the losses, do you really think that Microsoft and Sony will bother with them? Hell no. Why do you think Sony's supporting homebrew software so much? So that if the PS3 flops and they stop making them for financial reasons, most of the fans won't bitch as much because they can just make their own games for it. Which, from a certain point of view, can also be seen as a good business move. But out of the three good business moves I've mentioned - Nintendo's out-of-the-box profitability and Microsoft and Sony's seemingly-noble-but-really-covering-their-asses-in-case-of-failure - I'd still go with Nintendo.
Caption This!
Oct 7th 2008 10:36AM (WoW)Breakfast Topic: Silly, unconventional, and amazing dungeon runs
May 28th 2008 2:53PM (WoW)PS3 controller wins Emmy award [update 1]
Jan 8th 2007 10:32PM (Joystiq)Photo: Seven PS3s NOT being sold
Dec 28th 2006 11:38AM (Joystiq)Today's hottest game video: Wii fatality
Dec 22nd 2006 3:58AM (Joystiq)SplitFish's EdgeFX controller brings PC-style input to the console
Dec 21st 2006 9:41AM (Engadget)I, Mario [update 1]
Sep 25th 2006 10:09PM (Joystiq)Engadget's relaunch giveaways: Xbox 360 Premium pack
Sep 25th 2006 1:54AM (Engadget)Rational gamers choose subsidized hardware, all else equal [update 2]
Sep 15th 2006 9:30AM (Joystiq)Second, how does Nintendo's profiting off the Wii at launch equate to them being scared of long-run prospects? Instead of automatically jumping to the conclusion that they engineered the profitability of the Wii to cover their ass if the console doesn't go over well, did you ever think that maybe - just maybe - it was good business sense? If the Wii does go over well, which it more than likely will with such overwhelming gamer and developer support, then that means that Nintendo's going to profit from it for years on end. That's just sharp business sense, dude.
Microsoft probably expected to profit off the X-Box and the 360, too, but when they didn't, they covered up their obvious disappointment and anger by saying, "We're losing money on these systems, but we're still making them because we're that confident in its capabilities," all the while secretly cracking the whip on companies like Bungie and Bethesda and Rockstar and Lucasarts to ensure that their games are profitable enough to make up that lost console money. Which, in a sense, is also good business strategy, but not nearly as much so as Nintendo, who designed a console that'll be profitable in addition to the games for it. In all honesty, if the choice was to be made solely on the basis of corporate decisions and not the merits of the console itself, I'd gladly choose the company who was both confident AND profitable with their hardware as opposed to companies who aren't profitable and are only confident in the system so long as the lost money can be recouped somewhere else.
Seriously, if the 360 and PS3's games don't end up making back the losses, do you really think that Microsoft and Sony will bother with them? Hell no. Why do you think Sony's supporting homebrew software so much? So that if the PS3 flops and they stop making them for financial reasons, most of the fans won't bitch as much because they can just make their own games for it. Which, from a certain point of view, can also be seen as a good business move. But out of the three good business moves I've mentioned - Nintendo's out-of-the-box profitability and Microsoft and Sony's seemingly-noble-but-really-covering-their-asses-in-case-of-failure - I'd still go with Nintendo.