Akbar

@6, IslandLife:

Which "any software?" I tried it with one of those maxdrive things or whatever they're called, and the BC on the PS3 wouldn't run the software. and since nobody has a standard file format for those saves, it's impossible to know how to convert the .xps files into something the PS3 might actually want.

As a PS3 owner who would like to move to the PS3 for every PS2 game {except} Guitar Hero and DDR (and I wouldn't mind a solution to do those, too...), I'm remarkably frustrated by this doo-dad. Not that it's kludgy, but that I can't get my bloody hands on one. How freaking useful is a memory card transfer thing if you can't get one until after you're done with games that you'd already started on the PS2? Argh.

Are you kidding me, cello? I {am} getting a PS3 for me. I got up, so did my roomie. We're actually selling his, I'm going to play the hell out of mine. And you're right, I don't actually play alot of stocks or real estate. But it really isn't because I'm not a big boy, nor is it because I'm too busy "jerking off." I just don't feel like investing the time in it.

Now here's what you've got. My roomate and I are both professional programmers (big boys, mind you), and we decided that it was worth him going out to make sure that {I} got a PS3 preorder by hitting different GS/EBs. We wound up with two preorders. Guess what? we're not keeping the second one. So there you have two people that were willing to take a half day off work to camp the lines in order to get a PS3. It really wasn't so very hard. I {do} have a bit more sympathy for the few people who just missed the last of the line, because they were too late. But just a bit.

And I'm not ruining it for anyone. The fact that you {have} to camp out for two hours to get one is more likely to be the problem, don't you think? Blame Sony. If they could supply even 360 numbers, then the problem wouldn't be nearly so drastic. But I imagine that this post is kind of pointless since instead of thinking about this rationally, you'll just make more comments about me being immature while "mak[ing] jerking off motion[s]." A response I associate with gentlemen and diplomats.

@43, cello:

"Oh you Americans and your NON-STOP devotion to utter greed and capitalism by any means necessary."

EVERYONE is greedy. Why do you think Communism tends to fail so spectacularly over time? The people in charge want to have more than the people below them. To pretend like you have {no} greed is just delusional.

"I think standing in line to to buy something for the SOLE PURPOSE of "flipping it" and turning a profit is pretty shitty and lame thing to do. Just can't stand the sight of potential money and not jump on it huh?"

Well, it's a chance to make money on something for doing a few hours of work (that other people won't do), while not breaking any laws. Your ethics may vary, but I don't think that purchasing something to resell it is particularly underhanded (see lots of comments about real estate, stock, et al). It's just that {you} want one now and {you} don't feel like/didn't think to camp the night away for one, so {we} should feel bad about it. Sorry, I don't.

"I think I see some babies you could steal candy from and re-sell it back to - wanna line up for that too?

But hey ... greed's your thing. What else is there to say."

Well, no, I wouldn't. Because that would be STEALING. Would someone else like to throw some more straw men in here? I've heard buying an entertainment device to resell it compared to stealing and hoarding medicine. Also note that there are very few people that are actually hoarding these things (purchasing large numbers as an organised group/individual in order to take them off of the market temporarily to drive up demand). If {anyone} can be made responsible for the increase in demand by depriving paying customers of supply, it's Sony.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: If you went and preordered a PS3 for yourself, and someone stopped you in the parking lot after you picked it up, offering to pay you $2000 for it, alot of you would probably take it. Or definitely think about it. If not $2k, most everyone has a price they'll part with their beloved PS3 for, and some people are just a bit more agressive about getting that price.

Last point: 90% eBayers have {no} way of getting preferential treatment towards getting a PS3. They got one the same way you could. Just grow up and take it like a man.

Chris Clark: Funny, because I asked the manager at my Gamestop the {exact} same question and I was assured that if they get at least 5 in, I get mine (I was #5). So there may be some store-to-store descrepencies, but I'm going to take the guy's word on it. Beyond that, I've been watching the PS3 preorders on eBay too. It looks like they're completing anywhere from $1200 to $1500. I think it's safe to say they're moving. And based on the fact that they're selling for at least 2x what they retail for, we can ASSUME that not everyone is purchasing them to eBay them. For instance, the guys paying $1500 obviously aren't buying them to resell them (or they're stupid). For fair disclosure, I have a preorder that I'm keeping (I got off my ass and preordered one for myself... waited in line for 2 hours. Cry me a river you didn't get yours). My roomie got a preorder and we're going to eBay that one. Would I have been happy with just one for me? Sure. Will I honestly think there's anything amoral about spending the time to camp to get one that we're just going to resell? Nope. It's just business. People who cry foul about this typically have sour grapes because they think the world should cater to people based on {desire}, not what you {do}. Grow up.

cringer8, Durability may be removed, but quality most certainly is not. As all objects in SL must be modeled, skinned, and scripted by somebody, there's options for mis-aligned polys, skins that look sub-par, or scripts that are buggy. Quality could certainly be a factor in corporate allegiances.

@17, nootau:

Lucas? Strongly defending his IP? Since when? Lucas licenses Star Wars to anything that'll make a buck. Don't you remember C3P0's (cereal?) or the Star Wars shampoo? Lucas has no issue diluting his brand identity with cross-marketing and merchandising... And while he may {not} issue cease/desist orders to anyone & everyone who does a not-for-profit fanfilm/fanfic/fangame, that in no way proves that he has no basis to do so.

Really, though, when you get down to it, the best way to ensure that you're baby project won't be shot down is to, you know, come up with your own ideas. If you have alot of neat ideas, but still want to "pay homage" to another IP by ripping off their setting/characters, be prepared to be sent a cease & desist, because you're just taking your chances...

If you really want to give homage to something you enjoy, do it like the professionals do: have a guest character that's obviously a reference, but isn't just ripping them off.. take a look at all of the talks about characters that look exactly like {insert name of someone here} in Saint's Row... or the mention of Zephyr Cochrane in Starcraft...

Anyway, the bottom line is, if you feel obliged to rip off someone else's IP, for pay or for free, then you have to be ready for them to defend themselves...

supersocialist -
Since no one else seems to have answered your question, I'll do it (apologies if I missed someone else fielding it..)

Every game I've ever seen with a "save anywhere, but load once" option requires you to exit the game after the save. Thus, if you need to go somewhere, you can save, come back to exactly where you were, but you can't revert there from a death. Castlevania Dawn of Sorrow is the most recent game I can think of with a system like that. It's a really good system for something where you want the limited recovery from death, but you also need the ability to move on quickly. The first Hitman could've used something like that (that game was infuriating sometimes)

Personally, I like the idea of limited saves, if you allow it to be scaled with difficulty. It's really a matter of preference. While some people feel that it increases realism, others feel that it's artificially inflating the difficulty of the game.

I generally like the difficulty, but I don't necessarily feel it's more realistic.

Anyway, that's my 2 pennies

@13, SlightlyAnnoyed:

Wow... just... wow.

I mean, you just went on a 4 paragraph diatribe about pretty much nothing. Let's see, what can I address here:

1) The Wii/360 combo platter isn't because they're saving money, it's because they feel like they're getting a better "bang for their buck" as it were. The perceived consumer value is higher for having those two machines than it is for having the one, similarly priced, PS3.

2) I don't think many people who read Joystiq think that the companies are out to look out for their best interests, I think it more comes down to: the companies that best understand their target demographic get the business. That's not rocket science here, nor is it brain surgery... hell, it's not even rocket surgery. What you wind up with is this: People are less angered by the Sony pricetag, and more angered by the apparent lack of value for that pricetag. Microsoft and Nintendo have apparently plugged into the community more, to provide the consumers with what they want for a price tag they can stomach. Individuals are welcome to agree or disagree with those last couple of statements, but they're based on checking the way the wind is blowing on the internet, as it were.

Now, you proceed to say that $200+ is too much for "another game system." To which I say "good day, sir." If you're not willing to shell out at {least} $200 for a console you either a) just never cared about consoles, b) never bought one yourself (I believe the original Nintendo was $200 when it launched, and that was 1980's money... so it was much more pricey), or c) managed to lose interest somewhere along the way. You're welcome to any one or combination of those, but that sort of makes you irrelevant to a conversation about console pricing, doesn't it? It's like me saying that I think $20k is too much for a car, so screw cars... I'm welcome to draw that line, but it's not like I'm standing up against some sort of new price gouging or anything, I just happen to dislike the price that cars tend to be.

And just to clarify, I intend to have all 3 consoles at my earliest convenience (I probably won't camp them, but I'm not waiting for a price drop, either), so I'm writing this with no fanboyism intended (but I'm sure someone will accuse me of something...)

@2, zer0her0:

What about the Dungeon Siege games? They may not be perfect, but they fit the bill

#13:

What makes you say you're not supposed to sell mods? Valve was notable as one of the only companies that specifically allowed modders to sell their work, or do whatever they wanted to with it. At least, that's how it was in Half-Life... I don't think things have changed {that} much with HL2/Source. Also, as far as it's concerned for me, CS was the first third party mod they sold. Maybe you'll draw the line that it is a full game and not just a sandbox, I don't really care. It was free, Valve made it retail. Ultimately, if you don't think this particular mod is worth the wallet-busting $10, don't get it. I don't think it's in any way sickening that something which has garnered alot of users decided that they should try selling it.

Just my 2cents