Also, I think the screens are up high so people not currently playing can get drawn in and watch. They aren't designed to be comfortable, they want you to play a few minutes and move along.
I don't think these are fake, but they are probably just preliminary examples. I happened to see in a Software Etc/Gamestop Fall marketing guide whatever its called, and these were the pictures that were in that (or at least the Wii I remember for sure) given as examples of what the kiosks may look like. I don't think they are photoshopped, or if so I don't see the point, but they are probably scanned.
I'm in agreement that in the case of what this news item is talking about is Capcom's oversight; that's what I said at the beginning of my comment. My general point was that this and all games need to cater to both HD and SD playability equally at this point in time.
I was just commenting on an imbalance that I perceive in the marketing and game design for this system. I'm also not saying its impossible to enjoy the 360 in standard definition, but more just weighing the pros and cons of throwing down the money on the machine. I have played on friends' 360's and had a blast in standard definition, but still wouldn't find it worth the high (for me, anyways) cost of the system. In my particular situation, I already enjoy playing all kinds of games on far cheaper, previous generation systems on my (probably tiny) standard TV, so I personally could not justify buying a 360, and especially not a PS3. Money aside, sure I'd get either.
I realize that everything is going to eventually be HD, but the fact is that consumers are going to lag in actually being able to afford the stuff, and that in the meantime game developers should keep that in mind, just like with any change in a standard. Obviously Capcom here made a very serious and specific blunder in not accomodating both resolutions equally.
People would be well justified in getting pissed off at this oversight. If the game can be played in standard definition, they ought to have made sure that it would work in that mode.
But for me this just demonstrates why I think the 360 is not a well-rounded, well-designed machine. While not as extreme as the PS3 is apparently going to be, all the hype (seems to me) to be about the great graphics and the high definition, and the surround sound, etc. The problem is, much of their target market does not have HD equipment. There does not seem to be much thought into making the system really quite as worth buying for anyone without an HD tv.
For those who do have such equipment, I'd say that the 360 is awesome for you. But for me, blowing $400 on a system that you can't really get the most out of without having the home theater stuff to go with it is a bad move, mostly because I have a PC that I have put a lot of money into. If you are running SD stuff and playing 360 games, and enjoying them just fine, more power to you, and maybe I would too. But the way the system is geared has prevented me from desiring it.
Also, "Getting with the times" is simply not possible for a lot of people like me who are not going to be able to buy home theater equipment like that any time in the forseeable future. So, since I can't afford HD equipment, I won't buy an HD-oriented game system. I'd consider buying the Wii because it oriented more towards the kind of home theater (or lack thereof) setup that I have going.
Just my thoughts, and that said I REALLY wish I could play Dead Rising.
Fun facts about lightning, it creates a ton of RF noise that DOES interfere with aircraft radios, but only for a brief moment. Around thunderstorms I can 'hear' the buzz or click of each lightning strike in my headset. More interesting than harmful obviously.
ADF is not really used much any more, especially on commercial aircraft, but is also a good example. ADF is basically a needle that points to whatever radio station you tune in, there are specific transmitters for this purpose. Around thunderstorms the ADF will point at the thunderstorm, which is misleading if you are not aware of it. The obvious error would be to follow the needle right into the thunderstorm, not a good place to go.
But yeah damage (or not) to equipment from an actual lightning strike is an entirely different thing.
I suppose that did not have much to do with cell phones.
Yes the systems are checked in RF chambers, etc, but as much equipment on a modern airplane is designed specifically to take in RF signals, sources of RF can cause interference. Like has been said, it isn't necessarily a total failure, but would do things like cause static in the radios, weaken GPS signal reception (making location information less precise, which could lead to increased pilot workload for several reasons), weaken other radionavigation equipment reception, etc. The most common result would be increased pilot workload, and having to deal with less than 100% equipment, which makes things tougher for the pilots and reduces overall safety.
It isn't that the electronics get scrambled like holding a magnet right next to your PC or something like that, the electronics are shielded from that. But all those antennae are there to take in radio signals, and even if a source of radio noise is at a different frequency than the equipment is meant to receive, it can cause interference. The airlines that are planning to allow cellphones must be taking some kind of precaution or at least banning cell phone use during critical phases of flight.
My personal experience is much like the user above, a passenger using a cell phone prevented me from communicating with the radios, and it caused ATC's transmissions to come in as mostly static in my headset.
In the end, it really is a case of better safe than sorry, which you will see is a paradigm that is followed a whole lot with aviation, where mistakes and problems can have drastic consequences. Additionally, current cell phone technology is not really designed to connect to cells from way up in the air where your phone can see many of them at the same time.
Are these the PS3 and Wii demo kiosks?
Sep 1st 2006 12:34PM (Engadget)Are these the PS3 and Wii demo kiosks?
Sep 1st 2006 12:32PM (Engadget)Are these the PS3 and Wii demo kiosks?
Sep 1st 2006 12:29PM (Engadget)Capcom aware of Dead Rising standard-definition woes
Aug 15th 2006 2:12PM (Joystiq)I was just commenting on an imbalance that I perceive in the marketing and game design for this system. I'm also not saying its impossible to enjoy the 360 in standard definition, but more just weighing the pros and cons of throwing down the money on the machine. I have played on friends' 360's and had a blast in standard definition, but still wouldn't find it worth the high (for me, anyways) cost of the system. In my particular situation, I already enjoy playing all kinds of games on far cheaper, previous generation systems on my (probably tiny) standard TV, so I personally could not justify buying a 360, and especially not a PS3. Money aside, sure I'd get either.
I realize that everything is going to eventually be HD, but the fact is that consumers are going to lag in actually being able to afford the stuff, and that in the meantime game developers should keep that in mind, just like with any change in a standard. Obviously Capcom here made a very serious and specific blunder in not accomodating both resolutions equally.
Capcom aware of Dead Rising standard-definition woes
Aug 15th 2006 1:22PM (Joystiq)But for me this just demonstrates why I think the 360 is not a well-rounded, well-designed machine. While not as extreme as the PS3 is apparently going to be, all the hype (seems to me) to be about the great graphics and the high definition, and the surround sound, etc. The problem is, much of their target market does not have HD equipment. There does not seem to be much thought into making the system really quite as worth buying for anyone without an HD tv.
For those who do have such equipment, I'd say that the 360 is awesome for you. But for me, blowing $400 on a system that you can't really get the most out of without having the home theater stuff to go with it is a bad move, mostly because I have a PC that I have put a lot of money into. If you are running SD stuff and playing 360 games, and enjoying them just fine, more power to you, and maybe I would too. But the way the system is geared has prevented me from desiring it.
Also, "Getting with the times" is simply not possible for a lot of people like me who are not going to be able to buy home theater equipment like that any time in the forseeable future. So, since I can't afford HD equipment, I won't buy an HD-oriented game system. I'd consider buying the Wii because it oriented more towards the kind of home theater (or lack thereof) setup that I have going.
Just my thoughts, and that said I REALLY wish I could play Dead Rising.
Cellphones could disrupt airplane systems: study
Mar 1st 2006 1:07PM (Engadget)ADF is not really used much any more, especially on commercial aircraft, but is also a good example. ADF is basically a needle that points to whatever radio station you tune in, there are specific transmitters for this purpose. Around thunderstorms the ADF will point at the thunderstorm, which is misleading if you are not aware of it. The obvious error would be to follow the needle right into the thunderstorm, not a good place to go.
But yeah damage (or not) to equipment from an actual lightning strike is an entirely different thing.
I suppose that did not have much to do with cell phones.
Cellphones could disrupt airplane systems: study
Mar 1st 2006 12:53PM (Engadget)It isn't that the electronics get scrambled like holding a magnet right next to your PC or something like that, the electronics are shielded from that. But all those antennae are there to take in radio signals, and even if a source of radio noise is at a different frequency than the equipment is meant to receive, it can cause interference. The airlines that are planning to allow cellphones must be taking some kind of precaution or at least banning cell phone use during critical phases of flight.
My personal experience is much like the user above, a passenger using a cell phone prevented me from communicating with the radios, and it caused ATC's transmissions to come in as mostly static in my headset.
In the end, it really is a case of better safe than sorry, which you will see is a paradigm that is followed a whole lot with aviation, where mistakes and problems can have drastic consequences. Additionally, current cell phone technology is not really designed to connect to cells from way up in the air where your phone can see many of them at the same time.