Thursday Next

This is doing the rounds at work today. I've got a partial set of right answers. Let's see what the collective brains of TAY can manage...

I've scanned through most of this thread so here's my collected thoughts... Obviously, there's two arguments here, one of legality and one of morality. I think we pretty much all agree that piracy is illegal, beyond legitimate reasons like making a genuine backup. There are some grey areas, e.g. If I own a game in one format is it ok to pirate it in another format or emulate it on another platform? Valve offering Portal 2 free on PC to PS3 gamers muddies those waters nicely, it would seem that Valve's take is that you own a copy of the software it should work everywhere (a concept that EA is also driving towards, but that's another story). Morally it's a tougher issue. Copyright infringement is tantamount to stealing. It's not defined as stealing by law as the copyright holder has not had anything taken from them, there is no attempt to "permanently deprive", however, the pirate has received something from the copyright holder and deprived them of a potential sale. While illegal, some pirates do break the law in what most would consider a morally acceptable manner. Pirating to demo, pirating to have an additional DRM free version of software they legitimately own. However, even amongst these, take our own Dean by way of example have occasional lapses where they will play through the single player of MoH and then not buy the game because they are done with it. The rest of the excuses are pretty lame. As follows: "Games are expensive": Holidays are expensive. You have a number of recourses beyond piracy. You could save up for a holiday you really want, you can shop around for cheap deals, you can go on fewer holidays and only go on the ones that you really want to, or you can work hard and get a pay rise. You are not entitled to have luxurious holidays just because you want them. Same goes for games. You are not entitled to play every game you think you might enjoy just because it exists. "I tried it, completed it and I didn't enjoy it.": If I got to a theme park, I don't sneak in spend the whole day there, go on all the rides and then decide when I leave if I feel like paying. I either pay to go in or I don't go. "I wouldn't have bought it anyway.": Then don't play it. If it is not worth your money then it shouldn't be worth your time. I'm never going to buy Justin Bieber's album, I'm certainly not going to pirate a copy to confirm that it is as awful as I think it probably is. "I only pirate games that are short or I think I won't like.": If you don't think it is worth the money then don't play it, wait for it to drop in price and then pick it up in a bargain bin. If you think that spending £25 for 4 hours of entertainment is a bad deal then wait till it drops to bang:buck ratio that you are satisfied with. Bottom line, there are loads of reasons, excuses, justifications and what have you for piracy, they all prove one thing, that on some level you accept that what you're doing is, in some way, wrong. Otherwise why try to justify it?

Nah. It's not the same. I need to keep the whole thing. If you don't get it, I can't really explain it.

Woah! excel! long time. wb.

Yeah, the original Ico and Shadow came with postcards or artwork on postcard sized pieces of card... depending on how you look at these things. It's too pretty to give away for something as trivial as money.

While aiming (LB or LT not sure which) press the action button (probably "A"). Happen to be playing through Dead Space myself on the PS3. Amazing game. Pity the PC port was such arse.

Loved RED and Epxendables, I think they're from the same stable sort of. Both tongue in cheek and action packed. Both ensemble casts of oldie but goodie actors (though a different kinds of actors). I think that Malcovich totally stole RED. Stole it, ran away with it and buried it on a desert island.

I can't bring myself to sell Ico or Sotc. The boxes and postcards are too nice. Will defo get the collection. I loved both those games to bits.

No one is going to come out of this totally innocent. Activision were being overbearing at least and tyrannical at worst. West and Zampella were obviously up to something, whether Activision's attitude was the cause or effect of that scheming is a lesser issue, either way they seemed to be looking to breach their contract. Even EA could be accused of deliberately keeping themselves in the dark over W&Z's contractual status to maintain plausible deniability, though I am sure that this is not the case. No one in this whole mess is/was behaving entirely altruistically. It's just a case of weighing up all the sides and deciding what the most just outcome is. (Note: "Just" =/= "Fair").

Well, Jeff Brown is painting this email between EA exec as a joke: "A couple months ago, I asked Vince to hold back their map pack until after we launched (he owes me one). Given that they've already made a billion, he was cool with that, obviously Kotick took it as being belligerent." To be honest it's not uncommon to talk about rivals in this fashion. Also note that this email is dated the day of BC2's release. There's no emails from two months ago between EA and Zampella that indicate such a deal was done. Activision are pissed because they think that EA incited West and Zampella to breach their contract, however note that EA's internal messaging states: "Attached is a form of term sheet for a proposed dev/pub deal for your clients ('NewCo') to consider assuming they are free of any contractual commitments on their services and the IP they would develop under the deal." (Quotes taken from http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6286660.html) West and Zampella were likely looking for an out. That much is clear from the proceedings thus far. It's only natural that they would look to the next largest publisher to work with, and if any big name developer wants to talk to EA, then EA would be stupid to turn them down flat without hearing what they have to say.

Gonna join the not a Scott Pilgrim fan side of that debate. It was "ok", "competent" and "polished", but that's about it. I wouldn't say it was a "crap" movie either. I also think it is unfair to put Tron: Legacy and Resident Evil in the "crap" thread. To me, "crap" means that the film had little to no redeeming features. Most of the movies mentioned here are ones I would describe as "below par", "not good" or "ok". The last "crap" movie I saw was... hmm... probably the last Wyan bros. movie I sat through. Can't remember which one it was but I think it was Scary Movie 3... were there three? They've sort of all merged together. That or Starship Troopers 2.

The other thing that can be really irritating about rage quitters... Why do people ragequit 2 seconds before the game over? Think you answered your own question.

I played 'nam. Spent the first few rounds getting my arse kicked till eventually I admitted defeat, found a new server and some squad mates and had a great time burninating anyone who got too close.

I foolishly leant my copy to a colleague and he is taking aaaaaages to complete it. I should stop reading these posts, it just makes me annoyed at him for taking so damn long!

I don't mean to be rude, but how could you know good games are on the way if you don't even know what games are coming out? Just based on Nintendo's track record. Some of the best Gamecube games were released at the end of its cycle. Fandumb. Just because you're a self confessed fanboy doesn't mean Nintendo are gonna give you want you want. There's nothing in the Wii back catalogue that I miss, and there is nothing in the announced release schedule that I'm desperate for. I bought the Wii because I loved the N64 and missed out on the Gamecube, but it soon lost its lustre, hence its being transmogrified into a 157 Palmer Carbon Circle.

Battlefield Bad Company 2 Vietnam. PS3. Commence burnination.

Indeed EA were. It's still one of the best loved games within the company (certainly within DICE, they put their heart and soul into it).

It's sort of in limbo. Someone in DICE is always working on something to do with it, but it's not officially green lit.

Approximately 2 million sales for Mirror's Edge. Not amazing, but not terrible. I think it suffered from being too different from other FPS's without the marketing clearly branding it as such. That left reviewers playing what they thought was an FPS with parkour elements, finding the FPS elements lacking and being a bit down on the product. In retrospect, reviewers who have revisited their opinion have looked at it in a different light and feel that it was a fantastic free running game let down with some less than brilliant combat and worthy of higher praise for being different and bold and executing what it did differently really well. I honestly believe that Mirror's Edge could go on to be an amazingly successful franchise, especially now that it has some more games to be compared with. Assassin's Creed, Brink, Infamous, all embrace a new way of moving.

Batteries or wireless power transfer. If we can get wireless power transfer perfected we can just cover the whole freaking planet in the stuff and not have to worry about charging things.

I'm a coop gamer too. It's why I like BC2 for its squad play. Also a big fan of some of the PSN titles like Pixel Junk Shooter and Shank for the same reason. Local coop is awesome I really appreciate when a game has split screen / local mp these days, it's troublingly rare, especially on titles like Hot Pursuit where you could easily have two racers against the AI cops or vice versa. I find it odd that when I had a 14" CRT games had 4x split screen play and now that I have a 37" TV (enough that each quadrant would be an 18" screen) no games allow split screen.

Not into shmups, or rts or mmorpgs, but I'll give the first two a try, the only thing I don't really play is mmorpgs. I just don't have the time to invest that is needed to enjoy the experience.

I'm not about the KD at all. I'm all about the objective. Probably why I'm a much bigger BF fan than CoD.

I never quit. Even if I'm getting totally hosed. I'll always fight to the last. It's mostly because I'm an eternal optimist. I genuinely believe that until the screen says game over, there's a chance to turn it around, or at least salvage some dignity. There is no defeat so utterly complete as the person you have just thoroughly trounced quitting in a fit of despair. Why, there have been games in BFBC2 where the team-balancing has put me and my three friends attacking a full team of 12, we've been worn down to almost nothing, the first base still stands, Alpha long since destroyed in a sneak attack, Bravo still standing strong against our hopeless advance, the battlefield a smouldering ruin with not a single building standing, when, from no where another 5 or 6 people drop into our server, on our team, our numbers bolstered we overrun the team of lackadaisical defenders who have all long since switched to recon in order to increase their KD. We sweep through their defences, a tide of fury, of frustration now unleashed. Crate after crate falls under our advance, the defenders, battered, bloodied, sensing that where victory was assured, defeat now awaits them, dwindle in number. As the last crate detonates the teams are evenly balanced and I rejoice. If I quit every time I was getting pasted I'd only play half as much as I do, you can't win 'em all.