View Full Version : Tiger woods 360
http://sports.ign.com/articles/626/626268p1.html
There are 3 shots and a video
http://sportsmedia.ign.com/sports/image/article/626/626268/tiger-woods-pga-tour-2006-20050616013228456.jpg
JasonLD
19-Jun-2005, 04:04
Not particularly excited by golf title, it is not that it won't be a fun game, but...lol...could be just me.
Looks kinda too PCish to me..hopefully, final version will look much better than that.
typoEDR
19-Jun-2005, 04:04
I haven't played a proper golf game in a while, but that looks like an XBox 1 title to me, except in... *drumroll please* "H-D". Maybe it's the character animation that gets the kick with the added power.
DudeMiester
19-Jun-2005, 04:06
I wouldn't mind trying out a golf game someday, but not this one. It's branded by Satan.
Someone please turn on the anisotropic filtering! :)
BlueTsunami
19-Jun-2005, 05:04
Visually..theres just so much you can do with golf..lol...I'm not to into Tiger Woods Golf anyways...I like Hot Shots Golf a little more.....
The one thing that maybe graphically a Golf game could show off is some nice grass and tress...and the general surrounding...hmmmm...i'm ranting..
mckmas8808
19-Jun-2005, 05:48
I like golf since Tiger has introduce me to it. I can watch it only if he's playing. But for some reason that picture looks horrible to me for next-gen. Tell me one thing in that picture that is amazing. EA needs to step their game up.
I like golf since Tiger has introduce me to it. I can watch it only if he's playing. But for some reason that picture looks horrible to me for next-gen. Tell me one thing in that picture that is amazing. EA needs to step their game up.
it really does look unremarkable for next gen. :(
supposedly Madden and NBA Live are being built from scratch for Next Gen. :P
randycat99
19-Jun-2005, 05:58
Where's the hi-definition grass? :P
http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/617/617226/tiger-woods-pga-tour-2006-20050519031826117.jpg
randycat99
19-Jun-2005, 06:12
...and the free AA? :P
...and the free AA? :P
:lol: :lol:
I'll be back in a couple of months. :wink:
BlueTsunami
19-Jun-2005, 06:17
http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/617/617226/tiger-woods-pga-tour-2006-20050519031826117.jpg
Now thats what i'm talkin bout!!!!!
Now we get to see individual blade grass physics!!!!
>.>
Jokes aside...thats a nice shot...no more rough thats just short grass thats darker...
I saw no blades of grass or trees-a-swayin in those movie clips.
randycat99
19-Jun-2005, 07:38
Can't you see the individual blades growing in realtime? That's pure fractal number crunching goodness, no? ;)
Shifty Geezer
19-Jun-2005, 10:38
The obvious floor in the first pic for me is (apart from lack of AA, where even 2x AA is possible on existing hardware :? ) is/are the roofs. A small repeated texture. Okay, I'm not expecting procedural textures in the first take, especially for a game that's for PC too, but there's SO little going on in a golf game you can easily splash out on huge, gorgeous textures. In fact graphics is one of the few places a golf game can truly push the boat out. If you're going to see any game make the most of a console graphics capabilities I'd have thought it'd be a golf game (though maybe not from EA!)
...and the free AA? :P That was a very good point.
Moegames
19-Jun-2005, 12:34
hold your horses everyone lol geez..you guys are judging a game thats not even completed yet.. and i thought some of guys were smarter then this
Im sure it'll look much better once final kits are out and more dev time is put into this title.
hold your horses everyone lol geez..you guys are judging a game thats not even completed yet..
They're simply giving their opinion about pictures released by EA itself.
If the final product looks better, opinions, surely, will differ.
And, personally, when I look at thoses pics, I'm glad that the only Golf games I care for are HSG and Mario Golf.
Shifty Geezer
19-Jun-2005, 13:58
Im sure it'll look much better once final kits are out and more dev time is put into this title.How much difference is final hardware gonna make, especially on a game that's heading for PC as well? Some decent textures and AA doesn't need a new Xenos GPU and 10 megs eDRAM - even a lowly 9800 can manage better textures!
Cobra101
19-Jun-2005, 14:36
Is it me or are a bunch of these launch games going to look like ass?
Is it me or are a bunch of these launch games going to look like ass?
it's you :wink:
seriously.... the Beta kits, just went out, there are 5 months before we really know what we're seeing.
Wait until you see them after 4-5 more months of work, in motion, at Target with a Samsung HDtv X360 kiosk running it at 720P. :shock:
.
Im sure it'll look much better once final kits are out and more dev time is put into this title.How much difference is final hardware gonna make, especially on a game that's heading for PC as well? Some decent textures and AA doesn't need a new Xenos GPU and 10 megs eDRAM - even a lowly 9800 can manage better textures!
probably not much with this game.
this and Tony Hawk are probably the two worst looking games so far shown on the system.
there are 5 months before we really know what we're seeing.
you know ,the last 5 months of dev aren't generaly about graphical changes ,or lighting model change.It's more about fixing code ,optimizing frame rate ,debug and heavy test.
Some people seem to believe ,that the graphical assets are remade when a new kit arrives.
Graphics are typically added and or changed right up up until few months from the end (9 times out of 10 , before the coding is complete.). sometimes it's a matter of replacing place holder graphics. but your right they aren't usually working on them until art right until it goes gold (well usually).
For all we know theses screen shots were taken "before" E3 and released now.
Shifty Geezer
19-Jun-2005, 16:09
You gotta ask, why release them though? They don't really impress which is the whole point of promo work. "Here, have some pre-E3, early screenshots that aren't in any way representative of the final in-game graphics." :shock:
If it were my game I wouldn't post anything until I knew people seeing it would at least say 'that looks pretty good'!
koldfuzion1
19-Jun-2005, 16:13
Well, I've played a lot of the PS2 version of this game, and while these aren't perfect, it is a VAST improvement over current gen. The grass and bunkers look much better. Yes, I could nitpick that the individual grass blades look a little too, um, spindley (jagged), but previously there wasn't much in the way of blades of grass period. Ditto for the bleachers. I'm looking forward to it. :D
I thought Time magazine had some shots that looked better than this. And the Time writer said the grass was animated too.
The PC version of Tiger has always been different than the console version. People prefer the precision of the mouse and there are all kinds of user mods for it. Plus it reportedly supported features in the high-end cards.
The disappointing thing about Tiger for the X360 will be that it will only have like 3 courses.
Also remember that current console versions limit online play to only 2 players. Lets see if they at least find a way to support 4-players (from 4-different consoles) for a turn-based game.
koldfuzion1
19-Jun-2005, 16:14
Three courses??? :evil: That sucks. Where did you hear that?
AlStrong
19-Jun-2005, 16:18
Golden Tee rules!
Actually it's six courses. See the bottom of this page.
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/sports/tigerwoodspgatour06/preview_6125657.html
Also remember that current console versions limit online play to only 2 players. Lets see if they at least find a way to support 4-players (from 4-different consoles) for a turn-based game.
I would hope so.
Links 2004 Xbox supported 4 players and fast stroke play.
Each player could hit when they were ready without waiting for the other player to make their stroke.
Other players flying ball's trail could be seen from your player's perspective as you were preparing to hit.
It made for fast, fun online play.
koldfuzion1
19-Jun-2005, 16:31
Thanks wco81, that really blows. :( And downloading new courses for a $60 game--LAME! I suppose I can deal with it. BUT I'm really getting annoyed with all this microtransaction garbage. Not going to be happy if I have to pay $.10 every time I want a new pair of shoes for my golfer. RRRrrrr... :x or worse yet, $10 for a new course. NFW [reaches for pitchfork and torch]
....Tiger producers told us that four-player online is a go for the Xbox 360.....
Another big aspect the Xbox Tiger team is looking at is an upgraded physics engine, one that will put more import into things like wind and weather effects than ever before. One Tiger producer told us that they're even toying with the idea of having weather directly affect your player, instead of just affecting the movement of the ball. The example he used was playing a match in a rainstorm without dressing your golfer for the weather, and your play will suffer as a result. It's just a concept right now, so it's unclear how or if this will be implemented, but it's a tantalizing glimpse at what the Tiger team is seeing as possible on the Xbox 360.....
....The amount of graphical detail in the one playable hole we saw was astonishing: individual blades of grass (and grass of varying height, by the way), shiny specular reflections on the water surface, some incredible particle sand effects when blasting out of a bunker, little touches such as ducks in the water and birds overhead, and, of course, Tiger himself, who's looking better than ever.....
....Tiger Woods will only feature nine PGA golfers (Vijay Singh and John Daly among them) and a mere six courses (including the TPC at Sawgrass and Pebble Beach). If there was ever a case to be made for the microtransaction capabilities of the next-gen Xbox Live 2, it would be for downloading new courses to the new Tiger. No word yet on whether this will be possible, but the producers said they are "investigating" such a feature.
Actually it's six courses. See the bottom of this page.
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/sports/tigerwoodspgatour06/preview_6125657.html
Thanks wco81, that really blows. :( And downloading new courses for a $60 game--LAME! I suppose I can deal with it. BUT I'm really getting annoyed with all this microtransaction garbage. Not going to be happy if I have to pay $.10 every time I want a new pair of shoes for my golfer. RRRrrrr... :x or worse yet, $10 for a new course. NFW [reaches for pitchfork and torch]
on Links 2004 MS charged $5 to DL a new course and also offered a couple for free iirc.
I thought that was fair but certainly better if they started with 9 or 10 courses on the disc.
See this is where a structured microtransactions system as opposed to a mod community would be inferior.
For PC games, users create things like courses and distribute them for free pretty much. It's a labor of love and kudos from other fans of the games, not a way to squeeze more money from consumers.
On X360, the microtransactions are suppose to include content from other individuals. But you'd have to pay for these, with MS presumably getting a cut.
One of the mods for the PC version of Tiger is Augusta I believe. Would MS even be able to host an unofficial version of the Augusta course without having to pay Augusta? Or what about NCAA rosters which use actual player names? Those have been distributed informally but a big company might have trouble hosting such files without dealing with the NCAA.
london-boy
19-Jun-2005, 16:46
How many holes is a course? I have the number 18 in my head for some reason, so personally, $5 for 18 holes is not much. Though i really really don't like where things seem to be heading...
....
One of the mods for the PC version of Tiger is Augusta I believe. Would MS even be able to host an unofficial version of the Augusta course without having to pay Augusta? Or what about NCAA rosters which use actual player names? Those have been distributed informally but a big company might have trouble hosting such files without dealing with the NCAA.
They could not offer unlicensed content as the mod community now gets away with.
I doubt that the level of user creation tools that will be included in 360 games will ever compare to the PC tools.
I have serious doubts that the micro-transactions being sold/bought by/from other users will ever take off. I really think it is just a PR name for what they already do with LIVE, offer additional content from developers to improve, update, patch or add on to a game.
I do not think we will ever see the mod type PC community on X360 but would like it if we did. . :P
How many holes is a course? I have the number 18 in my head for some reason, so personally, $5 for 18 holes is not much. Though i really really don't like where things seem to be heading...
correct 18.. I painfully refresh my memory of that fact every week. :wink:
Shifty Geezer
19-Jun-2005, 17:11
I doubt that the level of user creation tools that will be included in 360 games will ever compare to the PC tools.
I have serious doubts that the micro-transactions being sold/bought by/from other users will ever take off. I really think it is just a PR name for what they already do with LIVE, offer additional content from developers to improve, update, patch or add on to a game.
I do not think we will ever see the mod type PC community on X360 but would like it if we did. . :P
I had a look at a fair number of NWN mods and came away mostly unimpressed. As freebies they were great, but the quality wasn't comparable with BioWares own mods for example.
I thought about creating my own mods but the time required was more than I could spare. Of course, if I made $1 a time for downloads a successful mod would be an investment. For me I can see microtransactions offering a chance for higher quality content as professionals (especially freelancers) working in other areas can splash out on high quality extras as it'd be another income stream. Look at how it's changed the mobile phone ringtones :shock:
There's room for abusing the system, but also scope for a stronger community with stronger content IMO. Depends which way it's worked.
I had a look at a fair number of NWN mods and came away mostly unimpressed. As freebies they were great, but the quality wasn't comparable with BioWares own mods for example.
I thought about creating my own mods but the time required was more than I could spare. Of course, if I made $1 a time for downloads a successful mod would be an investment. For me I can see microtransactions offering a chance for higher quality content as professionals (especially freelancers) working in other areas can splash out on high quality extras as it'd be another income stream. Look at how it's changed the mobile phone ringtones :shock:
There's room for abusing the system, but also scope for a stronger community with stronger content IMO. Depends which way it's worked.
very interesting.
you may be onto something there :shock:
Thanks wco81, that really blows. :( And downloading new courses for a $60 game--LAME! I suppose I can deal with it. BUT I'm really getting annoyed with all this microtransaction garbage. Not going to be happy if I have to pay $.10 every time I want a new pair of shoes for my golfer. RRRrrrr... :x or worse yet, $10 for a new course. NFW [reaches for pitchfork and torch]
What if we flipped around the cost though. What if, instead of $60 for the base game, +6 or so courses, it was only $20 but you only got one base course. Then, each additional course was 7-10 dollars, but you only bought the ones you wanted.
The major benefit to the publisher would be pushing down game prices into the impulse buy range while delivering a potentially renewable revenue stream. Consumers get to try more games for less cost--though possibly spending more on a game they are hardcore about.
People have been talking about "episodic" delivery for years, and microtransactions brings it much closer, imo.
.Sis
Shifty Geezer
19-Jun-2005, 17:54
Very risky strategy if you ask me!
I doubt that the level of user creation tools that will be included in 360 games will ever compare to the PC tools.
I have serious doubts that the micro-transactions being sold/bought by/from other users will ever take off. I really think it is just a PR name for what they already do with LIVE, offer additional content from developers to improve, update, patch or add on to a game.
I do not think we will ever see the mod type PC community on X360 but would like it if we did. . :P
Well EA would not offer such tools because that would just be creating competition to themselves, if they had any plans to sell additional courses for downloads. And to a certain extent, you make the mod tools too good and maybe there's no reason for gamers to buy a new game every year.
Wouldn't it be nice if it was just wide open and you could download files from any site, anywhere? Of course that would just bypass XBL and their little microtransaction system so MS would never enable that.
Now with the PS3, what if you mounted an SD card on a PC and downloaded stuff and then loaded it onto the PS3? That's assuming there's no direct connectivity on the PS3 to sites like Gamefaqs, although Sony has talked about surfing on the PS3 (but they talked about surfing on the PS2 and PSP too and we know where that went).
scooby_dooby
19-Jun-2005, 21:07
micro transactions are just going to be a small bonus that you CAN do if you want to. it's not like they're going to affect game designs or the prices of games themselves. I'm sure you'll still have plenty of golf shoes to choose from :wink:
This is a good thing, having new levels downloadable for a old game is cool, downloading new weapons and characters is very cool. It just helps add more value to a game if a developer decides to release some extra content.
Then you have games like Forza, with a decal editor that a person could spend hours designing decals for. So, what you'll see if people customizing cars, spending a few hours creating really cool custom cars, and then other users will be able to buy them.
I expect this whole "customizing" thing to get pretty big, especially as online competition ramps up, with cash tournaments, people will like to have a unique ride/character.
Here's some cars people have created, this kind of stuff is pretty neat:
http://img3.imagebarrel.com/img/05/154/01/fallen.jpg
http://www.tabwin.com/forza.htm
So you might see the same kind of thing with characters in Tiger, for example buy Mr. T or Hulk Hogan as your golfer, just cool bonuses you can do if you want to.
And more remember things like Gotham/KillTV, will alow tournaments, with prices and spectators, I want to see a 1/8-final from that, in probably modified maps with coca-cola/nike ads or have the chance to win (as allard said) a 1M price, that is a hole new market, then the winner can sell their suit/car to a lot of fans.
MS, Rare(...) and the user should all make proffit (1/3 ?).
I think that the future of XB360, is very promessing, exiting, and can do a nice revolution, if they can do what they want.
http://www.tabwin.com/forza.htm
That is pretty nice.
the other thing about X360 LIVE that I think is interesting is the new spectator mode.
On console games (especially sports tournaments) it will be huge to have a couple of the other team owners tuning into to watch (not sure if they can comment or not).
I was in a n NFL2k5 league last year and we all wanted this feature.
Also in other games (FPS) you can watch the best players and learn their strategies. :D
eDoshin
19-Jun-2005, 21:37
Micro-transactions are good unless its abused and/or exploited intentionally.. and sometimes that's asking a lot of companies who's entire goal is to make as much money as possible. How do we know that without these micro-transactions, a game will not have come packed with as much features, maps, etc .. as possible to increase its marketing appeal, as opposed to these extras being held off so that it can be released little by little to guarantee a revenue stream? A game may retail for 50.00, but a few bucks here and there and it may end up 80.00 in the final tally for the same game that may have come packed with all these features in the initial price.
randycat99
19-Jun-2005, 21:42
The "conflict of interests" in this scenario are very clear and daunting.
scooby_dooby
19-Jun-2005, 21:42
Wouldn't it be awesome if they had $5 or $10 golf, football, hockey and basketball tournaments?
For example, Madden 2006- 32 person tournament. $5 buy in, 1st place wins $75.
I'd love it.
Micro-transactions are good unless its abused and/or exploited intentionally.. and sometimes that's asking a lot of companies who's entire goal is to make as much money as possible. How do we know that without these micro-transactions, a game will not have come packed with as much features, maps, etc .. as possible to increase its marketing appeal, as opposed to these extras being held off so that it can be released little by little to guarantee a revenue stream? A game may retail for 50.00, but a few bucks here and there and it may end up 80.00 in the final tally for the same game that may have come packed with all these features in the initial price.
so far as I have seen work on the current version of LIVE, the extra content that I have downloaded and paid for has all been designed after the retail game shipped.
Sure they are using existing assets but they still are investing programmer time to create new maps/courses/skins/rosters/cars etc.
They often announce the downloads in advance and even give updates as to it's progress prior to being made available.
Of course it could happen as you have described it but i have to believe that developers have their hands full just getting the game out as full featured as possible as is.
scooby_dooby
19-Jun-2005, 21:46
I think Devs will try and release the best game they can by release date, period.
It would be a dumb risk to hold back content simply for resale later, it makes much more sense to release the best game you possibly can so that it will hopefully sell as many copies as possible. If that happens, you have a gauranteed market for downloadable content, and they can spend 6months after launch developing new stuff.
Everyone wins, gamers get more gameplay, dev's get some more revenues.
Micro-transactions are good unless its abused and/or exploited intentionally.. and sometimes that's asking a lot of companies who's entire goal is to make as much money as possible. How do we know that without these micro-transactions, a game will not have come packed with as much features, maps, etc .. as possible to increase its marketing appeal, as opposed to these extras being held off so that it can be released little by little to guarantee a revenue stream? A game may retail for 50.00, but a few bucks here and there and it may end up 80.00 in the final tally for the same game that may have come packed with all these features in the initial price.
One of the things the publishers are fighting is a rapidly declining Average Selling Price for games. If a game doesn't sell well, the publisher will be under pressure to discount as they risk losing shelf space to competitor titles. Game sales seem to resemble the movie business where most of the revenues are made in the first few weeks of release.
So microtransactions may be a way to recoup some of that declining ASP but it could also tempt them to put more content off the disc so that they have more to sell by downloads.
Spectator mode is interesting but not new. Old multiplayer PC games allowed that. For instance, AOE let up to 8-players join a game but any number could resign the game and watch, at which point they could see everything every active player was doing.
It sounds like for XBL, they will have some tournaments people have to enter (pay extra fee for?) and it's in these events that they will have some kind of spectator mode. But is it accomplished by connecting x number of spectators to the game? Or is it not real-time or slightly behind, as they stream what's happening in the game slightly afterwards?
I would rather see them work on multiplayer online modes so that you can hook up to 10 players in a hockey game, as they did with NHL Rivals, where I think up to 4-different consoles could join a single game.
EA has been real lazy about multiplayer modes. NASCAR only supports at most 4 players online, maybe just 2, while other racing games support 6 players from 6 different consoles. The PC versions of NASCAR however supports 16 or 32 different connections.
Yup, wouldn't it be awesome if they had $5 or $10 golf, football, hockey and basketball tournaments?
For example, Madden 2006- 32 person tournament. $5 buy in, 1st place wins $75.
I'd love it.
wow, that is cool
I know Allard talked a lot of PR rhetoric during E3 but seriously to ME, LIVE makes the biggest difference in gaming choices right now.
I believe the more people that use it (and no CC is going to be huge in upping subscriber rates) the more people may see it as the future of gaming.
People that never gamed online with their PCs due to lack of knowledge or fear, can now sign up, sign in and play.
Wouldn't it be awesome if they had $5 or $10 golf, football, hockey and basketball tournaments?
For example, Madden 2006- 32 person tournament. $5 buy in, 1st place wins $75.
I'd love it.
It will be interesting to see if the US government actually allows this. If the government says that online poker (amongst other online "gambling" activities) is illegal, why not on-line computer sports, for money, too?
Presumably these activities would generate income for the organiser, and ultimately one player walks away with the prize fund. What's the difference between online computer sports and poker?
Jawed
randycat99
19-Jun-2005, 22:25
Not only gambling, but gambling open to minors. :shock:
It sounds like for XBL, they will have some tournaments people have to enter (pay extra fee for?)
I would expect this would be a prime area for advertising based revenue. Think Mountain Dew Presents the Halo 3 Tournament Finals or something to that effect.
If you have to pay to play, I would then expect (as a gamer) some kind of payout.
.Sis
Very risky strategy if you ask me!
Sure, but the 2K sports games proved that $20 dollars is a good price point. In broadening the market, you would think that $50-60 is not a sustainable price for the majority of games.
Majesco also seems to be doing well targetting some of their games to this range--though they are still full featured games.
My point is that another way to get to the 15-20 dollar range is to offer less with optional add-ons.
.Sis
The market will sort itself out . If developer a makes a game with very little content and then trys to charge the people for it and the people don't buy (which is most likely ) then developer b , c , d and whatever will not go down that route
As for the tools . Well i see the map editors and what not being used on the pc . Live is streamable so i would be able to make the content on my pc and stream it to the xbox 360
Acert93
20-Jun-2005, 01:45
Wouldn't it be awesome if they had $5 or $10 golf, football, hockey and basketball tournaments?
For example, Madden 2006- 32 person tournament. $5 buy in, 1st place wins $75.
I'd love it.
It will be interesting to see if the US government actually allows this. If the government says that online poker (amongst other online "gambling" activities) is illegal, why not on-line computer sports, for money, too?
Presumably these activities would generate income for the organiser, and ultimately one player walks away with the prize fund. What's the difference between online computer sports and poker?
Jawed
I wonder if a "registation" fee to play in a tournament, where there is a "cash prize from a sponsor" would be considered gambling? Non-professional softball, bowling, tennis, etc... leagues have this. Heck, I remember track meets where there were both "registration" fees to participate and cash prizes for the winners.
I guess I never looked at it as gambling (hahaha I never won nor never expected to), just a fee to participate because a lot of other tournies had registration fees and no prizes. (I don't gamble, never even a loto ticket). It would be interesting to know what is, and is not, deemed legally as gambling.
I don't see ap roblem. The cash will be from a sponser and then the fee you pay is for the renue . Servers and bandwidth don't pay for themselves . Aside from that things like party poker are legal here in the states. I can go online and gamble as much as i want
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_poker
If you dig a little you will find all sorts of interesting restrictions with online "gambling", e.g. poker, in the US.
Jawed
blakjedi
20-Jun-2005, 03:34
Not only gambling, but gambling open to minors. :shock:
its not gambling its competition
mckmas8808
20-Jun-2005, 04:09
its not gambling its competition
Yeah thats what the gambling addicts that lose their house say too. :)
BlueTsunami
20-Jun-2005, 04:20
its not gambling its competition
Yeah thats what the gambling addicts that lose their house say too. :)
I would define gambling as something you don't have control over the outcome.....being able to enroll in a tournament and wage it out with your peers by displaying your ability to play a certain game as a form of competition is not gambling at all......In my opinion of course...
mckmas8808
20-Jun-2005, 04:26
its not gambling its competition
Yeah thats what the gambling addicts that lose their house say too. :)
I would define gambling as something you don't have control over the outcome.....being able to enroll in a tournament and wage it out with your peers by displaying your ability to play a certain game as a form of competition is not gambling at all......In my opinion of course...
Well I have to respectfully disagree with you here. People that play poker feel that they have some kind of control over their outcome too. Real poker players don't look at their skill as luck, yet people equal poker to gambling.
Well I have to respectfully disagree with you here. People that play poker feel that they have some kind of control over their outcome too. Real poker players don't look at their skill as luck, yet people equal poker to gambling.
The most skilled poker player can get beat by the lucky hand of a beginner--which is why it's gambling.
The most skilled Halo player will not get beat by a lucky beginner. (The most skilled basketball player will not get beat by a lucky beginner. Etc, etc.)
.Sis
mckmas8808
20-Jun-2005, 06:56
The most skilled poker player can get beat by the lucky hand of a beginner--which is why it's gambling.
The most skilled Halo player will not get beat by a lucky beginner. (The most skilled basketball player will not get beat by a lucky beginner. Etc, etc.)
.Sis
I beat more skillful people in Mortal Kombat all the time. It rare but it does happen. Anybody can have a good game. I see what you are saying and hope that something like that will happen. I might even try it once or twice. :wink:
I believe one of the check boxes to using live (When u sign up ) is that you are over 18 or have parental permission . So i don't see a big problem with these contests .
PARANOiA
20-Jun-2005, 07:14
How can you say you beat people "all the time", but then say "it's rare" next sentence. They're mutually exclusive!!
Anyway, the gov't can't just go and ban computer game contests - otherwise, I guess they'll be banning sporting events too.
mckmas8808
20-Jun-2005, 07:18
How can you say you beat people "all the time", but then say "it's rare" next sentence. They're mutually exclusive!!
Anyway, the gov't can't just go and ban computer game contests - otherwise, I guess they'll be banning sporting events too.
I typed it incorrectly. It is rare but it does happen. Anyways I'm with you guys I want this to be legal. I was just saying that if poker online is illegal like someone else said then betting through online gaming might be illegal too.
PARANOiA
20-Jun-2005, 07:27
Anyways I'm with you guys I want this to be legal. I was just saying that if poker online is illegal like someone else said then betting through online gaming might be illegal too.
I guess it's a differentiation of what is "betting" and what is not. I personally don't think paying an entry fee to an online gaming competition is betting - it's not like you're saying "I can choose the fee I pay for a higher reward".
They have huge "LAN party" type competitions already don't they? Eg, that "fatality" guy, right?
In a game like texas hold em its gambling because no amount of skill will change the out come . You can increase your chances of not loosing as badly by knowing when to fold or how much to bet or your odds . But u can't do anything about what comes out in the flops .
The most skilled poker player can get beat by the lucky hand of a beginner--which is why it's gambling. For one round maybe. But not for a game of several rounds. It has been mathematically accepted that poker is one 'game-of-chance' that a player has control over. It is an interesting subject of study in probability and statistics, and several math papers have been written about it.
Shifty Geezer
20-Jun-2005, 10:31
In the UK, gambling is a case of having a chance to win as a matter of probability (luck). If there is no skill involved to win a prize, it's gambling. TV competitions get around this law by having REALLY stupid questions. eg. A show is talking about the Spiderman movie, and offers a chance to win a prixe if you call a premium rate number. Pay to enter, random chance to win = gambling ; they're not allowed. So they through in a question "Spiderman takes his powers from which animal?
A: Spider
B: Antelope
D: Preying Mantis"
This adds an element of 'skill' (legally speaking) so is no longer gambling.
Over here a tournament with a prize won't be gambling. Victory requires skill (though dumb luck will always play in part in everything people do)
london-boy
20-Jun-2005, 10:33
"Spiderman takes his powers from which animal?
A: Spider
B: Antelope
D: Preying Mantis"
It's C.
"Spiderman takes his powers from which animal?
A: Spider
B: Antelope
D: Preying Mantis"
It's C.
no. it's A :lol:
The most skilled poker player can get beat by the lucky hand of a beginner--which is why it's gambling. For one round maybe. But not for a game of several rounds. It has been mathematically accepted that poker is one 'game-of-chance' that a player has control over. It is an interesting subject of study in probability and statistics, and several math papers have been written about it.
While there is skill involved, it is a game of luck and the skill basically amounts to maximizing your odds. Chris Moneymaker comes to mind as an example, having won the World Series of Poker a couple years back. If you watch the series, you'll see that he wins several big all-ins with dumb luck (winning against skilled players who had played the hand correctly).
Obviously, poker requires knowledge and skill to stay in the game, but winning is determined by luck. The player's skill cannot control the cards being dealt.
Tho there seems to be a fairly large difference between poker, being interactive, and slot machines and lotteries, so perhaps the arguement is moot. I just see there being as large a difference between video game competitions and poker...
.Sis
"Spiderman takes his powers from which animal?
A: Spider
B: Antelope
D: Preying Mantis"
It's C.
no. it's A :lol:
Odd, it's cannibalism :shock: :wink:
All this talk about stupid super heros reminds me of one of the best show ever created, Kamen Rider!
Behold Praying Mantis Man:
http://incolor.inebraska.com/stuart/riders/bug.jpg
There's also the incredible Starfish Man:
http://incolor.inebraska.com/stuart/riders/hito.jpg
Special mentions: Flying Squirrel Man, and Poison Moth Man (http://incolor.inebraska.com/stuart/riders/shocker.htm)
Oh, and to try to remain, on topic, I too like, I mean, love the idea of buying incomplete versions of games, €60, and then download "add-ons" for €5 or €9. It's like the future but right now, you know.
PARANOiA
20-Jun-2005, 22:26
I hardly think any company is going to release incomplete versions. That's the fear, of course, but I can't see it happening.
Eg, Tiger Woods for X360. Can you really see them releasing Tiger Woods with, say, 5 courses for PS2/3 and PC, and only 3 courses for X360. Then, surprisingly enough, trying to sell the other 2 for $5 later on as an add-on?
Do you know why not? The consumer would not stand for it. Reviews would burn the publisher at the stake! I can't ever think of a case where this would happen.
As I've said a number of times, I see the ability to get more from a game as a good thing. If you dislike it, you don't have to buy it, you know!
J_Saint
14-Sep-2005, 17:58
Some new screens available and looking much better...
http://www.xboxworld.nl/news/7292/
scooby_dooby
14-Sep-2005, 19:55
nice! it almost looks real
http://www.xboxworld.nl/images/content/34321.jpg
http://www.xboxworld.nl/images/content/34322.jpg
http://www.xboxworld.nl/images/content/34318.jpg
I actually must say I quite dislike the above screenshots purely for it's artifical PC-esque look... *shrugs*
qwerty2000
14-Sep-2005, 20:26
Wow they look amazing.
Shifty Geezer
14-Sep-2005, 20:30
Much improved, but the trees still pretty phoney. The lighting is definitely the weakest aspect in these shots. The detail on Tiger is good and it looks to be self-shadowing in parts, though with strong light from one direction there should be stronger contrast between light and dark on back/front of his trousers. Those pants look to be entirely baked on light.
looks good but thats about it, hopefully it continues to get better.
onetimeposter
14-Sep-2005, 22:29
EA can do next gen?
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.