"It's important that Apple not be the developer for the world. We can't take all of our energy, and all of our care, and finish the painting and have someone else put their name on it." - Tim Cook, Apple CEO
The same statement rings true for Google. If others are reaping the rewards, and little to nothing is left for oneself, then what's the point? If a product does not meet the expectations set before it, then developing for it doesn't make much sense. If any given product is not self-sustainable, then it is not cost effective and eventually becomes a burden to the maker--even if users appear to enjoy using it. Make no mistake about it, Google is in the business of making money, and everything else is secondary (including good will.)
Google's co-founder and now recently-minted CEO, Larry Page, bought Android in 2005. He also brought along Andy Rubin, one of its creators, over to Google, who recently renounced his post as Senior Vice President of mobile Digital Content. Basically, the guy who was leading Android. It has been said that Sergey Brin, the other tandem co-founder, was not enthusiastic about the purchase. Former Google CEO at the time, Eric Schmidt, now Chairman at Google had a similar reaction. These somewhat pessimistic receptions were also shared by Vic Gundotra, Senior Vice President of Engineering. However, he recanted these thoughts at Google I/O 2010.
I’m a pretty crappy journalist.
I do it in my free time, and for the most part, I’m an opinions and hands-on writer. I don’t go monstering around the nation’s capital with a fedora and notepad, and I rarely find myself in a position where I have to probe into anything that matters past an arbitrary release date. I don’t always fact check if I’m not making accusations.
But I know a scummy move when I see one. And Gizmodo’s actions in the iPhone HD prototype debacle have been consistently unethical, unprofessional, and, yes, illegal.
It sucks. Gizmodo’s parent company, Gawker Media, is home to a lot of great blogs and great people – people who seem to have some professional standards. But in the face of such reprehensible journalism, Gizmodo has been inexplicably wearing their tarnished reputation from this saga as if it were some kind of badge of pride. I’m sure they have lawyers going over every step of their story, but how someone in their legal or PR departments could have greenlit this is really beyond my comprehension.
Before I get into the ethical issues of yellow journalism, I think it’s important we establish a fact pattern and what I hold to be the optimal course of actions they could have taken through this whole sordid affair. Join me while I use my rudimentary Google-fu to make my case against the actions of nearly all parties involved.
Now that we’re over the holiday hump (i.e. every game imaginable being released at the same time, oh god, why do you do this to me), a lot of sites and publications have been putting together lists of games to look forward to in the new year. Me? Nuh-uh. I don’t have the cash for that. Fallout and Dead Space alone have depleted my gaming funds for a while (not to mention a certain 360 dying enough times for me to wish ill on its relatives), and if you’re like me, you want a cheap alternative until your funds recover. Hell, even if you don’t need it, you can’t pass up a quality gaming experience on the cheap, but being a penny-pinching bastard like myself tends to help heal those imaginary wounds. So, I’ve decided to put together a list of a few old-but-still-awesome games that you can get for slightly less than the cost of a night with your mom, though they’ll probably last far longer.
You may want to note that some of these games are older and may stutter and wobble and spurt blood if you’re running more than Windows XP, so you may want to check your compatibility before you plunk down the green to have them downloaded to your inferior operating system, muahaha. Hit the jump for the rundown.
Speaking at the Leipzig Games Convention Developer Conference, Peter Molyneux spoke on the need to evolve next generation combat. Both 1up and GamesIndustry.biz have covered separately different aspects of the talk, with 1up focusing on Molyneux’s ideas for advancing combat in the next generation. GamesIndustry.biz focused on the challenges that the Wii controller will present.
Molyneux’s general commentary on combat in video games is that, by and large, the fighting is not realistic. He proposed that developers do away with hit points, life bars, and unrealistic fighting in games. Molyneux held up Tarantino’s Kill Bill as an example of an approach to combat that video games might emulate. This might have been an unfortunate choice, given that this movie isn’t the most realistic portrayal of combat in the film world, but the points he expressed were still somewhat salient. His proposal includes going towards “one button” combat, combining charge attacks with timing and context awareness to alter how the fight progresses. The approach sounds similar to the timer attacks utilized in Yu Suzuki’s Shenmue series. Molyneux didn’t necessarily advocate this as the end-all of combat implementations, but seemed to use this to urge developers to think more creatively when developing new games. This somewhat tied into his remarks about the Wii controller.
When talking about the Wii controller, Molyneux confessed that he is “…an incredibly lazy person when I play games… when I have to get up, it’s painful.” He urged developers to consider the physicality of the control schemes that they were implementing, using the example of a movement-sensing glove that they tested. According to Molyneux, using the glove was “like some sort of Japanese torture that we’d put him through…” It seems Molyneux finds the freedom that the new controller offers exciting, but that excitement has to be tempered and worked with creatively to get the best that the controller brings to the table. Overall, the tone of the talk seemed to advocate developers to seek innovation rather than fall back into older, easier development patterns.
Read More | 1up
Read More | GamesIndustry.biz
© Gear Live Inc. – User-posted content, unless source is quoted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Public Domain License. Gear Live graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, videos, articles, blogs, forums, scripts and other service names are the trademarks of Gear Live Inc.