Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/
Yu-jin Chia reviewed:
World of Warcraft
| 13 of 16 people found the following review helpful:  Solid, intriguing MMORPG experience, March 29, 2006 Fun: World of Warcraft is a work in progress, and it generally works. Those familiar with general principles of engineering design know that true innovation is risky and likely to fail on the first try. There's no question that Blizzard knows this as well, and as such World of Warcraft does very little to change the tried-and-true MMORPG conventions. That said, it does do many things better than much of the competition.  The gameplay mechanics are pretty standard. You can choose from various classes, pick basic traits such as gender, race, and appearance, and use a variety of class/race-specific equipment and skills. You can choose professions that let you gather or create various items. You gain experience by doing quests, defeating enemies, and exploring areas. Along the way you interact with NPCs and other players, with whom you can pick up quests or trade items. Nothing too surprising in any of this, unless you've never touched an RPG in your life. It's the implementation of these aspects of the game that stand out. For example, trade is conducted both directly or through auction houses where you can put items up for sale to other players. This makes it unnecessary to actually physically meet in order to do business. An e-mail system lets you send messages, items, and money to other players (or even your other characters). Quests are given by level, and sometimes send you to instanced dungeons that require serious teamwork to get through. The number of items available, especially set items that provide extra benefits if you equip multiple pieces of the set, make for an endless number of options for outfitting your characters. The gameplay in general is well balanced, both for PVE (player vs environment) and PVP (player vs player). Quest chains are generally well done, and the level of difficulty generally fits with your current level. Skill balance is also generally decent, and there's no one class that really stands out as 'best.' If you like to do things alone, it's entirely possible to reach the maximum level that way. If you like doing everything with friends, that also works. The game's graphics are also decent. I've seen better, but I've also seen worse. The game generally performs well on my somewhat average machine, and it actually doesn't require high-speed internet to work (though it is still recommendable). Now, please note the number of times the word 'generally' appears in the last few paragraphs. There are numerous exceptions to all of those statements, though not enough to form a majority in any particular area. Blizzard is always fixing, tweaking, nerfing, and otherwise modifying the game, so issues vanish and new issues arise with every patch. Some changes are necessary, but some I've seen are highly questionable. I will concede that this may be a matter of personal opinion, but I haven't yet met a person that was happy with ALL of them. There is another major problem with World of Warcraft, and it is significant enough that it warrants a deduction in rating despite the game's many strengths. This is the game support and downtime. I've found the in-game tech support to be inept, wishy-washy, and overall a big waste of time. Most of your queries will be met by an automated response, and the proposed solutions almost never work. Granted, it must be a nightmare trying to troubleshoot a game as complicated as this, but they could at least say 'I don't know' instead of wasting your time doing something that clearly isn't going to fix the problem. I'm not sure if this is the result of a typical 'we never make mistakes, so the game has no bugs and it must be your machine' complex, or if it's just a way of giving Blizzard's QA personnel something to spin their wheels on. Either way, it needs serious improvement. The servers are often congested, regularly offline, and generally unreliable. As a matter of fact, the whole darn thing is down right now, which is why I'm writing this review instead of playing. People get booted off for no good reason all the time- I don't think I've ever seen a long instance run in which nobody was booted. Though the game is pretty stable, occasionally I'll see a fatal exception in something or another, or just a crash to desktop. Together with other sundry bugs and glitches in quests and the game environment, this can result in a rather frustrating experience. If you want to see just how frustrating it can get, take a look at the community site's tech board sometime. So you might ask, despite all this why am I willing to pay my $15 a month to play? Well, the game itself is just that good- there's so many things to do, see, and (of course) kill that you'll be hard pressed to experience the half of it in a year of play. Particularly if you have friends that want to play with you, it really doesn't get old. The addition of new content is also reason to keep coming back, and in that regard Blizzard has done a fine job. If you have a great deal of time to waste, or don't significantly value your social life, then World of Warcraft comes with my highest recommendations. |
| March 29, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/
Yu-jin Chia reviewed:
Star Wars: Empire at War
| 9 of 10 people found the following review helpful: At long last..., March 28, 2006 Fun: As a hardcore Star Wars fan, and an equally hardcore real time strategy (RTS) player, I have been yearning for a good Star Wars game that would fulfill both these aspects. Finally, after along and excruciatingly frustrating journey, it is here. A few years back, a game called "Rebellion" was released by LucasArts. It was so bad that it's not even available from most online vendors anymore (including this one). I think they, like most players, would rather forget it even existed. This was the first Star Wars game to have (some) real time strategy elements. Then came Force Commander. The game looked like a dream come true, and I was really excited about it. Just the idea of being able to command AT-ATs was enough to get me drooling. To make a long story short, Force Commander likewise bombed- severe technical issues, dated graphics and design, and poor execution were its hallmarks. Then came Galactic Battlegrounds. I enjoyed GB more than any of the predecessors, but then again I really liked Age of Empires 2 as well. The only significant difference between the two games was the addition of flying units. Though this was a marked improvement over the previous two games, it still lacked space combat and the single play campaign was a decidedly lackluster redux of Age of Kings. Note that Galactic Battlegrounds was actually not an original LucasArts product. At around this time, LucasArts realized their in-house development just wasn't working, and started to contract it out (Jedi Outcast is another superb example of the result of this strategy). Petroglyph, which includes developers that worked on the Command & Conquer series, received the task of developing the next Star Wars RTS. That alone gave me reason to hope that this time they would get it right. And they did. For those that have played Rome: Total War, Empire at War shares more with it than one word in the game title. Though the number of units available is far smaller, and the strategic aspect much simpler, Empire at War includes the best features of that other excellent strategy game. You are placed in command of either the Empire or the Rebel Alliance, and must fight for control of the galaxy. Your enemy will spare no expense to take you down, and so you'll be just as busy defending your hard-won turf as you will be attacking. Though there aren't many units available, there are heroes that significantly influence the course of battles and the war in general. Each hero has unique traits and abilities- for example, Darth Vader shows up in his TIE fighter in space battles and can call for wingmen, and on the ground can crush vehicles or send enemy troops flying. The various ships and ground forces you can build have specific strengths and weaknesses- all of which are clearly referenced if you're not the sort that likes to memorize these. Many units have special abilities that can significantly alter the course of a battle if used properly. The game's resource model is an interesting departure from convention. You gather credits by holding planets, some of which provide more than others, and all of which can provide extra income via mining. You can also steal credits from the other side by deploying smugglers. These are then used to produce ships and troops at your bases. When you attack or defend a planet, you do so only with the troops you have in place. You can only collect resources and buy units by capturing special neutral buildings, which aren't always available. You can only have a certain number of units on the tactical map at any time, but can call for reinforcements- if available- if you lose some or increase the unit cap (e.g. by capturing a strategic point). Some structures and units, such as space stations and Star Destroyers, have a garrison that auto-replenishes over time if they're destroyed. These can be extremely valuable in a long fight, so protecting such units can be vital to winning a battle. Fighter and ground units have several vehicles/soldiers per squad, and move and act as a team. Losing the whole squad results in its elimination, but if even one vehicle or soldier survives, the unit is restored at the end of a battle. Capital ships and space stations have 'hardpoints' such as engines, laser batteries, and torpedo launchers. These can be individually targeted and destroyed, resulting in the loss of that capability. In all battles where you are the defender, you can purchase upgrades. If you're the attacker, you can also do so if you find a mercenary outfitter. There are other numerous advantages and disadvantages for either an attacker or defender. For example, in space combat a defender with an ion cannon or hypervelocity gun in place on the planet's surface can use it to shoot at enemy capital ships. An attacker can also call down bombers in ground battles if they have them in a fleet at that planet. Additionally, each faction has its strengths and weaknesses. The Empire tends to be very strong in space since its larger capital ships garrison fighters and are generally better armed. The Rebel Alliance, on the other hand, can sneak troops past Imperial fleets with a raid, which can negate this advantage. In particular, the units available to each faction are extremely distinctive- not the typical clones you expect in a standard RTS. This is both realistic and fun, and the fact that the game remains well balanced despite the differences is a testament to the developer's expertise in this area. Skirmish mode and multiplay are available, and multiplay does include the galactic campaign in head-to-head. This is remarkable, since even the excellent Total War series didn't allow the strategic aspect to go online. The game's graphics are of superior quality, and it runs well on my very average PC. It might take a dream machine to run everything on highest detail, but such settings aren't necessary to make the game a fine cinematic experience. I haven't been able to find any technical issues yet, though some patches have been released. In summary, I can't be more pleased with Empire at War. It really is a dream come true, and was totally worth the wait. The game is challenging, immersive, gorgeous, and Star Wars down to the last pixel. As a strategy game alone it is a fine piece of work, and as Star Wars it is the final word in the genre. |
| March 28, 2006 |
Posted by admin
Bron reviewed:
Logitech Wireless Music System for PC
| 63 of 65 people found the following review helpful:  Excellent sound and does what it says!, You can just plug it in and go (without the software) and it will work. But if you want to really control your setup, then you'll have to load the software. I would have given it 5 stars, but the software is a bit buggy. I got it to work but it took some playing around. On my PC the logitech took over as the default audio device. I went into the SoundMAX Control panel and set everything back to my PC's internal sound. Then I used the Logitech software to setup MusicMatch output to go to this device. After twiddling a bit and rebooting my PC, everything finally settled down and now it works like a champ. WinAmp, Windows Media Player, and the many other audio programs I have now output through my PC speakers (before they all went to the Logitech device) and now only Music Match outputs to the Logotech device which is what I wanted. The remote is cheap and uses he plastic "bubble" keys, so you can get multiple key presses sometimes, but once I got used to it, it worked fine. But I programmed my main "learning remote" and now use that all the time, reserving the small remote Logitech remote as a backup. You have mute, play, pause, stop, previous track and next track commands available. Note there is no power off. There is no power off switch on either device (receiver or transmitter). Not a problem on the transmitter as it draws power from the USB port and so will be off when your PC is off (and vice versa). The receiver stays on all the time. I doubt that it uses very much current, but I still would have preferred an on/off switch. How much could it cost? Anyway, no switch seems to be the (stupid) trend these days. Note also that there is no track display on the receiver - not a big deal IMHO, but if you want that look elsewhere. Note also that the receiver for this device will work with anything that has audio in (analog)- a stereo receiver, a TV w/audio inputs, a boom box, whatever! That's nice, so if you have power out on your deck, take your boom box and the recevier out there with you and you're in business! The receiver is small and there's no power "brick" just an oddly shaped plug (with the transformer in it, I assume)so it's very portable. You can buy extra receivers and the Logitech software will let you select (on your PC) which one is active. It did not appear to allow multiple receviers active, but I only have one so I can't be sure about that. Since it is a 2 way channel (remember you are controlling the Player on your PC via the remote), I guess only one 'pair' can work at a time. Still, nice that you have the option to route the output to different rooms or locations (via multiple receivers). The transmitter could easily be moved from one PC to another (or to a laptop, etc.) as well. Very versatile! All in all, a great product for the price and I am very happy with it. I set 'shuffle' on MusicMatch and it's like having my own satellite radio station. ;) |
| March 27, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/themoneysit08-20
Rubin Carver reviewed:
True Love Waits: O'Riley Plays Radiohead
| 2 of 3 people found the following review helpful: Sleepytime music, March 27, 2006 All of the playing on this disc is superb on the technical level... obviously O'riley is a top notch classical performer. The arrangements are a mixed bag, though. There are some amazing renditions on here - see the impressionistic 'Everything In Its Right Place' and the melancholy coffee house arrangement of 'Knives Out'. Some others are also quite listenable, including 'Subterranean Homesick Alien', 'Exit Music', 'Bulletproof', and 'Motion Picture Soundtrack'. However, the upbeat pop tunes have difficult translating to solo piano. the Pablo Honey tunes suffer the worst here, and feel slightly unnatural; perhaps like a classical pianist paying tribute to a favorite band, rather than the more personal adaptations that make the 'Knives Out' arrangement so effective. Overall, a nice cd to put on in the background when you're reading or settling in to bed, but Radiohead fanatics beware - don't expect anything that lives up to the band's immense standards. |
| March 27, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/
Yu-jin Chia reviewed:
Nexus: The Jupiter Incident
| 6 of 6 people found the following review helpful: Not a Homeworld clone, March 23, 2006 Fun: When I first saw screenshots of Nexus:TJI, I figured it was just another Homeworld-type game. Since I rather enjoyed Homeworld, I proceeded to buy it. For those that are expecting Nexus to be that, you're in for a surprise, though not necessarily an unpleasant one. The most notable difference between the two games is that you don't harvest or build anything in Nexus. You're assigned a few ships (I've never seen more than 10 under my command) and can usually configure them before each mission. Oftentimes you don't even start with all of them, but receive the remainder as reinforcements after an objective is completed. Lost ships are replaced automatically, but with default equipment, which is pretty bad if you get in the habit of taking casualties. The weapons available for upgrade, and the number you can add on, are more or less predetermined. Adding points to the main character's engineering raises the amount you can 'purchase,' but I've found this has little impact in general. Resource units don't carry on between missions, so there's really no management aspect to the game. That said, the lack of resource focus means you'll be far more concerned with the mission objectives, which run the gamut of stealth to all-out war. The missions in general are well planned and remarkably challenging- on the hardest difficulty I actually got stuck about 1/3 of the way through the game. There are some issues in weapon configuration, which can cause you to scrub out on a mission the first time if you didn't know what you needed to equip, and oftentimes you're given few if any hints in this regard. Despite that, the missions are generally fun and fast-paced. I have to say, though, that at times I wanted to pull my hair out when playing through some of them. You're often put up against massively superior enemy units, and one wrong move can mean your doom (or losing a ton of ships, which is pretty much the same thing). Some battles can drag on forever, with your fleet exchanging potshots with strong enemy warships until someone's shields finally go down. I actually left to eat lunch during some of the longer ones, and came back to find my fleet happily victorious. If you respec all your weapons for each mission you might be able to go faster, but only at the cost of expensive general-purpose upgrades like shields, power cells, and engines. The game mechanics in general are well done and quite intuitive (despite what others here have said). There's advanced movement controls, but these are generally not needed. You issue basic orders to your ships, and they do their best to carry them out. Sometimes they may seem to take their time, but this is because even your fastest ships tend to be pretty slow and sluggish. The graphics and sound are both very well done. This is pretty clear if you've seen any screenshots of the game. The campaign is interspersed with full motion video cutscenes, and all dialogue is spoken. Some of the alien dialogue is really irritating, but that just gives you more reason to kill them all. In general, the campaign is interesting and immersive, and the mission objectives go beyond the usual 'kill them all' scenario. As previously mentioned, the missions are challenging, and get more so as the campaign progresses. Perfectionists will be hard-pressed to finish without losing any ships even on easy difficulty. I didn't have any serious technical issues with the game, though it doesn't seem to like multitasking. Load times were short, and Nexus ran very smoothly on my rather average PC. If you're the type that appreciates real time combat, sci-fi, and/or 3-D strategy games, Nexus is certainly a good pick. I would say it's one of the only truly difficult real time strategy games out there now, so those just seeking a challenge of any sort might want to check it out. |
| March 23, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/themoneysit08-20
Busy Bee reviewed:
Special Diets for Special Kids
| 3 of 3 people found the following review helpful: The one to get you started !...., March 23, 2006 It's great !! It's easy to read yet complete, is full of tips and has lots of recipes (easy to do and tasty). Implementing this diet is not exactly funny or easy at the beginning, this book will lead you every step of the way and give you great hope that you can live normally with this diet. Afterward everything falls into place ! With this book, you can do it ! |
| March 23, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/themoneysit08-20
Busy Bee reviewed:
Children With Starving Brains: A Medical Treatment Guide for Autism Spectrum Disorder, Second Edition
| 24 of 25 people found the following review helpful: A must have for bio-medical approach, March 23, 2006 She tried about everything on her granddaughter and is talking from experience !.... This book is about bio-medical approach in autism and covers topics such as the leaky gut syndrome, yeast overgrowth, vitamins & supplements, heavy metals, gluten & caseine intolerance...etc... It's very interesting, informative, and yet it's accessible to everyone. (You can read it even if you were sleeping during science class !) This book will help you understand what you can do (and how to do so) to improve your child's health, it will enable you to understand better your doctor's decision regarding your child, and best of all it will most likely push you to seek a qualified professional advice, someone that can give your child this comprehensive approach for autism and PDD (aka a DAN doctor). You can find a listing of DAN (Defeat Autism Now) doctors on the Autism Research Institute website (http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari). This book is about hope and healing, not about selling you a miracle cure ! It's about explaining to you why some things happen with our children and how to improve or correct it ! It's a must have for every parent considering this approach and I'd say a must have for every pediatrician who doesn't know a thing about autism, unfortunately they're legion... Take this step toward your child's recovery ! |
| March 23, 2006 |
Posted by Amazon Customer Reviews
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/themoneysit08-20
Bruce Stern reviewed:
California Girl: A Novel (Parker, T Jefferson)
| 1 of 2 people found the following review helpful: Atmospheric, intimate and a southern California epic, March 22, 2006 In a story that captivated me because of its vivid descriptions of the land, sky and sea, the people of all kinds who occupied the territory south of L.A. in the questing, combustible and frantic time of the 1960s. California Girl matches its, on one level the rather ordinary lives of the main characters, with a story that lovingly renders the big impacts of its characters small but extraordinary moments and twists of fate as little else I've read. The realistic, honest, empathetic, and struggling--in their souls and their hearts--Becker brothers are center pieces of this complete mystery, but more importantly, they are presented as lives with depth and are well rewarded characterizations. Mistakes are made, they are acknowledged, some are rectified, some are lived with, and some are redeemed. Such is human life. This novel has lots more in it than simply a fast-paced, airport thriller. It contains characters who this reader increasingly cared about the more into the book I got. I think this story might appeal more to guys than gals, but gals will enjoy the respectful and caring rendering of all the characters, including the wives, girlfriends, mothers, and daughters who populate this enriching saga. For people who care about people as individuals, rather as stereotypes, this is a story for you. It may take time building, but don't many of the best things do? |
| March 22, 2006 |
Posted by TheTechLounge - Recent Articles: Hardware: Motherboards
http://www.thetechlounge.com
| March 22, 2006 |
Posted by CNET Reviews - Top Rated Computer Systems
http://reviews.cnet.com/4566-3000_7-0.html?subj=fdba&part=rss&tag=TR_Computer+Systems
| March 22, 2006 |
