As I read reviews on Tap Tap Revenge 3, I find myself considering a more in-depth study of difference in ratings between iPhone games and more traditional console video games. Seriously, Tap Tap Revenge 3 is getting 9.5/10s across the board.

You know what else got 9.5s? Halo. Metroid Prime. Super Mario 64. Bioshock. These are works of art, the pinnacle of gameplay mechanics and storytelling and pacing. They’re technically impressive as well. It was clear when they were released that these games stood a reasonable chance of being fun and playable for years if not decades. That’s what a 9.5 means.

TTR3 is Guitar Hero crammed into an iPhone app with some social networking thrown in because that’s what all the cool kids are doing.

Macworld seems confused about how many reviews Tap Tap Revenge 3 has, or what the ratings are.

Macworld seems confused about how many reviews Tap Tap Revenge 3 has, or what the ratings are.

I get the sense that Tapulous didn’t trust the game to stand on its own. The App Store is competitive. The games section of the App Store is hugely competitive. Every game in the App Store faces a constantly onslaught of incoming new and fresh games every day, even established games like Tap Tap Revenge. And so they added more.

They added Tap Tap Revenge 3 the App. The App has stuff like seemingly-useless in-game currency and avatar customization. It doesn’t feel like these features were added because the developers honestly wanted them. It feels like they were added because it would give users something else to do with TTR3. And when TTR3 becomes split between the Game and the App, it becomes unclear what the focus should be anymore. Everyone loses the motivation to polish the details.

And so, trying so desperately to be relevant becomes its downfall. Tap Tap Revenge 3’s gameplay, shunted aside to make way for the banner features, is left neglected, alone, and ultimately buried.

comicallyvintage: Sound advice. I am twelve.

comicallyvintage:

Sound advice.

I am twelve.

via comicallyvintage

Dan: A wild Antitrust Lawsuit appears! Dan: Apple uses OH GOD OPEN ALL THE FUCKING APIS Dan: It’s super effective!
 kapowaz 

via kapowaz

Wow, this seems like an important and scary decision. It even throws up an “Are you sure?” after either choice. So which of these should I choose? Wrong. I have no calendars on this iPod touch. This dialog shouldn’t come up at all.

Wow, this seems like an important and scary decision. It even throws up an “Are you sure?” after either choice. So which of these should I choose?

Wrong. I have no calendars on this iPod touch. This dialog shouldn’t come up at all.

gamefreaksnz: The Difference between Nerd, Dork, and Geek Explained [Great White Snark] via [Sed Contra]

gamefreaksnz:

The Difference between Nerd, Dork, and Geek Explained

[Great White Snark] via [Sed Contra]

via gamefreaksnz

katefeetie: I LEFT MY HEAD AND MY HEART ON THE DANCE FLOOOOOR. I made this. I do not have the ability to feel shame. I am becoming a Lady Gaga fan. Stop me, somebody, anybody.

katefeetie:

I LEFT MY HEAD AND MY HEART ON THE DANCE FLOOOOOR.

I made this. I do not have the ability to feel shame.

I am becoming a Lady Gaga fan. Stop me, somebody, anybody.

via katefeetie

gamefreaksnz: Cooking GaGa by ~capitannathan on deviantART

gamefreaksnz:

Cooking GaGa by ~capitannathan on deviantART

via gamefreaksnz

At the on-board shuttle group, about one-third of the process of writing software happens before anyone writes a line of code. NASA and the Lockheed Martin group agree in the most minute detail about everything the new code is supposed to do — and they commit that understanding to paper, with the kind of specificity and precision usually found in blueprints. Nothing in the specs is changed without agreement and understanding from both sides. And no coder changes a single line of code without specs carefully outlining the change. Take the upgrade of the software to permit the shuttle to navigate with Global Positioning Satellites, a change that involves just 1.5% of the program, or 6,366 lines of code. The specs for that one change run 2,500 pages, a volume thicker than a phone book. The specs for the current program fill 30 volumes and run 40,000 pages.

Nasa’s software development process produces unbelievably inhumanly virtually-perfect software.

I would say my greatest failing when writing code is not doing just this — I usually have a vague idea of what I want to do and then figure out the details as I encounter them. It must make collaborating with me a pain in the ass.

Copyright © 2008-2010 Daniel Shusta