Saturday, September 29, 2007

Ocarina of Time

So last post I got myself talking about Legend of Zelda and it feels like a shame to just stop there. So I'd like to take a moment to reflect on one of my personal favorites of the series, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.

Ocarina of Time starts with our hero Link as a child, probably no older than 10 or 11. He is awakened from his nightmares by the small fairy Navi, who tells him the local forest's guardian has asked for him specifically. After a small adventure in the depths of the giant tree, young Link learns that he doesn't really belong in the forest with the other children-like Kokori (these people never grow up). Instead you're sent out into the rest of Hyrule to figure out your real destiny for yourself.

Along your travels you help out some of the mountain dwelling Gorons and a young Zora princess (water-dwelling people). Eventually through a series of events I don't want to ruin, Link is sealed away for 7 years and you play most of the rest of the game with a bigger, stronger, grown-up Link. The funnest part about the whole ordeal though is that you get to go back in time and switch between young and old Link as often as you want. You even have to do a few things in the past to get past obstacles in the future.

The game itself was released for the N64 and was the first 3D Zelda game. For its time the graphics are amazing and the game play is timeless. It was delayed many times for almost a year but many people call it one of the best games ever made.

Whatever your opinion though, the game is undoubtedly a huge success. I always enjoy playing it and will probably for the rest of my life. If you play any of the more recent Zelda games and ever get the chance to try Ocarina of Time, I hope you'll take that chance.

Smart Kitchens, Part 3 of 3, Technology in today's kitchens

Technology, as I have said before, is becoming a part of every day life. I won't leave the house without my cellphone and I almost go into withdrawal if I don't get on the internet at least once a day.

The kitchen is a prime place for technology too. We all spend time there and it's usually a great place to be. We have adapted our kitchen to make it fit our lifestyle better. Now it is almost standard to have a TV that folds down from the cabinets and it is a dream of inventors to get the entire kitchen wired to the internet.

But is this good for us? I know this is contradictory but we spend so much of our lives disconnected from the real world and plugged into Cyberspace. For a long time, the kitchen was a place to get away from TV, internet, music and everything and just be with people. I fear that this place will be corrupted to.

Not that I am saying that it's bad to have technology. It is very useful. But we need moderation. The whole smart kitchen thing reminds me of a popular movie from a while ago called Stepford Wives. The women were all high tech and had high tech homes too. I don't think it really worked out for them though.

All in all, I'm saying that we could use a little help when it comes to keeping up with things like groceries. But if all this technology makes us lazy, we need to get rid of it.

Thanks Home IQ Systems for the picture!

Legend of Zelda

Ahh, Legend of Zelda. I could go on and on about the series.

The Legend of Zelda games started with the NES and has since found itself on almost every Nintendo system since. They're a mix of action and adventure games. The hero, Link, usually has to save the land of Hyrule from the evil reign of Ganondorf who has harnessed the power of the Triforce for evil. In addition the princess Zelda usually gets dragged into the picture, making the story all the more timeless.

Your main weapon in the games is your sword and shield. Throughout the game you pick up other weapons such as the bow and arrows, boomerang and bombs. You can also pick up better armor, new shields, a better sword, and more hearts (health). There is a good balance between the action of battle and puzzles from room to room. All of the games are very free, letting you visit any area you've visited before and even rewarding you by leaving content that you can't find unless you come back with more abilities.

In addition, the game stays true to its roots, with every story line giving you the same classic feel of the original while making use of the newest graphics and new items and places. Its soundtrack has also stayed true through the years and most of the classic medleys are in every game.

Overall the games are humorous, challenging, and fun and it doesn't look like the series will end anytime soon.

Smart Kitchens, Part 2 of 3, Ovens

It seems so much of the world is on the go. Everyone is happy to save a little time. But, in the interest of saving time, real food has suffered. No one has time to cook real food anymore.

This oven is here to change it. With the smart oven, you can mix up a casserole in the morning, put it in the oven, which also has a refrigerator setting, and then call your oven on the way home and tell it to cook your food. By the time you’re home, dinner is ready to eat.

Honestly, though, how much time does it take to turn on the oven? If you can’t spare a couple of seconds to push a button or turn a knob, how much time will this oven save you? You can still mix a casserole and prepare a turkey ahead of time and keep it in the fridge. The only thing the oven saves you is the few calories it costs you to lift whatever you’re having for dinner. And even then, it doesn’t really save you that either.

Now a really cool oven would also prepare the food for you. It would be like out of the Jetsons, with a robot maid and everything.

So, overall, this oven is not a timesaver, so don’t waste your money.

Thanks Answers for the picture!

Smart Kitchens, Part 1 of 3, Smart Refrigerators

I know it’s very late in the week and that I haven’t posted. I’m sorry, but ENGR 126H, a class Bucket of Calculators was talking about earlier, is kicking my butt. I’m better now, though, and I here to bring you a short series on smart kitchens.

So here is Part 1 of 3, Smart Refrigerators.

When my parents finally let me get my driver’s license (my mom was once a bus driver and is all about safety) I would be sent on multiple trips to the store, usually to get one thing. This was because my mother would forget to get butter or pop or bread or something else that was vital for dinner that day.

So wouldn’t it be nice if the refrigerator kept track of everything in it?

I know that many of you have probably already heard of this awesome gadget but I felt that it was important because the kitchen is a gathering place for friends and family. It was only a matter of time until technology was fully integrated into the kitchen.

Right now, though not available in the US, people can buy smart refrigerators that can keep track of what is in the fridge. When you run out of something, you tell the fridge and it makes a list of things you will need when you go to the store next. It can even be programmed to tell you when to buy perishable things like milk and cold meat.

The downside is that it has to be programmed by hand. This means that when you go to the store, you tell the computer in the fridge what you bought and when it expires.

Product developers have been working to fix this small downfall in the fridge’s design by taking advantage of an older technology that is just now becoming affordable enough for commercial use called RFID tags. These tags hold enough information so that each product can be uniquely identified by brand, item and expiration date.

Another downside, though, is the enormous price tag. These gadgets can cost thousands of dollars. I think that when they become more affordable, it’ll be worth getting one.

Thanks Coolest Gadgets, DIY, First Glimpse Magazine and Search Warp for information for this post and for the next two!

Thanks Alibaba for the photo!

Halo 3: Third Time's A Charm

Many people say the very famous qoute "Third time's a charm." I believe Microsoft, with Halo 3, has made this quote come true.

Halo 3 is the best game of the Halo trilogy, without a doubt. It combines all of the best aspects of Halo 1 and Halo 2 into a single game, and then it adds even more. And then a little more after that.

One are that Halo 3 has improved on, has been the vehicles that are available to you, in the campaign as well as online multiplayer. One of these vehicles, as well as my personal favorite new vehicle is the Elephant (pictured below). It is a troop transport. It may be slower than other vehicles, but if you have it packed with people that know what they are doing, then you can be practically invincible.

Halo 3 has added multiple new weapons, that really re-define the way the game is played. There is no longer one weapon that everyone wants and tries to get. There are multiple weapons that are extremely strong. One of thes weapons is the Anti-Vehicle Model 6 Grindell (pictured below). This is basically a gigantic laser that has the power to kill your player in one hit. This is just one of many new weapons that can kill you in one or a few hits. Not to mention the vintage assault rifle way back from Halo 1. I know I sure am excited to see that back in the weapons lineup. Plus this can lead to a wicked combination of the assault rifle and the battle rifle. Here you have your shorter ranged weapon, and a longer ranged weapon, both of which can do a lot of damage to opponents.

This adds a completely new aspect to online gaming, which, for some is the main reason they would buy Halo 3. The change from Halo 2 online to Halo 3 online is absolutely magnificent. Halo 2 was basically a race to get the strongest weapon, or possibly weapons which consisted at most 4 weapons on the map, or playing area. Halo 3, however has over ten new weapons, including the gun turrets that you can now pick up and carry around. To me, this equals the playing field for all the people in the room, and brings it down to a matter of pure skill. This makes it less likely for someone that sucks at Halo to win in an online game.

Halo 3 also added some new online features to campaign. Yes, you use to be able to play the campaign with two players online. This was great, if you wanted to play with someone else, but did not have anyone close enough to play on the same xbox with. So, how could Halo 3 improve on this brilliant idea for the campaign play. Of course, Halo 3 does. It adds two more players to the online campaign. Yes. That is up to four players can now play the online campaign. However, Bungie keeps expanding the online play of Halo 3 even more. And yet, Bungie expands the online play for Halo 3 even more. The online play now has online scoring, which basically gives you points for the things you do throughout the game, and keeps track of your total number of points. This serves as a way to compare yourself to other gamers that have also played the online campaign.

Sixteen Years of Civilization (Part 4 of 4)

Except for the first Civ's nostalgia factor, Civ IV is my favorite of them all. Civ IV is the first game since the first that Sid Meier was directly involved, and much of Civ IV's greatness may be due to that.

Civ IV has many very big changes. Corruption from Civ III has been removed, replaced with maintenance. Maintenance was in previous Civs, but before it applied to buildings in your city. This could have the effect of making big cities less useful than small cities. Now, there is maintenance for number of cities and distance of cities. This means that massive growth which was a useful strategy in the previous Civs will stifle your economy and research.

Also new is religion. Although ceremonial burial and monotheism were on the tech tree in previous games, and you could build temples and cathedrals, there was no distinction between them. And you can ask any crusader, it's not important that someone has a temple, but what that temple stands for. Computer nations will distrust you if you have a different national religion.

Another new concept is that of great people. Now a city will generate great people points from having wonders and specialists. When a city gets enough great people points, a great person will be born. There are five types of great people: engineers, merchants, scientists, artists and priests. All great people can give you a free technology, or become a super specialist in one of your cities. If you have more than one great person of different types, you can use them to send your civilization into a golden age. And each type has a special ability. An engineer can finish any building a city is working on, including wonders, an artist can give 4000 culture to a city, etc. But a great person can only do one of these things and then they're gone.

In previous games, there were different governments your nation could have. Despotism, monarchy, republic, democracy, etc. But they were pretty much set in stone. Democracy was always the best (of course, you needed certain technologies before you could be a democracy). The only consideration between governments was whether you were going to be at war or not. Communism and monarchy are good for war, while republic and democracy are good for peace. In Civ IV that's all changed. Now there are civics. There are five categories of civics, each of which has five mutually exclusive options: Government, which has options such as hereditary rule, and universal suffrage; Legal which has options like bureaucracy and free speech; Labor which includes slavery, caste system and emancipation; Economy which has free market and state property; and Religion which has theocracy and free religion. Each of the different options has different strengths and weaknesses. Now you can have a communistic economy while still having universal suffrage and free speech. This allows for much more flexibility in governments, adding to depth of gameplay.

Another new concept is health. Health replaced two concepts: pollution and population limits. Before, if you had a city with a lot of people and manufacturing power, it would make pollution, which you would need a worker to clean up. Also, a city could not grow above a certain population until it got an aqueduct and later a sewer system or hospital (depending on which game). Now, cities when a city gets unhealthy, its growth rate will go down, or even become negative. A city will be unhealthy because of large population, as well as certain buildings, like factories, and certain terrain, like jungles. A city can be more healthy by building other building, like hospitals, other terrain, like forests, and food resources, like cows, corn and fish.

Also important is the tech tree. Before, every advance had exactly two prerequisite advances. You had to have both prerequisites before you could get what they led to. In Civ IV it's much more flexible. Some advances have one prerequisite, some two, some even have three. But unlike the previous games, you don't have to have all of them to get it, just one. For example, animal husbandry, pottery and priesthood all lead to writing in Civ IV, but you only need one of them to get writing. (And a small note: in all the previous games, alphabet led to writing, opposite of Civ IV and opposite of how it actually developed.)

And in every game, the combat system was tweaked. In Civ IV, it got a complete overhaul, and it's probably the best system yet. Now, every unit has one number: strength. No more attack and defense. (Hit points and firepower are included in strength.) "But how can that be better?" you ask "Some units should be better at attacking and some should be better at defending." That's resolved by every unit getting special abilities. For example, a pikeman has a strength of 6 and a knight has a strength of 10. But the pikeman gets +100% strength against mounted units. Swordsmen get +10% strength when attacking a city. Longbowmen get +25% strength on hills and +25% strength when defending cities. Now, you can't just build a bunch of the strongest unit and stomp on your enemy, because every unit has their weaknesses.

In addition to that, experience has been redone. Now when a unit gets enough experience, it goes up a level, and it gets a promotion that you can choose. These promotions can make them stronger when in combat against archery units, or mounted units or gunpowder units, etc. Or the promotion can give them advantages on certain terrain. Or they can make friendly units around them heal more quickly. Or increased sight range or increased movement. The promotions make experienced units extremely valuable.

Addendum: Of course, Civ IV isn't perfect. One thing that I think needs to be changed in a future version is how food and growth works. It's been exactly the same in each game. A city makes food for itself - it can't get food from other cities or give food to other cities. When a certain amount of food has been stored the population goes up. That's pretty good for up to the industrial age. But at that point, a nation isn't going to let a city starve because it can't grow enough food. They ship food from cities with surplus. Also, growth rate stops being related to food supply since people can move around more easily.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Sixteen Years of Civilization (Part 3 of 4)

Although Civ III has improvements over Civ and Civ II, it is personally my least favorite. Which is not to say it's bad, merely less good.

One of the biggest reasons I don't like Civ III is that the combat system is resimplified. It's not so bad as the original, but it's not as good as Civ II. Although, with Civ III, it is explicitly clear how a veteran unit is better than a non-veteran. Veterans were in the previous games, and they were more likely to win a battle, but it was unclear by what mechanism. In Civ III, a more experience unit has more hitpoints.

Another concept executed imperfectly in Civ III is corruption: the farther a city is from its capital, the less productive it is. Although this was originally implemented in Civ II, it wasn't much of a consideration. Presumably in an effort to make the strategy of making as many cities as quickly as possible less feasible, corruption is much much worse. Unfortunately, that didn't work. Unproductive cities still add to your land area and population, and don't take anything away.

Though, Civ III does have many improvements over the first two games. Least among these is the new worker unit. In the first two games, settler units would make new cities, and build roads, etc. Now, settlers only make new cities, and only workers can make roads, etc.

Another small change is the removal of the caravan. In the first two games, in order to trade with foreign nations, you would need to build caravans. In Civ III, cities make trade routes automatically, and trading special resources is done through the diplomacy screen.

Speaking of resources, luxury and strategic resources have been added. In the first two games, a resource could give a city extra production, commerce or food. In Civ III there are still resources like that (called bonus resources), but now resources can also give you extra happiness (luxuries like gems, spices, or silk) and certain units require certain resources to build (for example, to build swordsmen, you must have iron. To build tanks, you must have oil.) This adds extra layers of strategy. If you lack an important strategic resource (horses, iron and coal are the most important resources) you can be in serious trouble.

Another change is that which civilization you play is no longer a merely cosmetic choice affecting your color and city names. Now, each civilization has a unique unit and particular characteristics that make them better at some things. For example the Chinese are industrious and militaristic, which means workers build improvements faster, and units are more likely to gain experience from battles. The unique unit is interesting but has little influence in how you play.

And the most important and best change in Civ III is culture. In Civ III, every city has a culture value, which determines how far out its borders go. Also, if a foreign city with low culture is next to a city with high culture, the low cultured city can rebel to join sides with its more cultural neighbor. In the original Civ, there were no national borders and in Civ II, borders were static at a few tiles away from your cities. Now, with Civ III, you can expand your borders without be expansionist or warlike.

In the first two Civs there were only two ways to win, kill everyone else, or be the first to build a spaceship to Alpha Centauri. Those are still options, but now you can win by having a very large culture or by winning an election in the UN.

Who's the Best of the Best

The Endless Battle of Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo

So which one is it? What system is better than all the others? Which one has the best graphics? More memory? Faster processor? Better games? Most innovating? Most for its buck? These questions are always floating around both kids and adults alike dispute on which of the three newest systems are the best: The Microsoft XBOX, the Nintendo Wii, or the Sony Playstation.

Well first off is the 360. What does it have to offer? It has a 500Mhz RAM, making it much faster than the Wii and matches the PS3. It can hold a lot of memory, up to 20 GB. It doesn't have motion-sensored controllers, but can hold up to 8 wireless controllers. They aren't too badly priced, ranging from 250 to 400 dollars. (Sourced from They have classic game series like Halo...and Halo. They have many games that are universal to the PS3 as well. What not too like?

Next wii can look at the Wii. (Ha ha, get it?)((That wasn't funny man!)) Anyways, the Wii is definitely the worst when looking at hardware and software specs. It only has 88Mhz of RAM, its running power for wired Internet connection and CPU usage are multiply times smaller than both the PS3 and XBOX. It does offer wireless controllers with motion sensors and an innovating 3-axis rotation and 3-axis position controllers, letting the user move around the screen with pointers or cross-hairs. They come to be around 245 dollars. (Again from Games consist of classic and new Nintendo themed games. Overall, it's a new type of system, but doesn't have the same power and graphics as the other two.

The PS3 is very similar to the XBOX when looking at its capabilities. It has a 512Mhz RAM bandwidth, just as the XBOX, it has the same memory capabilities and graphics as well. It is a little more pricey, ranging from 460 to 620 dollars. ( It doesn't have a rumble feature in the controllers, but can have up to 8 wireless playing and has 3-axis features close to those of the Wii.

So there is as best of a summary of the three systems as I can. Some of the data may be out of date, and I failed to mention every advantage and disadvantage of the systems, but that is a quick and hopefully un-bais run down of the video games. As for my analysis, I do find the Wii to lack certain qualities that the other two have, but I love the games and the ideas they have for the new 3-axis controller. The PS3 definitely has some fine graphics, and it can certainly process the gameplay quickly, showing little to no lag. But I don't have 600 in my pocket to just go on the latter speculations. As for the XBOX, I would put that as my close but still number one. I am a Halo fan, so I obviously have a certain bais, but the graphics are more than enough for me, and it runs beautifully, even with the most complex games. So there you have it. Now to you hardcore gamers out there, how do these systems size up in your minds?

spurfan15's Digg blog

Sorry everyone for the false price range for the Wii. It isn't anywhere close to 400 bucks, only 245. Sorry for the confusion.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Sixteen Years of Civilization (Part 2 of 4)

And now, it's time for the second part. (I'd have gotten to it sooner, but I was busy with midterms and such.)

Many of the differences between Civ and Civ II don't affect the gameplay much, for example, better graphics, new civilizations, new units, new technologies, etc. These will not be my focus.

There are some interesting changes to purely aesthetic points. With diplomacy, you don't speak to the leader of an foreign nation as you do in the first game, but rather their ambassador, who stands in front of a portrait of the leader. In the original, when your people decided you were doing a good job, they would improve your palace. In Civ II, they improve your throne room.

In each successive game, the computer players cheat less. In this game, when a computer nation begins building a wonder, it is announced, to verify that they are not just being given them a turn before you finish them.

An interesting change, not major, but significant enough to be mentioned separately, is that rivers provide extra movement, like roads. This makes it easier to explore along rivers, making it more historically accurate.

One major change is diplomacy. In the original Civ, you can either be at war with an another nation, or at peace. Along with that, your actions did not affect how other nations dealt with you. In Civ II, you can have an alliance, be at peace, be neutral, have a cease-fire, or be at war. This adds some depth, but more importantly, a new diplomacy concept is that of reputation. If you break a peace-treaty, or sneak attack someone, the computer remembers and will be less likely to trust you.

The biggest and most significant change is the change to the combat system. In Civ II, units still have an attack value and a defense value, but now they also have hit points and firepower. Hit points are very simple. When they are gone, the unit dies, and if a unit does nothing in a turn, they will gradually regenerate.This way if a unit is attacked multiple times in a turn, each successive attack is more likely to succeed, making combat more realistic. Firepower is how many hit points of damage a unit does when it makes a successful hit. Two units will continue trading hits until one is killed. This makes combat much more realistic, though still does not alleviate the "phalanx kills tank" effect.

Possibly the coolest change (though it doesn't affect a normal game) is the enormous ability for customization. There is a special editor to make your own units, terrain, civilizations, technologies, and everything you need to make your own game. Although some of these concepts are in the later games, the degree and ease of doing them is unmatched by any other Civ games.

Matlab Tutorial II

Working with Loading Files and Input Commands

Welcome to another addition of Matlab Tutorial, your one fast track to computer programming!! (Wow that kinda sounds lame and a little cliche). This issue will cover some new but still very useful tools while working in the Matlab program.

Sometimes you are working with a program that you can use on any type of text file you have with numbers in it. If you were to go and manually type in each set of data or try to copy paste all the data, you may not get exactly the right set up you are looking for, or you down right get tired of typing in all those numbers! But fear not, there is a solution. That solution I speak of is the load command. It takes files from an outside source (must be from same directory that you are currently in on Matlab) and places the information or data from that file and inputs all of it into Matlab. Pretty nice I must say. Type load ('filename.txt') and you will be able to upload all sorts of numbers with just a click of a mouse! (I should really stop doing that...)

Another cool command that can be fun but still simple is the input command. This command usually is needed in any program that you need the user, or person running your program, to punch in or "input' their own data to get a certain result or answer. It helps if you want to make a universal program that does any kind of arithmetic computation or equation, like the Pythagorean Theorem or Hooke's Law. To create such a lovely device, use input ('What the user will see').

Well that is all I have for this issue. Hope you guys are getting better at using Matlab! I'm a little ashamed to say it, but once you get done the commands and concepts, Matlab can almost be f- Here are some of those resources again for better reference:University of Florida Matlab page; University of Michigan Engineering Matlab page; MathWorks Resource Page

Sorry if you viewed the first copy of this article, I accidentally posted it while I was still working on it, hence the errors and incomplete article. I also added a photo to spice it up.

Matlab Tutorial

Learning the Basics of Matlab

If any of you reading this happens to be a student at Purdue University, especially the freshmen in ENGR126H, you will understand what I mean when programming is HARD! I am very new to the methods of creating computer programs and I find it difficult sometimes to get your concept down into Matlab. Writing in code and having the correct syntax is hard to master. Here are a few things that I have picked up though in the few months I have been using the Matlab programming system.

One of the more simple commands that is useful to learn is the clear command. This command clears the page on which the output and input data is shown. I started out running my program time after time, printing out data each time which made the window cluttered with a lot of unnecessary numbers that were used in the previous program runs. Simply writing in clc at the top of your program will clear out all the old data so your new inputs and outputs can clearly be found after ever run through of your program.

Another good command that I use often use is size or length command. These help you when you are working with any kind of vector or list of numbers in columns or rows. Length helps you find how many elements are in a row vector. Size does one better; it comes up with how many rows and columns are in the given set of data. To use both commands, simply type size(data set) or length(data set).

Well that is all for my first "issue" of Matlab Tutorial, hope this helps out anyone who has to use a computer language to get something accomplished. If you are just dying to know more about Matlab and computer programming and can't wait for my next addition to Matlab Tutorial, then check out some of these links: University of Florida Matlab page; University of Michigan Engineering Matlab page; MathWorks Resource Page

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Rhythm Games

Rhythm games. Dance Dance Revolution, Guitar Hero, In the Groove, Karaoke Revolution, Singstar. You've probably heard of one or more of these games. So what makes them so fun? Well its the music. Its a bit different in each game, but deep down, the core of these games is how the player interacts with the music.

Everyone loves music, its just a matter of which kind of music you like. I happen to be a rock, metal, and electronica music lover. The first of these games that I ever played was Dance Dance Revolution (DDR). "I don't want to, I'll look stupid." I can't tell you how many times I've heard those words out of people before they play DDR. However, I always have this to say: "Everyone looks stupid when they play DDR... even me."

While DDR has your feet moving to the beat of the music, Guitar Hero is a whole other beast. DDR itself gives the player the satisfaction of a hard workout by the end of the song, but Guitar Hero gives you the feeling of making the music rather than just reacting to it. For those of you who have never played or seen it played, in Guitar Hero, a missed note means that you don't hear that part of the song. You've now been put into the shoes of the musician, and that is a magical feeling. To hear a song that you love or have grown to love played perfectly and know at the same time that you're the reason it was played so well is a powerful feeling. Many people joke around saying "People who play Guitar Hero think they can really play the guitar." From my experience however, the feeling makes sense even if its not true.

Rhythm games are fun, and even if you think you'll look "dumb" you really won't. The only thing that matters when you play a game is that has fun. So suck it up and have fun, because if someone can't see past how you look when you're doing something you love, they're not worth your time.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Microsoft: Saying Show Me The Money?

As many people know, Microsoft is releasing Halo 3 at midnight on Tuesday. This is a huge moment for Microsoft, considering how well the Halo series has been doing. The Halo series first started with Halo: Combat Evolved released on November 15, 2001. This sparked a Halo crave all across the globe, which has evolved and expanded in the past 6 years to the universe of online gaming.

Microsoft brought in 125 million dollars in the first day of release of Halo 2. Can Microsoft expect to bring in this much with the release of Halo 3? Brokerage Wedbush Morgan of Msn's tech and gadgets blog says Microsoft could sell 3 million copies in the product's first 12 days.

Perhaps Halo 3 may not profit as much from the actual game. But that might not be where Microsoft is expecting to make the majority of their profit. Wedbush Morgan also predicts that because of Halo 3, Microsoft might sell 400,000 consoles for September. This would be an incredible opportunity for Microsoft to make a lot of money. However, this all depends on how accurate their predictions have been, and if Halo 3 will have as big of an impact as they expect.