Quantcast

[Podcast] Ep 81: Wolfire Games, Zuma’s Revenge, Lifeboat

 

What’s inside this episode:

  • Overgrowth ScreenAn interview with John Graham of Wolfire Games about their game in development, Overgrowth, and their use of the Open Development method.
  • Zuma\'s Revenge ScreenAlso, a review of Zuma’s Revenge by PopCap Games, a match-three arcade shooter. Zuma’s Revenge hits the sweet spot of fast-paced arcade action and casual relaxation.
  • Lifeboat Screen And a review of Lifeboat, Fuel Games’ light-hearted iPhone game pitting you against the dangers of the deep.
October 2, 2009 · Posted in Games, Podcasts  

Comments

2 Responses to “[Podcast] Ep 81: Wolfire Games, Zuma’s Revenge, Lifeboat”

  1. Eagle0600 on October 3rd, 2009 12:44 am

    I believe that it’s illegal to threaten ANYONE.

    Much as I dislike Jacko, I have to agree with him that comments about hurting people should be removed. I don’t know if Facebook are the people he should sue, though. It can be difficult to moderate such large sites at the best of times. On the other hand, freedom of speech and all, the “I hate Jack” groups should be left up. Just not the violence.

  2. Omaha Sternberg on October 3rd, 2009 9:47 am

    Facebook isn’t actually liable for what people say or post on their site, any more than the phone company is liable for what people say on the phone. They are a conduit through which people speak. That being said, there is a certain responsibility for them to remove illegal activity once it has been brought to their attention.

    Apparently, JT hadn’t ever considered the possibility of submitting any of the sites he found offensive for removal (see http://gamepolitics.com/2009/10/01/one-mouse-click-later-thompson-fb-group-removed for more on that) as once they had been, they were removed.

    And you are correct that it is illegal to threaten anyone (I looked it up), although I didn’t see any of the groups mentioned actually stated a threat (I didn’t look over all of the groups on Facebook).

    One did state a promise for payment in exchange for bodily harm, which is also illegal, but considering how long the request had been up in public without affect, one could question it’s viability as a real request, as opposed to bad satire (either that, or people considered that $50 was too low ::snark::).