Support NeoGAF

[belvedere]

It's so cool to hate Sony

 

[mckmas8808]

erm... didn't Sony's presentation say game 3.0 isn't new it's an initiative/idea Sony wants to do and that it's the console equivelant of web 2.0?

jus sayin...

I think those people you are typing to have you on ignore.

 

[kaching]

you'd rather see gripshift get a level editor than the ps3 get trackmania united?

I think what I'd rather see is both, rather than arbitrarily trying to "screw" one or the other.

 

[Ranger X]

You know what Plagiarise? I LOVE Gripshift because it's a Trackmania copycat. Since the Trackmania guys are too dumb to release their game on console, i wish i'd get a Gripshift track editor.

This said, i'd buy Trackmania if it's coming out for PS3.

 

[plagiarize]

I think what I'd rather see is both, rather than arbitrarily trying to "screw" one or the other.

i wouldn't be against seeing it happen to gripshift, but i was just suggesting something i thought would be even better.

you know, like 'screw going out for a drink tonight, let's go to the cinema!'. it's not to say you never want to ever go out for a drink

You know what Plagiarise? I LOVE Gripshift because it's a Trackmania copycat. Since the Trackmania guys are too dumb to release their game on console, i wish i'd get a Gripshift track editor.

This said, i'd buy Trackmania if it's coming out for PS3.

so would i. even the level editor has always seemed perfectly suited to a pad.

 

[soco]

game 3.0 as a whole is somewhat new to consoles, but not entirely so. there have been bits on XBL for a while and there was a megaman game where you could build and share levels on the PSP and stuff.

i think it still remains to be seen whether creating those levels is actually fun. i can understand that the point of it is to be fun, and certainly for a group of people it will be, but i'm not sure if the majority will really get into it. it's the same with Home. it's like second life. to some people it's enough fun to spend portions of their lives in there doing shit, but to others its a waste of time.

 

[theBishop]

I'm a web professional, and Web 2.0 has absolutely no meaning to me. I don't see what open source software has to do with anything.

Wikipedia is the shining example of Web 2.0, how long has that been around 6 years? And we have to listen to people talk about this like it's some new thing? Give me a break.

It just natural evolution of services that has been ongoing for years, and they decided to tack a facy name onto it.

I don't know...

The operation of Wikipedia depends on MediaWiki, a custom-made, open source wiki software platform written in PHP and built upon the MySQL database. The software incorporates modern programming features, such as a macro language, variables, a transclusion system for templates, and URL redirection. MediaWiki is licensed under the GNU General Public License and used by all Wikimedia projects, as well as many other wiki projects.

Wikipedia runs on dedicated clusters of Linux servers in Florida and in four other locations.[37] Wikipedia employed a single server until 2004, when the server setup was expanded into a distributed multitier architecture. In January 2005, the project ran on 39 dedicated servers located in Florida. This configuration included a single master database server running MySQL, multiple slave database servers, 21 web servers running the Apache HTTP Server, and seven Squid cache servers. By September 2005, its server cluster had grown to around 100 servers in four locations around the world.

Welcome to Web 2.0

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

You should have went with your gut and use that as the title. The Ancestry of Game 3.0 makes it should more open and less critical.

What you bolded suggests that he gave it a title and Next Gen edited to what we see now.

 

[kaching]

plagiarize. I realize your original comment was just a turn of a phrase, I figured you'd get that the "rift" I spoke of was just a lighthearted jest.

Anyway, Sidhe Interactive is the only one doing anything to give us a Trackmania-like fix on consoles, and doing it quite effectively. I'd rather support their existing, quite excellent and continued efforts than snub that for the sake of a development team that isn't showing any interest in this space, as far as we can tell.

I mean, it's less like saying "screw going out for a drink tonight, let's go to the cinema" and more like "screw going out for a drink tonight, let's sit home and wait for someone to build a cinema nearby".

 

[jvm]

You should have went with your gut and use that as the title. The Ancestry of Game 3.0 makes it should more open and less critical.

I did. I submitted the article with that title. I am not the editor. :^)

 

[theBishop]

I did. I submitted the article with that title. I am not the editor. :^)

Colin Campbell, Get your ass out here!!!

 

[plagiarize]

plagiarize. I realize your original comment was just a turn of a phrase, I figured you'd get that the "rift" I spoke of was just a lighthearted jest.

Anyway, Sidhe Interactive is the only one doing anything to give us a Trackmania-like fix on consoles, and doing it quite effectively. I'd rather support their existing, quite excellent and continued efforts than snub that for the sake of a development team that isn't showing any interest in this space, as far as we can tell.

I mean, it's less like saying "screw going out for a drink tonight, let's go to the cinema" and more like "screw going out for a drink tonight, let's sit home and wait for someone to build a cinema nearby".

ah ha... no
it's more like saying 'screw waiting for someone to build a pub next door, lets wait for someone to build a cinema nearby'. the cinema is less likely, but they're still both things we're only hoping happens.

but of course i'm not really typing to you, nor did i read your post because i have you on ignore since you said mean things

 

[Steroyd]

Oh look I found the clip of Phll Harrison explaining Game 3.0

end of thread for me.

 

[zallaaa]

I want GAMES, big and original ones... I don't care at all about game 3.whatever...

 

[yukoner]

Welcome to Web 2.0

You seem to completely misunderstand what Web 2.0 is. Even if wikipedia was based on a proprietary backend it would still be a perfect example of Web 2.0

There is no realtionship at all between open source software and web 2.0, so you are confused.

By definition:

Web 2.0 refers to a perceived second-generation of Web-based services that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

Notice the wording. Even in their original definition, O'Reilly acknowledges that it is a percieved second generation, rather than an actual 2nd generation.

 

[kaching]

ah ha... no
it's more like saying 'screw waiting for someone to build a pub next door, lets wait for someone to build a cinema nearby'. the cinema is less likely, but they're still both things we're only hoping happens.

No, wait, it's more like "screw waiting for them to finish building that gameroom addition on the pub down the street, let's wait for someone to build a cinema nearby"

Gripshift is on PS3 now and we know Sidhe is working on the track editor update for a future release.

but of course i'm not really typing to you, nor did i read your post because i have you on ignore since you said mean things

Just for that, I'ma gonna adblock your avatar.

 

[plagiarize]

No, wait, it's more like "screw waiting for them to finish building that gameroom addition on the pub down the street, let's wait for someone to build a cinema nearby"

Gripshift is on PS3 now and we know Sidhe is working on the track editor update for a future release.

Just for that, I'ma gonna adblock your avatar.

i'm guessing you said something about adblocking my avatar.

why do you hate my kitten Max who died of cancer before he was even one year old?

man you must be some kind of monster.

perhaps a monster truck.

 

[Steroyd]

Notice the wording. Even in their original definition, O'Reilly acknowledges that it is a percieved second generation, rather than an actual 2nd generation.

But what IS the definition of the next generation take consoles for example while the PS3 and xbox 360 do your bog standard next generation thing, Nintendo decided to go in a separate tangent of next generation dubbed New Gen on GAF and it's also not seen as direct competition with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and what about the Dreamcast, that seemed to be a in-between generation console as well.

It's all perception.

 

[Aleman]

Until the "Game 3.0" idea is expanded beyond a single game with a level editor I don't think it's much of a strategy.

XNA seems more "Game 3.0" if you ask me.

 

[theBishop]

Oh look I found the clip of Phll Harrison explaining Game 3.0

end of thread for me.

that reminds me of another criticism i have of the article.

Phil introduces Game 3.0 as "suggestion for how we might define ourselves going forward", and in this context, he's speaking of game developers, not Sony specifically.

but the tone of much of the article is: how Sony might or might not fail to deliver on their promises, which aren't really all that new or original anyway.

I think that last sentence sort of characterizes the way I read the article. Other people may have read it differently, but Matt might want to consider if this is the message he was trying to convey.

 

[yukoner]

But what IS the definition of the next generation take consoles for example while the PS3 and xbox 360 do your bog standard next generation thing, Nintendo decided to go in a separate tangent of next generation dubbed New Gen on GAF and it's also not seen as direct competition with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and what about the Dreamcast, that seemed to be a in-between generation console as well.

It's all perception.

Sure, but with HW you are seeing a clear jump in capabilities, which can realistically be called a new generation, or version.

With this 'web 2.0' or 'games 3.0', there is no jump, there's no new version of anything, it's just a coined phrase to explain a concept, but it gives the impression that there's something new here. Which is why it's mainly a marketing buzzword imo, and has very little actual meaning.

it sounds great to Joe Blow consumer, developers see right through it.

 

[fabprems]

Isn't Game 3.0 new to consoles?

Yeah, on Pcs we're at Game 7.0, you can even create a level in a game, like a track or a tuned car in Trackmania, and share it with other people for free !!
But don't misunderstand me, Game 3.0 was real fun back in the 90s...

 

[Ranger X]

i'm guessing you said something about adblocking my avatar.

why do you hate my kitten Max who died of cancer before he was even one year old?
man you must be some kind of monster.

perhaps a monster truck.

Is that a joke or it's your avatar for real? If real... poor kitty

 

[mckmas8808]

i think it still remains to be seen whether creating those levels is actually fun. i can understand that the point of it is to be fun, and certainly for a group of people it will be, but i'm not sure if the majority will really get into it. it's the same with Home. it's like second life. to some people it's enough fun to spend portions of their lives in there doing shit, but to others its a waste of time.

It's that the same as everything in life?

 

[plagiarize]

Is that a joke or it's your avatar for real? If real... poor kitty

well, it wasn't said in seriousness of kaching obviously. i didn't take the offense i was feigning... but yeah. max isn't with us anymore.

still my headset breathed a sigh of relief if no one else did.

 

[mckmas8808]

What you bolded suggests that he gave it a title and Next Gen edited to what we see now.

Oh so they did it just to get more hits? Not surprising. Why must things be like this? I wonder how often stuff like this happens.

 

[mckmas8808]

Until the "Game 3.0" idea is expanded beyond a single game with a level editor I don't think it's much of a strategy.

XNA seems more "Game 3.0" if you ask me.

He's not talking about Sony only. He's talking about the next-generation which does include XNA. You need to get more educated on Game 3.0

 

[yukoner]

Oh so they did it just to get more hits? Not surprising. Why must things be like this? I wonder how often stuff like this happens.

They did it because it's true!

They didn't feel the need to be politically correct, and called it exactly like it is. Good on 'em.

 

[Steroyd]

Damn it and here's me thinking I'm finished with this thread. :/

Sure, but with HW you are seeing a clear jump in capabilities, which can realistically be called a new generation, or version.

With this 'web 2.0' or 'games 3.0', there is no jump, there's no new version of anything, it's just a coined phrase to explain a concept, but it gives the impression that there's something new here. Which is why it's mainly a marketing buzzword imo, and has very little actual meaning.

it sounds great to Joe Blow consumer, developers see right through it.

Are you not seeing a clear jump in capabilities from just browsing the web to say... at will adding your own user created video on youtube?

Hell it's not just confined to hardware, i mean it took MS's second generation of game software (another coined phrase) to get a game like Gears of war, and it all comes from the same static hardware launched the year before.

I don't get people, Game 3.0 isn't even a Sony creation it's a suggestion, just like no-one claimed they created Web 2.0. It's the creation of what YOU make, (as in YOU *points through screen*) that creates Game 3.0/Web 2.0 it's just easier for someone like Sony to put it all under one umbrella to identify it in a way so they can describe it to other people... it's called simplifying. :/

 

[theBishop]

You seem to completely misunderstand what Web 2.0 is. Even if wikipedia was based on a proprietary backend it would still be a perfect example of Web 2.0

There is no realtionship at all between open source software and web 2.0, so you are confused.

By definition:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

Notice the wording. Even in their original definition, O'Reilly acknowledges that it is a percieved second generation, rather than an actual 2nd generation.

From the exact same article:

Technology Overview:
- Use of Open source software either completely or partially, such as the LAMP solution stack

And if you look at the "Characteristics":

* "Network as platform" — delivering (and allowing users to use) applications entirely through a browser.[6] See also Web operating system.
* Users owning the data on the site and exercising control over that data.[7][6]
* An architecture of participation and democracy that encourages users to add value to the application as they use it.[6][1] This stands in sharp contrast to hierarchical access control in applications, in which systems categorize users into roles with varying levels of functionality.
* A rich, interactive, user-friendly interface based on Ajax[6][1] or similar frameworks.
* Some social-networking aspects.[7][6]
* A public good. "Public goods" characteristically have jointness of supply and are non-excludable.

You can see how many of the characteristics share philosophy with the Free Software Movement and their GPL software license. Namely: user control, participation, public good.

Take a look at the chart:

not a proprietary technology in sight.

In fact, much of what defines web 2.0 is taking all the open standards and technologies that Free Software developers have advocated for the past 25 years, and exposing them to users in a way that gives them the opportunity to create as well. Even "Network as a platform" has a Free Software motivation: if users aren't going to replace their Windows PCs, then they can use Free Software through the network completely transparently.

 

[yukoner]

Are you not seeing a clear jump in capabilities from just browsing the web to say... at will adding your own user created video on youtube?

No I'm seeing the results of a long slow progression that's been going on for years. Which is all Game 3.0 will be as well, a continuation of the existing technologies.

I dunno, I just think it gives the completely wrong impression of what it actually is. I've always hated the meaningless term Web 2.0, so when I see them try the same thing with games, it just bothers me.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

Until the "Game 3.0" idea is expanded beyond a single game with a level editor I don't think it's much of a strategy.

XNA seems more "Game 3.0" if you ask me.

does this mean excitebike was game 3.0?

 

[Steroyd]

No I'm seeing the results of a long slow progression that's been going on for years. Which is all Game 3.0 will be as well, a continuation of the existing technologies.

I dunno, I just think it gives the completely wrong impression of what it actually is. I've always hated the meaningless term Web 2.0, so when I see them try the same thing with games, it just bothers me.

What the hell? Isn't that the same for every "next generation" of consoles, or at least what the Playstation has slowly been progressing to.

Surely your pissed at the term "next generation of consoles" in the same context?

 

[kaching]

why do you hate my kitten Max who died of cancer before he was even one year old?

...... well, that'll be me sitting in uncomfortable silence.

So...when's Trackmania coming to consoles again?

 

[yukoner]

From the exact same article:


And if you look at the "Characteristics":

Lol, from that same list "Clean and meaningful URLs", they are taking alot of BS under the umbrella of Web 2.0. I'll grant you tehre is *some* extremely tenous relationship, according to wikipedia. Though, certainly not according to the original definition.

As for your points that you think point to open source software:

* Users owning the data on the site and exercising control over that data.[7][6]
- Nothing to do whatsoever with open-source vs proprietary software. This can be facitlitaed by either.

* An architecture of participation and democracy that encourages users to add value to the application as they use it.[6][1] This stands in sharp contrast to hierarchical access control in applications, in which systems categorize users into roles with varying levels of functionality.
- Encourages users to add value to the application. This has absolutely nothign to do with the applciation itself being oipen source.

* A public good. "Public goods" characteristically have jointness of supply and are non-excludable.
- What does this have to do with open-source?

In fact, much of what defines web 2.0 is taking all the open standards and technologies that Free Software developers have advocated for the past 25 years, and exposing them to users in a way that gives them the opportunity to create as well. Even "Network as a platform" has a Free Software motivation: if users aren't going to replace their Windows PCs, then they can use Free Software through the network completely transparently.

Says who? O-Reilly ceryainly never defined it as anything close to what you're describing. Web 2.0 is simply an classification for the new types of web interactivity that have emerged over the last few years, proprietary or not is completely irrelevant.

 

[plagiarize]

...... well, that'll be me sitting in uncomfortable silence.

So...when's Trackmania coming to consoles again?

when max comes back from the dead and hands us the keys to eternity

 

[kaching]

I believe in Max! He'll be back! Nine lives and all.

 

[theBishop]

As for your points that you think point to open source software:

* Users owning the data on the site and exercising control over that data.[7][6]
- Nothing to do whatsoever with open-source vs proprietary software. This can be facitlitaed by either.

Are you kidding?!? User ownership and control is THE single reason the Free Software Movement exists!

Free software is a matter of freedom: people should be free to use software in all the ways that are socially useful. Software differs from material objects--such as chairs, sandwiches, and gasoline--in that it can be copied and changed much more easily. These possibilities make software as useful as it is; we believe software users should be able to make use of them.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/

* An architecture of participation and democracy that encourages users to add value to the application as they use it.[6][1] This stands in sharp contrast to hierarchical access control in applications, in which systems categorize users into roles with varying levels of functionality.
- Encourages users to add value to the application. This has absolutely nothign to do with the applciation itself being oipen source.

This is exactly Freedom #3 according to the FSF:

The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

* A public good. "Public goods" characteristically have jointness of supply and are non-excludable.
- What does this have to do with open-source?

If you read any piece from the GNU philosophy page, you'll see its soaked in "Public Good" rhetoric. You can see it right in the wording of Freedom 2 and 3 (above):

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

The core belief of the FSF is that software should be used for the benefit of humanity, rather than to restrict and subjugate users into anti-competitive, proprietary black-box applications which the user cannot truly control.

Says who? O-Reilly ceryainly never defined it as anything close to what you're describing. Web 2.0 is simply an classification for the new types of web interactivity that have emerged over the last few years, proprietary or not is completely irrelevant.

Tim O'Reilly is a huge supporter of open source and FSF and is certainly well aware of the GNU philosophy.

Take a look at the headings in his piece "Open Source Paradigm Shift":
* Network-Enabled Collaboration
* The Architecture of Participation
* Customizability and Software-as-Service
* Building the Internet Operating System

http://tim.oreilly.com/articles/paradigmshift_0504.html

Look familiar? If you think Web 2.0 has nothing to do with Free, open-source Software, you're just not paying attention.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Hell I dunno I always thought map-making was fun. I had fond memories working with Duke Nukem 3D's "build" engine.

Hopefully more games are developed with level-editors in mind though. LBP looks great but it's not my kind of game(I want guns & boobs & stuff like that).

Trackmania to consoles is an excellent idea...especially since I don't have the PC to run it. :/

 

[yukoner]

Are you kidding?!? User ownership and control is THE single reason the Free Software Movement exists!

Ownership of DATA? Data is not software!

The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

In the quote you took from wikipedia it's stated "encourages users to add value to the application as they use it." It's not referring to adding new functionality to the software, but rather add value to the system by submitting content. I realize we're getting into semantics here though, lets not

Look familiar? If you think Web 2.0 has nothing to do with Free, open-source Software, you're just not paying attention.

I'm paying attention, and I just disagree. Open source software is gaining support, and as such you could construct an argument that it belongs under the classification of Web 2.0, but it certainly was never the original intent or definition of the phrase.

Basically, since the phrase was coined before many of these trends have emerged, you could shovel alot of stuff under it, essentially anything that emerges is web 2.0. But really, that just exemplifies how meaningless the term is, which was my original point.

There is no such thing as 'Web 2.0' imo.

 

[theBishop]

Ownership of DATA? Data is not software!

You can't own the data if you have no real control over the software that stores it.

Read Mark Pilgrim's blog on switching from Apple to Ubuntu for a real-world examination of this:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/06/02/when-the-bough-breaks

The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

In the quote you took from wikipedia it's stated "encourages users to add value to the application as they use it." It's not referring to adding new functionality to the software, but rather add value to the system by submitting content. I realize we're getting into semantics here though, lets not

Right, and I'm saying about Web 2.0 is that it is following after the FSF's GNU philosophy. Most applications recognized as "Web 2.0" (1) Use Free, open source software, and (2) empower users to add value to the application.

I'm paying attention, and I just disagree. Open source software is gaining support, and as such you could construct an argument that it belongs under the classification of Web 2.0, but it certainly was never the original intent or definition of the phrase.

So its just a coincidence that a few months prior to coining the phrase "Web 2.0", Tim O'Reilly wrote a piece called "Open Source Paradigm", which lays out most of the same design ideas as Web 2.0 itself?

I'm not saying Open source software is classified under Web 2.0. I'm saying Web 2.0 is informed by the philosophy of the Free Software Foundation, and the vast majority of applications which are called "Web 2.0" rely on Free, open source software.

There is no such thing as web 2.0 imo

There is no technology called "web 2.0". Its just a name given to a group of culturally-significant web applications that sprung up around the same time that share similarities.

Its like saying "there's no such thing as Rock music". We can argue about what it means to be "Rock", but it does exist, and there are common characteristics throughout the genre. And I'm saying Open source software, and GNU Philosophy are a common characteristic of Web 2.0 applications.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

I've never understood the buzz around LBP. I'm willing to give it a chance, but it seems faaaaaaaaar too restrictive on an actual gameplay level to be worth a damn as game 3.0 "material" or whatever.

 

[theBishop]

I've never understood the buzz around LBP. I'm willing to give it a chance, but it seems faaaaaaaaar too restrictive on an actual gameplay level to be worth a damn as game 3.0 "material" or whatever.

Its the restrictions that enable it to be Game 3.0. Someone rightly mentioned Gary's mod, so I should tread lightly, but it would be really difficult to give someone a blank 3d canvas and create in-game editing tools that were: (1) Flexible enough to be creative (2) Easy to use (3) fun to use.

By limiting it to a mostly 2d plane, the developers can give us a lot more flexibility in the kinds of items we can place in the world, and simplify the creation process. Also, I wouldn't discount the benefit of being able to see "Sackboy"'s face at all times.

 

[border]

Nothing about Xbox Live is new, but that hasn't stopped the press and the console gamers from jizzing over concepts that have been available on PCs for a decade.

We can download videos???!? OMG WOW!

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Its the restrictions that enable it to be Game 3.0. Someone rightly mentioned Gary's mod, so I should tread lightly, but it would be really difficult to give someone a blank 3d canvas and create in-game editing tools that were: (1) Flexible enough to be creative (2) Easy to use (3) fun to use.

By limiting it to a mostly 2d plane, the developers can give us a lot more flexibility in the kinds of items we can place in the world, and simplify the creation process. Also, I wouldn't discount the benefit of being able to see "Sackboy"'s face at all times.

I guess it depends entirely on how powerful an editor the game comes with. When I think of successful user created content, I think of something incredibly dynamic. Of course, it doesn't help that all I can think of for examples are highly competitive multiplayer games. I dunno. I kinda think there's a major flaw in expecting platforming boards, which have a rather finite amount of replayability regardless of how you gussy them, to draw the kind of community that seems to be expected.

 

[Stinkles]

Yaroze.

 

[PistolGrip]

What's the point of this Article?

Is the author trying to say: "I did not listen to phil when he explained Game 3.0"

Is he trying to get hits by writing nonsense? (common in this industry)

Web 2.0 is also nothing completely new. It's a vision about what drives future development.

I guess it's just further proof what a joke gaming industry journalism is. I expect this kind of writing in forums not in a respectable gaming site. Well, given the fact that GAF is the most civilized place for gaming on the Net, it should come to no surprise

=(

 

[teepo]

isn't lpb entirely structured around user generated content just like youtube is entirely structured around users uploading their own movies? downloading a level or a mod for doom isn't necessarily the same thing, and anything beyond doom just becomes even more complicated. you really had to dig deep into the internet or bbs's to find good levels as none of the content was regulated.

 

[Mario]

Wasn't it mentionned somewhere that Gripshift PS3 could receive a track editor in some future download? (maybe i just dreamed that too)

Yes. Working out how to make this happen with SOE currently, though the first task is to get all the upgrades of the PAL version back into the version on the US Store as well as getting Voice Chat and Race Mode leaderboards into both versions.

Along with the Track Editor, also looking at bringing across the Bonus Games.

We are very sold on user generated content. Pretty much all our future original games will have an editor of some sort, as well as though licensed titles we do such as Jackass The Game where we can convince the publisher.

 

[boutrosinit]

Level building isn't fun? Not true.

Building levels in a then very buggy Unreal Engine 2.0 was some of the most joy I've experienced creating things. Building rooms only to then have your character be able to play in them seconds after is a real buzz. Having your friends play it AND enjoy it too - also a buzz. Watching their faces for signs of boredon, fixing the boring parts and watching that boredom in the same section disappear - bigger buzz.