Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Quboid

Real Name Quboid   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Quboid
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description I can't make any car pop a wheelie.
Homepage http://bcmedia.biz/
Signed On Jul 26, 2001, 01:42
Total Comments 4324 (Master)
User ID 10439
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ] Older >


News Comments > Out of the Blue
7. Re: Out of the Blue Aug 5, 2013, 16:32 Quboid
 
What do people think of Peter Capaldi?

I don't watch Doctor Who so I've no strong opinion either way. He seems like an odd choice. A brave choice, he's no oil painting and he's best known for swearing a lot.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Lighting Tech Demo Video
9. Re: Lighting Tech Demo Video Jul 31, 2013, 10:46 Quboid
 
I can't remember the last time I was impressed by an engine technology like this. There's plenty of impressive looking games around but at this point (and with certain other gaming platforms weighing us down), the returns on faster hardware and new APIs is minimal. The quality of the art direction and the art its self matters so much more, whether you're going for gritty realism or something more stylised.

Things like coloured lighting! Transparent water! Real-time shadows! Translucent glass! Particle systems! All of them were cool when they were introduced and built on for the first few years but it seems like a long time since there's been anything like that and I don't expect anything to come along.

Perhaps it's not diminishing returns on hardware power, but my age. Perhaps I'm too old and ambient occlusion actually is as awesome as Quake 3's curved surfaces.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Steam Greenlights
7. Re: More Steam Greenlights Jul 27, 2013, 14:15 Quboid
 
ViRGE wrote on Jul 26, 2013, 00:17:
Quboid wrote on Jul 25, 2013, 20:44:
I'm quite impressed by how Valve have made a system whereby gamers do all the work of figuring out what's good and advertising the games for free. I know it's genuinely a big deal for small indie devs to get Greenlit so I don't want to be 100% cynical but damn, Valve are getting themselves a pretty good deal.
I'm afraid you have that backwards. Games have to do all the advertising before they get greenlit. Virtually no one votes on a game by going through Greenlight looking through games (there's simply too many of them and no real ability to filter them); they are directed there by the developer.

Now it's a nice bout of free advertising after you've been greenlit. But the amount of advertising needed to make it to this point may just as well be equal to how much advertising indies had to do before Greenlight.

It doesn't matter to Valve when or where the advertising happens, it contributes to sales and them getting their slice. I presume this is communities attached to the developers, fans of their work, who basically do grass roots campaigning for it. The cynic in me thinks that Valve are well aware of how they get people to find and advertise games while they take their cut *and* look like good guys for helping the indie community.

It's a good system and I'm not trying to knock Valve. It does help the indie community and it's helped me find games I wouldn't have otherwise. I respect the acumen shown by Valve, that's all.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Game Reviews
3. Re: Shadowrun Returns Jul 27, 2013, 14:08 Quboid
 
Isn't checkpoints the sort of shit that Kickstarter games should be relatively immune to? They're PC specific and tend to be made by developers who are themselves gamers and involved in gaming communities.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Steam Greenlights
3. Re: More Steam Greenlights Jul 25, 2013, 20:44 Quboid
 
I'm quite impressed by how Valve have made a system whereby gamers do all the work of figuring out what's good and advertising the games for free. I know it's genuinely a big deal for small indie devs to get Greenlit so I don't want to be 100% cynical but damn, Valve are getting themselves a pretty good deal.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
34. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 23, 2013, 21:26 Quboid
 
I'll try a more serious list. I can't pick a favourite as it depends on my mood, so I'll pick a range of genres.

The Life of Brian
The Matrix
Spygame
The Shawshank Redemption
The Godfather

Pretty unimaginative, eh? If I want to be all cool and hipster and stuff, I could say:
Taegukgi hwinalrimyeo (Brotherhood)
Hawk: The Slayer
Nikita
Blaise Moi
Cidade de Deus (City of God)
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
29. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 23, 2013, 18:44 Quboid
 
Cutter wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 16:48:
I have zero problem with dogs licking wounds because yes, their mouths are anti-bacterial factories. There have been plenty of people who have been saved by dogs cleaning their wounds until help arrived. There was a person here who 20 years back got into an accident in the winter and was trapped in their car for 3 days. Not only did the dog licking his wounds keep them from infection he was the one who finally got help to him and got him rescued. And I recall many other news stories down the years how dogs doing this have prevented gangrene, blood poisoning, etc. Yeah, if antiseptic is on hand that'll be my first choice, but a dog will do in a pinch.


And why are conservatives so utterly terrified of sex and intimacy? Is it just shame from all that religious brainwashing as children?

Dogs' licking is one of those things that seems gross when you think about it, but clearly it's something that does us no harm or humans with pet dogs would have died off. The small amount of bad stuff is probably good for our immune system (most of the time). If we live in a bubble, we'll die if the bubble pops.

Edit: I mean licking as in grooming. Not licking open wounds, that's just messed up. I'd be worried about giving him a taste for humans.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
23. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 23, 2013, 16:28 Quboid
 
Hoop wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 16:10:
I will give my top 5 movies.
please give yours
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wit_(film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_According_to_Garp_(film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Lyndon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thin_Red_Line_(1998_film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Harry_Met_Sally...

Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull
Star Wars Ep1: The Phantom Menace
Batman & Robin
The Godfather 3
The Matrix: Revolutions
The Godfather 3 is actually a very good movie IMHO, but it doesn't hold a candle to parts 1 & 2.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
21. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 23, 2013, 14:46 Quboid
 
MattyC wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 14:17:
Blue wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 12:51:
Quboid wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 12:20:
XKCD's mouse over text sums up Fight Club pretty well IMHO. I was blown away by the slick style and vaguely Anonymous style anarchy. Now, it seems rather silly and has plot holes large enough to host underground boxing matches in.

Wow, is it that bad? I have intentionally not watched it in years, wanting to maximize the impact of seeing it again, but now I'm worried I will be similarly disappointed. I guess my next viewing will be soon so I can know, and I can specifically see if I can find a satisfactory answer to your questions while I'm at it.

It isn't bad if you just watch it as a silly but visually interesting movie. Now if you are trying to get some deep meaning or insight out of it...

Spot on. It's still a fun movie, but while I always knew that these people (Jack, Tyler and Marla) were horrible, they seemed cool 10 years ago at the end of my teens. Now, I still know they're horrible but they also look pathetic. Likewise Tyler's goals, which although I always knew they were unwise and unworkable, now they just appear laughable.


Sirs, Yosemite Sam, some more spoiler comments (as if anyone doesn't know!):
1, You assume, which is obviously an incorrect assumption... they moved to another building while he was out. It was the place they planed to meet to watch the show, one guy brings a bag of munchies with him.

Ah, that explains it. Thanks.

2, Even though he didn't die he fully intended to blow his head off, so I've no problem that that conscious decision killed off his other personality.

He intended to kill himself, which certainly would kill Tyler. But upon failing to kill himself, it seems that he should have failed to kill Tyler. I feel that the author or screenwriter ran out of ideas for how to actually kill of Tyler, without resorting to years of therapy and medication which wouldn't really fit the tone of the movie

3, You find it hard to believe people follow nut jobs? or get freaked out? They were beating the crap out of each other for fun and blew up buildings for the guy... and they seemed quite aware of his quirkiness in the end when he was trying to stop it.

That's different. That's cult of personality stuff. I mean the physical logistics of that first fight with 1 or 2 recruits. How did that work? It's one thing to follow a crazy leader and his schemes but before the cult of Tyler was built up:
Jack: Welcome new guy, now fight me, Tyler
[Fighting]
Jack: OK, you fought Tyler. Now fight Jack.
Recruit: Uh, wut? Did I give you concussion?

I can believe that people follow nut jobs, but the leaders can't immediately be massive nut jobs. They've got to ease people into it.

Strongly related to this is how the split personality stuff works in a 2 hour film. There's all kinds of hints that on second watching suddenly make sense. However, over the course of what, 6 months? A couple of years? I can see that Tyler, being in on it, wouldn't mention Jack to Marla but Jack would have mentioned Tyler and confused her. She would have called Jack Tyler when Jack was Jack, inevitably she would have many times.

</spoilers>
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
12. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 23, 2013, 12:20 Quboid
 
XKCD's mouse over text sums up Fight Club pretty well IMHO. I was blown away by the slick style and vaguely Anonymous style anarchy. Now, it seems rather silly and has plot holes large enough to host underground boxing matches in.

I haven't seen it recently, 2 questions about the ending (spoilers):
1. Didn't Jack and Marla die? They're in the building which I assume Jack and Tyler just fought in and it appeared that Tyler kept the bomb going. I thought they went up with everything else.

2. How does Tyler die? Jack shoots himself, but how does that kill Tyler? Surely for Tyler to die, Jack would have to honestly believe that he's shooting Tyler to death. Why would blowing off half his head make Tyler die? That would only work if Jack believes that Tyler lived in that bit of his head, which doesn't make sense. If Jack could beat Tyler with willpower, he wouldn't have needed the gun at all.

3. Not to do with the ending, but how the fuck did the fights, the first one or two in particular, work? Didn't the first recruit get a bit freaked out when he fought Tyler and then fought Jack, without Tyler/Jack acknowledging that it's the same person? Wouldn't the first and second recruits have a quick chat and realise that this guy's a whacko?


It was great when I was a teenager...
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
11. Re: M O 4 L 3 L Jul 23, 2013, 12:08 Quboid
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 10:21:
I don't know how she could have 4 children and NOT be aware of this.

I think it's well established that this doesn't require a great deal of skill or intelligence. It would be nice if it did - I don't mean some creepy fascist eugenics stuff, I just think we'd be better off if sex was rather more complicated
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
24. Re: Into the Black Jul 23, 2013, 09:02 Quboid
 
InBlack wrote on Jul 23, 2013, 08:50:
Fair enough, and I missed that link. Ok so you dont have a written constituion, but please dont argue semantics with me because thats rather pointless.

Here are some polling numbers from last year:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/24/queen-diamond-jubilee-record-support

I understand that since it was a jubilee the numbers are skewed in the queen's favor but are you saying that the number of people who support the monarchy has fallen below 50% in one year?


That's a measure of how many people want the Monarchy intact, a scale from Royalist to Republican. I'm talking about people who give a damn day to day, for or against, a scale from Obsessed to Apathetic.

I support the Monarchy because they're good business. However, I don't care about them really. If they're in the news I will generally keep up to date but that's it - I don't think about them, I don't look up to them, I don't notice their existence.

I believe I'm in the majority in both these axis. I am slightly pro-Monarchy but I am only slightly above apathetic in terms of their existence. (Although not too apathetic to type this.)
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
22. Re: Into the Black Jul 23, 2013, 08:39 Quboid
 
InBlack, you're not filling me with any faith that you're trying. I got those figures from a link in this very thread. Additionally, saying something is written into our constitution is a clear sign you don't know what you're talking about, as there is no written constitution.

Those powers are ceremonial. Why do we have the Monarchy at all? Money and history, like I've been saying.

Your God metaphor doesn't work. You imply that I'm saying "me and my friends don't care about royalty, therefore no one cares" - I'm not, I'm saying "most people don't care about royalty, therefore most people don't care about royalty" and I'm happy to stand by that.

Objecting to the Monarchy on principal like Tulwinn, regardless of the money or other benefits, I understand. Ceremonial or not, I do think they are a relic and I wouldn't be unhappy if they went away - I'm just saying that there are good reasons for them to stay and for me, they're worth it.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Into the Black
18. Re: Into the Black Jul 23, 2013, 07:40 Quboid
 
No one I know (I live in the UK) gives half a shit about the royalty (note: I do care about my country being understood hence this post). InBlack, where do you live? It appears to me that the US media gave this baby at least as much coverage as the UK media. My point is that (with some exceptions Shocked ) people in the UK and the Commonwealth (other countries with the same Royal family) just don't really care. We just don't. And I'm pretty sure they own the palaces and if they were chucked out, they'd keep them.

No, I'm not proud of the history of oppression, what makes you think I would be? Do you only put nice, happy things in a museum? Have you ever been to a war museum, and if so were you shocked that killing machines are on display? They, and their property and possessions, are the strongest link we have to centuries of Empire and if that doesn't belong in a museum then I don't understand what museums are.

The UK is a democracy. The Crown, and whoever is wearing it, has no power. None. There's loads of ceremony; for example when a new Prime Minister is elected, the old one has to go the Queen and ask for permission to end their government, then the new guy has to ask for permission to start the new government. However - and I want to make this absolutely clear - if the Queen did anything other than follow the script, she would be ignored, the democratic process would continue, and the Royalty would then be dismantled. Also, they have NOTHING to do with the armed forces. Nothing more than maybe pinning a medal on someone every so often.

I get that a family being given a special position in society isn't democratic. They are a relic of a bygone age and as such, I would be in favour of ditching them. However, that would cost us money (parasites, Cutter? 40M in exchange for 200M from rent, ignoring the other income, makes for a lousy parasite), reduce the link to the past (they'd still exist, obviously, but would be less accessible), reduce the prestige of the Commonwealth and in particular the UK - and I have no faith that a ceremonial president would be any better or cheaper.

So:
  • Costs 40M

  • Gives 200M

  • Contributes to est. 7,000M in tourism

  • Has no actual power

  • Has no control of the military beyond whichever helicopter Prince William is flying

  • Has no relevance to every day life

  • Garners nothing more than mild interest from 95% of population


  • Does that make sense?


    The same goes for Dukes and Lords. The titles are relics and refer to little more than which country mansion they own - not taxpayer funded. What do you think an aristocrat is?

    (Edit: got me sums wrong I did, gov'ner.)

    This comment was edited on Jul 23, 2013, 09:29.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Into the Black
    10. Re: Into the Black Jul 22, 2013, 21:29 Quboid
     
    I was wondering if this topic would come up. Not really Bluesnews type of thing but it is arguably actually big news - unlike North West or whatever the fuck that kid's called, this boy will some day be my head of state. Even if you don't think the royal family should exist, this remains a big deal while they do exist.

    I've seen a bit of coverage on main news sites but apart from that, the only talk I've seen until now has been people desperate to tell anyone who's listening that they don't care, which is such a pathetic attitude.


    Cutter wrote on Jul 22, 2013, 20:24:
    Rhino wrote on Jul 22, 2013, 20:17:
    Cutter wrote on Jul 22, 2013, 20:12:
    Good now they can stfu about the stupid royal baby and the stupid royal family.

    Yeah! Those idiots, being happy for other people.

    So you're happy for parasites who think they're better than you and expect you bow and scrape to them for no real reason at all? Well, bully for you. This world is full of masochists, one more certainly won't make a difference. Personally I find the very concept of an aristocracy to be deeply offensive.

    Where do you live? When are you posting from? Do you think people in the Commonwealth work in servitude to the aristocracy? You're about 200 years too late. These people have no relevance to me and my life and as such, I wish them all the best as I would with any young family.

    I'd be a British Republican if I thought that a ceremonial president would be any better or cheaper but I don't. The monarchy doesn't really cost that much and probably brings in a heck of a lot.

    So, yeah, I'm in favour of the Royalty because I think they're a bunch of profitable living museums. That could barely be more different from your idea which makes it sound like I am grateful for the chance to lick Prince William's boot.


    Edit: that video jimnms linked to is good (and their other videos are good, I advise everyone, Brits or not, to watch his explanation of the UK). I thought the royal family would be on the whole profitable, but I didn't know it was so much. I think technically the Queen is still in charge of passing laws but I think if she actually tried to go against parliament's wishes, she would have to abdicate and possibly end the monarchy. She's just there to wave.

    This comment was edited on Jul 23, 2013, 07:12.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
    3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 22, 2013, 18:48 Quboid
     
    eRe4s3r wrote on Jul 22, 2013, 18:41:
    And another asshole politician pushing the censorship wagon by means of mentioning "child porn"

    2 News items that both make ye wonder...

    It will do virtually nothing to stop porn. However, it will create a censorship network with our ISPs that makes it much easier to block protest sites, Wikileaks et cetera in the future. Also, it gives the government a huge list of porn users (by who opts in) and the contract is going to David Cameron's ex-university pal, who just happens to donate money to his political party.

    There zero good and several very bad things going on here BUT WHO CARES ROYAL BABY YAY!
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Homeworld HD and Homeworld 2 HD Announced
    36. Re: Homeworld HD and Homeworld 2 HD Announced Jul 22, 2013, 10:23 Quboid
     
    Perhaps the project leaders can't get the backing for a whole new Homeworld game, so they are testing the water and as Wenzil says, building up the technology.

    Do these make much money? They tend to be greeted with more excitement when they're announced than when they're released.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > On Sale
    11. Re: On Sale Jul 19, 2013, 23:04 Quboid
     
    Sepharo wrote on Jul 19, 2013, 23:01:
    Do you guys think Metro Last Light will show up with a better deal than -40% and/or did I already miss that?

    I wouldn't expect it to beat that price yet. At Christmas I'd guess it will be 50% off or better. Perhaps 50% off the DLC too.

    It's a really good game, at 40% off it's better value that most games.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > Morning Mobilization
    1. Hardcore iOS Jul 17, 2013, 13:00 Quboid
     
    Which is more likely, he says that smartphones will become hardcore platforms because he writes games for them, or he writes games for them because he believes this is the future? I think the later, or rather both.

    That doesn't mean he's right. His central claim is that platforms like the PC have gone from casual to hardcore and his evidence for this is incredibly selective.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    News Comments > LoL Players Athletes
    12. Re: LoL Players Athletes Jul 13, 2013, 09:00 Quboid
     
    The word athlete really isn't appropriate. I read the headline as "LOL, players athletes" at first, did a double-take. An athlete is someone in peak physical condition and quickly clicking doesn't count IMHO. I wouldn't call a chess professional an athlete either.

    I gather NFL players are reasonably well remunerated but only the top athletes are well paid; plenty are not. It wouldn't surprise me if LoL professionals average better.
     
    Avatar 10439
     
    - Quboid
    Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
    4324 Comments. 217 pages. Viewing page 56.
    < Newer [ 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ] Older >


    footer

    Blue's News logo