User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
| News Comments > Impending DOOM |
 |
| 65. |
Re: Piracy |
Aug 2, 2004, 12:26 |
Geese |
|
|
"You think someone who downloaded a copy of a game with no demo and decides the game isn't for them and deletes it is a criminal? "
Do I think you are a criminal, as in, you should be locked up, and I would be terrified if you lived next to me, worried that you are going to break into my house and steal my posessions? - No, absolutely not. Do I think you broke the law? Yes.
" I say the multi-million to billion dollar middlemen providing no consumer protections are criminal."
Yes...there does need to be more protections for the consumer. But doing something illegal until the laws are changed is ok?
"Comparing this shit with murder... jesus christ... chodes. "
I'm sorry..I must have missed that. Who compared it to murder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Impending DOOM |
|
| 47. |
Re: Doom Dilemma |
Aug 2, 2004, 12:03 |
Geese |
|
|
"Minor fact they seem to ignore is that the money they say they have lost wouldn't have gone to them anyway because it's just not there! It's not a loss if they didn't lose anything!"
Look - I understand that there are SOME people who download games/MP3s, etc, that would have never bought in the first place. I understand that. But to take that thought and say that ALL people who download were never going to buy is just plain ridiculous.
Does the RIAA exagerrate it's statistics? Probably. But you can't go the other direction and say that NO money is lost due to pirating.
That would just be plain ignorant.
Like me, apparently.
"Doesn't make it right to download songs or games or whatever but it's a malevolent abuse of statistics that feeds to minds as ignorant as yours."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Impending DOOM |
|
| 37. |
Re: Doom Dilemma |
Aug 2, 2004, 11:44 |
Geese |
|
|
" All the numbers you see of people saying "so and so lost xyz money because of downloading" are bullshit! The money was not lost as they probably wouldn't have bought it anyway."
What a load of crap. I will never buy a DirectTV season ticket to every single NFL game available. So I guess it's ok if I steal that too? You can use lawyer jargon like 'copyright infringement' all you want. Us 'stupid' laymen know that if you take something without paying for it (when it has a sales price) - that's called stealing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Impending DOOM |
|
| 26. |
Re: Doom is good |
Aug 2, 2004, 11:23 |
Geese |
|
|
" I have the leaked copy. It's my Friday, I want to play it when I get off of work, which is after the stores close. I will buy a legit copy of it on Tuesday or Wednesday. But I wanted to play tonight."
You can justify it all you want to make yourself feel better...doesn't make it OK.
This comment was edited on Aug 2, 11:24. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > New NVIDIA XP Drivers |
|
| 15. |
Re: Things that make... |
Jul 28, 2004, 12:11 |
Geese |
|
|
While I can't really comment on image quality...I can say that there is no performance increase at all between 61.77 and 61.76. (at least on my system)
Athlon 1900 XP+ 1.6ghz
512MB Ram
Geforce FX 5900XT 128MB
I ran a battery of tests that include Far Cry, Q3, UT2K4, Call of Duty, Serious Sam2, and 3Dmark03
Didn't see any increase whatsover.
This comment was edited on Jul 28, 12:12. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Updated Pandora Tomorrow MP Demo |
|
| 14. |
Re: omg |
Mar 28, 2004, 08:49 |
Geese |
|
|
>You do realize the PC version has voice over IP? Fuck >the xbox. Anything a console can do, a PC will do 100x >better.
As both an Xbox and PC owner, I'd like you to explain to me how a totally buggy game is 100x better than a virtually bug-free game?
No one can argue that there are simply LESS problems in the xbox version than the PC version. And don't try the 'pc games can be patched' argument, because Xbox games can be patched too via Xbox LIVE.
100x better? Please. That's just an ignorant statement. I love my PC and do believe that most FPS are a ton better on it...but I'm not so elitist to not recognize that there are some console games that are simply better on the console. SC2 is a perfect example.
This comment was edited on Mar 28, 14:35. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Pandora Tomorrow Saturday |
|
| 21. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 25, 2004, 11:35 |
Geese |
|
|
Well...from my playing on Xbox live last night for about 2 hours, I can say that it's not just a 'gimmick'. The game is quite good. They implemented the 3rd person VS 1st person almost perfectly. The game is a blast to play, no matter what side you are playing, and the 4 player limit isn't restrictive by any means. It's needed to make the game feel like it should. Finally being able to sneak up behind a Merc and snap his neck was such a fufilling game experience. Accidentally shooting my partner because I thought she was a spy was just as suspenseful. What a great new take on multiplayer action.
This comment was edited on Mar 25, 11:36. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow Gold |
|
| 26. |
Re: And Blue makes a rare post! |
Mar 8, 2004, 07:41 |
Geese |
|
|
>but I read an article exclaiming how the game would only work just right if it was 2v2
Exactly. SC2 multiplayer won't be awesome in spite of 4 player maximum, it will be awesome *beacuse* of it. It's about time we had a FPS game (well, FPS/3PS) that allows a very small group of people to have a fufilling online experience without the need of hopeless AI. And because of the asymmetrical team structure, it shouldn't devolve into a simple creeping and sniping match.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Syberia II Gold |
|
| 10. |
Re: Cool |
Mar 3, 2004, 10:22 |
Geese |
|
|
Yeah, I agree with the others that Longest Journey is better than Syberia, but Syberia is definitely worth checking out. It's a short game, but a fun and challenging one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Far Cry Movie Plans |
|
| 5. |
judgment call |
Feb 20, 2004, 11:05 |
Geese |
|
|
Not to mention, you've gotta call into question the judgment of someone who would announce a video-game movie based on a game thats not even out yet!
(maybe he could do a Duke Nukem Forever movie....and that would probably also be out before DNF hits the PC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Unreal Tournament 2004 Demo |
|
| 164. |
Re: Really that good? |
Feb 12, 2004, 13:36 |
Geese |
|
|
>Is it really that good that a FPS veteran who played >everything since ipx-doom can get some fun out of it?
Hard to say. I'm in that boat...played multiplayer FPS as long as you...and I kinda like UT2K4. I'll admit it's nothing groundbreaking. Looks pretty much just like 2K3, but with vehicles. However, I *did* enjoy playing Onslaught mode, even just against the bots. I guess if you gotta save up to buy it, you might wanna wait until it hits bargain bin prices and just get as much playtime out of the demo as possible, otherwise, if you can afford the 60 dollar DVD set, it's probably worth it, if you liked 2K3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Quickie Tech Bit |
|
| 13. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 10, 2004, 13:35 |
Geese |
|
|
>In the original cantina scene with Han and Greedo Han >shoots Greedo under the table, in the revised version >Greedo shoots first and misses and then Han shoots him.
Oh, I get it. So the new version makes Han look like he's invloved in self-defense, as opposed to just killing Greedo. I just love Political Correctness 
This comment was edited on Feb 10, 13:39. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Quickie Tech Bit |
|
| 10. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 10, 2004, 13:23 |
Geese |
|
|
Being a casual Star Wars fan, can someone explain the comment about 'revisionist Han Solo'? I know about the CG added effects for the 3 movies, but what is meant by the Han Solo comment? Did the re-releases change dialog or something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Rock Star Games |
|
| 13. |
Re: Kill me, please? |
Jan 9, 2004, 07:18 |
Geese |
|
|
>Can't be any worse than Def Jam Vendetta.
Actually there's a really good chance that it could be worse. DJV, surprisingly, was a good wrestling game. Say what you want about the characters and theme, but the engine was solid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Magic: The Gathering Battlegrounds Trial |
|
| 11. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 19, 2003, 08:24 |
Geese |
|
|
>is this the unreal powered one
You are correct. Unreal powered. I also didn't have high expectations for Battlegrounds, but was pleasantly surprised (I have the Xbox version, but have also played the PC demo) Its high speed makes it feel more like a fighting game than a RTS (and I say that in a good way). Just understand that it's an MTG 'themed' game, and not a console version of the CCG. I've read tons of comments how people disliked it simply because it had the MTG name attached to it, yet it wasn't turn based like the CCG.
Oh well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Public Armed & Dangerous Demo |
|
| 20. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 18, 2003, 09:47 |
Geese |
|
|
>Actually Geese, I'm not entirely sure FilePlanet actually >pays money for exclusives. I think they convince >publishers by saying they 1) have lotsa lotsa visitors >and 2) guarantee exclusives will get top billing for at >least a few days.
Ok...I admit I didn't actually think about it that way. But even so, it still makes sense for the publisher to do that. In the scenario you posed (which seems plausible), the publisher 'pays' for top billing, by granting exclusive rights to fileplanet. (keep in mind that this exclusivity is only for a limited time)
It's no different than offering an exclusive story to 60 Minutes, Oprah, or the New York Times.
It still makes sense (to me)
Boycotting the demo hurts the gamers more than exclusivity does.
This comment was edited on Dec 18, 09:59. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Public Armed & Dangerous Demo |
|
| 17. |
Re: Woot! |
Dec 18, 2003, 07:36 |
Geese |
|
|
>Stick with it guys and lets end this exclusive nonsense >with demos.
It's funny how people keep calling it 'nonsense'. Do you really think it *doesn't* make sense? You can't understand why exclusivity exists? The publisher gets a handful of cash from fileplanet (that makes sense). Fileplanet gets exclusive distribution for a short amount of time, possibly resulting in a few more subscriptions for them (makes sense). After a short waiting period, all users can get the demo. (makes sense).
You may not agree with it. Obviously many end users simply want the demo as early as everyone else. But can you seriously call it 'nonsense'?
I support your right to boycott, strike, complain, whatever. At least be up front about what you are complaining about. You want a couple of companies to forgo their profits, so you can have the demo as early as everyone else. Plain and simple.
And don't kid yourselves that the file sites involved in the boycott are doing it for the 'community of users'. Bah humbug. They are doing it for themselves in any attempt to increase traffic on their sites by trying to rip exclusivity from fileplanet.
This comment was edited on Dec 18, 08:12. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Demo Open Letter |
|
| 39. |
Re: Well |
Dec 16, 2003, 15:36 |
Geese |
|
|
>It may not affect you now, but what about in the future? >If one corporation, such as GSI, ends up with a monopoly, >do we say goodbye to free demos?
I don't really undertstand how that could happen. A publisher can ALWAYS offer free demos to the public anytime they wish. It doesn't behoove a company to charge for demos. Smaller, underpublicized titles would never see the light of day if people had to always pay for demos. It just won't happen. All that's happening now is people are paying to try the demo 'just a little earlier' than the general public, who gets to try it for free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
208 Comments. 11 pages. Viewing page 9.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
