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 WaltC

Real Name WaltC   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname WaltC
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jan 31, 2003, 04:03
Total Comments 405 (Amateur)
User ID 16008
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Older >


News Comments > Quoteworthy
5. Re: Quoteworthy Sep 1, 2011, 01:18 WaltC
 
No way are you getting any snacks!  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall Turns 15
6. Re: The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall Turns 15 Sep 1, 2011, 01:15 WaltC
 
From what I recall, Daggerfall was a humongous bug fest for which Bethesda released a very large number of patches. I dimly recall losing interest in the game after installing a number of those patches; and also I seem to recall Bethesda announcing the "final patch" which, unfortunately, did not fix the game but which was, nevertheless, Bethesda's best/last effort, I suppose. After that, Bethesda was a studio I endeavored to stay away from.

The premise of Daggerfall was really neat at the time, and it was too bad Bethesda could not have better executed the idea. Morrowind was the first decent stab at a game from Bethesda that I can remember. It sure is funny to think that was only 15 years ago, though. Seems like an eon.
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Cancelled "Oblivion-style" Might and Magic Game
10. Re: Cancelled Aug 20, 2011, 15:31 WaltC
 
Yes, for years, long before "Heroes of..." was affixed as a prefix, "Might and Magic" produced several really fun (I thought) RPG's. Anyone remember M&M IX? I was very sad when they went to the RTS format--never was the same, or even close to it.  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Epic Working on 5 New Games, Unreal Engine 4, Has PC Plans
13. Re: Epic Working on 5 New Games, Unreal Engine 4, Has PC Plans Aug 16, 2011, 13:49 WaltC
 
"Everyone knows the middle class is disappearing from the console business. Gears of War, I hope will do really well, but a pretty good game doesn't make its money back any more. A game like Homefront sells a couple of million copies and they close the studio, right?

"That's not enough any more. That's pretty depressing. You don't want to see what happens to an industry where it's Call of Duty, Halo and Gears and no-one else has enough money to make any games any more. That's not a fun industry.

Is this a joke, I wonder? CDPR debuted with the PC-only The Witcher a few years ago, and the 1.5 million copies they sold not only put CDPR on the map, it made and established their company financially so that they could hang around to make and release The Witcher 2 to rave reviews and sales--again, PC only (with a console version coming later, if ever.)

If you can sell two million copies of your game and go out of business I'd say that you don't have a game company, you've got nothing more than a con artist chewing up money, instead. Valve reportedly spent $40M developing Half Life 2--and if Valve sold only two million copies and made only $30 per copy sold, they'd have made $60M and realized a $20M profit. There is no reason I can think of to sell two million copies of a game and then go broke. That's insane.
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > "New and Improved" The Witcher 2 Version 2.0 Plans
11. Re: Aug 15, 2011, 22:19 WaltC
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Aug 15, 2011, 21:01:
While this is great product support it begs the question why anyone should continue to be idiotic enough to buy a CDP game at full price at release. This is the second game where they bring substantial content updates as well as gameplay improvements and new features to the table via "free" (actually anyone who bought the game paid them up front for any post-release services) patches to create an ultimate super duper platinum uber director's cut version of the game.

Idiotic enough? Heh, that is truly a strange comment...;) Knowing that CDPR is just full of pleasant surprises in their "Witcher for PC" (and only PC) games development, in that they continue to develop the game you bought after you buy it with masses of new features and extra content given away for free--what most companies charge extra for--means that you shouldn't ever be afraid to buy one of these games at full pop when it is released because you know going in that you are going to get you money's worth--and then some. I don't know of any other game franchise that delivers as much, for so little! The Witcher series for PC is therefore king of the hill in value and quality content and its attitude towards DRM.

So, really, what's your point? Do you really think that Witcher 2 will be worth less when version 2.0 for PC is released? I certainly can't see that. Most companies charge the same price for less support and less content and when anything else *is* released for the game they charge you more for it. I think it's obvious that the extra development and content announcement make this game worth more, not less, right away.

Millions of people rushed out and bought StarCraft II and Black Ops for PC on Day One and paid ~$60 for the privilege--and neither of those games will get the same degree of lavish attention for improvement and content that CDPR did first for Witcher PC and now is repeating for Witcher 2 PC.

And of course, if you wait long enough--say, a couple of years--you'll be able to buy the game much cheaper in the bargain bin, but that's true for all games. Who wants to wait two years? Not me...;)

I'm really a bit torn on these tactics. It's nice and cool on the one hand but also incredibly lame on the other since it feels like I paid $50 at release for a barebone version.
Sure, the updates are sort of "free" but still... I could still have my $50 and spent it on another game while waiting for CDP to finish their creative vision or whatever it is that they are after. As it is my game is collecting dust while I'm waiting for the final version. That's not entirely satisfactory.

Your mistake, of course, is in concluding that Witcher 2 isn't already worth $50, and by any measure I am quite sure that it is...;) Your sentiments also remind me of listening to people bitch and moan and swear that they never buy a Microsoft OS until service patch 1 rolls out.

They can do whatever they choose, of course, but I bought both Vista x64 and Win7x64 very near launch, and had no trouble using either prior to SP1. By your standard of reasoning we should all wait until an OS is six months shy of obsolescence before we buy it, since all of the feature upgrades and fixes Microsoft releases for a given OS aren't included at OS launch. But that would be silly--because if you waited for Microsoft to finalize an OS version before you bought it you'd be buying an obsolete OS which wouldn't be worth the price of admission at any price, since the successor OS version would be due to ship any day.

On the contrary, the reason that millions of people go ahead and buy the new OS at or near launch is because they anticipate the several years of improvements and feature additions that will be added free of charge! That automatically makes the new OS version worth much more than it would otherwise appear to be worth at launch.

Witcher 2 for PC is the same. Except that it's a game (!) which makes this amount of support and improved content unheard of among game developers. (I've been gaming for 25 years and have never seen this kind of commitment to an already shipped game.) I've never seen a developer pour so much into a game a year after shipping at no charge to the customer! And, there's no way I want to wait until six months prior to Witcher 3 shipping to buy Witcher2. That's mainly because these Witcher games have an incredible amount of replay value. I played the Witcher through once before the EE version was released by CDPR, and since then I have played it through an additional two times, and am in the middle of my fourth replay of Witcher 1 even as I play the initial chapters of Witcher 2. Basically, holding the opinion that so much beyond-the-pale support for its Witcher PC games makes those games worth less is a sentiment I believe is shared by very few. In fact, you just might be unique in your views...;)

Last, playing computer games for 25 years I've never, ever, bought and played a game (and I've bought hundreds) that was a) 100% bug free, and b) so perfect that no amount of additional content could possibly make it better. Kudos to CDPR for improving their game and adding content for free as this will incite many more people to buy their Witcher PC games than any amount of mere advertising might ever do. And advertising, unfortunately, is where most companies spend their $ after they've already shipped a title.

 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA: PC "Extremely Healthy" and Could Become "Our Biggest Platform"
37. Re: EA: PC Aug 14, 2011, 10:21 WaltC
 
killer_roach wrote on Aug 13, 2011, 15:30:
Nothing about the next console generation changes what he's said. The problem is how much interest consumers have in PC gaming once the next generation of consoles comes out.


With ever more powerful PCs coming down the pike at ever-lower prices, I don't think it's a question of "consumer interest" in PCs, I think the real question is: How long do consoles have?

PCs enjoy economies of scale that console manufacturers can only dream of (PCs are selling > 300 million units a year.) I don't think it will be long at all before you can buy desktop PCs in the $300-$400 price range that have multiples of a given console's processing power, 3d rendering power, storage space and many other things that consoles don't offer at all. That's console country at the moment in terms of pricing, but when fairly powerful desktop PCs arrive in that pricing space the only thing that Microsoft or Sony will be able to do is either to slash the price of their consoles down into the $100-$200 range, start selling Microsoft & Sony branded PCs that are called "consoles" for the sake of tradition, or just give up the ship and walk away from the console business.

I think that people forget that consoles were originally introduced as a concept back when a "gaming PC" might cost as much as $5,000. Against that sort of backdrop, a $300 console was the perfect compromise product that would allow people to game while not costing them an arm and a leg in the process. The economic rules that originally made consoles attractive to people simply don't apply anymore, however. So, I think it will be interesting in the upcoming years to see just how long the console as a concept will be able to hang on in the face of the inevitable $300 UberPC...;)

 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Bethesda Sues Mojang Over Scrolls TM
68. Re: Bethesda Sues Mojang Over Scrolls TM Aug 7, 2011, 14:28 WaltC
 
DDI wrote on Aug 6, 2011, 22:24:
Uhm, are you guys familiar with the trademark lawsuit between Apple Corps and Apple Computers. It had been mostly settled but then flaired up because Apple Computers started selling electronic music which Apple Corps felt was an infringment on their mark.

Back when Apple Computer was strictly a computer company, the Beatles penned an agreement with Apple Computer allowing use of the word "Apple" in relation to their computer business, with the strict understanding that if Apple Computer ever at any time "entered the music business" (in any way, shape, or form) that Apple Computer would lose its trademark right to use the word "Apple" from then on. When Apple introduced the iPod & iTunes it "entered the music business" and broke the original agreement and the Beatles promptly sued. Apple paid the Beatles a cool $50M to continue use the word "Apple" from that point forward. Steve Jobs made his now-classic remark about how he meant only to "pay tribute" to the Beatles by ripping off their trademark...:D

You can claim you have superior logic but it's false. They are both video games with similar names, Bethesda is within their right to defend their mark. In fact, they must defend their mark or else they lose it. For example, Xerox brought back their trademark from the brink of oblivion; everyone says photocopy instead of xerox now due to their aggressive defense of their mark.

You guys can whine and moan about how you think its unfair that poor little rich indie guy who made one game you like is being picked on but Bethesda is required to defend their mark.

Unlike between Apple Computer and the Beatles, Mojang had no agreement with Bethesda allowing it to use the word "scrolls" until such time as Mojang used it in order to sell computer games...;) Indeed, the phrase "The Elder Scrolls" is what Bethesda has trademarked with respect to the title of some of its computer games. If Mojang wants to trademark "scrolls" with respect to the title of some of its computer games, and Bethesda disagrees, then Bethesda will have to prove to a judge that consumers are easily confused by a game title of "Scrolls" and a game title of "The Elder Scrolls," and that most consumers would believe when purchasing "Scrolls" by Mojang that they were instead buying "The Elder Scrolls" by Bethesda.

Yes, generally speaking a company is compelled to protect its trademarks by way of litigation when necessary. However, nowhere is it written or implied that fomenting a suit that is not likely to succeed is necessary for protecting one's trademark.

Should a judge rule that there is no reason to believe that consumers are likely to confuse "Scrolls" with "The Elder Scrolls," then the result is exactly the same for Bethesda that it would have been had Bethesda never sued Mojang: Bethesda retains a trademark for the phrase "The Elder Scrolls" as it pertains to the title of some of Bethesda's computer games, and Mojang retains a trademark for "Scrolls" as it pertains to the title of some of Mojang's computer games. Bethesda would have spared itself quite a bit of superfluous legal fees, too, while retaining its trademark, had it not sued Mojang in the first place.

Speaking of Apple, this reminds me of Apple suing Amazon over the phrase "App Store" in the larger phrase "Amazon App Store." Apple says that consumers will be confused by the Amazon trademark "Amazon App Store" and will think they are buying from Apple, instead of Amazon. The judge has already informed Apple that one of its so-far-unmet burdens of proof relative to a successful trademark infringement case against Amazon is proving that consumers are likely to confuse the "Apple App Store" with the "Amazon App Store". The judge has stated that Apple hasn't done this yet--at all.

If Apple cannot do that, and at this stage it appears Apple cannot, then Apple might as well not have bothered to sue Amazon in the first place, as having unsuccessfully sued another company for protection of your trademark has no effect on the mark at all, either pro or con. You have, however, wasted a lot of time and money on a superfluous, bogus effort, and accomplished little save for making some lawyers smile as they fattened their wallets. Nothing wrong with a company being prudent as to whom it sues and why, and taking a losing battle to court does nothing to strengthen your hold on the trademarks you already have.






 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > No Battlefield 3 on Steam
131. Re: No Battlefield 3 on Steam Aug 7, 2011, 13:06 WaltC
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 7, 2011, 10:53:
You're making completely arbitrary rules here. What exactly is the difference between selling one game and not selling another and selling one game and not selling the DLC?

I can't believe you're having a hard time with this...;) The subject is one (1) game, BC3, and that one (1) game's DLC. Whether Valve sells "other games" or doesn't sell them is completely beside the point and an altogether different matter.


Before you try and suggest other people don't know what they're talking about, you really should do some research to avoid making yourself look stupid. Selling a game on Steam does not mean that the game uses Steamworks. BF:BC2, for example, is sold on Steam, but has no Steamworks integration at all. Most, if not all EA games are done similarily, and there's no reason to suspect that they'd do it any different with BF3, should it actually come to Steam.

I wasn't aware of that, so thanks for the information. Frankly, though, it doesn't strike me that selling games through Steam, but not Steamworks, would be in Valve's best interests at all. Valve's rejection of B3C makes even more sense in light of this information.

 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > No Battlefield 3 on Steam
127. Re: No Battlefield 3 on Steam Aug 7, 2011, 10:31 WaltC
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 6, 2011, 16:56:
That's a ridiculous proposition for EA to put forward. Of course Valve isn't going to want to do that

Why is it ridiculous? Would it be ridiculous for EA to say "We're going to put these X games on Steam, but not these Y games"? Because they (and other publishers) have done that.

We aren't talking about different games--we're talking about one game, B3. Valve would want to offer the game *and* its DLC, as opposed to offering the game sans DLC. Why would Valve want to publish just part of B3?

Then there's the Steam Cloud to consider. It isn't going to work properly for B3 unless Valve can include the DLC.

EA games don't use Steamworks, so that's an entirely moot point.

Wow--you really don't know what the topic is here...;) I'd suggest reading the topic post and then reading mine, since you apparently have read neither...;) The subject of this thread is: "Why is Valve refusing to publish B3?" If Valve were to publish B3, then Steamworks would be involved (of course.)
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > No Battlefield 3 on Steam
47. Re: No Battlefield 3 on Steam Aug 6, 2011, 16:39 WaltC
 
The conflict here lies in the fact that both EA and Valve are game publishers. But the thing is, customers won't be hurt at all by any of this. They'll simply buy B3 from whomever they choose to buy it from aside from Steam (there will be no shortage of vendors selling it), and they'll get their DLC from whatever sources there are apart from Steam that will be selling it. No, the customer isn't going to be hurt here.

But I think Valve and EA both will be hurt by this silly skirmish. I think Valve is the least culpable party here, no doubt about it. Through Steam, Valve is acting as a software publisher. I think that Valve wishes to maintain the consistency of the software titles it publishes, and the consistency of the delivery of those games to customers, and Valve cannot do that if EA wants Valve to publish the game (among many others who will also be selling it) but refuses Valve the right to also publish the DLC. That's a ridiculous proposition for EA to put forward. Of course Valve isn't going to want to do that. Then there's the Steam Cloud to consider. It isn't going to work properly for B3 unless Valve can include the DLC. And that's it. EA is offering Valve the dubious proposition of publishing part of B3, but not all of it. Ridiculous.

This goes back, I think, to EA being a publisher itself. Obviously, EA understands what a successful business Valve has built otherwise there would have been no discussion about Valve publishing B3 in the first place. Valve has a very good reputation with its customer base among all of the digital publishers for quality and consistency. Of all of the digital publishers, I'd venture that Steam is easily #1. So, EA is hurting itself by limiting the distribution of B3 to non-Steam outlets, as this will most likely impact the total number of B3 sales EA will enjoy. Valve is going to miss out on some revenue, but I think Valve will gladly trade this loss of revenue in order to maintain its reputation as a publisher. Going forward, a sterling reputation will earn Valve far more in the future.

EA, otoh, is clearly a publishing company that has been run (into the ground) by having bean counters in the driver's seat instead of competent and experienced game developers and managers. It shows. The way EA has chosen to handle Steam in this instance shows the poverty of EA's managerial direction. I don't think anything could be clearer. EA is pretty much full of shit here, and the remarkable thing is that EA may be the only entity left who doesn't know that. At this rate, I really don't see how EA can survive as a going concern. I rate Valve's long term prospects much higher.
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quoteworthy - Epic on PC Gaming
24. Re: Quoteworthy - Epic on PC Gaming Aug 4, 2011, 14:38 WaltC
 
Oh, if only I had a nickel for every time in the last 15 years I've heard the refrain, "The PC is dead and the gaming console is the future"...:D It never happened because it couldn't have. PCs not only can do what consoles do and do it much better, they can also do many, many other things that consoles cannot do because they weren't designed to do them. And with PCs selling upwards of 300M a year, every year, the PC economies of scale are such that for merely double the cost of a current console you can buy a computer that runs rings around it while gaming and is good for many other things, too. Dollar for dollar, the smart money is on the PC these days. It just makes a lot more sense to buy a PC. I see that trend only increasing with the passage of time.

Is there really anyone left alive who doesn't know that the current hardware in "today's" console is little more than yesterday's warmed over PC state-of-the-art hardware?

Companies who dismiss the PC today in favor of exclusive console development are going to become increasingly marginalized as time moves on. I can say it without malice of any kind: software companies who ignore the goal of developing state-of-the-art PC games today in favor of consoles and even the other toy-like devices on the market (Nintendo, etc.) are already "has beens" and are on the way out. Companies like CD Projekt RED (Witcher, Witcher2) are the future and will be showing yesterday's great developers how things need to be done *today.*

Epic, id, and some other game-developing powerhouses of yesteryear are being shown the light by companies like CD Projekt Red. I certainly hope these guys wake up and smell the coffee. John Carmack, especially. As just one example, he loves to talk about how excited he is to be developing RAGE for Nintendo's latest toy-gadget. But if Carmack expects to market his games at $50 a pop as was true in the past, he isn't going to do that by offering the PC the same essential content he designs for Nintendo. Nope--not going to happen. And the upcoming so-called smart-phone gaming market, where people expect to buy games for <$5 at release, is not going to produce anything better today than 1980's Amiga arcade fare. I guess the old guard will just have to move over for the new if they think quality gaming is Commander Keen and pals. As difficult as it is to believe, I think some traditional developers actually do think this way.

 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quotable - Christoph Hartmann
13. Re: Quotable - Christoph&#8200;Hartmann Jul 13, 2011, 08:05 WaltC
 
It is regrettable, but Hartmann clearly doesn't get it. It was never the "style" of Ray Charles, or the "Ray-Charles type," that people loved--it was Ray Charles himself that people liked.

Likewise with bringing back great games from the past and dressing them up in a suit of more modern clothes--it could be a blast and a huge, huge moneymaker for the new company. Unfortunately, this almost never happens because the producers of the remake were, sad to say, never really big fans of the original themselves and never really understood what it was about the original game that made it such a success.

xCom was creepy and believable, with a pervasive atmosphere in terms of graphics, sound, and story that just oozed captivation and entertainment. The game was spell binding and it had a very creepy and believable story behind it--but most of all, most importantly of all, the story wasn't merely the backdrop and the mood setter for a cookie-cutter first-person shooter--the freakin' story *was* the game, the turn-based action *was* the game, and that was what made the game great. There was none of this lame attempt to "put in this element" and to "put in that element" until you came up with a laundry list of "cool elements" that, when combined, would guarantee a successful game. xCom doesn't need Kayne West anymore than it needs Ray Charles to survive. xCom needs xCom to live long and prosper.

Basically--like any remake of any great blast from the past--xCom doesn't need to be reinvented for a "modern audience." Hell, no--the game is *already successful* even by "modern standards." What it needs are better 3d graphics, a better sound scape, better voice acting, and a better musical score and a few other things. That's it.

What needs to be avoided at all costs is changing the game so fundamentally that the only recognizable feature about it is the title...;) Whenever that happens with a remake it is EPIC FAILURE. This is why so few remakes are attempted when the landscape is full of classics that simply beg to be remade according to modern production standards. The temptation to retain the title of the original but to change everything else is simply too great for too many to bear. And that's why so many remakes fail. So many people don't know when to leave well enough alone, do they?
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Torchlight Sells a Million
8. Re: Torchlight Sell a Million Jul 7, 2011, 07:28 WaltC
 
Bad grammar. Should be "Torchlight Sells a Million." Torchlight is singular, not plural.  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GFW and Xbox.com Marketplaces Merging
44. Re: GFW and Xbox.com Marketplaces Merging Jul 2, 2011, 09:34 WaltC
 
Rockn-Roll wrote on Jul 1, 2011, 15:53:
I think just 2 of the 50 modern games I own support my native Windows 5040x1050x32 resolution on the Matrox Digital TH2Go with three widescreen monitors. All the rest are like 3840x1024 or some such and most of them had to be patched for that resolution or was just being faked by zooming the output and cutting off the top and bottom of the output which causes the very unpleasant tunnel vision.

It's fairly obvious that your "nearly 30 years" of experience hasn't served to keep you in touch with the state of 3d gaming in the marketplace (and I don't mean "3d" with the funny glasses--I'm referring to the use of polygons and textures on an x, y and simulated z axis.)

Years ago, and I do mean "years," Matrox was the only game in town for a very nice 2d display. But when 3d came along, especially 3dfx's brand of 3d, Matrox began a decline it has yet to recover from. Let's be honest--Matrox is for all intents and purposes *gone* from the 3d graphics stage today. If you want the best in triple-screen (or even 6-screen) 3d-gaming support then you've no choice but to go EyeFinity from AMD (formerly ATi.) Not only does it blow Matrox TH2Go away in every respect, it also functions at resolutions even higher than 5040x1050. Lots of current games support EyeFinity, and will run at such resolutions at a decent frame-rate while delivering all of the 3d functionality that Matrox completely fails to support. Here's a FAQ to get you started:

EyeFinity

As for the comments about Steam...if any of you were around at the time...then you would remember the services which rose and fell in an attempt to provide multiplayer connectivity.

Steam's major claim to fame has always been in the fact that it serves as an online publisher and store--meaning you can buy practically any game you choose direct from Steam and download it immediately--so long as you are attached to a broadband pipe, that is. Otherwise, today's multi-gigabyte games will take you days to download...;)


 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
7. Re: Out of the Blue Jun 3, 2011, 17:54 WaltC
 
I had one of the 27.5", 1920x1200 Hanns monitors, too, and agree that for the money ($~550) they are very difficult to beat...;)  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Gay Character Plans: ME3 Yes, DNF No
37. Re: Gay Character Plans: ME3 Yes, DNF No May 16, 2011, 17:00 WaltC
 
The highly narcissistic "gay" social agenda has completely ruined so many other forms of entertainment--I pray it not be allowed to ruin gaming as well. I favor putting them all back into the closet inside games and lead-lining the doors. The truth is guy, or gal, I don't care if you dig men or you dig women--just stay out of my game! If I want some of that agenda there are plenty of places on the Internet I can go to have my head dunked in that sort of propagandist drivel. I play games for the fun factor--if want lessons in politically correct sexual etiquette circa ~2011 I will certainly look elsewhere. Stay out of my games! Thanks.  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
39. Re: Op Ed Mar 7, 2011, 17:43 WaltC
 
Nomaar wrote on Mar 7, 2011, 11:07:
Just because Bioware sold out doesn't mean the genre is dying. The Witcher, for example, was deep and engaging and I haven't seen anything that makes me believe The Witcher 2 will be anything less. They're just one of several independents in Europe that are making quality rpgs.

Yep, I'm on my 4th play through of the Witcher...;) Every time I think I've finally had enough of it--I'll eventually reinstall because there are some things about it that aren't equaled anywhere else. My sincere hope is that Witcher2 doesn't ruin the formula.
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crytek Responds to Crysis 2 Leak
160. Re: Crytek responds to Crysis 2 Leak Feb 13, 2011, 12:07 WaltC
 
Beamer wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 01:28:


You are fucking insane.

Heh...;) No, you are just naive.

Q: Where did the leaked software come from?

A: Either EA or Crybabytek.

Q: Who published the blurb telling the entire gaming world where the leaked software was to be found?

A: EA.

Q: Who took the occasion to promote the game while telling the world where the leaked software was to be found ?

A: EA.

Fact is, the best damage control EA might've done had this not been a planned PR event designed to promote the game, was to have remained completely silent about the pirated version of the game, and if asked about it, to disavow all knowledge of it. Even better, EA might've added a little something about "root kits" or "Trojans" all while declining to to announce to the world where the copy was to be found, and--oh, yea, we here at EA couldn't sleep at night if we didn't also tell you that this copy was indeed a legitimate copy of the game. I mean, we here at EA wouldn't want you downloading a pirated copy of our game that wasn't legit, would we? Heh...;)

Last thing a sane company might ever do for a pirated version of their game is to draw attention to it in this manner. However, a sane company putting on a PR event designed to promote their game might do exactly what has transpired.
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crytek Responds to Crysis 2 Leak
96. Re: Crytek responds to Crysis 2 Leak Feb 12, 2011, 21:29 WaltC
 
Here's what EA said:

Crytek has been alerted that an early incomplete, unfinished build of Crysis 2 has appeared on Torrent sites. Crytek and EA are deeply disappointed by the news. We encourage fans to support the game and the development team by waiting and purchasing the final, polished game on March 22. Crysis 2 is still in development and promises to be the ultimate action blockbuster as the series’ signature Nanosuit lets you be the weapon as you defend NYC from an alien invasion. Piracy continues to damage the PC packaged goods market and the PC development community.

Not a single word as to how the software could have "appeared" on Torrent sites. This is a note written to people who don't know that software can't just "appear" somewhere out of the ether...;)

This is obviously a put-up job by EA. My thinking is that by publishing this little blurb EA is inuring itself against the event that Crysis 2 doesn't sell very well--because EA already knows it's a shitty piece of property--and is preparing to lay the blame at the ever-present straw-man feet of insidious and invisible "piracy." Also, notice how almost in the same breath EA is promoting the game even as it alerts the public that it can download an early build of the game gratis on bittorrent somewhere...:D

EA kills two birds with one stone, here. It does an advance self-defense maneuver in case the game doesn't sell well (blaming it on "piracy"), even while it shamelessly uses the pirated goods to promote the game itself! Heh! This has EA's fingerprints all over it...!
 
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Mobilization
4. Re: Will anyone really pay $800 for Android-powered Motorola Xoom tablet? Feb 7, 2011, 17:52 WaltC
 
I think it depends entirely on how much better the Xoom is than the iPad. If it blows the iPad away, then its higher price will be justified. If it is only as good as, or not quite as good as the iPad, then it will fizzle in a hurry. It is difficult to believe that Motorola might screw this up--but you never know.  
Avatar 16008
 
It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
405 Comments. 21 pages. Viewing page 12.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo