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 Krovven

Real Name Krovven   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Krovven
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On Oct 17, 2003, 03:30
Total Comments 7012 (Guru)
User ID 19048
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ] Older >


News Comments > Blizzard Promises Diablo III Players Death
14. Re: Blizzard Promises Diablo III Players Death Feb 10, 2012, 11:55 Krovven
 
Wildone wrote on Feb 10, 2012, 10:50:
Q4 2013. MARK.MY.WORDS.

Missed the story the other day that Diablo3 is slated for Q2 this year?

A whole lot of loud mouth idiots talking out their ass this morning about a game their clearly know nothing about but just want to post shit.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Blizzard Promises Diablo III Players Death
13. Re: Blizzard Promises Diablo III Players Death Feb 10, 2012, 11:51 Krovven
 
LittleMe wrote on Feb 10, 2012, 10:43:
They should have a mode where you have just one life. I'm not talking about difficulty, just removing the immortality of the char.

Uhhm it's called Hardcore mode. Have you never played a Diablo game before?


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > F2P Hawken in December; Beta Signups
18. Re: F2P Hawken in December; Beta Signups Feb 7, 2012, 12:21 Krovven
 
I guess people just want yet another human vs human shooter. Thanks but I'll pass. Personally I found MechWarrior games to be too slow paced. But I also don't like hyper-speed twitch shooters all that often anymore. This could be just the thing.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > F2P Hawken in December; Beta Signups
1. Re: F2P Hawken in December; Beta Signups Feb 6, 2012, 21:55 Krovven
 
Looking to see what this was, I watched this gameplay vid. http://www.youtube.com/v/iVa7B1bLv8I&hd=1 Sweet!

F2P, but the FAQ mentions it being a downloadable title with a low cost. Will be interesting to see more details on this in the coming months.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
30. Re: Steam Top 10 Feb 6, 2012, 03:45 Krovven
 
Prez wrote on Feb 6, 2012, 02:03:
I REALLY liked Space Marine. One of the best 3rd Person action games I've played in a long time. Unlike others, I never got bored with the visceral and satisfying carnage.

I got it for $12 from GMG around New Years. I haven't finished it yet, but I did get kinda bored rather quickly. The environments are horrible. The vistas are above average. The voice acting and combat are the only things really holding the game together for me.

For $12 I got a good deal. If I had paid $50, I'd have wasted money. $20 for Saints Row 3 from GMG has been one of my best purchases lately.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
4. Re: Steam Top 10 Feb 5, 2012, 15:51 Krovven
 
deqer wrote on Feb 5, 2012, 15:42:
all these Warhammer 40,000 games, and I was thinking to myself "wtf? Which one?!?" Fuck it! I'm outta here."

ADD is a bitch.

This comment was edited on Feb 5, 2012, 16:09.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
40. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 16:17 Krovven
 
Verno wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 15:13:
Yeah no, you just wanted an excuse to post foolish and naive but whatever, I'm not going to e-fight with you about it.

And you just want to be an asshole and tell other people what they mean with their comments and then state you dont want to "e-fight" about it. Talk about passive aggressive. Don't start trying to tell me what I'm saying or how to say it, or this discussion will turn into something neither of us want it to. If you want to get personal because you can't handle someone criticizing your over simplification of the issue and obvious misunderstanding of my viewpoint, then we are done talking.

When you're trading in a game the main value of it is derived from the perceived value of the title itself and it's pretty much the same story in reverse for retail purchases. The industry is trying to change this with preorder DLC and stuff but multiplayer codes send the wrong message IMO.

You are arguing with me for the sake of arguing, typical Verno bullshit. I'm not debating trade-in value. I'm debating what the benefit is of paying $55 for a used game instead of $60 for a new game has for me the consumer when I know that the Pubs/Devs will not see a dime of that and I will likely not even get everything in that used box as I would the new box. Something you have yet to even touch on. To me there is ZERO benefit, and you have yet to explain how you think it's worth it.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
35. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 14:52 Krovven
 
Verno wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:51:
My point was simply that the game itself is functionally identical.

And my point was that it's foolish and naive to simplify the factors involved to only whether the game works or not, because that's not the only factor involved.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
26. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:41 Krovven
 
Bhruic wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:36:
It's a double edged sword, there is no black and white. Don't see how that is hard to figure out.

Well, it's not hard for me to figure out what I believe, it's trying to figure out what you believe that I'm having trouble with.

I've edited my last post. Hopefully its more clear for you. Don't see how it matters whether I'm pro one side or the other, cus really I'm not. But my actions in this case tend to side with the Pubs & Devs as that makes the most sense long term.

GameStop and every other retailer that deals in Used games could disappear today and it wouldn't upset me in the slightest. But every time a Pub shuts down a Dev, it's a sad day.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
21. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:31 Krovven
 
Bhruic wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:29:
The main problem is that GameStop has little reason to want to sell a New copy of a game over a Used version of the game. If they reduce their prices, they will reduce the amount they give on trade, thus will still make make the same margin on the sale of Used games. So nothing changes.

Ok, but what I'm trying to find out is if you are against the idea of selling used games in general, or just have an issue with the way Gamestop does it? The second half of your post leads me to believe the former, but I'd like to be sure.

It's a double edged sword, there is no black and white. Don't see how that is hard to figure out.

If used game sales disappeared, Pubs could theoretically lower their prices. They won't though. But if companies like GameStop continue to market used game sales over new game sales it will continue to have a detrimental effect on the industry. Yet they have a right to run that business, just like the Pubs have a right to change their relationship with them. Just as I have the right to consciously make most of my purchases New games to ensure that the devs get theirs.

This comment was edited on Feb 3, 2012, 13:36.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
20. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:29 Krovven
 
Verno wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:19:
Krovven wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:17:
Verno wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:12:
Those are not aspects of the game though, that's packaging.

And none of those things effect value?

Those are not aspects of the game though, that's packaging.

What's your point? They effect value. Discounting that is foolish and naive. If that value didn't matter, then everyone would buy their games digitally, not be able to trade them in at all and this discussion wouldn't be happening.

There's nothing wrong with the behavior, its done the world over in other industries. Heck it's a protected right in many countries.

And it's a protected right for the Publishers to try and change how their products are valued and sold.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
18. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:25 Krovven
 
Bhruic wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:12:
So would you be less annoyed by Gamestop if they were selling the used game for less? Or should they be making more on new copies, to give them more incentive to push those?

The main problem is that GameStop has little reason to want to sell a New copy of a game over a Used version of the game. If they reduce their prices, they will reduce the amount they give on trade, thus will still make make the same margin on the sale of Used games. So nothing changes.

Publishers are trying to fight that by devaluing the Used game. Until someone comes up with a better solution, Online Passes are a decent option. While rentals and used game sales provide some benefit to the consumer and a huge benefit to the retail shop, the long-term detrimental effects of fewer games being made and thousands of educated people losing jobs, are not beneficial to anyone.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
16. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:17 Krovven
 
Verno wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 13:12:
Those are not aspects of the game though, that's packaging.

And none of those things effect value?


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
13. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 13:07 Krovven
 
Giving $15-$30 trade-in value then turning around and selling it for $45-$55. Actively promoting the sale of used games rather than the new version of the game.

ie: Customer A buys new copy of a game that came out last week for $60. A week later they trade it in for $25 credit. The store puts it back on the shelf for $55, in some cases stores have been known to re-shrinkwrap that used game and sell it as New again for $60.

Customer B comes in and asks for a new copy of the same game. Instead of just selling them the new game, they are going to suggest that person buy the used copy of the game to save $5. From the sale of that used game the store has now made $25-$35 profit off the game they already sold and only made $10 on because it was New.

Publishers/Devs only saw the money from the first sale, not the 2nd. Yet the store made 300% more off the used game than they did the new, so there is very little reason for them to push the New sale.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
12. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 12:55 Krovven
 
Prez wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 12:10:
Scratches, damage to the discs, inserts (DLC codes) removed, box broken, instructions missing (assuming there were some), etc.

It may be a small distinction but the things you are mentioning are the media, not the game itself. To put it another way, assuming that scratched disc allows the game to be installed, the game that ends up on your machine is identical to a new game. If not, Gamestop will surely refund it.

All of these things are a factor when buying a retail boxed products, whether it's used or new.

All of those things are worth not saving a measly $5 to me and having the devs screwed out of being paid. I never buy used games unless they are significantly discounted and even then it's rare. I'd rather wait for a game to hit the bargain bin new @ $10-$25.

And when you say "install"...let's be real here, this impacts console games, not PC games. PC Games haven't been taken in trade-in for years at the majority of shops. While some games do have an install process, it's rarely a full install, thus the condition of the discs is a huge factor.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
8. Re: Op Ed Feb 3, 2012, 12:02 Krovven
 
Beamer wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 11:52:
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 11:40:
Prez wrote on Feb 3, 2012, 11:33:
I also think his points on why online passes are bad are extremely weak and his nerd rage extremely lame.
So...when you buy a used car, or fridge, or hell even clothes from someone else, they should be making money off you for the convenience buying used? I agree the guy does rant, and rant wildly. But the point of them double dipping on a sale is valid.


When you buy a used car or used fridge and a part dies, who manufactures the replacement?

But, again, you can't really use cars or fridges or clothes as a proxy. Would you want to wear used clothing? Would you say a used car is as nice as a new car? No way.

But a used game is identical to a new game.

Considering he talks about poorer people relying on trading in to buy games...people do buy and wear used clothes. There is an entire chain of stores called Value Village based on that entire philosophy.

Used car nicer than a new car? Uhhm yea. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think most people would agree there are plenty of nice used cars they'd rather have over their "new" cars.

Used game is not identical to a new game. Scratches, damage to the discs, inserts (DLC codes) removed, box broken, instructions missing (assuming there were some), etc.

While I dont agree with the "online passes" in general, I do think they are currently the best option for Publishers to hurt GameStop and other shops from exploiting the sales of used games.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Ascend Changes
50. Re: Tribes Ascend Changes Feb 2, 2012, 19:53 Krovven
 
elefunk wrote on Feb 2, 2012, 19:46:
Krovven wrote on Feb 2, 2012, 19:42:
And for all those saying this isn't Pay To Win.

If you can pay additional money to gain a benefit over players that do not pay the extra cash, it's P2W.

Tribes Ascend, can you pay an extra fee to gain XP and Tokens faster and purchase Gold to unlock more classes? Yes. It's P2W.

So once again, you've never played Tribes Ascend, have you?

Nothing you can buy in Tribes Ascend is better than anything else. The stuff you buy is *DIFFERENT*, not *BETTER*.

Same holds true for perks in the game. You can't outright buy perks. You have to earn them by playing the game. You could spend every single penny you own on this game if you want, and you'd have 0 advantage over someone who paid nothing.

You can't read can you? You pay to gain XP faster, and have to continue to pay monthly if you want to keep gaining XP faster. That's enough to make it P2W.

You can also buy classes faster with the increased Tokens and my understanding is Gold is also used to purchase Classes. Plus, they have stated they intend to sell other "undisclosed" stuff in the future.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Ascend Changes
48. Re: Tribes Ascend Changes Feb 2, 2012, 19:42 Krovven
 
And for all those saying this isn't Pay To Win.

If you can pay additional money to gain a benefit over players that do not pay the extra cash, it's P2W.

Tribes Ascend, can you pay an extra fee to gain XP and Tokens faster and purchase Gold to unlock more classes? Yes. It's P2W.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Ascend Changes
46. Re: Tribes Ascend Changes Feb 2, 2012, 19:26 Krovven
 
Jerykk wrote on Feb 2, 2012, 16:23:
Not that I disagree with your original point or anything. I just find it humorous that you condemn microtransactions while admitting to paying for CoD.

Already stated I've never bought any CoD DLC/Map Pack and refuse to support $15 for a few maps, sometimes rehashed maps. It's another model I will not support. MW3 is certainly not P2W so there is no comparison. If they started charging $15 a month to get XP and in-game currency faster, then I'd agree with you. But out of the box MW3 is a feature and content filled game that always works.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Ascend Changes
28. Re: Tribes Ascend Changes Feb 2, 2012, 15:41 Krovven
 
Hellbinder wrote on Feb 2, 2012, 15:24:
imo, your opinions are completely retarded.

The feeling is entirely mutual. And not just about this topic. Quite frankly I don't care what you have to say about my opinion of not throwing money at P2W beta's and that it's extremely harmful to the future of games (as more and more companies do this). Feel free to contribute to the monetizing of every feature in games.

$45 isn't a one time fee. He has already made multiple transactions, thus we can conclude he will continue to make more transactions so he can P2W. It's a stupid model, and one I will never buy into, simple as that.

If Blizzard was doing this with the Diablo 3 beta, you can be damned sure people would be screaming bloody murder.

This comment was edited on Feb 2, 2012, 15:55.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7012 Comments. 351 pages. Viewing page 51.
< Newer [ 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo