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 6811 (Guru)
User ID 19048
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Older >


News Comments > Hello Games Flooded
6. Re: Hello Games Flooded Dec 25, 2013, 17:40 Krovven
 
This game looks pretty cool!

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
8. Re: On Sale Dec 25, 2013, 15:17 Krovven
 
The load on Steam has been fine until L4D2 being made free today.
Didn't even have a problem accessing Steam in the first hour of the first day of the sale.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
79. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 25, 2013, 03:18 Krovven
 
Jerykk, stop trying to tell me what I want.

You don't seem to want to comprehend one message to the next, so I'm not going to bother continuing to repeat myself. You are against a morality system, consequences for player actions and unwilling to listen to anything that involves ideas along those lines, that much is clear. So I'm wasting my time discussing it with you.

There are two things in life that prevent most humans from killing eachother and taking what they want. Morality and the consequences if caught. In games, these things to out the window. Most people will do whatever they can get away with because of this. I'm sorry this simple concept is lost on you.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Christmas Eve Consolidation
6. Re: Xim4 Dec 24, 2013, 15:26 Krovven
 
Snow in GTAO for just one day, being Xmas day? That's just lame. I think most people are going to be a little busy Xmas day. They could have at least done the snow for the week.

I won't get to see it, because the devs are stupid. Love the game, but they have done a piss poor job handling many things about GTAO.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
72. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 06:37 Krovven
 
Jerykk wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 02:52:
So basically, you want an open-world, massively multiplayer co-op zombie survival game with no PvP. That could work, though I have to wonder how much threat zombies would pose in the long run.

Sigh, it's like talking to a brick wall. I've already said several times that I don't want to completely remove PvP from the equation. But the games offered currently have no consequences for just killing random people along with no benefit of random people working together. Therefore I may as well just play any number of shooters if I want to PvP.

I truly do find it amusing, how people are so defensive of their survival game PvP. How precious it seems to be to them that they don't even want to see alternative games and ideas instead of all these copy and paste jobs of DayZ. With all of them, including DayZ, being very amateurish and really none of them being very good or even completed.

The discussion is going on many websites and forums currently, with most defenders of PvP not even being open to other possibilities.
And a whole lot of stories from the PvPers saying "I tried to play nice and work with others, but I was just killed by them." Then they wonder why folks want to see something different.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
70. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 01:35 Krovven
 
Redmask wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 22:51:
What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

You can call it that but that's not griefing. Griefing is intentionally harassing other players using the game mechanics in unintended ways and it doesn't always result in death. Players don't need a reason to kill other players in a game with PvP combat because the game isn't bound by moralistic rules unless expressly written into the game code.

I don't see how a dev can include both PvP and coop while also enforcing some arbitrary set of rules to protect people from perceived unfair deaths in a survival game. The former seems to go against the spirit of the latter. Devs would be better off just making a separate coop survival game to serve that market or have entirely separate game modes. I think that's already happening with games like 7 Days to Die so I think those players will be served anyway.

That's your definition.

Wikipedia says "A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals."

Urban Dictionary has their own list of definitions. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=griefer

But I don't really care what you want to define it as, because there is no set definition as it's a term created by gamers and doesn't exist in the proper English dictionary. Most of those definitions apply partially or in whole to what I described.

But I'm not really interested in debating semantics. The point is, there are plenty of people that do not want to always play games that way and we'd like to see some alternatives. If I wanted to to play PvP or blatantly kill other players (or be killed) in games for no reason, I've already got dozens and dozens of other games to do that.

This comment was edited on Dec 24, 2013, 01:43.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
34. Re: On Sale Dec 23, 2013, 23:57 Krovven
 
Acleacius wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 23:48:
Maybe I'm missing your point. Viewership? Front page of Steam. On Specials List for bargain shoppers. Draws them in for the cheaper vanilla price without the download content.

Yep you are. Flash Sales are more prominent on the front page of Steam than the $10 category at the bottom on the page.

Acleacius wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 23:48:
Odd, sounds like we are saying the same thing, but according to you I'm complaining.

Maybe try re-reading what I said. I didn't say you were complaining. I said if you want it to change you need to complain...as in to the Publisher to get it changed for future sales. /facepalm

All you can do is complain. It worked to get the DLC discounted for Van Helsing...but I really doubt a company as big as Bethesda is going to care.




 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
32. Re: On Sale Dec 23, 2013, 23:53 Krovven
 
Well THQ was a big participant, and they are gone. So that's one less big publisher and their games missing from the mix. EA of course pushes Origin, and only stuff they have on Steam is old...and they have had sales this time around. BF2 was just on sale for like $2.50 as was Dragons Age complete for $7.50.

Ubisoft has had Farcry 3 at $7.50, along with other games of theirs on sale.

Activision rarely deeply discounts anything.

Still 10 days left in the sale. Lots of time for other stuff to get discounted.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
29. Re: On Sale Dec 23, 2013, 23:34 Krovven
 
Acleacius wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 23:03:
Best I can see is they still sell vanilla Skyrim for Flash sales (currently active) so they can be listed in the, Under $10 category to lure in the unsuspecting 'word of mouth' customers. Also, of course they want current Skyrim owners to buy Legendary, so they are holding back 75% off sales on dlc.

How would it being in the $10 category improve it's public view over being on the front page as a Flash Sale? Makes no sense.

It's the same scam as a lot of other companies have been doing lately. Massively discount the base game, leaving the DLC with a small discount, or none at all and hoping people that only buy the base game, or only have the base game already will turn around and drop $20 for Legendary or go for the DLC's Individually.

All you can do is complain. It worked to get the DLC discounted for Van Helsing...but I really doubt a company as big as Bethesda is going to care.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
20. Re: On Sale Dec 23, 2013, 19:33 Krovven
 
nin wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 15:02:
Parias wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 14:52:
nin wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 14:17:
I tried to play through it twice, and both times lost interest once it shifted to a "RTS"...


Fair enough - like I said, I guess I can see how some gamers may have found it a bit iffy, but I didn't consider that enough to make the game bad (quite the opposite in fact).

Just wanted to throw my own opinion in as BL definitely isn't a universally-bad game - it just depends on what you expect out of the gameplay as I really had a lot of fun with it.


I didn't notice todays Steam price until after I typed that (only read your comments, initially). I will say that for $2, it's hard to go wrong with any game. Even if you don't like it, the most you're out is that $2...

Interestingly enough, I bought the game on PS3 a few years ago, played it for a couple hours, turned it off and never went back and traded/sold the game. Someone described the later gameplay as similar to Sacrifice...I never got to this point. Maybe if they had started the game this way, instead of a hack and slash, I would have kept playing.

Sacrifice is such an amazingly underrated game, grab it for $2.50 on Steam if you haven't played it and like quirky RTS games. Watch a gameplay video first before you know what you are getting into though.
No thumbs down reviews on Steam...

This comment was edited on Dec 23, 2013, 19:42.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
68. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 19:24 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:34:
By the way, if you want to completely eliminate griefing try playing Rust on a pvp OFF server.

No thanks. Rust looks like absolute crap and zero fun to play.

I'm not interested in doing mundane work tasks in a game. "Somewhere between Dead Island and DayZ", does not equal building shacks in the wilderness with a bunch of naked dudes running around killing chickens with rocks.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
67. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 19:13 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
I hear it all the time, someone logs in, says they've played for 15 minutes gotten killed twice that that they hate this dumb game and leave. Happened in rust, dayz, etc. People in the forums would say they've been griefed, people would ask how, they would say they were minding their own business and someone killed them. Would you say they've been griefed? I wouldn't.

What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
Not sure where you are going with your last sentence. I SEE the cause and effect and am discussing portions of it so???

Schools in... CAUSE - player A gets killed repeatedly by other players while they are trying to explore and fight off zombies. EFFECT - player A learns to shoot other players on sight. Vicious cycle ensues where it's extremely rare for random players to help one another or work together.

Griefing is rampant in most games that players have means to grief. Give someone an environment that has zero repercussion for it and that's what they will do all the time.

Considering this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes. But I'm guessing you are one of the people that shoots other players on sight.

I'm not sure why it's so difficult for some people to comprehend that not everyone wants these kinds of mechanics. And that we'd like to see another game with different mechanics, more focused on coop.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
64. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 18:10 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
harlock most of the people complaining about being "Griefed" have not actually been griefed, they've just gotten killed, some of them ONE TIME and are cry babies.

You'd do better with your opinions to not claim to know what others have experienced.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
Also, many of the people who say "hey some dude killed me and all i had was my rock" do the EXACT same dang thing as soon as THEY get a gun.

Gee, I wonder why? Congrats on coming to the same conclusion as the others here, but not being able to see the obvious cause and effect.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
46. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 04:09 Krovven
 
Well to me it would be the same genre, with different mechanics. I don't want to change DayZ, WarZ, Nether, or the others like it. They are all the same basically. I want a new game, that shares mechanics, but alters others and brings in new ones.

Kinda like some people like RTS's along the vein of Starcraft, C&C, etc, whereas I like RTS's like Sacrifice and Dungeon Keeper 2. With Company of Heroes and Dawn of War 2 borrowing from both styles.

Survival games don't all need to be cookie cutter with different graphics.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
43. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 02:25 Krovven
 
Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 23:24:
Players should learn not to lone wolf in a survival game anyway.

The problem is, not everyone has friends that can always play at the same time. And joining these games as a lone wolf is trial and error in finding people that wont stab you in the back when they feel like they don't want to work together with you any more.

I seem to recall a video of DayZ, while amusing, also brings home my point. A group of players "helps" a lone guy, saves him. Tell him to join them in the helicopter and proceed to fly him to their "outpost" on a small island. He gets off the chopper and then they leave him there, with no way off, or they killed him and took his gear. I don't recall exactly.

Like I said in another thread. I'm interested in something between Dead Island and DayZ.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
42. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 02:12 Krovven
 
Jerykk wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 01:00:
Survival games should be sandboxes that are molded by the players themselves.

As I already said...people have those types of survival games available to them already. Why are you against having other options for people that want something different, that's not largely a griefers paradise?

This comment was edited on Dec 23, 2013, 02:18.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
37. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 22, 2013, 23:02 Krovven
 
Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 22:08:
Griefing is a side effect of having Player vs Player combat, you cannot get rid of it without getting rid of PvP which effectively guts a major part of those games.

Maybe not, but you can penalize it with good design. I've already posted in another thread an idea that could be expanded upon, but has the basis to lead to fun gameplay while limiting the unnecessary PvP.

"Something that would be a lot of fun, is if a player loses their humanity with each player they kill, becoming weaker each time, eventually becoming a monster themselves and playing as that monster until they are killed. There would need to be more to it, providing a way for players to gain humanity by peacefully interacting with players, etc. "

Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 22:08:
It's not like zombie AI presents any real difficulty to players anyway, the whole point is the human element which is unpredictable.

There are plenty of solo games that have challenging zombies. Nether doesn't even use zombies, specifically. They are these warping rage monsters. You telling me that they can't make monsters that have super-speed and can warp challenging enough for gamers without having PvP? I call BS on that.

Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 22:08:
You can't have meaningful PvP interaction without risk and fights are rarely fair, people just don't like being on the losing side. No one said they like griefing or microtransactions, people just like PvP.... You can't have fair, honorable combat in a PvP game without effectively neutering the whole experience. There are many people who play those games precisely because they don't want to work together with others and you can't really force them to do so.

Again...I'm going to repeat myself, for like the 10th time...I'm not suggesting removing PvP from the equation, or "neutering" it. If devs can come up with ways to award a person for killing other players, they can come up with ways to award a person for helping and working together with other players. I can think of plenty of ways just off the top of my head. Any devs want to hire me, I'd be happy to contribute to that design.

Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 22:08:
Once you start putting in numerous safe zones, forcing players to abide by engagement rules and trying to over balance combat you end up watering down the whole thing and people lose interest.

I never suggested safe zones or balancing combat. There are ways however to actually have drawbacks for killing people for no reason, or award them for working with other players.

Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 22:08:
There are numerous games on the market to accommodate that sort of play style already, I like that these games are branching out and experimenting more. It reminds me of the forced PvP and coop in the Souls games for the PS3.

No there aren't, that's the point here. The "survival" genre of games are basically all the same and nobody has tried to do anything different, with games like Nether basically copying feature by feature of WarZ, which both were basically just doing what DayZ did and trying to get their games to market before the stand-alone DayZ.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
32. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 22, 2013, 21:23 Krovven
 
Jerykk wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 20:00:
Redmask wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 19:36:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 18:52:
The problem with DayZ type games is the non stop player griefing. Just takes everything that is supposed to be fun out of it.

The threat of humans is the whole reason to play, the zombies are trivialized once you adjust. You can't remove that tension from the gameplay, the potential for PvP and cooperation are why people play in the first place instead of just picking up a single player zombie game. Build up a community of people and kill the griefers or just learn the ins and outs so you know how to avoid them.

This. If you arbitrarily limit PvP, you ruin the very thing that makes DayZ and its ilk compelling.

If your survival game isn't difficult enough without blatant PvP griefing, then you need to make design changes to your game.

You guys keep arguing that the game needs PvP. You keep missing the point. I'm not saying get rid of PvP. I'm saying there needs to be reasons for players to work together and not just kill each other on sight.

The other thing contributing to the problems, at least games like WarZ and Nether is the real money micro-transactions, especially in a game you've already paid to play. But that is really a problem in far too many games these days.

If you are ok with the PvP griefing and micro-transactions in these games, great. You've got several games to choose from to get that. There are plenty of people that are not interested in these things, and we'll choose to hold our money and game time until a survival game comes along that has some good game design for coop, but also allowing for meaningful PvP interaction.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
20. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 22, 2013, 17:04 Krovven
 
jacobvandy wrote on Dec 22, 2013, 16:51:
If nothing else, you can get 15 minutes of gameplay footage and discussion of issues it has. Skip to the last couple minutes for a quicker wrap-up of his impressions.

Aye, even at the 7 minute mark, that guy talks about how because it's so similar to WarZ, it will probably end up being the same, where players simply resort to shooting each other on sight because there is no reason not to. There are benefits for killing players. There are no benefits for not killing players.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
19. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 22, 2013, 16:57 Krovven
 
While the term reskin may be a little inaccurate, it's pretty obvious they copied many features/functions directly while making zero attempt to improve upon them, or even do them in their own way.

And as discussed in the other thread, his criticism of the PvP in these games is entirely valid. What's the point of spending time building a character to survive the zombie apocalypse, only to be sniped by someone picking off other players for the hell of it with zero consequence?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6811 Comments. 341 pages. Viewing page 13.
< Newer [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo