User comment history
< Newer [ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ] Older >
| News Comments > Origin Adds Publishers |
 |
| 16. |
Re: Origin Adds Publishers |
Oct 28, 2011, 02:26 |
Krovven |
|
|
ME2 and BC2 both have been $5 on Steam. $16 is a great deal for Crysis 2...too bad its no longer on Steam.
Origin is a piece of shit. I could easily come up with a few dozen things that don't work right, UI that doesn't make sense, and other various issues.
Like how they hide "Load with Windows Startup" down below the main screen area in the options and you have to scroll down to find it. They used to have it at the top. And my favorite is that every time they patch Origin, it turns that setting back on. Assholes.
Or how about Alphas and Betas that are over, yet they still show up in my games list.
Or how about when I did a "Repair Install" on BF3 trying to resolve a technical problem, and it corrupted my installation of BF3 forcing to me to redownload and install 12gigs.
Why does it have to download the games and then install? Why can't it deliver the game installed and ready to play when the download finishes?
Why are they making people manually update Punkbuster? I thought the whole point of digital distribution was to be able to push content and updates easier?
Of course the already mentioned download resuming issue.
The list goes on and on and on and on.
This comment was edited on Oct 28, 2011, 02:48. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Origin Adds Publishers |
|
| 1. |
Re: Origin Adds Publishers |
Oct 27, 2011, 21:05 |
Krovven |
|
|
Warner Bros. and Capcom I understand...THQ I didn't expect.
I still think it will be a cold day in hell that Activision games show up on Origin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > BlizzCon Hate-Speech Criticized |
|
| 151. |
Re: BlizzCon Hate-Speech Criticized |
Oct 27, 2011, 21:01 |
Krovven |
|
|
Bhruic wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 20:40:
Actually, it can help. In fact, it was obviously demonstrated to help in the very instance we are debating.What everyone seems to have overlooked in this little saga, is that GLAAD complained, and Cannibal Corpse apologized. That's how it works.
What behavior society accepts is determined by the members of society. It used to be acceptable to call black people offensive names. People objected to that, and now it's no longer acceptable. Does that mean no one does it? Of course not. It dosen't mean people aren't racist. But it's moved society towards a place where racism is no longer a completely tolerated behavior. And the same thing is happening with homosexuals. 20 years from now, thanks to the efforts of GLAAD, and things like the It Gets Better campaign, it will no longer be acceptable to use homosexual slurs (we're actually fairly close now, but I'm giving it some breathing room). Again, that won't mean no one does it, or no one thinks it, just that it won't be socially acceptable.
Agreed entirely.
But things that can be called racist, homophobic, sexist, or just plain derogatory to any particular person for any reason, will get said by people with no malice intended. With that said, a) I'm not racist, b) I'm not homophobic, but I grew up in time where referring to something as "That's gay" or "That's retarded" was said without a thought and certainly was never meant with disrespect to anyone. I try and refrain myself from using the phrases, particularly in certain company, but things do get said.
Another example, my grandfather lived in a time where referring to an Asian of any particular nationality as a "chinaman" was not considered racist. My grandfather was not a racist man, but every now and then he said something that would now be considered racist, simply because of what was considered common slang at the time.
A lot of people say stupid things, a lot of those things are never meant with malice intent.
As for the guy from Cannibal Corpse, if you check other interviews he has done, he could be racist/homophobic, I don't know. But it's obvious the English language isn't something he excels at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 3 |
|
| 62. |
Re: Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 3 |
Oct 25, 2011, 16:31 |
Krovven |
|
|
PropheT wrote on Oct 25, 2011, 16:15:
Does this one have bot matches like the older Battlefield games?
Not that I could find. Was a pain to test joystick binds as you have to wait for 7 players on an empty server.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 3 |
|
| 60. |
Re: Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 3 |
Oct 25, 2011, 16:11 |
Krovven |
|
|
Add me on Origin: Krovven (that's 2 v's)
Did they fix Coop invites yet?
Logitech Force 3D Pro joystick bindings worked. I hear other joysticks not so much.
I get a lot of sound stuttering. Anyone heard of a fix yet? The cutscenes sound stutters worse than ingame.
Single player is ok. What I expected. Main improvement is the enemies don't endlessly respawn if you don't move forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 95. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 25, 2011, 14:35 |
Krovven |
|
|
KilrathiAce wrote on Oct 25, 2011, 12:52:
and now EA games are not there.
Only 2 games have been removed from Steam due to this, which is Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2. That was because EA made an exclusive deal with someone else for the DLC distribution for Crysis 2 and DA2 was setup to sell DLC directly in-game cutting out Steam.
BF3 is not being sold on Steam but on other services because Valve's new rules are that DLC must be sold via Steam if your game is on Steam. They don't care if it's sold elsewhere, but they don't want the publishers circumventing Steam while having Steam host the main game.
If they did not have these rules in place, all the Free To Play/Microtransaction games they have added would never have to give Valve anything.
Steam will not suffer because a few games won't be on Steam. Only people that suffer are those saying they wont buy games if they arent on Steam...while on the other hand saying Steam needs competition and shouldn't dominate the industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 61. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 18:15 |
Krovven |
|
|
jacobvandy wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 16:09:
And you managed to focus on an afterthought to my main point.
I agree that they could/should have and that it would make a better game.
But ignoring the obvious design problems by letting a player fly in a linear space on a story mission, you directly compared this to CoD and that is what I took issue with. Is it an "afterthought" to your point, yes it is, but it was still a stupid afterthought nonetheless. I pointed it out, for the obvious reason that if I agree with your main point, I definitely did not agree with the comparison of that point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 59. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 18:02 |
Krovven |
|
|
So I just got an email from Origin stating:
Thank you for ordering on Origin. The release date for the preorder product has changed. The product listed below will now be available on October 24, 2011.
But when I try and launch the game from Origin it still says Oct 25th 00:00 PST (midnight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 50. |
Re: well.... |
Oct 24, 2011, 15:54 |
Krovven |
|
|
Shataan wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 15:49:
However the Reviews are stating quite a few been there done thats.
Give it two weeks, the same reviewers will be fawning over MW3 even though it will have the exact same gameplay and offer nothing new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 49. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 15:51 |
Krovven |
|
|
jacobvandy wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 15:14:
Have you played it yet? If not, why pretend you know any better?
Way to fail to see the point. You are selecting 1 moment of BF3 and comparing it to 1 moment in a CoD that is way over-done and not a lot of fun. You referred to the CoD gameplay as "free-reign" which is not even remotely accurate.
This discussion came up before when someone complained about the long time you sat there doing nothing while the tanks rolled in across the desert.
It's called pacing. Something the MTV + ADD generation is increasingly losing sight of.
Not everything needs to be in your face all the time. This is where CoD fails miserably at story and gameplay pacing. BC2 single player pacing was good, I expect more of the same of BF3. But what Im reading is that reviewers are comparing BF3 single player to CoD gameplay as if that is the defacto standard of greatness, and stating BF3 doesn't hold up to that. Sounds like a good thing to me.
With that said, I don't have massive hopes for BF3 to be an amazing game single player campaign, but I do expect it will be an amazing experience. If not, there is always Uncharted 3 next week for the amazing single player game experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 39. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 14:49 |
Krovven |
|
|
jacobvandy wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 14:26:
That was better, but still pretty dull compared to the free reign and dozens upon dozens of targets you're given during the AC-130 gunner segments of Call of Duty games
I'm sorry, but "the free reign...during...segments of CoD"? So the dozens of times in CoD games where you are fixed to a vehicles turret and while the game drives for you is different how exactly?
Someone drank the kool-aid this morning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 38. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 14:45 |
Krovven |
|
|
Verno wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 14:09:
BF3 Alpha? Stays no matter what.
Lol, I got rid of the BF3 Alpha, but I can't get rid of the Beta. Unisntalled, folders deleted...but yea can't get rid of it in Origin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 37. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 14:41 |
Krovven |
|
|
Creston wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 13:34:
A 93 on Metacritic, a week after it's revealed that EA is (allegedly) making sure that sites that get a copy are sites that are slobbering all over Battlefield 3 prematurely.
Somehow I'm not really all that surprised at the cherry-picked score.
How do you feel about readers (like yourself) that cherry-pick stories?
I'm given no control over WHERE to download this
Actually you are. Maybe check the settings like a PC user that isn't incompetent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 36. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 14:39 |
Krovven |
|
|
Tumbler wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 12:49:
Edit: I'm shocked that reviews are harping on the SP like it's not "good".
Pretty sure reviewers didn't like BC2 single player either, and I felt it was better than any of the CoD SP campaigns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 3 Reviews |
|
| 35. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Reviews |
Oct 24, 2011, 14:37 |
Krovven |
|
|
entr0py wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 12:25:
The fact that EA was screening favorable reviewers...
So you read the first story, but you didn't bother reading any of the followups? Was a fake story that clearly succeeded in trolling the gullible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Steam Top 10 |
|
| 14. |
Re: Steam Top 10 |
Oct 24, 2011, 03:19 |
Krovven |
|
|
Jerykk wrote on Oct 24, 2011, 02:29:
To each their own. The people who aren't enjoying Payday are citing the lack of depth as the game's biggest shortcoming. My ideas would help add depth. If you find depth tedious, I'm guessing that's why you enjoy Payday.
Exactly, to each their own, this is not for you. Payday is not meant for depth. It's a straight up action shooter. Having to micro-manage hostages only adds tedium to a game that has made all their design choices around keeping things simple so the player can point and shoot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
6344 Comments. 318 pages. Viewing page 29.
< Newer [ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
