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 Ted Smith

Real Name Ted Smith   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Teddy
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 5, 2004, 02:08
Total Comments 1063 (Pro)
User ID 20096
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ] Older >


News Comments > Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives
26. Re: Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives Sep 22, 2011, 20:57 Teddy
 
Xoxotl wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 20:00:
Since PC gamers tend to pretty much stomp all over console gamers in FPS games, I just view this as a form of handicap to give PS3 owners a chance to get a hang of the maps before we come in and school them....

Except that we won't be playing against them...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Why No Commander in Battlefield 3
3. Re: Why No Commander in Battlefield 3 Sep 22, 2011, 20:55 Teddy
 
Sepharo wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 20:52:
I will be amazed if anyone is actually upset about this.

Leave the commandeering to Natural Selection.

I take it you haven't seen the EA Battlefield 3 forums. Apparently, if there's no commander mode or 6 man squads, it's not a "true" battlefield game. They ranted for quite a while when it was first announced that it wasn't in.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives
22. Re: Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives Sep 22, 2011, 19:06 Teddy
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 14:53:
Verno wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 14:45:
Come on.. one week is not that bad for hardworking devs to bring in extra income from the highest bid. Relaxxxx

I doubt Dice devs sees a penny of that, it's most likely EA penning the deals.

Just another in a long running series of bone headed moves related to this games pre-release marketing and support plans. If you go back to the initial announcement its amazing how fairly united people were in their excitement when you compare to +10 stupid announcements later.

Care to elaborate? Its not like this is something evil. If you have your game done and plan on DLC why not look around whether anyone wants to pay your for a week of exclusivity? If anything this announcement means 1 thing, we get a big fat DLC just months after release of BF3 - and i can't see how thats supposed to be bone headed..

Because regardless of whether or not a company is willing to pay for exclusivity, the only people you're screwing with a move like this are the fans of your game on other platforms. Justify it all you like, any form of exclusivity to any individual platform is a slap in the face to people on the other platforms. I paid just as much as John Doe on his PS3, why am I as a PC gamer being punished for that?

Regardless of whether it's only a week, this is nothing more than screwing a portion of their customers for money. How anyone can even defend something like that is just baffling to me.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives
13. Re: Battlefield 3 Expansions Timed PS3 Exclusives Sep 22, 2011, 15:05 Teddy
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 15:01:
That page confuses me even more.. it does say the weapons will be for free for everyone, after some time, but pre-orders get it early.. so that means BTK is free for pre-orders (they get it on release day) and the DLC as such will only be sold 1 month later.

Nowhere does it say when the DLC releases or if we get it on day 0 ;(

They haven't announced the release date of the Karkard DLC pack. That's why there's nothing on there. No, you don't get it day 0. It's just free when it IS released.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 1.5 M Battlefield 3 Preorders
13. Re: 1.5 M Battlefield 3 Preorders Sep 21, 2011, 18:36 Teddy
 
Tumbler wrote on Sep 21, 2011, 15:42:
I have no fucking idea what they are going to end up delivering. I'm happy to wait until I have a crystal clear picture of exactly what I'll be getting if / when I buy.

I have to assume you're just being intentionally obtuse. No one is that dumb that they can't understand the information that's been laid out.

Yes it uses origin, no matter where you buy it.

The only "content" that is exclusive to any preorders are the spectact kits (which is a slightly different skin for your character, one per class, per side) and the exclusive dogtags (which are prettied up kill notifications) that are from one retailer only.

The Physical Warfare pack is just a few early unlocks that everyone will have access to eventually anyways.

The Back to Karkand map pack comes with any pre-order, regardless of where you get it from, and is the first DLC planned. It will not be available at release (even if you pre-ordered). It simply gives you that for free rather than having to pay for it when it is finally released.

It's all very simple. If you really can't understand any of that, then it's you, not them. They have been very clear about ALL of that.

Oh, and...

The more info they reveal the less this looks like the awesome game we are all hoping for.

Speak for yourself, thank you very much. The rest of us can make up our own minds.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Closed Beta Begins
34. Re: Diablo III Closed Beta Begins Sep 21, 2011, 01:10 Teddy
 
Dirwulf wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 23:59:
Teddy wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 23:37:
Razumen wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 22:47:
{PH}88fingers wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 21:29:
What if diablo 3 was labeled a multiplayer game... with the ability to play solo if you wish... would that make it ok to buy the game?

If the game is fun and you have an internet connection, what's the problem.

The problem is that Blizzard is using that requirement to squash any chance for user made mods, (even in SP) most likely for the sake of more profitable future DLC. That, and requiring being online for the singleplayer game is a ridiculous requirement, regardless of the majority of people's internet connectivity.

That's a pretty hefty statement considering Blizzard has never to my knowledge done DLC in it's entire history of games. Nor have they allowed mods, save for new maps in the *craft games.

You don't consider the mounts and pets you can buy for WoW DLC?

Considering they don't alter the game in any way, beyond the superficial visual appearance of a pet/mount? No.

I don't consider something DLC unless it adds to or changes the gameplay. New equipment, new levels, new classes, etc.

I don't consider pets or mounts content at all, since they don't change your gameplay experience.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Closed Beta Begins
28. Re: Diablo III Closed Beta Begins Sep 20, 2011, 23:49 Teddy
 
PHJF wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 23:43:
That's because Blizzard has released all of one game since the advent (or rather the viral escalation) of DLC. And it would look pretty god damn bad of them to release SCII DLC when two thirds of the single player game is yet to be released.

Perhaps, but again, to my knowledge, they have yet to even suggest they intend to do any sort of DLC for anything. They've always tended more toward expansion packs rather than smaller DLC.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Closed Beta Begins
26. Re: Diablo III Closed Beta Begins Sep 20, 2011, 23:37 Teddy
 
Razumen wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 22:47:
{PH}88fingers wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 21:29:
What if diablo 3 was labeled a multiplayer game... with the ability to play solo if you wish... would that make it ok to buy the game?

If the game is fun and you have an internet connection, what's the problem.

The problem is that Blizzard is using that requirement to squash any chance for user made mods, (even in SP) most likely for the sake of more profitable future DLC. That, and requiring being online for the singleplayer game is a ridiculous requirement, regardless of the majority of people's internet connectivity.

That's a pretty hefty statement considering Blizzard has never to my knowledge done DLC in it's entire history of games. Nor have they allowed mods, save for new maps in the *craft games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield 3 Beta This Month
29. Re: Battlefield 3 Beta This Month Sep 20, 2011, 20:46 Teddy
 
space captain wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 20:15:
why is an optical drive required? ive been building a new machine and grabbed a dvdrom before i thought about it but then i sat back and was wondering when the last time i actually used the one ive got in my old pc, with steam and netflix and hulu and torrents and all the shit thats online now - its almost not needed.. i came pretty close to just putting my win7 installer on a usb stick, shit would probably be faster anyways

Chances are it probably isn't, unless you buy the boxed version.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Closed Beta Begins
18. Re: Diablo III Closed Beta Begins Sep 20, 2011, 20:45 Teddy
 
Krovven wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 20:43:
I'm trying to login to the website to check my account, but I just get a little black box pop up (normally has the login script in it) with no nothing in it. So I have no way of logging in...anyone else get this? Using Firefox. Have never had a problem with Blizzards websites before.


Had the same for a while. Presumably it's getting hammered since the announcement with people checking to make sure they've 'opted in'. Worked for me eventually, but it was a pain for a while.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Game of Thrones RPG "Won't Be Along for a While"
12. Re: Game of Thrones RPG Sep 20, 2011, 16:16 Teddy
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 14:45:
Song of Ice and Fire went downhill in quality, imo, with the last book. Plus, I am getting the feeling George RR Martin is going to pull a Robert Jordan, and probably not live to finish the series.


I do recommend Steven Erikson's Malazan series, which is arguably as well written or better, and as a bonus, it is actually finished.

It is pretty lengthy though, 10 extremely large novels(approximately 1000 pages each).


The problem with the Malazan series is that it does the exact thing that Martin refuses to do. It jumps directly on top of all the stereo-typical fantasy gimmicks and repeats them over and over and over. Every book has a new MORE POWERFUL enemy that needs to be faced, and even when they get to the point of killing off gods, there's still MORE POWERFUL things that suddenly appear that they need to deal with.

Add to that, when characters do die, it's often in irrelevant fashions that have very little to do with the actual conflicts they're in.

It's decently written, but the characters have nowhere near the level of depth of those of SOIAF, and frankly I find it often facepalmingly frustrating to read thanks to the ever escalating levels of power of everything.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield 3 Beta This Month
18. Re: Battlefield 3 Beta This Month Sep 20, 2011, 15:49 Teddy
 
Creston wrote on Sep 20, 2011, 15:45:
Though I have to say that being required to Alt-Tab out of the game to join a new MP game through your browser+plugin has to absolutely take the trophy for smoothness.

Creston

It's a bit more awkward, sure but it also works faster than you can swap servers in BC2 or BF2.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Rogers Ordered to Stop Throttling WoW and Other Games
32. Re: Rogers Ordered to Stop Throttling WoW and Other Games Sep 18, 2011, 07:52 Teddy
 
Bhruic wrote on Sep 18, 2011, 03:16:
What? Trudeau didn't support free trade. Not in the least. He supported fair trade. And it was chretien that signed it into law in '94. Something you seem to have missed you know.

Chretien signed NAFTA, yes, but Mulroney signed the FTA, which was the originator of NAFTA. All NAFTA did was expand the number of countries in the FTA by one.

And the FTA was recommended by the commission that was appointed by Trudeau, so while he may not have supported it directly, the commission he created did.

And even if you'd like to blame the conservatives for the GST, you know that earth shattering "evil" 7% or even 8%, it removed the 13% hidden manufacturing tax. And in essence lowered taxes by 5%, or should have.

Much like the HST did in Ontario, the GST, while a lower overall tax, applied to a great many things that the manufacturing tax did not. For the "average" Canadian, it increased the amount of taxes that you were paying on the majority of items you bought. So no, it did not "lower" taxes by 5%.

So, yeah, about the "reality" you think you are talking about...

That pretty much sums up my response, thank you.

Yes, the conservatives are responsible for the GST. Yes they did it to INCREASE taxes on the whole for Canadians, NOT lower them. Unless you happened to be buying everything wholesale, then there's no possible way you could try and spin that into being a lowering of taxes. Again with the re-writing of history.

Secondly, the Free Trade agreement that Mulroney signed is the big "evil" that you're looking for. The expansion of it after the fact to NAFTA has made almost zero impact.

It may harm your precious love of the conservatives, but DEAL WITH IT. They are responsible for forcing through both the GST and Free Trade, both of which were opposed by the majority of Canadians and both of which were enacted via absurd loopholes in the constitution and voting system. The Canadian population voted with a majority AGAINST Mulroney when he was pushing for the FTA, yet despite having less votes than the NDP and Liberals combined, he still was awarded more seats and thus the false majority that was used to force the FTA into law.

The guy was a crook who did his very best to rip off each and every Canadian that he could using every loophole he could find. That's why he's still rated the worst PM in Canadian history.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Rogers Ordered to Stop Throttling WoW and Other Games
26. Re: Rogers Ordered to Stop Throttling WoW and Other Games Sep 17, 2011, 22:53 Teddy
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Sep 17, 2011, 18:12:
Cutter wrote on Sep 17, 2011, 17:12:
This is one place we agree entirely and it's tiresome. I've finally hit the point where I'm really looking at getting out. It's just a question of where to go. I don't see this country changing for the better anytime soon. Let them revel in their mediocrity.
The liberals never pushed for liberalization of industry and competition. They pushed for whatever could milk the country the most and fill their coffers the best while screwing everyone at the bottom. If you need a finer example of this all you need to do is look at the legacy trudeau left us. NAFTA is probably the greatest fuckup of canadian politics at the time, short of adscam and the fleecing of taxpayers. While the premise of NAFTA is good, it's no free trade agreement. It's a fair trade agreement. A true free trade agreement would have been great.

I'm looking at Japan. Massive loss in the older population, with a serious gap in younger workers required to fill the gap. Nearly 40% of their population will be retiring in the next 10 years. And if I'm going to be getting screwed, I know exactly how I'm going to get screwed and in what way. Plus I don't mind the lifestyle, or the cultural mentality.

Trudeau may have supported free trade, but it was a conservative that forced the issue during a majority rule and signed it into effect despite protest from both the Liberal and NDP opposition. A fact that seems conveniently forgotten in your diatribe. They also called forth an arcane constitutional provision to help them force the GST through the senate while completely ignoring the fact that 80% of the population disapproved of the additional tax.

That said, the liberals had 20 years to correct either of those blunders, and they did nothing about them, so they're not on any higher moral ground, but blaming NAFTA on them while excusing through omission the people who actually enacted it is nothing short of re-writing history.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Lag-Free?
27. Re: Diablo III Lag-Free? Sep 14, 2011, 13:18 Teddy
 
Creston wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 12:49:
"It's amazing! We're experiencing no lag at all, no matter our location! I can use the PC in the break room, or the one in the gym, or the one right next to the server, it all runs smoothly!"

I mean, come on. It's a friends and relatives beta. Odds are those people are pretty close by.

Creston

The person playing in the article was in Australia, incidentally. Now I'm not a geography expert, but I'm pretty sure that's a little ways away from California.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Red Orchestra 2; Free Content Plans Unveiled
8. Re: Ships Ahoy - Red Orchestra 2; Free Content Plans Unveiled Sep 14, 2011, 12:13 Teddy
 
KilrathiAce wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 01:42:
If you know TWI and how they supported ro1 and kf then you know what to expect here, its gonna be great support for years to come.

True, but that also means you have to expect a complete buggy mess for the first 3-6 months.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Lag-Free?
20. Re: Diablo III Lag-Free? Sep 14, 2011, 12:07 Teddy
 
Darks wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 11:49:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 11:12:
I have a hard time believing that they is NO latency.....seems like a marketing ploy.

Thereís no latency because thereís only a hand full of people playing the game. Take it from a Network Admin, to outright claim there is not latency is absurd. There is always latency and always will be, I donít care how you label it but Blizz is full of shit.

Maybe you should read the statement they made rather than calling them 'full of shit'. They said "Latency no longer matters at all for combat." They never said there is no latency, and more to the point, it wasn't even Blizzard that said it.

What they've suggested is not at all unrealistic. If the client handles the combat and movement calculations and doesn't require that the server respond before it can react to game activity, then the claim is perfectly accurate for your own personal experience.

The questions that remain are simply: What of friends playing with/against you? THAT seems impossible to create a zero latency solution for. And more to the point, what happens when the server doesn't like what the client sends? The theory of an instant disconnect sounds pretty ominous, but then I assume they thought of the possibility of corrupted packets and whatnot.

As well, a consideration is how long the server is willing to wait for it's information and what happens if it's not receiving it as quickly as it would like (issues with satellite connections, etc)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Red Orchestra 2; Free Content Plans Unveiled
4. Re: Ships Ahoy - Red Orchestra 2; Free Content Plans Unveiled Sep 13, 2011, 20:20 Teddy
 
Quboid wrote on Sep 13, 2011, 20:02:
It is like Battlefield's SP, but the AI isn't quite as bad as BF's was.

You're joking right?

The enemy AI may not be as bad, but the friendly AI is some of the worst I've ever seen in ANY game. I've not even finished one of the two campaigns and I've already lost count of how many times I've walked up to a window, or a wall, or whatever, gone into cover and instantly had 4 friendlies stand in front of me, blocking view. Ignore collision rules and stand INSIDE me, peeking out periodically, also blocking my view.

If I could turn those idiots off, I'd have finished both campaigns by now.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Why the Syndicate Remake is a First-Person Shooter
16. Re: Why the Syndicate Remake is a First-Person Shooter Sep 12, 2011, 21:51 Teddy
 
Beamer wrote on Sep 12, 2011, 21:39:
Or because it's Starbreeze, an FPS developer.

QFT.

You can almost always guess what a project is going to be, based on what a developer is known for creating in the past. Very few studios jump from genre to genre.

I'm not super happy about it, but the writing was on the wall as soon as Starbreeze was attached to the project.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Modern Warfare 3 Has LAN Support
34. Re: Modern Warfare 3 Has LAN Support Sep 8, 2011, 11:25 Teddy
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Sep 8, 2011, 09:06:
I find it odd they are letting you restrict items and "ANYTHING" and still able to be a ranked server where you progress your 'toon.

Where did they say that? I see them saying you can restrict anything, but I don't see them saying you can do it on ranked servers.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1063 Comments. 54 pages. Viewing page 17.
< Newer [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo