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 Rilus

Real Name Rilus   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Rilus
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On Apr 12, 2004, 15:20
Total Comments 26 (Suspect)
User ID 20616
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


News Comments > Revamped E3 Details
12. Bye bye E3 Oct 14, 2006, 12:25 Rilus
 
Well, you can count on E3 dying.
We sure as hell are not gonna pay the same exorbitant prices to show our stuff there if we're not going to get exposure to new potential customers.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Irth Online
8. Re: No subject Nov 2, 2005, 10:22 Rilus
 
is it just me or does this look almost exactly like the Succubus from WoW?
http://www.irthonline.com/gallery/gallery.asp?action=viewimage&categoryid=12&text=&imageid=91&box=&shownew=

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sims 2 Backlash Backlash
58. Countersuit Jul 28, 2005, 14:46 Rilus
 
I don't like litigaiton, but if that's the game Thompson wants to play, I'd sue him for libel if I were EA.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Unlocked BF2 Weapons
9. Re: Do the math Jul 26, 2005, 13:04 Rilus
 
Who said the Transport Heli pilots are getting nerfed, and why?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > BF2 Ranked Servers Status
29. Re: No subject Jun 24, 2005, 16:10 Rilus
 
I don't give a flying fuck what you think you have or you know. I work in tech support and I hear from assholes like you ALL day long where they think it is always our fault and never their computer or their own stupidity.
If I'm not having problems and your dumbass is, then it must be something with you and not the game... Retard.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > BF2 Ranked Servers Status
26. Re: No subject Jun 24, 2005, 12:23 Rilus
 
So... These ranked servers and stats (excuse my ignorance)... How much better are they than ngstats for UT that was released like 5 years ago? : )

-Alamar

Your ignorance is excused. Besides just trackign stats, the ranked servers allow you to unlock certain weapons in ranked servers.

And I don't know what kind of crappy connections/computers you guys have, but every server I have played since the retail release has been smooth and without problems. I think that this lag you guys are receiving is client-side. Say what you will, but I doubt that I have just been lucky when picking servers and I've just been playing in perfect servers within a mile from my house.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 2
120. Re: no thanks Jun 23, 2005, 10:58 Rilus
 
No Xbox emulators? Cxbx and Xeon are two that come to mind. I guess you've been under a rock for a long time. Granted the emulators might not do 100% of all the things an Xbox can, but it's close enough. Also, with a computer, like you said, I can emulate any other past-gen console. So even more flexibility there.

Now, I do know that there are couple of emulators out there for Xbox, but nothing like for a normal PC. (That's one of the things I like about the stuff being developed for PSP: the emulators being made for it)

I can play most console games thanks to the fact that many are cross platform and many of the others can be emulated.

I never said that higher resolution equals higher quality. I said 'higher AND quality.' Now, most consoles promise killer graphics and super advanced graphic cards. Well, in reality consoles, such as the Xbox (since it is what you seem to have,) only have video cards that are usually 6 months behind what's available on a PC. So, not only can you play many console games at higher resolution, you can play them at higher quality.

Now, I know you can play some media files but not nearly as many as a PC. You can't play movs, mkvs, oggs, or flash, to name a few.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 2
113. Re: no thanks Jun 22, 2005, 12:12 Rilus
 
Hmmmm let's see... $350 every 5 years for console hardware or $800 (low-balling) every year for PC hardware. I wonder why the console market is growing so rapidly.

I don't know what you're smoking, but I usually only spend about $400 every 3 years or so. Do I spend more than a console? Sure. But then again, I can do WAY more with my PC than I can with my console.

For one, I can emulate just about every other console out there.
I can use it for work to program, do graphics, and such.
I can play most games that come out on consoles and at better resolution and quality.
I can play movies, music, and all kinds of other media.

In other words: PC for teh win!

This comment was edited on Jun 22, 12:14.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 2
70. Re: Any sales? Jun 21, 2005, 16:02 Rilus
 
Oh, don't worry, we're not playing it yet, either. We won't able to play it until tomorrow or in about 9-19 hours from now.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 2
64. Re: Any sales? Jun 21, 2005, 15:29 Rilus
 
I prefer my good ole' mickey combo (mouse/keyboard combo)

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Q&As
1. Spyware Jun 21, 2005, 14:58 Rilus
 
Yea... I'll go ahead and download Wildtangent's newest spyware delivery application. Thanks, but no thanks.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > World of Warcraft Open Beta
112. Re: Wheee Nov 9, 2004, 18:21 Rilus
 
Guild Wars is very boring, indeed. No doubt about that. Very simplistic. Imagine Dungeon Siege and Final Fantasy XI combined but without the fun to get in the way.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II Date
51. EQ2 is just as bad in-game Oct 26, 2004, 12:26 Rilus
 
Don't be fooled by people that EQ2 looks better in action than it does on screenshots. It does not. Don't get me wrong, the game has some really nice and sometimes amazing graphics, but the artwork in the different aspects of the game does not match. The terrain is simplistic and barren even with flora turned on. The architecture can be amazingly detailed but so sterile. The humanoid characters and MOBs look freakish and more like mannequins with unnatural faces and strange skin tones. (Definitely in the uncanny valley) The hair styles are plain ugly. Some of the monsters do look very detailed and actually scary, but for the most part, they move like zombies or robots and they look so out of place in their habitats. Anyone who's played has seen just how stupid the player characters look; same as giants, gnolls, lizard men, skeletons. I'm serious... they're laughable. None of the art styles seem to mesh or go together, at all. Look at the screenshots people posted above and you'll see what I mean.

EQ2 is a lot slower paced game than WoW. Honestly, I wish WoW was a little slower paced and a little bit deeper like EQ2. Like many people have said, EQ2 is more for the "hardcore" gamer and WoW is more for the "casual" gamer. I consider myself somewhere in between.

MyRealName, you must be really new to RPGs if you think aggro, nuking, and tanking were invented, somehow, by EQ.


This comment was edited on Oct 26, 12:32.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Star Wars Battlefront
76. Re: Vehicles Sep 23, 2004, 12:44 Rilus
 
[Battlefront is] slow-paced, the combat is simplistic and boring, and the vehicles are too powerful and underutilized. Most of the maps I've played don't even have vehicles. And the snowspeeders are too hard to control. Also, it seems like a lot of air battles are unrelated to the ground battle, so they become irrevelant to the game. Very disappointing. Oh well, Evil Genius next week!!!!

I am loving this game the same way I love BF1942. Its graphics are really well done even at low poly count. Much like Blizzard with WoW, Pandemic shows you can have a gorgeous game without 40,000 poly characters. (Bethesda and Morrowind anyone?) The combat is as simplistic (or complex) as BF1942. Period.
The vehicles are powerful and like Teddy said, I am glad they're powerful. I don't want a single guy with rocket launcher to kill me in my AT-AT or AT-ST within 30 seconds (a la BF1942.) If you've played enough BF1942, though, you'll know that a tank can kill any naked infantry almost just by looking at it. The splash damage for tanks is almost apocalyptic in BF1942 and the machine guns will just tear through infantry like they're made of wet paper.
Underutilized?? Wow! What server have you been playing in? In any given server I've played, I've seen a good 5th of my forces be pilots and go out and wage amazing skirmishes. Geonosis comes to mind.
All the vehicles, to me, are ten times easier to handle in Battlefront than they ever have been in BF1942. Play Galactic Conquest and try to fly an X-Wing at full speed in Hoth. *shudder*
I even remember when BF1942 first came out how all the reviews used to joke about the steep learning curve to learn how to fly planes.
The first time I played in Hoth, in Battlefront, I was (literally) running circles around the AT-ST's while my AI buddy lassoed their feet. They never even got to the first bunker. It was awesome.
The best pilots I have seen in Cloud City and Geonosis blast the hell out of ground troops while trying to stave off incoming air-to-air fire.
This game may not be the holy grail of gaming, but I am having a blast with it.
The only gripe I have is the connectivity problems.
I can't wait for Evil Genius, either, though. =P

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Wars Battlefront Server
20. Plea to developers! Sep 21, 2004, 16:44 Rilus
 
I bought the game during my lunch break, but I haven't played it, yet. I am getting kinda nervous about playing it from the comments on this thread...
Am I the only one that is tired of dumbed down, simplistic games simply because the console crowd doesn't have the patience, time, or attention span to learn anything beyond a 4-button control scheme...

A horrendous example comes to mind... Final Fantasy XI... Jesus... the disappointment...
I was in the beta for that game and when I first played it I was wondering if I had the game in mouse-only mode.
The controls for that game are horrendous if you ask me. It was obviously made to be played primarily on a console. I mean, the whole game is played basically with just your mouse. You might be thinking, "Well that sounds nice to be able to play with just the mouse. A lot simpler." Not if you have to click 3 or 4 times to cast a spell or select an item...
I mean the damn keyboard has over a hundred keys to assign to multiple tasks and they used maybe 4 or 5...

Another depressingly pathetic example: Full Spectrum Warrior. I'm sure, most that have played it will be in awe at the graphics at first, but the more you play it, the more obvious it becomes of just how repetitive and plainly simplistic the gameplay is. You basically move from corner to corner and shoot, explode, or smoke your way to the enemy. That's it. That's the entireity of the game. You just keep doing this on different maps, is all.

Deus Ex 2. *sigh*
Also boasts breathtaking graphics, but the gameplay and RPG aspects of the game that made the original such a hit are all gone. Now, you don't gain better skills or anything. All you do is gain new implants.

Halo. 'Nuff said.

I am afraid as games become more and more mainstream, games will keep getting dumber to accomodate the short attention span of console gamers. Will developers please keep in mind that we have more than 8 keys in our computers? Will they remember that we don't need the text or menus to take up half the screen? That we will read through more than two lines of text? That we are more intelligent than a doorknob so we can remember different key configurations and complex gameplay?
This comment was edited on Sep 21, 16:56.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Valve versus Sierra
147. Re: regarding steam.. Sep 21, 2004, 10:35 Rilus
 
Listen, Beaver... Just ike you say I'm a Valve fanboy, you're one of those trolls with no substantial comments who hate things just because the rest of his hacker, rebel, anti-establishment buddies hate them. It reminds me of the mob mentality of Slashdot and other sites like this one. They hate Windows and Microsoft just for the sake of hating it. Any little thing Microsoft does wrong or differently and people, in Slashdot, will dissect it to death. Anyone supporting anything Microsoft does is a dupe. It's the same here in Blue's. I won't argue with you, anymore. I know that in the end, you'll be playing HL2 in Steam just like everybody else.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Valve versus Sierra
136. Re: regarding steam.. Sep 21, 2004, 02:17 Rilus
 
What CPU usage problem? and the spyware problem I pathetically claw myself onto is an issue YOU brought up.

Here's the quote from your post:
Easy Conclusion:
Valve can do with Steam what they want, include spyware or make it even more unefficient (is that possible?) and people will still love them and buy their crap.
I simply replied to your sorry excuse for a post.
And as usual, you did not even try to argue any of my points from my last two posts. You just said some moronic troll remark and LOL'ed your way into victory, right?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Valve versus Sierra
134. Re: regarding steam.. Sep 21, 2004, 01:25 Rilus
 
So, Nova, you're saying that Valve should modify the program so that third party game browsers (such as GameSpy Arcade) will work without a hitch? Programs not made by Valve? Programs not endorsed by Valve? Programs which are rendered obsolete by Steam?

You might say, "Well, but that's what people were used to and that's what they want to get back to." I hate to say it, but, eventually, things simply become redundant or obsolete. Either way, they're not necessary. Why trying to uphold the old "status quo"? <-- That phrase, by the way, is one that is used very frequently by anti-corporation advocates, anti-RIAA people, etc, etc. They say "Out with the old. In with the new." "Evolve or perish." Ditto for GameSpy and anyone using it.

It's time for change.

This comment was edited on Sep 21, 01:27.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Valve versus Sierra
131. Re: No subject Sep 21, 2004, 00:57 Rilus
 
Those self-important jackasses must be suffering from a god-complex, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone who pays for a copy of half-life 2 only to relenquish their privacy or any control over their own machines/games to Valve is as much a part of the problem as the ever increasing sleazoids in the software industry.

You're right. What kind of megalomaniac bastards would think of doing whatever they want with a game they created. Jesus. The arrogance. I bet those capitalist pigs at Valve only want money for their damn game they spent years and millions of dollars making! It's like making games is their job or something. How dare they?!

I am sick and tired of software companies that come into my house hold me down at rifle point and install Steam and they shitty games on my machine! Goddam them!!

They just keep violating my sacrosanct privacy by installing updates and patches while I'm not at my computer. I feel violated every time I get on my computer and I play my freshly patched game. I can't stand how they hide those autoupdate settings three clicks deeps so you can't find them if you have the intelligence of a bubonic dead monkey with a rock for a brain.

I hate Valve...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Valve versus Sierra
128. Re: regarding steam.. Sep 21, 2004, 00:44 Rilus
 
Easy Conclusion:
Valve can do with Steam what they want, include spyware or make it even more unefficient (is that possible?) and people will still love them and buy their crap. This has been discussed alot of times in other forums and they all came to the same conclusion. You, my friend, are the perfect example of those mentioned Valve-Zombies, actually youre worse since you try to defend that crap.

Easy conclusion? In what dimension?
How long did it take this team of PC experts and philosophers to reach the conclusion that Valve can put spyware and make Steam "more unefficient"? Of course they can!! Jesus! Sometimes, I wonder if this post aren't generated from random Google queries or just jokes. I mean, are people that seriously concerned that Valve will put Spyware on their software?? Why stop at Valve??? Why not Adobe with their Adobe Online, Macromedia with Extension Exchange or Maxis with Object Exchange???
How is it that everyone is so worried about Steam but not every other application and pirated piece of software in their computers?! Oh wait... hackers are cool and they'd never try to put a trojan or anything on their hacked games.
*sigh*

At any rate...
Harbinger, Steam DOES NOT need the internet to allow you to play Single Player or LAN games. Let me repeat this because I think you missed it on my first post. It DOES NOT require you to connect AT ALL into the internet to play a single player or LAN game. You DO NOT need a special license, either. You turn it on and if it doesn't detect an internet connection it'll ask you if you want to use Steam in offline mode. That mode will allow you to play Single Player and LAN games.

Now, that the issue of connectivity is hopefully been cleared up, let's move onto how many FPS Steam takes away from your sacred gaming experience.

*I* am a tweak player. I have not found ANY loss of frames while I play with Steam on. NONE. If there's any loss of frames, then it must less than one because I have the same FPS whether I play on Steam or not. If, however you do suffer frame loss due to Steam, then you're not "tweak crazy." If you simply don't have the money to upgrade your machine, then that's your bad.

If you're losing frames from using Steam, then you won't be able to play HL2. Either 1) Your computer doesn't meet the hardware requirements 2) You have some software problem (drivers, OS, viruses, spyware, etc) 3) Faulty hardware 4) A faulty user 5) A combination of the former 4 possibilities.
You can say you've run antivirus and downloaded this and that, but if your computer lags because of Steam and you have something equivalent to an AthlonXP2400+ with 640MB od DDR with a GFX 5950 Ultra or better, then there's a problem because I run CS:S without any hitch and at the same damn frame rate as regular old CS.

If it's that easy to find out what a program does and doesn't do, on the internet, then look up Steam.

Again, I go back to my pissed off first paragraph. Why Steam? Why are people so obsessed about having to see every where, when, why, how of Steam and not of every other program?
Just answer me that. Why Steam? What is it about Steam that REALLY scares you? What?!

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26 Comments. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo