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 Warskull

Real Name Warskull   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Oct 29, 2004, 16:20
Total Comments 443 (Amateur)
User ID 22169
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ] Older >


News Comments > Op Ed
14. Re: Op Ed Feb 7, 2011, 18:35 Warskull
 
Icewind wrote on Feb 7, 2011, 15:22:
Any game in which you aren't punished for dying isn't a game, it's something the losers at gamerdad.com probably play.

Diablo had it right. The first one that is. The one where when you die everything you wear is dropped and you either go down and get it somehow or you lose everything.

Without that fear that you could lose everything, where is the suspense? Where is the challenge? Where is the fun?

Gamers have become far too soft.

No, the tolerance for bullshit is much less now. Challenges are fun when you have crisp controls, death is your fault, and you don't end up repeating boring parts over and over again (such as the checkpoint right before the cut scene.) Death is not fun or interesting when it is due to sloppy control, random bullshit, and you end up repeating boring, trivial parts of the game repeatedly.

The reason you see fewer challenging games is because of lot of the old 'hard' games were flat out broken. The difficulty was due to bad design and that simply won't stand these days. Making a good, well designed, challenging game is difficult. It is much easier to simply make an easy game and rely on other tricks to sell it.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Direct2Drive Game Rentals
31. Re: Direct2Drive Game Rentals Jan 23, 2011, 12:54 Warskull
 
PHJF wrote on Jan 22, 2011, 19:34:
Dude it's five hours of game time, not a five-hour rental. Big difference. AND it goes towards your possible purchase.

Which is why I can't see most devs going for it, it is way too consumer friendly.

1) Most games don't have that long a campaign
2) Most games actually aren't that good, let's face it what we all call good for the most part is merely average and what we call average/mediocre is bad but still playable.
3) This directly undermines the hype engine. Almost all video game reviewers/writers are completely full of shit, they've become an extension of marketing.

This would put a huge ding in the bottom line for most games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Cryptic Lifetime Subs Sale
17. Re: Cryptic Lifetime Subs Sale Jan 20, 2011, 19:30 Warskull
 
Talisorn wrote on Jan 20, 2011, 17:41:
JohnBirshire wrote on Jan 20, 2011, 17:31:
Lifetime subscriptions are an indicator of a terrible game.

There are people who have been playing UO since release, $2,000+. Asherons Call, $2,000+. WoW, $1250+. You know your game isn't going to last long when you are selling lifetime subscriptions for a fraction of that cost. If they don't have any faith in their product, neither should you.

Bollocks! I got a lifetime for LotRO when if first opened an it's been one of the best MMO purchases ever. It's never even looked like going under and going F2P has seen it go from strenth to strength. Paying a full sub for a game when a lifetime option is available is a mugs game. I'd rather buy than rent.

Name another game that purchasing a lifetime sub was a good idea. Hellgate, Champions Online, maybe Star Trek Online? You simply do not offer a lifetime subscription if you think you have a successful game on your hands. If you think your game won't keep most players more than 3 months then you offer lifetime subs. Heck, just compare the amount of good successful MMOs to the failed crap. There aren't very many MMOs that last, most companies just churn out terrible MMOs. LotRO and Eve are the only two successful subscription based MMOs I can think of after WoW.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Legal Fallout
13. Re: More Legal Fallout Dec 23, 2010, 14:08 Warskull
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Dec 23, 2010, 13:58:
Tumbler wrote on Dec 23, 2010, 13:33:
Why are people mad at Interplay here?
Because Interplay needs to die, painfully. Followed by a round of rocks dropped on it from orbit, followed by 10 days of nuclear bombing.

Interplay deserves to die, and the ashes. Well we need to make sure there's nothing left of them.

Interplay offered Bethesda the rights to the MMO, told them it would be worth a lot of money, Bethesda said no. Now they realized Interplay was right (Fallout sells like crazy even if it is a buggy disaster) and now Bethesda wants the MMO rights for free.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Activision Suing EA over West and Zampella
16. Re: Activision Suing EA over West and Zampella Dec 22, 2010, 14:21 Warskull
 
Tumbler wrote on Dec 22, 2010, 12:33:
Anyone know what the bonus situation is with Treyarch? Are they paying bonuses there? Have they in the past? I'd be curious to know if they will try and screw that studio out of bonus's in some way...I would think not considering that is their only studio that has put out top notch games in that franchise now...but I wouldn't be surprised if they end up going through similar BS in the next month or 2.

The claim that EA somehow conspired to hire out most of that studio is laughable. I assume you have some evidence of this? Or you're just mad how everything turned out and want to bitch and moan?

I doubt Treyarch gets bonuses. Infinity Ward was the star, Treyarch was the other guy, completely replacable.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quote of the Day
7. Re: Quote of the Day Dec 21, 2010, 23:33 Warskull
 
Dev wrote on Dec 21, 2010, 21:28:
Not only have they been through it, they are still doing it.

I wouldn't say they are still doing it, but they are still trying to recover from it. It has been 2-3 EA was really, really bad. They still carry around the stigma and likely always will.

Activision on the other hand has the luxury of being attached to Blizzard. So they can just milk their games until they've run the studios and franchises into the ground and then just fire everyone and shut down the Activision side of things.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ex-Rockstar Dev Speaks Out?
26. Re: Ex-Rockstar Dev Speaks Out? Dec 21, 2010, 14:11 Warskull
 
Creston wrote on Dec 21, 2010, 11:47:
Valcor wrote on Dec 21, 2010, 11:08:
Unfortunately, from what I read in the blurb, this situation is hardly unique to the gaming industry.

Unpaid Overtime? Middle Management taking credit for hard work of others? Yup, can find that in most job sectors.

Yeah, that's simply corporate America. However, unlike the gaming devs, most of corporate America is smart enough to quit a job when said job treats them like shit.

Game devs just whine about it and expect others to come to their rescue in a storm of gamer outrage. Rolleyes

Creston

The problem with game development is tons of idiots play games and think being a game developer would be 'super-fun.' Thus there is a constant stream of employees that can be paid crap, treated like crap, and then thrown away. The industry has no respect for talent, but you don't need talent when you are churning out sequel after sequel and only aiming to cash in on mediocre games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Monday Night Combat Beta
12. Re: Monday Night Combat Beta Dec 17, 2010, 15:23 Warskull
 
The beta needs work, it very much is a beta. However, the core game is very fun when you get it going. They do seem to be genuinely working to hammer things out.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
13. Re: Op Ed Dec 15, 2010, 15:18 Warskull
 
When you have 12 million people giving you $15 a month, you don't suddenly say "we don't want your money." You can take a monthly fee and still milk them for more micro-transactions.

This guy simply doesn't get it, F2P isn't for the king of the hill, it is a way for other MMOs to develop a player base. When you have 12 million subscribers, you don't need F2P to lure people in, you can simply rely on your gravity and the incompetence of your competition.

This prediction is only useful in the sense that WoW may eventually, one day in the far off future, go F2P, when it has been surpassed.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA: A Decade of The Old Republic Won't Need Millions of Subs
32. Re: EA: A Decade of The Old Republic Won't Need Millions of Subs Dec 8, 2010, 16:25 Warskull
 
Jdrez wrote on Dec 8, 2010, 13:58:
MxxCon wrote on Dec 8, 2010, 13:44:
WoW got to 10million users not because of marketing but because of the quality of the product.

Hardly. WoW got big because it was accessible to non-gamers, was Mac/PC out of the box, would run on any hardware due to crap graphics, and became extremely trendy.

There's nothing special about WoW beyond it's adoption by the drooling masses who don't actually play games.

If you compare WoW's quality to other non-MMO games, yes it seems lacking. However, if you only compare it to MMOs you will realize before WoW every other MMO have extreme levels of grind and were very punishing. WoW focused on the reward schedule and a faster, but still addictive leveling system while leveraging their company name, which they built up over time. WoW cut a lot of bullshit out of MMOs (yes there still is a lot of bullshit.)

As a genre most MMOs tend to be very bad games. WoW, mediocre as it is, is still the best in its genre. There is a reason a vast majority of WoW players end up returning to WoW.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evil Genius Web Game
13. Re: Evil Genius Web Game Dec 8, 2010, 04:52 Warskull
 
So they are making Farmville dressed up as Evil Genius. How about just making some good games for Rebellion. The last decent game they made was AvP (the original 2000 release.)  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Being a Small PC Publisher
15. Re: On Being a Small PC Publisher Nov 22, 2010, 19:41 Warskull
 
Are the people behind Cities XL 2011 really the best people to talk to regarding being a small publisher? They basically bought a crap game from a company that went out of business and re-released it for the price of a new game, will all the same problems as the previous version. All they did was take out the monthly fee gates for some of the content.

Why not ask someone who isn't trying to shill crap?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Champions Online Lifetime Subscriptions Return
5. Re: Champions Online Lifetime Subscriptions Return Nov 13, 2010, 21:45 Warskull
 
The Half Elf wrote on Nov 13, 2010, 21:05:
Original Lifetime price

Ok so it was originally offered for 199.99, and then taken off the table when the game went live.

Then they offer one for Star Trek Online for 249.99 until the game goes live, then raise it to 299.99 after the game goes live.

Now I could see 50 bucks, but how do you justify 100 bucks when the game is about to become Free 2 Play?

You don't, they are just trying to milk dumb fanboys for cash one last time. There are a handful of players that will probably buy it and complain when it shuts down 6 months later (like Hellgate players.)

It is really simple, you don't offer a lifetime subscription when you think you have a highly successful game on your hands.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Emergent Selling Gamebryo
22. Re: Emergent Selling Gamebryo Nov 12, 2010, 16:37 Warskull
 
Creston wrote on Nov 12, 2010, 16:24:
So it's very possible that Bethesda just has a bunch of fucking monkeys for coders...

Creston

That sounds like a safe guess. All their games are buggy messes. FO:NV still has the exact same crash issues that were in Fallout 3. Don't run the game on Nvidia cards or multiple cores or watch out (had a crash roughly every 2-3 hours.) Meanwhile the Civ series uses Gamebyro and doesn't crash.

Thing is, since Gamebyro is heavily associated with Bethesda's terrible coding, I can't help but wonder if Bethesda has damaged Gamebyro's reputation.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Relic on GFWL and Steamworks
34. Re: Relic on GFWL and Steamworks Nov 4, 2010, 15:49 Warskull
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 4, 2010, 15:42:
If GFWL is chosen over Steam then it shows Danny Bilson, THQ and Relic's true colors; money is more important than making a great game. The fact that they're even contemplating GFWL means they don't trust their game, or their customers. Neither of which I want to do business with...

In fairness, when half-baked games tend to be released people here complain and moan "why didn't you develop longer!" When it's pointed out that the company ran out of money, the response is typically "find more money!"


This is THQ finding more money.

Yet, Relic is famous for still releasing half-baked games. The original DoW 2 used GFWL and released with catastrophic, game destroying bugs. Units permanently ate up pop-cap in multiplayer so eventually no one could make units. Then due to Relic's inability to test and make a proper patch, combined with GFWL requirements, they took over 3 months to fix these patches.

Relic is a company that cannot test to save their life. They literally do zero QA. A program like GFWL that slows down Relic's patches to fix their original incompetence is disastrous.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Universe Interview
18. Re: Tribes Universe Interview Nov 2, 2010, 16:45 Warskull
 
So what I get from this interview is that it will be Global Agenda 2 with the Tribes name stamped on top of it to make up for how bad Global Agenda 1 was. These are pretty much all the same things they said about Global Agenda 1, then their lead dev decided he liked PvE more than PvP.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
2. Re: Op Ed Oct 29, 2010, 14:12 Warskull
 
wrlwnd wrote on Oct 29, 2010, 12:01:
Eh, your average gamer is an idiot who can't wait a while for the patch.

That's why companies do this - it makes money.

Sad, but true. It boils down to gamers are far too accepting of bugs. They want a game to be good so bad, they are willing to overlook massive bugs. They let companies get away with released unfinished, sub-par products and they let the reviewers get away with glazing over bugs. They get exactly what they deserve, buggy mediocre games. Anyone who didn't expect Fallout 3:NV to be a buggy mess was delusional. Every game Bethesda released is buggy, every game Obsidian releases is buggy. The only problem is they lower the quality of gaming for the rest of us with their stupidity.

I'm not talking about small bugs either, software development is complex. Some bugs will slip through, particularly those that have to be triggered by a very specific set of circumstances. These days they don't even bother fixing blatant, game destroying bugs that QA probably found in 5 minutes.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Blizzard on the DOTA Trademark
33. Re: Blizzard on the DOTA Trademark Oct 25, 2010, 23:07 Warskull
 
heroin wrote on Oct 25, 2010, 14:40:
So, how do we know that Valve has not begun to employ the original creators of DOTA? If they have, then what is the big fuss about? Did Valve ever create the engine that the original Team Fortress came out of (Quake)? Hell no, they didn't. But, as far as I know they did hire a bunch of guys who created the mod and did a very good job bringing it into it's own.

I think Blizz just needs to STFU on this one (I love you guys but jesus, Mo Money the Mo problems you make up in your big convoluted heads).

The original creator of DotA is long gone. That would be Eul, Guinsoo stole an unprotected copy of the map and released his own version that happened to catch on (I don't believe he credited the original creator either.) Icefrog, who now work for Valve, took over and did a great deal to fix the balance and coding of the map.

Most WC3 maps have a history of changing hands (often without consent) and people taking credit for other people's work.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > TRIBES Acquired, Tribes Universe Announced
13. Re: TRIBES Acquired, Tribes Universe Announced Oct 24, 2010, 16:03 Warskull
 
Overon wrote on Oct 24, 2010, 16:00:
Warskull wrote on Oct 24, 2010, 15:37:
Sepharo wrote on Oct 24, 2010, 14:09:
The Global Agenda guys must be doing well to buy the Tribes IP.

Pretty damn ambitious list of features there too.

I really hope they pull it off but the realist in me says they won't.

The studio is backed by someone who has a ton of money to burn.

Global Agenda is a horrible game and the developers don't have the talent to pull something like Tribes off.
Even if they had the talent, tribes is complex with a high learning curve and that is the antithesis to a successful mmo.

That is true, which sadly makes me believe this game will essentially be Global Agenda 2 with a paint job designed to trick people into thinking it is something else.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > TRIBES Acquired, Tribes Universe Announced
11. Re: TRIBES Acquired, Tribes Universe Announced Oct 24, 2010, 15:37 Warskull
 
Sepharo wrote on Oct 24, 2010, 14:09:
The Global Agenda guys must be doing well to buy the Tribes IP.

Pretty damn ambitious list of features there too.

I really hope they pull it off but the realist in me says they won't.

The studio is backed by someone who has a ton of money to burn.

Global Agenda is a horrible game and the developers don't have the talent to pull something like Tribes off.

This comment was edited on Oct 24, 2010, 15:44.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
443 Comments. 23 pages. Viewing page 10.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo