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:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Bhruic

Real Name Bhruic   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Nov 14, 2004, 23:07
Total Comments 3145 (Veteran)
User ID 22304
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ] Older >


News Comments > Battle.net Adding "Appear Offline" Mode
31. Re: Battle.net Adding "Appear Offline" Mode Sep 20, 2012, 21:22 Bhruic
 
The sad thing is that as slow as they were to implement this, and as minor a feature it is, they are still adding this functionality before Steam is. Seriously Valve, how hard would it be to put this in place?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
25. Re: Op Ed Sep 20, 2012, 16:07 Bhruic
 
Quboid wrote on Sep 20, 2012, 15:16:
Bhruic wrote on Sep 20, 2012, 14:21:
I've read that a bunch of times and I still can't figure out exactly what the publishers are offering. Are they basically offering developers the option to "double dip"? Ie, they do a kickstarter, get financed from that, but then the publisher pays to make the game anyway?

I think it's a very poorly written article and the claim of "free" has to be wrong, almost by definition - if the publisher doesn't spend any money, why involve them at all? Distribution and marketing expertise perhaps? I can't believe that they could expect to own the brand if that's all they bring. I would guess that a large part of the budget would still be needed from the publisher.

Right, that's kinda what I was thinking. If the publisher wanted to simply be a distributer, there's absolutely no incentive for the developer to grant them any favours. If the publisher is expecting to get the game rights and the majority of the profits, they have to be kicking in a something substantial - which would almost have to be money. But if the developer does a successful kickstart, what do they need the money for?

Unless they are doing one of those "try and get publisher's attentions" type kickstarts. But if the publisher is already interested and talking to them, that would seem redundant. I dunno, it'd be nice if Obsidian would clarify exactly what the offer was - I don't care about the "who" so much, as they are all almost equally bad these days.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
17. Re: Op Ed Sep 20, 2012, 14:21 Bhruic
 
I've read that a bunch of times and I still can't figure out exactly what the publishers are offering. Are they basically offering developers the option to "double dip"? Ie, they do a kickstarter, get financed from that, but then the publisher pays to make the game anyway?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Dragon Age III Inquisition Announced
7. Re: Dragon Age III Inquisition Announced Sep 17, 2012, 12:10 Bhruic
 
Verno wrote on Sep 17, 2012, 12:01:
It was awhile ago at some weird LARP con whose name escapes me, someone asked if they would go back to a silent protagonist and they said no, they would be going with a voiced protagonist again. They weren't specific on who the character would be or etc though.

Ah, ok. Doesn't surprise me in the slightest of course.

I don't really have a problem with the voice part, my main concern is with the conversation wheel. It's really annoying to have the options so obvious. "Here is your good option". "Here is your evil option". "Here is your snarky middle-ground option". It makes it really hard to have any moral ambiguity when everything is so clear-cut. Maybe that's something they'll change, but I won't hold my breath.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
18. Re: Steam Top 10 Sep 17, 2012, 11:57 Bhruic
 
ASeven wrote on Sep 17, 2012, 11:23:
Glad it's doing so great, this game deserves all success and then more.

I gotta say, I don't understand the love this game is getting. My initial reaction to the game has been that it's the most dull, boring game I've played in quite some time. I'm really not sure what the draw is for most of the people around here.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Dragon Age III Inquisition Announced
3. Re: Dragon Age III Inquisition Announced Sep 17, 2012, 11:54 Bhruic
 
Verno wrote on Sep 17, 2012, 11:43:
I am disappointed that they wouldn't listen to feedback about the Player Character though, the addition of a voiced protagonist did absolutely nothing for DA2 and seemed to detract from dialogue options.

I'm sure they will be, but did they announce that? Even reading the full blog, I couldn't find anything that says that.

As long as they aren't releasing it this year, it definitely sounds like they've allowed themselves (or been allowed) more time, which is a plus.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
17. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Sep 17, 2012, 09:30 Bhruic
 
Cutter wrote on Sep 17, 2012, 01:11:
Unlikely is the key word there. Inducing a nun to steal something would be entrapment. Infiltrating an extremist group is worlds apart. These people already have set themselves apart and have chosen to put themselves apart from society - violently so. This is how they cane to the feds attention in the first place. They're not supplying them real bombs, and in any case it only proves how extreme they are. Geez, you make it sound like they trying to entrap boy scouts or the like. I'm all for the feds going after those sorts of assholes BEFORE they strike.

Convincing people to commit a crime is entrapment, no matter how easy they are to convince. Pressuring people to move from conversation to action is entrapment, no matter how little pressure you need to apply. In the example from the article, the FBI agent (allegedly) took people who were "fantasizing" about blowing up a bridge to a specific high-traffic target. It's a pretty clear case on entrapment (based on the description from the article, the reality may differ).

It shouldn't be the position of law enforcement to enduce people to commit crimes. Sure, going undercover to facilitate information gathering is fine. Even assisting in the preparation is fine (especially with bomb acquiring to ensure a dud). But the undercover agent should never be the one suggesting or initiating anything. Otherwise it crosses the line.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Safety Dance
8. Re: Sunday Safety Dance Sep 17, 2012, 05:33 Bhruic
 
Cutter wrote on Sep 16, 2012, 18:00:
America has never been the good guy, quite the opposite in fact. The only people in the world that believe that "Murica" is some noble champion of people and freedom are naive Americans.

The US, like most countries, looks out for the US (well, and Israel). I mean, it's even in the article - the guy was perfectly fine with the concept of spying on people from foreign countries, but suddenly when it's Americans, it's a Big Deal.

But that's not really unexpected. As I said, most - if not all - countries put their own interests first. It's what makes a lot of global issues hard to deal with.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sunday Metaverse
29. Re: Sunday Metaverse Sep 17, 2012, 04:27 Bhruic
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Sep 17, 2012, 02:41:
Rogers system is a mess on TPIA shit.

And yet, sadly, they are still better than Bell. It's one of the problems of going with a 3rd party, things are fine as long as nothing goes wrong, but as soon as something does, it's an uphill battle vs companies who have no real desire to be helpful.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Legal Briefs
12. Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Sep 16, 2012, 10:42 Bhruic
 
Quboid wrote on Sep 16, 2012, 07:44:
If they want to charge subscription, force you to watch commercials, make their prime-time programmes pay-per-view and charge you $5 every time someone says "bazinga", they can. I don't understand why people think that broadcasters are only allowed one revenue stream. They can do what they like, within reason, as long as you have the right to tell them to fuck off.

I think everyone is aware of the fact that as a business, barring legalities, they can do whatever they want when it comes to pricing. I haven't seen anyone arguing whether or not they can do something, just whether they should. So unless you are making the argument that because they can force people to watch commercials they should, I'm not sure what point you think you are countering.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Amnesia Postmortem - Piracy? "Screw It"
25. Re: Amnesia Postmortem - Piracy? Sep 14, 2012, 05:28 Bhruic
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 14, 2012, 02:44:
And this is why Kickstarting is the future, no cut to Publishers, 100% profit to the game developers.. I think Publishers are scared shitless right now

Again, this idea that they get 100% of the profit is silly. Unless they are going to put up the expense of individual storefronts for every game, someone is going to be selling the games for them. And that someone is going to be taking a cut. Yes, they get more of the profits than they would with the traditional publisher route, but it's definitely not 100%.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Amnesia Postmortem - Piracy? "Screw It"
17. Re: Amnesia Postmortem - Piracy? Sep 13, 2012, 23:27 Bhruic
 
Prez wrote on Sep 13, 2012, 23:14:
It's a million units sold according to the entry, not a million dollars. Considering that the lowest the game ever sold for (outside of indie bundles, which they are apparently not counting in their figuring) was $5, that would indicate a minimum baseline of $5 million, which makes the (quoted from the blog entry) "10 times as much money as the $360k it cost to make" confusing, even using their accounting for the number sold in the ultra cheap indie bundles. Of course, many of us bought it at $10 or $20...

You're overlooking the money that goes to the publisher/distributors. Assuming they take around 30%, and assuming they averaged $5 per copy, then net profit of around $3.6 million sounds about right.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Legal Briefs
5. Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Sep 9, 2012, 01:46 Bhruic
 
Rattlehead wrote on Sep 9, 2012, 01:01:
I don't buy into the fact that people can't afford games excuse. Here they are on a fast connection(fast enough to torrent), and a PC to run the games they download. Grow up, and give developers their due, they are struggling just as much, if not more, than you fucks stealing their game.

Hardly a compelling argument. Money is a finite resource. Sure, they could potentially buy the game instead of having an internet connection. But they likely need that internet connection for other things.

That's not saying it's true for everyone, but I'm sure there are many people who absolutely could not afford to buy all the games they download.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Darksiders II Sales
31. Re: On Darksiders II Sales Sep 9, 2012, 01:42 Bhruic
 
bigspender wrote on Sep 8, 2012, 22:28:
what annoys me most about lack of co-op is games where you have AI companions throughout most of the game - I want that to be a real person playing alongside me - seems like its a lot more effort to do an AI companion than to have an extra spawn point and some basic networking code.

No, because AI companions do what you need them to do. It's not going to run off and go to a different area because it's bored with what you are doing. It's not going to try and have a conversation with an NPC while you are trying to fight. The AI does things that the developers want it to do, rather than what an independent entity wants to do.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video
12. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video Sep 9, 2012, 01:38 Bhruic
 
Flatline wrote on Sep 9, 2012, 00:49:
Mines are fine in and of themselves, but in the above video they killed 2 out of a squad of 5 marines. Unless they are dirt cheap they look useless (maybe they're better at vehicles), especially since it looks like you'll have to dedicate production facility time when you could be building something else.

The video was just showing how they work, now how they can be used effectively. I just watched a replay where someone had seeded behind their base, and they took out an incoming Warp Prism full of DTs (they can hit air units, which is cool). Using just 1 to take out 1 enemy unit isn't going to be cost-effective, I agree, but they are a supplementary unit, not a staple of an army.

You're right about the 'toss core, which is cool, but it's still nothing actually new, just shuffled around a little.

Well, the core itself is new. The recall ability isn't, I suppose. But the energy charge and defensive matrix both are. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

And considering it took a year to crank out Brood Wars, units, campaign, and all, I don't see what the extra time is here. The pre-rendered movies are nice, but they aren't what's holding the game up.

Sure, but the technology was simpler back in the day. Using an extreme example, how long did it take to make a level in Doom compared to a level in Doom 3?

What *is* is "polishing" and "balancing", which i put in quotes because within a month they'll have patched the balance they achieved out. 2 years of "balancing" for the same experience that 1 month of general population play will provide. To prove my point, I give you every previous Blizzard title ever released. Getting it 90% close in, say, half the time, and then being fast on the balance/polish patches for the first month or two probably would cut dev time in half, but wouldn't have nearly the hype behind it.

I really doubt they've spent that much time on balancing - especially since that's the main goal of the beta that's going on right now. They've already announced some balance changes, and I'm sure they'll have some more (and yes, they'll have even more down the road). The fact they'll change things later doesn't mean they don't want to have it as good as they can manage at release. It's hard to say how long it'll take before it's taken up by tournaments, but I doubt it'll be that long.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Password Attacks
39. Re: Guild Wars 2 Password Attacks Sep 8, 2012, 19:44 Bhruic
 
Reikon wrote on Sep 8, 2012, 17:01:
I use KeePass, which has an option to automatically enter your credentials, including a method that combines simulated keypresses and pasting, which is supposed to defeat keyloggers.

Thanks for the recommend, I've been looking for something like this.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Legal Briefs
1. Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Sep 8, 2012, 18:56 Bhruic
 
Sosowski says he's has sold over 300 copies of the game at an average of $1.43 each.

Still, it's a significant increase from the 100 or so copies of McPixel Sosowski sold for $10 on the game's first day of availability

300 x 1.43 = $429
100 x 10 = $1000

Since when is $429 a "significant increase" over $1000?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video
6. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video Sep 8, 2012, 18:51 Bhruic
 
eunichron wrote on Sep 8, 2012, 18:28:
Indeed, if the Zerg campaign is half as good as the Terran campaign was I'll be buying it, as long as they're not charging $60 for it.

Me too, most likely, but I hope they scale back a bit on the "time pressure" missions. I tend to prefer turtling, which made a lot of the missions quite difficult (especially for ones like the mission where the firestorm was progressing over the planet). I understand why they do it (turtling until you have overwhelming force doesn't do much for dramatic tension), but it really forces you to have to play in one specific style, and it's one that I don't enjoy as much.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video
4. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Storm Units Video Sep 8, 2012, 17:35 Bhruic
 
Flatline wrote on Sep 8, 2012, 16:57:
So I stand corrected. Heart of the Swarm introduces 2.5 new units for 2 sides (mines that don't look particularly effective and a proto-mothership with a few abiliites being the halves), and 2 units for the zerg. Wooo.

Actually, the mines can be quite effective when used properly. And the mothership core gives the Protoss access to some abilities very early on they wouldn't otherwise get until late game.

But the time delay wasn't over adding units, so much as it was over the campaign. Making a good campaign (and the video that goes with it) takes a lot longer than throwing together some units - even if the units need to be balanced exceptionally well (as SC2 is a popular eSport game, hence balance being critical).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Password Attacks
16. Re: Guild Wars 2 Password Attacks Sep 8, 2012, 01:11 Bhruic
 
So now that people have had some time to play, how long a game is it? Speaking from a single player perspective, that is. I don't really have any interest in the PvP side of things, and from the sounds of it, there's no much else to do at max level? How long does it take to hit that point?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3145 Comments. 158 pages. Viewing page 18.
< Newer [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo