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 yonderboyOSLT

Real Name yonderboyOSLT   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname yonder
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ 7896851
Description
Homepage http://www.planetdungeonsiege.com
Signed On Oct 8, 2005, 00:21
Total Comments 159 (Novice)
User ID 23920
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Older >


News Comments > The Elder Scrolls Online on Steam
33. Re: The Elder Scrolls Online on Steam Jul 18, 2014, 07:38 yonder
 
PropheT wrote on Jul 17, 2014, 20:00:
jdreyer wrote on Jul 17, 2014, 19:41:
With an MMO, you go in with your friends, and if it doesn't work out then you've all lost a lot of money and hundreds of hours.

I have a hard time calling any game I get hundreds of hours out of a bad deal. Hell, if I got hundreds of hours out of it that's already a better deal than 90% of the games I buy.

Depends on if you have fun. You could grind a crappy FF game for 50 hours and really only have four hours of fun.

But I'm assuming that you're referring to hours of fun, not just hours of gameplay.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica Released
2. Re: Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica Released Jul 16, 2014, 22:41 yonder
 
Remind me how you earned your reputation around here...  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
32. Re: In Defense of Horse Armor Jul 15, 2014, 23:55 yonder
 
PropheT wrote on Jul 15, 2014, 18:02:
yonder wrote on Jul 15, 2014, 17:40:
Here's my main rule on DLC. You should never feel OBLIGATED to buy it, and you should never feel as if you are screwed if you don't buy it.

EA's final nail in the BioWare coffin, Mass Effect 3, had a similar Day 1 DLC. Sure, it was "extra" in theory, but you felt screwed if you didn't buy it, because (spoilers) IT WAS A DAMNED PROTHEAN (/spoilers). It wasn't like the extra characters in ME2 where, honestly, if you didn't get them, you didn't really miss much. The ME2 character DLC, while awesome, was truly EXTRA.

The extra character was a deluxe edition option, not really DLC; it was only DLC for people who bought the regular edition that wanted to upgrade after the fact. I don't see it as much of a complaint that they included something with a deluxe edition that actually made it worth getting, when most of the time it's useless stuff. He still wasn't a necessary component of the game any more than the optional character in ME2 was, he was just a more interesting character.

I would think that providing something you can purchase separately for the game that's compelling enough to make you feel like you need to have it would be a good thing, rather than 41 DLC packs that you can take or leave but might as well throw some money at.


Regarding the 41 packs, really there's only 7 that are really even "content". MOST of the other ones are just window dressing. Again, just like paying for silly outfits in a F2P game. COMPLETELY unnecessary. And, of course, you can buy them in packages and on sale and blahblahblah.

As for the extra character... here's the thing... I'm assuming you're talking about ME3 and not the extra character in ME2. Well... we didn't KNOW whether or not the extra character was going to be basically meaningless or if it was going to be a legitimately important part of the ME3 story. But it was "leaked" who the character was going to be, and everyone gasped and OMFGIHAVETOHAVETHAT!!!

Yeah... you could buy it for more after the fact, but it seemed, before the game was released, to be a VITAL part of the game. It wasn't. But you could either spent 10 bucks to upgrade sight-unseen or spend 15 bucks later if you investigated it and decided you wanted it. Either way, I count something that's "Day 1 for x additional dollars or Post-Day1 for x+y additional dollars" to be DLC. It was in ADDITION to the game...

Yeah... EA knew exactly what they were doing. And it was slimy. And, in a completely related fact, ME3 is the last EA game I'm buying. It's almost as if I have "pattern recognition" abilities or something.



Beamer: Well I've already talked about Horse Armor (completely pointless tip jar), but yeah... Fallout 3 was a low point. The original ending was Michael Bay levels of stupidity.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
23. In Defense of Horse Armor Jul 15, 2014, 17:40 yonder
 
Now that Bioware is fully owned and destroyed by EA, Paradox is likely my favorite gaming developer. Their view on DLC is so utterly amazing, as per this RPS article.

Here's my main rule on DLC. You should never feel OBLIGATED to buy it, and you should never feel as if you are screwed if you don't buy it.

That's what I don't understand about the Horse Armor.

Not to quote Cutter but... if you don't want it, don't buy it.

I don't buy Activision's crap because I *KNOW* exactly what they'll do, and so I factor in the price of their DLC into their annual releases and I ask "DO I want to pay 90 bucks a year to play this game? Hells no." It's an incredibly easy question.

EA's final nail in the BioWare coffin, Mass Effect 3, had a similar Day 1 DLC. Sure, it was "extra" in theory, but you felt screwed if you didn't buy it, because (spoilers) IT WAS A DAMNED PROTHEAN (/spoilers). It wasn't like the extra characters in ME2 where, honestly, if you didn't get them, you didn't really miss much. The ME2 character DLC, while awesome, was truly EXTRA.

Horse Armor is totally, completely, and utterly pointless. It was EXTRA. It had no impact on the game. Wanna know what it was in my eyes? A tip jar.

Bethesda makes amazing games for 50/60 dollars that provide me hundreds of hours of legitimate entertainment. They release "content DLC" (what we old folks call expansion packs) for 15-30 bucks (I say 15 because I'm old and that's what they used to be priced) that provide DOZENS (remember, 5 dozen is 60) of hours of additional entertainment.

If Bethesda had a tip jar, I'd HAPPILY put in a few more bucks.

That, my friends, is all I see Horse Armor as.

It's the EXACT same mentality as cosmetic DLC in F2P games like LoL and LotRO and other genres w/ F2P games. The difference of course is that Horse Armor was in addition to the cost of the base game. But... if I want to pay a few dollars to have a snazzy outfit that has no gameplay value in a F2P game, how is that any different than paying a few bucks for my HORSE to have armor in a great Bethesda game?

I'm not screwed if I don't buy it. I won't miss out on the full experience of the game (again, read the RPS article from Paradox please) if I don't buy it. Etcetera, etcetera.

Consequently, most of the DLC I buy is from Paradox and Bethesda.

Not at all a coincidence.

Just look at the latest expansion for Crusader Kings 2 - Rajas of India.

If you didn't buy the game, your map was still extended eastward into India, just like everyone else's game. You could still conquer the areas. You could still assimilate your religions. Blahblahblah. The only thing you couldn't do is PLAY as a character in the new areas. That's it.

There are FORTY ONE pieces of DLC for CK2. Seven of those are gameplay-involved expansions in the traditional sense. The rest are pretty much totally superfluous (just like Horse Armor). Oh, you released 12 hours of Norse music for two dollars to listen to while I play as my Norse character? I'll gobble that right up since I'll put a few hundred hours in as the Norse. And I happily own them all. And Paradox is making a lot more money from me than if they had tried to screw me over with the DLC.

And you know what? I can play a complete multiplayer game with anyone else no matter what combination of those 41 DLC options they own. 100% of DLC combinations are completely compatible with each other.

And that (and obviously superb gameplay) puts Paradox SOUNDLY in the "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" category. And I love them for it.

So, again, I don't see what's wrong with Horse Armor.

Do I PREFER traditional expansions to generic micro-DLC? Heck yes. But I'm okay with them OFFERING generic micro-DLC, because I realize that Horse Armor took them very little effort to put together.

Kinda like the effort to put a tip jar on the counter. Just in case someone wants to toss in some change.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > WildStar Updated
11. Re: WildStar Updated Jul 1, 2014, 16:00 yonder
 
Did someone say the Guild Wars games are 'too easy'? I'd be the first to admit that a lot of the content is very casual-oriented. But there are some very difficult and challenging things in the game. Especially in newer content releases.

On topic, I've no plan on subbing to another MMOG any time soon, Wildstar just isn't good enough to justify it IMHO.

I've never understood the line of logic. Unless I'm COMPLETELY misreading, you just said that you won't play it because the game isn't good enough to justify the sub.

Isn't that the exact same thing as people who say "I haven't watched television in 10 years because there's nothing good on television"?

Don't like the pay model? That's cool. Legit reason. But saying that you won't sub BECAUSE games that you don't play aren't good enough...... that's just circular logic. And bad, negative circular logic.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Play PC Titanfall for Free
52. Re: Play PC Titanfall for Free Jun 21, 2014, 14:26 yonder
 
nin wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 17:55:
HugeJerk wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 17:43:
There isn't an option to play with bots instead of other players. Part of the problem people are having is waiting in match queues because there aren't enough players and there's no "fill open spots with bots" capability.

yonder wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 17:31:
WHY do you think you need a SP campaign? You can play against bots, correct? Then who cares?

What that guy said. There are bots for some functions, but not all. You still end up needing to be online and find other (human) players.


While I'm sure that it's clear by my response to jdreyer (sp?) I'll just repeat.

That has nothing to do with a SP campaign. I should have phrased it better I suppose. But... yeah... lack of bots have nothing (or little) to do w/ lack of SP campaign. SP campaign means a lot of resources devoted to creating it, no matter how throwaway it is. SP bots (i.e. 1 person and 4 bots vs 5 bots, for example) *SHOULD* mean just a few extra lines of code and a few selection choices. But seeing how obscenely restrictive publishers are these days.......
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Play PC Titanfall for Free
51. Re: Play PC Titanfall for Free Jun 21, 2014, 14:23 yonder
 
jdreyer wrote on Jun 21, 2014, 03:46:
but they do offer a fully configurable single player offline mode with bots. Titanfall does not.

And *THAT* is why I don't like inappropriate complaining. If what you actually want is a fully fledged SP campaign then fine, but Titanfall has never remotely pretended to be that, so if you got the game and are disappointed in the lack of a fully-fledged SP campaign... that's on you.

But no bots to train against or play when your internet goes down or... whatever...

Yeah, that's lame. Horrible as a matter of fact. But I've seen dozens and dozens of complaints about the lack of campaign but none of them mentioned lack of bots.

I always just assumed that, because of the actual CONTENT of the complaints, that common sense applied and that you COULD play against bots, like with UT and Quake and blahblahblah. I guess that's on me... tho I would have preferred proper complaining.

Ugh... this is in the same vein as disallowing LAN play for a PC RTS (/cough... Blizzard... /cough).

I friggin hate publishers. I am ASSUMING that if it were entirely up to the developers that they'd let people want what they obviously want and should have. Meaning bots for one-person MP.

jdreyer: Thank you VERY MUCH for clarifying. And thank you for doing so all maturely and whatnot instead of, well, you know.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Far Cry 4 PC Graphics Gimped
40. Re: Far Cry 4 PC Graphics Gimped Jun 20, 2014, 17:42 yonder
 
Alamar wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 17:37:
Rattlehead wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 11:46:
Eh no loss for me, I pirate all Ubi games anyway, that's my policy. Until they remove fucking Uplay, they are never getting another dime from me.

So go ahead, castrate the game all you want.

We all have our justifications, for the things we do, but I wonder... Do you also have this policy for more invasive, in the way, DRM schemes, like Steam?

-Alamar

Please explain how Steam is *MORE* invasive and in-the-way than Ubisoft. Thank you.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Far Cry 4 PC Graphics Gimped
39. Re: Far Cry 4 PC Graphics Gimped Jun 20, 2014, 17:41 yonder
 
Verno wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 12:16:
Creston wrote on Jun 20, 2014, 11:19:
Why not just give the PC those few extra options and pieces of eye candy? They do it for their other games. Maybe they just don't sell enough PC copies to make it worth it, but then just say that. Don't try to hide it behind this fable that the failbox can run everything a PC can.

It's just marketing fluff to assuage their sales base. The PC version will definitely have extra options and visual detail. It's not even a concern IMO, Ubi has been doing much better in the port department.

Please look up what they did for Watch Dogs PC graphics to understand why you're wrong.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Play PC Titanfall for Free
38. Re: Play PC Titanfall for Free Jun 20, 2014, 17:31 yonder
 
I don't understand all the hate for the complete lack of single-player. I saw this as a return to the pure multiplayer game, like Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 Arena. I don't remember a lot of crying about the lack of SP campaigns in those games.

Sure, it was because those games stood on their own with MP only, but... why not apply the same standards to Titanfall?

For the record, I haven't played it, but I do believe in judging a game PROPERLY. Titanfall isn't pretending to be something it's not from everything I can tell (with the exception of pretending to be an Xboner killer app).

Don't like twitch games? That's cool. I used to, but I'm old now, and it really doesn't appeal to me outside of possibly playing with my friends (who are old now too). I remember going to a mega-LAN recently and played UT with a youngster who was somewhere between 15 and 22. We got ANNIHILATED. Back in the day, we were top of the game. Obviously he was much, much better than us, but to be blunt, it's no fun playing against players of that caliber. So... twitch doesn't appeal to me anymore.

But obviously... twitch shooters are still a huge thing. I just don't understand the hate. Mostly tho the above-stated SP-campaign comparisons.

WHY do you think you need a SP campaign? You can play against bots, correct? Then who cares?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Fallout, Fallout 2, and Fallout Tactics Return to Steam
13. Re: Fallout, Fallout 2, and Fallout Tactics Return to Steam Jun 19, 2014, 04:39 yonder
 
If you guys are going to have such a hard view on Obsidian, you should do yourselves a favor and educate yourselves about Obsidian so that you can have some facts to back up your viewpoint.

Obsidian was (was regarding pre-Kickstarter, cuz that MIGHT change everything) an incredibly odd developer. Most developers have a dynamic relationship with their publishers. Obsidian didn't. They were basically mercenary developers. They usually had concrete development-only contracts with the publishers for usually just one game. They pretty much never had any intentions of staying with that publisher in order to publish more than one game.

This led to some pretty unpleasant developments. With no post-publish support intended, Obsidian had no financial reason, at all, to fix bugs past the publishing date. I'm not saying Obsidian never cared about bugs. They definitely did. But once the publish date arrived... that's it (unless they get a post-release contract for bug support)

Now... bugs and delays happen all the time. But in a normal contract, publishers BASICALLY agree to support the devs until the game is published. If delays are necessary, it's unpleasant and often ends in unpleasantness, but things often get fixed. Basically... a regular contract is "We will pay you until you get the game done, which should be four years from now, at which point we will get the lion's share of the income" whereas Obsidian's contracts were usually "We will pay you until December 17th of such-n-such year at which point we will release the game or have a new contract in place, and after the game we will support the game in-house"

That leads to some incredibly predictable outcomes.

Look at their history.

KOTOR - Lucasarts - Buggy as hell (some game-breaking bugs STILL haven't been fixed.
Neverwinter Nights 2 - Atari - Pretty good, but buggy as hell.
Alpha Protocol - Sega - Need I even say anything?
Fallout New Vegas - Bethesda - Buggy as hell.
Dungeon Siege 3 - Squeenix - Just horrible. Horrible.
South Park, Stick of Truth - Ubisoft - see above about bugginess.
You'll notice a pattern. Publishers, who own the IPs, want a SEQUEL to a great game published on the cheap. Instead of paying more money to the original developers for a top-notch sequel, they hire developer Obsidian to make it under a mercenary contract.
Pillars of Eternity - crowd-financed but published by Paradox - We'll see.

Obsidian makes GREAT stuff. And if they had proper financial support in order to actually FINISH the games before they're released, I'd absolutely love them. But they haven't, yet.

I seriously don't understand the geek love that Obsidian gets. I *HOPE* it's because people incorrectly associate Obsidian with Black Isle. I could understand that. It's wrong, but it's understandable. But if you're judging Obsidian on their current record... you're simply wrong. Or you're okay with horribly buggy games. (And anecdotal evidence that YOU didn't encounter a butt-ton of bugs with their games doesn't mean squat other than you being lucky.)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > AMD Calls Out NVIDIA; Former NVIDIA Dev Calls BS
6. Re: AMD Calls Out NVIDIA; Former NVIDIA Dev Calls BS May 27, 2014, 10:56 yonder
 
ochentay4 wrote on May 27, 2014, 10:31:
Jraptor59 wrote on May 27, 2014, 10:08:
Ah, the irony. AMD crippled Tomb Raider for Nvidia. Nvidia didn't even receive the source code to update its drivers till after the game was released. Talk about the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.
AMD did not crippled Tomb Raider. In fact Tomb Raider had a lot of problems with AMD cards since the game was rushed to add stupid TressFX and skipped bug crunching and optimizations. So it ran like crap on both sides and worse on NVIDIA sicne TressFX was buggy as hell. After some patches it run great on AMD and NVIDIA.

It saddens me that even at BN fanbois still believe claims like that without putting forth any investigation. Tomb Raider was rushed, not crippled. I honestly thought common sense would be enough to determine that, but apparently not.

While AMD/ATI is far from blameless, most of the corporate shenanigans in the GPU wars have been done by nVidia. The closest thing to *REAL* crippling was done by nVidia in regards to forbidding PhysX from working universally. Turned out to not be that big of a deal, but yeah... that was definitely, to quote the nVidia employee "bullshit" (that's some mature classiness there nVidia employee...).

And don't even get me started on the videocard numbering system, which nVidia is most definitely to blame. AMD's numbering system isn't nearly as flawless as it used to be (it used to be bigger number = better, nothing more, nothing less), but it's still a crapton easier to figure out.

nVidia makes great stuff. But their corporation is terrible.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Consolidation
6. Re: Evening Consolidation May 15, 2014, 06:32 yonder
 
The Half Elf wrote on May 15, 2014, 02:40:
Here is how you sell the Kinect.

1)Remake Star Trek Bridge Commander
2)Have total voice control of the ship
3)Allow a Bluetooth mic or PC mic to work with it as well
4)For extra shit's n giggles be able to do the Picard 'Engage' hand wave.
5)Star Trek Nerdgasm/Ferengi Latinum-gasm

Dear Paramount, your welcome, just allow me to be on the design team.

There are a lot of legitimate AWESOME uses for the Kinect, but MS is too damned stupid to promote it properly and there's no reason to have faith that they'd support game development properly.

There's some talk about an official team-up between Oculus and Kinect and I'm sorry but that would be an AMAZING kill-app for the Kinect (obviously the x-boner Kinect, not the original one). If MS was working on that and NOT promoting it then holy cow... they're even stupider than I give them credit, and they get a LOT of credit.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
16. Re: Op Ed May 13, 2014, 13:36 yonder
 
Right now, there are only two established companies that I pre-order from. Paradox and Bethesda. And that's because I routinely play hundreds upon hundreds of hours with each of their games. Yes... Paradox had some severe growing pains, but they're mostly past that at this point, and I hold them to the new standard whereas before I honestly considered it funding a studio to finish a game that was awesome but unfinished. But of course this was back when the ENTIRE studio was a dozen or so people. A grand total of NO ONE else was going to make those types of games so I truly didn't mind.

Of course, this only holds to games by these two studios, not by their publishing parents... obviously.

I so fund a FEW Early Access and Kickstarter games. I think I can count the total number of games funded that way on two hands. And Towns was the closest I came to getting screwed although considering that I consider that a FUN game already... I don't consider that as getting screwed. It wasn't the game they envisioned, but it was still a fun game. I'm okay with that. Tho the Towns 2 commentary rubbed me the wrong way.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
13. Re: Go Sports May 4, 2014, 20:13 yonder
 
Quboid wrote on May 4, 2014, 16:52:
Are football/soccer teams owned by Americans given any attention in U.S. sports coverage? Clubs like Liverpool FC, Manchester United, Aston Villa, Arsenal (in part), Sunderland and AS Roma?
To answer your question a bit better than Cutter (I have no idea what Cutter's version of "here" is, for example), ESPN, the #1 sports channel in the US, has been pushing European (mostly British) football/soccer for about four years now, ever since they picked up on the last world cup. Personally, I think their strategy is horrible. I understand WHY they have British commentators talking about British football/soccer, but as an American, I can't understand half of what they're talking about. Not just the terminology (pitch vs field, club vs team, match vs game, etcetera) but the accents as well (there are two different English accents and that old Scottish guy who has, of course, a very thick Scottish accent).
I understand WHY they do it, but if you want to introduce European football (/soccer) to American audiences, do it in a way that is palatable to American audiences.
In 2006, they had one of their announcers commentate on the World Cup, but he had NO experience with calling the games. It was embarrassing. So, after 2010, they went to the extreme on the other side of the pendulum.
The US has had major league professional soccer (/football) for 20 years now. There have to be PLENTY of commentators out there that American audiences would find easy to digest who actually have a clue what they're talking about. Hearing an American voice using soccer (/football) terms like match, club, and pitch would be perfectly acceptable, and a great way to ease Americans into the world's most popular sport.
But ESPN is stupid.

Anyhow... in terms of ratings... soccer (/football) gets about half of the TV viewership of NHL (hockey) games in the US. Roughly a quarter million people watch each regular season MLS game on TV. That's not bad. It's NOWHERE near the NFL, which is an ASTOUNDING 20 million TV viewers per game. If you look at a list of the Top 32 most-watched TV programs in the US last fall, 31 of them were NFL games.

But still... if a quarter million TV viewers per game and the official attention of the #1 sports channel qualifies as "given any attention" then yes, they definitely are.

And to qualify some things I said above... I live in the US, and I don't actually have a problem using correct sports terminology, I'm just pointing out that the terminology combined with the accents makes it tough for Americans to consume. And this is coming from a huge soccer (/football) fan who is fond of British/European cultures and usually has no problem with accents (tho a thick Scottish accent... whew!)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > ZeniMax vs. Oculus and Carmack on VR Tech
25. Re: ZeniMax vs. Oculus and Carmack on VR Tech May 1, 2014, 17:09 yonder
 
Quboid wrote on May 1, 2014, 16:35:
I don't think the patent thing is necessarily BS. Carmack does acknowledge that ZeniMax owns the code that he wrote, he's not trying to deflect from that. This suggests that he has written new code that has similarities to ZeniMax's old code, similarities that would be in breach of a patent had there been one.

Are Carmack and Oculus VR using code that he wrote while at ZeniMax, or are they using code that's very similar to code that he wrote at ZeniMax? I don't know what the legal position is if it's the later.

Luckily FB has some experience with the concept of writing "similar code" after the coder has left a partnership.

All that aside... this is going to be ugly, and it's going to be interesting.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Minecraft Realms Launches in North America
3. Re: Minecraft Realms Launches in North America Apr 24, 2014, 19:15 yonder
 
Okay I'm sorry but I don't understand the specifics of this list. I see... a bunch of Western European nations, some Eastern European-ish nations that are coming along nicely, some financially strong and neutral nations (UAE and Caymans), some non-European nations with strong ties to the UK, and tons of anonymous regions inside countries.

I also see Canada, Mexico, and "North America"

Did they just replace "United States" with "North America"? Or do they mean all of NA? If so, why list Mexico and Canada?

And yes I am American and have some personal bias in wanting to know if my nation is specifically served but seriously, that's a weird list.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite Dangerous Premium Beta
13. Re: Elite Dangerous Premium Beta Apr 10, 2014, 11:55 yonder
 
This site's community is usually utterly awesome and consistent (with a few consistent exceptions), but this utterly baffles me.

$150 and $295 for early (i.e. test) access and hardly a scoff? Two weeks ago, GalCiv3 offered Early Access for 100 bucks that guaranteed you 100% of future DLC and the response was nearly universal disdain.

Sure, the only person who commented on both seems to be Rigs (I really didn't bother doing a full comparison) who *IS* consistent. But still... where are all the GalCiv3 naysayers here?

That being said, I truly wish I could afford this. Oh well... I've been waiting for this game for 30 years. I can wait a few more months.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Mobilization
25. removed Feb 26, 2014, 17:59 yonder
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Feb 27, 2014, 06:51.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > THIEF System Requirements - Mantle Support via Post-Release Patch
26. Re: THIEF System Requirements - Mantle Support via Post-Release Patch Feb 23, 2014, 23:49 yonder
 
Cutter wrote on Feb 23, 2014, 23:05:
Umbragen wrote on Feb 23, 2014, 21:07:
Damn, I just bought a new system and I'm already dangerously close to the recommended specs. Did I miss something?

Why would you buy something that low end to begin with? if you can't afford it all in one shot, do it piecemal.

I've actually never understood piecemeal computer building. Unless you're buying a piece on mega-sale, then it's going to cheaper in the future. Just save up and buy it all at once. This is assuming, of course, that you're talking about a whole new rig and not just an upgrade or two, which is what I'm pretty sure Umbragen was talking about.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
159 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo