Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Daniel

Real Name Daniel   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname CJ_Parker
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 11, 2006, 23:49
Total Comments 2583 (Senior)
User ID 24408
User comment history
< Newer [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ] Older >

News Comments > Divinity: Original Sin II Announced
18. Re: Divinity: Original Sin II Announced Aug 12, 2015, 11:37 CJ_Parker
Kajetan wrote on Aug 12, 2015, 11:25:
Hmmm, didnt they say last year that they dont want another Crowdfunding for the next game, because they got enough monies?

Sort of but not quite... if you want to read up on it check Swen's blog (in chronological order from top to bottom):

- Thoughts after releasing Divinity:Original Sin and what comes next
- The halo effect
- Returning to Kickstarter
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Divinity: Original Sin II Announced
17. Re: Divinity: Original Sin II Announced Aug 12, 2015, 11:32 CJ_Parker
HAHA so they believe that people have forgotten about all of the no show broken promises? Well, not everyone is suffering from Alzheimer's disease. I've backed part 1 at collector's edition level but with D:OS II I'm going to wait for the Enhanced Edition.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Dragon Age: Inquisition Patch Notes
15. Re: Dragon Age: Inquisition Patch Notes Aug 11, 2015, 08:37 CJ_Parker
InBlack wrote on Aug 11, 2015, 03:12:
After playing the Witcher3 how can anyone go back to this single player MMO turd?

^ this

I've only played the free trial of DAI but compared to The Witcher?

Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
124. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 10, 2015, 20:23 CJ_Parker
dsmart wrote on Aug 10, 2015, 06:11:
In this GC2015 video, in which he states Social Module (end of Aug), Star Marine (end of Sept), Multi-Crew (end of Oct). He never mentions anything about SQ42 or the PU, or even AC 2.0.

But he does... I originally said starting at "around 08:30" and, OK, I was off by six seconds as the question starts at 08:24.

At 08:45: "We're gonna have iterations of the PU by the end of this year."
At 08:52: "And then towards the end of 2016 we're hoping to have the full PU working and functioning. That's still our plan so..."

^ Note how he said FULL persistent universe, too! The only thing he dodged was Squadron 42. Also, AFAIK multicrew (end of October) is essentially the same as AC 2.0. The main feature of AC 2.0 was always going to be multiplayer ships. If there was a change of numbering then I'm not aware of it but until a few weeks back that's how it was. Multicrew = AC 2.0.

@Vall Forran: So you're saying the missile just flies through the drone as if it was not there? Huh? Wasn't one of CR's favorite pastimes always boasting about the whole physical super-accuracy of the simulation? Like to the point where every space dust particle is physically correct? But a missile just passes through a drone if it does not have a lock on it? Wow.

This comment was edited on Aug 10, 2015, 20:29.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
6. Re: Morning Tech Bits Aug 10, 2015, 14:18 CJ_Parker
Creston wrote on Aug 10, 2015, 10:58:
On the gaming front, I found strange input lag in StarCraft II. It wasn't hugely noticeable but scrolling and commands took slightly longer than they did in Windows 8.1, just enough that in a competitive game it felt sluggish.
After a quick Google search I found a number of users complaining about the same thing and all sources blamed Windows 10's Xbox application which is built into the OS and cannot be removed via conventional methods.
Despite never running this app or having an Xbox account to actually use it, it appears this was my problem. Fortunately, there's a Powershell command to disable the Xbox app and doing so eliminated the lag, allowing StarCraft II to play like it did on Windows 8.1. It was a disappointing discovery, but I'm glad it was relatively easy to overcome with some help from the Internet.

Yay, xbox app.

It is completely incredible that they have the balls to actually FORCE that fucking garbage on us.
This should be one of the Win10 install options: "Are you a retard and do you own a Xbox or have a Xbox account?" and then if you select you're not a retard then the ShitBox app should not even get installed in the first place. FUCK MICROSOFT.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Gatherings & Competitions
1. Re: Gatherings & Competitions Aug 10, 2015, 14:13 CJ_Parker
It is a VERY sad state of affairs for the gaming industry if that piece of complete fucking shit wins Game of Show. There does not seem to be an end to the decline.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Steam Top 10
17. Re: Steam Top 10 Aug 10, 2015, 14:09 CJ_Parker
Quinn wrote on Aug 10, 2015, 09:04:
A completionist shouldn't get pubished by being a completionist.

^ this

Level scaling discussions aside, they fuXX0red up the balancing, too. Properly done, the game should have "normal" difficulty (that is normal in regard to the chosen overall difficulty level) if you are a completionist and it should be challenging (i.e. nearly or even straight impossible on the higher difficulty levels) if you take shortcuts.
Why do people basically get rewarded for playing just straight through the story? That doesn't make any sense. Those people should be "punished" via a steeply increasing difficulty curve until they get the memo that "hey maybe I should not rush by every quest giving clown".
Ideally, CDP could also add an extra difficulty level which you can choose when starting a new game called "story mode" so people who really just want to play straight through the main plot could do so.
But a regular game/playthrough should be balanced in favor of completionists, i.e. always provide a decent challenge corresponding to the chosen difficulty level even if you do (almost) everything.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
108. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 9, 2015, 16:05 CJ_Parker
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Aug 9, 2015, 14:03:
As I've said before, the biggest omission was Squadron 42 - they announced delays to Arena Commander 2.0 and Star Marine yet nothing was said about Squadron 42, despite it supposedly being released this year. It's pretty obvious they're not going to meet that deadline and I think it will be nearer the end of 2016.

CR actually indirectly confirmed that Squadron 42 is still scheduled for the end of this year in this interview (near the end starting at around 08:30 or so).
He was asked whether the plan was still to have ~12 months gap between S42 and SC/PU and while he successfully tiptoed around specifically giving a date for S42 he did confirm that the PU is still scheduled for release at the end of 2016(!).
So since he did not deny the 12 months plan we can put 1 + 1 together and assume that S42 is at least in his world and mind still on schedule for late 2015.

To me this definitively confirms now that CR is either totally out of touch with reality or intentionally dangling carrot dates in front of backers to keep them hoping and especially pledging.
There is absolutely no way he can seriously believe they will launch the PU as promised with 100 systems at the end of next year so I'm more inclined to believe in the theory that he is intentionally misleading people.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > On Sale
2. Re: On Sale Aug 9, 2015, 15:26 CJ_Parker
Looking at my backlog, I ain't gonna have any "summer slump" until the summer of the year 2037. Or thereabouts.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
89. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 9, 2015, 02:23 CJ_Parker
Kosumo wrote on Aug 8, 2015, 22:36:
Lets just for a moment 'pretend' that they are true. What does the Chris Roberts fan club make of that?

I'm far from being a CR fan club member. Quite the opposite. Over the course of this whole SC endeavor I have turned from fan to "hater" but I believe that the allegations might be unfair and unwarranted.

First, Chris at least was wealthy for much of his life (if you google you will find he once owned a huge ranch near Austin etc.).
I don't know how much of his wealth was left back in 2012 when the SC campaign launched but it has always been my impressions that the so called "investors" that were supposed to cough up the remaining ~$20m in addition to the crowdfunding minimum of $2m were actually mostly him and maybe Erin.

So it seems entirely possible that he is paying jet trips, mansions, hookers etc. out of his private treasure chest.
Also, I see nothing wrong with him paying himself a reasonably juicy CEO salary. He should not go overboard, of course, and he should always respect the fact that he is paying himself, like the rest of his employees, from pledge money.
So I just hope that if he really uses private jets he actually pays them either from his pre-SC treasure chest OR from his CIG salary and does not use company funds. Or at least that he pays the difference between the economy class ticket and the jet out of his own pockets (still pledge money but indirect if it's his well deserved salary).

There is absolutely no reason to believe that Star Citizen is going to magically generate some sort of mass appeal among what the industry considers "mainstream gamers."

Well... have you ever even been to the official forums? I'm a very early backer, signed up on day one, citizen number <7600 and golden ticket holder and all that shit and I can tell you from first hand experience that the early audience was a very different one from the current audience.
There has been a HUGE shift towards the mainstream.
I could write a small essay but why bother? All you really need to do is visit the official forums and especially the question & answer section. Be prepared to facepalm. A lot.
There are many people who are absolutely expecting and even demanding a streamlined experience with lots of handholding and mainstream appeal.
There are also a lot of people who should simply not own a computer at all, let alone play games on it. Seriously.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Saturday Previews
12. Re: Saturday Previews Aug 8, 2015, 20:50 CJ_Parker
HAHAHA LOL @ Arse Fekkinya  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
59. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 8, 2015, 14:04 CJ_Parker
grudgebearer wrote on Aug 8, 2015, 10:49:
I think there's a lot of ill-placed belief in future sales of both Squadron 42, and whatever "Star citizen" turns out to be.

There's a reason that EA and the big studios aren't making games likes this, and it boils down to mass appeal. Some people here like games like this, and I sometimes enjoy games likes this, but as a whole the gaming community doesn't buy these games.

If you haven't backed this game already, you probably aren't going to until it is actually released or you aren't going to buy it at all, and when it is actually released, what are the sales numbers going to be like considering that the majority of people who want to play this game already backed it at an earlier stage?

So really...the only option for CIG is to keep producing ships, and now ship parts to be sold for real money in order to increase funds. The idea that this is going to take off, and every kid in America is going to put down his X-box controller, beg his parents to spend $3,000 on a gaming rig, and start living as "Star Citizens" is ridiculous.

The current business model is only sustainable by selling in-game items for cash, and considering the store existed way before the game, the store is the priority, and not the "game."

Yes and no.

Yes, if we would believe that the original vision for SC is still a thing, i.e. PC master race game, made for HOTAS, blablablah...

No, because it no longer is. The game has long been in a process of transformation to a game with more mass appeal. The whole purpose of the FPS module is more mass appeal (Mass Effect people etc.).
Then look at controller balance. The game is now 100% favoring mouse and keyboard and whenever they are presenting the game anywhere they are using console controllers. Anyone who believes they will do a 180 and make HOTAS the tool of choice needs to lay off the drugs.
Then there's a whole new opportunity now with Win 10 and streaming to the Xbone. It's a safe bet that this game will play very well with a controller.
As for hardware reqs... it's all just a matter of scaling. I'm sure you won't need a $3K rig just to play it at full HD on release (if they continue at this rate the game will probably play fine on ancient hardware when it comes out in 2020).

The casualization is in full effect. I agree that the store has no. 1 priority but after the project took off like a rocket and CR got a taste of the fame and the big bucks he is absolutely obviously interested in a MUCH wider appeal for this game. So I'd say it's clearly a double strategy... more mass appeal on the one side to draw in more people (and eventually sales if/when the game ever goes live) and on the other hand milk the core fans for all they are worth.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown
14. Re: Star Citizen Multi-Crew Shown Aug 7, 2015, 20:05 CJ_Parker
eRe4s3r wrote on Aug 7, 2015, 19:34:
Again not showing anything related to SQ42...

Not surprising in the least. Contrary to other developers who reveal the entire plot, the boss fight(s), the possible outcomes, every single key scene, you know, EVERYFUCKINGTHING in their pre-release trailers, CIG is finally doing at least this one thing totally right: No spoilers for Squadron 42. I thank them for that.

As for the MC demo, yeah, tech demo. I'll (maybe) be impressed if this works in a playable build of the game with many other gameplay systems in place and not under lab conditions at a gaming show where the whole purpose is just to show off some flashy shit. They've shown off more than a fair share of flashy shit these past (almost) three years. The time for some actual delivery has come...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Fallout 4: No Level Cap; Play Past the Ending
9. Re: Fallout 4: No Level Cap; Play Past the Ending Aug 6, 2015, 20:01 CJ_Parker
Translation: Fuck balancing. Let the modders do it!  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Interviews
28. Re: Evening Interviews Aug 6, 2015, 12:11 CJ_Parker
As for my personal preference I'd absolutely love a tactical shooter like Rogue Spear but that's not at all what we are getting with Star Marine.
CIG/CR originally promised slower gameplay (slower in reference to CoD, BF etc.) but that is nowhere to be seen in any of the videos. It is 100% run and gun with ridiculously poor animations given the budget and how they have boasted about mocap this, mocap that, mocap the bewbs bouncing and the penis dangling, everything, blabla...

Star Marine is another example of the many scope and target audience changes with this game. When CR got a taste of all the mucho dolares that kept coming his way, he realized that the original vision for Star Marine (slow, tactical etc.) would only appeal to a very limited demographic. So everything was shifted more towards mainstream compatibility and mass appeal.
To at least somewhat keep the promise, however, it looks like they are trying to cram some "tactical" features into the game. Features which any person with a brain and some taste in gaming can immediately identify as incompatible with the run&gun style.

And don't get me started on the totally overhyped "revolutionary" zero G. There is a reason it's not been done (often) before. The reason is it's slow, floaty, sucky, imprecise, dumb... anyone can hit a slow floating target. How do you make it fun? Do you slow down arm (weapon) movement and make it sucky and floaty so aiming becomes more challenging? Come on. It's just not going to be fun.
If you want to make zero G fun, you need to change genres, drop realism altogether and switch to a crazy fun shooter style like some of the original Q3A or UT mods/modes which had crazy fun low grav or zero G gameplay.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Quote of the Day
6. Re: Quote of the Day Aug 6, 2015, 11:54 CJ_Parker
Hm. Curious how that correlates with Phil Spencer's constant "everything is going to be so AWESOME and we have AWESOME stuff coming up for Windows 10 gaming".
In the meantime Kevin Unangst gets a bonus point for honesty while Phil Spencer gets to keep on wearing the "I'm a lying cockfag" t-shirt until MS prove they give a shit.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Interviews
25. Re: Evening Interviews Aug 6, 2015, 08:00 CJ_Parker
jdreyer wrote on Aug 6, 2015, 00:10:
Zor wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 22:50:
blah blah blah, they're taking too long so it's being done wrong and none of them have talent and it's all a scam and blah blah I'm impatient I don't want more I want less and quicker and I have noooooooooothing else to do with all my time but scream through my keyboard at the internet that game development I can actually take part of is a horrible and unexpectedly lengthy pile of crap I wish I had never touched blah blah...

Meanwhile, the actual takeaway from that article was this:
"We've seen what they've got coming up and you won't want to miss it."

Do we have more info on the FPS? I think from what I've seen so far, my main disappointment is: spaceships have pew-pew lasers, but the FPS has regular bullet guns. I'd much prefer even more futuristic weapons, even while the setting and zero-G stuff looked cool.

I completely agree. It is pretty clear that Roberts is just trying to completely appeal to the mainstream CoD, BF and CSGO demographic now. Remember the official poll on the weapon sights (with the retarded blur)? Those weapons and sights are supposed to be from the year 2943? Yeah. Right.
There is nothing futuristic about them at all. CIG is playing it extra safe in the name of the holy Dollar by trying to appeal to the mainstream pew pew gamers for MOAR MILLIONS.

And we're going to have to wait&see on the promised depth and complexity with regard to more "tactical" gameplay. I have serious doubts about the practical use of the suggested features like e.g. dragging a wounded team member to a safe spot. Who the fuck does that in multiplayer FPS? Right. No one.
Everyone takes care of themselves and why expose yourself and make yourself extra vulnerable to enemy fire by helping a team member if your time is much better spent on the offensive or defensive trying to find cover?
The only reason people heal others in BF is because it gives you upgrade points and not because of some tactical advantage. Heck, depending on the situation, the other guy might actually be much better off respawning on their squad leader than getting a heal/rez.

Roberts really sucks at game design that has nothing to do with the single player space parts. It is becoming increasingly clear that he has been out of the loop for a long time and that he has both, poor taste and poor experience with regard to competitive online play.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Elite Dangerous Horizons Announced
34. Re: Elite Dangerous Horizons Announced Aug 5, 2015, 19:20 CJ_Parker
SpectralMeat wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 14:46:
Bundy wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 14:30:
Yeah they wanted to not let you turret. I prefer Star Citizen's method to this, personally. In ED they gimped your ship. In SC they didn't, but if you keep spinning too quickly your vision gets blurry and you lose consciousness. I don't care for the flight system in ED. Regardless of their reasons. Even the nimble ships feel like you're flying a freight train. Just wasn't fun.
I much prefer ED flight model to SC.
SC just makes me frustrated and it feels like I am controlling a freecam not a space ship.

Anyways we'll see what Chris Roberts does until release but if they keep the flight model the way it is I won't be playing SC at all. Elite is way better imo, to each their own.

^ this

CIG is going to have to completely revamp their flight model to even come close to their self-proclaimed standard of wishing to become the BDSSE (best damn space sim ever).

Elite Dangerous may not appeal to everyone and certainly not to the exact same demographic as SC because it's two entirely different concepts but big kudos to Braben & co for nailing the spaceship part.
With my HOTAS Warthog (and a nice custom T.A.R.G.E.T profile) it is simply awesome from A to Z when you sit in your landing bay, go through the checklist and take off into the great wide open.
As you said, it feels like actually flying instead of playing Crysis in space.

At this point I have very little hope for SC in that regard. They probably just went with the wrong engine. Squadron 42 still has not officially been delayed so we must assume that S42 will launch with the current flight model by the end of this year. If S42 is delayed for improvements to the flight model then it will be a long delay because they are going to have to basically start from scratch to make it feel like flying a ship as in E:D or even like in CR's previous games.
All of the old space sims simply feel better than SC even if they're maybe not nearly as physically accurate (tho I actually have huge doubts about SC's *supposed* physical accuracy). But who really gives a shit about physics? Just make it fun already...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Wars Battlefront Trailer
9. Re: Star Wars Battlefront Trailer Aug 5, 2015, 12:35 CJ_Parker
Still doesn't say whether it's on rails or free movement. Looks like rails with some limited up/down/left/right to me. The lack of boasting free movement actually speaks volumes.

Anyway, this is only a discount buy at best since this will end up as bug, lag and DLC hell. Wake me up when the game *and* premium can be had for <= $20.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Elite Dangerous Horizons Announced
14. Re: Elite Dangerous Horizons Announced Aug 5, 2015, 12:18 CJ_Parker
Aero wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 11:45:
Planetary landings was always planned as the second expansion and was always going to cost $50. The alpha backers already paid for it ($150 for the initial release plus two major expansions--planetary landing and first person whatever). A lot of people seem surprised by this.

A minor correction: Backing at 150 (not $) which was called "Founder Level" actually only gave you "premium beta" access and not alpha access. You had to back at 200+ (not $) for alpha access.
Also, everyone who pledged at 80+ is getting a free expansion (I'm guessing that Horizons is free for those folks since it's the first real purchasable add-on) and everyone who pledged at 90+ is getting ALL expansions for free.

Personally I think that in the case of these expansions it's pretty cool of FD to actually honor and respect their early backers instead of going 'fuck 'em' and break promises left, right and center.
People who originally pledged at 90+ made quite a bargain compared to people who bought the game later (the lifetime expansion pass is now selling for 130).
It is nice of FD to honor the early commitment and to attribute real value to the display of trust of their early backers. That's exactly how it should be.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
2583 Comments. 130 pages. Viewing page 19.
< Newer [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ] Older >


Blue's News logo