User comment history
< Newer [ 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 ] Older >
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
 |
| 5. |
Re: Mouse |
Jul 21, 2008, 13:05 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
| If the mouse goes extinct at all then it's more likely going to be replaced by those fingertip sensor thingies that were recently shown off at some event I can't quite recall. But touchscreens and facial recognition surely won't cause the mouse to go extinct. They might replace the mouse in some very specific applications or devices where relatively little user input is required like mobile entertainment or home entertainment apps/devices (music/movie players of all sorts) but other than that it ain't gonna happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Command & Conquer 3: Kane's Wrath SecuROM Fix |
|
| 14. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 18, 2008, 18:51 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
This is the reason why almost every game I've picked up in the last year has been either through Steam or Impulse (formerly SDC). Online authentication probably works better at preventing piracy, and you don't have to worry about shit like SecuROM.
Errr... there are quite a number of Steam games that come with additional SecuROM protection. Get a frickin' clue, por favor. kthx.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Fallout 3 Movie |
|
| 62. |
Re: yuck |
Jul 16, 2008, 17:36 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
CJ Parker, your homosexual tendencies aside, have you ever played Fallout1 or 2?
What homosexual "tendencies"??? I R TEH KING OF TEH GHEYL0000RRRRRDDDZZZZ, d00d!!!11!!!one!11
To answer the question: Yes, I played FO1 and 2 and thought that they sucked overall. They had some neat aspects like the many different choices about how to approach a situation but in the end I felt that the negatives outweighed the positives. I can definitely understand how or why some people like the games but to refer to them as the ultimate in CRPG'ing is absofuckinglutely ridiculous in my not so humble opinion. They might have been pretty good games if you can deal with the stuff that sucked but best RPGs ever? Come on. Get a life or something. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > EA to Publish Rage |
|
| 46. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 15, 2008, 17:52 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Seriously, why must every game strive for photorealism?
An id game MUST be leading the pack in the gfx department. It is their major trademark. Blow people's socks off with uber visuals.
Asking the question you asked is kinda like asking "Seriously, why must every Blizzard game have multiplayer?" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
|
| 2. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 15, 2008, 17:47 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
No, Intel is not really getting SLI. The real story here is that nVidia will not be making a chipset for the Bloomfield CPU (Nehalem). That's why they offered the nForce-200 SLI chip to the board manufacturers so that the board makers can now produce X58 boards with SLI support. There hasn't been a direct licensing agreement between Intel and nVidia regarding SLI technology though.
The initial rumors that Intel got SLI and nVidia got QuickPath in exchange turned out to be false (at least as of now). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Tech Bits |
|
| 3. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 15, 2008, 05:36 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Wow GTX260 for 300 buck! Time for a new computer...
I'm not an ATI fanboi or anything like that but it needs to be said that the GTX 260 pretty much sucks. It offers only a fairly minor performance gain over the 8800 GTS 512MB but is a) expensive (even at the new price) b) drawing power like mad and c) noisy as hell when it switches to 3D mode. I was interested in buying one myself but after doing some research I figured that I'll wait for nVidia's 55nm offerings (rumored codename GT200b) that will hopefully be less power hungry, cooler and more silent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Dragon Age: Origins Announcement |
|
| 27. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 14, 2008, 19:53 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
A little game called Mass Effect got in the way of them finishing up Dragon Age. That's why it's not finished yet. Now that ME is done, a full dev team can be devoted to Dragon Age now.
Bullshit. ME was just scheduled to be released first. That's all. BioWare has at least 400+ employees. They have several fully staffed teams working on games for all sorts of platforms (currently ME DLC and an add-on/sequel, the Sonic RPG, Dragon Age and the MMO in Austin... just to name the known or most prominent titles).
Dragon Age coming out after ME most certainly has absolutely nothing to do with a "full dev team" (or lack thereof). A full team has been working on DA ever since it was first revealed. BioWare has gotten seriously HUGE over the years. Get a clue, please. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Tech Bits |
|
| 12. |
Re: DirectX 11 |
Jul 14, 2008, 09:26 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Ah, yes, those 32-bit limitations... uh, wait, what limitations are we talking about again? How many games actually take advantage of 64-bit CPUs? From the benchmarks I've seen, 64-bit Vista gives the same (or lesser) framerates as 32-bit XP so obviously games aren't really taking advantage of 64-bit CPUs. And future proofing? As you said yourself, most PC games are console ports and consoles are way behind PC hardware. It will be a long, long time before 64-bit becomes a necessity for games.
You really don't get it, do you? So here it is slooowly for you again: Windows XP is a 32-bit operating system. Like any and all 32-bit operating systems (this is not a Windows issue) it is limited to 4096MB of RAM = 4GB of memory.
Due to certain system components reserving memory, the real, useable RAM of a 32-bit Windows XP machine usually ends up being 3.2 to 3.5GB of RAM. That's the maximum amount of RAM to EVER be useable in Windows XP (32-bit).
We are already seeing games today that benefit from larger amounts of RAM (like Crysis in high resolution). It is only a matter of time (and not a long time span at that) until 32-bit operating systems just won't cut it no more.
In a year or two you will need to have a 64-bit OS to be able to play the latest games because you will need a system and an OS that can support 4GB of RAM and upwards.
That's why it makes sense to develop DirectX 11 with 64-bit OSs in mind. Games of the future will require DirectX 11. Games of the future will also require 4GB of RAM and more. The only logical conclusion here is to NOT develop DirectX 11 for Windows XP but to primarily target Vista 64 and Windows Seven 64 instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Tech Bits |
|
| 7. |
Re: DirectX 11 |
Jul 13, 2008, 20:42 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
A large reason why DX10 failed to gain mainstream acceptance was because it was Vista-exclusive.
The much larger reason is missing developer support due to the fact that no current gen console supports DirectX 10. Since most titles are multi-/cross platform titles, it wouldn't make any sense for a dev to put a lot of effort into the version that is eventually going to sell the lowest amount of copies anyway (= the PC version).
Since the lead platform for most games is the 360 or the PS3, it simply makes more sense to just port the game over to the PC without slapping additional DirectX 10 features on top of it. Additional DirectX 10 crap just costs extra time and money.
Sure, some devs did it anyway (Bioshock, Crysis et al) but let's face it: The DirectX 10 support was in many cases very limited in scope (just slightly better looking smoke or fog in Bioshock IIRC) and it was mostly just slapped on for marketing reasons.
I don't think that a larger Vista install base would change this dramatically. PC sales are lagging far behind console sales anyway so the resources of a dev/publisher will always be directed at consoles first and the (DirectX 9) PC port second.
With that in mind, it obviously makes more sense to have DX11 be compatible with XP.
No, it doesn't at all. Plain retarded statement.
Windows XP with its 32-bit limitations (yes, I know there's a 64-bit version of XP but we all know how widely accepted and supported that is) is about as future-proof as Pam Anderson's boobs.
The only thing that makes any real sense is to develop DirectX 11 for current operating systems and those of the future that truly support 4GB+ of memory, i.e. for 64-bit OSs.
It obviously makes more sense to look ahead, rather than to look back in that regard because games of the future just won't work with "only" a max of 4GB of RAM (or actually 3.2 to 3.5GB of useable RAM depending on your rig) as is the case with XP.
Well, and ahead lies further improvements to Vista 64-bit and eventually Windows Seven 64-bit in a couple of years. Windows XP is the past already despite its large user base.
But just wait until 4GB+ of memory becomes the norm. That's when XP will be dropped and forgotten about faster than you can say "Vista sucks".
Unless you like playing old games. Or use old hardware. Or dislike excessive and annoying security measures.
Plain retarded again. He said "if you got a big machine...". Why would anyone with a big machine like playing old games or use old hardware (actually "big machine" and "old hardware" = mutually exclusive)? Learn to read and think, k?
Besides, you could always dual boot with XP for old games and old hardware if you really wanted to. And the "excessive and annoying security measures" can easily be customized to a non-excessive (but still secure) and non-annoying degree by just about anyone who isn't such a complete n00b as you appear to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Flagship Loses IPs, Closes |
|
| 48. |
Re: ... |
Jul 13, 2008, 09:46 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
I question the reason as to how you believe that this game was doomed to begin with. It was a very promising title driven by some of the (then) well known people.
Yep. Extreeeemely promising, dude. I mean the whole concept of *gasp* a DEMON PORTAL that spawns critters from HELL unto EARTH sounded so motherfucking uber original from the start that it is really hard to believe that this mother of all video gaming concepts actually failed. Add to that the really crappy graphics and animations plus the really intriguing subscription model and you really gotta wonder why no one bought this game. WTF is up with people these days??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Flagship Loses IPs, Closes |
|
| 47. |
Re: Whatever |
Jul 13, 2008, 09:40 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
lol@Flagship
Glad to see these losers exit the video game market. Now if you would please be so kind as to fucking retire, Mr. Roper, instead of polluting another poor company with your retarded corpse. kthxbye. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Activision Blizzard Approved |
|
| 12. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 9, 2008, 08:09 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Vivendi acquired Activision. Vivendi contributed their Vivendi Universal Games (VU Games including Blizzard, Sierra et al) unit to the merger plus $1.7bn in cash. Activision just contributed themselves and their shareholders received a nice, fat 31% premium for selling out.
At the end of the whole deal, Vivendi received a 52% (controlling) stake in the newly formed Activision Blizzard.
They dropped the Vivendi Universal Games brand for Blizzard since Blizzard is undoubtedly the more recognizable, more established and more reputable brand.
So, since Vivendi is controlling the whole thing, Blizzard are effectively keeping their old bosses since they have been a part of Vivendi/VU Games for years now. Nothing's really changing for them. If anything, it's Activision that might get fucked up as a result of the acquisition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Warcraft III Patches |
|
| 42. |
Re: No subject |
Jul 1, 2008, 19:51 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Another stupid question: It's safe to delete off the install folders once the install is done right? IE there's no reason the game should need them (once the full game is installed)?
Nope. You need to keep the folders just like if you own the CDs you need to whack off on them in regular intervals. Obviously with the folders it's more convenient since you just need to whack off looking at the folders instead of actually whacking off onto them. Cool, huh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Diablo III Announced |
|
| 84. |
Re: ... |
Jun 28, 2008, 19:16 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
The isometric style with modern graphics tech is looking gorgeous in Diablo 3, and I think would've been much better suited to Fallout 3 than its current "pandering to the weak-minded masses" over-the-shoulder view.
Errmmm... isometric is WAY more "pandering to the weak-minded masses" than OTS or FPP. OTS or FPP usually cause motion sickness in people who are not into (hardcore) gaming. Isometric also alleviates orientation and is easily the most accessible perspective since all you have to do is point and click like a tard.
The success of dumbed down isometric tard games like Diablo or Baldur's Gate is proof enough of that.
Sorry but please try again to come up with a retarded bullshit reason to hate on Bethesda and FO3.
Diablo is continuing in the isometric tradition because it is a game aimed at the "weak-minded" masses.
Fact. True story. You = pwned + STFU, n00b. kthxplzdiebye. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > E3 to Show Games! |
|
| 15. |
Re: Doom4 |
Jun 28, 2008, 06:43 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
I think you missed my point. I don't care about the risk. I'm not a shareholder or a publisher. I'm a gamer.
Yup. A gamer who doesn't even buy games but just torrents them all. Why don't you just STFU? As someone who isn't even spending any money on games, you are about as irrelevant as it gets. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Blizzard: Another Day, Another Tease |
|
| 38. |
Re: No subject |
Jun 24, 2008, 19:25 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Blizz's name for their codename for their unannounced project is Hydra. Hydra's supposedly have 3 heads
Hydrae in mythology usually have nine heads, not three. You uneducated, burger-munching, basement-dwelling, American dumbfuck console zombie! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
1152 Comments. 58 pages. Viewing page 30.
< Newer [ 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
