User comment history
< Newer [ 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ] Older >
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
 |
| 3. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 19, 2008, 16:25 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
however it does fit in with man's infantile propensity to inflate his personal ego to a gargantuan, cosmic scope.. i mean, how could he ever be wrong about anything?
Speak for yourself, bitch. I'm never wrong about nothing.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Epic on MS Buyout Rumors: Only One Billion? |
|
| 31. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 19, 2008, 16:18 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
This is the fault of gamers how? The PC platform is not taken seriously by most developers and publishers, at least not seriously enough to sink some advertising dollars into promoting the PC versions.
It's the "fault" of gamers in so far as PC gaming has declined in favor of console gaming over the years. It's because people have voted with their wallet and told the gaming industry that "yes, we want to play games in the living room from the comfort of our couch, on our huge ass TVs and we love it that starting up a game is as simple as putting a CD/DVD in the drive". That's all there is to it, really. Gaming has made it to the mainstream over the years. It's no longer a bastion of fat, pimply-faced, retarded geeks who don't mind spending 16 hours a day at their desks at the office and at home. Gaming has made it to the normal folks who spend 8 hours at their desk at the office and then prefer to go couch potato style when they get home. Whether you (or I) like it how people, how the consumers like to lead their lives is irrelevant.
It's simply a fact that PC games are subject to total pwnage by console games at retail. That's why companies like Epic and id are making the switch now, too. People buy console games. It has nothing to do with advertising. It's just people's preferred choice of consuming their games. You will never get people to switch over to their desks for viewing movies or TV either.
Watching movies/TV from the living room couch just like playing games on consoles in the same fashion is a lifestyle choice, not just a quick trend that could be stopped via ads for the PC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > The Witcher Enhanced Edition |
|
| 73. |
Re: ... |
Feb 19, 2008, 07:39 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
True, Oblivion doesn't restrict where you can go by "fencing you in". But, that tradeoff comes at a horrible price.
No, it doesn't.
The price of that tradeoff is that Oblivion mostly just has a generic, empty, hollow world.
That's 100% grade A bullshit.
That you can go anywhere you want doesn't matter, because there is very little, if any, meaningful content anywhere in that world.
Yes there is. You just got to *gasp* actually put some effort into finding it instead of being railroaded towards it like in The Witcher where you just can't miss any content unless you intentionally choose to ignore it.
Oblivion feels like a dead, hollow world.
You already just said that like two seconds ago, you Alzheimer clown.
The Witcher feels like a living world because it develops all your relationships with the NPCs to do a fantastic job of making them seem like real persons. Oblivion doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of that.
Bullshit. Oblivion has a bunch of excellent NPCs with fleshed out backgrounds and naturally hordes of pretty generic filler NPCs that are simply needed in a world of that scope.
By The Witcher "fencing you in", it is able to create a game that chockfull of meaningful content.
You really do suffer from Alzheimer, don't you? Or is one of your parents a fucking parrot or something?
Every event feels like it's really happening, every person feels like a real living person. Everything in the world feels living.
No, it doesn't. The "fenced in" crap alone and the fact that your movement is very limited and the fact that the game has no Z-axis but that it is only pseudo-3D make it feel infinitely less believable than the world in many, many other games. Actually the world in The Witcher in many ways feels like a stage setup just made for the player to play on and in and around with. It feels artificial and generic.
The Witcher does have quick travel, by the way. So no, travel is never a chore in The Witcher.
Yes, it is.
Subquests in The Witcher are very complex and well done, not sure how Oblivion has any subquests that can even try to compete.
Quests like the one where you enter the world inside the painting in Oblivion are infinitely more creative and better done than any single quest in The Witcher.
As for saying the NPCs in Oblivion go off and do their own thing. That's a joke. All they do is ignore you when you kill people in front of them, or go stare at walls for 6 hours in a row, then go home. Here's some good links to show how the "brilliant" Oblivion NPCs go off and do their own thing. The Witcher doesn't have any immersion-breaking, ridiculous NPCs like this. The Witcher's NPCs are a billion times more believable than Oblivion's and don't behave in ludicrous, immersion-breaking ways as Oblivion's do.
100% grade A bullshit once again. Just because a couple of NPCs out of hundreds do some stupid shit every once in a while doesn't mean that all NPCs do stupid shit all of the time. Quite the opposite. Those AI glitches are a rather rare occurence. If you really would have actually played Oblivion instead of just watching "omg teh funnieeeh vidz" and repeating what your hardcore elitist RPG retard friends told you then you'd know it all to well, too.
In essence: Go. Fuck. Yourself. In. The. Ass. Long. Time.
Thank you,
Your friendly neighborhood bro C.J. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Intel, Microsoft, NVIDIA, AMD, and More in Gaming Alliance |
|
| 34. |
Re: First get all your ducks in a row... |
Feb 13, 2008, 10:38 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
| What a weak response, you dumbass. Did you even bother to check the link you posted, Mr. HardCore Retard? Those games are only X360 exclusive in so far as there will be no other console versions (PS3, Wii) for those games but they will all be coming to the PC sooner or later. Puuuhleazze. Get a fucking clue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Intel, Microsoft, NVIDIA, AMD, and More in Gaming Alliance |
|
| 31. |
Re: First get all your ducks in a row... |
Feb 13, 2008, 07:50 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
How can Microsoft sign exclusive deals with game developers to purposefully "not" make a PC version, and yet somehow they are going to help PC gaming. Cut me a break.
Exactly how many of those "exclusive" deals did Microsoft sign in your opinion? I count zero. Even games like Halo, Halo 2 and Mass Effect ended up on the PC eventually. So before you make any more dumbfuck accusations let's start listing all of the (without a doubt numerous) games that MS paid money for to not come to the PC. Weeeelll? I'm listening... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
|
| 18. |
Re: Dog Whisperer? |
Feb 8, 2008, 10:27 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
I have already listed my problems.
I have talked about them in great detail.
Yes. And you have unfortunately also talked about how great 98SE was which gives me a nice idea about your level of proficiency (or extreme lack thereof to be precise) so if your Vista probs are really irresolvable is most questionable.
Seriously, only a complete uber n00b would claim that 98SE was great.
For starters you couldn't just let 98SE run 24/7. You had to reboot the system frequently to fix the issues that would begin to show up after a while of use (apps crashing inexplicably, short freezes, blue screens etc). The more load you put on the system the more likely it became that you needed to reboot. You couldn't just open 10 instances of IE or Netscape for example. At least not for long. The system got clogged up quickly when you did a lot of things in parallel or simultaneously. Windows 98SE (like all previous incarnations of Windows with 16-bit leftovers) just wasn't made for real multitasking. That's also why you had to reinstall 98SE every few months because the system was very prone to getting clogged up and accumulated all sorts of junk over time that would lead to random issues from crashing to freezing to obscure error messages and so on.
Please. Get real and refresh your memory. 98SE was OK for its time but I'm sure glad that frequent reboots, blue screens and reinstalls have become a thing of the past thanks to XP. Honestly, 98SE sucks giant loads of ass compared to XP. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
|
| 6. |
Re: Dog Whisperer? |
Feb 7, 2008, 14:37 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
nin = smart
the rest of you = whiny little n00b cunts
Like anyone really gives a fuck whether you will or will not ever move on from XP. The future is inevitable. Unless you kill yourselves today you will have to deal with Vista and Windows 7 replacing XP. So STFU and deal with it or buy yourselves Linux and a pet penguin to make love to or whatever whiny little n00b cunts like you tards do when they're pissed off at the evuuuhhhl M1cR0$s0ft umpire... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Spaceships Ahoy - Sins of a Solar Empire |
|
| 51. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 5, 2008, 06:48 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
At least I am intelligent enough to bring forth a valid argument, like it or not.
Wow. Not only are you a dumbfuck, Surf, but also a pretentious, vain and delusional one. So you're actually on the dangerous side of retarded, huh?
Man, sure glad to know that you are such a little no life loser that you'll never be any real threat to people. Whew.
Final question: Why did you stop using the Jeryyk account? You (two? or your alter ego?) sound an awful lot alike in trying to make up bullshit justifications for stealing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Tiberium Gameplay Video |
|
| 4. |
Re: Hopefully much better than Renegade |
Jan 27, 2008, 13:47 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
I'm one of the few who thought that Renegade was pretty fun actually but this Tiberium game here looks seriously underwhelming. There was absolutely nothing special shown in that movie. If that is all they got then it looks like it's gonna be one of those OK-ish FPS games that will score an average of 8/10 in reviews and that will be forgotten about faster than you can say "EA suX".
I guess it might just maybe get some appreciation from the console crowd (the Halo 3 victims) but I don't think it will trigger much more than a yawn fest from PC gamers who could choose from dozens upon dozens of mediocre FPSs if they really wanted to play another one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Saturday Previews |
|
| 2. |
Re: No subject |
Jan 26, 2008, 20:33 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Because it's the preview of a content update to LOTRO: Shadows of Angmar, you dumbass. You could've found that out by, you know, just following the link to check for yourself. Sheesh. What a concept, huh?
And not sure what you mean by "original LOTRO". The LOTRO that is covered in the article and that was released last year was at some point called Middle Earth Online but ever since the name change to LOTRO it has always carried the "Shadows of Angmar" subtitle.
Got that? Good. Here's two dollars. Now please piss off and buy yourself a BIG bag of clues. kthxplzdielol!!!!111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crysis versus Cheaters |
|
| 10. |
Re: No subject |
Jan 15, 2008, 14:35 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
I have friends in BF2 and 2142 that love hacks and never get caught.
So... why do you have gay friends? Oh wait, nevermind. U R TEH GHEY AMIRITE LOL??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Codemasters Announcement Coming |
|
| 13. |
Re: Yet another subpar MMO? |
Jan 15, 2008, 09:03 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Codemasters MMOs dont have the most stellar track record, and in fact they had very little to do with LOTRO.
That Big Mickey Mouse dude is prolly from Europe where Codemasters is the publisher for LOTRO. So they do have quite a lot to do with LOTRO actually but all the high level decisions that really matter are, of course, made by Turbine (and Vivendi, was it?) so that Codemasters can indeed not be credited for the game's success in any way. I would agree with the impression that at least the MMO division of Codemasters are a bunch of zero skill faggots. All they have ever pumped out are cheap, crappy, lame, low budget Asian MMOs that went from subs-based to free in no time due to zero consumer interest. They suck. A lot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Tech Bits |
|
| 10. |
Re: The Crysis Hardware Experiment. |
Jan 14, 2008, 06:03 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
256mb cards worthless? Not according to my ATI 3850. It was a WONDERFUL card for its money. Sure I dont run AA but since I run at native on my LCD monitor then it isnt too much of a problem. I turn shadows off and run at medium/custom settings.
looking good so far
You, Sir, are a sick, sick man with no taste whatsoever. Or you just need a new pair of glasses or something... how the fuck would I know? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Tech Bits |
|
| 7. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 24, 2007, 12:59 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
You make this sound like a good thing CJ. That the gap is negligible now. When you release a new product like Vista, it should never be a step back.
Microsoft screwed the pooch on this release. "Check out this great new OS. To get DX 10 you NEED it! And we have a new feature, games for windows. Its the greatest." One year later its performance compared to XP is negligible?
No thanks.
Dude, I generally agree with that but...
1) It isn't exactly Mickeysoft's fault that ATI and nVidia (especially the latter) took so long to get their shit together.
2) Even if Vista outperformed XP by +20% or +50% or *gaaasp* a whooping +5616514% it wouldn't even fucking matter because for the most part consoles are setting the pace for how well games can and may perform. And for the small number of PC exclusives PC hardware is the limit. What I'm trying to say is that it is not exactly right to expect of an OS to be a performance booster. It's just the OS after all. The performance in games (strictly on OS level) did not improve from Win 95 to 98 to 2K/XP either. It's always the peripheral stuff like hardware, drivers and DirectX versions etc that's setting the pace. Right now one of the big problems is that *genuine* DirectX 10 features are way ahead of their time. The hardware to run *real* DirectX 10 stuff at reasonable framerates just isn't available yet.
All of this will only change when the next gen consoles (X360/PS3/Wii successors with easy portability from console to DirectX 10.x/11.x PC) are released. Right now we're stuck with DirectX 9 due to the console - PC relationship. That's why no one has even begun to take advantage of the potential of DirectX 10. And why would devs/publishers bother anyway? The PC market is pretty much negligible compared to consoles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Tech Bits |
|
| 4. |
Re: Nothing wrong with Vista's performan |
Dec 24, 2007, 08:23 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Is this really all down to drivers?
It would seem so. Look at the scores. XP only performs much better when no Anti-Aliasing (AA) is involved. As soon as AA is turned on, the difference becomes totally negligible or Vista outperforms XP even (NFSPS). That reeks of a driver issue of some sort. It would have been interesting to see ATI scores next to these. ATI may have the shittier hardware at the moment but their Vista drivers have been quite a bit better than nVidia's crap from day one of Vista. There are enough benchmarks of ATI vs nVidia on a Vista machine to be found on the web though. Just check it out. The former performance lead of XP has become totally insignificant due to better drivers. It's actually been like that for a few months already. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Canadian Forces: Direct Action SWAT 4 Mod |
|
| 5. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 11, 2007, 07:44 |
CJ_Parker |
|
|
Word is this really is just a training tool and is as much fun as going to the dentist.
Dude, going to the dentist can be a fucking HELLUVA lot of fun. That is if your dentist has the same huge-titted assistants that mine has. Muahahahahahahahahaaaaaa... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
1151 Comments. 58 pages. Viewing page 33.
< Newer [ 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
