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 Cram

Real Name Cram   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Cram
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On Apr 22, 2006, 05:10
Total Comments 722 (Apprentice)
User ID 24692
 
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 > 20 Years of Blizzard
30. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 23:51 Cram
 
Yifes wrote on Mar 8, 2011, 23:00:
Real stuff though, mind you; splitting Starcraft 2 apart, dropping lan support or selling horses on Wow doesn't count.

Again, the same old retarded arguments that never held any water. Yes man, JRR Tolkien is a total dick for splitting LOTR apart into 3 books. And the same with Star Wars, and every trilogy ever made.

It's difficult trying to have a respectful debate with those that have such a immense sense of entitlement, as well as the inability to support anything they're saying.

I can't fathom how Blizzard supporting one of their franchises with two guaranteed expansions is an issue with anyone. Like Yifes said, it's ok if LotR or SW is split up, but it's unacceptable if SC2 is. I don't get it. What if there had been three campaigns in the original release and then no expansions, that was it. The same people would now be upset about the complete lack of expansions to the game and then say things like, for example, "Activision moved all the SC2 people to Titan instead of making new content for SC2 so Titan can come out faster and Activision can make lots of $" On top of that, these same people would be further upset about how much longer SC2 would have taken to be released had it contained three equally sized campaigns at release. SC2 would still be in development this very moment if that had been the case.

I already expressed my disappointment with the LAN issue, and I don't even own or play the game. All I was trying to say was that there is no way to confirm Activision was responsible for that decision. In ones opinion they may think Activision was the cause, but there is no way to know that for sure. For Microtransactions, like the horse I mentioned, Blizzard is simply filling a demand for novelties. The demand exists and is huge. People with $$$ get irrelevant bonus stuff that makes them happy, Blizzard profits which makes its stake/shareholders happy and simultaneously in no way is their integrity or quality design philosophies compromised.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
22. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 07:21 Cram
 
Stop, don't feed the trolls Cram....don't feed the trolls.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
20. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 07:17 Cram
 
Go ahead and edit that mess of a post there Luke.
I don't need to re-read my entire previous post, I know what I said.

Oh, I do see there is some irrelevant new sentence added somewhere in that mess. Interesting one, considering I specifically stated I have several massive issues of my own with Blizzard that piss me off to no end.

By the way; English, do you speak and can you write it?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
18. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 07:02 Cram
 
InBlack wrote on Mar 8, 2011, 06:04:
Well said Cram. Although I too have deep reservations about Activision. I just dont trust them to keep their promise of "hands off approach" with Blizzard. As soon as WoW's bottom line starts dropping off (and its bound to happen, sooner or later people will get tired of the same old thing) they will start to meddle.

We'll all move to Titan.
I do admit that, at this time, it is impossible to in any way predict what Activisions meddling/involvement may be in that one (Titan). For the sake of my arguments, I speak only of what has happened until the present (from 20 years ago to today). You may very well be correct, and Blizzard may shortly 180 on us. They, however, have not yet done so as others seem to think due to the Activision merger.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
16. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 06:46 Cram
 
That's a matter of opinion. Blizzard innovated. Activision Blizzard just improve upon the previous.

Blizzard didn't start improving upon the previous after they merged with Activision. When did Blizzard innovate beforehand?

Starcraft set the bar. Then Diablo 2 set the bar. Then Warcraft 3 set the bar. Then World of Warcraft set the bar.


It can be argued Diablo was just an improvement from Ultima and a handful of other games beforehand. Diablo was not the first of its kind. Darkstone and Revenent, despite coming slightly later, were a far greater source of innovation in the genre then Diablo was at that time, and to be honest that is not saying much since did neither of those two games innovate much beyond graphics and new system or two. Starcraft? Ideas stolen and improved upon from Command and Conquer and a handful of other games, who no doubt got their ideas from other games before that, just in a different setting albeit a vast amount of improvements, but not innovative at all. How did Diablo 2 set any bar from previous games in the genre? Skill trees had already been done a couple years before. Nothing else to discuss there. How did Warcraft 3 set any bar over WC1 and 2? It was, to some (not everyone) an improvement over the previous two games. To those others, from what I remember, it was actually a step backwards.

Now WoW is a touchy subject because of how successful it became. How do you argue anything against this glorious empire right?

I personally think it ONLY improved upon Everquest and a handful of other MMO's of the time. It also brought a recognized IP into the fray. I do not see any innovations in Vanilla WoW compared to the MMO's before it. At all. It was just an unbalanced a level grinding mmo as any other before it, that thanks to a massive budget and excellent team it eventually received decent end/game content and subsequently very well developed expansions and support. Expansions that, compared to other similarly priced expansions in the genre, offers far more polished content and experiences. Again, not saying too much since it's all an unbalanced mess just like most other MMO's.

Starcraft set the bar.
Starcraft 2 did not set the bar.

What were you expecting? Starcraft 1 was and for all I know still is one of the most played games in the RTS Capital of South Korea. It was the pinnacle of RTS genre perfected (and not through any form of innovation). Why would Blizzard reformulate the sequel to something that has already been proven right? If you were expecting some sort of revolution, that was on you and in no way is Blizzard at fault. You're disappointed in your own self-mislead expectations. They did exactly what they wanted to do with Starcraft 2 and they did it right and I say that as a non-RTS player.

Maybe I've just tired of RTS games in general, and Diablo 3 will do it for me, but that their first major release since the merger has turned me off definitely has me thinking that the company is no longer what it was.

I see nothing that shows their first major release would have been any different merger or not. From a business standpoint, it works. From a gamers standpoint, it works. SC2 was an excellent complete release, sans LAN support which I agree kinda blows but I don't see how Activision would be to blame there, and its expansions look to improve the storyline and gameplay. You are the only one that may have set the expectation that you should have gotten three massive campaigns at release of SC2.

In an era where single player portion of games are 4-5 hours long, SC2 was far beyond that. Its multiplayer is again proving timeless. None of this came from innovation, but from support and improvements in the genre and the IP.

I will concede my argument if you can list and prove what Blizzard has done to innovate the respective genres they've developed games in. Forcing MMO developers to develop perfected games with huge end game content at release in order to be at all successful, fyi, is not an innovation. In the last few posts, it may come off that I've both defended and attacked Blizzard. I respect the hell out of them, despite being extremely pissed off at how they've handled SC2 and D3 with massive pre-release information drawn out over years etc. I stand firm, however, that Activision has yet to do anything to degrade Blizzards integrity in any way over the last three years. And I despise Bobby K.

How about Micro-transactions? Hah, no one is forcing you to buy that flying star horse for 25 bucks, nor does it give you any advantage. No matter what money grubbing things you think you've seen to shake your fist in Activisions direction, it has not given anyone the advantage for having money, effected their integrity, quality or gaming social responsibility in the products themselves.

Blizzard is the same Blizzard they were last year, three years ago, 10 years ago and 20 years ago. It's your own self-created expectations that have let you down if anything.

This comment was edited on Mar 8, 2011, 07:06.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Alice: Madness Returns GDC Trailer
8. Re: Alice: Madness Returns GDC Trailer Mar 8, 2011, 05:38 Cram
 
I enjoyed the trailer; it's enough to keep me interested till June.

I did get, for the first time in awhile, a consolized feeling from some of the battle scenes. This may just be in my head, and I don't say consolized in a negative connotation like others may. For example, I love Thief 3 on the PC, despite an entire of legion of people saying it's a consolized and a piece of crap (I just don't get that at all...Go Shalebridge Cradle!)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
13. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 05:15 Cram
 
Actually, no, it didn't. Certainly not Starcraft 2 at any rate. Despite being a day one purchase, it didn't do anything for me, and while I may be in the minority here, others will no doubt agree. I might be wrong, but I get the feeling that most of those who have spent a significant amount of time with Starcraft 2 either really didn't play much of the first, or were just hoping for a high definition version of it.

Nothing to do with, and you'll have an impossible time proving to me it was, Activision; the issue I was tackling.

The WoW expansions have been about milking what's already been established. It's just more of the same, and for me, that's largely the problem. They're not trying anything new, and they're not setting the bar again. Which is fine, if that's what floats your boat, but I was hoping for something new.

Nothing to do with, and you'll have an impossible time proving to me it was, Activision; the issue I was tackling. This is what MMO expansions do, period.

Here's hoping we get that with Diablo 3, but to be honest, I won't be holding my breath. Not now.

What I'm about to say has been said by a dozen other people on this site, and thousands elsewhere. Blizzard does NOT innovate. They improve upon the previous. To what extent may be a matter of opinion.

Diablo 3 will be Diablo 1 and 2, HD'd with a couple new things. That's what I'm expecting and TBH that's what I want. I love the Diablo universe and I absolutely don't need Diablo 3 to go bad shit insane with new ideas and innovations. To have EVER expected anything else, those were expectations you made NOT what Blizzard made for you. To be disappointed with that is to be disappointed with Blizzard in general (all 20 years of Blizzard), not to be disappointed with Activation's involvement (again the issue I was tackling). Blizzard improves upon, they do not innovate.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 20 Years of Blizzard
10. Re: 20 Years of Blizzard Mar 8, 2011, 04:01 Cram
 
Paketep wrote on Mar 8, 2011, 03:27:
17 years of Blizzard. 3 years of Activision-Blizzard.

The last 3 weren't up to par. The next 20 probably won't, either.

Really now?

So WotlK, Cata and Starcraft 2 didn't do it for you eh? I suppose their absolutely ridiculously beyond industry average customer support and ridiculously beyond industry average support for their old titles didn't do it for you either.

Perhaps you're upset they're announcing games and going off about them well before those games release (I am big time, fyi, BUT)....except that's something they've always done well before Activision came along.

What exactly has Blizzard done the specific last three years that's sub-par? See, WoW has always been an unbalanced mess well before Activision, so all those hotfixes, balancing patches and all that jazz just doesn't count. WotLK was too easy, *complainers*, Cata is too hard, *complainers*,. Make up your mind WoW'ers. SC2 and its three-part series, whatever. A guaranteed two-expansions to the sequel of one of the most respected RTS series ever made. I would have killed for multiple well-made expansions to Diablo, Diablo 2 and about six dozen other franchises out there.

What has been sub-par these last three years, compared to the 17 previous? Go.

Edit: clarifications

This comment was edited on Mar 8, 2011, 04:21.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GDC 2011 Record, 2012 Dates
1. Re: GDC 2011 Record, 2012 Dates Mar 7, 2011, 16:54 Cram
 
Did we actually end up hearing anything (music/sound or otherwise) Thief4 related at this years GDC from the audio director?

afaik not a single site has mentioned anything.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars Patch Plans
3. Re: Guild Wars Patch Plans Mar 4, 2011, 14:24 Cram
 
I could, and probably will at some point, spend time researching....but does anyone know how Arenanet is making enough money to support GW for free all these years, keep a dedicated team on that game AND develop GW2 for as long as they have? They have other games/projects out there I'm not aware of generating funds?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Alice: Madness Returns in June
4. Re: Alice: Madness Returns in June Mar 3, 2011, 00:40 Cram
 
Maybe it'll blow, maybe it'll be fantastic. I personally hope it turns out excellent. I am sure a Gameplay vid is upcoming soon.

On another note, I prefer this style of releasing a game. I am bored of companies releasing screenshots and videos YEARS before a game is released. You end up knowing absolutely everything there is to know about the game before you even play it. No one forces you watch those vids, view those screenshots or read spoilers, but they just seem to end up taking over the internet whenever they're released. I'm looking at you Blizzard. Others are guilty too, in my opinion. I've seen all there is to see of Rage as of right now, and TBH I'm already bored; and I usually love ID games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption
19. Re: Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption Feb 27, 2011, 16:55 Cram
 
Who cares who made the maps and why?

I care because someone in this thread made a post that PCF developed this game and its maps. This is absolutely false and someone needs to say something; if I were less informed about this mod and actually believed that post that PCF were involved, then bought the game only to later find out they weren't at all, I would be displeased. False information presented as fact, not going to let that go.

It's Painkiller with 5x's the amount of enemies in it.

I would argue it's not Painkiller at all, but Serious Sam on enemy spawn steroids in extremely tightly confined spaces. In Painkiller, you were progressing forward while killing enemies, not staying in one location for more then a couple minutes. In this game, you move from one small room to the next, 15 minutes at a time. Serious Sam did this, but the environments were much larger and varied so it was easier to handle. You could actually use a Rocket Launcher most of the time without being afraid of gibbing yourself.

It lasted 4 hours

That's pretty good actually. It took me over 1hr15min to beat the first level due to the need and requirement to artificially greatly expand game time through more respawns since there's no variety in level design whatsoever. I played through the second level today despite saying I wouldn't. More of the exact same. Getting all 6 done in 4 hours would be quite an accomplishment without cheats.

It was 5 whole dollars, how could there be any dismay for 5 bucks?

Because if stuff like this is allowed to, and does, sell, the price will soon move to $10, then $15 and so on for products of such absolute poor quality.

can't please 'em all (or any of 'em on BluesNews)

I fail to see how labeling our criticisms on the fact we're Bluesnews readers is relevant here. Yeah there are other threads where things get trollishly out of control and rude, but in this case we're dealing with an genuinely terrible product. It's awesome you had some fun for a bit, but in the bigger picture there is literally nothing to be pleased about with this mod.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption
13. Re: Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption Feb 27, 2011, 14:05 Cram
 
Oh man...

Ok. First of all, People Can Fly had nothing to do with the development of Redemption. The sole developer was Eggtooth Team. People Can Fly have never said or made anything "clear" in regards to this project. They're not involved.

Second, these maps are NOT from any abandoned project. These are the maps in question used in Redemption:

DM_Illuminati
DM_Mine
DM_ExMortis
CTF_CHAOS
DM_Fallen1

These are finished multiplayer maps from other previous expansions or fan-made maps (Eggtooth Team did not create any of them).

Third: If you think paying $1, $2, $5 or $100 for crap is acceptable, you either have way more money then you know what to do with, or you have no real concept of money in the first place.

Fourth: I was having a crashing problem so I went to a couple different forums to get help. There I found other people with various issues and for the most part expressing them respectfully. Eggtooth is there, posting. He's rude, way to defensive and hostile. Nothing like seeing people pay money for a product, have problems with it and then be yelled at by the developer. I regret supporting this joker.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption
11. Re: Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption Feb 27, 2011, 13:27 Cram
 
I got through the first level, and I'm done. Can't be bothered to keep playing. This is not Painkiller, despite whatever the developer Eggtooth says. Painkiller didn't keep you locked up in one small area at a time for 15+ minutes at a time just button mashing and bunny hopping.

This being only $5 does not excuse the complete lack of variety, boredom, terrible load times, horrible spawning, re-used levels (I'm told some of these levels are MP levels from previous expansions) and a slew of other issues. Crap, avoid.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption
2. Re: Ships Ahoy - Painkiller - Redemption Feb 26, 2011, 16:38 Cram
 
Just went through Battle out of Hell for the first time yesterday.
I didn't really enjoy it; probably should have played on Insomnia difficulty instead. The card challenges were absurd and things were way to inconsistent. That roller coaster....wtf was that?

I'll give this a shot if only to just put, hopefully, closure to the ridiculous story and kill a few hours.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Thief 4 Image
20. Re: Thief 4 Image Feb 25, 2011, 12:59 Cram
 
I need to kill more Pagans.

Day one buy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Console Diablo III Confirmed?
45. Re: Console Diablo III Confirmed? Feb 18, 2011, 21:13 Cram
 
PHJF wrote on Feb 18, 2011, 21:09:
Agent.X7 wrote on Feb 18, 2011, 17:11:
Couldn't. Care. Less.

Diablo was great. By the time Diablo II rolled around, Blizzard had already dropped the ball on the action RPG genre. Dungeon Siege beat it out of the gate by quite a bit and had way better graphics, since Blizzard stuck to sprites. It also had a good many innovations that made it a lot of fun, which Diablo II skipped as well.

Diablo II

Release date(s) * NA / PAL June 29, 2000

Dungeon Siege

Release date(s) April 5, 2002

And lol's were had.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Console Diablo III Confirmed?
31. Re: Console Diablo III Confirmed? Feb 18, 2011, 15:29 Cram
 
Give the consolers they're own battle.net so they can all play together with whatever limits are imposed on the console version (that's right, impose the limits on the console version not the PC version), and let all the PC people have their own battle.net so they can all play the game in it's fully customizable glory thus having no advantage in resolution or whatever over the console people.

I can't imagine the console and pc people could play together anyway. Consolers would get creamed in pvp and would probably just lag behind trying to keep up in pve with the PC crowd.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Retail Amnesia in N.A. Next Week
15. Re: Retail Amnesia in N.A. Next Week Feb 16, 2011, 00:15 Cram
 
An above average set of headphones does wonders for this one.

Frijoles wrote on Feb 16, 2011, 00:08:
I just can't get immersed enough in this game to feel scared. I tried playing late at night with all the lights out, but no luck.

Maybe I should find an abandoned warehouse and play there on a laptop around midnight.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Retail Amnesia in N.A. Next Week
8. Re: Retail Amnesia in N.A. Next Week Feb 15, 2011, 21:38 Cram
 
Sorta yeah. You want nothing more then to hide in the dark to avoid certain...obstacles, but stay in the dark for too long and....

Play this game!

MajorD wrote on Feb 15, 2011, 21:27:
You guys struck my curiosity, so I watched a couple game trailers on YouTube and there seems to be some Thief1-esque to it. Is that a true statement?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
722 Comments. 37 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