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 S Westberg

Real Name S Westberg   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Flatline
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 15, 2007, 19:09
Total Comments 2116 (Senior)
User ID 34131
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Consolidation
5. Re: Morning Consolidation Nov 25, 2014, 11:44 Flatline
 
SpectralMeat wrote on Nov 25, 2014, 11:15:
It's not like this is their first Halo game they release.
I don't understand how an established dev studio like this can be so incompetent.

Fuck that, it's not like matchmaking is some new goddamn technology that hasn't ever been attempted before. What's next? Option menus that completely crash the program?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed
48. Re: Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed Nov 24, 2014, 19:26 Flatline
 
panbient wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 16:16:
Flatline wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 15:47:
Has Warren Spector put anything good out since Deus Ex?

And when was the last time Chris Roberts put out something good?

Freelancer didn't see the light of day until he was removed from the project. So... Starlancer? Or 3 months before Deus Ex back in 2000 (and now I feel old).

Very true. I just meant that we should probably take Warren Spector's opinion with a grain of salt.

I have a whole salt lick over here for CR.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed
46. Re: Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed Nov 24, 2014, 15:47 Flatline
 
panbient wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 08:26:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 06:08:
One thing that we can safely say is that CR has no intention of merely following the rest of the industry. This is a game that is going to be different, for better or worse.

I'm just going to quote Warren Spector's 7 big questions to ask about designing a game right now -

Warren 'Deus Ex' Spector wrote:

1. What are we trying to do? What’s the core idea?

2. What’s the potential? Why do this game over all the others we could do?

3. What are the development challenges? Really hard stuff is fine — impossible or unfundable? Not so good…

4. Has anyone done this before? If so, what can we learn from them? If not, what does that tell us?

5. How well-suited to games is the idea? There are some things we’re just not good at and shouldn’t even attempt. A love story, for example!

6. What’s the player fantasy and does that lead to good player goals? If the fantasy and the goals aren’t there, it’s a bad idea.

7. What does the player do? What are the “verbs” of the game?

From my perspective it seems 'everything and anything' is the answer to 4 of those questions (and that's not a good answer). It lacks focus and definition. And really consider question #4, especially the last bit.

Again, like I said in the last massive E:D thread, it seems too many gamers are thinking with their hearts and not enough with their heads. It's not necessarily wrong but operating on feel rather than analysis tends to result in less than ideal outcomes.

I just wanted a game that played like Privateer and looked like X3 and I know I'm not the only one. It doesn't have to accurately simulate much of anything so long as it's fun and both SC and E:D seem to be avoiding that core KIS rule of making something fun - Keep It Simple!

Has Warren Spector put anything good out since Deus Ex?

Those are good points, and I'm all for innovation, but at the end of the day "is it fun?" is going to be the final hurdle.

Star Citizen isn't a niche game. It's grown way beyond that. But it's being designed like it's a highly niche game. I'll agree with one thing though: success or failure this game is going to reshape the industry in a fundamental way. The problem is, if it blows, or collapses under it's own baroque clockwork fetishism of mini-systems, that'll probably be the end of major crowdsourcing, and almost assuredly the end of community guided feature sets.

To keep it in a space analogy, it's like saying "fuck going to Mars, we're going to settle Titan permanently."
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed
45. Re: Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed Nov 24, 2014, 15:31 Flatline
 
Killcrit wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 08:05:
Interesting, I have not had fun in games for over a decade....

and...

Killcrit wrote on Nov 24, 2014, 08:05:
Love the hate here.... Played for 6 hours of dogfighting last week.. had more fun than anything since BF2

Are mutually exclusive. Yes I checked the release date.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed
30. Re: Star Citizen FPS Health Detailed Nov 23, 2014, 21:33 Flatline
 
I'm even less impressed about this than before. Whoever said it was like a teenager's first video game project nailed it.

At some point the game has to be "fun" instead of "complicated". The fact that the developers aren't able to so far say "We want this to be fun so realism/complexity is taking a back seat here" suggests either really inexperienced devs, or a design crew that doesn't know how to say no.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release
12. Re: WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release Nov 21, 2014, 13:11 Flatline
 
SimplyMonk wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 12:25:
Flatline wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 12:04:
Wasn't the monetization of this like psychotically egotistical? I have this vague recollection that they were charging nearly the same prices as the physical models for "expansions".

I don't think they've released official pricing yet so most of that is just rumors. I'd expect more of a $1-5 range for units.

Okay so maybe it was the battletech/mechwarrior tabletop/tactics thing that was basically an attempt to stitch World of Tanks' pricing scheme onto tabletop BT. That sounds more familiar because everyone was like "oh snap WOOT" and then the pricing structure was announced and people were like "Wait WTF???"
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release
11. Re: WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release Nov 21, 2014, 13:09 Flatline
 
Orogogus wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 12:20:
SimplyMonk wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 11:21:
That being said, I've not heard good things about this from other fans of the table top. It amazes me that when these games get made they just don't copy the core rules and mechanics of the table top.

Blood Bowl was the only decent table top game implementation I've ever seen from the Warhammer Universe.

The original release of the recent Space Hulk game was nearly a 1:1 implementation, and people didn't like it. People here, on this forum, was like, "Marines are so bad in hand-to-hand against Genestealers, it sucks." The new Ascension release supposedly makes it a lot less of a 1:1 implementation -- it's no longer rolling virtual dice for your actions, checks are percentages now, jamming isn't completely random, etc. -- and people are saying it's a much better game for it.

Space Hulk is a game that essentially hasn't been updated since the 80's. The mechanics are old and creaky.

I appreciated the direct video game port, because it saved me 120 bucks when I decided not to buy the board game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
7. Re: etc. Nov 21, 2014, 12:09 Flatline
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 11:31:
Are we really at the point in society where we think any criticism is an attack and any criticism must be shut-down immediately because it's "thought police," even though the people using that terminology are the ones screaming about what people are and are not allowed to think?

And isn't it funny that people claiming it's about ethics in journalism tried to get ad money pulled by a publisher over a negative review when part of the biggest issue in games journalism is good reviews in exchange for continued ad money?


No, forget all this, I'm done engaging. Don't respond. I won't read it.

Too bad, because I'd like to point out that your solution to shutting down argument and crowd-sourced "thought police" is to make the government the thought police.

Also, instead of taking and responding to criticism, you're "shutting down" the discussion.

Just sayin...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release
6. Re: WARMACHINE: Tactics Full Release Nov 21, 2014, 12:04 Flatline
 
SimplyMonk wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 11:21:
garrywong wrote on Nov 21, 2014, 10:57:
Hm, a WH40K game that might hopefully not suck, but priced at $40 with no demo.
Unfortunately, that means I will not be buying this, even though I would love to.

*twitch*

WARMACHINE is NOT Warhammer 40K. Completely different universe. Both are awesome, but different.

That being said, I've not heard good things about this from other fans of the table top. It amazes me that when these games get made they just don't copy the core rules and mechanics of the table top.

Blood Bowl was the only decent table top game implementation I've ever seen from the Warhammer Universe. Relic did an awesome job with all the Dawn of Wars of course, but they weren't trying to mimic the table top. Just use the Universe.

Wasn't the monetization of this like psychotically egotistical? I have this vague recollection that they were charging nearly the same prices as the physical models for "expansions".
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
138. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 18:28 Flatline
 
D4rkKnight wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 18:26:
Any offline experience would be fundamentally empty. We could write a separate mission system to allow a limited series of fixed missions, but that would still not be a compelling game, and is just the first step in the mountain of work that would be required.

That's what I thought, making a real story with interesting missions would take a lot of work that they don't want to create. Don't expect an engaging storyline in this game, its going to be "player created".

Actually beta 3.9 just dropped and among the 3 pages of tweaks and updates it repeatedly mentions faction and galaxy missions, branching missions, and missions that are generated that are reactionary to the events in the galaxy/universe.

So a *lot* of PvE has just been introduced in this latest beta. I can't give a review of what that's like because I'm at work and the update is downloading about 1/10th the usual speed but if the universe is populated by interesting, branching narrative missions then shit just got real.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
93. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 15:38 Flatline
 
Creston wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:49:
No, you paid for a pine chicken coop, and that's what's said in the contract. You can sue for breach of warranty and will win in any US courtroom.

I seriously doubt it. One thing you'd have to do is prove that oak is inferior to pine. In this literal example, you received a free upgrade, the value is objectively higher (as oak is easily provable to be a more expensive wood than pine) and arguably an oak construction is going to be intrinsically better.

Reverse the situation, where you order oak and receive pine, and you have a real situation.

But that doesn't even qualify for this. It'd be like if you ordered an oak coop, and everything but the roof was oak, but the roof was pine.

That's more of a grey area.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
82. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 15:10 Flatline
 
gilly775 wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:51:
Flatline wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:42:
Prez wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:16:
I think the refunds should be offered to everyone, not just people who haven't played yet. They failed to deliver on what I understand is a promised feature, and that means the ethical thing to do would be to offer everyone who wants one a refund. I played Planetary Annhilation online when it was Early Access because it was the opnly way to try out the game so I could give my feedback, but the only reason I backed it was because of the promised offline mode. I assume that would be the case with some people who were in the Beta. They are burning up a lot of their trust with gamers.

I kind of feel that kickstarters should get a refund opportunity period, since beta was free.

But if you paid a premium for the beta, which I did, that was to participate in the beta process. Even if the end product isn't something that meets it's promises, you got your beta money's worth and there's no reason why you should get that refunded.

I didn't hear about the KS until when the beta released, so when I read that the KS promised offline mode, I paid in for the PB. I bought the game mainly for offline mode since where I live in the sticks, I barely have a solid connection most of the time with the local ISP. So, yeah, I feel I was lied to knowing an offline mode was promised.

Also, I have no played the game since the end of May. One other time I tried, my inet connection went down and other, offline games took over from there. I was holding out for that offline mode to pick it up again.

I think you should get your money back for the main release. But if you waited for the paid beta, you had access to the Elite forums and there was TONS of information there on what the beta did and didn't support. For the beta I'd say Caveat Emptor.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
70. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 14:42 Flatline
 
Prez wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:16:
I think the refunds should be offered to everyone, not just people who haven't played yet. They failed to deliver on what I understand is a promised feature, and that means the ethical thing to do would be to offer everyone who wants one a refund. I played Planetary Annhilation online when it was Early Access because it was the opnly way to try out the game so I could give my feedback, but the only reason I backed it was because of the promised offline mode. I assume that would be the case with some people who were in the Beta. They are burning up a lot of their trust with gamers.

I kind of feel that kickstarters should get a refund opportunity period, since beta was free.

But if you paid a premium for the beta, which I did, that was to participate in the beta process. Even if the end product isn't something that meets it's promises, you got your beta money's worth and there's no reason why you should get that refunded.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
69. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 14:40 Flatline
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Nov 20, 2014, 14:14:
Well, so far throughout alpha and beta the game has always required an online connection. I think it would be extremely hypocritical of people to claim a refund for a game they have downloaded and possibly played for dozens or hundreds of hours only because it does not ship with an offline mode.
If they haven't had a problem with always online in alpha and beta then why would it all of a sudden turn into a deal breaker post-1.0?

I would, however, encourage FD to decide on a case by case basis like if someone has downloaded the game but played less than x hours (where x<= 10 or thereabouts) then still give them a refund, i.e. if online/game time has been tracked at all... I'm not sure about that. If not, then stick to the proposed policy. I think it's fair. You can never 100% cover everyone's individual fate but the way they are doing it seems generally right.

Oh it tracks your time in the stats option of the program.

And while I agree with you there that it's kind of hypocritical of users, offline mode is significant enough that promising it on your bullet list when you sell it is probably something that could be reasonable to ask a refund over.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy
53. Re: Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy Nov 20, 2014, 14:05 Flatline
 
While I find it kind of dirty pool to not allow refunds if you played in the alpha/beta I can sort of understand why.

I'd prefer and find it fair that if you bought into the alpha/beta you get the release price back, but the premium you put into A/B is non-refundable. That'd be fair.

Except.

How the F*ck do you do that with kickstarters? And to give kickstarters no refund while waiting and buying from their store gives you a refund would be bullshit.

So yeah, I can see why they went hardline and it sucks but I don't know how you'd do it without total refunds.

Edit: Note to kickstarters, do yourself a favor and outline a refund policy before launching a kickstarter. And share that with your backers.Don't wait until there's a shitstorm.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
14. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 19, 2014, 14:10 Flatline
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 18, 2014, 21:39:
And why would a vote even be required? They're walking all over the Constitution. This simply boggles the mind. Oh wait, America is a plutocracy now so it doesn't.

A vote is required because the court system has no problem with it somehow.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
13. Re: Op Ed Nov 19, 2014, 14:03 Flatline
 
Agrajag wrote on Nov 19, 2014, 06:27:
Prez wrote on Nov 19, 2014, 02:35:
So only 48 Senators are even aware that the 4th Amendment exists. Wonderful.

58... And, that's what I don't get: why did they need 60 votes to pass?? Is this another one of those threatened Republican filibusters they need a supermajority to overcome? I say call their fucking bluff: make them do a real, old-style, stand up and read from random books for days on end non-stop type filibuster! Make them piss and shit their goddamned pants at the podium if they want to filibuster! Screw this caving to threats crap...

Yes. Republican senators basically filibuster everything that goes through the Senate now as a matter of course.

I'm not sure if it happened here but usually nowadays Senators can even put a seal on their filibuster, so it's not public record who initiated it.

It's fucked up man.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
11. Re: Morning Interviews Nov 17, 2014, 15:34 Flatline
 
SpectralMeat wrote on Nov 17, 2014, 14:01:
CJ_Parker wrote on Nov 17, 2014, 12:49:
the "private server" will probably be a 4vs.4 deathmatch instance with one ship type and two maps.
Nahh man
RACING!!!!

Competitive virtual drinking from the liquor cabinet that you can buy right now for $29.95
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
10. Re: Morning Interviews Nov 17, 2014, 15:33 Flatline
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 17, 2014, 12:25:
Oh he'll deliver SQ42 alright, he's not that stupid to break a promise like that. However, it'll be an hour long campaign and that's it. After that, everything will be online and monetized up the ass.


Well he did say that SQ42 would be the "tutorial" for SC. So maybe you're right about that.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Game Sessions Steam Trials Add Ryse Son of Rome
13. Re: Game Sessions Steam Trials Add Ryse Son of Rome Nov 17, 2014, 14:53 Flatline
 
Snark aside I appreciate any effort to bring back demos.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2116 Comments. 106 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo