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 Matt C

Real Name Matt C   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname MattyC
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On May 23, 2007, 03:50
Total Comments 633 (Apprentice)
User ID 39012
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ] Older >


News Comments > Gabe Newell on EA vs. Steam
64. Re: Gabe Newell on EA vs. Steam Aug 18, 2011, 09:28 MattyC
 
InBlack wrote on Aug 18, 2011, 03:42:
I hate to say it but Zef has a point....

Digital distribution is so much cheaper than retail its unbelievable that games sell in the same price range.

Think about it for a second.

First of all you remove the production costs for CDs, DVDs, whatever. In bulk they are not great but it does cut costs.

Next, you remove the middle man i.e. retail. Here is where the biggest costs can be cut, the mark up price at retail is quite a bit. (Assuming that Steam is the publisher of said game)

So basicaly what Zef is saying is true. Instead of games being 20-30% cheaper in digital, they are priced at the same range and all that extra cash goes right to the publisher and/or Valve.

This is because B&M stores exist and have expenses. They can't compete with20-30% off online. If you say "yeah we are going to sell this for 30% less digital" the B&M stores say they can't compete with that so they won't carry your game. Developers hear this and don't want to lose having their game in Walmart and Gamestop so they set the same prices. Steam then counters with its regular sales.


It isn't all cloak and dagger to suck the poor clueless customer dry... it is more like normal business.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Frozen Synapse Demo and Sale
4. Re: Frozen Synapse Demo and Sale Aug 11, 2011, 15:20 MattyC
 
nin wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 15:17:
I suck at this game, but I don't regret buying it and supporting them.

It's fun, but I do tend to get my ass handed to me.


How popular is the multiplayer? I won't need to spend twenty minutes trying to get a game going or anything will I?
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Frozen Synapse Demo and Sale
2. Re: Frozen Synapse Demo and Sale Aug 11, 2011, 15:16 MattyC
 
This is a game I had been interested in but unsure of so... yay demo!  
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
48. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 15:09 MattyC
 
Verno wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 14:33:
Who said anything about winning or losing? You posted your opinion and the reasoning behind it. We are disagreeing with the reasoning, not the fact that you have a unique opinion and your own experiences. It's not that difficult a concept to understand. People posted why they disagree and you just fall back to "well its my experience". Fine, if thats your answer then fair enough but it's not terribly logical nor does it relate very well to peoples problems with the discussion topics. Your gameplay experiences have no relation to how people are reacting here, how you played doesn't have anything to do with how they did or want to play games.

I wasn't referring to your overall opinion but to your supporting Bhruic's

Bhruic wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 11:42:
To me, Diablo has been an online only game.

I'm not sure what you are using this to explain? You only play it online, so that negates all the people who didn't? Or everyone should be forced to play it the same way you do? Everyone playing it single player is wrong?

as "He pretty much cut right through everything you've said with a succinct reply.". That would be like someone quoting something you said and saying "SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT NO ONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PLAY ONLINE BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO?!? YOU ARE SO WRONG" and someone calling that a rebuttal instead of a logical fallacy. You would think based on the second part of his post he gets how silly his post is, but I guess not. Hence the


My statements since the info came out have always been more along the lines of 'I get what you are saying and for many games I would agree with you, but here I think for myself and a lot of others it is a non issue' not 'you don't play it online? You shouldn't be allowed to play games and you are wrong'. Always on games are here, like it or not. I was just talking about it, not championing it.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
44. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 14:24 MattyC
 
Verno wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 13:24:
Not really. I have said my statements do not invalidate the opinions of anyone else

The foundation of your statement is inherently flawed was his point which you have seemingly missed, its the same thing I said earlier in much longer posts as well. Saying you experience the games one way is fine, thats not what anyone has an issue with. It's when you start saying other people are overreacting and your only basis for that is your own gameplay experiences that it becomes a problem. There will always be doom and gloom but there is a lot of reasonable points in here too so you take the good with the bad.

We have different opinions. I think people are overreacting for the most part, you don't. We just disagree, that is no reason to setup a straw man and imply that I think other opinions have zero merit when I never said anything like that. I offer my experience as an explanation for why I feel the way I do, not because it shows I am somehow "right" or that others are "wrong". I am just discussing not trying to win.


It seems like they sort of want D3 to be WoW lite. I don't find that ideal, but I still plan for it to be a launch day purchase.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
41. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 12:38 MattyC
 
Verno wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 12:28:
On the plus side, even playing an SP game, if I find some uber rare phatty lewts, I can throw them up on the real money AH and make a few bucks... Which may require jumping through some stupid hoops, but if it's worth it, maybe I'll quit my job and do it full time (not too likely heh).

Hah, good point. I might put up with being online if it means I can sell imaginary items to some moron.

MattyC wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 11:51:
Only if you ignored all my other posts in this thread...

I've read all of your posts in this thread and it just seems like you have no rebuttal. He pretty much cut right through everything you've said with a succinct reply.

Not really. I have said my statements do not invalidate the opinions of anyone else. I just didn't like the threads being all doom and gloom. Some of us are ok with this, just only for certain games. Diablo 3 requiring me to be online? Thats fine by me. The next Final Fantasy doing the same? Not a chance.


And he didn't really cut through my argument. He set up a straw man. I never said anything like what he implied.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > 300K Join Age of Conan: Unchained, Movie Tie-in Content Plans
7. Re: 300K Join Age of Conan: Unchained, Move Tie-in Content Plans Aug 11, 2011, 12:07 MattyC
 
Fibrocyte wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 11:09:
Great to hear. Age of Conan is by no means a bad MMO. It's just not the one for me.

Have you played it lately? Any good? I got it at launch and it was complete garbage. MMO launches are never prefect but AoC was just ... ugh. The talent trees didn't even work! It absolutely had potential but I have avoided it since simply because I was ticked that I payed full price for a beta.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Alpha Centauri TMs
4. Re: Alpha Centauri TMs Aug 11, 2011, 11:59 MattyC
 
If done right I would LOVE a new AC game. Not sure if that will happen though. Games of that style seem to be very niche now. Sure Civilization is still kicking, but that is about it.  
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming
173. Re: Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming Aug 11, 2011, 11:55 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 10:43:
MattyC wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 09:36:
And even if both of these are down Blizzard has been cool with ICCUP and WarCraft 2 Combat edition.

Blizzard is also the company that sued the bnet emulator guys out of existence...

Creston

As far as I know they only did this with one of them and I am not sure why. I guess because it added no additional functionality? I couldn't say. They never really messed with ICCUP and WarCraft II Combat edition. Not sure why those two were given carte blanche and FSGS (that was it right?) was not.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
38. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 11:51 MattyC
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 11:42:
To me, Diablo has been an online only game.

I'm not sure what you are using this to explain? You only play it online, so that negates all the people who didn't? Or everyone should be forced to play it the same way you do? Everyone playing it single player is wrong?

It'd be like me saying that if I only played Diablo solo, if they completely removed all the multiplayer aspects, that shouldn't bother anyone.

Only if you ignored all my other posts in this thread...
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
31. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 10:46 MattyC
 
Verno wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 10:15:
Are there? I haven't seen any video of such. There could be, but I would imagine with an always on requirement it is just 'play game' and you can invite people to your game or not.

I was referring to Diablo 2 there.

I don't know/care what most people perceive about games with stories. To me some games are just made on playing together.

Ok but that has nothing to do with a persistent connection being a requirement for playing through the campaign when you don't need other players to do it. It's a technical requirement that doesn't make any sense except on a business level. People aren't asking that you play the game any differently, you can continue to treat them as multiplayer experiences and only play with your friends blah blah blah etc. They just want to be able to play them as boring Rogue clones and so on and if their connection happens to drop not interrupt the experience. Blizzard solved this problem already with Starcraft 2 and offline activation hashes. It's a proven method of DRM that works reasonably for all parties.

I am not a fan of always on DRM. I am just trying to be reasonable with my complaints. To me, Diablo has been an online only game. This greatly reduces the hacking/cheating that has always been rampant in Diablo and to be honest if internet wasn't available I wouldn't bother playing a Diablo game anway.

Again, I can see why some people wouldn't like this but the "OMG CONTROL DRM SKY FALLING DEATH AND DOOM!" seems silly. To anyone who played Diablo online it has been an always online game since Diablo II. Open Battle.net there was a nightmare. It was all hackers and cheaters. You couldn't go on regular Battle.net with a single player character so it basically was an online only game.

With D3 I am willing to accept online only as having benefits outside the realm of DRM. It fits with my play style and offers me benefits similar to the way Steam is restrictive but gives me things in return.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Safety Dance
1. Re: Evening Safety Dance Aug 11, 2011, 10:13 MattyC
 
Did Adobe hide 400 vulnerability fixes in latest Flash Player patch?

It is Flash... I wouldn't worry. Yet another patch will be out in about 3 seconds. I swear that thing updates hourly.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
26. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 10:09 MattyC
 
Verno wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 09:56:
How you played it doesn't change the fact that there are singleplayer and multiplayer entries on the game menu, not to mention a traditional singleplayer campaign with story and that most people perceive a story mode as a single user experience in those types of games

Are there? I haven't seen any video of such. There could be, but I would imagine with an always on requirement it is just 'play game' and you can invite people to your game or not.


I don't know/care what most people perceive about games with stories. To me some games are just made on playing together. Diablo and Gears of War are both games like that. I love them and played them many times with my friends. However I am not sure I would have really bothered with either if I played them solo. They just don't have much depth without other people. Playing with others, the co-op play, is what made them fun. Like I said before my opinion doesn't invalidate the opinions of others, but people need to stop stating theirs as fact.


When I first played Diablo years and years ago I wasn't like "WOW! Look at this incredible story and RPG elements!" because they weren't that impressive. I was like "Awesome we can play this rogue clone with great graphics and sound together!"
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM
24. Re: Runic on Diablo III vs. Torchlight 2 RMTs and DRM Aug 11, 2011, 09:53 MattyC
 
Undocumented Alien wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 09:20:
Diablo 1&2 were NOT MMO's, in any way. This word "MMO" is thrown around WAY to much these days.

Diablo 1&2 were incredible SP experiences with a fun LAN/Internet party MP option.

As I have said here before that is an opinion. It is a valid one, but it isn't a fact. People keep stating that like it is. My friends and I, for example, viewed them as purely online games. That is what was fun and awesome about them. Without others to play with they were fairly bland and boring Rogue games.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming
163. Re: Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming Aug 11, 2011, 09:36 MattyC
 
Prez wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 18:09:
For the frickin' BILLIONTH time, it's not MY computer I'm worried about being always online; it's theirs; i.e. whoever decides to use this bullshit DRM scheme insultingly disguised as a "feature".

I play games from 1988 on GOG. That's 23 years ago for the trolling retards who can't be bothered to see past the nose on their face and keep telling us "Your computer is always connected - quit whining!"

Maybe Blizzard will still be running the Diablo 3 services then; maybe they won't. Who's to say? Point is, I like to revisit old games for nostalgia, history, and just plain fun. I'm not going to be told by anyone that I can no longer do that because they want to treat me like a thief and then insult my intelligence by giving me some utterly lame excuse about how they "have to do this", and how it's a "bonus" or a "feature".

As it stands now, the only way I will ever play Diablo 3 (as I am only interested in LAN and singleplayer) is if Blizzard abandons this stupidity or I pirate the warez version.

It is worth noting that you can still login to Diablo released in 1996. I haven't tried WarCraft 2 BnE, but I would be surprised if it wasn't also online. And even if both of these are down Blizzard has been cool with ICCUP and WarCraft 2 Combat edition.


I am not saying that totally invalidates your argument or anything silly like that. I am just pointing out that Blizzard has a damn good track record here. You might want to target another company if that is the angle you are going for. Blizzard has proven its merit in that department more than any other company I know of.


I guess they could take down the servers after a year and not release an offline patch. They could. I could also suddenly sprout wings and be able to shoot lightning from my ass, but no evidence exists that either is likely.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Hardware > Pads, Laptops, etc.....input needed
4. Re: Pads, Laptops, etc.....input needed Aug 10, 2011, 17:01 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Aug 6, 2011, 00:59:
As much as I dislike Apple, there currently is no real competition for an iPad 2. All the other tablets are just flawed. However, I fully understand your dislike of their DRM, and no flash is just plain Steve Jobs Retarded

I agree with the iPad 2 being the king. If you just have to have a tablet RIGHT NOW then the iPad is the one to get. If you can wait then I would do that if you just don't want to go Apple.

On the flash bit, meh. I hate Flash Click2Flash or a Flash blocker is one of the first things I install on any browser. It was clearly coded by the devil in hell and you can find an app for most anything or just jailbreak it.

EDIT: I should add that I understand that for now Flash is a necessary evil, I just wanted to point out that it is plenty rational for Jobs to hate it.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming
109. Re: Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming Aug 10, 2011, 16:34 MattyC
 
ASeven wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 15:08:
MattyC wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 14:36:
ASeven wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 13:25:
you're in the tiny majority in accepting this.

What?

Hooooly crap, what a comically idiotic mistake of mine. Tiny minority.

MattyC wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 14:36:
ASeven wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 13:25:
Be with mainstream games, the rest of us will be having fun playing rreal fun games. You know, indies.

And good strawman use by throwing pracy. Notch doesn't care about it, he's become rich nonetheless.

I honestly haven't seen much worth buying from indie developers lately, so not crossing my fingers there. I mean for 'single player Diablo' I could just play Nethack until the end of time. It is honestly a much deeper game anyway. That is probably why I don't mind this so much. Diablo has always been an online series for me. There just isn't much there if you are just going to play it yourself offline.

But either way for all the touting I see here, most pay indie games are generally a huge letdown for me. If I did have to give up studio games I would just as soon go play something free and open source, probably a lot more fun anyway. Obviously there are some gems out there, but they seem quite rare.

Most open source or freeware games, like Tactical Assault or Overdose, are still indie. Being indie doesn't mean you charge money for it. Hell, dwarf fortress devs are indie, the nethack devs are probably the oldest indie devs out there.

Not charging money does not make a dev not indie. Also, indiedb.com, use it to find new games, maybe your opinion on not finding enough good indies may change.

True I guess I worded that poorly. I just meant that a lot of the ones I see for sale look ok, but not worth paying for. A lot of them are just TowerDefenseClone9000 or YouveTotallyPlayed20FlashGamesJustLikeThis.


Thanks for the link though, I'll check it out. I like to support Indie devs whenever I can, I just don't want to get ripped off.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming
90. Re: Quoteworthy - id's Tim Willits on Always-on Gaming Aug 10, 2011, 14:36 MattyC
 
ASeven wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 13:25:
you're in the tiny majority in accepting this.

What?

ASeven wrote on Aug 10, 2011, 13:25:
Be with mainstream games, the rest of us will be having fun playing rreal fun games. You know, indies.

And good strawman use by throwing pracy. Notch doesn't care about it, he's become rich nonetheless.

I honestly haven't seen much worth buying from indie developers lately, so not crossing my fingers there. I mean for 'single player Diablo' I could just play Nethack until the end of time. It is honestly a much deeper game anyway. That is probably why I don't mind this so much. Diablo has always been an online series for me. There just isn't much there if you are just going to play it yourself offline.

But either way for all the touting I see here, most pay indie games are generally a huge letdown for me. If I did have to give up studio games I would just as soon go play something free and open source, probably a lot more fun anyway. Obviously there are some gems out there, but they seem quite rare.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
19. Re: Op Ed Aug 9, 2011, 13:23 MattyC
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 9, 2011, 11:19:
Indeed, it's what most Steam competitors seemingly don't understand about Steams success.

I'd disagree, I think they just recognize(d) that as the later-comer to the party, people didn't want another "service". Once you're running Steam, who wants to have to run a client for another DD? That's one of the big sticking points with Origin. It's fine to have something like GoG, where you just download the game, and then don't associate with them from that point on, but service based systems are going to have a massive uphill battle. Frankly, a big publisher like EA is about the only company that would have a decent shot at it (although it'd help if they hadn't burned so many PC bridges).

This is how I feel. I just don't want another 'service'. If you want to sell me the game and just have me download it fine, but the last thing I was is to have my games scattered across multiple Steam clones. Steam got there first so that is what I have. Sorry EA, but that is just the way it is.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo
33. Re: StarCraft II: Starter Edition Replaces Demo Aug 8, 2011, 13:32 MattyC
 
An update on people watching replays with this - it should work for all replays 1.3.5 and later. If you can't watch one it is likely because it is from an earlier version.

I didn't see any info on if they were planning to fix that or not.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
633 Comments. 32 pages. Viewing page 18.
< Newer [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo