User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
 |
| 6. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jun 15, 2013, 21:12 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Sepharo wrote on Jun 15, 2013, 20:32:
Yuengling. Since I live in Michigan I need to drive down to Ohio to grab it so I figured that was a bit more thoughtful than picking up a gift card or something 
I just moved from PA (near where the brewery is!) to FL (near apparently another of their breweries!)...so it's still ubiquitous here. Nice.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Saturday Consolidation |
|
| 14. |
Re: Saturday Consolidation |
Jun 15, 2013, 20:51 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Dev wrote on Jun 15, 2013, 19:41:
But with licensing hasn't that been the case for quite a long time now for all software?
Yes. The idea of software being a service is pretty much the backbone of contemporary gaming. Anybody who thinks otherwise needs to go dust off their non-Internet-enabled gaming consoles or pull out their Gold Box game manuals to bypass challenge questions. That's the last time you even came close to "owning" your games.
Also, I see people pointing at the price time and time again. Yet the PS4 doesn't have the Eye bundled. I know in another thread here somebody said that dividing your user base is a bad idea - and it is. It's even worse for developers because, well, who do they develop for? It takes extra resources to develop for both Eye-enabled and Eye-disabled users. That upfront $100 option is not looking as bad.
Then you're looking at the used games issue...and well, let's be fair here, Microsoft wins another point for developers. Against consumers, sure, but most markets these days are moving towards the developers. If you think that's ridiculous, consider Google's primary revenue streams and re-think your position.
I'm not buying either console and haven't owned one since the N64, so I could care less. Yet I feel I'm not doing my duty if I don't link the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMLcKtVwF-A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Consolidation |
|
| 35. |
Re: Morning Consolidation |
Jun 13, 2013, 16:00 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Yeah, pretty much what I predicted over two months ago. (original post)
"the console companies want to exit the market (take a look at the XBox division sale rumors for an example)." (Microsoft is phoning the gaming portion in while pushing other entertainment areas far more)
"it's clear that Sony and Microsoft are both tired of the game. It's likely you will have a monopoly on your hands" (Sony, most likely, which ties back to the XBox division sale)
"the current strategy is an exit strategy, not one of growth, so of course they're going to tie down the user base. They want you hooked on the services, not the games." (a prediction borne out by things like Microsoft's recent free games for Live plan, DRM in XBox One, etc.)
The PS4 won simply because Microsoft isn't interested in the same things as Sony. Quite frankly, they can't afford to be, as I have stated many times the traditional console marketplace is shrinking. It's like saying one grocery store is killing another when the former is selling only food and the latter has gone Walmart. There's room in the market for both types because they aren't serving the same customers for the same goods. Anyway, I've made other posts essentially saying the console market will be commoditized/licensed because outside AAA games you got a booming mobile and indie market along with viable streaming/indie competitors.
In otherwords, the XBox One is trying to be the jack-of-all-trades to cover all its bases (and relying on continued Xbox 360 sales, Live subs, etc.) while Sony is being aggressive, but again, the market itself is dying, so Microsoft's strategy once again is an exit strategy. I can't emphasize that enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Blizzard's Unannounced MMOG Reset and Delayed? |
|
| 22. |
Re: Blizzard's Unannounced MMOG Reset and Delayed? |
May 28, 2013, 23:10 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
m00t wrote on May 28, 2013, 22:36:
Cutter, sorry you won't get to play it. I work with the guys who were running that show and they're sorry, too.
I know'm, too. This game was always intended to be more dynamic than Guild Wars 2, yet more traditional than TESO, and more socially-integrated than WoW vanilla could ever pretend to be. These guys have money and experience at their disposal and knew exactly what they were up against, and what they had to deliver. There were two failures in this plan (when it originated), both of which I have mentioned in posts previously: one, that subscription MMO's are still realistic, and two, that Diablo 3's model can translate to a MMO.
I actually find that Sepharo's initial reply is relevant here, because my first objection has to do with the fact that Blizzard has become aware of next-gen console backlash at some DRM methods. That of course also ties into my second objection - not only because of the fact that consoles play a part, but because DRM and real money involvement (along with social factors) are critical to getting the most out of the game. It's like paying a regular fee to be a member of Facebook...it defeats the internal purpose.
I've stated this before and anybody who truly had a look at Titan's prior development would know that it was overly designed towards cross-platform and social interaction. In otherwords, I take this news to be a good thing. The reality is that their dream only has a place in a universe where all parties involved agree to the axioms they present - that is to say, that all platforms kiss their ass...and in this case, Blizzard came up empty when Microsoft and Sony both told them to sod off. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Funcom Financials |
|
| 3. |
Re: Funcom Financials |
May 28, 2013, 21:02 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Rattlehead wrote on May 28, 2013, 19:25:
Is this good or bad?
They brought in almost 3 times the revenue at a bit more than only 10% the losses, which would appear to be a good thing...except they still lost money. These huge gains were realized through "restructuring" that won't be fully realized until Q3/Q4, implying they expect to return to profitability. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Scrolls Next Week |
|
| 10. |
Re: Scrolls Next Week |
May 27, 2013, 15:46 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
fawker wrote on May 27, 2013, 12:48:
Looks like everyone is trying to jump in on the card trading game these days.
It's like gambling except you can only lose money.
What I find funny about this is that the "old school" guys love the whole card gaming (and collectibles) setup, as well as the old model/board gaming and what have you. Best example of "guys" would be Penny Arcade. I recall them stating in the past that they couldn't understand the long-term costs of things like WoW (or D3's RMAH), then I remembered how much I (easily) spent on MTG and miniatures, etc., back in the day and I really facepalmed at their attitude.
I guess what I'm saying is, the line between passion and addiction/obsession is a thin one. The association of "pay to win" with a lot of games these days further amuses me because it's really no different with MTG and similar games...yet you get armchair old school board-type gamers (again, PA) who pretend the latter is a purer form. Then you get something like Scrolls which blurs the lines a bit, and things ironically become a lot more clear. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Op Ed |
|
| 12. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 26, 2013, 22:50 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Prez wrote on May 26, 2013, 20:55:
To rephrase my earlier rant if a gameworld needs an economist then I don't want to play it.
I'd argue that such an outlook only bars you from some gameplay (genre) experiences, but far from all.
A lot of my favorite games from the SNES/PSX era, for example, were simulation (Koei titles), and certainly a lot of people like some realistic gameplay (ARMA, etc.). Yes, you said economist, but let's be clear that you're really saying realism. The point of the person I quoted (Eirikautha) is that games that attempt to simulate worlds are, at least in part, simulations, and worlds as we known them always include economics. It's one of the foundations of civilization.
Titles that claim to be persistent worlds (MMO's, usually) fall into this category. So if you're saying you have no interest in persistent worlds, then I'm fine with your comment. If, however, you're saying you'd play Minecraft but not WoW, then I'm already partially disagreeing because economics is a very real part of any persistent world. I'd go so far as to say that any game that attempts to simulate persistence/stability requires economics, and thus, an economist for design by its very definition.
At least games where the economy poses issues for the player in real life...such as Diablo 3. I don't really consider that "persistent," though, but I do think MMO's generally qualify. Yet I'd have to say that titles like EVE, PotBS, etc., that are based on economy and have real world attachments, are much more upfront about it. I would not exclude them from my playlist simply for that nature.
This comment was edited on May 26, 2013, 23:01. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Op Ed |
|
| 10. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 26, 2013, 19:28 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Eirikrautha wrote on May 26, 2013, 11:39:
Good article. It's funny how folks that are so good at algorithms to simulate the real world (physics, projecting a 3D image on a 2D plane [your monitor], etc.) are frequently so inept at understanding the algorithms that make the real world tick (and by extension, their game worlds).
Which is why Gabe Newell had the sense to hire an economist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Consolidation |
|
| 32. |
Re: Evening Consolidation |
May 22, 2013, 00:17 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
From my past comments...
First
"the console gaming industry is getting hit hard. The implication is that the big players want out, and technology is moving towards streaming and cloud gaming."
"Gaming is at its heart part of the media spectrum. It managed to escape the Sony-BMG style for a while, but it's only a matter of time now. I'm no Pachter but it doesn't take an analyst to see which way the wind blows. All the evidence is towards a commoditized future as a platform for licensing."
Second
"I think it reflects the reality of the console gaming marketplace. There is little to no growth in that segment, largely due to competition from mobile and other devices ... That is what happens in any industry once it becomes saturated and technology progresses beyond its initial role."
Third
"Simple - they're the content distribution centers ... EA will be unable to produce like all other developers (we see them dying on a daily basis, and the console industry is clearly collapsing) and will just become Origin, much like dinosaurs are today's birds."
I could go on...but the predictions are there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Tech Bits |
|
| 7. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
May 17, 2013, 11:06 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
ViRGE wrote on May 17, 2013, 10:40:
AMD's stock was up 82% in a month for no good reason - in fact they had just recently reported that they lost money on the quarter yet again.
Exactly. The stock rose because of rumors of an Intel merger and because of expected deferred earnings from AMD's hardware in the next generation of consoles. The rest of the rise is from people taking advantage of these two expectations by shorting the stock. That's not exactly "fraud," but it is a practice frowned upon. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Steam Top 10 |
|
| 17. |
Re: Steam Top 10 |
May 12, 2013, 17:57 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Techie714 © wrote on May 12, 2013, 13:47:
Any deals out there for Metro or Rome?
Got Rome for $45 on GMG earlier this week. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Death to Spies 3 Fundraiser |
|
| 7. |
Re: Death to Spies 3 Fundraiser |
May 8, 2013, 01:15 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Flatline wrote on May 7, 2013, 13:10:
The final exam of the OSS in WW2 was to drop you off outside New York City with 20 bucks, no ID, the clothes on your back, and gave you 24 hours to come up with as much confidential data from the government as you could.
Sounds a lot like the Henderson Challenge. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 22. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Apr 30, 2013, 13:28 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
I'll be honest. When I was younger, all my friends (I refuse to include myself) smoked a lot of pot and (thanks to it being a gateway) other drugs. Now that we're all grown up and reliable adults, every last one has at least one autistic child. Coincidence? Certainly autism rates have skyrocketed. My theory? Recreational drug use.
They're also all suffering from conditions at a higher rate than the national average (everything from sleep apnea to strokes to autoimmune). Better diagnosis? No, probably the drugs again. The problem is that simply not enough studies have been done to properly analyze the long-term effects of drugs.
As I'm a scientist and can see 15+ years after the fact now, I can tell you it's pretty obvious. If I could only go back in time...and trust me when I say my friends feel the same. Now they add in a far higher than average cost to the medical system because they wanted to "just smoke a little weed."
Put that in your pipe and smoke it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Mobilization |
|
| 13. |
Re: Sunday Mobilization |
Apr 28, 2013, 22:13 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
dj LiTh wrote on Apr 28, 2013, 19:40:
I think a good analogy would be an all electric car that makes no noise hits someone from behind and the car manufacturer is not held responsible.
I love that you brought this up. I came across this issue when I was studying business law in school many years ago. Naturally, car makers were forced to apply a sound to their cars, but then they had the idea of "vanity sounds." We had to delve into the legality of that while it was still working its way through the system, so it was an interesting chance to see how things like this actually come to pass. In other words, I think your analogy actually is pretty good in this case.
One could say that privacy is not involved while safety is, but then technically I could say I had the right to a (privately) silent car. Clearly, safety trumps privacy; that is not a new theme. Obviously people are fighting tooth and nail to say it's the other way around, but it's not. That's what Schmidt is saying here and that's what has people up in arms about it. Yes, he's arguing for the freedom of convenience, but he's also pushing for the Google automated car which (supposedly) increases safety all-around while also making it much safer to use Google Glass while "driving."
That may seem like a round-about way to connect the cars to the glasses but the reality is that's exactly what he's doing. If that sounds a little bit like a liberal argument for control over your life, well...duh. Stop being afraid of change. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > EA Partners to Close? |
|
| 31. |
Re: EA Partners to Close? |
Apr 26, 2013, 07:30 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
As for all this going private talk and everything...as I've said in other threads here, the console gaming industry is getting hit hard. The implication is that the big players want out, and technology is moving towards streaming and cloud gaming. I never took it further than that, but it's not difficult to do so.
We saw NBC get bought by Comcast, and it had a market cap several times that of EA, and in fact all the major publishers could fit into the value that NBC had at purchase. That's not to imply equality but rather to show that the likeliest fate for a "live" EA in the long-run is as a platform for something like Comcast. I can see it now: Quadruple Play!
Gaming is at its heart part of the media spectrum. It managed to escape the Sony-BMG style for a while, but it's only a matter of time now. I'm no Pachter but it doesn't take an analyst to see which way the wind blows. All the evidence is towards a commoditized future as a platform for licensing.
PC gaming of course is separate from this, but even that is largely 3 segments: MMO, casual, and indie. Only the indie segment is relevant to true gamers and that's going to end up on Steam...which again is pushing stream/cloud gaming. Full circle, we're right back where we started. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Company of Heroes 2 Closed Beta Open to Facebook Affection |
|
| 18. |
Re: Company of Heroes 2 Closed Beta Open to Facebook Affection |
Apr 15, 2013, 23:08 |
NewMaxx |
|
|
Redmask wrote on Apr 15, 2013, 21:49:
We don't have enough information to know that right now, we have a 6 map multiplayer beta without any single player content, you're getting way ahead of yourself. This will undoubtedly be smaller than Company of Heroes and its 5 years of expansion work and patching but that's fine because it's not unreasonable.
Actually, I think his example of DoW vs. DoW2 is quite pertinent. It's the same company with a game that uses the same engine, in the same genre, under similar circumstances. Not in either case is it a completely new game but an overhaul of an existing engine and the gameplay mechanics. I don't see how he's getting ahead of himself at all, especially if they are asking full retail price for a game that has generally had a mediocre beta showing.
I own CoH and all its expansions, and have played the heck out of it. Have not played this beta but have been following CoH 2 intently. I want to make it clear that these facts as discussed are pretty much turning me off from the new title, and they are thus relevant as I am the target audience (as in, someone with money who is willing to pay for what I want). My assumption from their choices is that they are anticipating repeat business, in which case I think he has a pretty damn good leg to stand on here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
208 Comments. 11 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
