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 ] Older >
| News Comments > 1UP Label Closing |
 |
| 10. |
Re: 1UP Label Closing |
Aug 8, 2011, 15:49 |
Veterator |
|
|
Was Minecraft sold anywhere but the Minecraft website?
Biggest thing that would entice me to buy indies is if they had demos....at least then you could try the game. Most of them don't have the outrageous following that Minecraft does to put up hundreds of videos showing them off. And even Minecraft had the web "free" version you could play, although it wasn't nearly as good as the game itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > DC Universe Online Server Merges Begin Today |
|
| 9. |
Re: DC Universe Online Server Merges Begin Today |
Aug 8, 2011, 15:39 |
Veterator |
|
|
Let's see. Beta was going, all the builds were pretty decent. Few weeks prior to release they scrambled some of the better builds and made them worthless. Then removed some of the power lines......and released the game. Only to now plan an expansion that adds them back.
Then within 3 months of release they release a statement saying they will no longer update the content like they had promised at a more rapid schedule.
Then they get hacked.
I mean.....they shot themselves in the foot prior to the hack, but the hack just sealed their fate. SOE can not handle third party content MMOs, and I question whether they can handle a true MMO anymore. It's not feasible to have a 20-30 dollar expansion every 8 months like they did with EQ, and to a lesser degree with EQ2.
And they are also trying to cash in on many other fronts with MMOs....they barely produce a game for all the "sales channels" they want to stick into them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > No Battlefield 3 on Steam |
|
| 13. |
Re: No Battlefield 3 on Steam |
Aug 6, 2011, 13:51 |
Veterator |
|
|
I dunno. I mean this looks like Steam being greedy, but then I got to wondering...how does Steam function if it can't tell what you own?
For instance, some games come with a lot of DLC material (skins, weapons, etc) already included in the release game. So you paying to unlock them or earning them is something that the authenticating server from the publisher can tell.
But if you have DLC that is closer to an expansion, Steam doesn't know to automatically update your game with that content if you don't have a key associated with it registered to their service. So it would require another level of complexity JUST for EA games, or sending content to people who may or may not own said content.
I can see why Steam doesn't allow it if they are going to open themselves up to a lot of headaches and issues with no monetary incentive just to please one publisher.
It sucks for us, but other distribution systems that I've experienced such as D2d and the like are not like Steam...you just get a starting point for the game then you have to seek out all the patches and what not afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Diablo III Will Require Persistent Connection, Feature Cash Auctions, and More |
|
| 168. |
Re: Diablo III Will Require Persistent Connection, Feature Cash Auctions, and More |
Aug 1, 2011, 16:26 |
Veterator |
|
|
briktal wrote on Aug 1, 2011, 16:09:
Veterator wrote on Aug 1, 2011, 16:01:
And in the games where you can buy things with real cash, it's always been a "Why bother?" kind of scenario. Whether it be third party sites or whatever, it creates a scenario in which farmers thrive. You can't possibly get a "true" value of an item when there's a guy running a couple hundred accounts that farm all day long completely ruining anything remotely fun about the game.
Your point is incorrect because people will farm the hell out of things with millions of bots as long as there are items to get. Perhaps a greater number of people will do that if they can make money out of it, but people will do it for free.
My point was more that adding this to the game doesn't add anything for anyone who doesn't want to buy their way through a game. In fact it probably takes away more game experience than if people had to get things for themselves. Although yes, I do see that bots would exist whether there was cash or not. It just wouldn't be a prevalent part of the game where people were more likely to try to earn a living off of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Diablo III Will Require Persistent Connection, Feature Cash Auctions, and More |
|
| 150. |
Re: Diablo III Will Require Persistent Connection, Feature Cash Auctions, and More |
Aug 1, 2011, 16:01 |
Veterator |
|
|
There hasn't been a single game in the history of games where I thought "Wow, I wish this game had a cash auction."
And in the games where you can buy things with real cash, it's always been a "Why bother?" kind of scenario. Whether it be third party sites or whatever, it creates a scenario in which farmers thrive. You can't possibly get a "true" value of an item when there's a guy running a couple hundred accounts that farm all day long completely ruining anything remotely fun about the game.
So what I see here are two features that were put into a game that will make it less enjoyable for many people, which cost money and time that could have been spent on the game or lowering the box price. And they are tacked onto a game that many will buy because it exists.......and it will be used by the farmers excessively so it'll look like it's utilized to the benefit of all.
And always on connections......don't see the point. Seems like Blizzard wants to dictate how you can use their games now. With them only allowing "authorized" content and banning people who cheat purposefully just for shits and giggles.
I can accept control on MMOs, but I don't see the point for the control on SC2 and Diablo 3 when they really shouldn't be able to affect others with a well implemented ignore command.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Videogame Physical Sales Down 10% in June |
|
| 36. |
Re: Videogame Physical Sales Down 10% in June |
Jul 16, 2011, 08:13 |
Veterator |
|
|
nin wrote on Jul 15, 2011, 23:05:
Sins of a Solar Empire?
Torchlight?
Basically indie to me means independent, so if they are supported by a publisher they are no longer indie.
Sins of a solar empire was published by Stardock, Stardock helped them with the game. I might call it indie due to it's budget, but doesn't really fit the definition of indie if Stardock was tied in with the game during development.
Torchlight was indie as far as I can tell. It looks like a publisher bought up a major portion Runic Games if not entirely since then though...Im having trouble telling if the boxed sales were pre-publisher buy out or post-publisher.
Torchlight was indie, it's just a matter of when the publisher got their hooks in and when the boxed game was put out.
So you might have Torchlight as a boxed indie game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On PlanetSide 2 Microtransactions |
|
| 21. |
Re: On PlanetSide 2 Microtransactions |
Jul 14, 2011, 01:02 |
Veterator |
|
|
Depends on if it's free 2 play, but also if it's free to download. If I pay for the game and then I find out I need to continue spending money to actually use what I earn in the game, that's a big kick in the crotch.
I know they have resources and such you can collect, but they could just as easily make it so in order to use those you need to spend money on something.
Too much "everything is just awesome!" with this game. Waiting for them to drop the other shoe and give us some negatives BEFORE they put the game out there during the cloud of massive all-positives hype.
Otherwise, I'll be waiting to buy it until I am satisfied someone has actually covered the negatives in the game which won't be for at least 2-3 months after it's release.
Which by that time, they might have renigged on their promises to the PS2 game like they did with DCUO and make it a no-buy anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > DC Universe Online Green Lantern DLC Plans |
|
| 6. |
Re: DC Universe Online Green Lantern DLC Plans |
Jul 12, 2011, 06:44 |
Veterator |
|
|
Guess the subscription fee doesn't include content updates....that game was super short/small/lacking on release...doubt this pack would add even 10%.
This comment was edited on Jul 12, 2011, 07:18. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > PlanetSide 2 Announced |
|
| 28. |
Re: PlanetSide 2 Announced |
Jul 9, 2011, 00:09 |
Veterator |
|
|
That block of text a few comments down sounds a little..........too good to be true. Especially since SOE has a habit of over promising.
I am not a huge graphics fiend, and I think the trailer looks pretty good. It's just a matter of how it will handle large combat with the game looking like that.
The planes doing loops and what not....I just don't see it being fluid without a lot of prediction algorithms, otherwise you'd never be able to hit the other guy with the latency that is built into a game like this. If the latency doesn't exist, then the game isn't doing any kind of data verification to make sure people aren't cheating.
I thought planetside was a pretty good game, I found the major downfall to be just running big loops and capturing bases with little resistance. But I want to bring a little perspective to this game since SOE banks too much on hype and not enough on actually delivering.
And I really don't believe that they will give THREE YEARS of player feedback specific development to this game when they left the other one to fend for itself versus it's other MMOs getting some updates to make them a little more modern and play better.
They didn't even give DCUO 6 months of it's promised accelerated updates, think it was about 3 months or less in fact.
Need someone to hold them to the fire instead of getting the fluff "hype" info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > PlanetSide 2 Announcement This Week |
|
| 11. |
Re: PlanetSide 2 Announcement This Week |
Jul 6, 2011, 03:27 |
Veterator |
|
|
Original Planetside was what...100-150 per side, maybe 300-400 tops in a zone before it turned people away? They never got it to play smooth or reliably stable when a zone was full and they bunched up when it was in the open terrain zones with all the vehicles and what not.
They need to put out actual info, videos, and screenshots about this game. All we've seen so far is hype, and historically with SOE and hype you end up with half a broken game and a lot of promises at launch. And a broken but kind of working game when they finally give up and take back all of those promises.
And then crap out an expansion with another handful of promises that they never really get around to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Star Wars: The Old Republic Bounty Hunter Trailer |
|
| 5. |
Re: Star Wars: The Old Republic Bounty Hunter Trailer |
Jul 2, 2011, 09:58 |
Veterator |
|
|
entr0py wrote on Jul 2, 2011, 04:42:
I think the point of these videos is to quickly show off some of the armor, and attacks of the class. Not to give an accurate depiction of the gameplay or challenge involved.
Only thing is, all of the combat videos I've seen look like this. It may not be one shot kills, but the combat looks like it's out of sync.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Star Wars: The Old Republic Bounty Hunter Trailer |
|
| 1. |
Re: Star Wars: The Old Republic Bounty Hunter Trailer |
Jul 2, 2011, 02:33 |
Veterator |
|
|
What's probably the most depressing thing about these videos is that they have time to pick and choose shots that make him look good and this is all they come up with.
The combat in this game looks really f-in boring even with the guy one shotting nearly everything in the video....it just doesn't look like they are responding properly in most cases aside from maybe the spray on the bugs that turns em to stone/whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Consolidation |
|
| 3. |
Re: Evening Consolidation |
Jun 29, 2011, 01:27 |
Veterator |
|
|
Whether the employees did it or not, company is still responsible for protecting the information. Although I think if the employees DID do it, they would have said so by now. If they are still investigating the problem, then their whole setup was a joke.
However I think they could do with axing a Smedley as well, SOE has been a cluster fuck for awhile now and full of lip service but no follow through for awhile now.
DCUO, update scheduled reduced drastically.
SWG, Closing but they are going to put up more content! (WHY?)
EQ2 F2P = Joke
EQ1, had a lot of serious problems in it's early years when I played. From GM corruption, to corpse erasing bugs, to item deleting bugs during trades, to every expansion being broken when it was released (usually too easy and then made a lot harder roughly 3-4 weeks later.....which I think was another form of corruption letting the high level guilds pillage zones freely for 1 month).
Planetside...they fucked that up no other way to describe that.
Planetside 2, they've been flaunting it but really....it's probably going to be fucked up given their track record with planetside 1 and all their other MMOs.
Vanguard, they bought it fucked up and never un-fucked it up. So that in turn is a fuck up.
SOE may be profitable (I have no idea if it is or isn't, kinda shocked if it's very profitable) but if it had a little less bi-polar disorder with it's statements and promises it might be able to fix stuff. Smedley should be axed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > EVE Online Player Exodus? |
|
| 39. |
Re: EVE Online Player Exodus? |
Jun 28, 2011, 19:32 |
Veterator |
|
|
Cash Shops are kinda like 3d movies, it's cool when you see it done the first or second time. Then it gets old and you start wondering why you're spending so much on it versus the regular experience.
Except cash shops tend to get their claws in and the game is never quite the same as it was on subscription only.
Here's hoping cash shops die like 3d.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield Heroes Hacked |
|
| 10. |
Re: Battlefield Heroes Hacked |
Jun 27, 2011, 16:34 |
Veterator |
|
|
necrosis wrote on Jun 27, 2011, 12:12:
Hellbinder wrote on Jun 27, 2011, 11:37:
no, all they showed is what a group of smart degenerates can do given enough time, dedication and opportunity.
people do care about security, but its hard to prepare for complete scum like these guys who sit around doing this all day long.
And it is that kind of thinking that keeps banks and the like exempt from punishment when severely damaging hacks leak the personal information of millions.
Hacks even today are still treated like 'acts of God'. Things that just can not be prepared for. Yet they can and I for one am sick of these institutions getting off 'scot free' whenever things like this happen.
Agreed. Especially with banks going more online and driving people away from paper. They are responsible for protecting the transactions, if they make it more difficult for themselves...that's really their problem.
They have "security experts" that should be continually challenging their security measures. If they choose not to implement better password rules, or other forms of identification to secure things further.......again that's their responsibility.
And I don't get what the deal is with these places storing old information, especially games like this. They stored early phase beta info....why does that need to be readily available for a game that's been out of a beta for a long long time now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
440 Comments. 22 pages. Viewing page 14.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
