User comment history
< Newer [ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ] Older >
| News Comments > Take-Two Suing 3D Realms |
 |
| 12. |
Re: Take-Two Suing 3D Realms |
May 15, 2009, 09:56 |
Elessar |
|
|
| I hope they rake them over the coals for several reasons. A) for never delivering on DNF and B) for taking 12 million dollars to show nothing for it. Seriously, what a bunch of bumblefucks. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Modern Warfare 2 Details |
 |
| 3. |
Re: Modern Warfare 2 Details |
May 14, 2009, 10:38 |
Elessar |
|
|
I'm particularly excited that they're addressing enemy respawns (i.e. the clown car effect) and opening up the gameplay from the typical linear approach. I always buy CODs for online play, but it looks like I'll be giving the campaign a look this time around.
This comment was edited on May 14, 2009, 10:38. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On Blizzard's New IP |
 |
| 30. |
Re: 2013 |
May 13, 2009, 21:02 |
Elessar |
|
|
I would prefer Blizzard just release Starcraft II instead of spewing out 200000 screenshots a month and basically discussing absolutely everything there is too know about the game before it is even released. To that end, I just ignore anything related to SCII and Diablo 3. Sure they're announced projects, but the concept of ignoring things you don't want to hear about remains the same.
We would all prefer "less talk more game" from Blizzard no matter what the context, but that is simply unrealistic so take responsibility for yourself to avoid the things you don't like (Blizzard discussing whatever in any context regarding unannounced projects), and don't want to hear about. Thanks for the lecture, but you're basically saying the same thing I did. I'm not making any demands here, not that it would matter. Just saying what I prefer, like you did, and sharing my opinion on the matter. That is, afterall, what we do here.
I do generally try to ignore the 200,000 screenshots and teaser info for an anticipated game. But there's no crime in expressing my frustration with having to do that. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On Blizzard's New IP |
 |
| 22. |
Re: 2013 |
May 13, 2009, 18:30 |
Elessar |
|
|
Elessar - but Blizzard is notorious for extremely long development times.
Dagok - Everyone knows this. I didn't say anything related to that. Right, I did. That was a subject that I was bringing up, if you have nothing to say about that, then move on. I have no interest in arguing about what level of announcement this game is at.
Fact is, this game's existence is known and made known by Blizzard. I expressed how I found this frustrating. I would prefer they (and all devs) refrain from any form of mention, announcement, leak, whatever the hell you want to call it... till there is some substance and is preferably going to be released within a year or two. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On Blizzard's New IP |
 |
| 17. |
Re: 2013 |
May 13, 2009, 17:43 |
Elessar |
|
|
Dagok - Why don't you just shut yours? I'm sorry you were offended, though it wasn't directed at you at all.
I don't know where you've been for the past decade, but Blizzard is notorious for extremely long development times. I find it annoying to be teased for 3+ years about a product I'm anticipating. No this wasn't an official announcement, but they started poking the coals of this fire months ago. It's not like this is a surprise.
Speaking of context, I never said they made an announcement. I was complaining about hearing of games years in advance and how frustrating that was. I suggest you comprehend before lipping off.
This comment was edited on May 13, 2009, 17:55. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On Blizzard's New IP |
 |
| 11. |
Re: 2013 |
May 13, 2009, 16:28 |
Elessar |
|
|
Since this IP is new & Blizzard is known for putting in an extensive background on lore, art, etc. I would not expect to see this game hitting stores till at LEAST 2013/2014. I have a friend that works for Blizzard & no he never tells me anything about the stuff they do up their, however a few months back I asked him about this & he said "Dont it expect for quite a few more years". Probably true and annoying as hell. It's bad enough we have to hear/anticipate games 2 years out. Now we're looking at 4-5 years. How about they just shut their mouths until a) they have some actual substance to announce and b) it's coming out within a year, two tops. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Call of Duty 7 In Production |
 |
| 38. |
Re: Call of Duty 7 In Production |
May 13, 2009, 16:24 |
Elessar |
|
|
Caveman - Does anyone else want Call of Duty to just go away already? Absolutely not. I hope for many more to come as they continue to develop and progress the franchise. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > id on Engine Licensing |
 |
| 24. |
Re: id on Engine Licensing |
May 13, 2009, 12:31 |
Elessar |
|
|
"infinitely more complex"? try "more challenging" .. but hey, if you called it what it really is, then your little whiny tirade would sound rather childish and stupid - so i suppose you cant do that can you
"waaaahh this game is too hard" I want to interject to point something out here. If anyone looks childish here it's you. He conveyed his thoughts in a coherent manner. While you come in with your melodrama claiming it's a tirade? I assure you, that wasn't a tirade. Settle down and have a discussion.
To the subject, I agree regenerating health and picking up health packs aren't that different. Not sure what direction id is going to go in, but I agree with whoever said it earlier, that they don't typically follow the mainstream approach to game making. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Call of Duty 7 In Production |
 |
| 17. |
Re: oops? |
May 13, 2009, 12:05 |
Elessar |
|
|
so what innovative MP aspects do they bring to the genre? As I understand it you cant use vehicles, so its just capture the flag or deathmatch? How's it any better than Doom2 or Unreal Tournament!?! If you need to be told why the MP portion of the COD franchise is better or different than Doom2 or UT, then you're a dolt.
WaW didn't necessarily innovate the series, but what it did do is combine the setting and weaponry from COD2 and the leveling, profile system of COD4 to make yet another fun addition to the series. It's not new and better per se, rather fun and different. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Movie |
 |
| 45. |
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Movie |
May 12, 2009, 10:48 |
Elessar |
|
|
I used to bitch about the COD series seeming the same time after time, but have come to realize it's strongpoint... Playability.
COD has never been about cutting edge graphics. It has always had sufficient graphics for each release time period with an emphasis on superb gameplay and an immerse control scheme. If they felt like it (I wish they would), IW could simply release a new map for COD4 and that would add hours of gameplay.
FarCry2 might have had superior graphics, but I put that down after a little over 2 hours because it was just wasn't captivating. I've logged days worth of hours in COD4 based purely on how captivating and fun it is. Granted this is all subjective, but it's not news that gameplay is the most important facet of a game.
Nothing about this movie seemed disappointing to me at all. I think for almost anyone anticipating this game, it added to that anticipation. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Windows 7 RC |
 |
| 45. |
Re: Windows 7 RC |
May 7, 2009, 12:42 |
Elessar |
|
|
Stable 64 bit clients. Speaking of 64bit, I'm downloading the RC and have a choice between 32 and 64bit. Same deal with beta and I chose the safer 32bit option. It's my understanding that the primary benefit for a gamer to go from 32bit to 64bit is to utilize 4GB or more of RAM as the 32bit version will only recognize up to 3GB. I read up on some 32 vs 64bit benchmarks and the performance improvements were negligible. I'm not concerned about hardware driver compatibilities, since it seems MS has a good grip on that situation, more now, than before.
From time to time I'll run older apps/games, so moving to Windows 7 alone is somewhat of a challenge for those. I don't want to compound that by going to 64bit if that's going to add to that challenge. Then again, I'm dual booting with XP, but it's always nice to be able to stick with one primary OS if possible.
Anyone here have experience running current and older games on the 64bit versions of either Vista or Win7? |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Windows 7 RC |
 |
| 9. |
Re: Windows 7 RC |
May 5, 2009, 13:06 |
Elessar |
|
|
I've been running the beta at both work and home for awhile. At work I run into virtually no problems, as all our "corporate" apps work fine.
At home, games generally work great. Newer releases nearly all the time. The only issue I have is with older games. Diablo 2, BF2, etc. For the most part there are workarounds, but it's not as easy as simply loading them on XP.
I've been curious about this RC, my only hesitation to upgrade from beta to RC is there's really no motivation (that I know of). I'll have to dig around for some comparisons, but does anyone here know of any good reasons to upgrade from Win7 beta to RC? Stability hasn't been an issue at all for me, but if one of the RC features was greater stability, I guess that would be enticing.
As far as the debate goes between XP/Vista vs Win7... I personally think Win7 is a great evolution. I'll be buying when it comes out. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > CoD7 Setting Rumors |
 |
| 22. |
Re: Fion |
May 4, 2009, 12:21 |
Elessar |
|
|
Do a sci-fi game right, and people will eat it up. If CoD can pull off a "realistic" science-fiction setting I think it would top the charts. I know I'm craving for a new sci-fi shooter. I totally agree. The COD franchise has always had a great balance of tactical and action gameplay. The other sci-fi shooters tend to lean more towards action, which is fine, but I think a futuristic COD setting would be fantastic. If they maintained a good balance of action/tactics, I believe the masses would gobble it up.
I'd like to see a Civil War COD where you can pick which side to fight for. I also would love to see something like this done professionally, instead of the mods that are out there.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Zeno Clash Devs on Piracy, Demo Plans |
 |
| 98. |
Re: Zeno Clash v. Piracy |
May 4, 2009, 11:57 |
Elessar |
|
|
Dades - Pirate your crap but shut up about it. Be happy with potentially free stuff or at least "advance demos", just stop talking about it. It's like listening to bank robbers who are dumb enough to brag after the fact. See Jerykk? This is why you'll never get through to him. He's comparing you to a bank robber. When is the last time you've heard of bank robbers giving money back to the banks they stole from? Again, the black and white mentality fails. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Zeno Clash Devs on Piracy, Demo Plans |
 |
| 91. |
Re: Zeno Clash v. Piracy |
May 2, 2009, 11:29 |
Elessar |
|
|
All you're doing now is adding to the piracy statistics, adding seeds to pirated games for those who will NOT buy them, no matter what, and most importantly, to me anyway, contributing to the low opinion of PC game sales. Ah, but that's not all he's doing. If he likes it and buys it, he's adding to the good, fact-based sales statistics as well.
You can tell people to ignore games w/out demos all you want. But in reality that's hardly feasible and if I had to guess, most people wouldn't just skip a game. If an honest person follows a game and is curious enough, they'll do what the devs failed to do in the first place; Help them sell their game by offering themselves a first hand experience.
Look, I think it sucks that it comes down to this for some people, but it is what it is. Devs have to fight battles on many fronts, but this is one they can actually address without there being ambiguous factors involved. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Zeno Clash Devs on Piracy, Demo Plans |
 |
| 85. |
Re: Zeno Clash v. Piracy |
May 1, 2009, 16:35 |
Elessar |
|
|
Dades - Ignoring the game completely hurts them a lot more than anything else you do. Bitching on messageboards about DRM doesn't really seem to helping does it? This would be true if I were talking about teaching the devs a lesson. But I wasn't. I was saying that if you're interested in a game, but have no way to determine your money will be well spent, saying you should simply skip it is a ridiculous statement.
Jerykk - Customers and pirates are not mutually exclusive. A very popular stance that anti-piracy folk generally like to take is that there is no overlap between pirates and customers... unless they're talking about stopping piracy, in which case pirates conveniently turn into paying customers. Anti-piracy folk also like to claim that nobody would buy something they already have. Let me ask you this: Why would anybody buy anything if they can get it for free? Piracy is easy and viable to all customers. Why does anyone buy anything? Logically, they would just pirate everything. What's that, you say? Morals and principles? Good point. Now, if a pirate downloads a game and plays it, logic states that they wouldn't buy it... but here comes morality again! If a pirate enjoys a game he downloaded, he might feel compelled to reward the developers by buying it. The point here is that there are varying shades of morality. It's not just right and wrong, good and evil. Some people believe that games should be purchased sight unseen, others believe that games need to prove themselves first. Some people think piracy is inherently evil, other people simply see it as a means to an end. To assume that everyone has the same morals is a bit shortsighted. I didn't read this whole debate, so I can't attest to everything that was said. But I did catch this and I think it was very well said. The topic is the epitome of grey area. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Zeno Clash Devs on Piracy, Demo Plans |
 |
| 82. |
Re: Zeno Clash Devs on Piracy, Demo Plans |
May 1, 2009, 15:21 |
Elessar |
|
|
Verno - You act like the only options are to pirate the game or blow money on it. The third option would be not doing either. Ignoring a game or forgetting it's existence is a ridiculous statement.
I don't think adding DRM, not releasing a demo or anything else is an excuse to steal/pirate a game and never pay. But what about the flip side to this...
Do you think it's "right" for devs to take money from unsatisfied customers? |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Screenshots |
 |
| 3. |
Re: Evening Screenshots |
May 1, 2009, 11:33 |
Elessar |
|
|
I disagree. This went from off my radar completely to my top 10 watchlist.
I like the style a lot and hope the gameplay is as good as the art indicates. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Velvet Assassin |
 |
| 11. |
Re: Ships Ahoy - Velvet Assassin |
Apr 30, 2009, 14:13 |
Elessar |
|
|
Frosty - Fine, replay entire parts where you spent up to 30 minutes playing carefully only to meet one little mistake, and then have to re-do the entire thing, another 30 minutes... 30 minutes? I think it's relatively common now that games have built in checkpoints. You may be getting riled up for no reason. Besides, don't you think quick saves cheapen the experience? I've never been a fan. I feel like a game has a better quality when the devs setup proper pacing with well placed checkpoints. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Rourke is Rogue Warrior this Fall |
 |
| 20. |
Re: Rourke is Rogue Warrior this Fall |
Apr 28, 2009, 10:01 |
Elessar |
|
|
PHJF - Yeah, I'm no graphics whore... but who decided these were good enough for public consumption? I agree for the most part. The jaggies, shadowing and environmental textures are horrible. For some reason, I find the character models very well done. It's like they don't belong in those shitty screenshots. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
712 Comments. 36 pages. Viewing page 32.
< Newer [ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ] Older > |
|