Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

User information for CH

Real Name CH   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname Endo
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Homepage http://
Signed On May 6, 2008, 23:34
Total Comments 282 (Amateur)
User ID 49520
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Older >

News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Mount & Blade: Warband
11. Re: Ships Ahoy - Mount & Blade: Warband Mar 30, 2010, 18:37 Endo
I bought M&B way back in the day. I think the current version at the time was 0.6xx. I'm not sure exactly, but I do have a version 0.7xx on my other computer still. Some of the best money I've ever spent on a PC game. I had tried the demo to like level 6, and it didn't take me long to decide it was going to be worth my money. But it's really interesting to me that this announcement should show up today, because I just installed the game on my laptop last night and started playing again, after not having played it for a few months.

If you're someone who's never played this game yet and you like melee combat, you should download the free trial now. Especially if you can get past graphics that are a bit dated. The combat system in this game makes the next best (Oblivion maybe?) look sad.

Also, there are tons of mods and addons out for this game.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Blizzard Game Successes and Failures
13. Re: Blizzard Game Successes and Failures Mar 15, 2010, 20:35 Endo
Jason wrote on Mar 15, 2010, 20:29:
Had it not had them, it would have been a thoroughly forgettable game.
You say that like that would have been a bad thing.

WC2 was very memorable, and I don't recall any heroes there. In fact, most of the most memorable RTS's aren't memorable for their heroes.

So are we saying the rest of WC3 was so bad that the heroes are the only reason people remember it at all? I guess that fits for me. Unfortunately for me, remembering them isn't really a good thing.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Blizzard Game Successes and Failures
9. Re: Blizzard Game Successes and Failures Mar 15, 2010, 18:10 Endo
Muscular Beaver wrote on Mar 15, 2010, 17:12:
The implementation of hero classes in WC3 sucked ass.
In LOTR:BFME they were very well done, best so far imo.
It seems we are in agreement then. The BFME games also had a few other concepts I really liked, such as cavalry literally running over some types of infantry.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Blizzard Game Successes and Failures
7. Re: Blizzard Game Successes and Failures Mar 15, 2010, 17:11 Endo
I can't help but agree with most of the posts here about WC3. The heroes did kill that series. A much better (though still not "great") implementation of heroes (IMHO) was in Lord of the Rings: Battle for Middle Earth, both 1 and 2.

As for WC3, I just very recently tried the game again after having gotten disgusted with it early-on, soon after release and well before I completed the single-player campaigns. I got further this time, but still didn't finish it. To me, it feels like a bad merging of an RPG and RTS, with most of the worst elements of both. One of the things they really got wrong is how limited the resources always are where you start. You can barely even get a base built and some half-decent defenses up in the single-player campaigns before you're already having to start chasing down more gold. This is bad enough for an RTS, but for a game that is far more RPG than RTS, this is entirely inexcusable. It forces you to keep moving so fast you don't even have time to enjoy the story, let alone the other RPG elements. And that's on the easiest level.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Ubisoft's DRM Failure
37. Re: Ubisoft's DRM Failure Mar 8, 2010, 12:52 Endo

Wait, no I'm not.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > On Ubisoft's Online DRM
42. Re: On Ubisoft's Online DRM Feb 18, 2010, 01:55 Endo
BurntSoul wrote on Feb 17, 2010, 22:19:
The reason refunds aren't offered on PC games is simply greed not a technical limitation of DRM.

It has to be something specific along with greed - otherwise we'd also see the same for consoles.

Not allowing for a refund (please, just give me a day to see if I like it) and opening a crappy game just trains the consumer to wait until the price goes down.
They HAVE tried to force the same with consoles. Here's just one link I came across in a quick google search that demonstrates how developers feel about the secondary market, which is also generally applicable to how they feel about refunds:

It's just a lot harder to force the issue with consoles, because those games have always been available only on a disk or cartridge that can be bought, traded, sold, rented, etc., while PC games have their roots in simple games that you actually coded yourself. And after that, they came on floppies which were basically the easiest thing to copy, ever. So on the one hand, you have something that seems more like actual physical property, while on the other you have what amounts to little more than data that can be easily copied.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Virtual Egg Hatches Almost $70K
11. Re: Virtual Egg Hatches Almost $70K Feb 6, 2010, 19:05 Endo
Wow, I guess I've been playing all the wrong games.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Heroes of Newerth Beta Opens for the Holidays
3. Re: Heroes of Newerth Beta Opens for the Holidays Dec 23, 2009, 14:00 Endo
Yeah Stormslinger, I found that to be true also. Of course, part of the problem is it's impossible to find a truly "newbie-only" game there. There's always at least one or two total jerks who shouldn't be there who have to make it miserable for true newbies. I've tried the game several times now, and each time I end up playing less than a dozen games before I just uninstall it again, as I find myself reminded again why I quit playing last time.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Voice Acting Trailer
5. Re: Guild Wars 2 Voice Acting Trailer Dec 17, 2009, 01:44 Endo
Let me know once they have better customer support for their crap than they do for Guild Wars. Until then I want nothing more to do with their products.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Warhammer Online Reenlistment Campaign
5. Re: Warhammer Online Reenlistment Campaign Dec 16, 2009, 14:51 Endo
Maybe once it's FTP I'll consider coming back. Until then, there are so many better ways to spend $15 a month.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Age of Conan Wants You Back
11. Re: Age of Conan Wants You Back Nov 11, 2009, 16:20 Endo
And where, pray tell, would they make a profit?
Item mall, like pretty much every other free-to-play.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Age of Conan Wants You Back
8. Re: Age of Conan Wants You Back Nov 11, 2009, 16:17 Endo
There wasn't anything really wrong with the game when I tried it, it just wasn't that fun. There's FTP MMOs out there that are more fun, so why would I go back at any price?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Heroes of Newerth Trailer
2. Re: Heroes of Newerth Trailer Aug 30, 2009, 14:56 Endo
Yeah, I don't think they know what tower defense games are.

Also, I tried the beta of the game. It's fairly well done and fairly polished, but the heroes were unbalanced, and the stealth abilities of a few of the heroes are completely overpowered.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Ubisoft's Anti-Piracy Plans
105. Re: Ubisoft's Anti-Piracy Jul 31, 2009, 02:43 Endo
You miss the obvious - because they can.
Yeah, that's an obvious answer - obviously wrong.

Sure, lots of people have done *some* pirating simply because they can, but not to the extent that you described. Shall we take another look at your statement?
I know a fair number of pirates who will not purchase a title unless absolutely forced to, like in the case of an MMO or game with compelling multiplayer.
Again, the vast majority of people who pirate to that extent don't do it simply because they can. But you wouldn't know that, because you think you already know the reason people pirate and so didn't even bother asking. Sorry, you don't. It's almost always about money, pure and simple. Most people who pirate games buy the ones they want the most and that they can afford. Then they pirate the rest that they kind of want, but aren't really worth the price tag. Sure, with most products that fall into that category they'd just do without. But with software, it's available so why not? Either way the developer's not losing anything. You'd be surprised though how many of those games they actually would buy if they were more affordably priced.

So yes, the developers are right to consider some percentage of pirated downloads potential lost sales, but they're 100% wrong about why they're lost and what to do about it. Those people aren't going to buy that product at the price it is being sold, regardless. Trying to force people to pay for what they're already getting in such a situation is never going to work. If they actually had the money to buy it, they already would have. Suing won't do any good for the same reason - the money just isn't there. Unless the developer is willing to compromise on the price, then he should simply ignore piracy because he's not willing to do what it takes to make the sale. It's exactly the same principle as whether or not a fancy steak house wants to compete with McDonalds. Look at all those people eating food that they're not buying from our steak house! Look at all those lost sales! If only we could force them to buy our steak, look how much money we'd make!

Yes, the pirates are getting their software for free. Yes, it's illegal. Yes, it's not fair. But from a financial standpoint, it doesn't matter the least bit if you're not willing to do what it takes to make the product worth the money.

In short, the only reason a company should ever concern themselves about piracy is if they are interested in seeing if they can reclaim enough of those lost sales by reducing the price to be more profitable than they are at the current price point.

Any other reason is not worth their time or money. Too bad for them that they can't see that.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Two Worlds II Announced
36. Re: Two Worlds II Announced Jul 5, 2009, 05:18 Endo
It wasn't Oblivion: No shit. The best description that has been repeated that I started long ago is "an updated Diablo".
No, that's not the complaint a lot of people have. The complaint is that it tried to be Oblivion and failed miserably.

Can't hit anything on mounts: I can. Wasn't that hard to master.
Sure it's *possible* to hit something on a mount. The sad part is, even with the damage bonus for hitting something from a mount, it's quicker (not to mention about 10x easier) to dismount, kill it on foot, and remount than to try to kill it from the mount. And that's still not getting at the fact that this game has the worst mount controls I've ever seen, in any game.

There's a reason it's selling for $2.90. Basically, if you've already finished every other hack n slash CRPG out there and you still have spare time and just have to have more, this one might be worth the $2.90 for you. Otherwise, don't bother. Unless there's some major improvements in the next one, it also won't be worth the money.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Two Worlds II Announced
18. Re: Two Worlds II Announced Jul 3, 2009, 16:52 Endo
I guess Bioshock just isn't for everyone. I thoroughly enjoyed it all the way through to the end.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Two Worlds II Announced
13. Re: Two Worlds II Announced Jul 3, 2009, 15:31 Endo
I played Two Worlds. It was fun... for about a week. Attacking from a mount? Sure, assuming you can even control the damn thing properly in the first place. The only reason I used a mount *at all* was for the storage space. I never used it for transportation more than absolutely necessary. Attacking from a mount wasn't even a joke, it was that bad. The online co-op was ok, except it was a terrible pain in the butt to set up, and with the permanent stat increasing items you could get, your character became unbelievably overpowered in no time. Oh yeah, and getting good gear mostly involved just visiting the vendors over and over and over to find the set you liked with the stats you needed to stack with eh... what was it, 100(?) others. Not that it mattered, because the permanent stat boosts let you do anything you wanted with the worst shit in the game.

I never played the single-player much, because I don't care much for open-ended single-player RPGs, and this one just seemed like a game that wanted to be Oblivion except couldn't. Oh, and did I mention that the mounts sucked giant donkey nads?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > StarCraft II LAN Dropped Due to Piracy
132. Re: SC2 LAN & Piracy Jun 30, 2009, 19:44 Endo
I'll be sure to quote you on that after SC2 and D3 hit
A game doesn't have to be good to be a hit. And it certainly doesn't have to live up to the standards of WC2, SC, and Diablo2. I didn't say they wouldn't sell well. I said their reputation will take a hit. And yes, you can quote me on that.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > StarCraft II LAN Dropped Due to Piracy
130. Re: StarCraft II LAN Dropped Due to Piracy Jun 30, 2009, 18:06 Endo
The people who created all the old Blizzard games, Warcraft 1 through Starcraft, really aren't there any more.

WC2 was headed by.... Bill Roper. Which shows that even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I guess even he feels that the times changed.

Which is precisely why I find it so amusing that so many people think that the soon-to-be-released Blizzard products will be as good as the previous iterations. It's been almost 5 years since WoW was released. In that time, all we've had is expansions. It's really not that hard to add more content to a game that already exists. And just look at how well they've done with that. The writing's all there, you just have to know how to read. Blizzard's status as a premier developer that releases only top-notch, fun games is about to take a sharp nose-dive.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > StarCraft II LAN Dropped Due to Piracy
127. Re: StarCraft II LAN Dropped Due to Piracy Jun 30, 2009, 17:33 Endo
And you can't get your LAN online?
It's 2009? Who has a local network in their home that's not connected to the internet, or at least has access to wireless for all the computers?
Even when you can get everyone online, it's not worth the hassle. And that's not even considering the fact that you're now trying to get not just one computer online for an RTS, but at least 4, and maybe 8+. Not everyone is on FIOS you know. In many places around here, you're lucky to get 1.5 Mbps down/384Kbs up. You know as well as I do that there's no way in hell that's going to support any kind of LAN party online. And this is 20 minutes from a major city.

All of which is rather moot. I'm the customer. I don't have to have a "good" reason to not purchase it. It's their job to get me to want to buy it, not my job to want to buy what they're selling. The fact is, for myself and many others, this constitutes enough of a reason to not purchase it that I am quite confident that the lost sales from this will far outweigh any potential sales gained from less piracy. There's plenty other good RTSes to play out there; I don't have time to play them all as it is. Would this have been one of the best ones in the near future? Probably yes. Would I have loved to play this one? I don't see why not. But since they're making this decision, I have no problem at all making a decision to not play it. It's their loss, not mine.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
282 Comments. 15 pages. Viewing page 11.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Older >


Blue's News logo