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 Anonymous User

Real Name Anonymous User   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname DrEvil
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On May 31, 2000, 05:27
Total Comments 490 (Amateur)
User ID 5120
 
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 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Metaverse
19. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 14:22 DrEvil
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 14:09:
Obama had two years to grant blanket amnesty and he didn't. He could have sorted the whole thing in your favor in fifteen minutes and he didn't. And you're still waiting at his feet for him to grant you freedom.

First of all, I'm not waiting for amnesty. I was born here, and my ancestors were both native american indians and caucasian immigrants. Second, amnesty would be beyond the president's executive powers since immediately after granting amnesty, it would be invalid again until congress changes immigration law.

His position in fact is that your immigrant family members are still likely illegal- he can come for you whenever he wants to but he is graciously choosing not to, for now.

Thanks for making ASSumptions.

We racist Americans only want two things regarding Mexico: get control of the boarder and make immigrants suffer all the same taxes and regulations that we do while they are here. Mass exportation is a bogey man story told by Democrats to keep you in line.

If you think immigrants don't suffer, you're dead wrong. To keep the government from finding out, the vast majority of businesses still withhold taxes from the paychecks of "undocumented" immigrants and treat them exactly as they would a normal employee in terms of taxes.

So it's even worse than you'd like to believe; the current situation makes immigrants permanent second-class citizens. They grow up here, live here, pay taxes here, but don't get citizenship and so don't have the right to vote to determine how their taxes are spent. They can't legally get driver's licenses in most states, and they can't get many forms of insurance we take for granted.

Even more tellingly, I bet you're not aware that a large portion of those undocumented immigrants actually file their federal taxes at the end of the year using a federal tax ID that was assigned to them at one point in the past. That's right; they have no valid social security card, but still end up paying and filing federal and state taxes.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
12. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:58 DrEvil
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 13:48:
Everyone likes money. They have less under Obama- it's simple arithmetic. Not enough people yet value ideology over prosperity, thankfully.

Actually, I have more money under Obama; and I believe will get even more if his administration is able to get certain social and immigration policies enacted as that will favorably impact my friends and family.

Do I like everything he's done? Hell no. But Romney is not the answer.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
10. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:39 DrEvil
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 12:57:
I don't want national health care. I don't even care if you understand why- the evidence against such a thing being beneficial is so overwhelming that only a blind ideologue could ignore it.

Really? Care to point at some of that evidence from a neutral third-party? Why is the USA the only major, developed economy country that doesn't have it? Some of the greatest minds in history (such as Stephen Hawking) are only alive today because of national healthcare programs in their respective countries.

Healthcare should be provided for every member of a society; a "rising tide lifts all boats" as they say. Any economist will tell you that until you take care of the basic needs of a people in a society, they won't have disposable income to inject into the economy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
9. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:32 DrEvil
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 12:34:
You're 3+ years behind the times and that's why Obama will lose.

You have some pretty interesting claims in your post, and some statistics I'm pretty sure were pulled out of some random nether region.

You seem to imply that Romney is superior to Obama, but you completely gloss over the fact that despite Obama's failures, Romney would be a disaster from a religious freedom and personal freedom perspective.

I don't have much else to say about the rest of your post except that my personal belief is that you are so very wrong. I can't fathom how Romney could win at this point, unless Americans have another collective lapse of consciousness and zombie-vote for Romney like they did for Bush.

You also appear to completely ignore the large segment of non-Caucasian voters who I sincerely doubt would vote for Romney.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Oculus Rift Kickstarter
40. Re: Oculus Rift Kickstarter Aug 2, 2012, 20:51 DrEvil
 
Quboid wrote on Aug 2, 2012, 11:15:
640x800 on a 110 degree FOV screen? That is not a high resolution display.

1) you don't need super high resolution that close to the eyes, it would be nice, but this is pleasant enough by all accounts

2) the latency is what matters; almost every other headset available has poor latency by comparison
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sanctum OS X Plans
12. Re: Sanctum OS X Plans Jul 29, 2012, 16:08 DrEvil
 
Kitkoan wrote on Jul 29, 2012, 02:57:
DrEvil wrote on Jul 29, 2012, 01:52:
I'd like to see what claims you have to backup "OSX is bloated"; I also fail to see how the "bloat" of an OS in the "traditional sense" would even matter here. As far as "Apple's lackluster hardware", which hardware are you talking about? Certainly not the new MacBook Pro Retina with a GeForce GT650M. Their hardware, in general, is certainly no worse than the mainstream PC market in terms of performance or ability.

As I said, look up other games that are both coded for Windows and OSX. You'll notice that the OSX version needs a more powerful GPU due to OSX's excesses usage of OpenCL for all the "pretty" effects. And your comparing a $3000 laptop to what kind of "mainstream PC market"? Most people aren't paying $3K, so please use a more serious example.

Sorry, but I disagree, again. For example, my (fairly old now) MacBook Pro from 2009 has an nVidia GeForce 9600 GT; yet I'm still able to play things at acceptable framerates such as StarCraft 2, Civilization V, etc.

Does it run as smoothly as my PC w/ a GTX 580? Heck no. But it's playable, and it works well enough.

Could the performance be better? Sure. But that's not what I was arguing about.

I will readily agree that on Windows, most games can run faster. But that wasn't my point. My point was that it's a commercially viable platform.

I'm uncertain why you believe the OS' use of OpenCL/OpenGL is the primary cause of issues here.

Most of the performance issues in OS X can be traced back to the kernel or to Apple's current OpenGL stack. But these are things that continue to get better, and I might add are not preventing the commercial success of games on the platform.

The performance of the system is good enough, although I wish it was better in some areas.

So hold on, first you tell me you don't know why I think OpenGL could be a primary cause here, then you go on to tell me you know that OpenGL has problems which would be a primary cause since it is the API used from graphical games. If it's having issues doing the main part of the program/game then I would say that is one of the primary causes. And back to OpenCL doing too many OSX extras like the animation, etc...

No, you implied that OpenGL was somehow broken or busted on the OS X platform; it's not. Apple has an OpenGL 3.2 implementation that's very reliable, spec-compliant, etc. I never claimed it was the fastest implementation though. I merely claimed it was a good one, in the sense that it works as expected.

You continue to harp about OpenCL being the cause of woe, but I've seen no evidence to support that, either from you, or in my own development work, or from the comments of other developers. This is the the first time I've seen anyone claim that OpenCL is the source of performance issues on OS X for games, etc.

Nowhere did any of us suggest that Apple makes "a good gaming rig"; I agree that they don't. What I am willing to claim though is that their hardware is just as suitable as most mainstream PCs for gaming, and their laptops are certainly just as qualified as the majority of the ones on the market. (Exceptions being "portable workstations" like the ones Alienware/Dell sells.)

Define "their hardware" and now you want to compare I'm guessing that $3000 laptop but don't want to compare it to a $2000-$3000 PC laptop?

You're guessing wrong. You could take any of the desktop or laptop systems Apple currently sells with discrete graphics hardware and they would provide a commercially viable system for mainstream gaming for developers to sell to.


Until Apple actually makes it clear that their intent is to lock their platform down, it's silly to assign to classify their actions here as malignant. Microsoft is making the same moves with Windows 8. Believe it or not, the same moves have also been considered (as far as signed application execution) in the UNIX market space for the last few years now as well with the advent of TPM and "trusted boot" technologies.

Turning it on by default pretty much did show they are slowly moving towards closing OSX. Depending on the backlash will show if they finally do, but my money is that they will. But it's not set in stone nor did I claim it was.

Again, until Apple actually moves in a direction that prohibits open development, I'm not going to run around thinking the sky is falling.

Me: Gatekeeper is now on by default and most basic users won't turn it off because you have to go to the Security settings and turn things off (people will think warning signs about turning any system settings off, more so with a security setting clearly labelled Security).

But by default, there's a documented shortcut key for allowing you to open the app regardless of the security setting. Which I believe can be reached through the '?' read more link on the Gatekeeper popup. I applaud Apple's move here as too many people will just run any random thing they download and instantly click through dialogs. It's almost a given that if you require people to actually read something, they won't, and so most individuals won't bypass gatekeeper.

Because everyone reads every system warning and doesn't just click the box to remove the warning/note. Might I introduce you to the average user? Tip, they don't read things like that. Which means that for basic users it kinda will and they are using this as a judge to move to the next step of locking it down.

Did you read what I wrote? I just pointed out that the default behaviour was desirable, and that most users won't read the text, so won't see how to bypass gatekeeper.

The dialog for gatekeeper doesn't offer any options to disable it; the user has to manually nagivate to system preferences and change the setting in the security panel. Or they have to actually read the text and discover the key shortcut for bypassing it.


Yes, I agree the sandbox model needs more permissive models for certain classes of applications. But on the other hand, Apple's trying to do something no one in the desktop industry has done before, so I think it's going to be a learning process for everyone involved. Apple has already expanded the capabilities of the sandbox model from what they provided originally based on developer feedback.

Based on developer feedback? Thats why they are having such a backlash? Over things that developer feedback agreed with?

Apple did make changes based on developer feedback; did I claim they made *all* the changes developers wanted? No. I simply indicated that they already expanded capabilities based on feedback. That doesn't mean they just did whatever they were asked. As I said before, Apple is trying something no one in the major desktop market has done before; it's going to be a learning experience for all parties.


Me: And what API's are good for making games on OSX? From what I've heard, OpenGL support is pretty bad on OSX and DirectX doesn't work at all. The two main API's used for games don't have much support that I'm aware of. This really hinders development on OSX as you'll need to use Cocoa I think?

First of all, as of OS X 10.7, the OpenGL support is very good. Apple has a very solid implementation of OpenGL 3.2. Yes, I wish they supported greater than 3.2, but they have a holistic approach to what they support on the platform that tends to reflect their minimum supported hardware profile. My guess is that the next release of OS X will provide support for a newer version of OpenGL as OS X Mountain Lion was the first version to officially drop support for all pre-OpenGL 3.3 hardware.

You are aware OpenGL is version 4.1, and many Apple machines physically can support it but Apple isn't bothing to? This is hurting them, old outdated support, and 4.1 was released in Augest last year, so almost a year later they still are showing no interest. They are only just supporting 3.2 with the newer version of OSX, which is from Augest 2009. Explain how this is really good support of OpenGL?

You are aware that Apple has chosen to base their API support based on the range of supported systems instead of based on the hardware in each individual system?

Now consider that development cycles for supported products typically span years. Apple completely reworked their entire OpenGL stack and provided full OpenGL 3.2 support only two years after it was released.

Then consider that there were three versions of OpenGL released in 2010, and one version in 2011. Then remember that Apple is on the OpenGL review board and actively contributes to it. They know more about the roadmap then we do, and I can't blame them for wanting to take a more holistic approach to its implementation rather than just blindly updating as fast as possible.

Finally, consider that Intel's integrated graphics chipsets didn't actually support versions of OpenGL greater than 3.0 until the HD 3000/4000 series. And even then, those only officially support OpenGL 3.3 currently {1}. Apple was only able to support up to OpenGL 3.2 on Intel hardware because they have their own OpenGL stack and their partnership with Intel.

However, Intel is promising they'll deliver OpenGL 4.x support by the end of this year or beginning of next. With that in mind, I expect Apple's next OS update or the one after to support OpenGL 4.x.

As for them not supporting DirectX; WTF? That's a microsoft-only API that's patented, copyrighted, etc. No large corporate entity is going to provide support for that. Most of the mobile and console device space (excluding the Xbox) is OpenGL ES (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, etc.), or OpenGL-based (PS3).

This is why I mentioned OpenGL, since pretty much every game runs a on either DirectX (Windows only) or OpenGL, and as both you and I have shown, Apple isn't really supporting it since they are only just using a 3 year old version of it thats horribly out of date.

DirectX 11 is also three years old; so I'll assume your real point is that OpenGL 3.2 isn't as capable as OpenGL 4. I would argue that's a failure of the old OpenGL ARB and the new Khronos group is fixing that.

OpenGL 3.2 is more than capable enough to produce commercially-viable titles given that most "PC" games these days are written for DirectX 9 capable hardware anyway thanks to most of them just being so-called "console ports".

For example, did you know that Torchlight was written using the OpenGL 2.1 feature set? How about the fact that every game delivered on OS X before OS X Lion was using OpenGL 2.1?

Furthermore, take into account the context of the discussion here. My original response was to someone implying that Linux was somehow the better development platform here. I would point out that if your'e using Intel graphics, or any other 3D graphics hardware that relies on Mesa3D, you're limited to *less* than OpenGL 3.0 support right now in most cases. Only if you used the closed-binary drivers from AMD or nVidia do you get better than that. So again, developers would be stuck writing their games for an OpenGL implementation even older than what Apple provides.

As such, I stand by my implication that OS X is currently a better development platform than Linux. Since you can at least be guaranteed a minimum OpenGL 3.2 support implementation as it's now reasonable to require OS X Lion or greater.

Me: As for the Humble Indie Bundles, OSX users tend to buy a few more copies but not enough to compensate the average price between it and Linux so it doesn't not have a greater revenue collected.

Uh, wrong. If you actually go look at the last humble bundle graph for total revenues, you'd see that the Mac users contributed more revenue in *total* than Linux users. Almost double. While the Windows users of course contribute several times the Mac+Linux users combined.

Go back, look at it again. I did, thats how I know. I didn't write that until I checked to see.
Humble Bundle 2 was a tie. Frozen Byte Bundle Linux out did OSX by about a decent amount. Humble Bundle 3, Linux just out did OSX. Frozen Synapse was a tie. Voxitron OSX just out did Linux by a little. Introversion Bundle Linux out did OSX by a little. Humble Bundle 4 OSX sold a bit more the Linux. Android Bundle Linux did more then double OSX. Mojam OSX just out sold Linux. Android 2 again Linux more then double. Botanicula OSX did about double Linux. Humble Bundle 5 OSX out sold Linux by about 2/3. Not touching the Music Bundle since it is game free. And Linux always pays more. This means Linux out does OSX on average. I own all the Bundles but the first one so I can check.


PS, I was too tired to bother with better quote tag but it is still understandable

So I'll attribute my original erroneous conclusion about "double" on average to be wrong. As for Linux "out does OS X on average" though; that's also wrong. And here's the data to prove my point:

http://cheesetalks.twolofbees.com/humble/

Currently, total Mac payments is ~$300K greater than total Linux payments. And if you look at the last Humble game bundle (The Humble Indie Bundle V), total Mac payments were almost ~$400K greater (or almost double) than the Linux payments.

You can also see from the graphs that on average there are more Mac purchases than Linux purchases. The only category in which Linux purchases really "win" is average platform purchase price. Linux users get far less games than most other platforms, so are willing to pay more money for these bundles.

{1} http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/intelhdgraphics4000_2500/sb/CS-033600.htm
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sanctum OS X Plans
6. Re: Sanctum OS X Plans Jul 29, 2012, 01:52 DrEvil
 
Kitkoan wrote on Jul 28, 2012, 21:48:
DrEvil wrote on Jul 28, 2012, 17:01:
Axis wrote on Jul 28, 2012, 15:27:
Mac != gaming.

Companies would be smarter making them for Linux...

The Mac has everything needed to make games, and I would note that the total amount of revenue collected on every Humble Bundle has been greater for the mac than for Linux.

It's also quite frankly a better, easier platform to develop for from a development and OS API standpoint.

The problem is, OSX is bloated and this makes it harder to play games combined with Apples lackluster hardware makes gaming a bigger challenge then it should be.

I'd like to see what claims you have to backup "OSX is bloated"; I also fail to see how the "bloat" of an OS in the "traditional sense" would even matter here. As far as "Apple's lackluster hardware", which hardware are you talking about? Certainly not the new MacBook Pro Retina with a GeForce GT650M. Their hardware, in general, is certainly no worse than the mainstream PC market in terms of performance or ability.

They fill up the GPU (which games need) with the OS's bloat using OpenCL to make it seem faster until you need to use the GPU then you notice that the OSX version needs a faster/more powerful GPU then the Windows version (the only game that doesn't have this issue I've seen are small indie games and Portal 2 and the Source engine is a CPU intensive engine, not GPU).

I'm uncertain why you believe the OS' use of OpenCL/OpenGL is the primary cause of issues here.

Most of the performance issues in OS X can be traced back to the kernel or to Apple's current OpenGL stack. But these are things that continue to get better, and I might add are not preventing the commercial success of games on the platform.

The performance of the system is good enough, although I wish it was better in some areas.

Apple doesn't make decent hardware for gaming in mind and most won't/can't upgrade easily to make a good gaming rig.

Nowhere did any of us suggest that Apple makes "a good gaming rig"; I agree that they don't. What I am willing to claim though is that their hardware is just as suitable as most mainstream PCs for gaming, and their laptops are certainly just as qualified as the majority of the ones on the market. (Exceptions being "portable workstations" like the ones Alienware/Dell sells.)

And with Apples move to it's own built in App store plus the fact that it's slowly locking OSX down to become iOS doesn't encourage anyone.

Until Apple actually makes it clear that their intent is to lock their platform down, it's silly to assign to classify their actions here as malignant. Microsoft is making the same moves with Windows 8. Believe it or not, the same moves have also been considered (as far as signed application execution) in the UNIX market space for the last few years now as well with the advent of TPM and "trusted boot" technologies.

Gatekeeper is now on by default and most basic users won't turn it off because you have to go to the Security settings and turn things off (people will think warning signs about turning any system settings off, more so with a security setting clearly labelled Security).

But by default, there's a documented shortcut key for allowing you to open the app regardless of the security setting. Which I believe can be reached through the '?' read more link on the Gatekeeper popup. I applaud Apple's move here as too many people will just run any random thing they download and instantly click through dialogs. It's almost a given that if you require people to actually read something, they won't, and so most individuals won't bypass gatekeeper.

n the next version or two it could be possible to no be able to disable Gatekeeper and it being marketed off as a selling point "No need to worry about malware as OSX has been now designed to prevent viruses from being able to do anything." This has been touted already as a security for it's users on iOS and a selling point for many.

And it would be irresponsible, wild speculation to believe they'll go further than that. Until Apple says otherwise, I have no reason (as a developer and user) to believe that they will.

The day they do is the day I'm no longer interested in the platform, but until they do, or give indications that they will, I'm not going to waste time worrying about hypotheticals.

At this point, I'd be more inclined to believe Microsoft would do that than Apple.

And many developers are already complaining about the sandboxing for the App store.

Yes, I agree the sandbox model needs more permissive models for certain classes of applications. But on the other hand, Apple's trying to do something no one in the desktop industry has done before, so I think it's going to be a learning process for everyone involved. Apple has already expanded the capabilities of the sandbox model from what they provided originally based on developer feedback.

And what API's are good for making games on OSX? From what I've heard, OpenGL support is pretty bad on OSX and DirectX doesn't work at all. The two main API's used for games don't have much support that I'm aware of. This really hinders development on OSX as you'll need to use Cocoa I think?

First of all, as of OS X 10.7, the OpenGL support is very good. Apple has a very solid implementation of OpenGL 3.2. Yes, I wish they supported greater than 3.2, but they have a holistic approach to what they support on the platform that tends to reflect their minimum supported hardware profile. My guess is that the next release of OS X will provide support for a newer version of OpenGL as OS X Mountain Lion was the first version to officially drop support for all pre-OpenGL 3.3 hardware.

In general, my experience as a developer has been (OS X 10.7+) that if I think I've found a bug in Apple's OpenGL stack, I was wrong. They actually tend to follow the OpenGL spec far more strictly than vendors do on other platforms. Which is sort of nice for a change. The engineers have also been quite helpful and have personally responded to my inquiries on more than one occasion.

As for them not supporting DirectX; WTF? That's a microsoft-only API that's patented, copyrighted, etc. No large corporate entity is going to provide support for that. Most of the mobile and console device space (excluding the Xbox) is OpenGL ES (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, etc.), or OpenGL-based (PS3).

And if so, you're just adding more cost to an already small gaming market. Things like these make gaming on OSX less then a great move and why I think Valve has all but stopped development of Steam on OSX.

"all but stopped development of Steam on OSX"? Seriously? On what basis do you make that claim. They make updates to the steam client frequently on OS X. In fact, when I logged into it tonight there was an update.

As for the Humble Indie Bundles, OSX users tend to buy a few more copies but not enough to compensate the average price between it and Linux so it doesn't not have a greater revenue collected.

Uh, wrong. If you actually go look at the last humble bundle graph for total revenues, you'd see that the Mac users contributed more revenue in *total* than Linux users. Almost double. While the Windows users of course contribute several times the Mac+Linux users combined.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Sanctum OS X Plans
2. Re: Sanctum OS X Plans Jul 28, 2012, 17:01 DrEvil
 
Axis wrote on Jul 28, 2012, 15:27:
Mac != gaming.

Companies would be smarter making them for Linux...

The Mac has everything needed to make games, and I would note that the total amount of revenue collected on every Humble Bundle has been greater for the mac than for Linux.

It's also quite frankly a better, easier platform to develop for from a development and OS API standpoint.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Castle Story Kickstarter
7. Re: Castle Story Kickstarter Jul 28, 2012, 16:59 DrEvil
 
Not surprising; Markus Persson (aka "Notch") posted about this on Twitter yesterday and their donations skyrocketed.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Hardware Survey Results & Bug Fix
6. Re: Steam Hardware Survey Results & Bug Fix Jul 25, 2012, 13:44 DrEvil
 
Verno wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 12:02:
Very surprising number of dual-core systems still out there, I guess maybe the laptops are skewing that.

Shouldn't be; I still have a high-end Core 2 DUO E8400 system at home I built with a nVidia GTX 580, 16GB of RAM, and a 10,000 RPM WD VelociRaptor. Since it's a 3GHz processor, it's been more than fast enough to play even recent titles. Of course, that's likely because every PC game is secretly a console game in disguise But seriously, I haven't felt the need to upgrade the base system.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
20. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 15, 2012, 14:17 DrEvil
 
Seriously, what the others said. Get a laser printer and never look back. If you need to print color, just drop by a FedEx/Kinko's with a USB Flash Drive and print there, it's way cheaper.

I paid $79 for a Brother HL-2270DW on sale at Staples; it's even wireless! Haven't even finished the starter cartridge yet and it has printed a few hundred pages this year.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Free Worlds of Ultima on GOG.com; "Special" Announcement Nears
9. Re: Free Worlds of Ultima on GOG.com; Jun 18, 2012, 18:17 DrEvil
 
Creston wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 11:16:
Free is free, so obviously it's worth it to pick both of them up, but don't be fooled by the Ultima name in the games. Neither game has really anything to do with Ultima other than cheap name placements, and their quality is Worlds Below the actual Ultima games.

Creston

Speak for yourself; Martian Dreams holds a very fond place in my memories.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Game Limit Dropped - EU RMAH Friday
8. Re: Diablo III Game Limit Dropped - EU RMAH Friday Jun 13, 2012, 13:01 DrEvil
 
The Half Elf wrote on Jun 13, 2012, 12:39:
Any Authenticator from Blizzard works. WoW, SC2, etc, all work with Diablo 3 and vice versa.

Except the dial-in authenticator, which is still listed as only supporting WoW and SC2 (strangely enough).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
3. Re: etc. Jun 10, 2012, 16:29 DrEvil
 
Prez wrote on Jun 10, 2012, 16:12:
wtf_man wrote on Jun 10, 2012, 15:19:
The Black Mesa Facebook Page is promising a media release in exchange for "likes" for this Half-Life remake and its Episode 3-length development cycle.

If there were "Fuck You"'s... I would be tempted to make a Facebook account.

Seriously. At this point the creators of the hoax known as the Black Mesa mod are just trolling the community.

No, it's just that "real life" forced them to recognise just how much work it really is to do what they wanted to do. They fell into the trap of hyping what they had well before it was ready; they're not the only game devs to have done this...

Rock Paper Shotgun posted an article about it recently.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage
41. Re: Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage Jun 8, 2012, 19:30 DrEvil
 
Prez wrote on Jun 8, 2012, 18:07:
Am I the only one who enjoyed Rage?

No - quite a few people here said they liked it. I liked it myself, but like I said, I couldn't believe an engine by id could run so badly. I definitely think the game's overall "badness" is exaggerated a bit by some people, but given that this is the same developer that gave us seminal games like Doom and Quake, it's understandable that people would expect a bit more from them.

Once I grabbed the latest nVidia driver, Rage actually ran great on my PC (I have an older Core 2 Duo E8400 system w/ 8GB Memory). From interviews done with Carmack, it seems like the driver situation was a total cluster****. iD had been told that drivers that worked properly would be released before the game was, and that didn't happen.

As far as FPS' go, I had a lot of fun with it; was certainly far more interesting than the various Call of Duty crap.

My only real issue was the lack of an editor; I had gotten so used to that as a given with iD games in the past.

I think it was a good game, marred by screwups w/ the editor, the drivers, and bad timing.

I don't think it was a great game; certainly not as great as Quake 2 was.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage
33. Re: Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage Jun 8, 2012, 16:39 DrEvil
 
Beamer wrote on Jun 8, 2012, 16:09:
No matter how bad Rage was they still make more money on it than on licensing.

Considering they announced they wouldn't be licensing anymore starting with id Tech 5, that's not surprising.

(Happened after Zenimax bought them.)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage
20. Re: Bethesda Still Wants RAGE to be All the Rage Jun 8, 2012, 14:51 DrEvil
 
I'll believe them when they release the editor. After all the hype about being able to just type 'id studio' in the console and go, their failure to ever release it, or to even talk about it after release is a stunning failure.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
9. Re: Spacequest Jun 3, 2012, 17:01 DrEvil
 
Ozmodan wrote on Jun 2, 2012, 13:51:
Never thought the space quest series was very good.

Space Quest I-IV were actually pretty funny; with IV being my favourite.

V and VI clearly weren't so great; the breakup of the comedy duo showed.

The series I really missed is Quest for Glory though.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
6. Re: Out of the Blue Jun 3, 2012, 16:59 DrEvil
 
Sir Graves wrote on Jun 3, 2012, 16:38:
I just buy KFC chicken. Done.

You only think you're buying chicken.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ground Branch Kickstarter
4. Re: Ground Branch Kickstarter Jun 3, 2012, 16:48 DrEvil
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jun 3, 2012, 16:43:
That's a pretty steep goal for 3 days. Why do they need to do that? I didn't see anything skimming the KS page. Is it explained in the video?

It says 33 days when I visit the page (Deadline is FRIDAY JUL 6). Where's the 3 days coming from? I think there was a glitch in the Matrix...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
490 Comments. 25 pages. Viewing page 5.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo