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 Kyle Smith

Real Name Kyle Smith   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname briktal
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jan 6, 2009, 18:41
Total Comments 486 (Amateur)
User ID 54674
 
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 > Ubisoft DRM Glitch Ends
32. Re: And... Jul 16, 2012, 16:09 briktal
 
wonkawonka wrote on Jul 16, 2012, 15:14:
SimplyMonk wrote on Jul 16, 2012, 13:52:
Although you can draw a comparison between Uplay and Battle.Net, it really isn't that cut and dry. Even though anti-piracy is a big win for the publisher in how B.Net functions, it at least makes a honest attempt of giving the user features and security in exchange for the annoyance that is DRM. Blizzard has no legitimate reason for not offering an offline mode to D3, but to say their DRM scheme is the same as Uplay when it comes to user acceptance leaves out the added value B.Net offers.

It may not be that cut and dry, but when you launch D3 to play for a half-hour and it tells you you can't, it's as fucking cut and dry as can be.
I've shelved that piece of shit game.

A lot of the anti-DRM response to D3 is because a) the previous games in the series had offline gameplay b) Blizzard is a "big developer" and c) Blizzard is related to Activision. If D3 was instead the first game in a new IP from a new developer, people would almost certainly be less angry at the lack of an offline mode. However, if another company made a 3rd person action game or shooter or single player strategy game with always online DRM, they'd get just as much anger as ubisoft.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Beta Details
32. Re: Guild Wars 2 Beta Details Jul 9, 2012, 17:29 briktal
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jul 9, 2012, 16:34:
Beta tests are not supposed to be demos... Sure a lot of big publishers are to blame for fostering that mentality as of late, but to come around demanding a game like this have an open beta test just so you have a chance to try it out before buying is ridiculous. Did you ever think for a moment that they don't care to "show it off to draw in more customers?" Is it so hard to believe that there's a studio out there that is actually interested in collecting feedback from players and making changes based on that info, rather than finishing development completely in-house and then putting out a release candidate to build hype while calling it a "beta" to negate most or all criticism?

It's a waste of time and resources to allow the general public into testing, because even a large portion of people who actually signed up for and were accepted into your closed alpha/beta never intended to take the task seriously... But as pointed out already, there are hundreds of hours of gameplay videos available and it is extremely easy to get into the "closed" beta with all the thousands of keys they give away just before each one. So if all you care about is making an informed purchasing decision, there is already ample opportunity for that. Or you can just jump to conclusions based on your warped perception of what game development should be.

Or they could have the restricted beta/beta weekends for feedback and then an open beta a week or two before launch for people to try it out?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Summer Sale Confirmed
39. Re: Steam Summer Sale Confirmed Jul 6, 2012, 16:18 briktal
 
Rhino wrote on Jul 6, 2012, 11:12:
I didn't realize that there was much in the way of significant concern that it wasn't going to happen; but still nice to see some sort of confirmation and smart to do so to reduce the number of rumours that will run about. Looking forward to it, not just for reduced prices, but also because I just find the these sorts of things fun.

Some people were getting concerned because the summer sales have started in the last week of June in the past and it's past July 4.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Golden Rules
34. Re: Guild Wars 2 Golden Rules Jul 5, 2012, 20:40 briktal
 
Fion wrote on Jul 5, 2012, 15:17:
briktal wrote on Jul 5, 2012, 09:22:
My favorite way of respecting the player is requiring them to purchase character slots if they want to have one character of each class.

They have to make money somehow, and that's still better than say The Secret World, which has a monthly fee and still only gives two character slots, with extras costing you money. At least with GW2 there are in game ways to get gems, and almost everything you can buy at the store is also available in game in a variety of ways. Hell in BWE1 and 2 I 'bought' three extra character slots just by buying gems. It's very easy to make money if you know how to work the market (and you don't even have to be at an NPC to do it!) I also got a number of boosts, repair canisters, etc all from Mystic Chests and I didn't buy a single key for any of them, I got them via personal story rewards or drops in the world. Same for about two-dozen dyes.

Reading some of the below comments I can tell some folks either didn't actually play the game and are just saying they did (because of how factually wrong they are), or those people did some newbie zone stuff (1-15) in zones that were zerged and never got past level 10 or 15 and into the much more challenging content. To suggest that GW2 is just 'coast through the game it's so easy' couldn't be more wrong. If that were the case there wouldn't have been two dozen 'this game is too hard!' threads on the main forums during BWE1 and 2.

Yeah they have to make money somehow but could you imagine the shitstorm if a company like Blizzard did it?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 Golden Rules
30. Re: Guild Wars 2 Golden Rules Jul 5, 2012, 09:22 briktal
 
My favorite way of respecting the player is requiring them to purchase character slots if they want to have one character of each class.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 August 28th
43. Re: Guild Wars 2 August 28th Jun 29, 2012, 06:43 briktal
 
Steele Johnson wrote on Jun 28, 2012, 19:06:
I really haven't been following this game very closely, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't this just another "fetch x items, kill x mobs" type game? Isn't this genre way burnt to a crisp?

I like to call these games (and specifically the latest Diablo) a Trash Collecting sim. All you do is run around and pick up useless trash, and then hike back to a place where you can dump it. Over and over and over again. Do that many people have OCD to justify keeping this genre alive? OMG!

The big innovation is that instead of telling you what X is, there's a bar that fills up as you fetch items and kill mobs.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2 August 28th
2. Re: Guild Wars 2 August 28th Jun 28, 2012, 09:57 briktal
 
InBlack wrote on Jun 28, 2012, 09:54:
Ok...fingers crossed that Blizzard is watching that date and brings us PvP (among the other promised shit) to D3.

The WoW expansion also has a chance of coming out around that time.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details?
16. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 11:20 briktal
 
Verno wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 10:48:
StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 10:28:
Finally started playing this, about 7 hours in right now. Will be very interested in seeing the original ending that pissed everyone off, so I haven't downloaded the DLC. People seem to think said ending ruins 3 amazing games worth of content and by itself is an example of Bioware's plummeting stock, so... will be interesting.

I thought ME3 was the best game in the series and I don't think the endings by themselves "ruin" anything. That said they definitely put a big damper on what was an interesting attempt at having a story built through player choice.

I hope you don't just play the contrarian role here and actually weigh it without automatically opposing whatever the internet at large thought. I will have to dig up some of my old posts, I wrote up some pretty lengthy teardowns of endings.

You really think three highly successful games are ruined for his resume because of the ending complaints on forums?

I think he was referring to internal dissent about the writing team being precluded from working on the ending. That was also the area of the game everyone had a problem with, the rest of the game has received nothing but accolades.

I don't think the rest of the game is quite that good. A lot of the minor issues that would normally fill the discussion about the game get ignored because the ending was so bad.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Patch Reduces Item Wear
17. Re: Diablo III Patch Reduces Item Wear Jun 26, 2012, 20:18 briktal
 
Muscular Beaver wrote on Jun 26, 2012, 19:49:
Creston wrote on Jun 26, 2012, 19:39:
Blizzard's method of balancing is just completely nuts.

"This is too strong. It needs to be lower."

*power or ability gets nerfed by 100%*

"Oh, people are complaining about it. I guess we need to adjust it back up a little."

*adjust it back up by 50%*

It's like they don't even understand the concept of taking small steps to adjust something. It's no wonder they keep patching and "balancing" shit for a dozen years, because that's how long it takes with their methods...

Creston
And one year later its back to where it was before the nerfs.
I was sick of it in WoW, saw it once in Diablo 3 and pulled the brake.
I thought about selling my stuff over the RMAH, but then I realized Blizzard would get more money through me, if I did that. So I just uninstalled it.

You realize they did stuff like that with the 21 patches released for Diablo 2, right?

Also, and I don't know why they didn't make a bigger announcement about it, but they removed the level/progress restrictions for digital purchases.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
9. Re: Brevity - Huh? Jun 25, 2012, 10:36 briktal
 
nin wrote on Jun 25, 2012, 10:25:
kanniballl wrote on Jun 25, 2012, 10:23:
OK, I'm confused. What does the 25-Jun Brevity mean?

Is the guard afraid he's gonna strip? Is that supposed to be a rock star? Does this have something to do with a news item I'm not following?


I'm assuming it has to do with that stupid assed jersey shore bullshit...? (FWIW, I didn't find it funny.)



Yeah I'm pretty sure that's The Situation from Jersey Shore. And he's going up an escalator. The joke is...pretty rough.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
11. Re: Gamefly Client Jun 22, 2012, 16:53 briktal
 
jdreyer wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 16:44:
1. Wow, copy Steam much?

Maybe I don't use the right Steam layout but...that doesn't look anything like Steam.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III 72 Hour Restrictions to Change
22. Re: Diablo III 72 Hour Restrictions to Change Jun 22, 2012, 16:48 briktal
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 15:34:
MacLeod wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 15:03:
jacobvandy wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 14:34:
And conveniently, the forum topic from yesterday where they announced this has been deleted, so you can't read where they plainly stated these "unintended consequences" were a part of the deal.

Google Cache is your friend.


Oh I know it's still out there, all the news places quoted it and whatnot, but deleting it (and burying hundreds of angry posts, I'm sure) is a desperate PR damage control move that only incriminates them further.

It was a locked, stickied one post announcement/information thread from a support guy. It was replaced by a similar thread from a CM. They have three options: edit the original post, add another post in the thread, or create a new thread. The first and third choices are basically the same (the original wording is gone) and the second is confusing. This part of it isn't anything to get worked up about.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Curt Schilling on 38 Studios' Demise
13. Re: Curt Schilling on 38 Studios' Demise Jun 22, 2012, 13:50 briktal
 
NKD wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 13:45:
LgFriess wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 13:41:
Note to self... never trust a former professional athlete to run a multi-million dollar company. There may be just a SMALL chance he won't know what he's doing and the company will struggle.

They should have started small, made the mistakes they were bound to make, learned from them, and grew.

It's a fairly common mistake when someone comes from a lot of success in one field and tries another. They feel like they should be able to compete in the big leagues. Actors who try to sing. Singers who try to act. Basketball legends who try to play baseball. Baseball players who try to manage a company.

They definitely made a mistake by putting so much on the line and going so big so early. With the amount of money they had, they could have gotten their company and name established with far less risk before trying big expensive projects.


It's not just that they feel like they should be able to compete, it's also that they are given the opportunity.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III 72 Hour Restrictions to Change
5. Re: Diablo III 72 Hour Restrictions to Change Jun 22, 2012, 12:53 briktal
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 12:41:
All they needed to do was restrict use of the auction house and prevent weapons from being traded / exchanged (i.e. stop the player from picking up dropped weapons). There was no need to stop players from matchmaking, levelling up or progressing in the game.

I'm glad that Blizzard is making changes but how the hell did they think such a change was going to be received? They come across as a bunch of headless chickens. As I've said before, Blizzard's security precautions are woefully lacking and nonsense like this doesn't make them look any more credible.

Well the chat restricts are for gold spam. But yeah, it really shouldn't have the level/progression cap. WoW basically does the same thing, without the level cap.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition
94. Re: Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition Jun 22, 2012, 11:24 briktal
 
Verno wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 11:11:
Yeah I feel like the whole fraud defense isn't really much of one. Steam, Origin and other services have to deal with this sort of criminal activity on a daily basis. Blizzard themselves had to deal with it in WoW pretty much from the start.

They deal with it in WoW by doing the exact same thing, except it removes the level restriction. Other services can get away with it more because those issues aren't as common or as big of a deal. There's no flood of fraudulent HL2 or ME3 purchases from botters who will use the account for a day or two then make another. Maybe you'd get some people doing that to hack in an online FPS/RTS or something. But even then, that's just one game that gets a little hurt, but everything else is fine. For Blizzard, Diablo 3 is one of their three current games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition
81. Re: Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition Jun 22, 2012, 10:52 briktal
 
Asmodai wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 09:55:
briktal wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 09:23:
Though actually they have said here that the level 13/skeleton king restrictions on "unintended" and they hope to remove them later. Which I'm assuming to mean they wanted to push out the other restrictions but didn't have enough time to implement just the set of restrictions they want so they went with the Starter Edition.

Bullshit. There was no way this patch could land with that restriction included and no one notice. Unintended my ass, it was perfectly intended as a stop gap because they can't figure out why their perfect online solution was fucked, and now the backlash is so bad they are crapping themselves and will say anything to try and get out of accepting blame.

"Unintended" in that they don't want that restriction in place long-term, but they knew it would be out there now.

The WoW trial->full upgrade also takes up to 72 hours to remove all the restrictions, though the level cap is raised immediately. However, it doesn't have a RMAH so nobody cares.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition
65. Re: Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition Jun 22, 2012, 09:23 briktal
 
Parallax Abstraction wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 09:02:
This will be the last Blizzard product I ever buy unless they completely change the way they're approaching this stuff in the future. If the only way to protect your RMAH is to restrict paying customers to demo mode for 3 days, then you failed at properly designing and securing your RMAH and that's what should be taken away until it can be fixed.

They should put in some restrictions that prevent all these spam/bot accounts paid for with bad/stolen credit cards from spamming or affecting the economy.

Though actually they have said here that the level 13/skeleton king restrictions on "unintended" and they hope to remove them later. Which I'm assuming to mean they wanted to push out the other restrictions but didn't have enough time to implement just the set of restrictions they want so they went with the Starter Edition.

It was almost certainly, in that scenario, a bad idea to put it out there with the level/progression restriction. People might understand if it takes a day or two to get access to chat and the AH on a new purchase, but not restricting it to the Skeleton King. I mean, realistically, you'll hit that wall pretty quick. You can go without chat forever and the AH for a while without missing much.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition
52. Re: Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition Jun 22, 2012, 08:40 briktal
 
Undocumented Alien wrote on Jun 22, 2012, 08:36:
DiaRMAHblo 3. Everything for the RMAH... Blizzard is dead.

Yeah this is a real nightmare they got going on and it's the fastest selling pc game ever.

Only because the brand name "Diablo" is on the box. Otherwise, because of the always on requirement, this game would have been DOA.

What are all these things designed just to push the RMAH people keep talking about?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition
50. Re: Digital Diablo III Now Spends 72 Hours as Starter Edition Jun 22, 2012, 08:35 briktal
 
Would this look better or worse if you couldn't play at all until the payments cleared, instead of getting the trial version until then?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Legend of Grimrock Editor and Follow-up Plans
21. Re: Legend of Grimrock Editor and Follow-up Plans Jun 21, 2012, 08:41 briktal
 
Beamer wrote on Jun 20, 2012, 15:05:
briktal wrote on Jun 20, 2012, 14:55:
Beamer wrote on Jun 20, 2012, 10:53:
Dades wrote on Jun 20, 2012, 10:44:
Never had a chance to play this, what was the general consensus around here?

General consensus around here is overwhelmingly positive. One of those rare games almost everyone here loves.

I did not love it. I found it an awful combination of FPS and old school dungeon crawler, like taking the worst parts of Zork, Nethack and Doom and throwing them into a pot. Every wall looks the same, you can only move in cardinal directions (it's tile based), combat is real time but turn based, and you find some things by mouse looking. I found combat annoying, I found the dungeons dull, and I really hated that I was in first person but had to move a tile at a time.

I'd prefer playing Zork, Nethack or Doom.

There is a set of "old school dungeon crawlers" more or less exactly like it already, so they didn't really create a genre by mashing up some old games. And I think that was one of the keys to the success/positive reaction to the game. It was a very simple, focused indie made modern version of an existing, well-defined genre. About as close as the "Game X with better graphics" many fans of classics wish for. A lot of people went into it knowing exactly what to expect, and it delivered that. Grimrock also avoided the biggest problem these kinds of genre remakes have because it is such a simple game. That prevents almost all of the "well it didn't have x..." or "back in the day y worked like this..." complaints as well. Picking a genre that has been dead for 20 years didn't hurt either.

Oh, I agree, though none of the dungeon crawlers I played were quite like this (it moved closer to FPS, while still limiting you.)

And I didn't like it. I'm all for reviving old genres, but dislike doing so without getting rid of the old warts. Sticking me on a tile, and keeping me with kind of turn based kind of real time combat just isn't fun to me. It was that way due to technical limitations back then. Now that we're no longer limited I'd prefer more freedom of movement and freedom of combat. It feels, to me, like remaking X-COM and still making you do base defenses where only 3 of your guys have clips because everyone else is holding an empty heavy plasma.

I'd say that for these games, going from tile movement to free movement would be more like remaking X-COM and instead of using TUs, using a move and shoot system.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
486 Comments. 25 pages. Viewing page 6.
< 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