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 yuastnav

Real Name yuastnav   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jun 25, 2010, 15:17
Total Comments 777 (Graduate)
User ID 55800
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Older >


News Comments > New Thief's New Garrett Profiled
8. Re: New Thief's New Garrett Profiled Mar 14, 2013, 12:40 yuastnav
 
Blackhawk wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:44:
[...]
You sound like my nine year old being offered a new food he's never tried. There's no way to know if it is going to suck. It may be a great game.
[...]

If your nine year old turned out to be like that after years of being offered new variations of his most beloved dishes which then turn out to be complete rubbish then this analogy would be a little bit closer to the truth.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
69. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 12:03 yuastnav
 
PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:

[...]
Science is in essence experimentation repeated until a clearly predictable result is defined.
[...]

That is not entirely correct for two reasons:
1. You only described experimental science. There are also theoretical sciences that come to conclusion based on mathematical calculations. The anti-particle is a good example of this because the idea, that something like that exists, wasn't even conceivable until the theoretical predictions of Dirac.
It was an experiment that verified this, yes, but the prediction itself was theoretical.
2. If science would only describe theories that completely predict a phenomenon then quantum mechanics would not be a scientific theory. It predicts a lot of outcomes but it ultimately fails to predict which one will actually happen.


PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:
[...] I wouldn't have arrived at that conclusion from blind faith but from inductive or deductive reasoning (which I learned in the 8th grade). [...]

I would be careful with inductive reasoning.
If I use inductive reasoning to say that the sun will rise tomorrow I need to have faith in the fact that the universe does not change in a way that science wasn't able to predict due to a lack of data; there are a lot of things we do not know yet.


PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:
[...]
No. We don't know the end (if there even is one) of the trail.

I think Beamer was talking about the end of science, not the end of everything. While the end of everything arguably does not exist you can actually historically guess when scientific argumentation may have begun.


PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:
[...]
And what we learn from science directly improves our quality of life, whereas religion's only practical function is to give people hope.
[...]

Which also improves their lives because it gives them, psychologically speaking, comfort which can result in physiological changes.


PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:
[...]
Science will make gods of men.
[...]

I know you are being hyperbolic but that is impossible by definition because you will never be able to create energy out of nothing. That is, most likely, scientifically impossible.


PHJF wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 11:30:
[...]
Actually, that already happened back in the Dark Ages. Ironically it was monks who painstakingly preserved what knowledge humanity had by then accumulated.

Afaik most of the preserved knowledge that led to the renaissance actually came from the middle east, i.e. from the Arabic countries which were the stronghold of civilisation.


[edit]
Hmm, my syntax seems to be faulty but currently I don't see the problem (i.e. where I forgot to open or close a quote). Sorry about the mess

This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 12:51.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Alice 3 Possibilities Raised
4. Re: Alice 3 Possibilities Raised Mar 14, 2013, 10:22 yuastnav
 
I only played the first one (watched a let's play of the second one) and while I liked some aspects of how the world/story was designed the games themselves were not that great.
I still liked the first one because it was on the Quake 3 engine (I love that engine, it was the platform for some great games, i.e. Jedi Outcast...) but the second one was really not that great because it was too repetitive.
I also had a problem with how they handled the story. At the end of the first game she was like "Yay, I'm cured!" and the second game was basically "lol NOPE".
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
65. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 09:14 yuastnav
 
InBlack wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 08:38:
@yustnav:

1. Science is nothing like religion, please look up the definition of the scientific method because nothing you (or Kuhn) have stated actually holds water. The only reason science 'appears' in some ways to resemble religion is because humans are irrational beings who live in their imagination. Remember that an 'appearance' of similarity does not indicate similarity itself.
[...]

Are... are you serious?
I do have to say that I am a bit speechless now.
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", the book that was written by the physicist and philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn, caused an uproar in the scientific community and forever changed how science was viewed, by scientists but also by non-scientists, in the whole world.
Don't get me wrong, you can still claim that "nothing that Kuhn has stated holds water", but I would at first advise you to acquaint yourself with his works and think properly about it because the way I presented it may have been not entirely true and does Kuhn no justice.
It's not some "crazy idea" that someone thought up overnight and which is barely known, quite contrary it, or rather a modification of it, is a well accepted theory of how scientific progress works.

InBlack wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 08:38:
@yustnav:
[...]
2. You can argue semantics with me all day long but I dont believe that god or gods (divine beings whatever) exist. How does my lack of belief indicate another belief? I also dont believe that unicorns exist. Does that mean i BELIEVE that unicorns dont exist? Quit your circular and flawed logic and trust me even if you cant understand this very simple logic. Atheism IS NOT A BELIEF system. It is a lack of one.

Of course that means that you belief that unicorns don't exist. How is that flawed or circular? And please stop being so damn condescending as if you know it all.
When I say that I don't believe that magic exists that means I believe that magic does not exist. When I don't believe that a fifth fundamental force does not exist I believe that a fifth fundamental force does not exist.
I just rewrote it in a different way but the main statement is still the same.

[edit]
I agree that this is arguing semantics. Maybe it is different for different atheists. Some believe that there is no god and other know there is no god.
But then I come back to my previous point where I state that there are few things you can truly *know*. Oh well.

This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 09:24.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
61. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 07:32 yuastnav
 
SimplyMonk wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 20:03:
NewMaxx wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 14:57:
You'll be disappointed. What most people don't realize is that science is just another religion.

Science isn't a religion. It might appear to be at times, but only because we, as humans, are so bad at living up to its ideals. The same could be said for religion itself in that most of them have inherently beneficial aspects to them, but they are abused and distorted from their ideals.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that humanity sucks and is the reason we can't have nice things.

The way that science works and has worked for the last hundreds of years is in some ways similar to religion.
Popper basically said that scientists are rational beings who, when confronted with a new, superior theory, will abandon the old one. To that Kuhn answered that it is not true and that older scientists will still cling to older theories while younger scientists will be more interested in newer theories and the newer theories will then prevail because the older theories will die out with the older scientists.
A good example for that is quantum mechanics.
Many of the physicists who played a more or less great part in quantum mechanics like Planck, Schrödinger and Einstein were opposed to the idea of quantum mechanics because it made them uneasy.
There were rational reasons for and against quantum mechanics but in the end it all boiled down to faith, to a believe. Some wanted to believe in quantum mechanics and therefore continued working on it, others didn't. A paradigm shift occurs and the older theories are (at least partly) replaced by the newer ones.

And it's not bad that it works that way, because Popper claimed that the older theories are completely removed and not used anymore, which is not true. They were true for a period of time until people encountered problems that were not solvable and incompatible with these theories, so they made new theories while some people still tried to salvage the older theory by trying to make it compatible with these incompatible problems, which can work to an extent but more often than not doesn't.

There is no perfect ideal of how science should be. Science works the way we do it.


InBlack wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 04:53:
I love it how Beamer actually tried to convince some of us that our lack of a belief system is somehow a belief system itself.

Nice try dude, but the ounis of proof is on you. You want to have a God? Fine you can have one, or ten for all I care. As far as Im concerned they DONT exist, since there is no evidence of their existence if you could provide me with some I would be glad to change my mind.

I think there are only very few things that one can *know*, i.e. it is possible to doubt almost everything, so I don't think that one can say that one *knows* that there does not exist a metaphysical being that exists in a state indescribable by something out of this universe (which is the reason why the word "state" would also be misplaced here) which has, by definition, the ability to create energy from nothing.
In that sense atheism, too, would be a belief system. And being able to prove one thing or the other would be, from a human standpoint, meaningless because if you aren't dealing with symbolic logic or mathematics no proof is infallible.
On the other hand atheism is the opposite of theism and by using that word alone atheism is just the absence of any belief system.

Personally I would say that agnosticism is the actual absence of a belief system because atheism would be, by argumentum e contrario, the belief that no deities exist.


This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 07:42.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Offline SimCity
39. Re: More on Offline SimCity Mar 13, 2013, 08:51 yuastnav
 
RollinThundr wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 08:19:
Creston wrote on Mar 12, 2013, 22:37:
In other words: EA is full of shit, as usual. This is about DRM and about preventing mods so they can DLC it out the ass. This comes in addition to reports from EA's forum that the engine is just plain broken and just goes into full "what the fuck ever" mode once you reach a certain number of people. I hope the whole fucking thing burns around them and their shit-ass company.

Bye Maxis. You can join the corpses of Origin, Westwood, Bullfrog and all the other once great developers who were fucking murdered by EA. Once upon it time, it was nice playing your games. Not anymore.

Creston

Instead you'll make 50 post per EA thread bitching because that's oh so more productive than swearing off EA titles. I get the outrage with SimCity, terrible design choices and crippling DRM. If I had bought the game I'd be pretty livid myself. You Creston take the cake though, I've never seen someone waste so much time and energy on something they clearly hate.

Then I'd recommend you to watch some Nostalgia Critic or AVGN episodes. :>
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Consolidation
23. Re: Evening Consolidation Mar 12, 2013, 10:54 yuastnav
 
Creston wrote on Mar 12, 2013, 10:50:
Jerykk wrote on Mar 12, 2013, 01:38:
Beamer wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 23:29:
Creston wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 23:07:
Ray Marden wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 20:44:
They have a point, though, as much as I don't like admitting it. Today, my PC is vastly more powerful than the hardware in the PS4. And yet, come launch time, all of my games will step up to PS4/Xbox 720 image quality and I suspect my PC will struggle to play games anything close to 60 FPS at 1080P.

The "next-gen" consoles won't play 1080p at 60fps either,

People keep saying this.
I don't think they understand how meaningless it is.

Won't play what at 1080p and 60fps? Anything? The best games? Some games? All games?

What? Why even bother having this conversation? People keep talking about how the consoles will or will not run at that, and then claiming their PCs can. If we're not talking about something specific than it's meaningless. Again, I can easily write a piece of software right now that the PS3 can run at 1080p and 60fps. I can also write a piece of software, hell even with the same exact output, that it can't.

I think he meant that the vast majority of games won't run at 60 FPS, much like with this generation. The next Killzone has already been confirmed to be 1080p30 and I expect that to be the same for the rest of the games.

Beamer likes to be deliberately dense and ignore everything but the except letter of what someone said for the sake of seeming smarter.
[...]

I wouldn't say that. Some people are just pedantic like that, I know that very well from personal experience.
The problem is that sometimes I do that deliberately and other times I don't even know I'm doing that and people get mad at me. :/
That's why it's always good to think carefully about what you are going to write.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Tech Bits
5. Re: Evening Tech Bits Mar 12, 2013, 08:43 yuastnav
 
deqer wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 21:24:
[...] I mean, who uses printers anymore? [...]

Many, many, many, many, many, many, many people do.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA Will "Look Into" Offline SimCity; New Patch Released
56. Re: EA Will Mar 11, 2013, 08:17 yuastnav
 
Optional nickname wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 08:01:
[...]
^ NKD, I am opening a game dev studio and I wish to hire you as lead director to a variety of games, for your post demonstrates what I thought was a lost character trait amongst the 7 billion people alive today. Thank god I am not alone in thinking about what is epically wrong with the gamer audience of today's day and age. Finally some substance showing after a long wrath of stupidity rage out there.

EA needs to get with the program, keep on voicing people !

You do know that not all gamers are completely shallow when it comes to principles, right? It's a minority but I don't think it is as bad as you make it out to be.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Max Payne 3 Steam CD Keys Exhausted
31. Re: Max Payne 3 Steam CD Keys Exhausted Mar 11, 2013, 06:36 yuastnav
 
A good reason not to play a game is because there is barely any game in it. I really loved the first two games but I don't think I will "play" the third one.
I really, really hope that it hurt Rockstar for pulling crap like this.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
3. Re: Steam Top 10 Mar 10, 2013, 16:28 yuastnav
 
Yeah, I finally went ahead and bought it.
I just wished that there weren't so many damned wasteland servers. It is rather difficult to find a good game where you can actually work somewhat as a team and have some fun but it is not impossible.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On Sale
4. Re: On Sale Mar 10, 2013, 12:40 yuastnav
 
Rawbots is (or at least was yesterday) completely free.
At first I was not really interested in this but now that I have tried it out it is pretty awesome, definitely a lot of potential there (it is still in early alpha).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Arma III Alpha Released
67. Re: Arma III Alpha Released Mar 6, 2013, 06:07 yuastnav
 
DangerDog wrote on Mar 5, 2013, 19:56:
I know, there's all sorts of alpha stuff in the game. windows making a breaking glass sound but don't actually break. I did find one object I could sort of interact with, a bucket. I shot it and it turned over on its side - no physx type interaction just flipped over.

They've really improved the movement, especially when in close quarters. If the AI is up to the task you could make some really cool rainbow six type scenarios.


As much as I loved Rainbow Six (Raven Shield was probably the best one but I enjoyed Rogue Spear a bit more) the AI was never one of its strong points.
Currently I am on the verge of buying Arma 3 (it would be good to support a PC developer but I am really not sure how much fun I am going to have with it). Someone tip me over!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Arma III Alpha Released
50. Re: Arma III Alpha Released Mar 5, 2013, 16:16 yuastnav
 
Quboid wrote on Mar 5, 2013, 12:44:
I always tell myself not to buy Arma, it's glitchy as hell and you'll never play it enough to justify it. Then I buy it. Then I find it's glitchy as hell and I don't play it enough to justify it.

Dammit I'm so tempted. I should wait for a demo but that looks awesome and it's a good price. The movement and feel of Arma2 was what killed it for me and apparently that's fixed.

Decisions decisions decisions.

Heh yeah, I am in a similar situation at the moment.

I think I only played a few hours of Arma 2 but I remember that I did play Operation Flashpoint quite for a bit; The campaign until you got your own command (I am not really up to this), after that I played around in the editor.

I am tempted but I am not sure whether I'll still have the time to figure it out. :/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Natural Selection 2 "Gorgeous" Update This Week
22. Re: Natural Selection 2 Feb 27, 2013, 11:28 yuastnav
 
InBlack wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 05:50:
I bought it a month or so ago, still havent logged more than two hours with it. I like what I see but it feels very 'basic'. Cant find another word for it.
[...]

Shame because that game has a really steep skill kurve.


InBlack wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 05:50:
[...]
All the maps feel samey, and the gunplay is kind of weird. Its crap that I cant shoot and run for shit. If it featured a more run and gun gameplay ala Quake, Doom etc. (for the marine side at least) it would be more fun, as it feels like COD style shooting without the aiming options. I wish they would make up their mind.
[...]

Shooting without iron sight and then not being able to shoot while sprinting is actually not that uncommon. Oo
Shooting while sprinting would be rather stupid because you wouldn't be able to hit anything.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Natural Selection 2 "Gorgeous" Update This Week
11. Re: Natural Selection 2 Feb 26, 2013, 16:48 yuastnav
 
Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 26, 2013, 12:38:
Anyone from germany here and knows if this will be a censored version if bought from Germany?

My version is not censored, as far as I know.
I did preorder it back in May of 2009 when preorders first opened up so I don't really know what the current situation is.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Natural Selection 2 "Gorgeous" Update This Week
10. Re: Natural Selection 2 Feb 26, 2013, 14:26 yuastnav
 
jdreyer wrote on Feb 26, 2013, 12:58:
I would buy this game if there were a single player component. Even just skirmish bot matches vs. the AI.

I doubt it'd be possible to make a decent Skulk/Lerk/Fade AI. (making a decent fade AI for the 3.0 or even 1.04 fade would be even more difficult).
Natural Selection was always about other people.


eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 26, 2013, 10:47:
[...]
And of course.. 128 players. And a 1:2 balance for Marines:Aliens ie. Aliens get twice as many players as marines. That way, you could build balance around that. And make huge swarms possible.... ;p

If you have such asymmetrical gameplay it is difficult to balance the game. Natural Selection was balanced for 6vs6 and basically everything beyond 8vs8 was a mess.
If you want something akin Battlefield 3 you would need to redesign large aspects of the game and the classes.

This comment was edited on Feb 26, 2013, 14:36.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > No Diablo III PC/PS4 Play
24. Re: No Diablo III PC/PS4 Play Feb 26, 2013, 06:02 yuastnav
 
Sempai wrote on Feb 26, 2013, 05:01:
KilrathiAce wrote on Feb 26, 2013, 02:44:
Sony just scared to have their console players get pwned by PC lols


Dude, just stop..You make the PC adults look bad.

It is not an unreasonable assumption though.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Destiny Announced for Consoles
44. Re: Destiny Announced for Consoles Feb 18, 2013, 17:48 yuastnav
 
Jerykk wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 12:39:
Kajetan wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 05:39:
Jerykk wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 05:02:
They revamped the equipment system, the skill system, the combat and the party system.
In this case: Revamping = dumbing down. A lot!

In comparison to Gothic, Risen 2 was nice and simple action game with a few RPG elements. I am GLAD, that the sales of Risen 2 weren't nearly as high as expected. As with Gothic 4: Arcania, the attempt to gain a broader audience for a once dedicated niche RPG franchise was not very sucessful. RPG fans do not want a watered down gameplay and "casual" players have no interest in a game they knew only as a complicated and time consuming RPG.

Not really sure what you're talking about. In the Gothic games, your armor was always full body. In R2, you could choose individual components, each with their own unique attributes and bonuses. That's not dumbing down. That's the exact opposite of dumbing down. Same with the skill system. In R2, they added a bunch of active abilities, in addition to the attributes and passive skills. They also added skill checks during dialogue, something sorely lacking from the Gothic series. Again, exact opposite of dumbing down. Then they added a proper companion system, unlike the Gothic games where you only had companions for certain quests. The new companions are much more fleshed out and have unique abilities that compliment the player. Again, exact opposite of dumbing down.

The only part that was actually dumbed down was the animals' day/night cycle reactions. Unlike Gothic, the animals in R2 never sleep, which was disappointing. Oh, there was also the fact that you could only choose from two factions instead of three, but this was compensated by the fact that the story missions were generally much more open-ended.

Damn you Jerykk, you actually kinda make me want to play Risen 2 now. :>
Well, I still hope that they get away from that action/adventure with rpg elements fantasy rpg to something else, like an action/adventure with rpg elements in a science fiction setting. :p
[edit]
I think I do remember that someone from that mentioned in an interview a long time ago, something about science fiction. Oh well, who knows what will happen. Still sad that KaiRo departed.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Destiny Announced for Consoles
34. Re: Destiny Announced for Consoles Feb 18, 2013, 03:34 yuastnav
 
Beamer wrote on Feb 17, 2013, 22:34:
[...]
But that's not the argument the original poster made. He called them idiots for making the game millions of people love.
[...]
I'm all for thinking Halo games suck, but I'll never say to someone at Bungie "gee, aren't you guys stupid for being one of the most successful studios of all time!"

In a sense he is right though. They are idiots for making the same game, if this is true, not because it brings them a lot of money but because they do it's the same game.
Gothic 1 is probably my most favourite game of all time and this is basically the same game that Piranha Bytes did over and over again. I didn't finish Risen, nor did I even buy Risen 2. Why? Because I am sick and tired of them making the same game, over and over again. I want something new.
And this is also how I feel about Bungie. If they want to make the same game to shill the masses with the same concept/gameplay so it makes them money - fine. But I will still think they are idiots because remaking the same game shows because they fail to innovate and are incapable of coming up with something new. Maybe I am wrong, maybe it will be completely different. If not then it is not unreasonable for calling them idiots.

To be honest though: I wouldn't even care; let them make their stupid game. But the fact that Jason Jones has the audacity to say "And now nobody plays shooters the way they used to play them before Halo ’cause nobody wants to." instead of being honest and saying someting like "We will not bring this game to the PC because we don't know anything about how to make a successful PC shooter/don't know how to make something new/don't want to make it for the PC just because/some other reason." is rage inducing. You call the other poster arrogant and stupid? Saying that no one plays shooters the way they used to is arrogant and stupid. Either there is a massive reality distortion field around him he is purposefully saying stupid stuff like that to troll PC gamers.
Because this is what that sounds like. It's on the level of 4chan trolling. Which doesn't speak in his favour and makes them even more forgettable.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
777 Comments. 39 pages. Viewing page 13.
< Newer [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo