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 Crustacean Soup

Real Name Crustacean Soup   
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 Jul 14, 2011, 01:04
Total Comments 381 (Amateur)
User ID 56982
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ] Older >


News Comments > Evening Mobilization
7. Re: Evening Mobilization Jun 28, 2012, 02:00 Crustacean Soup
 
Jay wrote on Jun 28, 2012, 01:30:
If I didn't have a tablet already I'd order one in a heartbeat. By far the most impressive thing about it is its low low price, despite using seemingly hi-quality components.

Also... 7" sounds a tad too small. All the demos they showed so far were done in portrait orientation, which is suitable for smaller form factors like this. I just hope Google isn't going to recommend or mandate portrait presentation for app developers going forward, because that's definitely not my preferred way to hold tablets.

Considering that most 10" Android tablets seem to be 16:9 and traditionally held landscape, I really doubt that's going to happen. Most apps support both right now, I don't see that stopping.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Tribes Ascend on Steam
7. Re: Tribes Ascend on Steam Jun 27, 2012, 23:06 Crustacean Soup
 
Prez wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 22:57:
At any rate, is what's being offered in the starter pack worth getting? How long would it take a mediocre-skill noob to get all that stuff by just playing and how much of a slog would it be?

I'd do it, if only for the permanent 50% boost. I paid $7.50 during the beta for a 2-week booster which included the permanent 50% VIP boost (back when they still offered that). Considering what I've gotten out of the game, and how much extra XP that boost has given, it's definitely been worth it.

The 4 bonus weapons will help. Each is probably worth a few days of effort, and they're all actually weapons you'd actually want (aside from the MIRV, they're among the first things I'd unlock, actually), and the Reach and Ultracapacitor II upgrades are very handy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Mobilization
3. Re: Evening Mobilization Jun 27, 2012, 22:56 Crustacean Soup
 
I really prefer a 10" tablet. I have a 10" HP Touchpad, and I've had a Kindle Fire (bought used, resold for what I paid for it). The screen difference is big in practice. If I really need portability, I have my smart phone.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ghost Recon: Future Soldier PC Issues
24. Re: Ghost Recon: Future Soldier PC Issues Jun 27, 2012, 17:29 Crustacean Soup
 
Darks wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 17:19:
go read this one from Rage3D. pretty good one and sums the game up very well.

www.rage3d.com/articles/gaming/ubisoft_ghost_recon_future_soldier_tech_review/


Dark
So in summary: looks pretty, no dedicated servers, consolized UI. That's not much of a review, it doesn't really sum the game up at all (though it is on Rage3D, they weren't aiming for a review review).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
15. Re: Ships Ahoy - PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Jun 26, 2012, 23:42 Crustacean Soup
 
Jerykk wrote on Jun 26, 2012, 22:51:
The game feels like a mix of Vegas and Ghost Recon.

I guess that's a good thing if you enjoyed the more recent entries in those series? If you didn't (and many fans of the original R6 and GR games did not), Future Soldier looks to be yet another Tom Clancy game that strays further from its realistic and tactical roots.
Indeed. I liked the plodding pace of the original games, it was different.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Endless Space Begins Next Month
12. Re: Endless Space Begins Next Month Jun 26, 2012, 22:01 Crustacean Soup
 
The main issue I still have with Endless Space is Warp. There's no choke points, no intercepting or blocking units until they reach your planet. I also don't like the cutscene battles; if I could just play my cards and have a quick battle, I'd be happier (last I checked, autoresolve never leads to anywhere near as good an outcome as manually fighting). AI diplomacy is also a tad simplistic, and I tend to play 4X games singleplayer so that sucks.

Drifting back off topic: we should be able to do massive space battles these days. I'd love to see a new X-Wing/TIE Fighter game with a few hundred ships flying around at once. I'd expect that a competitive Space Sim would be cheaper to make than most other genres these days; you have ships, effects, and UI to create. No levels, no level design, no environment art, little to no character art, few if any animations...

Edit: choke points, not "checkpoints"

This comment was edited on Jun 26, 2012, 22:48.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
36. Re: Steam Top 10 Jun 25, 2012, 11:15 Crustacean Soup
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jun 25, 2012, 07:54:
I still think that civs are overly aggressive and not very strategic. In my game last night I was attacked early on from the sea by a character that although obviously had a larger army was not in a position to use it against me. I destroyed his invading army with minimal effort but he refused to negotiate peace and had all the city states allied to him. I then had to annex them all and he still didn't give up. So I sent in a naval fleet and captured one of his coastal cities, fended off the assault and he offered me everything in peace... for about 15 turns, before breaking his word and launching another attack. I razed his city, withdrew, turtled on science and then nuked him into oblivion. The point is that AI was basing all its decisions on who had the highest rated army rather than on any strategy or on probable outcomes.

See, I said that bit about Sulieman because he didn't have the larger army. Nowhere close (and his war declaration message reflected that, which was a neat touch). He did have the largest on that continent and sued for peace after he took that city I planted on his turf. Maybe I'm just having good luck this game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
31. Re: Steam Top 10 Jun 25, 2012, 02:15 Crustacean Soup
 
Chromius wrote on Jun 25, 2012, 00:04:
A game does not even need to be made for todays consoles for it to be dumbed down for the console masses. Civ 5 was very basic on release and its funny how you all get faked out by the pretty graphics, just like the oversized boobs on the blonde bimbos on tv that are ugly as hell. It was simple and is simple.

In what way? The interface is much nicer, they changed Happiness from a city thing to an empire thing and got rid of health, they added building and tile improvement maintenance, they got rid of war weariness, they added a far higher (empire-wide) happiness penalty for annexed cities, they got rid of religion, they added extra brains to the diplomacy-side AI to form blocs more organically.

There were some heavy balance and AI issues on release, but exactly where's the dumbing down?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
23. Re: Steam Top 10 Jun 24, 2012, 21:40 Crustacean Soup
 
I've heard complaints about irrational AI diplomacy; either they've improved it a lot, or those complaints were off, because I'm not seeing it. Civs declare war on me when they have a comparably powerful military (or are desperate; e.g. I wiped out two civs, then settled on Suleiman's continent, ignored his warnings and set up a second city right beside his capital), and they usually only seem to do so now when they have a sneak attack ready. They form blocs. Blocs occasionally collapse, and your friends will turn on you if you start to encroach on their territory or start to become threatening; not really a bad thing, and they always seem to act at least somewhat 'rationally'.

Spies are a nice new mechanic. Melee naval units and coastal attacking are very nice additions. I'm still not sure if religion makes a very large difference, but my current (and first) game I decided not to play religion-heavy, and went with Rationalism instead of Piety. I like the new units and techs fleshing out the early-modern age, and the combat rebalance seems to have worked well.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Consolidation
12. Re: Saturday Consolidation Jun 24, 2012, 15:55 Crustacean Soup
 
PropheT wrote on Jun 24, 2012, 12:10:
They do look stunning for the platform the games are made for, and those higher resolutions don't really mean anything when you're doing your gaming on a TV anyway.

Unless you have a little 720p TV, or you're sitting a few miles away from your screen, "those higher resolutions" definitely mean something. I play some PC games on the couch with a controller, and I have a 360 connected to the same TV; on multiplatform games there's no competition at all.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut Tuesday
35. Re: Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut Tuesday Jun 23, 2012, 18:20 Crustacean Soup
 
In any case, I'm doing my second playthrough with this DLC. I forgot that I hadn't put in my code for the Eden Prime DLC either, so I've got even more newness to check out the second time through.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut Tuesday
34. Re: Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut Tuesday Jun 23, 2012, 18:11 Crustacean Soup
 
---
(spoiler warning)
---

Enahs wrote on Jun 23, 2012, 12:02:
There aren't any continuity errors though, that is the thing. And all the tearing down videos and post have had actual technical flaws, or missed the subtle information in the game.

But again, it is still ok if "you" do not like the ending, despite being wrong about not actually knowing what is going on. It is still an opinion.

The very justification for the Reapers is that synthetic life is inherently untrustworthy and murderous. So who better to entrust with saving the essence of whole races than... synthetic life?

The justification for ending the cycles is that the Crucible changes everything. The Crucible that the Catalyst apparently has complete control over and could simply render useless.

The justification for giving the Options to Shepard is... well, it's not actually provided. The Catalyst is all mysterious and enigmatic (unsatisfying in an ending). As is the justification for providing those specific options, including one that simply undoes all of the Catalyst's work.

And storytelling-wise, in addition to what he said, the Space Magic in the Synthesis ending is really out-of-place given the ridiculous strides the rest of the series took to overexplain and rationalize all of the science fiction elements.


Never mind some of the silly "continuity" errors that are brought up in some videos and explanations (especially "indoctrination theory"), pointing out that those make no sense and then using that to explain that there are no problems at all in ME3's ending is silly.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary
11. Re: Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary Jun 19, 2012, 01:50 Crustacean Soup
 
Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 19, 2012, 01:35:
"I was hoping for an actual explanation, rather than "everything is simplified"."

I guess I like the added layers of options available to me in 4 that are not there in 5. In 4 you really have to manage at both the city and global levels, where in 5 you are only really concerned with the global level. Like happy, in 5 your pop is unhappy, build whatever happy improvement in whatever city, it doesnt matter. In 4 each city is its own entity (far more realistic IMO) so you have an unhappy city you have to deal with that city. Plus its not just a simple food issue like 5, in 4 unhappy pop can hurt you in many ways, cash, science, food, production... thats what I like, 4 is much more dynamic... and thats not even going into, health, corporations, religion, espionage, city specialization ect, and even war... as much as I would prefer a 1UPT it doesnt work in 5. I have never felt threatened playing 5 as I do playing 4, SODs may suck but you sure sweat fearing one will show up at your border and you cant counter it.
In 4, you counter health and happy with buildings. Your city is unhappy, you want it to be happy. Response? Well, it's just about always to build a happy building, of course (policies aside). That's pretty near a rote response, there's no thought required. Get a new Happy building, and widespread unhappiness? Get ready to queue it the thing in all 20 of your cities. You of course also build +Happy buildings to respond to unhappiness in Civ 5, but building that Happy building on all of your cities could easily plunge you into inescapable debt, or take away income you were planning to spend on military maintenance, turning it a harder decision.

So there's a level less of decision-making. In exchange, you get another. You go from making a rote decision about building +Health and +Happy buildings to making a thought-requiring decision to building +Happy buildings (and any building in general, since most require maintenance now; I don't know why you put City Specialization on your list there, because Civ 5 has all the old mechanisms in addition to the building maintenance one. You can't build every building possible in every city, you have to pick-and-choose).

Yes, Happy only really affects Growth, Rebels, and Golden Ages. But those are huge. An unhappy empire is going to stagnate completely (not just in one or two cities), and won't get periodic boosts from Golden Ages, which gradually pulls it behind its competitors. In Civ 4, I could just steamroll an enemy civ and live with a few unhappy cities, whatever, no biggie. In 5, doing so could plunge my whole empire into unhappiness. Sitting on unhappiness in 5 for a protracted period of time is no good at all.

Again, different, not simplified and stupid and made for 10 year olds.

Edit:
As for the rest:

health, corporations, religion, espionage, city specialization
Health is dumb, it's Happiness under a different name. I'm fine with that going.

Corporations were an annoying way of choking an enemy, but I never really got into corporation strategies much, so I can't say too much about those.

Espionage was only really developed in BTS. And here's a Civ 5 expansion right here that's bringing in an Espionage system. Fancy that.

Religion, before BTS, was mostly a way of generating income and forcing the AI into blocs. It was a really good mechanism for forming blocs too, but one that occasionally made diplomacy pretty obtuse. BTS added the Apostolic Palace which was pretty neat. Civ 5 seems to use declarations of friendship and denouncements to help build up blocs, and it feels more organic. And of course, this expansion right here is adding Religion in but in a wholly different and more developed manner than in Civ 4 including BTS (with religions providing different bonuses, a new Faith resource, etc.).

I hit on city specialization above; I don't know why it's on your list.

war

Yeah, the AI is often pretty stupid as far as combat goes, there's no denying that. They still manage to crush me on the higher difficulty levels though.

This comment was edited on Jun 19, 2012, 02:03.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary
9. Re: Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary Jun 19, 2012, 01:00 Crustacean Soup
 
Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 21:09:
Crustacean Soup wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 15:30:
Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 14:38:
the management system is far to simplified, the game sucks.
Just curious: what's simplified that you don't like? They got rid of health and per-city happyness, but per-empire happyness and building maintenance lead to an interesting juggling act. Are you referring to that, or something else?

What I dont like is pretty much the entire game from the top down is simplified. The complexity of Civ4 is what keeps me going back for yet another game. You say the juggling act between happy and cash is interesting, its so simple a ten year old could understand it. Getting your shit together in Civ4 on the other hand is far more complex and that to me is interesting.

I was hoping for an actual explanation, rather than "everything is simplified".

In Civ4, if you have an unhealthy city, you push out a +Heath building. If you have an unhappy city, you do a +Happy building. You can pretty much push out as many buildings for any city you want. In Civ 5, you're limited by high building maintenance fees and have to specialize your cities better. You also have to be very careful not to expand or conquer beyond your current capabilities (low happyness can screw you over very quickly, but +Happy buildings all require a pretty good amount of maintenance).

Again, how is the Civ 4 way of handling this any more complicated? All I see is that it's different.
Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 21:09:
How does it get insane quickly? Theres nothing to it, unhappy people stops growth which in turn stops people from becoming unhappy, its unbelievably simple.

Happy affects growth in Civ 4 as well (consuming, but not producing). The growth penalty in Civ 5 can be crippling though, which makes happiness quite important.

Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 21:09:
Being at war doesnt even effect happiness, unlike civ4, and settle what citys down? Its global, simple. Now in Civ4 you get in a protracted war and shit really starts to hit the fan, your citys start to go to pieces and that dominoes throughout your whole empire.

Yeah, there's no war weariness in Civ 5 last time I checked. I don't think that's a bad thing at all. There's a relatively extreme happiness penalty for conquering cities. If you overconquer, you'll quickly screw your whole empire over. So the conquering players are still penalized, the only difference is that the weaker party in the war is not. If someone massively powerful and not at all interested in peace fights a protracted war against you, you're not penalized for it. I like that.

This comment was edited on Jun 19, 2012, 01:09.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary
5. Re: Civilization V: Gods & Kings Diary Jun 18, 2012, 15:30 Crustacean Soup
 
Yosemite Sam wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 14:38:
the management system is far to simplified, the game sucks.
Just curious: what's simplified that you don't like? They got rid of health and per-city happyness, but per-empire happyness and building maintenance lead to an interesting juggling act. Are you referring to that, or something else?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
17. Re: Steam Top 10 Jun 18, 2012, 15:24 Crustacean Soup
 
Like Endless Space, but with a couple issues so far.

There's no easy way to set up chokepoints or to intercept or block enemies once they get warp; they can just sail over to your worlds, and you need to play whack-a-mole to keep up. This is dealt with in Civ and Galciv, but in here you can't interact with ships in-transit, so there's no way to intercept or block them.

I also don't like the combat. It's fun the first few times, but I'd like to just play my cards and get it over with instead of having to watch the same cinematic over and over and over. Auto resolve very often performs much worse than the fleet would in manual mode, so it's not a great alternative.

Diplomacy with the AIs also seems pretty simple and lifeless compared to the Civs and Galciv 2.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Origin Sale; EA Calls Service "A Huge Success"
55. Re: Origin Sale; EA Calls Service Jun 18, 2012, 15:05 Crustacean Soup
 
Dev wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 14:55:
You are right, that was a bad example. But I have seen people defend EA and origin, so they must exist out there somewhere
I have had no issues with Origin that weren't my own fault (I had a connection problem, but that's because I horribly screwed up my Windows Registry permissions), and I'm not terribly opposed to buying the occasional game there. And as for EA? It's EA, I just treat them like any company, and I will buy their products if I like them enough. That's not loyalty, that's more like apathy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On BF3 Cheating
20. Re: On BF3 Cheating Jun 18, 2012, 14:54 Crustacean Soup
 
Matshock wrote on Jun 18, 2012, 13:42:
It's pretty easy to tell- you can't even take very long range shots from a good, concealed position without instantly being spotted by either the person you took a shot at or someone you swept with your "pointer" near the person you took a shot at. It's especially bad with vehicles and their large hit boxes.

Then all they have to do is only use their aimbots when they've got a clearly doable shot otherwise. Like ASeven said- it's easy to do subtly.

Tribes Ascend is still pretty good though, I think the first aimbots made an appearance a few weeks ago but were quickly squashed.

Aimbots shouldn't even be possible in T:A. Even after the last patch nerfed the bullet weapons, they're still obnoxious as hell. They're all capable of dealing damage outside of the distance at which any of the slow-projectile weapons are effective (because bullets are harder to evade). They should spread out more with time as they're fired, but I'm not sure that they do. They have had their overall spread increased slightly and damage decreased slightly, but I still get chewed up by techs when I'm trying to mortar spam the enemy base and have no way of responding to them. Haven't had anyone Falcon the hell out of me when playing Pathfinder, so that's something.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > On BF3 Cheating
5. Re: On BF3 Cheating Jun 18, 2012, 13:28 Crustacean Soup
 
I've never seen cheating, though it may be I'm just not attentive enough (and I haven't been playing a lot of BF3). I noticed it all the time in COD:MW2; at least one aimbot and/or wall hack every time played.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Consolidation
17. Re: Evening Consolidation Jun 18, 2012, 01:12 Crustacean Soup
 
Beamer wrote on Jun 15, 2012, 07:34:
Crustacean Soup wrote on Jun 14, 2012, 22:32:
Beamer wrote on Jun 14, 2012, 11:34:
Fantaz wrote on Jun 14, 2012, 11:29:
I think John Carmack is on to something with VR head mounted display gaming, and the future...

The issue is really the distance - having your eyes look at something that close to them isn't very good for them and causes a good amount of fatigue.

You put them virtually farther out, then. Like a reflex sight, or the mirrors in an optometrist's office that artificially lengthen the room.

...

Those are completely different issues and your solution, at best, partially solves it.

The main problem with looking at an object up-close is the focusing; putting an image virtually at infinity fixes that. What's the completely different issue?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
381 Comments. 20 pages. Viewing page 9.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo