Elessar wrote on Aug 28, 2012, 14:09:

RailWizard wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 21:00:
I did actually grab premium just cuz I felt invested in BF3 already. I also have zero plans to buy bf4, especially since it's just more of the same.

All I have to say is the next 3 dlc better be good, because CQ is fucking shit. Either way, last DICE product, ever.

I wanted to buy CQ but held out because I hadn't heard much about it. They're doing a terrible job of marketing and integrating bf3 dlc. PS3 gets it first, then premium users on other platforms, then the public release. Then you're lucky to find servers depending on which DLC at a what time you want to play it. Armrored Kill is going to make Close Quarters even more obsolete and so will each successive DLC release.

So instead I spent 15 bucks on CS:GO and have thoroughly enjoyed it for the money spent.

Ozmodan wrote on Aug 28, 2012, 12:45:
Someone has maxed a crafter already. Give me a break, this is just another copy cat MMO with very little substance behind it. No challenge, strictly fun. We saw that with SWTOR and the exact same complaints will follow this title. Nothing original, at least their is no subscription for this game, kudos to the developers for that.

Fun is great, and this game has plenty of that, but in the long run, it is the same old, same old crap they have been serving to the MMO players since EQ was unfurled.

I have nothing against fun, BUT there is nothing new in this title, just presented in a slightly different manner. Anyone thinking this will be a game they play for a long time has been smoking something far more potent than weed.

ASeven wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 21:06:
Have they released any patch since the last DLC?

bhcompy wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 18:38:

DangerDog wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 17:42:

Steazy wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 16:32:

DangerDog wrote on Aug 27, 2012, 16:01:
The free-2-play model is just such bullshit, all these developers give lip service to the games not being pay-2-win but in the end it's either grind, grind, grind or pay up!

Yea it really sucks how developers all want to make a living wage and shit, fuck those guys! Make me some games bitch! I don't care if you could make ten times as much money with your skill set doing something else! LIVE IN POVERTY LIKE A MAN!

No, but the sooner this "free-2-play" scheme comes to an end the better off we'll be, I'm still a fan of pay once and play whenever you want.

So would I, but I also like my developers to continually develop the product, which the continual revenue stream allows without the restriction of being solely subscription based. League of Legends and World of Tanks both have decent and fair(particularly LoL) free to play models, and I enjoy playing them and occasionally paying for something from them, and both are under constant development, so situations like with most modern one time fee PC games where bugs stay forever and no new maps, modes, weapons, etc ever release because the developer moves on to make a different game to go in to debt to make a product and hope to recoup costs on purchase price alone don't occur.

InBlack wrote on Aug 24, 2012, 05:49:
Will they have EU servers?

1badmf wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 16:39:

RailWizard wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 15:17:
Don't mean to rain on any parades, but I've been in since 1st wave and it's pretty bland. It's basically bf3 with a bigger map and less gear.

Though they STILL don't have all systems operational, like 'perks' or w/e they call them. So there possibly is still hope.

It feels nothing like PS1, I can say that much with certainty.

an aircraft carrier is just a sailboat, but bigger and without a sail. see? i can irrationally oversimplify too! i've never seen a bf3 game where i was part of a column of around 30 tanks rolling cross country to our next target. be blase all you want, but that's a unique and exciting experience not to be found in COD nonsense.

gilly775 wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 15:33:

Verno wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 15:04:

gilly775 wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 14:57:
So don't use it. I go into the Start Screen to search, not to click on pretty looking tiles. While it does cater to tablets, it still is a functional OS that has allowed me to open items faster than searching for the same things in the Start Menu in 7.

You have to use it, that's the point and what is rubbing many people the wrong way. There are many ways to trigger Metro, you get bounced into it for everything from search to plugging in a second monitor to shutting down the machine. Microsoft went out of its way to prevent most forms of booting straight to the desktop. They even ripped out legacy Start code in an effort to prevent people avoiding its use then they tied it into many other areas of functionality.

I can understand people liking Metro but what I don't get is people who seem to think that others are whining because they don't like being bounced between two jarringly different interfaces. Having a tablet mode would not have been a difficult thing, Windows 7 already laid the ground work.

Ok, I'm speaking of the Start Screen and you are talking about Metro. I have no issues with Metro, it doesn't take that much to hit Windows key + I to power it down and I actually like the popups when you plug in a USB drive. If anything, it also helps those that can't see well.

Matshock wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 11:10:

Technology doesn't replace due diligence. Nature is not tamed yet.

dardin wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 11:01:
The blinking function happens automatically on stop lights when they malfunction or lose power. I know where I live all the lights are monitored remotely these days so if there is a malfunction or a problem no one needs to call it in. Ours even have traffic monitoring cameras on pretty much every light here in town. They use these cameras to monitor the traffic flow and adjust the timing of the lights based on it. Apparently this is not the case with that light where you live.

deqer wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 14:46:

Verno wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 14:33:

I'm not surprised with your response, because you're another victim as well just like this guy. You've spoken already about how you're revisiting/playing after these updates. So, I'm not surprised. And yes, by continuing to play, he is supporting the company.

Your inappropriate and misapplied use of the word victim aside, if he is having a good time and enjoying himself then there is no problem. It's his money, it's already spent which invalidates your entire argument and quite frankly it's none of your business. You aren't some special snowflake who gets to tell people what to play and how to spend their money. People like different things, grow up.

If you were in any way remotely objective or reasonable, you'd understand that Blizzard deserves criticism for their mistakes but they also deserve praise when they get something right.

Well, that's why I said he's pushing himself to continue playing it. He's telling himself to enjoy it because he spent $60 on it.

Blah, whatever.

Have fun being owned by blizzard and playing your single-player game online only, and only when Blizzard says so. Forever.