Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Eirikrautha

Real Name Eirikrautha   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Homepage http://
Signed On Apr 10, 2012, 20:31
Total Comments 338 (Amateur)
User ID 57390
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >

News Comments > Evening Interviews
1. Re: Evening Interviews Mar 30, 2015, 20:35 Eirikrautha
Says the rich, hypocritical fuck who made his money via capitalism, but is now of the opinion that (since he's well off now) no one else needs the same opportunity to get rich he had. Hopefully the irony will pass through his brain right before the bullet from socialist/communist mofos who would be more than happy to put his bourgeoisie ass up against the wall first.

Oh, and a little quibble. What he is describing is not a feature of "capitalism." It is in fact a product of neo-mercantilism and corporatism. The fact that government has been used by conglomerates to choke out smaller businesses means that only the huge returns that figure on a mega-corporation's balance sheet are considered "worthwhile" for a company to pursue. Scratch an economic "progressive" (especially a rich one) and you'll find just another asshole looking to use the power of government to pick the economic winners (which, strangely, always happens to be whatever they are invested in).

There are two kinds of people in the world: those who resent the wealth of others and want to drag them down, and those who want to drag themselves up to the wealth status that makes them comfortable. The first group are inherent losers, pretty much by definition. The second group resents the hell out of those folks who, having made their wealth, want to throw road-blocks in front of everyone else to prevent others from accomplishing what they did...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Version 1.1
26. Re: Star Citizen Version 1.1 Mar 22, 2015, 20:38 Eirikrautha
jdreyer wrote on Mar 22, 2015, 13:32:
Eirikrautha wrote on Mar 22, 2015, 12:57:
Let the games begin! Popcorn

What's the over/under on 100 comments? 12 hours?

So far, this thread is way underperforming!!! Time to intervene...

CR selling virtual spaceships is incredible, but believable. But RSI is now renting ships in an incomplete game??? For real money??? Seriously??? Is there an IQ maximum for backers of this "game"?

Let's see what that will stir up...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Version 1.1
1. Re: Star Citizen Version 1.1 Mar 22, 2015, 12:57 Eirikrautha
Let the games begin! Popcorn  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
47. Re: removed Mar 17, 2015, 00:26 Eirikrautha
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Mar 16, 2015, 19:06:
CJ_Parker wrote on Mar 16, 2015, 16:57:
They're not going to release it any time soon. They are going to call what is essentially an advanced beta a "pre-alpha" for as long as dumbfucks keep buying the separately sold Arena Commander and in the very near future FPS module alpha passes.
I'm betting they will only advance it to beta and then to release once the pressure from the community really starts mounting. Until then they'll keep calling it "pre-alpha" and ripping off the mouthbreathers... because why not? Easy money.
It's not beta because it's not feature complete, which is the traditional definition of the term. Multicrew ships are months away and there has been no mention of the implementation of ship boarding. I imagine it will enter beta later this year around the launch of SQ42.

Eirikrautha wrote on Mar 16, 2015, 17:19:
More than anything else, this video has convinced me that SC has no chance of succeeding. Take a moment to look at the FPS terrain. Look at how much detail there is in one station. Now tell me how many of them CR and his teams will be able to build at that level of detail.
They've been developing the various locations simultaneously and using a prefab system that will allow similar building types that can be arranged to create a distinct look. The materials system they use allows them to quickly build up detail. They've said there will be some franchises, so you'd expect to see similar stores with the same brand in multiple locations. Further, they'll be rolling out the various locations and they'll continue to be added after 'launch'. Most of the hard work is being done at the moment, which is creating the themes and styles. It's also worth pointing out that CIG is a large studio now, with over 270 employees - the speed of development has increased significantly over the past 6 months and we'll see faster, more substantial updates this year.

The team working on the PU (Austin) is separate from that of the team designed the FPS mechanics (Illfonic), which is separate to that of the team designing Squadron 42 (Foundry 42), which is separate to the team designed the AI (Moon Collider), which is separate to the team designing the website and backend (Turbulent), which is separate to the team designing the UI (Behaviour), which is separate to the team designing the ships (Santa Monica). The studios have become very specialised. That means the development of one aspect of the game doesn't bottleneck others, though obviously they work together for vertical slices.

A great example of the improved development is the ship pipeline. Since that's been reworked there has been a constant flow of new concept ships, as well as hangar and AC ready ships. We've seen the Herald, Orion, Carrack, Redeemer, Gladius, Gladiator, Javelin, Retaliator and 890 Jump, along with various variants. F42 has been working on ships for S42 (Idris, Bengal, Cutlass, etc) while other studios take on the general ships.

The point is, while progress has been slow up to this point most of the effort has been building up the studios and developing processes and technology. Now CIG is established we'll see things pick up. Further, this isn't a traditional game where all the content has to be available at 'release' - we'll see substantial amounts of content added beyond launch, as the game is intended to last at least five years. That said, CIG has a lot to live up to and it's perfectly understandable to be sceptical. What I'd say is, if you have an interest in the game, follow the videos (Around The Verse, 10 For The Chairman) as they give a good idea of how the game is progressing.

I base my opinions of what I've played and what I've seen coming. At the moment all the signs are positive, even if they do often miss deadlines. I don't mind a few delays if the end game is worth it.
Well, that's taking the most positive outlook on the present state of the game possible. One could look at the same situation and say that they have compartmentalized their efforts into so many studios that unifying the work into a single game will be a nightmare. 5+ studios who are working on interconnected systems are bound to have merge issues. And that doesn't deflect the criticism that the pie has been split so many ways that the part of the game most people backed (the space sim part) is only receiving a fraction of the resources.

Oh, and the cynical person might point out that the reason the ship-creation part of the studio is so streamlined is that this is the part they are using to make more money, as opposed to the part that makes a fun game. Strange how that is the priority, eh?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
39. Re: Star Citizen Video Mar 16, 2015, 17:19 Eirikrautha
More than anything else, this video has convinced me that SC has no chance of succeeding. Take a moment to look at the FPS terrain. Look at how much detail there is in one station. Now tell me how many of them CR and his teams will be able to build at that level of detail.

There's really only three possibilities:

1. CR and team attempt that level of fidelity for 1000's of systems, and they go broke well before they have any "game" to publish.

2. They make not station at hyper-fidelity, they repeat it all over the universe. So every station is the same, etc. Talk about wearing out fast!

3. The detail is nothing more than a facade. It's a mile wide and an inch deep. So, you will be severely limited as to what you can interact with.

In any .case, there's no way RSI can burn the cash on this part and still come through with a good space-game, too much fluff, with meat lacking...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
87. Re: Op Ed Feb 28, 2015, 16:06 Eirikrautha
See, the difference in these false comparisons of yours are that they are based on inaccurate analogies. Segregation failed because it was based on something that was provably false... the idea that black people were different than white people simply based on their color. This is demonstrably false. And reality always wins out.

That is why the same will never be true regarding sex. There ARE demonstrable differences between men and women (in fact, biologically, a black male is far closer to a white male than he is to a black woman). So, while social qualities can be equal (like voting and political rights, equal pay, etc.), there will always (within the scale of human history) be biological differences that separate men and women. A perfect example would be elite military forces. Expecting an equal number of women to qualify for these forces is delusional. Reality always wins out.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
81. Re: Op Ed Feb 28, 2015, 10:52 Eirikrautha
You know, it's pretty simple. Sarkeesian is directing her argument to the wrong entity. She's attacking video game producers when her real complaint is with nature and reality.

See, Sarkessian is on record as saying that all differences between men and women are the product of societal conditioning. Not "some." Not "most." All. This is the kind of delusion that engenders the vociferous and angry invective that she and her supporters are known for. It's why you have bogus terms like "the patriarchy" and "misogynists" as a staple of her argument. Because, in the end, she's fighting reality... and it angers her.

Let me be perfectly clear in what I mean. Men and women are not the same. There are over 528 biological differences between them, differences that evolved over millennia, to better suit men and women for the primitive roles they played before civilization. Go back 5000 years and look at gender roles. You will find that they weren't "invented" to keep women down; they were based on the very real living conditions of the time. With a life-expectancy of 30 years and a 50% child-mortality rate, human life was tough. There were no social safety nets for the elderly, meaning that those people lucky enough to make it to old age would be dependent on their children for their support. That means most women would have had to stay pregnant constantly, simply to produce enough children that the half that survived could support them. Men evolved better spacial awareness and more muscular frames to assist in their roles as hunters. These are all well established biological facts.

Now, as societies have become more productive, as standards of living have risen, men and women no longer need to obey their biological roles in order to survive. This is a good thing. In fact, our societies in the West have advanced technologically to the point where we can easily say that men and women should have the same societal responsibilities and privileges (voting, legal standing, pay, etc.). But evolution does not work as fast as society changes. And men and women still carry the biological differences of their primitive ancestors.

These have real world consequences. Look at Sarkeesian's complaint about the animation for walking. Women's hips are constructed differently than men's (on average). Were you to motion capture an average woman walking and a man walking, you would instantly be able to spot the stick-figure that was female, just from her gait. So complaining about this in a video game (even when exaggerated) is ridiculous, especially when what qualifies as "exaggerated" is not an objective standard in the first place.

Likewise, when it comes to representations of female as, say, warriors, once again reality intervenes. Even modern militaries (whose inclusiveness has more to do with politics than capabilities) have a difficult time with female front-line troops (the ones that do use them tend to be the small nations facing existential threats, like Israel, or the nations that don't fight anyone, anyway... see Scandinavian militaries). The US Army has had to develop a training course to prepare women for the Ranger training, because they are so desperate to get a female through the course. Think about that! They have to train the women extensively just so they can have a chance to not wash out on the first day (which none have managed to avoid so far). This is totally a product of the biological differences between a peak-performing male and a peak-performing female. It's why we have an NBA and a WNBA.

Such biological differences aren't all in the males' favor, though. Most courts still give women preference in child custody cases, for real biological reasons. But to deny that women's bodies and minds are built differently (talk to any college or professional-level trainer about men's and women's knees, for example) is a direct contradiction of reality.

So what Sarkeesian wants is an unrealistic portrayal of men and women, based on her own personal biases. And she wants this enforced across video games, so that she doesn't have to see the reality of biology thrown in her face over and over again. That's why so many people have a visceral reaction against her. It'd be like having a person tell you that you had to agree the sky was green, or you'd lose your job (just as people have lost their jobs for "offending" the sensibilities of the SJWs). That's the level of stupid this woman represents.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
19. Re: Op Ed Feb 27, 2015, 11:39 Eirikrautha
I seem to remember the various Anita-defenders around here asserting that she didn't want to change video games, just change the way people thought about the contents of them and how they made them. She didn't want to stop people from making the games they wanted to, just encourage people to make other kinds of games as well. Now she's demanding changes. Pretty soon, she'll be advocating forced changes. It's the inevitable progress of any argument with a "do-gooder." It quickly goes from "You should" to "You must..."  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
12. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Feb 22, 2015, 22:29 Eirikrautha
First, the OGL requires all content you use to be accessible in its original form by the users of your product. This was not done. So the guy was in direct violation of the licensing. Secondly, the new 5e generators (more than just the one here) that got letters were all using verbatim sections of the basic rules or the PHB. Since there is not a license for 5e yet (WotC says springtime for more info), they were all in direct violation. Not much gray area here.

P.S., 5e is doing very well, including dominating the amazon charts during the release of the big three products. Look it up...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Interviews
6. Re: Evening Interviews Feb 19, 2015, 10:46 Eirikrautha
Wow, how nice. Talented young girls who have internalized the "Look at me, I'm female! You can recognize what is different about me because I'm female, but only when it is to my benefit. Anything else, and you're a misogynist and hater" crap from their elders.

I hate to see people with talent crippled by the pathologies and mental handicaps of their "mentors." Girls, your mentors don't want you to be successful and happy. They want you to be as angry, miserable and unhappy as they are.

One benefit of this is the many new genres of games we can expect to see. Nocturnal Emission Run. Flappy Prostate Exam. Somehow, I don't think those will get made (or celebrated by the same folks who celebrate this)...

This comment was edited on Feb 19, 2015, 11:11.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Telepath Tactics Delayed to April
2. Re: Telepath Tactics Delayed to April Feb 16, 2015, 21:48 Eirikrautha
I was willing to give this a chance, but the more I saw of it, the less I was interested. I can get past graphics on indie games, but there was nothing ... inspired... about the game. Besides, I haven't particularly liked some of the stuff I've heard from the developers (both about the game and also just in general). So... this delay is relatively irrelevant... as I'd never buy it...  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Earns $21M; New Content Coming; OS X Beta Status
47. Re: Elite: Dangerous Earns $21M; New Content Coming; OS X Beta Status Jan 11, 2015, 10:25 Eirikrautha
Jyve wrote on Jan 11, 2015, 06:57:
Fantastic space combat sim, that's great.
But damn, it A) needs some more content B) better customer services.

A) Kinda done all I wanted to. Got a decent ship, geared up, progressed up through the Empire/Navy. Now what? What's the mid-end game? Maybe I burned out too fast on it, but you mine a bit, explore a bit, trade a bit (lots), shoot a bit, and... it's all very samey at the moment

B) Frontier themselves suck at handling customer issues/bugs it appears. They have bugs in game, that players who aren't aware of anything they've done, cause them to get an email accusing them of being exploiters of the game. Not the best way to do customer service, annoying your dedicated customers. That's probably why I've cut down playing at the moment, there's still a lot of bugs in the game, and I don't want to hit one accidentally and get banned.

But for all that, the actual pew pew pew is pretty decent. Having wings of players (groups/raids) and the content to engage them in that playstyle should make for a great game. It's just got a lot of time to go till it gets there, and probably why the projections of sales are including later expansions to be sold.

You can get banned? From the multi-player part or from the whole game (single-player too)?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Earns $21M; New Content Coming; OS X Beta Status
19. Re: Elite: Dangerous Earns $21M; New Content Coming; OS X Beta Status Jan 10, 2015, 18:08 Eirikrautha
Was interested in buying, but lost all desire to buy when they changed their terms at the last minute and went always online. Braden better be working on a paid expansion, because they won't get any new sales beyond what they already have. So he'd better find a way to get money from the folks who already bought the game.

I'd buy the game if I didn't have to worry about my internet or their servers being crappy (i.e. If they dump the always-online). But I don't see them doing so... The game has been successful enough that Braben & Co. can tell themselves that their... how shall we say it... deception... didn't affect their sales.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
26. Re: Op Ed Dec 2, 2014, 16:13 Eirikrautha
Creston wrote on Dec 2, 2014, 12:55:
It's so far from the concept of how a crowd-funded game should work, it really shouldn't even be called that anymore.

The term you are looking for is "Ponzi scheme"...

Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Game of Thrones Episode 1 Next Week
7. Re: Game of Thrones Episode 1 Next Week Nov 30, 2014, 11:29 Eirikrautha
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 30, 2014, 06:01:
Cutter wrote on Nov 29, 2014, 12:37:
Fuck hashtags. Dumbest things ever.
Welcome to 2006.
God, I hate to agree with Cutter (you have no idea how much), but he's so right here. Let's take a medium designed to reduce complex ideas to 140 characters (draining the intelligence out of any topic at lightning speed) and compress it even further into a jingoistic phrase that would make Joseph Goebbels squee himself with joy. Enhance the stupid with even more stupid! Progress!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Black Friday Interviews
24. Re: Black Friday Interviews Nov 29, 2014, 09:55 Eirikrautha
NKD wrote on Nov 29, 2014, 05:12:
Dirwulf wrote on Nov 29, 2014, 02:16:
Religion is just a process to control the masses.

Yep. Governments come and go, and can be overthrown when people get pissed. But over time if you can convince people that your rules and regulations come from some unknowable untouchable eternal deity, they last a lot longer. Not forever though, all religions die.

I really struggle to understand how any intelligent human being can continue to believe in that crap once they are freed from constant indoctrination from their parents or whoever else.

I have no respect for anyone who willingly throws reason out the window in favor of magical thinking.

The only problem with that world view is that it inevitably leads to relativism and brute survival. Civilization is not possible without a set of norms. And if those norms are not set by something greater than humanity, then they are simply arbitrary. So why obey them?

Morality (the foundation of all human interaction) is impossible without some rules transcending human preference (even those few non-Christian U.S. Founding Fathers appealed to "natural law" for their rights). If all morality is simply human invention, then human conduct is simply a matter of choice. There is no distinction between kindness and cruelty. Human beings are just animals. I have no respect for anyone who willingly reduces all of the human condition to simply human whim.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Elite: Dangerous Goes "Gamma"
48. Re: Elite: Dangerous Goes Nov 24, 2014, 05:58 Eirikrautha
Dacron wrote on Nov 23, 2014, 19:12:
And other than losing solo offline, how has ED been muddled ??

Other than the shooting, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Refunds Demanded as Elite: Dangerous Offline Mode Scrapped
155. Re: Refunds Demanded as Elite: Dangerous Offline Mode Scrapped Nov 16, 2014, 21:01 Eirikrautha
Darn it! I was going to buy this at launch. Not happening now.

Oh, and for the "this-doesn't-affect-you shills," I'll speak slowly and use small words, so you'll be sure to understand:

See, it's my money. I decide what I purchase. I decide what "affects" me and what doesn't. So if I like the idea that a game doesn't require always-on internet, it doesn't matter if I have a T-1 or a string-and-cup for communication. If always-on is OK with me, I'll spend MY money. If I don't, I won't spend MY money.

So, it doesn't matter what any of you nasal-cockstoppers think about my justification of how I spend MY money. It so happens that one of the features that attracted me to this product was that it had an offline mode. Now they announce it will not. So I'm no longer interested enough to buy it. You can't argue with that, because it isn't your money or your interest. So STFU. And have a nice day.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Game Reviews
10. Re: Game Reviews Nov 11, 2014, 16:57 Eirikrautha
Beamer wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 14:30:
Julio wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 12:40:
Cutter wrote on Nov 11, 2014, 11:40:
Well their paid reviews means you can halve their scores so it puts it in the 4 or 5 out of ten range. Definitely wait for actual player reviews.

Agreed, and even then a lot of player reviews. Polygon and Destructoid aren't exactly known for their ethical reporting.

Source/evidence of that?

Oh, right, you have none, other than them having opinions you disagree with.
Or, the owner of Destructoid green-lighted a story that outed a transexual (who was scamming folks via kickstarter), then abandoned the reporter when the heat rose, and even used his connections with other media to blacklist said reporter (including sending emails encouraging other outlets not to hire the reporter that may violate Florida and US laws on collusion). In addition to publicly misleading others about whether the reporter was still employed by Destructoid...

Sure... they're as clean as the wind-driven snow... I'd trust them to be honest...%)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Saturday Metaverse
3. Re: If Twitter Won’t Handle Its Massive Harassment Problem, These Women Will. Nov 8, 2014, 20:14 Eirikrautha
Squirmer wrote on Nov 8, 2014, 19:32:
What are you afraid of?
I don't even have a twitter account. But, to answer your question: stupidity. It's catching faster than Ebola nowadays.

BTW, nice attempted redirection! Do you have a useless Hyphen-Studies degree you are trying to get some mileage out of? (see how that works?)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
338 Comments. 17 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >


Blue's News logo