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 Ceribaen

Real Name Ceribaen   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Ceribaen
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On May 15, 2012, 15:34
Total Comments 218 (Novice)
User ID 57420
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >


News Comments > Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access
33. Re: Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access Jan 27, 2016, 21:30 Ceribaen
 
Yes, a fresh investment of 45 now gets you beta access. Let's not split hairs on 'early access' vs 'beta'... the state of the game is still very much beta from what I can see, and Steam doesn't have a 'beta' program in this sense, so Early Access is the closest equivalent.

Now, as a KS backer who when backing the project decided that you were not interested in beta access, you get a discounted rate of 20 for beta access if you've since changed your mind. Those who did back for beta access got a week 'headstart' for all that's worth.

I still fail to see how anyone's getting screwed here. Late comers are not getting anything more for their money compared to what the backers paid for the same access. The only ones possibly are the 4000 or so who paid 28 for a digital copy, and then 20 for beta access as an add-on are paying $3 more than the non-KS backers.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 27, 2016, 20:44:
Ceribaen wrote on Jan 27, 2016, 19:16:
CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 27, 2016, 18:40:
@Ceribean: Maybe read the thread? You are completely factually wrong about the tiers at which people now have or have not access to the game/beta/early access. Why even bother replying if you don't even understand the basics?

I did read the thread.

250 is where physical rewards gains beta access.
150 is where the CE physical tier sits.
75 is where digital gains beta access.
20 is the buy in for KS backers who do not currently have beta access.
44 and change is the buy in for EA entrants.
Also, as I recall, it was 20 was the initial tier for a digital copy with no access to betas.

Which part of that did I misread?

But I still don't understand what would make you upset that you don't get access to a bug-filled story based rpg now, rather than waiting for the time you originally assumed you were going to get it?
Also, how do you assuage the (correctly I might add) upset people who paid for a beta access if they grant the non beta tiers EA just because they started selling a non-KS discounted beta buy-in?

Let me put it this way. They should have done either of these two things in my opinion:

- Since early access at $44.99 effectively buys you beta access right now, they should have handed out keys to all KS backers, regardless of digital or physical tier, who have pledged $44.99 or higher.
If they would be nice they would maybe even extend it to tiers starting at $39 or $35 or even lower since KS backers made this game possible in the first place almost THREE years ago and had to stomach many delays already.
The $20 beta pass is complete bullshit. It needs to not even exist. It is an insult.

- Alternatively they should have had a much longer beta period where only the original KS backers have access ($75 up and $250 up respectively). No one is complaining about the original idea. That's fine. The huge gap between physical and digital makes no fucking sense whatsoever but OK... people had a choice when the KS was on.

The only real problem here is that early access is fucking it all up.
Why does a Johnny Come Lately early access dude who coughs up $44.99 now that the game is almost done (a very safe investment) get treated better (has more access privileges) than people who pledged a multiple of $44.99 in the case of physical tiers way back in 2013 when this was a much more unsafe loyalty/good faith investment?

Knowing inXile this game will be in early access for months (WL2 took nine months) so getting in now for $44.99 is quite a feat. Let us assume Torment will be in early access for the same period of time.
The complaints would probably be way milder if, say, beta would have run for eight months and then early access only meant a week or a month max but this is not going to be the case.
People who pledged $45 or $50 (digital) or below $250 for a physical tier are really getting screwed in the a by early access. Especially for the digital people it would have been much better to just wait for early access instead of making a pledge.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access
30. Re: Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access Jan 27, 2016, 19:16 Ceribaen
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 27, 2016, 18:40:
@Ceribean: Maybe read the thread? You are completely factually wrong about the tiers at which people now have or have not access to the game/beta/early access. Why even bother replying if you don't even understand the basics?

I did read the thread.

250 is where physical rewards gains beta access.
150 is where the CE physical tier sits.
75 is where digital gains beta access.
20 is the buy in for KS backers who do not currently have beta access.
44 and change is the buy in for EA entrants.
Also, as I recall, it was 20 was the initial tier for a digital copy with no access to betas.

Which part of that did I misread?

But I still don't understand what would make you upset that you don't get access to a bug-filled story based rpg now, rather than waiting for the time you originally assumed you were going to get it?
Also, how do you assuage the (correctly I might add) upset people who paid for a beta access if they grant the non beta tiers EA just because they started selling a non-KS discounted beta buy-in?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
41. Re: Steam Top 10 Jan 27, 2016, 18:16 Ceribaen
 
Jerykk wrote on Jan 26, 2016, 01:41:
Many people claimed that the entire series was ruined because of ME3's ending. I find that position pretty absurd because the ending comprised maybe 0.01% of the entire series. Also, if story is the only reason you replay games, I'm not sure what the point of replaying any of the ME games would be. The choices you make have minimal impacts on the overall narrative and you're basically just deciding whether to be a nice savior of the universe or a rude savior of the universe. If someone dies, they're just replaced with an equivalent character with whom you play the same missions regardless. The real reason to replay the ME games is for the gameplay and in that respect, ME3 is the best in the series and ME1 the worst. ME1 had the most RPG elements but the level design was awful, the AI was stupid, enemy variety was lacking, the weapons were boring, the Mako handling was terrible and the planet exploration was pointless. ME1 had a cool setting and interesting characters and story but gameplay-wise, ME3 completely destroys it.

And you've hit on the WHY most people say ME3 ruins the franchise because of it's ending. All through ME1 and ME2 people were told 'your choices matter'. Then they finish ME3 and see 'or not...'.

It's same with a book, sometimes you'll read a book and it's a great story... and then due to the lack of a good enough editor, the author goes and destroys it with some terrible ending. And you're left with sour taste and no desire to recommend it to anyone.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access
28. Re: Torment: Tides of Numenera Early Access Jan 27, 2016, 18:09 Ceribaen
 
Cutter wrote on Jan 27, 2016, 09:52:
If they're going to hand out EA to people just buying the game now then the absolute least they can do is hand it out to everyone who made the fucking game possible in the first place. I really don't like inXile.

Then what do you do for the people who paid extra in advance for the early access, which now everyone at lower tiers received?

I legitimately don't see what the big to do is about running an Early Access beta (and charging a full retail price for it), for those who for one reason or another missed the KS.

Those who got the lower physical tiers, purchased it knowing they weren't getting the game until it is 'ready'. And if they really that badly want to join in the fun, there's an avenue which allows them entry for less than the non-KS crowd.

So where exactly is the problem other than 'someone's got something I don't have and I don't want to pay to get it'

I forgot to back the KS (had planned to, but couldn't decide on a tier and then got distracted), but for a story based RPG I really don't see the draw to playing an unfinished beta version and having it all spoiled. I'd personally rather wait for the finished product and enjoy it then.

For a multiplayer game, where early access might mean gaining an edge either in skill development or resource procurement -- I can see the argument, maybe.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crusader Kings II: Conclave Announced
3. Re: Crusader Kings II: Conclave Announced Jan 7, 2016, 11:58 Ceribaen
 
I think my biggest issue with CK2 (and I don't know if an update ever fixed it), was that if you were a smaller kingdom... to protect yourself in terms of military you had to rely on mercenaries. However the game did not refresh the stock of mercenaries available over time, so eventually you just get stomped by a large nation because there's no more way to hire additional troops even if you had a relatively strong economic engine.

Numinar wrote on Jan 7, 2016, 11:54:
This game is the gift that keeps on giving.

I cannot think of a reason why they would make a CK3 when this platform seems capable of so much more than the initial (perfectly awesome) design as they keep expanding. I think I would have preferred more expensive DLC with unit/ruler graphics and associated tunes bundled in but hey, whatever. I'm definitely due for a play through soon though, and the council was already one of my favourite parts of the game so this content drop seems like it will be more than worth it.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Mordheim: City of the Damned Launch Trailer
7. Re: Mordheim: City of the Damned Launch Trailer Nov 19, 2015, 17:50 Ceribaen
 
So it's basically Broken Chalice with a Warhammer license?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Total War WARHAMMER in April; Preorders Begin
3. Re: Total War WARHAMMER in April; Preorders Begin Oct 22, 2015, 23:01 Ceribaen
 
Advertising 0-day DLC race packs this many months in advance is just bad business.
Who wants to take an under of 2 weeks before there's enough backlash that they change their minds?

Or is TW franchise hurt enough not enough people care these days to complain?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
21. Re: Heroes Reborn Sep 19, 2015, 23:46 Ceribaen
 
Heroes went from interesting concept to 'wtf???' when they changed directions of 'every season we'll introduce a whole new cast' to 'let's just keep resurrecting everyone we've already killed off, and anyone new we introduce will just have a copy of an existing character's powers'  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void in November
3. Re: StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void in November Sep 14, 2015, 09:36 Ceribaen
 
Now all we'll need is the battlechest that combines all three into one purchase and I might finally buy SC2 since it'll be finally a complete game!

edit: Looks like they have that available for purchase now too... but gonna need to wait for a box copy since no CAD regionalization...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Hearthstone Power Inflation Addressed
11. Re: Hearthstone Power Inflation Addressed Sep 10, 2015, 12:19 Ceribaen
 
Alamar wrote on Sep 10, 2015, 11:23:
Comparing it to other games in the genre, or physical CCG's makes more sense... How did MTG solve this issue? They don't... People buy a crap ton of cards to be competitive... : ) They also have classic tournaments, and each new edition has some consistent, still useful for years, base cards...

You say they don't control power creep and then right after explain exactly how they do. Certain blocks (expansions) are the only 'official' tournament cards. So with each season, everyone starts on equal ground again.

Yes, you do have other tournament variants where the older cards are used. And of course there's also draft tourneys which put everyone that day on an equal footing since you're building from the cards pulled that day only.

How that might be best implemented into an online CCG, not sure.

Or they could go the Netrunner route where everyone who buys an expansion has immediate access to all the same cards. No having to buy boosters in the hopes you might get that one rare (and therefore ditch the first 'c' of ccg).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Crowdfunding Roundup
4. Re: Morning Crowdfunding Roundup Aug 27, 2015, 11:33 Ceribaen
 
ForgedReality wrote on Aug 27, 2015, 11:23:
I. FUCKING. HATE. THAT. NAME.

Why the fuck can't they call the first one "Divinity: Original Sin" and the second one "Divinity 2: Second Coming" or something? Dumb.

Because they already have a game called Divinity II?
Seems an odd thing to get upset about.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Divinity: Original Sin 2 Kickstarter
4. Re: Divinity: Original Sin 2 Kickstarter Aug 26, 2015, 10:56 Ceribaen
 
nin wrote on Aug 26, 2015, 10:36:
Tigger wrote on Aug 26, 2015, 10:34:
Is there any sort of project schedule or deliverable plan? They are quick to tell you all the awesome 1007 you will get but come up short on any sort of plan that describes how they will deliver.

Damn, $50 to get a copy of the previous one with it?

Guess I'll pass...looks like they'll do fine w/o me anyway.


25 a game is too much?? Considering it's still 40 for the original at full price, sounds like a good deal to me if you don't have the first already.

As far as schedule goes, who knows, it's KS. But Larian will deliver as they've shown.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Some Star Citizen Refunds
55. Re: Some Star Citizen Refunds Aug 21, 2015, 17:37 Ceribaen
 
Your premise in point 2 is flawed. The Forbes article would be written in terms of USD as it is written for a US audience, established by the fact that the other numbers used for comparison (ie GTAV at 265M) are also in USD.

So W3 was 32M to develop, and 35M to market. Long story short, Forbes did all the math ahead of time for you.

Considering that CIG has no real need currently to market thanks to how 'viral' any news story they put out is, they basically have 3x the money required right now to develop a game equivalent to W3.

Kxmode wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 17:11:
Mikus_Aurelius wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 17:04:
Kxmode wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 16:23:
So using basic math we can conclude about a 4:1 ratio or 4 times more. Using the same converter I plugged in 67 million Zolty and the US Dollar spit back $18,025,555. Based on a 4:1 ratio I then multiplied 18,025,555 by 4 to come up with 72,102,220.

You just divided by 4 then multiplied by 4...

If you wanted to know how much W3 cost in dollars, you already had the answer. 67 million.

1. 3.72 Polish Zolty = 1 US Dollars (~4:1 ratio established)
2. 67,000,000 Polish Zolty = 18,025,555 US Dollars (currency conversion... not division)
3. 18,025,555 x 4 = 72,102,220 (multiply by 4)

The third step is where we find the equivalent amount in US Dollars. Step 2 doesn't provide an accurate conversion because production totals for AAA-rated titles like Witcher 3 or GTA is never going to be 18 million. I used the 4:1 ratio to help establish the approximate US Dollar equivalent. $72,102,220 was the 4:1 ratio conversion. That amount sounds right.

Could some math whiz help me confirm or correct my numbers?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
5. Re: Morning Interviews Aug 14, 2015, 13:42 Ceribaen
 
I liked Pacific Rim, but honestly... there should have been more monsters vs robots and less character development.

That and not have the final climatic battle be in an environment where the robots are basically useless!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Divinity: Original Sin II Announced
27. Re: Divinity: Original Sin II Announced Aug 12, 2015, 14:36 Ceribaen
 
Between this and HBS' upcoming Battletech KS, sounds like there's a second wave of crowdfunding I'm going to have to get involved in.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Pillars of Eternity Expansion This Month
10. Re: Pillars of Eternity Expansion This Month Aug 5, 2015, 13:06 Ceribaen
 
deqer wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 12:44:
The game just came out, and already there's an expansion? C'mon...

I understand you're in business to make business, but, at least try to pretend that your expansions have more meaning than just to make more money for yourselves.

5 months for first expansion release, and it's the first of two parts which was originally a single expansion promised in the KS backing plan. And also after several major patch updates for the original game to 'fix' most of the major grievances.

Fail to see the issue here.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > BATTLETECH Announced
9. Re: BATTLETECH Announced Jul 29, 2015, 11:33 Ceribaen
 
I'm actually pretty stoked about a mech tactical RPG... the only thing better would be the originally teased MW game as posted before me.

But my question is, I thought the Battletech license for PC was a web of who knows who actually owns it these days between FASA, Microsoft, and a few others? Did I miss when that got resolved?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More Arkham Knight Issues; GMG on Possible Refunds
34. Re: More Arkham Knight Issues; GMG on Possible Refunds Jun 24, 2015, 22:51 Ceribaen
 
I swear, these days there needs to be a site that actually tabulates the results of how a game runs on PC/PS4/PS3/XBone/X360

Getting harder and harder to figure out which if any platform to purchase a game for.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns Pricing Adjusted
18. Re: Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns Pricing Adjusted Jun 23, 2015, 22:12 Ceribaen
 
Because they've totally removed the base game from their store.
The cheapest option you have to buy now is Base Game + Expansion for 49.99.

There is no Base Game only for sale that I saw.
Just as there is no Expansion only for sale.

I mean sure if you walk into a brick and mortar store you might find a few unsold copies still on shelves for varying prices, and can pick that up and play without expansion features. But I'm talking about active SKUs on the GW2 site.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns Pricing Adjusted
12. Re: Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns Pricing Adjusted Jun 23, 2015, 17:45 Ceribaen
 
Would it really hurt them that much to have three total SKUs?
1. Expansion plus Base game for 49.99
2. Expansion only for 39.99
3. Keep base game SKU active at 14.99

This way
a) New blood can jump in straight with the expansion and it looks like they get a deal on the base game
b) Veteran players can get the expansion without the base game and save a bit of coin
c) There still exists a base game SKU for those who just want to jump in and give a try AND it sets it up to look like it's a good deal from both a and b's perspectives.

For all their DELUXE and ULTIMATE editions, can either keep that as bonuses on Option 1 OR they just make them DELUXE and ULTIMATE addons priced at 24.99 and 49.99 which grant you all the bonuses associated on top of which ever game you enter with.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
218 Comments. 11 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo