DG wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 13:40:

AngelicPenguin wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 13:00:
I also remember at the very beginning of the movie, two aliens injure themselves to escape a prison cell or something. I remember realizing at that moment this movie was going to be a train wreck, since that seemed so out of character with what they had shown aliens do in the past.

IIRC 2 aliens bullied and killed the third.

AngelicPenguin wrote on Jul 25, 2012, 13:00:
I also remember at the very beginning of the movie, two aliens injure themselves to escape a prison cell or something. I remember realizing at that moment this movie was going to be a train wreck, since that seemed so out of character with what they had shown aliens do in the past.

Dades wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 21:26:

Fibrocyte wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 21:21:
Online-only will never and never was intended to prevent exploiting the built-in game functionality (such as the recent exploits being so very newsworthy lately).

It was intended to help them quickly remove them and was a factor in their decision to go with online only so the resulting loss of offline access is the same regardless.

I liked T3 and Alien 3. But yeah, Alien Resurrection... what the HELL? I mean, that was mindblowing just how bad it was. It made the two AvP movies look like high art by comparison. My disappointment with it has rarely been matched. Incidentally, discovering Diablo 3 was being made as a DRM-laden, half-assed MMO tied to what amounts to a Nigerian Prince email phishing scheme was one of the few times it has been equaled.

Sigourney Weaver had a lot of creative input that turned out to be terrible, the studio and director had some conflicts and there were several script rewrites. The whole production was a mess from start to finish, too many cooks in the kitchen. The original whedon script is actually really good, it's a shame they didn't just go with that.

I'm pretty sure that by now most everyone is aware it was made online only simply to force use of the real money scam house.

Online-only is used to prevent hacking within the game.

Fibrocyte wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 21:21:
Online-only will never and never was intended to prevent exploiting the built-in game functionality (such as the recent exploits being so very newsworthy lately).

I liked T3 and Alien 3. But yeah, Alien Resurrection... what the HELL? I mean, that was mindblowing just how bad it was. It made the two AvP movies look like high art by comparison. My disappointment with it has rarely been matched. Incidentally, discovering Diablo 3 was being made as a DRM-laden, half-assed MMO tied to what amounts to a Nigerian Prince email phishing scheme was one of the few times it has been equaled.

Prez wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:29:
EDIT: I just realized I posted in a Diablo 3 thread without saying anything bad about it or Actiblizz. To right that wrong let me say I find it hysterical that a game that was made online only because it would eliminate hacking has an official Hack Report Form on the Blizzard website. LMAO!

AngelicPenguin wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 19:11:

shihonage wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 18:59:
Diablo 3, like Terminator 3 and Aliens 3, does not exist.

DOES NOT EXIST.

I didn't think Alien 3 was THAT bad, although a pretty big letdown from the first 2. The CGI alien was especially egregious. Now Alien 4, THAT was bad. One of the worst movies I've ever spent money on in a theater.

Elricsi wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 19:08:
I have never played a Diablo game, and I find these exploit and bug reports entertaining reading. If it was every stupid minor thing, then no, but an invulnerable wizard sounds neat.

P.S. I loved Torchlight and pre-ordered Torchlight 2. With my pre-order they give you a copy of T1. Anyone wants to try Torchlight, hit me up here and post your steam ID and I will friend you and send it.

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:37:
Yeah that could be. I just think we need to keep in mind this isn't a Diablo 3 fansite and people don't necessarily want or expect details on the latest minutiae like bugs and exploits. There are specific sites for people who are interested in that. I've always enjoyed Blue's because it's a convenient high level view of the recent developments in gaming. Its easier to read when it isn't cluttered with news about bugs.

It isn't that bad yet, but I'm just hoping this isn't the start of a trend of reporting on non-newsworthy stuff, or worse, a deliberate attempt to start flame wars to get views. That is the Gawker way, the dark side of the gaming journalism Force.

shihonage wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 18:59:
Diablo 3, like Terminator 3 and Aliens 3, does not exist.

DOES NOT EXIST.

Prez wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:29:

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 11:03:

If this was an extremely popular title here I could understand more coverage, but in fact the game is quite hated and no longer played by the Blues crew for the most part.

With like a billion sales I think Diablo 3 would qualify as "extremely popular" despite the tendency for threads to get nasty. I have a feeling Blue is catering to what I suspect is the vast majority of visitors who never post at all and just scan the major websites for news.

EDIT: I just realized I posted in a Diablo 3 thread without saying anything bad about it or Actiblizz. To right that wrong let me say I find it hysterical that a game that was made online only because it would eliminate hacking has an official Hack Report Form on the Blizzard website. LMAO!

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:37:

Prez wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:29:

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 11:03:

If this was an extremely popular title here I could understand more coverage, but in fact the game is quite hated and no longer played by the Blues crew for the most part.

With like a billion sales I think Diablo 3 would qualify as "extremely popular" despite the tendency for threads to get nasty. I have a feeling Blue is catering to what I suspect is the vast majority of visitors who never post at all and just scan the major websites for news.

Yeah that could be. I just think we need to keep in mind this isn't a Diablo 3 fansite and people don't necessarily want or expect details on the latest minutiae like bugs and exploits. There are specific sites for people who are interested in that. I've always enjoyed Blue's because it's a convenient high level view of the recent developments in gaming. Its easier to read when it isn't cluttered with news about bugs.

It isn't that bad yet, but I'm just hoping this isn't the start of a trend of reporting on non-newsworthy stuff, or worse, a deliberate attempt to start flame wars to get views. That is the Gawker way, the dark side of the gaming journalism Force.

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 11:03:
Do we really need a new post about every bug or bug report? And why do you only cover Diablo 3 bugs? I try not to be that guy who goes "Why are you posting things I'm not personally interested in??" but in this case I think its just a matter of a threshold of newsworthiness that just isn't being met.

If this was an extremely popular title here I could understand more coverage, but in fact the game is quite hated and no longer played by the Blues crew for the most part.

Prez wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 17:29:

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 11:03:

If this was an extremely popular title here I could understand more coverage, but in fact the game is quite hated and no longer played by the Blues crew for the most part.

With like a billion sales I think Diablo 3 would qualify as "extremely popular" despite the tendency for threads to get nasty. I have a feeling Blue is catering to what I suspect is the vast majority of visitors who never post at all and just scan the major websites for news.

NKD wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 11:03:

If this was an extremely popular title here I could understand more coverage, but in fact the game is quite hated and no longer played by the Blues crew for the most part.