User information for RegularX

Real Name
RegularX
Nickname
None given.
Description
Relatively non-descript male.

Supporter

Signed On
January 11, 2000
Total Posts
232 (Novice)
User ID
1937
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
232 Comments. 12 pages. Viewing page 7.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  ] Older
49.
 
Re: Sin-Wages Of Sin & Sin 2
Dec 3, 2003, 19:34
49.
Re: Sin-Wages Of Sin & Sin 2 Dec 3, 2003, 19:34
Dec 3, 2003, 19:34
 
CS was being developed for HL before HL was released.

I don't know where you are getting that fact, but I'm 99% sure it's not true. CS was just a mod when it came out, they didn't have any special relationship with Valve and Valve didn't have any reason to give them one until many "betas" later.

22.
 
Re: PlanetSide has a bright future
Dec 3, 2003, 12:28
22.
Re: PlanetSide has a bright future Dec 3, 2003, 12:28
Dec 3, 2003, 12:28
 
This game has had a lot of growing pains, especially technically. Let's face it, nobody else has pulled something like this off.

That's the typical MMO apology - that MMOs are somehow inherently flawed technically. More like, if companies can get people to pay for beta testing - why not? Sony TS wasn't interested in answering problems, all they cared about was culling player logs to hopefully implement in a patch later. Sure sounds like beta testing to me. How much have you handed Sony for that "feature"? How many of my bugs did they even respond to while I was there? Oh yeah. None.

And growing pains is an understatement. I once respawned as a wall. I could see. I could hear. I couldn't move or do anything else. Nobody else could see or hear me. Why? because I was a wall.

A monthly charge is a lot to ask from consumer, especially for a game. Even without the above nags, PS just gets old after a while - and the community will only put up with them "inventing" new gameplay (especially if they have to pay for it extra) for so long. Depending on how cheap the servers are, they might keep this alive until they try again in a few years.

16.
 
Just one step away from dead...
Dec 3, 2003, 10:11
16.
Just one step away from dead... Dec 3, 2003, 10:11
Dec 3, 2003, 10:11
 
Even die hard PS fans I know have started to agree that the game has just become boring. Yes, it helps if you have a good outfit, and it helps if you aren't plagued by the many, many technical issues which have haunted the game, but in the end even that only last so long.

I got PS after a recommendation of one of those die hards above and regretted it to my very bone. At one point, it crashed 5 times in an hour - a record for any game I've ever played (and only kept logging back on to try and help my friends). Horrible performance and hands down the worst technical support in the history of supporting things technically. I, and several other people, had posts deleted rather than answered. Then I got banned for trying to egg the TS in actually responding. Then they turned my subscription back on without notifying me.

The only time SOE did anything customer friendly was when they agree to cancel my account and take back the subscription fees. Least they did that right.

8.
 
Re: Um, no...
Dec 2, 2003, 17:08
8.
Re: Um, no... Dec 2, 2003, 17:08
Dec 2, 2003, 17:08
 
Blue is just making up Invisible War headlines to see how many times the posters will generate exactly the same thread

Agreed - what's next? A press release to tell us that the boxes are on trucks, and then another to tell us the truck is moving, and maybe one when the trucker takes a coffee break?

62.
 
Re: Any other game delay pales in compar
Dec 2, 2003, 12:07
62.
Re: Any other game delay pales in compar Dec 2, 2003, 12:07
Dec 2, 2003, 12:07
 
Read the review. He spent most of the time listing problems that were either carried over from the first game or (worse, IMO) newly-introduced flaws

I did. Unlike some, I just decided to read the whole thing.

61.
 
Re: Shallow AI?
Dec 2, 2003, 12:04
61.
Re: Shallow AI? Dec 2, 2003, 12:04
Dec 2, 2003, 12:04
 
Now, some of you might think that it means the game is 'good enough to make you look past the flaws', while others might say, 'they're paid/forced to give it high scores so buttfucks on message boards can quote numbers that a POS game got great reviews' --

Can you say contradictory argument? If that's your attitude, why read reviews at all? Oh, unless it's the part of the review that support what you say. So when the review says "Problem is, the physics are goofier than they are believable, as most of the moveable objects in the game seem to lack any real mass--as though everything in this grim future was inflatable or made of Styrofoam.", that's the ever-loving truth but when it says "As previously suggested, Invisible War is a great-looking game, for the most part" or "Invisible War mostly sounds great, as well." or "None of this should ultimately deter you from checking out Invisible War", that's just bullshit lies from a corporate whore.

whether or not you want to take the ostrich approach

Couldn't have said it better myself.

54.
 
Re: I noticed this...
Dec 2, 2003, 10:27
54.
Re: I noticed this... Dec 2, 2003, 10:27
Dec 2, 2003, 10:27
 
Sorry to break it to you, but there are only three websites and three magazines whose reviews really count in PC gaming. And two of them have so far come out saying that the final game has the exact same problems as the demo.

Don't know what three you consider gospel, but I usually read IGN (9/10) and Gamespy (4/5) and compare the two as a decent guide. Both mentioned similar things the complainers have mentioned. Unlike the complainers, they also looked past the flaws to score the game itself with high ratings.

And the numbers do not matter when the reveiws themselves are attesting that the flaws we all hate are indeed there. What you are doing is being an apologist.

No offense, but that makes zero sense. The entire review is void simply because the reviewer agrees that say, the AI is shallow? Because it mentions that, anything positive it mentions is simply ... gone? What you are doing is being blind.

Sorry to break it to you, but with Deus Ex: Invisible War, complaining is the bandwagon. And from my experience with games, there is always good reason why such a state of affairs comes to pass.

From my experience, bandwagons are overcrowded affairs.

This comment was edited on Dec 2, 10:28.
8.
 
Re: UGH
Dec 1, 2003, 19:25
8.
Re: UGH Dec 1, 2003, 19:25
Dec 1, 2003, 19:25
 
It's just an extension of the first game and by looks of the demo is FAR more immersive than it. And the hype on the immersion for DX1 was 10x greater than this game.

A multitool opening a lock isn't missing an attention to detail, it's just a work of fiction, just like a glowing drone of light that reconstructs living tissue - which if that got past your suspension of disbelief, a sonic screwdriver is no problem.

they also chose to actively deny missing the little things, and calling it a design implementation

Unified ammo, locational damage, multitool use, the interface - these are design decisions. Good or bad, IS isn't being shifty here, they are owning up to how they designed it.

stop saying how wonderful the game is, with all its outrageous lies

All the previews out so far of the full game have been saying great things about it. Maybe the game is not so broke as you think the demo is?

promote the damn thing as Deus Ex sequel ... it is just another factory churned out game that has a potential

Right, like all those other games that emphasize you being able to shoot, sneak, hack, etc. There's nothing factory churned about it.

6.
 
Re: UGH
Dec 1, 2003, 17:59
6.
Re: UGH Dec 1, 2003, 17:59
Dec 1, 2003, 17:59
 
OMG THETS GHEY it's like Star Trek it so stupid, who ever heard of lasers that don't burn people? Or all those sounds in space - DUDE there's no sounds in space!!!

Jesus, get a grip. It's science fiction, not science fact. Go watch some Doctor Who and learn to love the sonic screwdriver like the rest of humanity. You'll have a lot more fun with life.

Nobody can say the demo didn't have flaws but some of the whining over it is Oscar worthy.

106.
 
Re: Negativity
Nov 26, 2003, 12:40
Re: Negativity Nov 26, 2003, 12:40
Nov 26, 2003, 12:40
 
Yeah, that's why I was dismayed to see this had already gone gold. It sounds like Ion Storm is still trying to figure out the compatibility scenario that's causing the performance hits. A shame they didn't delay it a week or two to avoid the now obligatory patch.

100.
 
Re: still sucks
Nov 26, 2003, 11:47
Re: still sucks Nov 26, 2003, 11:47
Nov 26, 2003, 11:47
 
The AI is definately flawed, I've harped on it before. And actually I think it's just more shallow then flawed. But that guy is being needlessly nitpicky for humor's sake.

Allied spiderbots don't react at all if you shoot them, until they finally explode in one of DXIW's trademark "poof and it's gone" explosions. They really should be smarter than that.

Why? Why would anyone expect a spiderbot to act human? Then, after complaing that his trick of making noise outside the Greasel Trainer's apartment doesn't work, he complains

After the developers forced me to spend a multitool to gain entry, I looked in the apartment to find...

You can easily break into the apartment through a window. This guy is spending too much time trying to break the game and not enough time trying to play it.

And I might be mistaken, but I think the "non-aggressive enemy" problem is one of the many ini hacks. And at least when I played on realistic, I got killed pretty fast.

And hopefully they tweak the physics in the final build.

337.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 26, 2003, 09:47
Re: No subject Nov 26, 2003, 09:47
Nov 26, 2003, 09:47
 
The ammo "debate" is now reaching Trekkian proportions. Let's let it die.

307.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 23:39
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 23:39
Nov 24, 2003, 23:39
 
Heh, no, that was the argument until it became an argument about who is or isn't a dumbass. That part was even more pointless

That I can definately agree with And I think Yakumo's thoughts as good synopsis.

303.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 23:00
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 23:00
Nov 24, 2003, 23:00
 
Which no one was asking for...

Except for whoever said There's no reason you couldn't reload with unified ammo. Unified ammo and no reloading are still bad ideas. ... oh yeah, you.

Yes it would. Look below for explanation. Good night

Which explains away reloading altogether, dumbass. Sweet dreams.

This comment was edited on Nov 24, 23:01.
300.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 22:42
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 22:42
Nov 24, 2003, 22:42
 
Regular was trying to logically justify the gameplay decisions and doing a crappy job of it, focusing the discussion on the plausibility of the system

No, you jackass, I was telling you why tacking reloading onto the current system was a dumb idea that wouldn't work. And now that you've made it necessary to explain it five different ways, it's probably pretty evident.

Which, if you used both sides of your brain, you'd realize you just agreed with for the second time.

295.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 22:20
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 22:20
Nov 24, 2003, 22:20
 
Fine. Here's the deal. The ammo doesn't exist in the gun. It exists on your belt. Those "clip" indicators are clips on your belt. The ammo is nanobots and they're attached to the gun via a thin wire you don't really notice in the HUD. Each weapon is connected to the ammo, so there's no time to swap it. When you use any weapon, it's mini UC converts the nanos into whatever ammo the weapon needs and fires. If a clip is used up, it just moves to the next.


There. Since you are apparently the kind of gamer who isn't happy until you explain something to death - you have your explanation. Since you're the kind of person who can't admit when he's wrong (that you can't introduce reloading with a unified ammo setup without messing things up), just STFU.

292.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 21:48
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 21:48
Nov 24, 2003, 21:48
 
You're acting like the finite supply of ammo exists in all of your guns simultaneously.

YES! Yes! Yes, you dense, dense little boy, that's exactly what I'm saying because that's exactly how the game plays because THAT IS WHAT UNIFIED AMMO MEANS. U N I F I E D.

Even if the concept were possible, you'd still have to put the ammo into the gun!

Of course the concept isn't possible you moron, it's a damn game construct. It's a completely unrealistic concept. The whole thing is unrealistic. What, you want to wait every time you swap guns to put one big clip into the next gun? That would be an improvement? Go play the demo again and realize that EACH WEAPON DOES NOT HAVE SEPERATE AMMO and that every "solution" you come up with assumes it does.

which presumably is assembled by a mini Universal Constructor into different forms for different guns

Presumably you just pulled all of that out of your ASS.

Tell me, where did I say you lose ammo? Lots of games have implemented reloading in a clip based system without making you lose ammo.

Yes, guess what - THEY DON'T USE A UNIFIED AMMO SYSTEM. A clip based system isn't a unified ammo system. This is the point you can't seem to grasp.

Could you pull your head out of your fucking ass?

~Steve


Listen to me Steve. Listen to the sound of my voice telling you you are being an idiot. You are wrong. Reloading within a unified ammo setup is stupid, stupid idea. Accept it, move away from the keyboard and move the hell on.

289.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 21:11
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 21:11
Nov 24, 2003, 21:11
 
OMFG, can you be more dense and stubborn?

Unified ammo does NOT mean "we all use the same brand of ammo in seperate clips", it means "all weapons share the exact same source of ammo". Once you move from one to the other IT'S NOT UNIFIED. You now have seperate pieces of ammo. You can't try to make a decent system out of one without changing the other, hence the connection between the two. Once you let that sink into your skull, it becomes painfully obvious.

There are no clips, that's a figment of your imagination. There's a counter on the hud to count how many times the ammo bar will refill - that's not the same thing. With the unified ammo system DX2 has, reloading would work as I described it which we both agreed would be a bad thing.

Or when you bring up a new weapon it could always start with a fresh clip, presumably loaded offscreen

That would work with unified ammo?? Then you lose ammo every time you swap weapons or reload! Why? because it's unified. Hurrah, that's an improvement.

Would you think about this before responding again?

Please??

287.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 20:31
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 20:31
Nov 24, 2003, 20:31
 
I don't know where you got the idea that I want unified ammo and reloading

I didn't. You said: You seem to see an intrinsic connection between unified ammo and lack of reloading which isn't there.

But it is there. As now you seem to agree. What I've been saying all along is that reloading is useless with this ammo system. Sorry if it was confusing, but I've been saying the same thing from my first response. I even broke it down in the "reloading" response, but apparently it took a blow by blow example to show you what I meant.

I think Ion Storm made a big mistake by releasing a demo. I think this is a game that has to be experienced in large sums to see if much of the mechanics add up or not. Will it be as great as the original? Probably not, but that will still leaves a lot of room for a fine game.

Hopefully they'll change some things due to user reaction so that the demo's not a complete loss.

283.
 
Re: Re-newing my Preorder
Nov 24, 2003, 19:31
Re: Re-newing my Preorder Nov 24, 2003, 19:31
Nov 24, 2003, 19:31
 
No, it's not. You know, I'm having trouble not coming to the conclusion that you're an idiot. If you had a clip that could be used in any type of weapon it would still have to be fed into the weapon. Seriously, it's not that big a deal, but just drop it, it doesn't make any sense

Maybe it would help if you would stop assuming you're right and think about what you're asking.

Last try to explain this. Load the demo. Go to the room with the shotgun and ammo. Take both. Arm the shotgun. Fire enough rounds that the ammo bar is almost depleted. Switch to pistol. Fire like, two shots and the "clip" is gone.

If you had your wish, you would have just reloaded. Is that more realistic? No, because you weren't firing the pistol before. It doesn't increase immersion or plausibility, it reminds players of the unified ammo system and how little sense it makes.

Does it make it more strategic? No. In fact, it punishes you for doing something common in a reload system - swapping to a fully loaded weapon instead of taking the time to reload the current one. Now you have to reload any weapon.

It would add annoyance and nothing more. Well, some more weapon animations.

The only real solution is different weapons having different clips and different ammo levels. At that point you would pretty much have different ammo types and no unified ammo system. Well, you could just have some animations but that would just be lip service.

It's the exact same system as Jedi Knight with a different HUD setup. Does that make it OK? Not really, unless they made all the weapons energy based. But reloading is still a victim of the unified ammo, whether you like it or not.

At this point, if you don't buy it, go to the ion storm forums and ask them. You've descended into name calling over this and I don't have any more desire to debate with someone being an asshole over a game discussion - so take it to them. But I'll bet dollars to donuts that reloading and the ammo decisions were married to each other.


232 Comments. 12 pages. Viewing page 7.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  ] Older