O'Reilly sent you, didn't he.

That's great news. It's the only place I've been going to for downloads for several years now.

Yeah. I mean GOG has Beyond Good & Evil for $10!

I got my copy free in a bag of Cheesy Head cheese snacks for $5.99 as per this story:

Game & Snack (Blues News)

The cheese was kind of chewy and flavourless but the game installed fine.

Wow. Choices and consequences, different endings and multiple ways to solve a puzzle. Traditionally adventure games have been extremely linear, which is fine. It almost sounds like they're trying add some of the best aspects of a good RPG.

I'm definitely interested to see how this plays out.

Not of your games, man. Just so. Fucking bored with games these days.

It's a great big bummer.

I'm so bored.

I like the way both games that I like do it. Of course they are class and objective based.

They simply let you get your unlocks for about four maps, then everyone is reset to zero. It's pretty simple. You can be the king of the mountain for a few minutes to a few hours, depending on the campaign, but then we're all back to a level playing field.

I think it's cool.

The new version let's you brag about your 'skills'. Wee-haaa!

In the God of War series you have to press a sequence of buttons to accomplish a particular task, typically the killing of a creature, or defense against an event.
Another example may be in Resident Evil 4 when they roll the boulder at you in the introductory stages, and you're forced to tap A furiously, until it suddenly asks for either both A and B or both shoulder buttons.

Well, I understand what you mean but I haven't had a console since the Intellivision days.

I'm sure there's an equivalent in some PC game, like a platform puzzler?

Excuse my ignorance but what is a QTE? I understand that it means 'Quick Time Event', but can you give me an example? I haven't played many new games lately.

I haven't actually played TF2 for more than ten minutes even though I got it with the Orange Box over a year ago, so I won't comment on this particular case.

I was a big BF1942 fan (and still am) but when I went to play BF2 at my brothers, I felt I was at a disadvantage for being a noob. I played as medic and for hours, and despite being quite good (in my own mind) at other online FPS's, I couldn't hit anyone for shit.

Eventually I got my first (last and only) unlocked weapon and suddenly I was hitting and killing people with ease. I'm not sure if that new gun was any better or if I'd just gotten better. But if the gun was better, why would they do that?

Why give experienced players an advantage and give noobs gimped weapons? It doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not saying that's what is happening here as I haven't played TF2 but I understand the argument against linking rewards with achievments. Not that I've ever understood achievements. I remember finishing HL2 (or one of the episodes) and seeing a list of them. I didn't know they existed. Many seemed rather stupid but most were something you'd do in the game anyways, or have to do just to complete a particular level. Anyways, some people like them so I don't really care.

I prefer the way both Wolf:Enemy Territory and QW:Enemy Territory do it. You get minor XP and unlocks (advantages) over the course of a Campaign. A Campaign is usually four maps, then everybody is reset back to zero. So, you might be at a disadvantage jumping into map four or something, but it'll reset and everyone will be on a level playing field again.

And for those that like 'achievements' and ranks/medals/whatever, they give you those too and you can go look them up on a website and brag to your friends. Although they give you absolutely no benefit in-game. Which is as it should be.

If you've spent a million hours playing a game, your reward is your own personal skill.

You know, what Ensemble Studios was working on, before fuckin' Microsoft closed it's doors? Right, a Halo MMO!

I thought it was a Halo RTS for consoles, but I could be wrong.

As an aside, did you know that people that drink shitloads of beer and are really old, actually benefit from super intense, hand-eye co-ordinated thought processes? It makes them less susceptible to Altimeters disease. And limp consolitis of the dick.

It's a fact. Play Quake or go back to sleep. Your choice.

I guess I'll warm up to 'nostalgia' then gib your ass somewhere else. Pick a game, slo-mo 'gamer'.

This comment was edited on Feb 25, 2009, 23:44.

And how many companies have gone from strength to strength? Plenty, especially when they are providing a forward looking service with increasing appeal. It could go either way but I'm not naive about the realities of business and buyouts / bankruptcy.

Exactly, it's not a big deal.

We're talking about video games. Some of us really care about our 'investments', but at the end of the day it's simply a form of entertainment.

Some people think that they should own that 'DVD' forever, others don't care as much.

I don't spend much money on DVD's but I do on games. Maybe I'd like that energy spent on buying that shit to last longer than a few months, weeks, years? Maybe?

Some people might not have the spending power that you do.

I personally don't really give a shit, but if you think about it, people want value for their money. If you don't think a library of video games, or movies or books or VHS's, something someone has collectected and spent a lot of cash on is worthless, they might not.

I enjoy the throw-away mentaliity of watching Rambo 4, but I'd rather have the DVD and the extras. Yes, I've watched it, but can I show it to my brother? Can I?

If I own the DVD I can give it to him, as a gift five years down the road. "Here, brother, is a cheesey flick I'd like you to watch". Can I do that with steam?

I just paid $64CDN to play COD4. Is that embarrasing or what? I understood the implications (I thought I was paying $50) but still. I feel a little ripped off. If I could give it to my brother later as a gift I wouldn't feel so stupid.

But I can't. That's my own fault so I don't care, but it a was a pretty frivolous purchase and rather ridiculous.

I won't do it again. If I'd bought it at the store, I would have saved over twenty dollars and been able to pass it on.

So what have I learned?

I exchanged convenience (that ended up taking six hours to complete) for value. I agreed with that model of business and I won't complain. But that's what I got. Overpriced bullshit for more bullshit.

So, for me it sucks, but it allowed me to download, somewhat at my convenience, a game I wanted to play. That's all I paid for, and that's what I got. Nothing more, nothing less.

I think it's a viable business model, but as I've learned, you get what you pay for. And quite often, as in this case, a lot less.

Well, it sounds to me like I might actually upgrade my PC just to play this game (Arma2). I don't really have any interest in Codemasters at this point. They sound like another Jowood.

I'm hoping Dragon Age is a lot better.

Well. I think I'm getting old, jaded, bitter and opinionated. I just saw a clip on Youtube showing the 'origins', and I thought it was a Youtube voiceover joke.

But I guess it was the real thing. Yes, being an old guy and seeing as this is the year 2009, I sort of expected more. But I guess we're stuck with 'dumbed down for the masses' gameplay for a few more years at least. I was expecting better. Not holographic better, but something.

Anyways.... ho hum

I suppose I might be 'old school', but I just can't bring myself to believe that reneging on a map editor and charging people for superficial content is 'value' in my eyes.

To me it just smells like 'scam'.

Downloaded, playing now, going through the tutorial. We'll see how it all comes together....

Sacrifice was a cool, cool game. I loved my minions. I actually got the game free with a video card I think. Excellent game. I can't remember who made it. It was pure fun.

Also, Steam will always have a value and bandwidth costs continue to decrease - if Valve goes tits up it will be bought by a competitor. That may result in drastic changes but it seems unlikely a company would want to risk tanking the brand.

This is an attitude I don't understand. Since I was a young boy, and even modern kids can see, many studios and even publishers have gone tits up. How many closures, buy-outs and failures have you read about on these very news boards in the last year, two years, five years?

I'm not going to bother to list them, but it's there for all to see. And now, when times are 'tough' and even banks and car manufacturers are tanking hard, 'Valve' is indestructible.

Keep believing what you want. I personally don't think they're going to tank anytime soon, but nothing is written in stone.

I like what Steam is now, but I'm not stupid.

Reality is what it is. Valve is not immune to the market forces in the world.