Littleme: Also a good thing to see is trees and vegetation that not only be destroyed but move in a more natural way.

Larry Niven: "How smart do you have to be to sneak up on a leaf?"

Perhaps you mean Rambo style and want to wipe out everything around you with a mini-gun, as bullets fly, trees are mowed down, foliage is flying and their's nothing but the complete and utter destruction of everything around you. I'll admit, it sounds satisfying, I'm completely into that. Even if you kill a few trees.

But to be honest, I initially thought of one of those newer 'animal casual games' and that you wanted to be 'immersed' in being a Giraffe.

I agree, BF1942 was brilliant and still fun. BF2 I recognized as a piece of shit, in my own mind, early on.

I think with a bit of refinement, NO achievements or unlocks, and updated graphics, a remake of BF42 could be a big hit. It was fun. Just fun. That's what games are all about. Or supposed to be.

I'm looking forward to stacks of crates in warehouses tumbling down realistically. Once that happens you'll know that we've hit the holy grail of FPS's.

That would be nice. Not sure if you mean that sarcastically or not. I'm looking forward destructible buildings and terrain for games like Battlefield 3, ArmA 5 or whatever they will be. Also a good thing to see is trees and vegetation that not only be destroyed but move in a more natural way.

I actually meant it as a not so subtle joke as every FPS since the beginning of mankind has had a crate, somewhere in some level. Sometimes they're used as cover, occasionally as a jumping block, often as a cheap (polywise) way of providing decoration.

I really can't explain it further, if I need to then you're probably young or new to the whole evolution of FPS's. Or I'm just really crappy at telling jokes.

As to the rest of what you guys all started getting into, I don't get it. I think Derek is right in what he was talking about, but it's devolved into arguing about different things.

There's nothing wrong with adding more realism and 'imershun' to games, none at all. Go for it. Even if it adds nothing to gameplay. I like bouncing crates that don't shatter into twenty million pieces or ricochet off the walls and ceiling before finally settling down. That helps.

As far as I can understand, PhysX is just another piece of middleware/API to help you program your games, like Havok or the open source library he mentioned.

The only difference is that PhysX tried making a custom hardware device to take advantage of it, which failed. Now it's got the backing of nVidia using your GPU and probably low-level instruction sets. Who cares? Why does a gamer care if the CPU or the GPU is using processing power to calculate your falling boxes, splinters and gibs?

I'm not much of a coder anymore and certainly not a game developer, but why would you WANT your expensive graphics card doing stuff that your dual or quad core CPU is perfectly capable of? Sure, it sounds like a GPU if it has extra cycles is more efficient at that, but who cares?

I guess my point is, is that I agree that PhysX is a bunch of hype. I'm not arguing against having more 'immershun' in games, but why 'champion' some ridiculously hyped API?

It's almost like me going, “Yeah, my accounting software uses a super efficient STDLIB to convert strings to integers. But it only works with motherboards that have a VIA1922b chipset. Isn't that awesome!

This comment was edited on Dec 24, 2008, 00:59.

Finally something that sounds half honest. So sick of 'metascore' reviews these days. Haven't played it yet, maybe next year.

Even the video was boring. I'm all into dialog, but it took two guys the entire time to go, uh, humm, ahh, yeah, Grey, the, mmm, character, uhhh, mentor, (scratching balls), ug, different.

Spit it out.

So bored of RPG's these days, this is going to be worse than the last ones. Ummm. Errrg.

Ford is able to refuse a bailout.

I like the Economic Darwinism theory. Let the companies that aren't fit to manage their own private domain fail.

I don't see the Government giving me or many other millions of small businesses, 'helping hands'.

I'm sure it will be used for more than for just flowing flags and simulated hair, etc..

I'm looking forward to stacks of crates in warehouses tumbling down realistically. Once that happens you'll know that we've hit the holy grail of FPS's.

Xenu makes my games load faster.

The scary part is having your ISP act as a traffic cop. I wonder which ones agreed to tattle to the RIAA?

I prefer that each game have its own dedicated server browers, master servers, etc.

I agree. I used to use in game browsers, then waaaaaaay back when I used Gamespy. But they turned into a peice of shit company and kept changing the product, then I used All Seeing Eye, but it got bought out by Yahoo and abandoned. Now I'm back to using the in-game browser or Q-tracker.

It's bad enough when they try and optionally (yes by default) cram stuff like Gamespy onto your computer during an install, but once crap like this becomes mandatory, it's just annoying.

Luckily I haven't bought a game yet that 'requires' Windows Live.

Like Tumbler was saying, it's a way to get their 'service' on as many computers as possible so that it looks like it has some value. Eventually they might make it somewhat functional, then package it with their new operating system, monopolize that 'space' then they can spam it with all the ads they want. Something like that.

With a hard copy, all that stuff is avoided. I still have working games from Microprose, 3DO, Interplay, and many other companies that are no longer in business. I don't think I could ever feel like my purchases are really mine, and that they will always be there.

With a hard copy, that stuff might be avoided if it doesn't have that weird online activation and 'limited installs' DRM.

I just bought Bioshock for twenty bucks and haven't bothered to look up what they removed DRM-wise in the last year. But just because I own the physical disc doesn't make me secure that it will install if Take 2 goes down.

I agree, companies go out of business or get bought out all the time. We read it here often enough. There is no guarantee.

I have probably a couple modern DRM infected hard-copy games and a few from Steam. I understand you can archive Steam games but still need them in business to run them again.

As far as I see it, the only sure-fire method of securing your purchases is to pirate them and store them somewhere. It's technically illegal in many countries and has might give you moral headaches depending on how you view these things.

I haven't bothered yet as I'm kind of lazy (it's a fair amount of work) and don't care enough at the moment. I plan to get on it eventually.

That trailer was really creepy and weird.

I think way back when, Carmack said this was an experiment. He said something along the lines of since Q3 is so old most computers should be able to play it within a browser these days. Since he's been interested in the hand held space lately it sort of makes sense. They weren't sure if the business model would work.

Of course now they've admitted that the whole Web backend part of the deal was a lot more complex than they thought it would be, which would explain why it still isn't 'Live' yet.

Regardless, I'm looking forward to it. Every time I read about it I want to load up a map. The convenience factor will work for me as I think it's a great game. I just wish gibs were an option.

As to whether the business model will work? I don't know, I'm leaning towards, 'probably not'. It will appeal to the old hardcore gamers and probably suck in some new blood. But millions of people? It's a twitch shooter with a hit/scan system that depends upon skill. Not dice rolling, big reticles, slow/assisted aiming etc. I'm not sure if the modern gamer is used to that type of thing anymore and they might find it frustrating or at the least, unappealing.

Regardless, I'm really looking forward to it. And it's free!

I'd buy your game, that sounds like fun!

Am I the only one out there that didn't really like Bioshock? I bought it on Steam for $15, and I haven't finished it yet. It gets boring after a while because the game is so repetitive.

Yes, I was just mentioning this the other day. I bought Bioshock for $20 bucks and although I love the atmosphere, story and the concepts of upgradable weapons and plasmids, I too have lost interest (at some point after the Gardens). I'll finish it one of these nights.

It made me feel like playing an RPG so I installed Icewind Dale 2.

I think I know the level you are talking about, it was hard and frustrating. I don't know if it took forty reloads to beat it but it was a lot. Some levels were really easy, the occasional one extremely difficult. It probably could have used to re-balancing.

That sucks. I don't want to play a game that fifteen year old wussies from Australia think is okay. I need VIOLENCE. Blood, death, murder, rage, all of that. Not fucking Nintendo.

If an Australian gives it the THUMBS UP, then you know it's pussyville.

Think I'll pass on this one.

The games these days aren't even worth pirating.

I can spend five hours going through groups, downloading .nfo files and hunting down reviews on different sites.

And at the end of five hours, I have a treasure trove of free games I can download, but I don't. Not because of morality. But because I just killed five hours methodically reading reviews of shit I don't want.

I did download Fallout 1, but that was because I was too lazy to walk over to the boxes and unpack it. Talk about convenience.

Same with Nexus: The Jupiter Incident. I was like, whoohooo!

So whatever, Deadspace, nah. CoD5, nah. What is that, like 7GB? Fuck, it's easier to buy it in the store when I care.

The Witcher was tantalizing, but again, how many GB? I'll download it off steam. Or buy the DVD, whatever hits me first.

I like finding the old gems. Once in awhile they're there.

And yes, I downloaded FO1 about two weeks before GOG opened. So sue me.

That is quite possibly the most asinine post I've ever seen.

Yes, well what do you expect? When the worst argument from these console kiddies is something as sad as comparing an MS product to an MS product, what can you do?

I miss the old OS/2 wars. Those were good days. When operating systems were object orientated and logic ruled the day....

It's embarrassing I tell you, simply embarrassing.

I understand what you're trying to say in theory, but I don't really agree with much of it in practice.

1. PC games need to auto patch in exactly the same manner as on the 360. It needs to be seamless and handled automatically by the game.

I don't think so. From OS patches to apps and even games, what fixes one mans trash often breaks anothers. I could live with it if it asked me first, but gave me the option to bail.

I already have a PC, and know how to use google: "bioshock patch download". It's not difficult.

2. Drivers - Shipping games that need a driver upgrade to play and not including that on the game disc so the game can handle it automatically is a problem.

That makes sense, as long as I'm given the option. This has been done will millions of variants of DirectX for several years. As long as it's optional, who cares? But installing one driver might break two other games that I have. Games that I care about.

3. Multiplayer Games - ... I think PC games can no longer choose to focus on singleplayer games like they have in the past and must focus on building a MAJOR portion of the content around a multiplayer experience that players can only experience through a service they provide. I believe this is the driving force in most of my buying decisions for PC games. Does it have a strong multiplayer game in it?

I think that is bullshit. I know the three multiplayer games I like, I mainly play single player games. I'm not interested in seeing FEAR's or Crysis's, or Call of Duty's broken, boring, run of the mill multiplayer component.

I buy certain games for multiplayer and the rest for single player. Why should I have to connect to the internet to play Bioshock? Or STALKER? I didn't buy the games for their lame tacked on multiplayer component and I think developers should actually stop doing what your suggesting.

Is Baldurs Gate a multiplayer game? Why does every single devloper think that tacking on some broken, yet functional, deathmatch component is worth the effort? They are better off focusing their energies on the single player game instead of ticking off features in a list.

Leave the multiplayer for games that are designed for it, like Q3A or BF42.

I don't believe that every peiece of software I install on my computer has a right to 'call home' whenever it wants to. It's irritating.

How many computer systems have you seen where the app tray is longer than the task bar? Twenty million apps, all running their own process, staking out a peice of the pie just to call home when they want to. I'm so sick of it.

How about I just buy a single player game, install it and it doesn't fuck me over with DRM, 'call home' crap and background processes.

Everyone wants a piece of my CPU pie, including memory and bandwidth. Should we have a Valve Steam, an EA Steam, and Activision and Atari Steam, all taking up their chunk.

Hey! Let's throw in .Net version whatever and how about Windows Live and Rockstar Live and maybe we can get a chat program going for Bioshock and a couple for Call of Duty and shit, why not just install a couple of toolbars for my browser while you're at it as I might need instant access to some game homepages.

Just tired of the bullshit.

I think if you want it easy, get a console.