User information for Com

Real Name
Com
Nickname
Com
Email
Concealed by request
Description
Homepage
Signed On
September 18, 2004
Supporter
-
Total Posts
151 (Novice)
User ID
21851
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
151 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 4.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older
45.
 
Impressions after about 10 hours.
Jun 20, 2007, 17:44
Com
45.
Impressions after about 10 hours. Jun 20, 2007, 17:44
Jun 20, 2007, 17:44
Com
 
I've had this thing since Monday, when I fooled myself into thinking that a year of fileplanet for $39 is not that bad of a deal and I might get some decent use out of it. But basically I got it because QW is the only game left that I was really, really looking forward to. I'm a hardcore fps vet so keep that in mind as you read my impressions.

ETQW very much follows in the vein of RTCW/ET's mix of fast action in a team based, tactical shooter setting. No, it's not nearly as fast as Q3 like some CS/BF nublets will have you believe, it feels very much like ET. The spawn-to-action time is generally faster on the map included in the beta due to the attacking team gaining up to three spawn points along the way as they capture objectives. Also, vehicles are almost always available even in full 12vs12 battles, so you'll spend a lot of time shooting.

Generally speaking, the game design is outstanding. All classes have unique and important roles, loaded with their own gadgets. Vehicles are useful, but not overpowered (I never felt the BF-like urge to camp the tank/plane to harvest ridiculous 20-1 K:D ratios with any of the vehicles in QW). The map is intricate and flows well. Firefights require skill in both aim and movement, and there are few quick kills that turn the likes of BF into "who sees who first" affairs.

What kills this game is not the theory, it's the execution, and I place the blame squarely on the Doom 3 engine. Like the good thing that you take for granted until it's gone, the sturdy Quake 3 engine with its silky smooth feel and netcode is very sorely missed. Firefights in QW have a real wishy-washy feel to them that would take several paragraphs to fully describe, but if you've played Doom 3 MP you'll know what I mean. It's a world of a difference from Q3 engine games.

This extends to vehicles, which to be honest are not at all meaningfully implemented at this point. Part of the reason why they're always available as I mentioned above is simply that they don't add too much to the game besides quick transportation. You can drive them quickly, but they have a very floaty feel to them, combined with a cockpit view that shakes way too violently whenever you're driving on rough terrain (most of the time), combined with netcode that at 100 ping made the faster moving vehicles often realign and jerk around when I drove them. Also, the tank/walker cannons are disappointingly point-and-click straight shooters, unlike say the BF1942 tanks where projectiles had an arc that proficient drivers needed to account for.

Lastly, I was disappointed with the only map in the beta. While it's definitely a quality map, it just doesn't have the wow factor that the incredible beach map from the rtcw test had. You'd think they would include the very best they have, but if this is it, it's not looking good.

Overall I've found QW to be a decent game so far that has a lot of potential that will never be fulfilled due to technical challenges. This is not the game that will resurrect the fast paced online FPS subgenre, and it's a real shame.

6.
 
Re: scumbags...
May 22, 2007, 11:06
Com
6.
Re: scumbags... May 22, 2007, 11:06
May 22, 2007, 11:06
Com
 
Yep, after bf1942, road to rome and bfv, bf2 vanilla was really the last one for me.

It's funny (or not) how something can start out so good (fresh gameplay, open beta for months, many patches, free bonus content) and end up so bad (stale musical chairs gameplay, short fileplanet beta, rare patches, purchasable "booster packs", buggy as shit and hacked to pieces).

122.
 
Re: No subject
May 20, 2007, 13:41
Com
Re: No subject May 20, 2007, 13:41
May 20, 2007, 13:41
Com
 
Loot is definitely not the only pleasure in D2. The skill system is very good in that you can make creative and effective builds that are fun to use, which is more than you can say for any mmorpg out there. It's entertaining in itself to teleport around and spam static with nova/chain lightning/meteors on huge hordes of minions. Or how about 'spamazon' build that revolves around +% cast chance on hit items that basically unleashes an ungodly amount of spells with multiarrow+pierce. Just one of many examples. It's a much better "game" than other loot hunter computer simulators.

Note, I've only played through 1.09, so some of this may have changed since.

This comment was edited on May 20, 13:42.
4.
 
Re: No Games?
May 20, 2007, 13:31
Com
4.
Re: No Games? May 20, 2007, 13:31
May 20, 2007, 13:31
Com
 
Did you just call a shrubbery tech demo with gameplay out of 1995 a "great game"?

61.
 
Re: You people are idiots
May 11, 2007, 11:14
Com
61.
Re: You people are idiots May 11, 2007, 11:14
May 11, 2007, 11:14
Com
 
To be fair there are plenty of students who might be on summer vacation or are just skipping lectures who basically have 16 free hours a day. Even if you're a k-12 student, figure you get home around 3pm, playing for 3 hours isn't a big deal really, that's less than half your free time if you don't spend too much time on homework.

Once you get a fulltime job though...

42.
 
Re: No subject
May 10, 2007, 22:49
Com
42.
Re: No subject May 10, 2007, 22:49
May 10, 2007, 22:49
Com
 
As one of them said "If I'm going to pay a monthly fee, why don't I just pay for a real MMORPG?"

Because "real" mmorpg's are not as fun as hellgate? WTF is this shit about real vs not real mmorpg. You're paying for entertainment, and having non-instanced areas with tons of people lagging up the screen at the same time is not inherently any more fun.

Basically anyone who says this is implying that WoW or whatever is more fun than hellgate, and they'd only choose hellgate if it saved them a few bucks a month. Really? Way to not put any value on your time.

This comment was edited on May 10, 22:49.
18.
 
Quake Wars
Apr 23, 2007, 13:14
Com
18.
Quake Wars Apr 23, 2007, 13:14
Apr 23, 2007, 13:14
Com
 
Bring on Quake Wars. PC is more overdue for a great online FPS game than I can remember since Quakeworld.

19.
 
Powere by gamespy
Apr 1, 2007, 10:33
Com
19.
Powere by gamespy Apr 1, 2007, 10:33
Apr 1, 2007, 10:33
Com
 
Oh yeah, everyone has mentioned EA, but nobody's mentioning "Powered by gamespy"? If there was ever a death sentence for RTS games, this is it.

18.
 
Re: ...
Apr 1, 2007, 10:32
Com
18.
Re: ... Apr 1, 2007, 10:32
Apr 1, 2007, 10:32
Com
 
You people laughing at "one patch issued two in the works" seriously need to rethink what you're saying. Maybe they know the problems but don't have all the fixes yet. Do you want them to release multiple patches to fix stuff as soon as the fixes are developed, or wait until they have ALL the fixes and release one behemoth patch? The former is much better for the user, I congratulate them for doing this.

I've seen several great upstart RTS games get KILLED by devs stupidly delaying important fixes for months just to get all the other fixes into a single patch.

25.
 
Re: Business Model?
Mar 21, 2007, 16:44
Com
25.
Re: Business Model? Mar 21, 2007, 16:44
Mar 21, 2007, 16:44
Com
 
I should RTFA

23.
 
Re: Business Model?
Mar 21, 2007, 16:10
Com
23.
Re: Business Model? Mar 21, 2007, 16:10
Mar 21, 2007, 16:10
Com
 



So I'm curious what this is supposed to say about their business model, since initially the expansions were supposed to carry on much longer and were ArenaNet's sole source of income. Does this mean the no-fee MMO concept isn't really working for them?

uh, no.

Have you been involved in any of their festivals? They put in a TON of time to give a TON of free material away. The developers are game players who love to create the game for people that enjoy it.

It isn't uncommon to see a developer online and chat with them. They aren't looking to make as much of a mint as WoW - I think they just love what they are doing!

Uh, that's not what he was asking though. He wasn't asking if the developer are bad guys, he was asking if the BUSINESS MODEL is not working. Which is what it looks like. There was a link to an analysis posted here recently that compared sales numbers to cost of operation for arena.net, and its conclusion was that it's a much closer shave than the devs were anticipating because the game has not taken off in asia as much as they had hoped. They have to sell tons of every expansion just to sustain.

So, don't be surprised if GW2 has a monthly fee.

1.
 
Nice game
Feb 26, 2007, 15:43
Com
1.
Nice game Feb 26, 2007, 15:43
Feb 26, 2007, 15:43
Com
 
This game doesn't get the love it deserves. It's a real attempt at taking the basic 4X space gameplay and evolving it, as opposed to simply rehashing and souping it up to the limit (GalCiv2).

I own GalCiv2 as well, but although that game is definitely more polished and has better AI, it's same ole' MOO on steroids. Sword of the Stars actually tries to do something novel with its battles. The game has some flaws, but I'll be playing it again when this expansion hits. I'm skipping Dark Avatar.

12.
 
Re:
May 14, 2006, 12:58
Com
12.
Re: May 14, 2006, 12:58
May 14, 2006, 12:58
Com
 
Well at that exchange rate, $50 US = $64 AU, so it doesn't make sense that games start at $80.

GoGamer.com 30% off deals on new games plus the cheap shipping is even better though, $37 games!

19.
 
Re: PAR2 Repair File
Apr 29, 2006, 11:42
Com
19.
Re: PAR2 Repair File Apr 29, 2006, 11:42
Apr 29, 2006, 11:42
Com
 
Who is "you people" to you goofball, the game always ran great for me, now it just looks a lot worse.

17.
 
Re: PAR2 Repair File
Apr 29, 2006, 11:02
Com
17.
Re: PAR2 Repair File Apr 29, 2006, 11:02
Apr 29, 2006, 11:02
Com
 
Game plays smoother, but at a cost. The texture quality has been drastically reduced. Doesn't look like the screenshots anymore.

Bingo. HUUUUUGELY disappointing.

2.
 
Re: Gothic 3
Apr 12, 2006, 10:38
Com
2.
Re: Gothic 3 Apr 12, 2006, 10:38
Apr 12, 2006, 10:38
Com
 
It's hard to tell how much detail is there because the shots are so tiny. But I must admit I don't know how I feel about the injection of sky bloom. I think it fits into oblivion universe much better than gothic's.

83.
 
Re: Fancy Pants
Apr 7, 2006, 14:36
Com
83.
Re: Fancy Pants Apr 7, 2006, 14:36
Apr 7, 2006, 14:36
Com
 
You're missing the point. Very few people care about the stupid $2.50 horse armor. If every publisher starts doing this and it catches on

And you don't even have a point. If very few people care about it, how can it "catch on"? The two are contradictory. On the other hand if it DOES catch on, it's because enough people care about it that it makes business sense to create polished extra content. Supply and demand.

2.
 
Re: No subject
Apr 2, 2006, 21:06
Com
2.
Re: No subject Apr 2, 2006, 21:06
Apr 2, 2006, 21:06
Com
 
I agree, but I'm over this strategically stale, rarely patched game anyway; RoL all the way now, just hope gamespy doesn't kill it...

1.
 
Awesome!
Mar 30, 2006, 11:29
Com
1.
Awesome! Mar 30, 2006, 11:29
Mar 30, 2006, 11:29
Com
 
I didn't realize this game was imminent, RoN was pretty good so I have high hopes for this.

42.
 
Re: No subject
Mar 22, 2006, 22:01
Com
42.
Re: No subject Mar 22, 2006, 22:01
Mar 22, 2006, 22:01
Com
 
I wonder if they just announced this now after hearing about the nVidia+Havok thing. They might be worried that their product won't sell as good if people can do the physics on the GPU.

It's actually the other way around. Announcements like this aren't created in a day, they are planned well ahead. It's nVidia who knew EXACTLY when this announcement would come and simply undercut Ageia with an announcement of their own. It's just like when they announce or release hugely optimized drivers right before ATI announces new cards to steal some thunder.

If you dig deeper though, and do some research, you'll find out that nVidia's implementation will not be anywhere as good as Ageia's because they can only add more special effects but can't use physics to truly affect gameplay.

Some decent info here to get you started:
http://www.theinquirer.org/?article=30434

This comment was edited on Mar 22, 22:03.
151 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 4.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older