User information for G-Man

Real Name
G-Man
Nickname
G-Man
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
Signed On
May 31, 2005
Supporter
-
Total Posts
149 (Novice)
User ID
23202
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
149 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older
3.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 9, 2008, 16:00
3.
Re: No subject Jan 9, 2008, 16:00
Jan 9, 2008, 16:00
 
I for one am totally pumped about this news! I can't wait to see what Ron pulls together with the Hothead team.

4.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 14, 2007, 15:33
4.
Re: No subject Dec 14, 2007, 15:33
Dec 14, 2007, 15:33
 
I'm shocked this game is still around! They were shopping this title around back in 2001-2002ish. I was VERY surprised to see it being announced as complete.

I can't wrap my head around the gameplay from their descriptions, I'll have to give it a try.

4.
 
Re: No subject
Oct 16, 2007, 18:04
4.
Re: No subject Oct 16, 2007, 18:04
Oct 16, 2007, 18:04
 
I've heard really positive things from people who have been in the Beta.
This comment was edited on Oct 16, 18:07.
48.
 
Re: Not True
Aug 28, 2006, 01:06
48.
Re: Not True Aug 28, 2006, 01:06
Aug 28, 2006, 01:06
 
Call of Duty is Activision...


45.
 
Re: Not True
Aug 27, 2006, 17:24
45.
Re: Not True Aug 27, 2006, 17:24
Aug 27, 2006, 17:24
 
Hey Hellbinder, you looked at the NPD data recently?

Perhaps you should lay off the Starbucks for a few days.

If you don't know what NPD data is then perhaps you should take a back seat and STFU. Publishers, especially EA don't really give a rats ass about the server rankings on gamespy, they care about the sell through at retail.

This comment was edited on Aug 27, 17:54.
33.
 
Re: Engines
Aug 27, 2006, 03:02
33.
Re: Engines Aug 27, 2006, 03:02
Aug 27, 2006, 03:02
 
EA has about 20% share in Ubisoft now, they are a minority share holder. The do not have any control over Ubi's day to day operations including the development of the SC games.


---Quote Bashley---
More proof EA is trying to buy out every developer. Hell they even got ahold of the next Splinter Cell installment. God I hope the great game developers of Crytek don't sell out to EA.
---End Quote Bashley---

32.
 
Re: Engines
Aug 27, 2006, 02:52
32.
Re: Engines Aug 27, 2006, 02:52
Aug 27, 2006, 02:52
 
EA would actuire Crytek because they do not have a very strong foot hold in the FPS market, not because they want to crush the competition. EA's share of the FPS/Action genre is very minimal, even with the BF and MOH franchises and they see that area as room for growth. They aren't trying to screw Ubi's relationship with Crytek, because their no longer is a relationship with Ubi... my understanding of the Ubi Crytek relationship is that it went VERY sour after Far Cry.

EA wouldn't ice Crytek after Crysis either... they need them to continue to make games in the FPS genre, we are more then likely going to see them continue to develop FPS games if they are acquired, just that they would be forced to some EA rules (deadlines, target platforms etc.)

Lastly, Crysis is being published by EA already... it's not a Ubi property.

---Quote CJ_Parker ---
I wouldn't be too surprised if Crytek is a target of destroy competition by acquisition (due to their close relation to UbiSoft which is definitely a target of EA... remember Ubi holds all Farcry rights and remember how EA attempted a hostile takeover of Ubi), meaning that all Crytek development would be put on ice after Crysis has shipped (I would guess that they have to deliver Crysis for Ubi by contract so the possible EA deal would not affect Crysis but only future products).
Origin, Bullfrog and Westwood suffered a similar fate. Who knows?
---End Quote CJ_Parker ---
This comment was edited on Aug 27, 03:00.
3.
 
Re: Not looking forward to this at all
Jan 14, 2006, 02:17
3.
Re: Not looking forward to this at all Jan 14, 2006, 02:17
Jan 14, 2006, 02:17
 
[qn-game advertising may be a great way for independant developers who release shareware titles to gain a big source of revenue, but I would'nt want to see ads in commercial games that I already go out and pay lots of money for. [/q]

An indy developer, with a shareware title isn't going to "gain a big source of revenue" through in game advertising. The game won't move enough copies to convince an advertiser to pay much for exposure in their game.

22.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 31, 2005, 05:32
22.
Re: No subject Dec 31, 2005, 05:32
Dec 31, 2005, 05:32
 
Well said Bhruic... Well said.

4.
 
Re: Oh wow!
Dec 26, 2005, 21:59
4.
Re: Oh wow! Dec 26, 2005, 21:59
Dec 26, 2005, 21:59
 
Regardless of the fact that this is YET another WWII game, the game looks iffy at best.

19.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 9, 2005, 02:50
19.
Re: No subject Dec 9, 2005, 02:50
Dec 9, 2005, 02:50
 
I can't believe that Valve would stoop this low.

ex-SFIer wishing that Valve would have kept it's distance.

Ex. BDM SFI. RIP.

46.
 
Why not STEAM it?
Dec 8, 2005, 18:14
46.
Why not STEAM it? Dec 8, 2005, 18:14
Dec 8, 2005, 18:14
 
I don't get it? If HHS is using STEAM for Prey, why don't they use.... oh wait, I'm confusing Prey with, with... oh fuck, what was that game? (me googles...) Oh yea, SiN, I confused Prey with Sin...

Well, HHS should consider STEAM and forgo the publishers if they believe in Prey so much and they think the marketers at the pubs are silly for not taking on a new Rune. Let HHS take the financial risk, see if they are willing to risk their shirts based on a game that had a modest metacritic, sold half heartedly at retail and has a small on going community.

2.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 6, 2005, 01:31
2.
Re: No subject Dec 6, 2005, 01:31
Dec 6, 2005, 01:31
 
I thought I was the only one following this title...

It looked incredible back in 2002-2003 when I first saw it. They are still showing the exact same screenshots to the game today.

This game should just give up and die...

6.
 
It's likely reason from post #2...
Nov 28, 2005, 19:31
6.
It's likely reason from post #2... Nov 28, 2005, 19:31
Nov 28, 2005, 19:31
 
I don't think we need to be all doom and anti capitalist gloom here. It's likely the EXACT reason's that RomSteady lists that is stopping Midway from funding the completion of this game.

SSSI's last game, Empires:Dawn of the Modern World, sold like ass and likely lost Activision a boat load of money. I wonder if the deal with Midway was signed before or after EDotMW shipped and sales tanked. Anyone know?

Because the ~$2 million spent in development is significantly less than the additional ~$8 million necessary for marketing and press tours, packaging and materials, shipping, purchasing shelf space, and warehouse space for storing the copies that didn't sell that inevitably you'll have to buy back from distributors and retailers.

8.
 
Yawn...
Nov 28, 2005, 19:25
8.
Yawn... Nov 28, 2005, 19:25
Nov 28, 2005, 19:25
 
ok, they're trying to get the attention of some investors or a publisher that they might not have touched base with yet... Makes some sense.

Unfortunately, the game looks completely uninspired and generic. OOOOOOOooooooOOOOOooo a big room in a space ship with a bunch of cargo crates.... OOOOooooOOOooo some guys in black suits that look somewhat bad ass...

Does anyone know if these guys have ever created a game before? I've never heard of them myself...

If they don't have a pedigree, it's going to be next to impossible for them to get any funding.

5.
 
Re: No subject
Nov 22, 2005, 10:08
5.
Re: No subject Nov 22, 2005, 10:08
Nov 22, 2005, 10:08
 
I love seeing Steam get more and more content.

VIVE LA REVOLUTION!!!!!

1.
 
No subject
Nov 19, 2005, 20:21
1.
No subject Nov 19, 2005, 20:21
Nov 19, 2005, 20:21
 
Wow... this title is one of the worst ever.

5.
 
Re: NA release?
Nov 18, 2005, 03:04
5.
Re: NA release? Nov 18, 2005, 03:04
Nov 18, 2005, 03:04
 
I'm glad to see it's been appreciated by a few gamers on this side of the pond... there are many games that get mediocre reviews that have so many cool quirks to them that make them worth playing but they get avoided because of the reviews.

I'm actually kinda bummed that I follow reviews so closely these days, it was fun finding a diamond in the rough back in the day... mind you those were the days that I used to pirate most, if not all of the games that I played, now I'm too lazy and I also want to support the industry that I enjoy.

Moral of the story... pirate games to find diamonds in the rough? Kidding of course...

2.
 
Re: Great looking game...
Nov 17, 2005, 23:04
2.
Re: Great looking game... Nov 17, 2005, 23:04
Nov 17, 2005, 23:04
 
I hadn't looked at the screenshots in a while so I thought I'd double check to see if my memory serves me correctly.

It sure does, this game looks incredible.

http://spellforce.jowood.com/sf2/screenshots.php?lang=en&rid=1394&id=11649&screen=screenshots

Reviews for the original don't bode well for the sequel (as found on Metacritic.com):

1. PC Games: SpellForce: Shadow of the Phoenix (2005) 67%
JoWood Productions

2. PC Games: SpellForce: The Breath of Winter (2004) 68%
Encore Software / JoWood Productions

3. PC Games: SpellForce: The Order of Dawn (2004) 74%
Encore Software / JoWood Productions

1.
 
Great looking game...
Nov 17, 2005, 22:59
1.
Great looking game... Nov 17, 2005, 22:59
Nov 17, 2005, 22:59
 
...graphic wise... I have my doubts how fun it will be...

149 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older