Creston wrote on Jan 8, 2019, 13:24:
FYI: If you use social media the Internet, you have no privacy. None.

Creston wrote on Jan 7, 2019, 18:02:
"Fly across a beautiful landscape"

for ten seconds. Then you have to recharge and walk for ten seconds.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Jan 6, 2019, 12:15:

DarkCntry wrote on Jan 6, 2019, 12:09:

PropheT wrote on Jan 6, 2019, 11:57:

DarkCntry wrote on Jan 5, 2019, 23:04:
Now, now...the sentry guns only worked because of Hollywood magic of never-ending supply of ammunition for thematic effect

That's exactly the opposite of what happens in that scene considering it mostly consists of watching limited ammo counters running down to empty while Hicks talks. Then the aliens get past their defenses immediately after the ammo runs out.

While I was being somewhat facetious in my statement about the endless ammo, in all honesty, there's no way that 500 rounds could be housed in those turrets internally as was shown in the movie.

Well, since they have ammo drums on the side, I'm pretty sure they could hold 500 rounds.

RedEye9 wrote on Jan 6, 2019, 12:16:
We await your "Everything Wrong with Aliens in 45 Minutes or Less" youtube rundown with bated breath.

PropheT wrote on Jan 6, 2019, 11:57:

DarkCntry wrote on Jan 5, 2019, 23:04:
Now, now...the sentry guns only worked because of Hollywood magic of never-ending supply of ammunition for thematic effect

That's exactly the opposite of what happens in that scene considering it mostly consists of watching limited ammo counters running down to empty while Hicks talks. Then the aliens get past their defenses immediately after the ammo runs out.

Creston wrote on Jan 5, 2019, 22:56:

Armengar wrote on Jan 5, 2019, 18:57:
in Aliens the violence and guns approach didnt work very well though.

The Marines initially get overwhelmed by the Aliens because of the surprise of them coming out of the walls, and because their dipshit lieutenant forces them to take the ammo out of their guns.

In a straight up fight, they handled themselves fine against the Aliens. In fact, in the director's cut, they have a scene where they put up some sentry guns, and those guns wipe out like 50-60 Aliens in the space of a few minutes.

Suppa7 wrote on Jan 4, 2019, 23:02:

eRe4s3r wrote on Jan 4, 2019, 21:43:
Holy crap, if before I just thought they are misaligned assholes now I think they are malicious fucktards.

When hasn't this been the case? The games industry has been that way since the beginning, if you look at early lawsuits from atari and nintendo to shut down other game companies. Japan just passed a law outlawing game save editing, a giant wtf.

robdot wrote on Dec 23, 2018, 15:21:
This is the type of game that helps destroy all of gaming,it's predatory in it's very concept. The developers only see the players,as prey. I bought this based off my love for fallout 4. It's not a mistake. Every aspect is intentional. It's also partly my fault,for buying it. But it's the kind of thing that should put people out of business...it was a fraud from the start.

[SC]TherMight wrote on Dec 22, 2018, 20:47:
People bring out the pitchforks a bit hastily.

It's an early access game for heaven's sake.

Cutter wrote on Dec 18, 2018, 20:03:
HoF for Halo? Seriously?

Quinn wrote on Nov 28, 2018, 14:19:
Sorry, Agent.X7.. but you're an idiot. This game has no NPCs, no story to speak of, and literally zero improvement upon their previous titles (the opposite, in fact) except for the fact you can run around in it with your girlfriend. Whoop-dee-fucking-doo.

Let's face it -- and this is going to be controversial! -- but this game is objectively garbage and a money grab from a studio that's sold their soul. Anyone who claims differently, please.. let me know in no unclear fashion so I can put you on the blacklist of people that I should NEVER listen to when it comes to any single word they have to say about any game.

I'll mention it again for good measure, watch this vid and then check your head. The only way I can understand how you could praise this game, mate, is if it's the kind of "playing game with girlfriend" where you have a constant boner and a promise that you'll get lucky in a couple of sexy minutes.

ledhead1969 wrote on Nov 28, 2018, 14:39:
Aren't baseball card packs the same thing? Why aren't they under scrutiny?

HoSpanky wrote on Nov 28, 2018, 14:10:
DarkCntry, that’s not really the same argument. YES, in digital purchases of ANY sort, a kid’s parent is ultimately at fault for giving their child access to the funds, but this isn’t about the actual money spent. The concern is the behavior it encourages, because the high a gambler feels from winning erases all the anguish of prior losses. Letting kids think this is a normal behavior will lead to their ruin later in life.

Unlike direct digital purchases, where you know what you’re getting, loot boxes have varying “quality” of items in them. In reality, none of them are worth anything, but that’s not the point. It’s the perception of “winning” that sticks in the mind, which can lead to that kid growing up and having a higher chance of gambling their house away. THAT is the concern being raised.

theglaze wrote on Nov 28, 2018, 13:05:

Jivaro wrote on Nov 28, 2018, 12:35:
if you always get something from a loot box can it really be considered gambling?

I mean...the value of what you get is variable, but you never get "nothing". In that way games companies can argue that there isn't any gambling going on.

Or am I misunderstanding/missing something?

(PS: I am as irritated by loot boxes as anybody, but I had resigned myself to the belief that the video games industry had found a way around the "rules" by simply creating tiers of rewards and eliminating the possibility of getting nothing.)

It's the simulation of gambling that's the issue.

Children, who often lack an understanding of the value of money let a lone gambling, are exposed to the same emotional experience that adults feel when gambling.

IMO, loot boxes for digital content that cannot be traded to others or transfer into actual money is WORSE than real gambling.

VaranDragon wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 02:54:

DarkCntry wrote on Nov 19, 2018, 19:34:

Tipsy McStagger wrote on Nov 19, 2018, 18:33:
someone explain what this game is like..

is it dayZ/rust/etc but Fallout?

Well, technically it's just a multiplayer version of Fallout 4 in Survival mode.

People's biggest dislike for the game revolve around the perceived lack of NPCs (they do exist, albeit non-human), and the lack of a story. There is a story, despite it being found in holotapes, terminals, and notes.

Be honest dude. Every single quest is basically a variant of a fedex quest, they are extremely predictable and offer you exactly one choice in how to complete it. Either do the quest or don't do the quest.

Tipsy McStagger wrote on Nov 19, 2018, 18:33:
someone explain what this game is like..

is it dayZ/rust/etc but Fallout?

Creston wrote on Nov 15, 2018, 13:47:
Did you like the pew pew pew in the game? Then come do the pew pew pew in real life!

I guess that's more of a cop thing than an army thing though.

In any case, this isn't the first time the army turned to a game to shore up its recruiting. I wonder how it went the last time.

El Pit wrote on Nov 8, 2018, 13:53:
Come on, you know how it goes once the game is sold. Idiots will start mobs running around killing you and/or sabotaging your missions. NO WAY I will touch this game with forced pvp. Not even if it should ever go free to play. If you got no problem with griefers and other human ticks, good for you. I won't bother with them or games that allow those knuckledraggers to anger me. Plenty of other games to play...